Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Well, it appears that collectively the Scots are not morons. I wonder though is this vote will have knock on effects throughout the EU. I have already heard rumblings about Catalan in Spain wanting the same opportunity. Can it be long before the Wallons start demanding a referendum? There are plenty of ethnic groups in Europe that could clamor for self-determination as the Scots did. It is Wilson's ideal of national self-determination taken to it's logical extreme. Heck I can even envision the Sorbs clamoring for a vote in Germany. After all, the Sorbs are Germany's Indians since they were here first.
They could produce a written confession and photographic proof of guilt and there would always be naysayers. This seems like about as close to “got him” as we are going to get. The methods used are innovative to say the least.
I heard about them on the news. Here is a story about the incident in English: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2014/09/05/Police-arrest-Sharia-Police-in-Wuppertal-Germany/2811409937280/I hope and think that normal westerners are starting to wake up to the danger posed by not just extremists but muslims in general. The problem is that Islamists are seen as if not quite mainstream, then representing a legitimate thread of Islamic thought by many non-extremist muslims. It is as though the average Christian would tell you that "while I disagree with the Westboro Baptist Church's preachings, they kind of have a point." Failure to condemn confers legitimacy. The fact is that Islamists are animals and those that support them whether tacitly or covertly are just as guilty of any outrage. Huntington was right, we are looking at a Clash of Civilizations. The big difference is that right now most westerners refuse to acknowledge that the clash is occurring.Things are going to get worse before they get better because it will take some huge Islamist outrage to wake people up. 9/11, Madrid, and the London Underground bombings were apparently not enough.
I have been decrying the inclusion of historically dubious characters in period films and shows for years now. That kind of garbage just proves how effective PC and the modern thought police really are.
I usually get between 5-6 hours of sleep per night. If I get more I usually don't feel right the next day. Incidentally, it drives my wife crazy that I sleep so little.
Check out http://www.usa.com/ as well. That site is full of all kinds of useful stats about cities.
Nota BeneIn my replies, it was not my intention to dismiss or disregard opinions or expertises from anyone.If my statements have been hurting or upsetting someone, I present my apologies
No hurt feelings here.
I just remembered reading somewhere that the statues in Greek temples were carved nude and clothed with the clothing changed based on the season. I could be wrong here though. I am no expert on ancient religious practice.
Roman heavy cavalry wore a kind of chainmail hauberk, a fully enclosed pseudo-corinthian style helmet and carried a Spatha sword about 1/3 longer than a Gladius and either javelins or spears. All Roman horse archers were not Romans but provincial auxiliaries and most cavalry was also composed of non-Roman auxiliaries although some citizens did serve in the cavalry.The Roman saddle was a strange four-horned affair in which the rider used the strength of his thighs to stay in the saddle and the high horns at the four points helped to keep them from being unseated when throwing or striking a blow. There is a very good reason why the most dominant armies of the world prior to appearance of the Huns were infantry. Cavalry was simply unsuited to shock action. Not only do horse refuse to charge a square or formed infantry, the rider was so unstable that they were really only suitable for reconnaissance work and running down and killing routed infantry. Outside of Numidia and Parthia, cavalry was a despised arm and the only reason it was considered special was because the care and upkeep of a horse was so expensive only the rich cold afford it.Note: I am not down on cavalry because I don't like cavalry, I am just stating objective facts. Also, I spent my entire military career as a cavalryman and the US Cavalry takes our lineage as horse soldiers very seriously indeed.
I find it improbable because how would a fully armored man stay in the saddle? The romans did not have stirrups, which is what gave a medieval knight the stability to stay in the saddle while wearing 100+ pounds of plate armor. ANyone who has ever ridden bareback knows how difficult it is to stay on a moving horse with just legs and reins. I cannot even magine staying on a horse while armored AND fighting without a saddle. I could buy Roman cavalry wearing the same armor as infantry, but not plate.
I think Krauthammer is wrong on this one. Mainly, because I don't think the GOP rank and ile in Congress would let politics get in the way of impeachment over such a blatantly impeachable act as amnesty by EO.What I do see is an executive that increasingly turns to expanding executive authority to get around Congress because Congress will not do the will of the executive. It is the aggrandizement of executive power and presidential side-stepping of Congress that is the biggest threat to democracy. That the courts are hit and miss on reining the executive in only make the current course more dangerous.What we have seen with Obama is that legislation does not matter. He can take any bill and change and twist it through EO to what he wants it to be. What he is creeping towards is taking a bill passed naming a post office and making it into a bill allowing indefinite detention of dissidents. That is an extreme example but shows the logical conclusion of where he is heading I think.
Does this mean that in the future, POTUS will be able to get any general kind of legislation pushed through Congress, and then enforce it as he chooses so that it's effectively a different law than Congress passed?
No, what it means is that the executive is moving towards a uniquely American version of the Fuhrer Prinzip. Obama is only the most egregious abuser of executive power we have yet seen, other presidents have done it too (notably FDR). All with the excuse that they could not afford not to act. The only thing that has saved the Republic so far from dictatorship is the presidential term limit. I expect that to go away within the next 20 years and when that day comes, the American experiment is dead.
