Merry Christmas!

Discussion of current events
Jim the Moron
Posts: 1118
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: Merry Christmas!

Post by Jim the Moron » Fri Dec 28, 2018 12:18 am

cassowary wrote:
Thu Dec 27, 2018 8:38 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Thu Dec 27, 2018 9:22 am
cassowary wrote:
Thu Dec 27, 2018 12:18 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Dec 25, 2018 8:30 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Tue Dec 25, 2018 8:20 am
One cannot celebrate Christmas one day a year, and make a mockery of it the other 364 days... People are being exploited, people are being killed and maimed, people are deprived of food and of medecines, and we do what? We celebrate Christmas for 24 hours?... Does that make us feel good? Perhaps it shouldn't...
Absolutely, and that's why I never stop calling for Peace On Earth though non-interventionism, and Goodwill To Men through the voluntary interactions of the marketplace.
That sounds naive. Non-intervention in Europe during WWII would have led to victory by Nazi Germany. Non-intervention in Korea would have resulted in South Korea under them thumb of the Kim dynasty. Non-intervention in Vietnam might have resulted in SE Asia under Communist rule (according to LKY).

Non-intervention does not lead to peace.
Non-intervention in Europe during the first world war would have prevented everything you just listed.
Non-intervention in Europe in WWI would have resulted in an Europe dominated by the Kaiser. The Russians were defeated and German troops were shifted to the western front. France and the British, the two major democracies in Europe would have been defeated. I am not sure if that is better.
Merry Christmas? Anyway, I'm assuming that this discussion of "intervention" vs "non-intervention" relates to US actions. But the rather complex interactions of other parties early on in WWI really are interventions in themselves, based sometimes on treaties. Britain didn't have to enter the conflict. Why not have let continental Europe stew in its own juices?

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 1582
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Merry Christmas!

Post by Milo » Fri Dec 28, 2018 7:58 am

Jim the Moron wrote:
Fri Dec 28, 2018 12:18 am
cassowary wrote:
Thu Dec 27, 2018 8:38 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Thu Dec 27, 2018 9:22 am
cassowary wrote:
Thu Dec 27, 2018 12:18 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Dec 25, 2018 8:30 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Tue Dec 25, 2018 8:20 am
One cannot celebrate Christmas one day a year, and make a mockery of it the other 364 days... People are being exploited, people are being killed and maimed, people are deprived of food and of medecines, and we do what? We celebrate Christmas for 24 hours?... Does that make us feel good? Perhaps it shouldn't...
Absolutely, and that's why I never stop calling for Peace On Earth though non-interventionism, and Goodwill To Men through the voluntary interactions of the marketplace.
That sounds naive. Non-intervention in Europe during WWII would have led to victory by Nazi Germany. Non-intervention in Korea would have resulted in South Korea under them thumb of the Kim dynasty. Non-intervention in Vietnam might have resulted in SE Asia under Communist rule (according to LKY).

Non-intervention does not lead to peace.
Non-intervention in Europe during the first world war would have prevented everything you just listed.
Non-intervention in Europe in WWI would have resulted in an Europe dominated by the Kaiser. The Russians were defeated and German troops were shifted to the western front. France and the British, the two major democracies in Europe would have been defeated. I am not sure if that is better.
Merry Christmas? Anyway, I'm assuming that this discussion of "intervention" vs "non-intervention" relates to US actions. But the rather complex interactions of other parties early on in WWI really are interventions in themselves, based sometimes on treaties. Britain didn't have to enter the conflict. Why not have let continental Europe stew in its own juices?
Because the UK had a treaty with Poland.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Pol ... y_alliance

I am very much in favour of non-intervention but facts are facts.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2544
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Merry Christmas!

Post by cassowary » Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:53 pm

Jim the Moron wrote:
Fri Dec 28, 2018 12:18 am
cassowary wrote:
Thu Dec 27, 2018 8:38 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Thu Dec 27, 2018 9:22 am
cassowary wrote:
Thu Dec 27, 2018 12:18 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Dec 25, 2018 8:30 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Tue Dec 25, 2018 8:20 am
One cannot celebrate Christmas one day a year, and make a mockery of it the other 364 days... People are being exploited, people are being killed and maimed, people are deprived of food and of medecines, and we do what? We celebrate Christmas for 24 hours?... Does that make us feel good? Perhaps it shouldn't...
Absolutely, and that's why I never stop calling for Peace On Earth though non-interventionism, and Goodwill To Men through the voluntary interactions of the marketplace.
That sounds naive. Non-intervention in Europe during WWII would have led to victory by Nazi Germany. Non-intervention in Korea would have resulted in South Korea under them thumb of the Kim dynasty. Non-intervention in Vietnam might have resulted in SE Asia under Communist rule (according to LKY).

Non-intervention does not lead to peace.
Non-intervention in Europe during the first world war would have prevented everything you just listed.
Non-intervention in Europe in WWI would have resulted in an Europe dominated by the Kaiser. The Russians were defeated and German troops were shifted to the western front. France and the British, the two major democracies in Europe would have been defeated. I am not sure if that is better.
Merry Christmas? Anyway, I'm assuming that this discussion of "intervention" vs "non-intervention" relates to US actions. But the rather complex interactions of other parties early on in WWI really are interventions in themselves, based sometimes on treaties. Britain didn't have to enter the conflict. Why not have let continental Europe stew in its own juices?
Hi Jim,

I believe it’s because a Grandmother invited her grandson to visit. The granny was Queen Victoria. The little boy was the future Kaiser Wilhem. She showed him her Royal Navy, then the greatest in the world.

He was impressed and wanted all those toys. When he grew up, he started building a German navy to rival the Royal Navy. The British felt threatened by Germany. So that was why Britain entered WWI.

neverfail
Posts: 2860
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: Merry Christmas!

Post by neverfail » Sun Dec 30, 2018 12:20 am

Well, happy New Year all!

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2544
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Merry Christmas!

Post by cassowary » Sun Dec 30, 2018 1:23 am

Happy New Year, everybody!

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 2044
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Merry Christmas!

Post by Sertorio » Sun Dec 30, 2018 1:49 am

cassowary wrote:
Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:53 pm

I believe it’s because a Grandmother invited her grandson to visit. The granny was Queen Victoria. The little boy was the future Kaiser Wilhem. She showed him her Royal Navy, then the greatest in the world.

He was impressed and wanted all those toys. When he grew up, he started building a German navy to rival the Royal Navy. The British felt threatened by Germany. So that was why Britain entered WWI.
Is that how you interpret world events? You must think that the world is peopled with simpletons. With the exception of your good self, that is...

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2544
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Merry Christmas!

Post by cassowary » Sun Dec 30, 2018 2:08 am

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Dec 30, 2018 1:49 am
cassowary wrote:
Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:53 pm

I believe it’s because a Grandmother invited her grandson to visit. The granny was Queen Victoria. The little boy was the future Kaiser Wilhem. She showed him her Royal Navy, then the greatest in the world.

He was impressed and wanted all those toys. When he grew up, he started building a German navy to rival the Royal Navy. The British felt threatened by Germany. So that was why Britain entered WWI.
Is that how you interpret world events? You must think that the world is peopled with simpletons. With the exception of your good self, that is...
I suggest you do more reading, Sertorio.

The Naval Race 1906 to 1914
The naval race between Germany and Great Britain between 1906 and 1914 created huge friction between both nations and it is seen as one of the causes of World War One.
There are other causes of course, such as the British treaty with Belgium to come to its aid if attacked. But I believe the threat to Britain's naval supremacy is the key one.

Britain then had a far flung empire that required a powerful navy to defend. Germany's rapid construction of battleships threatened the Royal navy and thus their empire.

It simply cannot afford a German victory in Europe. This would expand German industrial capacity and hence build more warships.

neverfail
Posts: 2860
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: Merry Christmas!

Post by neverfail » Fri Jan 04, 2019 12:55 am

How did a website dedicated to wishing one another a merry Christmas lapse into a discussion of the likely causes of World war One/

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: Merry Christmas!

Post by SteveFoerster » Fri Jan 04, 2019 2:55 am

neverfail wrote:
Fri Jan 04, 2019 12:55 am
How did a website dedicated to wishing one another a merry Christmas lapse into a discussion of the likely causes of World war One/
Not because of the "Christmas truce", as one might guess. :-)
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

Post Reply