Figleaf

If you signed up, then yes, the ads are good. But if you didn't sign up, then you are in no position to praise the ads (indeed you are suggesting the ads don't work very well). Ease up, amigo. The ads are targetted quite deliberately at a different demographic than me. You will note that attracting recruits was a key element of my analysis. Still, I think there are other ways that can be used to judge something, dpending on what you want to judge. Yes, I had heard that. It's not especially laudable, but it is partly explained by the demographic effects of sharply shrinking the overall size of the forces from 1945 onward.

I would say, keep the federal government, split up/shrink the provinces, ditch the regional, and push local government down to being even more local.

Really? What state exercises military and administrative control over it and under what authority? Can you fill me in more on this promise? I'll look into it myself if you could cite the relevant document or documents for me... Self-defence, eh? Come off it. Everyone knows Israel attacked first in 1967. Bullshit. Gaza is still subject to regular incursion of Israeli forces, and Israeli forces still occupy and maintain checkpoints in the West Bank. Israel also controls the ports, borders and airspace of both territories. The Occupation continues. As the Temple was destroyed c.70AD, and Mohammed wasn't born until something in the 600s, was it time-travelling Muslims who did it?

Yeah! And how about we send in some contaminated blankets too. And castrate their male children. They have to learn somehow.

So, if I understand properly, employers are now facing potential employees who are acting in their own self-interest.As I say, this is new? Sort of. People are less in awe of authority and with improved self-esteem are less likely to internalize the standards/interests of their arbitrary 'betters'.

Has anyone seen these ads? They are a series of b/w clips of Canadian army guys in action, with four simple messages superimposed in sequence: "Fight fear. Fight distress. Fight chaos. Fight with the Canadian Armed Forces." I think they are fantastic ads. They are forceful and state clearly a purpose you can be proud of doing in the forces, but they don't gussy it up with chrome and flags. I think these ads will appeal strongly to the right kind of recruits. Whoever is responsible for them has done a good job.

That's very informative and aposite. Still, to clarify and restate my question: Given that the cadres and party leadership will be active and energetic in carrying out the functions of the dictatorship of the proletariat, do they need to be aware of, and undertake any particular actions in response to, the coming withering away of the state?

Yes, without the US they would all be screwed. No other country is that important on its own. Any other country could fall off the face of the earth and not have near the impact. A lot of people don't like that idea but it is true for the forseable future. But so what?

The Monroe Doctrine. It's good. Google it. Read it. The Monroe Doctrine??? First off, the notion of US promulgated Doctrines has never had any credibility outside of US borders. Second, the Monroe Doctrine was specifically asserted against European imperialism. A homegrown populist like Chavez can be a victim of US imperialism, but he can't be criticized under a proper interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine.

How so? If you don't have a market for what you sell, you are poor. If you don't have suppliers to buy from, you are rich in gold, but poor in belly. The thing about TRADE, see, is that it involves BOTH parties satisfying a need.

And what country has more to offer the world than the US? Non sequitur.

What's the big problem with that? You're calling Chavez a madman on pretty thin grounds.

I'm puzzled why Israel's apologists have begun to take this particular line in recent months. What value is really gained in a public relations strategy based on "Yeah, but not as bad as Them."? Anyway, there are a number of explanations for the greater attention paid to the middle east conflict in 'Western' discourse than to conflicts in Africa, for example. In particular: -Israel to some extent a creature of the modern international order and so has a legacy of intense attention from the wider UN community. -Along the same lines, the conflict in that area is a legacy of the failure of the modern international order in an institutional sense, and so receives greater institutional attention still, compared to non-institutionalized conflicts that crop up, like Darfur. -Israel and its Arab neighbors have more connections to the lives of people in 'the west' than other parts of the world, both in terms of family and social connections between people, and in light of the Biblical cultural legacy of Judeo-Christianity (not to mention the strategic importance of the larger region).

Begun, the hyperbole war has. Look out for Bush-Clones and Imperial Rove-rs.

As we all know, according to Marx, the Dictatorship of the Proletariat is a temporary phase which, ultimately will lead to the fading away of the state. My question is, when will party members be able to recognize the time for this transition to take place?

Didn't she call the 9/11 widows 'witches'?

John Stuart Mill was instrumental in the capitalist conspiracy to enslave the minds of the proletariat in order that they comply with servitude to the bourgeouis class. He was the opening salvo in the class warfare that will result in the triumph of the working people of the world. When those people unite, war and discord sewed by business classes that thereby benefit will end. Hugo Chavez Rules!!! You write some pretty good Marx-speak, jbg. Who'd have thought?

If you mean the ancient captvities in Egypt and Babylon then it's not accurate to call them Arab cultures. why is it not accurate to call them arab cultures? they are part of the Arabian Peninsula (well except the egyptians) It would be inaccurate to call them Islamic. Recheck your geography. Mesopotamia (i.e. Babylon, Akkadia, etc.) is to the north of the Arabian peninsula. It wasn't until Mohammed led the wars of Islamic conquest that Arabs and Arabian culture was noticeably felt anywhere outside the Peninsula. so it is your perception that the Persian empire contained no arabs? even tho it stretched from India to Eastern Europe? I dare say the Arabic culture effected alot more than just that area. Remember that the capital city of Persia was located in present day Iran. And yes i know Persians arent exactly Arabs, its kind like saying English people are not related to Americans. Your original point was that Jews had been oppressed by Arab cultures. I pointed out that if you meant Egypt and Babylon, they were not Arab cultures. The presense of an Arab or two or ten or six hundred in either of those empires won't change that a bit. You need to accept the facts of history ... Pharaonic Egypt and Ancient Babylonia were not Arab cultures. And neither were the Persians for that matter.

Except in Coulter's case it's calling a spade a faggot.

Exhibit 1 - already mentioned - Warren Kinsella and that dumbass Barney doll to make fun of, and mischaracterize, Day's religious beliefs. You want more? "Want"? Not exactly. But since the antics of a lone arseh*!e like Kinsella don't amount to a campaign, if you hope to support your earlier statement, more is required.

No need to be rude. Lack of attention to what interlocutors are saying is rude. Piss off. Still not paying attention, I see. Why should I bother to communicate with you if it's your intention to ignore or distort my comments? Answer: no reason.

So you are saying the original assertion wasn't really counter-intuitive at all. No. Pay attention. It is counter intuitive. Wealth and privilege are obvoiusly advantages. Hard work (as I think Geoffrey imagines it) is clearly not a guaranteed path to success. And also if they are hard working.

In your case, lack of imagination.

Hmmm, it is counterintuitive that you can achieve success with hard work and determination. The more counterintuitive part is that wealth or privilege has no part. Well, some form of 'hard work' can certainly contribute to success. But I think it's more important to emphasize opportunism, alertness, optimizing efforts, and follow-through. (And of course, luck, including inherited privilege.)

Should Islamic states also reconstitute themselves as religiously neutral states? Yes. As I just said above. Read much? I read just fine, and I've never understood you to oppose radical Islam with the same vitriol that you reserve for Israel and Jews. What the hell are you talking about? I have no vitriol for Jews. And my criticisms of Israel are always fair. In any case, Rue's comment was clearly inclusive of all religiously based states, mentioning both Christianity and Islam specifically. My endorsement of his statement was obviously equally inclusive. You only think you can read, it seems.