It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is the U.S Navy too small

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 4 2005 @ 02:10 PM
link   
you posted:

"Currently, 15% of America's population does not have medical insurance. This is just not acceptable"

You are joking here right????

Is this a poltical default setting allowing non Americans the ability to play through while others are obligated to stand still???? Is this enlightment????
Gnosticism, Sophism??? We get this from our own politicians..to sell us for votes. This is the breast feeding formula ..cradle to grave. Especially for votes.

By the way..I have no doubt that taxes will increase...also knowlegable people know that inflation..also called more accurately "depreciation " is disguised taxation. It is money one works to acquire for which one gets no goods and services..same as taxation. " Experts" just like to hide this fact by calling it inflation.
Taxes must increase to conceal.....theres that word from Occult religions again....how much the government is stealing out of the economy by deficit spending on all programs..including the military "and" social welfare programs et al.

Thanks,
Orangetom




posted on Nov, 4 2005 @ 02:12 PM
link   
To what riots do you refer to in France. I must have missed that news. When did this take place???

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Nov, 4 2005 @ 08:01 PM
link   
I'm not manipulating statistics - in nearly every way you look at it, America spends far in excess than it needs to.

In any case, I have not used 'rhetoric' nor have I waxed lyrical about how perfect European welfare systems are. Moreover, there is no connection between my arguments and the French riots - I have argued consistently over the past week or so and the rioting has continued throughout this time period.

Even so, European welfare systems are certainly fairer and more comprehensive than those in the US. French medical aid is universal and is generally regarded as one of - if not the - finest in the world. Does this mean that poverty is eliminated in Europe? No. It exists but it is considerably lower than in the US.

I won't present statistics as they tend to be disregarded anyway.

In any case, what are the reasons for the French riots? I suspect that it is likely to as much based around racism as poverty. The extreme right is gaining ground across Europe at present and I suspect this is a reaction to race tensions - particularly between immigrant populations and the police.

I will not be posting any more on this topic on this thread. I feel it has been argued to death.



posted on Nov, 4 2005 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by kedfr

I won't present statistics as they tend to be disregarded anyway.



you mean "refuted", dont you? "disregarded" would mean that they have been completely ignored, when in fact they have been proven to be misleading.

orange.....if you check the atsnn you will find stories about the french riots.



posted on Nov, 5 2005 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Thanks for the heads up about the Riots in France. I finally read a article today about them. Seems to me that variations of this are happening across Europe...mostly France and Germany but I think they have had problems in the UK also. What I recall mostly hearing about ..was the mess going on at the soccer matchs. This seems to have a different flavor.
Also I expect more of this. But dont they have free medical in these countrys??? Strict gun laws too!!!!????

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Nov, 5 2005 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
Thanks for the heads up about the Riots in France. I finally read a article today about them. Seems to me that variations of this are happening across Europe...mostly France and Germany but I think they have had problems in the UK also. What I recall mostly hearing about ..was the mess going on at the soccer matchs. This seems to have a different flavor.
Also I expect more of this. But dont they have free medical in these countrys??? Strict gun laws too!!!!????

Thanks,
Orangetom


I'm not quite sure what this has to do with anything much less the subject of the original thread. What does free medical and strict gun laws in Europe have to do with the rioting in France? Surely you aren't suggesting that the US is free of the problems of racism and violence? Football hooliganism, while unfortunate, is not a problem relating only to the UK. I think a lot of sports are plagued by violence.

Incidently - Do you really think that having free medical care ensures that one won't have problems of a different nature? Your logic seems a little faulty.

As far as refuting logic, I've been reading this thread for the last few days and other than to hear some of you say you don't agree with statistical information, I don't really see you proving your argument. It just seems to be a bashing of Europe in an effort to not address the issues of this thread - IE: Whether the US Navy is too small. I think other responses might be forthcoming if the topic were to stay on course rather than resorting to the bashing other members unnecessarily.



posted on Nov, 5 2005 @ 06:15 PM
link   
That does it, the U.S. Navy has way too many ships. They should sell a couples on Ebay, so I can expend my own personal fleet... with my welfare check!



posted on Nov, 5 2005 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by nikelbee

I'm not quite sure what this has to do with anything much less the subject of the original thread. What does free medical and strict gun laws in Europe have to do with the rioting in France? Surely you aren't suggesting that the US is free of the problems of racism and violence? Football hooliganism, while unfortunate, is not a problem relating only to the UK. I think a lot of sports are plagued by violence.

Incidently - Do you really think that having free medical care ensures that one won't have problems of a different nature? Your logic seems a little faulty.

As far as refuting logic, I've been reading this thread for the last few days and other than to hear some of you say you don't agree with statistical information, I don't really see you proving your argument. It just seems to be a bashing of Europe in an effort to not address the issues of this thread - IE: Whether the US Navy is too small. I think other responses might be forthcoming if the topic were to stay on course rather than resorting to the bashing other members unnecessarily.





then you havent actually read all of the posts on this thread. if you had, you would have realized that the Brit is the one that brought up welfare expenditures in both the US and Europe in his arguments, and my posts were merely refuting his numbers and incorrect assumptions.

furthermore, my comments in regards to the riots in france were in reference to his inference that the european sytem is so much better than the US's.

[edit on 5-11-2005 by snafu7700]



posted on Nov, 6 2005 @ 02:06 AM
link   
Snafu

I have read the thread in its entirety and it is not hard to see that the so-called 'refuting' of the data, is not refuting, as you have not provided any data or statistics to the contrary, with the exception of a 2002 data link. What is prevelant is that you choose to discard any links that were provided and your willingness to continue the argument about which is a better country despite the many valid points Kedfr brought up trying to lead it back to the original post.

You cannot say that the rioting in France is a example of the welfare system not working, anymore than you can say that the US has no problems of any kind with rioting, racism, violence, shootings, because its non welfare system there works wonderfully. That logic is faulty. Kedfr has not claimed that Europe's welfare system is perfect, his arugment was that public monies in the US should be used less on the military and more on medical care. In fact he says on many occasions:



I have never suggested that a state-backed medical system is perfect. I live in England and know what the NHS is like


Also, when you 'refute' you have to take point by point and not simply state an opinion, but also provide logical reasoning, statistics as well as opinions as to why you believe the other person may be incorrect in their assumptions. I read two pages of posts where you simply say you aren't going to believe this or that. You discard the UN data as not being in your best interests. For example regarding World War II you say:



we spent the first two years helping you guys with a continuous stream of weapons, equipment, and general supplies. huge convoys shipped out from the US to Britain on a weekly basis starting shortly after dunkirk. FDR had every intention of entering the war, he just needed a way in that allowed for complete backing of the american people. to this day there is speculation that he knew of the impending pearl harbor attack and did nothing so that he would have that excuse.


Fine, you are using speculation to back up an argument, but where are the links proving this? How can speculation be used in a fair debate? How are you backing up this claim to make it stronger and more believable?

This is NOT refuting. You are simply disagreeing. Here is another example:


f you love studying history so much, then you should know that in order to keep from repeating our past mistakes, we have to learn from history. one lesson we have learned here in the states, is that every time we reduce the size of our military, it bites us in the arse, and i really dont care whether or not you agree, because you dont have to depend upon our military for your protection.


This isn't so much refuting as stating an opinion. And you are already saying you don't care whether the other posters agree or not. What is the point of sharing information on this thread? I am not saying your opinions are invalid, but it is how much you backup your beliefs and views, as much as what you think that in the end will make your posts succesful. You may think that saying you don't agree with something is enough, but it isn't. Kedfr made a few fair points and they weren't debated, he was instead attacked for his views and that isn't the motto of this board. On pure issues alone, I don't think you have sufficiently disputed anything. You have just scared off people who may have wanted to respond to this thead.

In addition, it makes it upleasant for the rest of us to have to read a 'my country is better than your country' thread, instead of what I stated earlier. I'm just trying to steer this back to where it should be. Let's not make this a xenophobic attack on members. I am not a MOD, but simply a member who feels concerned that you can somehow use the riots in France to 'prove' your argument about welfare systems and call that a victory.






[edit on 6-11-2005 by nikelbee]



posted on Nov, 6 2005 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by nikelbee
Snafu

I have read the thread in its entirety and it is not hard to see that the so-called 'refuting' of the data, is not refuting, as you have not provided any data or statistics to the contrary, with the exception of a 2002 data link. What is prevelant is that you choose to discard any links that were provided and your willingness to continue the argument about which is a better country despite the many valid points Kedfr brought up trying to lead it back to the original post.

You cannot say that the rioting in France is a example of the welfare system not working, anymore than you can say that the US has no problems of any kind with rioting, racism, violence, shootings, because its non welfare system there works wonderfully. That logic is faulty. Kedfr has not claimed that Europe's welfare system is perfect, his arugment was that public monies in the US should be used less on the military and more on medical care. In fact he says on many occasions:



I have never suggested that a state-backed medical system is perfect. I live in England and know what the NHS is like


Also, when you 'refute' you have to take point by point and not simply state an opinion, but also provide logical reasoning, statistics as well as opinions as to why you believe the other person may be incorrect in their assumptions. I read two pages of posts where you simply say you aren't going to believe this or that. You discard the UN data as not being in your best interests. For example regarding World War II you say:



we spent the first two years helping you guys with a continuous stream of weapons, equipment, and general supplies. huge convoys shipped out from the US to Britain on a weekly basis starting shortly after dunkirk. FDR had every intention of entering the war, he just needed a way in that allowed for complete backing of the american people. to this day there is speculation that he knew of the impending pearl harbor attack and did nothing so that he would have that excuse.


Fine, you are using speculation to back up an argument, but where are the links proving this? How can speculation be used in a fair debate? How are you backing up this claim to make it stronger and more believable?

This is NOT refuting. You are simply disagreeing. Here is another example:


f you love studying history so much, then you should know that in order to keep from repeating our past mistakes, we have to learn from history. one lesson we have learned here in the states, is that every time we reduce the size of our military, it bites us in the arse, and i really dont care whether or not you agree, because you dont have to depend upon our military for your protection.


This isn't so much refuting as stating an opinion. And you are already saying you don't care whether the other posters agree or not. What is the point of sharing information on this thread? I am not saying your opinions are invalid, but it is how much you backup your beliefs and views, as much as what you think that in the end will make your posts succesful. You may think that saying you don't agree with something is enough, but it isn't. Kedfr made a few fair points and they weren't debated, he was instead attacked for his views and that isn't the motto of this board. On pure issues alone, I don't think you have sufficiently disputed anything. You have just scared off people who may have wanted to respond to this thead.

In addition, it makes it upleasant for the rest of us to have to read a 'my country is better than your country' thread, instead of what I stated earlier. I'm just trying to steer this back to where it should be. Let's not make this a xenophobic attack on members. I am not a MOD, but simply a member who feels concerned that you can somehow use the riots in France to 'prove' your argument about welfare systems and call that a victory.






[edit on 6-11-2005 by nikelbee]


LMAO....you, again, did not read the post. you just wasted alot of time and energy explaining how i was not refuting his arguments, but merely stating my opinion.

here's what i actually said:



then you havent actually read all of the posts on this thread. if you had, you would have realized that the Brit is the one that brought up welfare expenditures in both the US and Europe in his arguments, and my posts were merely refuting his numbers and incorrect assumptions.

furthermore, my comments in regards to the riots in france were in reference to his inference that the european sytem is so much better than the US's.

[edit on 5-11-2005 by snafu7700]


with the last paragraph, i am not trying to state that the european systems is any worse than ours, just that they are definitely not better.

as i have stated over and over again, our sytem is not better or worse, just different.

again, if you go back and read the posts, you will see how i have tried over and over to bring the topic back around to US expenditures, but kedfr continuously brought up civilian welfare expenditures.

good try though, nikelbee...or should i call you kedfr? one thing you wont ever catch me doing here is hiding behind another nick.



posted on Nov, 6 2005 @ 01:18 PM
link   



good try though, nikelbee...or should i call you kedfr? one thing you wont ever catch me doing here is hiding behind another nick.


Care to back this up? I suggest you go and look around the board and see what threads I have posted and then come back and let me know how you came to this ridiculous conclusion. I think this is a great example of your logic in action:

1. based on a weak premise
2. little or no research to provide proof or evidence
3. unfounded
4. impossible

If you were REALLY observant, you might look up where I hang out on ATS and realise I am quite active on the writing forums - I also have podcasts and you should have a listen and see what I sound like. I suppose there always exists the possibilty that I'm very good at throwing my voice; as I believe Kedfr is male.

As for written expression - Are you SURE you really want to get into an argument with me regarding writing styles?
Kedfr has a very similar tone to mine (ie: we tend to use logic in the same way) but we both write in completely different styles. Just in case you ever think about making yourself look silly again and accuse two different people of being one and the same, i'll give you a few suggestions to look out for.

Grammar and sentence structure: how do they punctuate? Are they partial to long or short paragraphs? Does the writer like clauses? Are thoughts complete or do they chop them up? Do they abbreviate? Mispell? Use proper upper and lower cases in specific ways - do they use British or American spelling? Most writers have pet words they like to use. I know mine. Can you figure them out? Better yet, can you prove Kedfr and I use the same key words? I would be interested to know if you can even spot them.

All this can be proven just by taking the time to read a few posts. But then there is the 'deeper' stuff. How does the poster formulate their thoughts? Are they linear going from one point to another? Or do they summarise? Are their posts easy to read or do they rely heavily on data and statistics? Do they like using quotes? These are all things to look out for as even the most expert forger will let something slip. I invite you to view Kedfr's posts and compare them to mine and then get back to me if you are still sure we are the same person.

Actually, if you are still 100 percent sure, don't bother letting me know; because i'll probably be visiting a shrink somewhere getting help for my personality disorder, as I am not aware I am a British male but you never know...

I think Snafu, you need to look at the handbook and get a clue on how to post good threads and not waste your time harrassing other members and making false accusations you can't prove when you feel you are being backed up against the wall.



posted on Nov, 6 2005 @ 02:08 PM
link   
for many of us "Yanks" the UN is the wrong place to go for statistical information. They are mostly politically motivated and looking for handouts.
So when I see someone quote the UN for statistics or opinions they quickly move into the highly suspect arena in lieu of so many failed projects sponsored by the UN on someone elses handouts.
Many Americans view the UN as questionable in the peace arena. By the way..if we cut back our Military..will the UN fill the void ..and with what????

I agree with SNAFU on many of thier postings. We are Yanks...meaning different. Different meaning not the same. Meaning we dont want the medical system they have in Europe.
As to racism...please dont use that as a example of America. I have been around the world both as a military dependent and later when I enlisted. I have seen the face of racism in this world and many cultures practice it much more than Americans. However ..the stigma of racism has been so propagandized in America by people using it for political leverage that it silences so many as to the knowlege of which I speak. Orientals are very racist...hebrews are very racist , even many blacks in America are very racist... Racism is showing its face in Europe...again...I dont think it ever really left.. Most Americans have never been places in this world other than for brief vacations. Its easy to silence them on this topic. Racism has become a default setting to allow some to politically play through unhindered. Others must stand pat and let them play through. It just doesnt work on me.

We are Yanks..we are not Europeans . That is the main point ..we are not intrested in letting Kedfr, you or anyone else ,play through on a default setting while we stand pat. The implication on Kedfr's part is that Europe and its medical system is so much better than conditions here in the USA that there is something wrong with us that we do not default to that manner of thinking and conducting ourselves.
I will remind you and Kedfr that the very "wealthy " state of California is finding itself going into the tank by supporting so many welfare projects and the voters are begining to react to the concept of "free."

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Nov, 6 2005 @ 02:34 PM
link   

By the way..if we cut back our Military..will the UN fill the void ..and with what????


Maybe we should save money by cutting back the funding we give the UN, we are one nation, yet we pay 25% of their bill.



posted on Nov, 6 2005 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by nikelbee



good try though, nikelbee...or should i call you kedfr? one thing you wont ever catch me doing here is hiding behind another nick.


Care to back this up? I suggest you go and look around the board and see what threads I have posted and then come back and let me know how you came to this ridiculous conclusion. I think this is a great example of your logic in action:

1. based on a weak premise
2. little or no research to provide proof or evidence
3. unfounded
4. impossible

If you were REALLY observant, you might look up where I hang out on ATS and realise I am quite active on the writing forums - I also have podcasts and you should have a listen and see what I sound like. I suppose there always exists the possibilty that I'm very good at throwing my voice; as I believe Kedfr is male.

As for written expression - Are you SURE you really want to get into an argument with me regarding writing styles?
Kedfr has a very similar tone to mine (ie: we tend to use logic in the same way) but we both write in completely different styles. Just in case you ever think about making yourself look silly again and accuse two different people of being one and the same, i'll give you a few suggestions to look out for.

Grammar and sentence structure: how do they punctuate? Are they partial to long or short paragraphs? Does the writer like clauses? Are thoughts complete or do they chop them up? Do they abbreviate? Mispell? Use proper upper and lower cases in specific ways - do they use British or American spelling? Most writers have pet words they like to use. I know mine. Can you figure them out? Better yet, can you prove Kedfr and I use the same key words? I would be interested to know if you can even spot them.

All this can be proven just by taking the time to read a few posts. But then there is the 'deeper' stuff. How does the poster formulate their thoughts? Are they linear going from one point to another? Or do they summarise? Are their posts easy to read or do they rely heavily on data and statistics? Do they like using quotes? These are all things to look out for as even the most expert forger will let something slip. I invite you to view Kedfr's posts and compare them to mine and then get back to me if you are still sure we are the same person.

Actually, if you are still 100 percent sure, don't bother letting me know; because i'll probably be visiting a shrink somewhere getting help for my personality disorder, as I am not aware I am a British male but you never know...

I think Snafu, you need to look at the handbook and get a clue on how to post good threads and not waste your time harrassing other members and making false accusations you can't prove when you feel you are being backed up against the wall.



then why would you send me a U2U wondering how i came to my conclusion? anwer: to be sure that i wasnt able to track your IP.

as i said in the U2U, i really dont care one way or the other whether or not you have multiple nicks, just dont use them to restart an argument youve already lost.

i suppose if we really wanted to be sure, we could ask the mods........



posted on Nov, 6 2005 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Snafu

I stated quite clearly that if you are making allegations about me that you PROVE it. I haven't seen you do it. Just more silly statements and i'm not getting into an argument with you as that would be a complete waste of my time. I suggest you either U2 me directly, contact a mod or move this elsewhere.



(Edit: Btw - if you WERE indeed tracking my IP address, we would be having a completely different discussion)


[edit on 6-11-2005 by nikelbee]



posted on Nov, 6 2005 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Let's stay on topic please. Thank you all...



posted on Nov, 6 2005 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by nikelbee
Snafu

I stated quite clearly that if you are making allegations about me that you PROVE it. I haven't seen you do it. Just more silly statements and i'm not getting into an argument with you as that would be a complete waste of my time. I suggest you either U2 me directly, contact a mod or move this elsewhere.



(Edit: Btw - if you WERE indeed tracking my IP address, we would be having a completely different discussion)


[edit on 6-11-2005 by nikelbee]


fine. i was willing to let it ride, but if you really want to push it, then lets ask the mods, because they do have the ability to read IP addresses. but, of course, they wont reveal this info without your approval. so its up to you, how do you want to play it?

sorry, kinglizard, i was typing this as you posted evidently....unless he wants to push this by bringing you into it, i'll leave it alone


[edit on 6-11-2005 by snafu7700]



posted on Nov, 6 2005 @ 02:51 PM
link   
No more off topis posts please...



posted on Nov, 6 2005 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Maybe we should save money by cutting back the funding we give the UN, we are one nation, yet we pay 25% of their bill.


Yeah your also the biggest and most powerful, your country agreed to the terms which state that, unless your saying that you supply over 25% of the UN forces?



posted on Nov, 6 2005 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Maybe we should save money by cutting back the funding we give the UN, we are one nation, yet we pay 25% of their bill.


Yeah your also the biggest and most powerful, your country agreed to the terms which state that, unless your saying that you supply over 25% of the UN forces?


wait a minute....just so i understand you....

its ok that we are paying 25% of the UN's bill (and i'm taking his word on that figure because i havent had time to check it), because our economy is so much larger than everyone else's, but its not ok that we spend more than anyone else on our military because our economy is so much larger?

edited for typos

[edit on 6-11-2005 by snafu7700]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join