| Sunday, November 30, 2003 - 02:20 pm |
Matt, that's because it is, in the minds and even in the hearts of many involved, a cold and rational process. Terror attacks on the Red Cross and UN in Iraq can not have had the betterment of the Iraqi people as their reasons.
I usually think that Chomsky is so full of his ideological crap that he can't address the real world, but he's right on target in your quote on freedom and democracy. But what to do when a truly democratic and free society must be based on trust among members and between members and the society and government as a whole, and that very trust allows those who care little for freedom and democracy to work at undermining them for fanatical or other aims? We lose if we give up our freedom to control the fanatics, and we lose if we allow them to continue.
| Sunday, November 30, 2003 - 03:53 pm |
from my own experience with the current rebellion rules, welfares of greater than 150 all but stoped corporation destructions with an empire of 25 countries (the size of my FB empire, before I started my half-assed transfer to GR
with 15 countries i still lose some corps in countries with 170+ Welfare index.... though not often to be fair.
I think its an annoying but needed feature. I remember before the rebels we had fb warlords with 100 countries.
| Monday, December 01, 2003 - 01:40 am |
"And Lorien..I must say...while I fuond your post cogent, I also found it disturbingly cold."
>As the occupying power gets more retributive and
>violent in their countermeasures, they
>inevitably kill or main innocents - whose
>friends and relatives become new recruits for
Hey! Hope you know I don't advocate it, I'm just explaining it. If you want to know the basics of the game plan from the Iraqi side, read up on the French vs. the Algerians in the late 50's and early 60's.
And Manufacturing Consent is a awesome read, I wish it were required reading for civics classes. Not likely that will happen, truth isn't welcome there, just myth.