Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

madmartigan

Has Socialism ever worked in Latin America?

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, happycamper said:

When any thing "libruhl" became socialism. We totally don't practice identity politics!

There's a shitton of green energy innovation being created by private enterprise because there's consumer demand for it now. 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

There's a shitton of green energy innovation being created by private enterprise because there's consumer demand for it now. 

LIBRAHLS LAIK IT MUST BE SOCIALIZT!

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, happycamper said:

No, they don't. They don't get the stated agreement that they need zero armed forces against numerous, larger, historically belligerent neighbors. 

 

Since we have people like you who support intervening everywhere at the same time.  Whether there is a written agreement or not you will send troops there likely.

Obama sent special forces to over 100 countries his last year in office.  Right down your alley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

Since we have people like you who support intervening everywhere at the same time.  Whether there is a written agreement or not you will send troops there likely.

Obama sent special forces to over 100 countries his last year in office.  Right down your alley.

So you like Costa Rica because they get the welfare you hate?

Also, really? 100? That's kind of amazing

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, BSUTOP25 said:

When and how did no military and green energy become synonymous with socialism? 

Well, I am using "Socialism" the way that many around here like to use the term.  You could also call it "Authoritarianism" or whatever floats your boat.  

The fact of the matter is anyone who is only looking out for themselves would be foolish not to burn coal...cheap per unit of energy used.  Unfortunately with unrestrained capitalism you get the tragedy of the commons and when everyone uses coal you end up with air like Beijing.  Until you get a situation where everyone who uses that common area gets together says, "Okay...this isn't working...we are killing ourselves and our common area," and puts some minimum standards in place you would be a fool to do green energy alone...you would put yourself out of business if you were making widgets using more expensive energy.  

But when this happens the freakout happens when people suddenly can't use their old fashioned light bulb and we start talking about Authorarianism...so on and so forth.

 

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Akkula said:

Well, I am using "Socialism" the way that many around here like to use the term.  You could also call it "Authoritarianism" or whatever floats your boat.  

The fact of the matter is anyone who is only looking out for themselves would be foolish not to burn coal...cheap per unit of energy used.  Unfortunately with unrestrained capitalism you get the tragedy of the commons and when everyone uses coal you end up with air like Beijing.  Until you get a situation where everyone who uses that common area gets together says, "Okay...this isn't working...we are killing ourselves and our common area," and puts some minimum standards in place you would be a fool to do green energy alone...you would put yourself out of business if you were making widgets using more expensive energy.  

But when this happens the freakout happens when people suddenly can't use their old fashioned light bulb and we start talking about Authorarianism...so on and so forth.

 

You’re insane.

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, happycamper said:

So you like Costa Rica because they get the welfare you hate?

 

I like Costa Rica because they do a good job for a little country in that region.  Compared to their neighbors they are rock stars.

 

54 minutes ago, happycamper said:

 

Also, really? 100? That's kind of amazing

Yeah that is like half the countries in the world.  But i was wrong badly.

https://warisboring.com/u-s-special-operations-forces-deployed-to-149-countries-in-2017/

n 2017, U.S. Special Operations forces, including Navy SEALs and Army Green Berets, deployed to 149 countries around the world, according to figures provided to TomDispatch by U.S. Special Operations Command. That’s around 75 percent of the nations on the planet — and represents a jump from the 138 countries that saw such deployments in 2016 under the Obama administration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Akkula said:

Well, I am using "Socialism" the way that many around here like to use the term.  You could also call it "Authoritarianism" or whatever floats your boat.  

The fact of the matter is anyone who is only looking out for themselves would be foolish not to burn coal...cheap per unit of energy used.  Unfortunately with unrestrained capitalism you get the tragedy of the commons and when everyone uses coal you end up with air like Beijing.  Until you get a situation where everyone who uses that common area gets together says, "Okay...this isn't working...we are killing ourselves and our common area," and puts some minimum standards in place you would be a fool to do green energy alone...you would put yourself out of business if you were making widgets using more expensive energy.  

But when this happens the freakout happens when people suddenly can't use their old fashioned light bulb and we start talking about Authorarianism...so on and so forth.

 

You are so +++++ing ignorant and stupid.

Why does China have worse air quality than anywhere in the world?  It must be all that green energy that socialist/communist countries use.  HA!HA! HA!HA! HA! HA! HA!HA! HA! HA!HA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

I like Costa Rica because they do a good job for a little country in that region.  Compared to their neighbors they are rock stars.

 

Yeah that is like half the countries in the world.  But i was wrong badly.

https://warisboring.com/u-s-special-operations-forces-deployed-to-149-countries-in-2017/

n 2017, U.S. Special Operations forces, including Navy SEALs and Army Green Berets, deployed to 149 countries around the world, according to figures provided to TomDispatch by U.S. Special Operations Command. That’s around 75 percent of the nations on the planet — and represents a jump from the 138 countries that saw such deployments in 2016 under the Obama administration.

JESUS! 

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Costa Rica doesn't need a military...they have nobody nearby who could threaten them.

They have oceans on two sides and their neighbors are Nicaragua and Panama.  Nicaragua has tried to invade in the past and gotten their butts handed to them mostly because they were just completely inept.  The same thing goes for the northern Central American countries. Panama doesn't have a miltary either.  Colombia would have to cross the Darien gap to invade Panama or Costa Rica.   Mexico has enough of its own things to worry about than wanting to invade all of Central American to get to Costa Rica.

Geographically Costa Rica doesn't need a military.  A lot of the neighbors have enough problems internally to contain than to be looking outside their borders.  Furthermore, even if they got invaded and got no help all the Costa Ricans civil society would have to do would be to just to peacefully resist and that little bit would be enough to topple the inept invaders.  Holding territory that doesn't want to be held is a hell of a lot harder than rolling tanks through...and that is no easy feat in this jungle either!

Having a military would be a waste of money whose only use would be to suppress the people since they would likely be very weak against a true big foreign invader.  Look at how easy it was for the USA to take over Panama when they had a military.  After that Panama was like...our military sucks...let's spend the money on schools instead!

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Akkula said:

Costa Rica doesn't need a military...they have nobody nearby who could threaten them.

They have oceans on two sides and their neighbors are Nicaragua and Panama.  Nicaragua has tried to invade in the past and gotten their butts handed to them mostly because they were just completely inept.  The same thing goes for the northern Central American countries. Panama doesn't have a miltary either.  Colombia would have to cross the Darien gap to invade Panama or Costa Rica.   Mexico has enough of its own things to worry about than wanting to invade all of Central American to get to Costa Rica.

Geographically Costa Rica doesn't need a military.  A lot of the neighbors have enough problems internally to contain than to be looking outside their borders.  Furthermore, even if they got invaded and got no help all the Costa Ricans civil society would have to do would be to just to peacefully resist and that little bit would be enough to topple the inept invaders.  Holding territory that doesn't want to be held is a hell of a lot harder than rolling tanks through...and that is no easy feat in this jungle either!

Having a military would be a waste of money whose only use would be to suppress the people since they would likely be very weak against a true big foreign invader.  Look at how easy it was for the USA to take over Panama when they had a military.  After that Panama was like...our military sucks...let's spend the money on schools instead!

We got your back!

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Akkula said:

Costa Rica doesn't need a military...they have nobody nearby who could threaten them.

They have oceans on two sides and their neighbors are Nicaragua and Panama.  Nicaragua has tried to invade in the past and gotten their butts handed to them mostly because they were just completely inept.  The same thing goes for the northern Central American countries. Panama doesn't have a miltary either.  Colombia would have to cross the Darien gap to invade Panama or Costa Rica.   Mexico has enough of its own things to worry about than wanting to invade all of Central American to get to Costa Rica.

Geographically Costa Rica doesn't need a military.  A lot of the neighbors have enough problems internally to contain than to be looking outside their borders.  Furthermore, even if they got invaded and got no help all the Costa Ricans civil society would have to do would be to just to peacefully resist and that little bit would be enough to topple the inept invaders.  Holding territory that doesn't want to be held is a hell of a lot harder than rolling tanks through...and that is no easy feat in this jungle either!

Having a military would be a waste of money whose only use would be to suppress the people since they would likely be very weak against a true big foreign invader.  Look at how easy it was for the USA to take over Panama when they had a military.  After that Panama was like...our military sucks...let's spend the money on schools instead!

First, it was American pirates that tried to invade.

Second, google the War of the Pacific. Oceans have been highways for conquest for over 100 years. 

Third, what good is "no help from civil society" when civil society has zero arms to have partisan uprisings? Looking at Honduras and Nicaragua, they get "no help from civil society" in their own countries and they still manage to rule. 

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, happycamper said:

First, it was American pirates that tried to invade.

Second, google the War of the Pacific. Oceans have been highways for conquest for over 100 years. 

Third, what good is "no help from civil society" when civil society has zero arms to have partisan uprisings? Looking at Honduras and Nicaragua, they get "no help from civil society" in their own countries and they still manage to rule. 

Here are the official battle plans.  No need for guns in the jungle!  

image.jpeg.91a410cbdd93163f37411bc062f84d61.jpegimage.jpeg.8f5ebc3856b4fde55a2e52f2c5fc259c.jpeg

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, happycamper said:

When any thing "libruhl" became socialism. We totally don't practice identity politics!

Yep. This.

Actual definition of socialism:

a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

The definition that is often used here in the U.S. 

anything that moves the country even a tiny bit to the left

1mwpHNX.jpg

I wouldn't roll my eyes quite so hard at "socialism" if everything Democrats ever tried to do wasn't called it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, pokebball said:

are you talking wind?

Wind, solar, hydro, bio, photovoltacics, etc.

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...