0

They weren't Cuban missles. They were Soviet missles being deployed in Cuba. Considering the ties between Castro's Cuba and the USSR, that's not too surprising.

0

I remember hearing a quote by Castro that said something like he didn't want to be in the middle of the two superpowers being used by both of them as puppets. I don't remember the exact quote. If anyone knows then post it. But yeah, there were definitely ties between Cuba and the U.S.S.R.

0

Quote of the day on my customized iGoogle from Joseph Stalin:

"A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic."

Sounds like something he would say, right?

0

Here's something that one of our founding fathers said. I thought it was interesting. It was John Adams.

"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."

1

Wow. After trying to read this thread I'd have to say that the most interesting part about American history is the inability of a number of Americans to remember it. [Directed at no one in particular.]

This is probably the best saying in the thread. Each of our interpretations of history depends heavily on our individual points of view. That is not necessarily right or wrong, but we can't let that dilute the facts. If we don't understand what really happened in history--in wars, economics, politics, or anything else--we haven't learned our lessons. As the saying goes, we are then doomed to repeat those same mistakes. We as a government and as a people need to make the right choices instead of the "right now" choices.

I've said my peace. I welcome your responses.

0

Here's something that one of our founding fathers said. I thought it was interesting. It was John Adams.

"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."

Its a good thing the USA is not a democracy:*

0

Its a republic isnt it?

Thankfully the founding fothers had the forseight to make it a republic. They took what they liked about UK and France then made up the rest. You do realize, though, that they were just a bunch of rebels and criminals of their day, or at least according to the King of England. It wasn't until just a few years ago that Queen Elizabeth gave us our freedom. :D

0

I learned some interesting stuff about history today in class. We had special guests from Turkmenistan come in and talk to us.

lol borat

0

I'm probably missing a few destails so anyone can fill in if they want, but one of the biggest reasons the United States rebelled was because of high taxes. They considered high treason justifiable. But now taxes are higher than they could ever have been at that time. We even get taxed on earning money, yet today treason is looked down upon by everyone (I'm not saying let's go take down the government). Also, during the time of the revolutionary war, citizens of England were being taxed more than citizens of the colonies. Besides taxes the other big reason was a lack of representation, but I don't really see the big necessity to break from Britain at the time. I'm glad we are an independent country now and all and I'm glad those founding fathers did what they did, but I don't really see how it was very justifiable at the time. But like I said, I'm probably missing a few details so fill it in.

0

um, actually the colonists were not taxed as heavily as the citizens of England. The main reason the colonists revolted was b/c the colonists were taxed without representation. After the French and Indian War/7 years war the King decided to raise the colonist's taxes since they had spent a lot of money defending the colonists from the Native Americans. However, the American colonists were very angry b/c they had no representation.

And ironically, Washington D.C., our capitol, is taxed without representation.

0

Taxes in the US are low compared to here

We better start advertising that:

And for ONLY 33% of taxes you can come and live in USA, where we have very competitive rates.

0

So, if the colonies had the right to revolt for being taxed without representation then so do the citizens of Washington D.C. right? They have three delegates to the House don't they? They just can't vote. It's very ironic that the nation's capitol has no representation.

0

Yeah, they have no representation in congress whatsoever.. but they can vote for president. So, they could easily use this as a reason to rebel from the union... however, I don't think the D.C. citizens have a death wish..

0

Yeah, they have no representation in congress whatsoever.. but they can vote for president. So, they could easily use this as a reason to rebel from the union... however, I don't think the D.C. citizens have a death wish..

Hmm... Not too sure about that. They did after all vote Marion Berry for mayor.:ooh: And after getting busted for cocaine and the video released, they voted for him again!

They might not have a death wish. Perhaps they are just masochistic?:?:

0

I don't think DC was originally intended to be the big city that it is today -- it was supposed to be a place for our nation's capital that was not in any state so that it could be more impartial. People who live there today do so by choice -- nobody is making them stay there. If they want representation then move to one of the 50 states.

0

Hmm... Not too sure about that. They did after all vote Marion Berry for mayor.:ooh: And after getting busted for cocaine and the video released, they voted for him again!

They might not have a death wish. Perhaps they are just masochistic?:?:

Actually, yeah he's still right because he said they have no representation in Congress. A mayor doesn't serve in Congress.

0

I don't think DC was originally intended to be the big city that it is today -- it was supposed to be a place for our nation's capital that was not in any state so that it could be more impartial. People who live there today do so by choice -- nobody is making them stay there. If they want representation then move to one of the 50 states.

Yeah, but then we could take away the voting rights of the state of Rhode Island and just say, "No one is making you live in Rhode Island." It still isn't fair. Some people in Washington D.C. are poor and it's difficult for them to move. What if a piece of legislation is harmful to the citizens of D.C.? Who is going to directly defend them? By that logic you could say that nobody was making the colonists live there and they could have moved to England if they wanted representation.

0

I'm sorry that my intent was mistaken, Mayor Berry was used as an example of the type of person that WDC would elect to Congress if that option were available. As for the taxation without representation question, our governement was formed to be of the people, by the people, and for the people. "The people" is a reference to us, not "the people" on Capitol Hill.

One thing that historians fail to mention is that they didn't want career politicians like we have today. Our first generation of representatives were doctors, lawyers, teachers, and other local leaders who met on the national level only briefly and then ajourned to live and work inside their district.

I'm not saying that this is what should happen with today's international policy. We just need to remember where we came from. If Congress is meeting, they need to be making positive changes or no changes at all. Two things that waste our money: filibusters and pork barrell spending. I like the line item veto as well.

There's my two cents. It's what's left after taxes and filling my tank.

0

Yeah, but then we could take away the voting rights of the state of Rhode Island and just say, "No one is making you live in Rhode Island." It still isn't fair. Some people in Washington D.C. are poor and it's difficult for them to move. What if a piece of legislation is harmful to the citizens of D.C.? Who is going to directly defend them? By that logic you could say that nobody was making the colonists live there and they could have moved to England if they wanted representation.

Exactly. D.C. may not have been designed with the intention of being what it is today.. but it has become that way, and something should be done to accommodate their vote.

I'm sorry that my intent was mistaken, Mayor Berry was used as an example of the type of person that WDC would elect to Congress if that option were available. As for the taxation without representation question, our governement was formed to be of the people, by the people, and for the people. "The people" is a reference to us, not "the people" on Capitol Hill.

One thing that historians fail to mention is that they didn't want career politicians like we have today. Our first generation of representatives were doctors, lawyers, teachers, and other local leaders who met on the national level only briefly and then ajourned to live and work inside their district.

I'm not saying that this is what should happen with today's international policy. We just need to remember where we came from. If Congress is meeting, they need to be making positive changes or no changes at all. Two things that waste our money: filibusters and pork barrell spending. I like the line item veto as well.

There's my two cents. It's what's left after taxes and filling my tank.

I agree.. fillibusters and pork barrell spending definitely needs to be changed. They always release everything that Congress has decided to fund, and every year I am disgusted by all the tax dollars going to complete waste. Someone should post the most recent data..

I also think we need to move away from the politics, and try to have more educated people running for office (damn, look at Bush.. he is a complete idiot!).. The problem is, so much money is spent on the damn campaigning and such that the candidates end up accepting tons of money from special interest groups and people who expect favors in return.. Politicians spend more time raising money than actually campaigning. And our Campaign season begins much earlier than any other democratic nation.. It's too much stress, too time consuming, and way too expensive for many of the educated people to participate. Something should definitely be changed as to the campaigns and special interest groups..

0

I don't like pork barrel legislation or filibustering all that much either but not all pork barrel is bad. It has accomplished things that might otherwise not be accomplished. As for filibustering, it can always be ended by cloture so there is a check on that if it just gets out of hand. If someone feels so strongly on a topic that they have to speak for hours on end then it's an important topic that needs to be addressed. They just need to keep the speeches germane to the topic which they don't always do. But like I said, if it gets out of hand they can always use cloture.

0

What do you mean by voting rights? If you mean they want to creates representatives for Washington D.C. that seems, to me, like it wouldn't pass. Why would the House of Representatives pass something that would increase their population thus decreasing their power as individual representatives?

0

A few more representatives would not affect the system much.. Besides, wouldn't you reelect someone who voted to keep democracy alive and give D.C. the right to vote? It's all political.

0

But it's a congressman that would introduce such a bill. He/she wouldn't look bad in front of their consituency if it never came up at all.

0

That's true. but I'm sure there were petitions, and lots of publicity behind it (not just from D.C. residents either).. pressure from the people will always motivate congress to do something..

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.