Revolution - Which side are you on?

Stormrage · 2005-07-03 13:31:18

Actually, the jihadis are falling out and duking it out among themselves. Some groups have given up - anybody heard from Muqtada Al-Sadr lately? The difference between Baghdad now and Baghdad last year is amazing. Elections have come and gone, there aren't any major insurgent controlled areas like Sadr City and Fallujah. The Iraqi police and army are acting independently and reasonably well. Most of Bin Laden's recruits are dying in-place there.
The war in Iraq is a success so far by pretty much any objective standard: tyrant deposed, free government instated, insurgency downgraded from major threat to major nuisance.

Did you know that Islam is the fastest growing Religon? If the trend continues there will be more muslims then other Religon. So there will be alot of muslims in the west
It's the fastest growing religion - in Islamic countries, and in European countries with open immigration. Elsewhere, Islam is not growing nearly as fast as Christianity, and most would not consider adding millions of hungry mouths to what are mostly desert countries depending on a finite resource for their surivival to be a viable long-term strategy.

There huge growth doesn't come from Islamic countries. Most of them have a huge 80% population that already are muslims. The growth of islam is 2.9% while the world population growth is 2.6%. The growth of Christianity is 2.3%
http://www.religioustolerance.org/growt … htm]Growth rate of Christianity and Islam

America? Are you kidding? America is beginning to lose a grip of its superpower status especially know when China is growing fast.
China has last-mover advantage; it's growing very fast because it modernized very late. It's basically copying what worked for the US, Europe, Japan, South Korea, etc, and because it's copying the process of industrialization, it's basically able to hurry up in its process of catch-up. China also has massive problems of bad debt, severaly uneven growth, and a whole host of other growing pains which it will have to muddle through. It is very, very unlikely that China will surpass the US in the coming century. It probably will surpass Europe, but that's only because Europe is staring demographic meltdown in the face.
As for the US losing its grip on superpower status, please. The US in the world resembles nothing more than some champion boxer being harassed by a crowd of children and surly teenagers. He knows that he could basically stomp them flat, and might even fantasize about doing it, but knows that no matter how satisfying smashing the little twerps might be, it's not worth the hassle in today's media-soaked world. Teenagers in that sort of situation tend to mistake that sort of mixture of stoic indifference and self-restraint to weakness and egg the guy on until he snaps.

Yes the US is losing a grip on it. The one advantage that the chinese have over the rest of the world isn't the fact that they copy stuff. It that they have a big work force. They can make cheap good quality merchandise for less pay. Thats why your more likely to find Made in China products then Made in U.S.A.

And know the USA can't do jack shit to any other countruy expect for the poor ones. If the country starts something with Britain or any other european country we would hesitate to show our force. Individiluty we might get our ass kicked but working has a group we could beat you. Why? Beacuse no country is self sufficient. You need other countries to help you. So that crowed of children would be adults.

6: The War on Terror is ending. Iraq is a big disaster. All it did was waste the budget of the USA and give osama bin laden more reqruits
Actually, the jihadis are falling out and duking it out among themselves. Some groups have given up - anybody heard from Muqtada Al-Sadr lately? The difference between Baghdad now and Baghdad last year is amazing. Elections have come and gone, there aren't any major insurgent controlled areas like Sadr City and Fallujah. The Iraqi police and army are acting independently and reasonably well. Most of Bin Laden's recruits are dying in-place there.
The war in Iraq is a success so far by pretty much any objective standard: tyrant deposed, free government instated, insurgency downgraded from major threat to major nuisance.

So is this why the attacks still continue? Is this why there is a growing dissent in america? Is this why both your troops are dying? Is this why America is in talks with them terrorists themselves breaking there own "We do not negotiate with terrorists" rule? Is this why Iraqis are still dying? Is this why the budget on the war is causing record deficits?

Tell me what planet you live in beacuse it's not Earth.

Trebuchet · 2005-07-04 12:16:42

There huge growth doesn't come from Islamic countries. Most of them have a huge 80% population that already are muslims. The growth of islam is 2.9% while the world population growth is 2.6%. The growth of Christianity is 2.3%
Growth rate of Christianity and Islam

Their huge growth does come from Islamic countries - the birth rates are comparatively high there, and people more or less inherit their religion (most people are not converts). The Christian core has either stable populations or shrinking ones (US, Europe, Russia). If you thought about it for a second and applied some common sense, you'd realize that your numbers suggest that - Islam's growth in numbers is slightly higher than natural increase.

Yes the US is losing a grip on it. The one advantage that the chinese have over the rest of the world isn't the fact that they copy stuff. It that they have a big work force. They can make cheap good quality merchandise for less pay. Thats why your more likely to find Made in China products then Made in U.S.A.

How long can China keep its cheap labor force cheap, with increasing wealth? Why do you worry about China, which faces a variety of major crises - the demographic one of too few children to too many adults (ironic, considering it's China, but One-Child policy leaves a stiff bill for the children!) and too much bad debt? Why not worry about India, which will have a larger population in thirty years or so and is getting just as much investment? Why not worry about the US, which is increasing in population fastest among the industrialized nations, and should more than double in size over the next century? Why don't you?

It's because China is in the news, dummy. Personally, I think it's a shadow of old racism not quite forgotten - a new softer variant of the 'yellow peril'.

And know the USA can't do jack shit to any other countruy expect for the poor ones. If the country starts something with Britain or any other european country we would hesitate to show our force. Individiluty we might get our ass kicked but working has a group we could beat you. Why? Beacuse no country is self sufficient. You need other countries to help you. So that crowed of children would be adults.

That fails the laugh test. You guys couldn't handle a little mess in your own back yard (Serbia) and need the US to provide logistics for force projection overseas.

So is this why the attacks still continue? Is this why there is a growing dissent in america? Is this why both your troops are dying? Is this why America is in talks with them terrorists themselves breaking there own "We do not negotiate with terrorists" rule? Is this why Iraqis are still dying? Is this why the budget on the war is causing record deficits?

I've pointed out that Iraq has gotten vastly better over a year, and the insurgents have been downgraded from threat to nusiance. A lethal nuisance, granted, but one that isn't strong enough to change reality on the ground anymore. And yeah, our troops are dying. It would take about 70 more years of this to match Vietnam casualties, though, at the average (not recent) rate of death.

As for our recent deficits, they've been caused by the inability of the Bush government to resist spending money on anything. That comes from massive domestic spending, not massive overseas spending. The US government has literally trillions of dollars (2.2 or thereabouts) to play with in its spending - the old joke in Washington is "A billion here, a billion there, soon you're starting to talk about real money!" Much like the casualty rate, the expense of running a war in Iraq will only frighten people who don't realize the context.

As for what planet I live on - I do live on Earth, the real Earth, dealing in real facts. You would be the one living on "Planet Perception".

Stormrage · 2005-07-05 09:07:14

Their huge growth does come from Islamic countries - the birth rates are comparatively high there, and people more or less inherit their religion (most people are not converts). The Christian core has either stable populations or shrinking ones (US, Europe, Russia). If you thought about it for a second and applied some common sense, you'd realize that your numbers suggest that - Islam's growth in numbers is slightly higher than natural increase.

You would have noticed that the the population of muslims in Islamic countries are stable. The growth comes from immigrants and africans. Did you even read the link i posted?

How long can China keep its cheap labor force cheap, with increasing wealth? Why do you worry about China, which faces a variety of major crises - the demographic one of too few children to too many adults (ironic, considering it's China, but One-Child policy leaves a stiff bill for the children!) and too much bad debt? Why not worry about India, which will have a larger population in thirty years or so and is getting just as much investment? Why not worry about the US, which is increasing in population fastest among the industrialized nations, and should more than double in size over the next century? Why don't you?
It's because China is in the news, dummy. Personally, I think it's a shadow of old racism not quite forgotten - a new softer variant of the 'yellow peril'.

If you even took up reading you would notice that the wealth is going to the urban community not the rural. So no matter what happens there will still be alot of Chinese that are going to work in the factory. Also i think you your facts confused with Japan. China is not suffering any problem with it's population beacuse the population growth is still growing and the one child policy isn't effective enough. Yes it does leave the population with more boys then girls but this is offsetted by the human trafficking from the surronding countries.

The increasing population of United States isn't going to be a problem towerd China beacuse americans are paid more then the average chinese are. Now why would anyone buy something that is more expensive when they can get it same quality from a chinese product. Your forgetting why companies go to China.

Also India isn't going to be a threat if it is going to continue the path that it is heading. India is suffering from the old problems of Casts and religon. It's choking it down with Violents between Hindus and Sikhs and Hindus and Muslims.

t's because China is in the news, dummy. Personally, I think it's a shadow of old racism not quite forgotten - a new softer variant of the 'yellow peril'.

I suggest a good hour of Bloomberg will open your head.

That fails the laugh test. You guys couldn't handle a little mess in your own back yard (Serbia) and need the US to provide logistics for force projection overseas.

Do you know the one diffrence between Americans and Europeans is? We always demand that proper knowledge of the situation is know and that the UN is behind it. Just beacuse our leader says it is the right thing to do doesn't mean that we should do it. We are not sheeps and we don't call the ones advocating peace unpatriotic.

I've pointed out that Iraq has gotten vastly better over a year, and the insurgents have been downgraded from threat to nusiance. A lethal nuisance, granted, but one that isn't strong enough to change reality on the ground anymore. And yeah, our troops are dying. It would take about 70 more years of this to match Vietnam casualties, though, at the average (not recent) rate of death.
As for our recent deficits, they've been caused by the inability of the Bush government to resist spending money on anything. That comes from massive domestic spending, not massive overseas spending. The US government has literally trillions of dollars (2.2 or thereabouts) to play with in its spending - the old joke in Washington is "A billion here, a billion there, soon you're starting to talk about real money!" Much like the casualty rate, the expense of running a war in Iraq will only frighten people who don't realize the context.
As for what planet I live on - I do live on Earth, the real Earth, dealing in real facts. You would be the one living on "Planet Perception".

Do you watch Fox news by the way? It seems like it.

No matter what Americans and the British do the insurgents will still be there. People are dying and the terrorists are not going to be taken down. Even when they americans went for the Syrian border it didn't help. The terrorists feed on impressionable young men who don't have to do much. Stand here and trigger the bomb.

You know what i am getting tired arguing with you. I'll give you one tip.

Watch a non-biast news channel.

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-07 09:41:21

What is the point of revolution if it kills everyone in the process? Pushing the button on the life support system, or "holding" it over the masses is ridiculous.

You have two potential outcomes as far as society goes.

1) All life support systems are centralized and controlled by some government, a possiblity in the larger colonies that have come to Mars in a large group.

2) All life support systems are decentralized and controlled by each individual, they can be brought together to be part of a whole or they can exist indepdently of one another.

The first situation allows for one to hold life support over the heads of the masses, and say, "Do things this way or you're screwed!" However, it is a genocidal position, and I don't think anyone would take it seriously, at least not until someone actually kills a few hundred if not thousand people using that tactic. The second makes it an impossiblity (though you could take out one or two habs or whatever, you would only strengthen their resolve against you).

But that begs the question, what exactly could these "revolutionaries" ask for? Society would be already revolutionized if we approach it the second way. And the first way could be revolutionized if the government or the people started decentralizing their life support systems so that individuals have more control.

Since when did revolution have to be violent?

BWhite · 2005-07-07 09:48:58

Now, to apply this to Mars, I see a problem. We're looking at colonizing a planet. For various reasons - cost, complexity, travel time - it will be a long time before mass immigration to Mars will be possible. However, the hypothetical Martian colony will basically be starting off with a postindustrial economy, with its implied almost-equilibrium birthrate. How does this thing grow?

Send Mormons.

Mostly white Anglos, very Republican and very pro-natalist. And they have a tradition of making deserts bloom after a long and dangerous trek.

Grypd · 2005-07-07 14:19:21

To protect the people who live on Mars life support systems will be very hard to disable and though the most efficient system will cover all parts of the colony there will be backup systems galore. Just opening an airlock to vacum will not be enough when each area of the colony will lock down to protect people.

So revolution will need to be a symptom of major general unrest but though terrorism may kill and hurt people it will not succeed in destroying the colony and with the advantages of modern technology crime and terrorists will find it hard to function.

Earthfirst · 2005-07-13 21:22:12

I would be on my side of crouse, any ways why would you want to have a revolution? Blindly flowing orders alwise makes people happy.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2005-07-03 13:31:18

Re: Revolution - Which side are you on?

#27 2005-07-04 12:16:42

Re: Revolution - Which side are you on?

#28 2005-07-05 09:07:14

Re: Revolution - Which side are you on?

#29 2005-07-07 09:41:21

Re: Revolution - Which side are you on?

#30 2005-07-07 09:48:58

Re: Revolution - Which side are you on?

#31 2005-07-07 14:19:21

Re: Revolution - Which side are you on?

#32 2005-07-13 21:22:12

Re: Revolution - Which side are you on?

Board footer