Why Can't We Have Republicans Like This Anymore?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
One other thing to consider, only those living on the island are allowed to vote.

Duh?

[chequita guevara]

Americans abroad are allowed to vote in our elections. Pretty much every country allows its people to vote in its own elections when they don't live there. Even states allow it. Congress does not allow it for Puerto Rico.

[Kuciwalker]

States don't let you stay as a resident if you live long enough in another state, che.

[chequita guevara]

That depends on where you declare your permanent residence.

Furthermore, Puerto Rico is an occupied country. If it became independent, all those Puerto Ricans living in the states would have to chose which country to be citizens of (though likely dual citizenship would be allowed). They ought to have a say in the status of their home country.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by rmsharpe

So you're saying that welfare creates a dependency cycle...

Well played, sir.

-Arrian

[chequita guevara]

I admit, he got me.

The reality, though, is that there simply aren't enough jobs in Puerto Rico, even with companies not having to pay taxes. That's where there are almost as many Puerto Ricans in the U.S. as in Puerto Rico. The welfare payments at least keep the island from being the poorest part of the U.S.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Furthermore, Puerto Rico is an occupied country.

Puerto Rico is a territory of the United States and recognized as self-governing by the United Nations.

[David Floyd]

DM,

It's the gist of the speech excerpt, which Floyd seemed, on first reading, to be saying that he was disagreeing with. On a second reading of his post, I'm less sure exactly what the disagreement is. :shrug: I probably misunderstood.

I was basically agreeing with what he said, but my response was sort of a preemptive strike against those who would blame the US for "warmongering" and "massive defense spending", rather than laying the blame where it belongs - with the Soviet Union.

And, given the lack of response to my last set of points, I'd have to guess that either chegitz agrees with me, or doesn't have an answer for me. Either way,

[Garth Vader]

Originally posted by David Floyd
And what happened after Patton said this? He was stripped of his command of 3rd Army, and sent to command the 15th Army, which had no combat divisions and was chiefly responsible for documenting the history of the war in Europe. Further, Patton died in a jeep accident in late 1945, and he was the ONLY senior American military officer to even suggest going to war against the Soviet Union.

Sorry, but the US didn't attack the Soviet Union, it intervened, with 19 other countries, in the Russian Civil War, on the side of the White Russians. It's not as if the US simply invaded. Just because the Reds ended up winning the war didn't give them license to perpetually fear future invasion.

Didn't Lemay suggest carpet nuking the soviets before they built enough bombs to be a deterrent?

If what the Russians/Soviets went through from 1914-1945 isn't enough to fear future invasion what would be? Given the paranoid reaction the US had to losing 3000 people if you had gone through that you'd make the Soviet Union look like freedom camp.

[David Floyd]

Didn't Lemay suggest carpet nuking the soviets before they built enough bombs to be a deterrent?

While he might have held such a belief, I don't recall him being on public record as saying this, nor did he say it over an open phone line easily intercepted by the Soviets. Also, given his position, LeMay would have known that "carpet nuking" the Soviet Union wasn't possible in the late 1940s.

Now, whether or not he held that belief in the 1960s is irrelevant, because what we are discussing is the lack of Soviet disarmament in the 1940s.

If what the Russians/Soviets went through from 1914-1945 isn't enough to fear future invasion what would be?

Well, what Russia "went through" in WW1 was largely Russia's fault. If you look at the major combatents, the Russians - along with the French - bear a MAJOR share of the war guilt, whether or not they'll ever admit it. As for WW2, they may have been paranoid, but that still didn't justify their aggressive moves immediately after the war, particularly in Korea and Iran, nor did it justify them maintaining a conventional military of the size that they did, when there was no conventional force on the European continent in the late 1940s (after US demobilization) that could have stopped a Soviet drive to the English Channel.

[Garth Vader]

No argument on WW1 war guilt, but can you not imagine how the mindset of a country that had just lost 1 in 7 of their people would be more aggressive and protective than a country that came through relatively unscathed?

I am not saying it was the "right" thing for them to do, but I do understand why they did it.