Ideal Social Engineering Settings

[Dry]

Now, the causalties of first WW.

1 symbol = 100,000 deads

[Dry]

WW2.

[Dry]

WW2, Asia.

[Dry]

This may help in understanding those who suffered from the war(s).

I still wonder why europeans are not soooo eager to go to war...
I still wonder why europeans dislike/fear patriotism so much...
I still wonder why europeans dislike/fear right wing values of 'doing his duty'
I still wonder why europeans dislike/fear capitalism/free market that allow powerfull private companies/lobbies to put their men in political position, and 'incite' governments to go to war (did someone said Bush?).

Leftist sissies, probably, I see no other explaination...

[Commy]

I think I'm going to go with the livid Imp digest. Free markets suck. Hence why there is no true free market on earth. The Planned depicted in the game is much more practical. But anyway...

I am no history buff, but I will not disagree with the fact that Europe, if you consider its entire history, has seen more wars than any region in the world. Lots and lots of wars, like the ones in medieval ages and the ones before that and the ones before that and on and on and on. But do those really matter? Europe has changed quite a lot. So for all intensive purposes, to make a fare comparison with America and Europe, let's start at the Revolutionary war.

It appears to me that while England sent over its STANDING army of SOLDIERS, most americans that fought in that war were not soldiers, simply civilians with hunting rifles. There were a few continental soldiers, key word being FEW. If you ask me, AMERICA saw a lot more war than England. I do not agree with the whole american patriotism thing, even though I am American, but I didn't see England ever having to fight for its freedom from a world superpower. You say Europe has seen more war? And yet it, with it's superior army and navy it still loses to a bunch of farmers and children with guns. Not only that, America had just been established, while England had been around since the Saxons.

And what about Cinco de Mayo? You all probably don't think it means anything. Historically however, it was a day that a Mexican city, greatly outnumbered, DEFEATED the 'glorious' Napolean army, the army with the new 'high tech' muskets and cannons. What does this have to do with America? Let's see, I don't see America LOSING to a bunch of Mexicans. Sure, maybe Europe saw more war, and an equal amount of defeat...

And then there is the American civil war. Let's look back at Europe. Most countries in Europe fought eachother, mostly for rediculous reasons. While I'm sure there are more, I do believe that France had its own civil war. And if I remember correctly, it LOST. There was still France, but practically in anarchy. However, America won it's civil war, and yet you still say Europe has seen more war? War of what, religion? Or maybe something stupid, like killing all the redheads and burnettes for fun, because only Hitler liked Blondes. Which brings us to WW2. (I don't know anything about WW1)


I don't know much, but I do know that WW2 was because of some insane fascist. Okay, so it is fairly arguable that Europe has seen a lot of war in that. But Europe, being stupid, has to go to war because some of it doesn't like Jewish people. If it weren't for America, chances are Germany would have won. I didn't see one of Europes 'glorious' generals leading D-Day, the decisive battle of the war. No, it was an American 5 star general, Eisenhower. And you say America hasn't seen war?

In short...

I didn't see Europe fighting in Vietnam for something for WORTHWWHIL, called FREEDOM. No, Europe only fought cause it didn't like people who didn't have blue eyes...

While I don't know the exact numbers, more Americans are in the mid east fighting for FREEDOM than Europeans are. So England sent in a few troops. Great. You say EUROPE has seen more war? All I remember is England sending in a few troops and Germany LOANING us a couple of their tanks.

Yes, Europe has had terrorist attacks just like the US, and Europe has seen, although meaningless, quite a lot more fighting than the US in MEDIEVAL ages. So, maybe Europe, maybe of over 20 countries, has seen a FEW more wars in modern times than the US, but is that necessarily a good thing. You think that the US just takes all the wars and makes movies of them? Ever seen the movie TORA TORA TORA, of Pearl Harbor, made by the Japs? I watched it. It doesn't show one Japanese plane get even nicked. Yet Pearl harbor shows an ever more realistic picture of it. You think no americans see the true horrors of war? Tell that to all the families who have family members in Iraq. Tell that to all the families who had loved ones die in Terrorist attacks. So maybe Europe had a couple people die on a train bombing. MILLIONS of Americans are affected by the 'horrors of war'. Believe me, the horrors of war are just as bad and ever more real back at home when you're told your father in Iraq...

[mmontgomery]

Dry, the major wars in this world were not started by capitalistic or free market governments. They were primarily started by planned (dictatorship or communist) countries.

The US did not have to fight a single war this century. (With the possible exception of Japan in WW2. However, it is doubtful that Japan would have attacked the US if they were confident that the US had an isolationist policy and would not have gotten involved anyway.) Many within the US have pushed for the US to have an isolationist policy, where we leave everyone else to fend for themselves.

Why has the US gotten involved in WWI, WWI, Korea, Vietnam, Kawait, etc? It certainly was not for economic gain. Each of these wars has been large economic loss for the US. It is not for territory gain. It was not for oil or other resouces; we have not kept control of a single oilfield, gold mine, etc.

So why have we sacrificed so many Americans on the battlefield to fight battles that were not our own?

The primary reason that the US has become involved in these wars is for the cause of freedom. We did not want Europe enslaved by Hitler. We did not want South Korea enslaved by North Korea. We did not want Kuwait enslaved by Iraq.

Those who enjoy bashing the US should think about whether they want the US to help them next time they are attacked by another one of these "planned governments" that they seem to love so much.

[Chaos Theory]

This seems less like an argument and more like a flame war now.

[mmontgomery]

Originally posted by WotanAnubis
...
In my current real life I'm pretty pleased that I live in a mostly Free Market economy and am equally happy that there's a bit of Planned in it as well.

So... if you want to go defend the sacred Free Market, please go and defend Alpha Centauri's Free Market.

The majority of posts in this thread are not about Alpha Centauri; they are about free markets on Earth, and particularly within the United States.

As I said before, the Alpha Centauri definition of free market is highly flawed; what they call free market is actually economic anarchy. I refuse to debate with such flawed definitions. It would be like referencing the Ministry of Love in 1984, whose primary job is to torture people, and then using this to prooftext that love is bad.

Countries which embrace true economic freedom and free markets (which provide laws which ensure that economic freedom and that punish economic bullying), provide wealth, freedom, and opportunity for their citizens. Government central planning has just the opposite effect.

There are a lot of issues being raised which are totally orthogonal to free market, such as pollution, caring for those unable to earn a living, war, etc. Production produces pollution, period, whether free market or planned. The question is how much resources are being devoted to controlling pollution; this question is the same for free market or planned.

[WotanAnubis]

Originally posted by mmontgomery
Countries which embrace true economic freedom and free markets (which provide laws which ensure that economic freedom and that punish economic bullying), provide wealth, freedom, and opportunity for their citizens. Government central planning has just the opposite effect.

So we agree then that Free Markets can only work if the government interferes both with the economy and with the way businesses are allowed to handle their affairs.

So why are we still arguing then?

[Dry]

EDIT: deleted. I forgot we were on SMAC forum and not in the OT.
Apologize.

[Whoha]

Originally posted by Dry

WW1, stupid patriotism was strong enough to trigger it.
WW2, well, who were behind Hitler? (I mean those who financed his party). German heavy industry.
Why the heavy industry? Well, Hitler was an anti-communist champion and promoted re-armement of Germany. Could german heavy industry expect any better? Dead afraid of what happened in USSR and oportunity to make money. Men, he's our savior. Let's finance his campaigns.
We know today that behind each dictator, there is a financer. Behind Hitler, there was the heavy industry.

You are forgetting Stalin's support of heavy industry, and the fact that Even communist states don't get along very well. Its a tough sell to say that the national socialist workers party was all about capitalism and the free market.

[Natalinasmpf]

provide wealth, freedom, and opportunity for their citizens. Government central planning has just the opposite effect.

What if a democratic assembly had power over this planning?

Its planned by a democracy, I don't see freedom being robbed.
It often abolishes the poverty cycle, oppurtunity is there.
Wealth, well per capita, it is often good.

I think free markets provide the opposite effect.

[Chaos Theory]

This never seems to work. Politicians (liars and manipulators) will construe ways to appear popular while not doing what people want, while simultaneously changing what people want. The way around this is to make bad plans fail regardless of their popularity, and the free market does this, ruthlessly.

[Commy]

pol-i-tics: n .

poly--many

tics--bloodsucking creatures

politics=many bloodsucking creatures

[livid imp]

Originally posted by mmontgomery
Countries which embrace true economic freedom and free markets, provide wealth, freedom, and opportunity for their citizens. Government central planning has just the opposite effect.

You got that quote right out of the Capitalists Propganda Handbook.

Nothing is that black and white, just ask the Swedish just how down troden their socialistic government is.


I've seen that Poly-tics joke before and it still makes me LMAO.