The NAU

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Starvald

"considering in 1776 "we" fought tooth and nail to separate from them and their way of life"

LOL by doing what?, asking the French to win the war of independance?, to be honest the american war of Independance was as much a European war as it was a British American war.


What I was referring to was the American Revolution. 1775 the Americans began their own war for independence. In 1778 the french "assisted" the to be United States in their quest. The french did not win it for them. They "helped". Yes, as history has depicted, the assistance from the french was crucial, but that's not the point I was trying to make.

As far as it being a European war... that came after the original 13 colonies that later became the U.S. of A. The wars that pursued after what took place to for the United States was a domino effect caused by "our" efforts.

[edit on 3/9/2007 by Infoholic]




posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 12:07 PM
link   
What importance you place on the assistance of France, Spain and the Netherlands who effectively entered into a state of war in order to support that rebellion in hopes of weakening britains power is up to you. As it stands it was a European war, albeit a colonial one, fought by Europeans over what European nation would go on to dominate the world, and lucky for Britain, we did. Regardles. This is not the issue.

The new cold war is the issue, or rather, the cold war thats always existed since the second world war, never really went away but kind off calms down now and then but apparently has resurfaced in an apocolyptic and untimely fashion, or timely, depends on how people take that i suppose.



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Infoholic

As far as taking into consideration the Canadian and Mexican viewpoints... could you explain to me why I should want to relinquish my rights to make another country (or two) happy? You just don't get it, do you?

As well, have you been able to vote on anything that has taken place with the SPP, or the North American Union movement thus far? What makes you think you'll be able to vote on that when the time comes? All that is left (besides fine tuning the NAU articles of agreement) is that mighty stroke of a pen.

Something I haven't asked thus far, but I can easily assume... I take it you are a Canadian, right?
[edit on 3/9/2007 by Infoholic]


Infoholic,

Why should you consider Mexican and Canadian viewpoints?Considering there are three nations involved it is only proper and unbiased to consider all viewpoints.Or are you of the opinion that only US considerations are valid?If that true you, sir are a BIGOT.Does it even occur to you that Mexican and Canadian rights are also in danger if what you say is true.I respect your right to not give a damn about Mexico or Canada,but it shames me to say,that's the reason alot of people across the world dislike the US and they are justified to feel that way.

Did you not admit that no treaty has been signed?So whats to vote on?Trust when the day comes, if I don't have a say I will revolt with the rest of you.But if in my opinion the NAU is a good thing I will vote for it as is my right.

Finally,does the fact that I respect both Mexico and Canada's viewpoints make me Canadian?I may be jumping the gun when I think with the education level of the US,everyone would consider alterior viewponits with respect and a open mind,but I'm obviously wrong in your case.I'll leave it to you to decide where I live.



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 01:14 PM
link   


Or are you of the opinion that only US considerations are valid?If that true you, sir are a BIGOT.

I think the term your looking for is a nationalist.
en.wikipedia.org...


A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own.

www.thefreedictionary.com...


1. nationalist - devotion to the interests or culture of a particular nation including promoting the interests of one country over those of others; "nationalist aspirations"; "minor nationalistic differences"


I think you will find alot of people in the U.S. are nationalists.



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 01:38 PM
link   
if the devotion to the interests or culture of your particular nation leads to it conflicting, comprimising and superseding the importance of others, then that nationalism will lead to bigotry. Nationalism is pretty false anyway, it more often than not is a tool to incite bigotry amongst people.

[edit on 9-3-2007 by Starvald]

[edit on 9-3-2007 by Starvald]



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Wha?
Just because I am a proud American citizen I am a bigot?

That may be the single most rediculous comment I have read here at ats.



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 02:28 PM
link   
you should probably read what actually i said



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 03:52 PM
link   
I did read it. What is a nation for if not to take care of the people within that nation.
I am a citizen of the U.S.A. not of any other nation. To equate someones nationalistic pride with bigottry is hogwash spewed by global eliteists. I like Canada and Mexico just fine...as long as they are Canada and Mexico. I will do everything within my power to see that the U.S.A. never joins in any form of joint government with any other nations. Too many Americans(not Canadians or Mexicans) fought and died for the rights I enjoy. I will not stand by and see that legacy tossed aside like rubbish so the globalists can get their way.



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Wow, I lay down to nap for a couple hours and look what happens. I'm very impressed.


Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
Why should you consider Mexican and Canadian viewpoints?Considering there are three nations involved it is only proper and unbiased to consider all viewpoints.Or are you of the opinion that only US considerations are valid?If that true you, sir are a BIGOT.Does it even occur to you that Mexican and Canadian rights are also in danger if what you say is true.I respect your right to not give a damn about Mexico or Canada,but it shames me to say,that's the reason alot of people across the world dislike the US and they are justified to feel that way.

So you are suggesting that the Founding Fathers should have took into consideration that fact that the King of England wanted us to worship him, and we shouldn't have walked away from his tyranny?
Oops, guess we messed up there.



Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
Did you not admit that no treaty has been signed?So whats to vote on?Trust when the day comes, if I don't have a say I will revolt with the rest of you.But if in my opinion the NAU is a good thing I will vote for it as is my right.

Yes, and quite obviously you didn't read between the lines as I've suggested you do. The ones that have formed the SPP clearly have you where they want you. tsk tsk tsk :shk:


Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
Finally,does the fact that I respect both Mexico and Canada's viewpoints make me Canadian?I may be jumping the gun when I think with the education level of the US,everyone would consider alterior viewponits with respect and a open mind,but I'm obviously wrong in your case.I'll leave it to you to decide where I live.

Nope, but you have a stance that is completely Anti-American. So that tells me you must live (or at least deserve to live) somewhere else. And in case anyone asks of my point there, "If you don't want to be an American, don't live here."


Originally posted by Starvald
if the devotion to the interests or culture of your particular nation leads to it conflicting, comprimising and superseding the importance of others, then that nationalism will lead to bigotry. Nationalism is pretty false anyway, it more often than not is a tool to incite bigotry amongst people.

I don't believe that to be correct. I think all it does is strengthen one's nation.

Obviously you need some education as well, Starvald. Start here.

Ahh, the old "bait and switch" tactics. I love it.


[edit on 3/9/2007 by Infoholic]



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 04:11 PM
link   
then if you did read it you grossly misinterpreted what i said. My point was, and please note i too am highly nationalistic but not at the expense of another, that if for whatever reasons someone’s sense of nationalism causes them to compromise the beliefs, freedoms and ideals of another then they have crossed the fine line from nationalism into bigotry. And yes, nationalism can be used as a very powerful political tool to form bigotry, take Nazi Germany and McCarthyism as good examples of how it can be manipulated, or generally any type of war governments are part of they effectively hijack peoples sense of nationalism to rouse them to war against others this leading to bigotry..


"Too many Americans(not Canadians or Mexicans) fought and died for the rights I enjoy"

Your implying what exactly?, Canada doesn’t have the same freedoms as you and that Mexico nor Canada have ever been involved in a conflict for freedoms?, sorry but you should probably try your best to look into the history of those nations, try not to let your nationalism get in the way, I know those lesser "countries" like to pretend to have a history but at least humor them


"I don't believe that to be correct"

Well your basicaly saying that nationalism cannot lead to bigotry, but it can it doesnt lead to it all the time but obviously you are ignorant of the many instances in history and present day where it has so not only are you ignorant of this, you also happen to be wrong.

[edit on 9-3-2007 by Starvald]

[edit on 9-3-2007 by Starvald]



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starvald
Well your basicaly saying that nationalism cannot lead to bigotry, but it can it doesnt lead to it all the time but obviously you are ignorant of the many instances in history and present day where it has so not only are you ignorant of this, you also happen to be wrong.


If I am ignorant to the ideal you mistakenly are taking to the definition of "Nationalism", then may I cite a point in recent history of 9/11?

President Bush and his administration used 9/11 to stir the patriotism of the US general population to enable him to go to war (albeit, the war was never "declared") in Iraq.

That instance has nothing to do with nationalism, as you are trying to compare it to, nor does that type of "patriotism" have anything to do with denying the government the unconstitutional means of dismantling the US of A.

[edit on 3/9/2007 by Infoholic]



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Infoholic


Pure luck?
[edit on 3/8/2007 by Infoholic]


The British were busy fighting other nations besides France during the time of our revolution. My memory is bad, but I think it was the Seven Years War. Great Britian couldn't of focused all their forces at the time so it seems like we did have luck. Maybe the founding fathers purposly declared independance when GB was busy.

[edit on 9-3-2007 by wildcat]



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 04:45 PM
link   
How can you be nationalistic and it not be at the expense of another?





Your implying what exactly?, Canada doesn’t have the same freedoms as you and that Mexico nor Canada have ever been involved in a conflict for freedoms?, sorry but you should probably try your best to look into the history of those nations, try not to let your nationalism get in the way, I know those lesser "countries" like to pretend to have a history but at least humor them

I was implying nothing. Canadians and Mexicans did not fight the war for independance for the U.S. Americans did. Any Canadian or Mexican support in the war of 1812? How about the Canadian support for the spanish-american war? Who amongst "western" allies carries the big stick? Who amongst "western" allies is not afraid to use it? Don't get me wrong here I am glad Canada and Mexico are our allies; and they have wonderful countries( I have been to both);but they each have their own governments and I believe it should stay that way.
As far as freedoms go I bet we here in the U.S. enjoy more than any other country in the world. I am not about to let them go.



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 04:55 PM
link   
I have only ever stated that nationalism can in many instances lead to bigotry
, i have never said bigotry and nationalism are the same thing.

What President bush did infact do was inspire nationalism, which is the patriotic feeling, often to an excessive degree and the advocacy of political independence for a particular country.....like political independence in Iraq perhaps?

And you cannot deny, because of this excessive patriotism there have been many cases of blatant bigotry towards Islamic and Middle Eastern people, you deny this?

“Canadians and Mexicans did not fight the war for independence for the U.S. Americans did”

You never actually stated you were talking about a war of independence though, I thought you meant in general, my mistake if you weren’t.

“As far as freedoms go I bet we here in the U.S. enjoy more than any other country in the world”

I don’t know about that, more or less every government has the freedom to spy on its own people.


"Any Canadian or Mexican support in the war of 1812?"

Why the hell would you get Canadian help during that????, or spanish for that matter.

[edit on 9-3-2007 by Starvald]



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 04:57 PM
link   
not every country has the 2nd ammendment tho

and the 2nd protects the rest...like the 4th(privacy) and the 14th(privacy)

[edit on 9/3/2007 by shooterbrody]



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by wildcat
The British were busy fighting other nations besides France during the time of our revolution. My memory is bad, but I think it was the Seven Years War. Great Britian couldn't of focused all their forces at the time so it seems like we did have luck. Maybe the founding fathers purposly declared independance when GB was busy.


Which one of the seven years wars? There were three of them.

1563–1570 war - Nordic Seven Years' War
1592–1598 war - Korea
1754 and 1756–1763 - America

Mind you, the American Revolution was 1775-1783, well after the seven years war.



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Why would they?, its only there to serve some antiquated ideology based around the premise of a revolution.l



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starvald
I have only ever stated that nationalism can in many instances lead to bigotry
, i have never said bigotry and nationalism are the same thing.

I know you never said it, but you sure as hell implied it.


Originally posted by Starvald
What President bush did infact do was inspire nationalism, which is the patriotic feeling, often to an excessive degree and the advocacy of political independence for a particular country.....like political independence in Iraq perhaps?

What Bush did was exploit the patriotism of his "nationals".


Originally posted by Starvald
And you cannot deny, because of this excessive patriotism there have been many cases of blatant bigotry towards Islamic and Middle Eastern people, you deny this?

Yes, I deny that. I cannot speak for everyone of this nation, but I deny bigotry.



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 05:06 PM
link   
yeah keeping your government from turning into a tyrannical state is an antiquated idea

ideas like that one are why I would prefer to keep the U.S. on its own



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Yeah its fair enough to have it as an ideal, but it isnt practiced and your goverment has slippd into a tyranny, great load of good it did you. Theres also the fact that despite having all these lofty ideologys in your constitution, your constitution is routinely ignored and violated by your goverment. So yes, it is severly antiqauted and completely void.





new topics
top topics
 
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join