Why are Americans so afraid of Socialism?

[deltaoscarbravo]

Re: Why are Americans afraid of Socialism?

What history are you reading from? Germany had carved France up and given a slice to Italy and was staging U-boat operations against GB out of France's ports.

Without the US what meaningful resistance was there to Germans plundering GB? The Russians???

The reasons why we were able to remain effective in projecting offense against the axis powers was not just due to our might but because our proximity to the theater of battles didn't allow for our infrastructure to be pounded.

You guys were pounding each other back into the stone age and Germany was winning that battle.

I suggest that YOU need to re-read WWII and it's history.

In respect of meaningful resistance, Britain declared war on Germany in Sept 1939.
Britain held out against Germany for two years BEFORE the USA was dragged in to WWII.
(ever hear of the battle of britain, dunkirk, etc????????????????????????????????????????????????)
That resistance coupled with internal resistance in France and the low countries, certainly slowed down the offensive attacks of the Nazi's.

The fact of the matter is that the Nazi's lost the war by opening an eastern front against USSR, which moved resources from western Europe to the eastern front.

 

[Friday on my mind]

Re: Why are Americans afraid of Socialism?

I suggest that YOU need to re-read WWII and it's history.

In respect of meaningful resistance, Britain declared war on Germany in Sept 1939.
Britain held out against Germany for two years BEFORE the USA was dragged in to WWII.
(ever hear of the battle of britain, dunkirk, etc????????????????????????????????????????????????)
That resistance coupled with internal resistance in France and the low countries, certainly slowed down the offensive attacks of the Nazi's.

The fact of the matter is that the Nazi's lost the war by opening an eastern front against USSR, which moved resources from western Europe to the eastern front.

We are on same page here I think.Without the steadfastness of the brits and if they had surrendered allowing gemany to turn all its attention east to the russians there would have been no war for the US to enter it would have been all over.The brits and the russians in their own ways did as much as anyone to beat hitler.but the result of the war as an american historian in the best documentary on the war ever ("The world at war") said was that europe had a civil war (ww2) which none of the european countries emerged at the real big winner of.It was the US who dictated almost everything in the aftermath of the war that emerged as its big winner.

 

[deltaoscarbravo]

Re: Why are Americans afraid of Socialism?

We are on same page here I think.Without the steadfastness of the brits and if they had surrendered allowing gemany to turn all its attention east to the russians there would have been no war for the US to enter it would have been all over.The brits and the russians in their own ways did as much as anyone to beat hitler.but the result of the war as an american historian in the best documentary on the war ever ("The world at war") said was that europe had a civil war (ww2) which none of the european countries emerged at the real big winner of.It was the US who dictated almost everything in the aftermath of the war that emerged as its big winner.

I think that US involvement in WWII was the tipping point.

If the US had not entered WWII, the war in Europe would well have gone on for years without any clear outcome.
(Britain holding out, Germany and USSR blasting each other to pieces - with no one side gaining the upper hand).

With the US entry in to WWII - along with Hitlers crazy decision to declare war on the USSR - sealed Germany's fate.

I have the utmost respect for the sacrifice made by US forces during WWII.
That sacrifice is beyond question and is greatly appreciated still 70 years later.

 

[mrtrebus]

Re: Why are Americans afraid of Socialism?

I think that US involvement in WWII was the tipping point.

If the US had not entered WWII, the war in Europe would well have gone on for years without any clear outcome.
(Britain holding out, Germany and USSR blasting each other to pieces - with no one side gaining the upper hand).

With the US entry in to WWII - along with Hitlers crazy decision to declare war on the USSR - sealed Germany's fate.

I have the utmost respect for the sacrifice made by US forces during WWII.
That sacrifice is beyond question and is greatly appreciated still 70 years later.

True. But now we've paid them back the WW2 loan. . .the special relationship is over! :thumbsup:

 

[boobmanz]

Nice to see this discussion end in a debate about WW2 and the differences between Europe and the U.S.
I don't know about socialism, what I do know that capitalism fails and has put the world in a deep crisis, that large companies esp banks can't be trusted and that governements should play a much stronger rule to prevent us simple citizens being nothing but toys in the hands of large corporations.

 

[boobfan]

No you don't know the difference - and that is the problem.






With respect, you don't know what you're talking about.

Russia?
You're confused.
The former Soviet Union comprised Russia and many other countries such as Latvia, Ukraine, Estonia etc.
The USSR was a totalitarian state during Stalin's ran and after Stalin's reign.
The totalitarian regime did not die with Stalin, as you claim.
If the totalitarian regime died with Stalin as you claim, why did the USSR send forces in to Hungary in 1956, three years after Stalin died?
Czechoslovakia in 1968 - does that rings any bells?




I never suggested that the Soviet or the Chinese ystem of goverment were the best system to adopt.

What I have suggested is that the western European system of goverment and it's economic model, do work.

You claim to be an engineer?

I am well aware of the coutries that made up Russia of old, I am also well aware of the aggressive actions they took to try and keep thier economic base. That does not make them totalitarian communist. It was a socalist system and it failed miserably. Did you know that Hungarians are not 'Hungarians'? They are Magyars.

Bringing more socalism into our country can only cause more harm already we have the worst public overall public education system in the industrialised world, the worst welfare system (one that benifits non citizens while citizens do without), the worst tax system, all of which can be traced back to politicians with socalist mindsets being put in office. The worst part is because the education system has been so jacked up by the socalists the 'common' man in the U.S. can't tell the difference between a socalist idea and a capitalist one.

 

[Friday on my mind]

Nice to see this discussion end in a debate about WW2 and the differences between Europe and the U.S.
I don't know about socialism, what I do know that capitalism fails and has put the world in a deep crisis, that large companies esp banks can't be trusted and that governements should play a much stronger rule to prevent us simple citizens being nothing but toys in the hands of large corporations.

Here,Here well said!
And truth be known its not the govt that has been dictating to the banks and the other corporations even now under Obama as the banks and corporations are still getting their way for the most part and doing the dictating to the govt still.Makes you wonder who really owns or runs the country,the banks and corporations or the people and the govt,think we know the answer as it stands now.

 

[boobfan]

Re: Why are Americans afraid of Socialism?

What history are you reading from? Germany had carved France up and given a slice to Italy and was staging U-boat operations against GB out of France's ports.

Without the US what meaningful resistance was there to Germans plundering GB? The Russians???

The reasons why we were able to remain effective in projecting offense against the axis powers was not just due to our might but because our proximity to the theater of battles didn't allow for our infrastructure to be pounded.

You guys were pounding each other back into the stone age and Germany was winning that battle.

I am guessing you are not aware of the difference between Vichy France and the rest of France, look it up.

I suggest that YOU need to re-read WWII and it's history.

In respect of meaningful resistance, Britain declared war on Germany in Sept 1939.
Britain held out against Germany for two years BEFORE the USA was dragged in to WWII.
(ever hear of the battle of britain, dunkirk, etc????????????????????????????????????????????????)
That resistance coupled with internal resistance in France and the low countries, certainly slowed down the offensive attacks of the Nazi's.

The fact of the matter is that the Nazi's lost the war by opening an eastern front against USSR, which moved resources from western Europe to the eastern front.

This is a perfect example of why we can't stand the idea of Socialism, the education system in the U.S. has been so severly comprimised it is just pathetic. We have socialism to thank for it.

 

[Friday on my mind]

Did you know that Hungarians are not 'Hungarians'? They are Magyars.

No Hugarians in Hungary?
I knew there were no russians in russia though.:1orglaugh:banger:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIo1FfnRpKs

 

[deltaoscarbravo]

I am well aware of the coutries that made up Russia of old,

Priceless!

I am also well aware of the aggressive actions they took to try and keep thier economic base. That does not make them totalitarian communist. It was a socalist system and it failed miserably. Did you know that Hungarians are not 'Hungarians'? They are Magyars.

I am aware of who the Magyars are.
But the name of the country is Hungary.

You told us earlier that the USSR was a totalitarian state under Stalin and that it stopped being a totalitarian state thereafter.
History shows that the USSR was a totalitarian state after Stalin - it invaded Hungary and it invaded Czechoslovakia.
That's what totalitarian states do - they invade sovereign countries.

And the correct spelling is socialist - not socalist.

Bringing more socalism into our country can only cause more harm already we have the worst public overall public education system in the industrialised world, the worst welfare system (one that benifits non citizens while citizens do without), the worst tax system, all of which can be traced back to politicians with socalist mindsets being put in office..

A tax system that allows billionaires like Warren Buffett to pay less tax than his secretary is indeed a bad tax system.
I agree.
But that US capitalism for you.

I would have thought that you'd think that this would
be fair?

The worst part is because the education system has been so jacked up by the socalists the 'common' man in the U.S. can't tell the difference between a socalist idea and a capitalist one.

Socialism and social : they're both to blame for poor spelling?

 

[lurkingdirk]

Socialism and social : they're both to blame for poor spelling?

frickin hilarious

 

[titsrock]

Believe what you will. :yinyang:

Seriously? THAT'S your reply? That's pretty lame even for you WillE. Hmmm. Gee, I don't like that winter exists. I'll chose not to believe it I guess...:dunno:

 

[Will E Worm]

Seriously? THAT'S your reply? That's pretty lame even for you WillE. Hmmm. Gee, I don't like that winter exists. I'll chose not to believe it I guess...:dunno:

Okay, then.

You need to do much more research.

I'm not going to argue the point. :hatsoff:

 

[titsrock]

Show me where to do this research then. I clearly am offbase and I would like to know. I am intrigued that you know so much about Karl Marx and Marxism. What's the research I need to be up on.

 

[Facetious]

Mum and dad always told me growing up to never to take anything "free" from the gumment. "Work your way around them and be a real man" they said.

 

[georges]

because assisting social leeching parasites and unwilling to work ghetto people is definitely against the values of America. Obama wants to implement a social assisting where poor people and also unwilling to work people have their healthcare paid by hardworking honest citizens and by a part of the state with the social taxes. That kind of system was implemented in France in 1975 by Chirac when population from Magrheb was massively immigrating in France. Many of immigrants knew that in France, they would have a free healthcare and being paid social helps, this kind of system lasted till 2003 where now the the healthcare isystem is getting privatized and the social helps given regarding very strict conditions. 27 years of assisting and giving social helps to leeching parasites and unwilling to work ghetto people that are not bringing anything to the country,that is more than enough to hate socialism.

 

[boobfan]

Priceless!








I am aware of who the Magyars are.
But the name of the country is Hungary.

You told us earlier that the USSR was a totalitarian state under Stalin and that it stopped being a totalitarian state thereafter.
History shows that the USSR was a totalitarian state after Stalin - it invaded Hungary and it invaded Czechoslovakia.
That's what totalitarian states do - they invade sovereign countries.

And the correct spelling is socialist - not socalist.




A tax system that allows billionaires like Warren Buffett to pay less tax than his secretary is indeed a bad tax system.
I agree.
But that US capitalism for you.

I would have thought that you'd think that this would
be fair?



Socialism and social : they're both to blame for poor spelling?

Show me a definition of Totalitarian where it says "we must invade our neighboring countries" that does not come from a source that has the word 'wiki' in it. Just 1.
I guess you have never actually spoken with a Russian party member who actually lived in Soviet Russia? At my age I have had the time to speak with a lot of them.
If you have actually paid attention to my posts in this thread you would notice that what you are calling a spelling error was a typing error.
So you think it is right that 1% of the population pays 60% of the tax?
How about a system were everyone pays (including politicians) the same ammount?
How about a system that taxes businesses when they outsource jobs (like phone jobs) to foreign countries? Better yet make that tax equal to what a US workers minimum withholding would be not the foreign workers rate.
Did you know that our President, Senators, and Congressmen can chose not to be paid?
They are paid though annuity's and they can chose to take money out of the annuity or not. They can even chose to take out an ammounts regularly that would not need to be or that would be reported, they don't have to annuitise it and set up a payment schedule.
We have elected officials who have actually reported making less than a taxable ammount every year for more than 12 years because of the way that they are paid.

 

[boobfan]

because assisting social leeching parasites and unwilling to work ghetto people is definitely against the values of America. Obama wants to implement a social assisting where poor people and also unwilling to work people have their healthcare paid by hardworking honest citizens and by a part of the state with the social taxes. That kind of system was implemented in France in 1975 by Chirac when population from Magrheb was massively immigrating in France. Many of immigrants knew that in France, they would have a free healthcare and being paid social helps, this kind of system lasted till 2003 where now the the healthcare isystem is getting privatized and the social helps given regarding very strict conditions. 27 years of assisting and giving social helps to leeching parasites and unwilling to work ghetto people that are not bringing anything to the country,that is more than enough to hate socialism.

Well that is the quick and sloppy version but yea another perfect example of the FAILURE of socialism. I was gonna be nice though and not pick on the poor French.

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

I wouldn't be opposed to it on a state level, I think. But when the federal government wants to regulate everything on the federal level, I think it violates states rights. My state has a superb standard of living. We have a good health care system that takes care of all, Pell grants for college students, the right to own a firearm and a C&C, in addition to other factors, which all make my state a great place. One problem I have is all the parasites out-of-towners who move from Chicago, Millwaukee and other trash can's of cities so they can take from those of us who have been born and raised here; decendents of people who made the state such a beautiful community to begin with. But when you talk about the federal government intruding on our sovereignty, I think many people are offended by it. In short, I want a very weak federal government, laws to be decided primarily on the state level. It's another way of checks and balances as well. We don't want/need an oppressive Uncle Sam breathing down our way of life and turning our state to mirror other have-not shithole states. Spreading the wealth via federal legislation is not only unAmerican, it's sick and twisted.

 

[marquis2]

Don't ya know we won WW1 and WW2 single handedly??

Everybody would be speaking german or Japanease right now if not for us.

Of course I'm kidding.We only pushed the allies over the top to victory with our entrance into WW1 in 1917,the brits and the french still did overwhelmingly the majority of fighting and dying.Not saying america's entrance was not a factor ,it was but we had help lol.

And of course in ww2 the brits again were vital to the defeat of hitler as were the Russians,maybe we can claim we whipped the japs basically all alone.

Believe it or not there were more British and Empire troops engaged against the Japanese than there were American.There were nearly two and a half million troops engaged in the Far East, particularly in Burma.