All this hatred and bitterness for a man that has made a living stating his opinion nothing more nothing less. I personally find the man abrasive and quit watching him over 20 years ago reminded me of the direct opposite of the far left wing liberals I tune them out also.

Who really cares what a man makes for a salary are we so petty to debase him for his salary because he is speaking for the blue collar worker. So what someone has to and people must have listened to him or he wouldn't be making that much money would he?

I honestly hope and pray for his recovery the same as I would Obama and I have zero respect for him as a president. I do have respect for him as a human being. I have to say I am appalled by the callousness of the humanity I see in this thread.

No matter what he does for a living he is a a human being, have we as a society reached so low as to bash and trash someone when they are down.

I think that saddens me more than anything.

All this hatred and bitterness for a man that has made a living stating his opinion nothing more nothing less. I personally find the man abrasive and quit watching him over 20 years ago reminded me of the direct opposite of the far left wing liberals I tune them out also.

Who really cares what a man makes for a salary are we so petty to debase him for his salary because he is speaking for the blue collar worker. So what someone has to and people must have listened to him or he wouldn't be making that much money would he?

I honestly hope and pray for his recovery the same as I would Obama and I have zero respect for him as a president. I do have respect for him as a human being. I have to say I am appalled by the callousness of the humanity I see in this thread.

No matter what he does for a living he is a a human being, have we as a society reached so low as to bash and trash someone when they are down.

That's all lovely and everything. If the world were run by women like you I might be shocked. But listen, a scumbag is a scumbag, so don't think he wouldn't kill a few people himself if he could get away with it. Are you OK with gangsters, mafiosos, even Hitler should've lived? The guy is controlling the minds of a big segment of the politically intelligent. That's dangerous. We just don't care if he passes on, that's all. He is NOT, I repeat NOT just voicing his opinion. He is a manipulator, just as Jerry Falwell or Jim and Tammy don't believe half of what they're saying, he knows he is lying. He thinks it's fun! And he's laughing all the way to the bank.

I think that saddens me more than anything.

Nobody expects anything more than that from this girl. I feel sorry for her.

I forgive you.

War, actually, is the outcome of failed diplomacy -- when negotiating parties fail in reaching the agreement.

_________________On the other hand_________________
war is the best vehical for stimulating a stagnating economy -- that's why most of the wars have started during the economic crizis... -- increased production reduces the unemployment, selling arms to either of the warring parties also brings huge profits that further stimulate the economy...

............ WAR IS THE INSTANT GRATIFICATION!

(*** not that I agree with such policy! *** But, so far, nothing has been devised instead of that horrible economic stimulator!!! ***)
And, sometimes (like in case of Livia, Khadafi) the pre-emptive strike was necessary for protection of the allies -- before the conflict escalates into something much more serious...

Certainly, preemptive strikes ought to be authorized in advance by the UN Security Council. But then the pre-emptiveness of the strike -- which relies on the effect of the unexpectedness -- would be worthless and not as effective!

For over 65 years the world has avoided the WWW -- World Wide War! The population explosion, fueled by the advances of the medical research, would have brought the world to the brink of Hunger & Overpopulation some 15-20 years ago, if it wasn't for all of those "little" local wars that, mostly, occure in the underdeveloped countries -- so that there won't be any risc of employing the nuclear weapons.

**** It may be a startling news to some, but I'm sure the UN Security Commitee itself -- which consists of the major super powers that comprise a Marshal Commitee -- may be involved in estimating what countries are the "safest" to engage in a "little local war" -- the most losses at the least expenses! (you might've heard of the elite "secret societies", i.e. local representatives of the Marshal Commitee...)

Terrorism might be the unexpected, yet helpful, side-effect in that regard -- although such a random element is highly unpredictable and, therefore, undesireable!

I suspect the unpredictability the world might be under a much greater control than seems at the surface... * * *
Yet, the general public shouldn't concern itself with such issues... Pursuit of happinness is a much more worthy endaevor!!! (while such organizations as APPGCI, and the like, give people a sense of hope -- thus giving the renegades a false sense of security...)

The violent nature and controversial social effects of war raise troubling moral questions for a thoughtful person. Is war always wrong? Might there be situations when it can be a justified? Is war an outcome of unchangeable human nature or of changeable social practice?

War is a phenomenon which occurs between political communities and it seems that all warfare is precisely, and ultimately, about governance. Carl Von Clausewitz the (so-called) philosopher of war famously suggested that war is “the continuation of policy by other means”. Governance by bludgeon might be a better way of putting it.
We all had high hopes going into the new millennium in 2000. In many communities the midnight bells were followed by John Lennon’s call to peace -“Imagine”. Within a year Afghanistan was invaded. Within 2 years the US and UK went with the utmost belligerency into a war on Iraq. The Lancet estimated that 601,000 people were killed in Iraq between 2003 and 2006. The rule of non-combatant immunity has been replaced by the heartless term ‘collateral damage’.

Can there be such a thing as a just war when aggression is defined as the use of armed force in violation of someone else's basic rights? Aggression attacks the very spine of human civilization. Is it not absurd to punish someone for an offense they have yet to commit? International law forbids preemptive strikes unless they are clearly authorized in advance by the UN Security Council.

The just causes most frequently mentioned include self-defense from external attack and the protection of innocents from brutal regimes. Terrorism is the use of random violence against civilians with the specific intent of spreading fear throughout a population and advancing a political objective. Terrorism is not overcome by killing the same innocents which the notion of a just war is professed to protect.

The nature of humans is formed by their experiences and education. This is changeable. Unless practical and effective alternatives to violence are offered, policy-makers without imagination will always tend to favor the default method (violence), borne from historical teaching rather than future planning.

Military approaches to conflict have limited use and often make the underlying problem worse. They are also very expensive. For every dollar spent globally on conflict prevention and conflict resolution by non-military means, nearly 2,000 times as much is spent on defense and the military. The average direct cost of one violent conflict is $64 billion. With just a fraction of that sum, violence could be nipped in the bud, thousands of lives saved and many millions in post-conflict reconstruction costs avoided.

Since the early 1990s more wars have ended by negotiated settlement than by military victory, and yet the chances of violent conflicts restarting are still almost 50%. Ignition or re-ignition of violent conflict is much more likely where local peace builders are insufficiently mobilized or resourced to engage in the peace process. Non violent resolution to conflict is entirely possible. The only thing lacking is funding.

One organization which encourages dialogue on the practical means to prevent, transform and resolve violent conflict is the APPGCI. Read more here - http://www.conflictissues.org.uk

Been writing a novel for the last past three years. Haven't decided if I will try to have it published or just turn it into "National Novel Writing Month" and call it a day.

After having finished it (the hard work that detailed) I can't see myself going through the further hard work to have it published. My writing is more therapy and boredom killer than anything, but I must admit that making a few pennies off of it wouldn't be a tragedy.