Good anti Drug Poster?

Hiy all)))

EtOH - Port
“drugs” - i have an increasing penchant for Rx’ing tramadol. 
TMJ - i usually start out with NSAIDS - Aleve - then go to Flexeril, then Valium - in a less-to-more-addictive-substnaces pattern.

Well, the doctor that saves the life of the mother at the expense of the child would be considered a hero. The mother go on to live a full life, whereas the child has many more risks to death before the age of two (SIDS, Bad Infections, Accidents, Viruses, whatever. Adults just arnt as prone to death as children.) So there are times when an abortion may be required and not necessarily be a choice.

The doctor that takes the lives of babies because it is an inconvenience, on the other hand, I do not consider heros and many people around the world do not consider them to be heros.

But, the question was, do they think of themselves as “the good guy”? Sure. As I said with Ossama, you don’t do things that you think would make you the “bad guy”, you do things that, in your mind, are “right.”

@Meijing:

Why do I not see headlines every day on the frontpage speaking about all the wonders and majesty of how the USA has straightened up Iraq?

oh come on - there is some reason. After all - look at that news footage of all of the Iraqis cheering at the toppled statue of Saddam :roll:

I’m living in a country part of which wasn’t democratic for 40 years. And it wasn’t war or an ultimatum which brought the change. In fact the BRD (West Germany) recorgnized the DDR (East Germany) as a sovereign state and even lent money to it. On the contrary Cuba remains communistic despite a US embargo and military action.

this is funny (not in the haha sense)
I firmly believe that if the US took exactly the opposite direction with regards to Cuba for the last hundred years or so (i.e. with every fork in the road if it made a different choice) then things would be much different. The US chased Cuba into the arms of Russia making Castro choose a more communist road than he was prepared to go down. With each of the hostile maneuvers directed at Cuba and Castro, Cuba reacted against them (not with - surprising, eh?). What happened is that Canada and Spain are two of the few democratic/capitalistic nations who have Castro’s ear. The problem with this is that the carrot is not big enough yet.

D:S, my most sincere apologies!
You had some good stuff, but I messed up on my confusing, butterfly ballot. You should demand a recount.

Those damn hanging chads! And military votes shouldn’t count! :wink:

Mr. Ghoul, I think the Japanese started in China as far back as 1933. You are right as to why the US cut off her fuel supplies. You’re right that didn’t give the Japanese the right to attack in the minds of the US and according to their law. And that is probably the right position legally. However, how would the US react if her oil supply was threatened. Ahhhhh yes, if radical Islam swept across all the oil in the middle east and the world decided to shut of the oil to the US. How would the US react.

The only difference is the degree to which their arguments are valid. Both Japan in 1940 and the US in the last 5 years of done some bad stuff, broken internation law etc. Of course the rape of Nanking is orders of magnitude worse then anything the US has done since perhaps the Indian wars, even then it was spread out over centuries not weeks.

I believe the US had and has laws on her books not to sell weapons to countries at war that don’t involve the US. The US was not at war during WWII until Dec 8, 1941. Therefore it was illegal for the US to supply ANY weapons or war materials to any country at war during the period preceding Dec, 8 1941. The US doesn’t like syria selling weapons to Iraq now, why should they expect war time Germany to like the US selling weapons to England.

In fact, Germany had a legal right to stop and sink any ships entering the british home waters found to be carring war materials. But I digress on this law and history lesson.

BB

@yourbuttocks:

In the Soviet Union, did the class system disapear? NO! It became much more Ironclad than in Capitalist countries.

This is your counter argument to my post? How utterly disappointing.

@yanny:

A communism must be democratic to work.

As said by myself before, there is no other system inherently democratic as communism.

@eyeless:

true communism – the theory stated by Karl Marx – sounds like a wonderful idea to me but this is the real world. that is why the capatialist system is more effiecnt.

The problem is that you are studying too much of the theories under Marx and Engles. There is just as much to gain from reading from the theories of the new era of influential communist. However brilliant The Manifesto may be, it is similarly outdated for the 21st century (read the coming of the information war) and should only be used as a template for the new communist movement.

@yanny:

Due to the post WWII and present day envirment, it is currently impossible for a democratic communism to exist. The United States will involve itself in everything, and will always be sure to have a capitalism put in place. Therefore, the first Communism will be the US itself.

This is true. Look at the economic peril South America is currently in from adopting US capitalist modes. South America is on the verge of initializing groundbreaking, leftist reforms, though the United States Government gone through great pains to try and prevent that from happening.

@guest:

Impossible, america is too individualistic and too capitalistic

I would not count out the Americans. If anything, a smoothly operating communist government would be more successful in America, Europe, or Japan due to their vast, modernized infostructure.

@yanny:

Emu, I agree with you entirely. The kibbutz is a great example. Its the only working communist system in the world. Israel is all bad!

I wouldn’t say the only “communist” system in the world, but I do respect the Kibbutz system as a model for future communes.