The Future of Earth

Just ask anyone in the South if fighting at the border (and at home) is a good idea.

Let me get this straight, because I just have to be reading it wrong:

ACIM teaches you should stop trying to change the world, and start just feeling better about it?

Holy Neville Chamberlain Batman! That is like saying don't fight back, just imagine the rape is the coolest seduction ever. Don't pay the hydro bill, just imagine the disconnection notice is a poem praising your thriftiness. Hel, don't even leave the burning building, just feel thankful that there is both heat and light coming from the walls.

There has just got to be another way you all read that initial premise, because if not then it looks like the single stupidest thing I've read since The Secret.

allthegoodnamesweretaken wrote:I didn't respond to this initially because I thought you said that you were going to be gone.

heh I fell for warlordofks trap Maybe now I'm falling for yours. To bad this isn't China I might actually have some free speech

allthegoodnamesweretaken wrote:I drive an SUV. I refuse to drive a little tin can that will get thrown around on the interstate, or spend 60 grand for a vehicle.

Those are not your only two options. Hybrid SUVs start at about $30,000.

allthegoodnamesweretaken wrote:Enough for what?

Enough to make a difference in global warming and our dependance on oil.

allthegoodnamesweretaken wrote:DI,

I was raised with the idea that we should focus on our defending our borders and not fight wars on foreign soil. I have since seen that this is a short sighted mindset.

By fighting wars on foreign soil we are defending our borders.

Not fighting is not an option. One does not pluck a string without it vibrating. I would rather fight on foreign soil than fight at home.

Parents know best. America never had a problem with terrorism until it started sending it's forces abroad. The same can be said of Britain. There are many examples of industrialized nations who are not trying to take over the world who have no problems securing their borders and are free of terrorism.

The whole "fight there or fight here" argument is nothing but a campaign slogan. It amounts to nothing more than fear mongering and ignores the real reasons why we are doing it. The stuff that this country is doing is illegal and based on lies. Our actions over seas are not only making new enemies but bring them here as 9/11 demonstrated. To say that we secure our borders by making enemies over seas and ignoring our borders here at home is ludicrous.

John T Mainer wrote:Let me get this straight ...

You missed the point of my post, but that's okay. As I have said ACIM allows for self-defense.

warlordofks, great example of what ACIM is saying. You need to forget about changing the world and focus on your interpretation of it. Not everybody is a racist.

Okay, this fish isn't taking any more bait. I'll leave you with one last thought.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpYeekQkAdc

You know, there's a hide feature, if you don't like what warlord has to say.

DiminishingInsanity wrote:
Parents know best. America never had a problem with terrorism until it started sending it's forces abroad. The same can be said of Britain. There are many examples of industrialized nations who are not trying to take over the world who have no problems securing their borders and are free of terrorism.

The whole "fight there or fight here" argument is nothing but a campaign slogan. It amounts to nothing more than fear mongering and ignores the real reasons why we are doing it. The stuff that this country is doing is illegal and based on lies. Our actions over seas are not only making new enemies but bring them here as 9/11 demonstrated. To say that we secure our borders by making enemies over seas and ignoring our borders here at home is ludicrous. No

Have you ever read history? Son you are so far from right you cannot even find it in the same map book. England has known terrorism for as long as it known organized religion or political philosophy. Given the choice between fighting a civil war over the Spanish backed Catholic Church, or war with Spain (later France when it was the dominant Catholic power), it chose to crush its domestic unrest, and seek out its sources of supply, funding and sanctuary, and fight the war at sea or abroad, rather than endless burnings and killings of English by English. Guy Fawkes day is still celebrated. They got sick of fighting at home, and carried the war abroad and frigging settled it. Spend your young men to harry the foe, or spend your young men, your women your children, your aged, your crops, flocks, fields factories and farms to fight at home. The choice is simple, and there really is only one answer.

Canada has never fought a war, nor financed one, nor aided those who did in India, yet Indian terrorists planted bombs in a plane in my own damned city that rained burning bodies from the sky over Lockerbie Scotland. How many hundred bodies from my own city must I stack up before I can cry bullsh*t? Buddy, I have over three hundred corpses from my own damned town whose murder cries foul to your words.

Terrorists given foreign aid and sanctuary may carry out phase I guerrilla operations forever. All they can do is murder soft targets (innocent civilians) without affecting the function of government, but they can do that forever unless their sanctuaries are taken. This truth was old when the Serbs backed their pet extremists to kill Arch-Duke Franz Ferdinand to kick off WWI, the greatest mass killing in human history at the time, and it is still true today.

DiminishingInsanity wrote:

allthegoodnamesweretaken wrote:I didn't respond to this initially because I thought you said that you were going to be gone.

heh I fell for warlordofks trap Maybe now I'm falling for yours. To bad this isn't China I might actually have some free speech

It's not a trap. I just disagree.

DiminishingInsanity wrote:

allthegoodnamesweretaken wrote:I drive an SUV. I refuse to drive a little tin can that will get thrown around on the interstate, or spend 60 grand for a vehicle.

Those are not your only two options. Hybrid SUVs start at about $30,000.

I do mostly interstate driving. Hybrids get better gas mileage in town. The SUV I just got was 17K. I can buy a lot of gas to make up the difference for 13K.

DiminishingInsanity wrote:

allthegoodnamesweretaken wrote:Enough for what?

Enough to make a difference in global warming and our dependance on oil.

I really think it is too late to make a difference in global warming, and am not concerned about our "dependance" on oil. If they give me a viable option, I'll take it, but am not going to spend tens of thousands of dollars because someone thinks I should.

DiminishingInsanity wrote:

allthegoodnamesweretaken wrote:DI,

I was raised with the idea that we should focus on our defending our borders and not fight wars on foreign soil. I have since seen that this is a short sighted mindset.

By fighting wars on foreign soil we are defending our borders.

Not fighting is not an option. One does not pluck a string without it vibrating. I would rather fight on foreign soil than fight at home.

Parents know best.

DiminishingInsanity wrote:
America never had a problem with terrorism until it started sending it's forces abroad.

Do you understand the dynamics of the changing world?

The ideas of mutually assured destruction that fostered the cold war being cold? The fighting abroad in smaller countries that were being used as chess pieces?

DiminishingInsanity wrote:
The same can be said of Britain. There are many examples of industrialized nations who are not trying to take over the world who have no problems securing their borders and are free of terrorism.

Name them.

DiminishingInsanity wrote:

The whole "fight there or fight here" argument is nothing but a campaign slogan. It amounts to nothing more than fear mongering and ignores the real reasons why we are doing it. The stuff that this country is doing is illegal and based on lies. Our actions over seas are not only making new enemies but bring them here as 9/11 demonstrated. To say that we secure our borders by making enemies over seas and ignoring our borders here at home is ludicrous.

Based on what laws?
I know you haven't been around here long enough to know many of our stances on these issues, but what laws govern these actions? What specific laws have been broken?

I don't see where you get the idea that we are ignoring our borders here at home?

Haven't you all notice how diminished has basicly ignored all that I've posted. Only answering that he fell for my trap?. What trap ? I didn't post any trap. Only answered what he posted. And try to show him that the world isn't pollyanna. And that running away isn't the answer. Also that some of us have not only seen but have lived through the darker side of humanity & have came out of it & hopefully became a better & more loving person. We have chosen to try to make the World a little bit better instead of hiding our heads in the sand. Or in otherwords. We're trying to improve our World Humanity. Not run away. All of us here in our own way no matter what our personal belief/faith work together & Love & accept each other & work, as I've said earlier, together to improve this World & not run away.

Warlord, given a choice of the people here of many different faiths who choose to accept their responsibility to make the world better, or a hundred times as many of my own faith who would decide to sit back and watch the world burn, I would joyfully stand among those who only shared the belief that it was our duty to make things better.

Everyone changes the world. Those who chose to deny they are, are rarely changing it for the better.

Getting back to the subject.... I think it was about climate change.... humans have survived drastic climate changes in the past, and I see no reason why the species shouldn't survive the next ice age. I don't expect to be here for it, because we're looking farther down the road than I have left to walk. But I don't fear for the future.... as I said, mankind is pretty resilient.

John T Mainer wrote:Warlord, given a choice of the people here of many different faiths who choose to accept their responsibility to make the world better, or a hundred times as many of my own faith who would decide to sit back and watch the world burn, I would joyfully stand among those who only shared the belief that it was our duty to make things better.

Everyone changes the world. Those who chose to deny they are, are rarely changing it for the better.

I know my friend. I was hoping to make my points to diminished. And while I'm at it John M. I see the World in a little different light than some do. No, not you. I see all of the different Spiritual paths as just another path to the Divine & don't see that there's only one path.

And now to my great friend John5180. I hear you brother. Hopefully you, & I will be around for quite awhile. But only if we develope selective hearing of our wifes telling us what to ?

Your woman is going to kick your butt if she reads that.

Can't speak for Warlord, but I can run faster scared than mine can mad.....

Good afternoon.
I just read every post from character Diminishing Insanity[Welcome to the Forum, sir!]. Wow,...too bad I missed out on all of that interesting fun.

The future of Earth depends on people action , collective karma.