TheKwas

Stalin took alot longer to kill his people, and it's a tricky thing seperating deaths that are due to Stalin and that are due to famine/conditions. Same should be said for Mao, who by some extreme estimates, killed more than Stalin and Hitler combined.

No, that would cause the countries that need free trade the most to lose it due to working conditions.

So when exactly was the last time Usama kidnapped kids, treated them nicely, and returned them to their parents a week later? Those senseless murderers... Also, I'm going to use your link to back one of my earlier statements "In fact the only area where they have stayed consistent is in their demand for an end to Nepal's constitutional monarchy." For the most part, they try not to. Most of their (fatal) attacks are on police forces. This also why we aren't see any major assaults on Kathmundu, because too many civilians would be hurt. Instead the Maoists use mainly general strikes and siege methods on Kathmundu meanwhile pick off the odd police patrol.

First, I don't really have a problem with how-to-build-bombs literature, and I just saw "The Anarchist Cookbook" in a store not to long ago and was even tempted to pick it up. And the only reason kiddie porn should be illegal is because it's causes direct harm to the child. Also, I don't think hate-crime punishment should come into affect until the "haters" are harrassing others. It's your freedom to believe that jews are scum, but if you start harrassing jews and calling them sub-human, you got a hate-crime on your hands. Millions of Vietnese, Cambodians, and Laoese died due to the Democrat and Republican Party. Shall we limit their freedom of speech too? PS: 14 million died in the Holocaust.

If you don't want them to place that sign there, then you go clean up that trash instead.

Never trust an Indian Media source to provide an objective view on the Nepalese Civil/People's War. Of course this constitutional democracy grants the King the power to overturn and decisions and plans made by the government, and unlike the British Queen, uses this power to his advantage. Indian (and for that matter, British and American) intervention has already been happening for a number of years now through military Aid. And this Aid is the reason why the King still has any power in Nepal and the Maoists/rebels haven't taken complete control. This is really just another ploy that the King has used numerous times before to gain legitimacy. He allows the Maoist's party to take part in the constitutional democracy, the Maoists demand that the King's powers be removed for good, the King kicks them out, and the Maoists resume the fighting. Oh, and the Maoists ARE mainstream in Nepal, when they hold general strikes, EVERYONE takes part. Some because they are afraid of being targetted if they don't, most because they believe in the strike. Not to mention the King himself rarely negotiations with the Maoists, he always sends out other people to do such things for him. And when the Maoists leaders demand to talk to him in person and not to a henchmen that always give them vague and useless answers, the King refuses and continues the fighting. Save Nepal from being destroyed by the so-called Maoists? You mean the Nepal that is already 60% under Maoist control? And has been for the last 6 and some years? There's a thing you should know about these Maoists, alot of them really aren't Maoists, just anti-monarchists. The main reason why they have come to be known as Maoists throughout the media is generally the way they model their revolution methods after Mao and Peru's Shinning Path by taking the countryside and mobilizing the peasants. Granted most of the intellects and the leaders of the Maoists see Maoism in a good light, the only demand that the Maoists refuse to back down on and compromise is the complete removal of the King from power. Other than that, they have shown great interest taking part in a democracy, considering they could proplay pull of a majority vote. So if the King truely wants democracy and to stop the fighting, all he has to do is strike a deal with the Maoists that involves him stepping down. So yeah, find yourself another source other than Indian Daily to understand the depth and complex stitiuation of Nepal.

Update: The Liberals are in more debt and digging deeper faster than the NDP before them were. Effective my ass.

Australia is the last country I would want as a power house. John Howard makes Bush look good. Not to mention that Australia sent troops to both Iraq and Vietnam, and has done their share of freedom control in the name of fighting terrorism. If a country HAS to have superpower status, give it to the swiss or to Mongolia.

Free Trade= Very Fucking good. Free Market= Not so fucking good. NAFTA has ruined the name of Free Trade for years to come, and should never be cited as an example of free trade.

It's quite unbelievable how often I hear this arguement, that Anarchy is somehow "un-natural" and won't work because people will always try to gain status and power. Yet, I think the above statements might be a part of why anarchy COULD work. If people are naturally greedy, they would want the best chances at a good outcome. Lets say that I have two pieces of cake behind my back, one is a massive piece that includes ice cream, strawberries, and a cherry on top, the other is barely one bite and lacks ice cream, strawberries and a cherry on top. Now if I said that I would give you and your friend a piece at compete random, meaning either one of you could get the big piece or the small piece, wouldn't it be natural, smart even, to make an agreement with your friend saying that whoever got what piece, you would divide it equally amoung you so that both of you will win and neither of you risk the chance of losing? By this method, you are making sure that you gain cake (status and power) no matter what the cards deal you, and thus it would be "natural" for you to take this path. Now if we were to properly deminstrate what the odds are of recieving the "big piece" in modern capitalism, we would have to create more small pieces, a crapload of meduim size pieces, and have the big pieces to be entire cake factories that dictate your cake eating abilities.

Karma's payment plan...

Point 1 for SuperMe. It's like saying that progressive-liberal ideas are formed from cold weather because most progressive-liberal countries are very cold.

Even if you do have more brothers and sisters, you also have more parents to look after you. It's not like the women of the family will have that many more babies. It's like a little hippie commune for the family.

Wow, that was bad.

To be fair, the NDP in BC got in power with a massive debt left-over from the Social Credit, and despite popular belief, LOWERED that debt.

I would vote NDP, regardless of the fact that they overly left-leaning. Liberals under Martin (who, lets face it, is the most fiscal responosble prime minister we have had in quite a while) aren't bad, but it's still the Liberals. Conservitives are jokes, plain and simple, they lean right in all the wrong places and left and all the wrong places. Greens aren't exactly bad, I feel like they would be a good oppisition party if they stuck to their hippie roots. Bloc would be nice, if they weren't such assholes milking Ottawa for all it's worth with threats of seperation.