Power causes corruption ?

[PanzerJaeger]

I dont know if you understand exactly who Hitler and Stalin were, and what they did. Do you want me to provide some links?

Also, this is the first ive heard GWB and Moon are "good buddies".

[Aenlic]

Learn something new every day, don't you?

And after your thread regarding WWII, I'm not sure you understand what Hitler did.

[PanzerJaeger]

Learn something new every day, don't you?

Can you provide some links that show GWB playing golf, having lunch, or doing anything else that "good buddies" do with Moon?

And after your thread regarding WWII, I'm not sure you understand what Hitler did.

You obviously didnt thoroughly read the thread... which is not a suprise.

[LeftEyeNine]

PJ,

It's been two pages here and people are agreeing with my thread starter. You may agree or disagree. And this forum's patrons are intelligent enough to decide what is worth discussing and what is not.

If you may be taking this thread as an anti-American propaganda, you may be feeling quite comfortable with US propaganda ongoing in other threads. Do you think it would be beneficial for some purpose to make an anti-US propaganda here? Actually I am a Business administration dept. graduate student in an university with a serious population of anti-US propagandist students. They are no more than rubbish, wanting a Bhutan-like isolated country. I keep myself updated with how things are going around, not a demonstration kid like them flocking thorugh the campus with meaningless teen enthusiasm..

I think you should try "looking into face" instead of "looking down on".

[PanzerJaeger]

You might want to try to place it into context verus assuming you know what my point is. Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. The common ground is corruption - and power. Not in attempting to find a middle ground in the discussion.

That makes the comment even more outrageous as you were not even trying to garner some level of agreement with the original anti-american poster.

I see no instance where any US president can be considered in the same vein as those dictators. That kind of rhetoric only promotes the kind of relativism that people like the original poster try and draw between America and such empires as the Nazis and Soviets.

[PanzerJaeger]

I think you should try "looking into face" instead of "looking down on".

This is not conducive to a reasonable discussion. I believe the term is "strawman". You're starting the discussion with extremely biased, if not propagandistic, "information".

In the best case, you stated completely innaccurate information and expected to have an honest discussion based on it.

As long as there is an endless conflict between US and others, I asked myself "Would it be the same if it wasn't US, say, was Myanmar or Sweden or Turkey?".

Sorry to sound against US but.. There must be a difference between "liberating" and "tearing into pieces".. US has a policy to create 300 diiferent states that consist the Middle East. "Scatter and Manage" is their policy in Middle East. Chaos and conflicting minor factions are what US aims in order to take control in Middle East..

It would be like me saying "Since we all know Turkish people are idiots, is it the water that makes the dumb, or the way their education system is set up?"

[Redleg]

That makes the comment even more outrageous as you were not even trying to garner some level of agreement with the original anti-american poster.

Now that is funny - are you so idealogical blinded that you can not see how yes indeed certain aspects of the American government leads to individuals becoming corrupt because of the power involved? That we have had leaders who for the most part went into office with all good intentions - who have become corrupt because of the power.

Hell no I wasn't trying to find a level of agreement with the orginial poster - because his question is correct and while his perception is slightly skewed because of his views - notice how I called him on the 300 countries comments. Which he admitted he was incorrect. - the premise of his question and the premise of his answer are correct.

Do you think vast power somehow harms the subject itself or would it be different if the super power was another country ?

The answer to this question is simple - power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I see no instance where any US president can be considered in the same vein as those dictators. That kind of rhetoric only promotes the kind of relativism that people like the original poster try and draw between America and such empires as the Nazis and Soviets.

Again your placing values on things that are not there.

Corruption is corruption regardless of who the individual is or what the individual does. The Relative value of the impact of the crime on certain individuals is far greater then others - but they all fell for the oldest adage of them all - which is always shown to be true regardless of what level you look at.

[PanzerJaeger]

Now that is funny - are you so idealogical blinded that you can not see how yes indeed certain aspects of the American government leads to individuals becoming corrupt because of the power involved? That we have had leaders who for the most part went into office with all good intentions - who have become corrupt because of the power.

I guess im too ideologically blinded to see any sort of comparison between Clinton and Stalin..

And truly, I have a hard time coming up with any Presidents who went into office as boy scouts and came out as corrupted. Being corrupt is in itself a characteristic. Stalins absolute power didnt corrupt him, he was always a bad person..

Corruption is corruption regardless of who the individual is or what the individual does. The Relative value of the impact of the crime on certain individuals is far greater then others - but they all fell for the oldest adage of them all - which is always shown to be true regardless of what level you look at.

I really dont agree. There are degrees of corruption. Skimming a little off the top is certainly not the same as genocide. In that light, I cannot see how even the worst, most corrupt US president can be mentioned in the same vein as the dictators of WW2.

Just my opinion though..

[Aenlic]

Can you provide some links that show GWB playing golf, having lunch, or doing anything else that "good buddies" do with Moon?

Okie-dokie!

First some links to Daddy's association with Reverend Moon:

http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/moon1.html

Given the controversy, Argentina's elected president, Carlos Menem, did decide to reject Moon's invitation. But Moon had a trump card to play in his bid for South American respectability: the endorsement of an ex-president of the United States, George Bush. Agreeing to speak at the newspaper's launch, Bush flew aboard a private plane, arriving in Buenos Aires on Nov. 22. Bush stayed at Menem's official residence, the Olivos. But Bush failed to change the Argentine president's mind.

Still, Moon's followers gushed that Bush had saved the day, as he stepped before about 900 Moon guests at the Sheraton Hotel. "Mr. Bush's presence as keynote speaker gave the event invaluable prestige," wrote the Unification News. "Father [Moon] and Mother [Mrs. Moon] sat with several of the True Children [Moon's offspring] just a few feet from the podium."

Bush lavished praise on Moon and his journalistic enterprises. "I want to salute Reverend Moon, who is the founder of The Washington Times and also of Tiempos del Mundo," Bush declared. "A lot of my friends in South America don't know about The Washington Times, but it is an independent voice. The editors of The Washington Times tell me that never once has the man with the vision interfered with the running of the paper, a paper that in my view brings sanity to Washington, D.C. I am convinced that Tiempos del Mundo is going to do the same thing" in Latin America.

That's just one of many examples, by the way.

For Dubya? He certainly knows how to repay the unwavering editorial support he receives from Moon's newspaper - the Washinton Times.

In 2003, Bush appointed former Washington Times managing editor and Unification Church member, Josette Shiner, to be Deputy U.S. Trade Representative. Among her jobs there? Enforcing free trade agreements in East Asia, including Korea (snicker, care to guess where Rev. Moon's empire is headquartered, or do I need to spell it out for you?) http://www.ustr.gov/Who_We_Are/Bios/...hiner.html?ht=

In 2003, Bush appointed David Caprara to be head of AmeriCorps(VISTA). Caprara is another Unification Church member and was formerly head of the Moonie front organization, American Family Coalition. http://www.americore.gov/about/newsr...?tbl_pr_id=117

I'm afraid I don't have any links to Dubya accepting large cash remunerations for speaking at Moonie gatherings, yet. Dubya, like his father, will have to wait until he's out of office before taking those $1 million plus paychecks from Moon per speech.

You obviously didnt thoroughly read the thread... which is not a suprise.

Oh, but I did. And as soon as you specified that the thread must separate out any such minimally important political things such as, oh... Hitler, from a discussion on whether or not Germany was wronged in WWII, it wasn't too difficult to see where you were going with the thread.

[Al Khalifah]

Not really related, but I think UK and France have roughly the same destructive power as China. Actually, UK might even have more nuclear weapons than China.

You think very wrong.

Though reliable figures for the strengths of the PLA are always going to be sketchy due to the system in place in China, it is believed that China has in excess of 20 DF-5 ICBMs in addition to an unknown quantity of the newer DF-31s. These are liquid-fueled and solid-fueled missiles capable of hitting anywhere on the globe. China also has 5 nuclear weapon equiped submarines and an (estimated) excess of 200 heavy bombers for the delivery of tactical nuclear weapons.
Compare this to the UK's four Vanguard class submarines equipped with Trident missiles capable of striking at targets within 5000 miles, of which only one is on active service at once during peace time.

China is a big boy along with Russia and the United States. Britain and France's nuclear detterants are, in reality, effective against little more than insuring that these nations are not invaded by a hostile power. Russia and the US have excellent strategic programs in place to hunt for an opposing power's submarines in the event of nuclear war - its reasonable to assume that China would have developed a similar program.

[Aenlic]

China is a big boy along with Russia and the United States. Britain and France's nuclear detterants are, in reality, effective against little more than insuring that these nations are not invaded by a hostile power. Russia and the US have excellent strategic programs in place to hunt for an opposing power's submarines in the event of nuclear war - its reasonable to assume that China would have developed a similar program.

I believe you're correct about China's nuclear ICBM arsenal, Al Khalifa. About 20 of the DF-5's and maybe 120 altogether counting the older 3's and the newer 21's. Best place to check is www.fas.org. They keep a pretty accurate accounting of all countries' forces, nuclear and non-nuclear, at least as far as they can discern from available unclassified records, some not intended to reveal as much as they do.

I'm not so sure about the Chinese strategic submarine capabilities. To date, they still only have the one functional (and functional is giving it a lot of credit, considering its history of problems) nuclear powered SSBN called the Xia, and a project they call the Type-94 to develop more. The Type-93 SSNs they are still in the process of developing , they claim will be as capable as a U.S. Los Angeles class SSN. That's probably stretching the truth. Really stretching it. Other than the program for the Type-93's, of which there is not yet a prototype, they have about 20 Ming class SSN's which are derivatives of the old Soviet Romeo class. Hardly a challenge for our own SSNs. They also have a bunch of Kilo class non-nuclear subs and some of the old Soviet Romeo's which they copied for the Mings.

The Soviet capabilities were quite a ways behind our own in attack subs, and the post-Soviet economy has ended almost all research beyond that. The closest the Soviets came to our abilities underwater were the very latest generations of their subs, like the Schuka-B which we call the Akula and the possible but not proven in unclassified documents Yasen which was given the designation Graney. About 2/3 of the entire former Soviet sub fleet lies waiting for scrapping across the bay from Petropavlosk-Kamchatskiy, which is one reason many Russian generals were upset about having U.S. military personnel there during the recent rescue of their research sub.

[Strike For The South]

You guys are just jealous we are the best so get on you're knees!you heard me now say it with me I Pledge aleigance...

[Ironside]

When it comes to the US, the record in Latin-America pre-WWII is quite telling when it comes to show that you don't need to be a super-power to be abusive. We have actually seen an improvment since that.

And power certainly causes corruption, but isn't a straight path as many factors plays a part.

That saying that a Myanmar, Sweden or Turkey superpower would behave quite different from the US, but power abuse would problably occur anyway.

[LeftEyeNine]

Well, I personally believe in coruption occured by vast or absolute power too. I need to tell this in order to cover any more claims being this thread to be biased somehow..

I can not actually imagine what I would be doing if I had a superpower's president chair. (not a genocide, relax.. )

Actually, may be the headline of another topic tough, but watching your own country's favors in every step outside, somehow hurts another one. And that's the rule of the nature. So that as long as US is considered to be the best of the corrupted ones, for example a strategic partnership (I hate the word..It means "we are targeting another, we have other plans") always showed up in a destructive manner.

Reversly, he will allways be hated by those lower in the pecking order just for being on top.

That is an excellent assertion - the absolute truth. But I have to repeat that I am not talking in a "downsider" way here although am I (a citizen of the country - Turkey). I opened the topic in a true demand of debate.