pbleighton

"the shah came to power as a result of british/russian involvement during wwII... you, i think, are referring to what happened in 1953 when the prime minister was overthrown (he'd nationalized the oil industry)... the fact is, this 'coup' restored the iranian constitution" Constitution? The Shah was a brutal, corrupt dictator, who ruled with an iron fist, not to mention secret police, with our approval. "vietnam started, for us, around 1950 when truman began sending military aid to france (vietnam was part of their empire - the type of empire i've been discussing)... france lost the north in 1954, but america believed a communist north not to be in its interests... so a gov't was established in the south and a military was trained... this continued thru eisenhower and kennedy, until johnson turned it into full scale war" Eisenhower refused to get the U.S. directly involved in a war, for the reason I gave. My point was that Vietnam had NOTHING to do with freedom for the Vietnamese. "the us did invest money and influence in the chile election of 1964, and allende was defeated at the polls.. he won a plurarity the next election, though," A plurality is a victory in a democracy. " and was overthrown by pinochet (yes, the sanctions imposed by nixon had some effect here)" The CIA had more than a minor role here. "i'll take it.. peter, do you think the national interests of the united states are of no import at all?" No. What you should take is that it is wrong to topple foreign governments, and support foreign dictatorships, which we have been doing for a century. We are completely entitled to the use of all necessary force in direct self-defense of our country. We are NOT entitled to the practice of puppetmaster nonsense. Contrary to your repeated statements, puppetmastery IS an ideological position. It is also imperialistic. Typically, its practitioners engage in ritual self-denial. It is morally wrong. It also repeatedly blows up in our faces - see Afghanistan (Taliban/Al Queda) and Iran (the present regime came to power directly because of the U.S. installation and support of the Shah, one of the most brutal dictators of the twentieth century), to name just two. When the regal kleptocracy in Saudi Arabia is toppled and replaced by an anti-U.S. theocracy, we will once again have reaped the whirlwind. This may well be the case in Pakistan, as well. During the 2000 election, Musharraf deposed the democratically elected government of Pakistan, and Bush reacted favorably. He continues to support dictatorships in the Muslim world, as long as they are at least somewhat compliant. In this, he continues a long U.S. tradition. Peter

1N, but I wouldn't blame some for 1D. I wouldn't ever pass this. Peter

"imperialists aren't known for their penchant for freedom.. the roman empire wasn't about importing freedom... neither were the spanish, the english, or the french empires... " Iran, Vietnam, Chile, Nicaragua... none of these were about freedom. They were about toppling regimes we didn't like. In the latter two cases, we actually went after democratically elected governments. In the Iran, we toppled a populist (though non-democractic) government because we didn't like its politics, and we wanted an oil-rich nation to dominate. Eisenhower refused to get involved in Vietnam, saying that if an election were held, Ho Chi Minh would get 80% of the vote. And if you think that the invasion of Iraq was about freedom, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you... As to what is imperialism, it still exists, but technology has dictated that it has changed. This is also seen in the history of the other major post WW II imperialistic power, the former Soviet Union. I'm sure that they would have liked to extend their borders in the old-fashioned Roman/British way, but they (like us) realized that it wasn't feasible. They became puppetmasters instead. So we have some recent company. Peter

"I was also thinking that this thread made me feel kind of sad. I felt like there were things I wanted to say, but that no matter how carefully I worded my post people wouldn't think about what I meant, but would attack it, until I was no longer saying what I meant but was simply entrenched in a position. It's nice when discussions are discussions and not debates." Too bad you feel that way. I suggest (in good faith) that you, and others who are offended by vigorous political debate, stop reading this post. Don't EVER read unmoderated internet newsgroups on politics - they make this thread look like Sunday school. Speaking for myself, I am enjoying this thread. My feelings haven't been hurt at all, and I haven't meant to hurt anyone else's feelings. But, stuff happens :) Peter

"are you basing your assertion strictly on america's borders, and those people conquered during their establishment? what makes america an empire, in your opinion?" Well, the Native American history is in response to your assertion that "some of the very things we are criticized for came about because of the imperialistic bents of countries such as england and france... they both have empires in their histories... we don't" Manifest destiny? 50 million to 100 million Native Americans when the Europeans arrived, and by the end of the 19th century less than 2 million, mostly living on reservations? How is this not traditional imperialism? As to the imperialism by proxy which has been our preferred methodology outside our borders - we are imperialistic (an adjective, not a noun - I didn't say we were an empire) as long as we continue to overthrow governments of foreign countries we don't like, and prop up corrupt, unpopular dictatorships (as we are still doing in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, to name just two). As I said in an earlier post: "We are finding out in Iraq that is very, very difficult to do traditional imperialism - which is much tougher when the natives have Uzis and explosives instead of bows and arrows - we learned this in Vietnam (and the Russians learned it in Afghanistan, the French were expelled from Algeria, etc.), but we seem to need a refresher course in reality." We are not "the same thing" as the Roman Empire - so what? The Roman Empire couldn't exist today - modern technology makes it impossible. We (sometimes) seem to try to come as close as possible - naive geopolitical puppetmaster nonsense which always seems to blow up in our faces - see the installation of the Shah of Iran in the 50's, the arming and training by the CIA of Al Queda and the support of the Taliban in the 80's, etc. It goes in cycles - prior to Bush 2, we had actually been calming down. Now, however... Maybe the Iraq fiasco will bring us to our senses, at least for another 20 years. Peter

"The Southern states voted, I repeat, voted to leave the Union. This means that most of the voting public in the South voted for leaving the Union voluntarily." Make that "most of the white voting public". Oh, never mind. Peter

"just a guess but are positive responses now game forcing and make those auctions more constructive?" No, they were GF before - opposite 14+ unbal/15+ bal they went to game on 10 hcp. Peter

1. 4S. I play Texas transfers as being on over pd's NT opener. Do you mean NAMYATS? 2. 4S. 3. 3S. Peter

The first one is fine, as long as your partner gets the joke. First seat, favorable, IMPs, singleton spade, all argue for dramatic action. I'm not sure I would do this with a pickup pd. I hate the second 4H bid. You are way too strong, and the vulnerability is unfavorable. I would double, then bid hearts. You have an excellent hand. Involve partner. Edit: Opps - didn't see pd was passed. Not crazy about the bid at this vul, but it is not too bad. Any other vul, it is automatic. Peter

"why isn't america the greatest country in the world?" Why is there necessarily a "greatest country in the world"? I don't think there is one. "but imo there's a big difference between disagreement and outright hatred... you might think 'hatred' is too strong a word, but i don't" I am unclear - you seem to be saying that I hate my own country. If you are, you are dead wrong. "the u.s., despite your saying the opposite, has a common culture" I said no such thing. The U.S. does have a common culture. What I said is that it is not superior to all other cultures, contrary to the opinion of many in this country. "sometimes i do wish america would just withdraw from the world stage and take care of all our problems at home... make all points of entry safer (including space), strengthen our education and health systems, ignore the rest of the world until we figure out how to make this country better than it is" There is a middle ground between isolationism and imperialism - engage peacefully and respectfully with those countries who wish to (almost all countries), and ignore those who don't. Continue to increase international trade - it benefits all countries. "but if we did that, there would be those who still hate us, who still criticize us, from without - and from within" Yes, of course, this is true of any country - but if we minded our own business there would, over time, be far fewer. There is a reason the terrible 9/11 attacks were directed at us, and not at Canada, Germany, or France. "i take exception to peter's earlier remarks concerning america's imperialistic motives... if that was true, it would be manifestly so... also, it would be relatively easy to carve out an empire, given the will to take the necessary empire-building steps... " We are finding out in Iraq that is very, very difficult to do traditional imperialism - which is much tougher when the natives have Uzis and explosives instead of bows and arrows - we learned this in Vietnam (and the Russians learned it in Afghanistan, the French were expelled from Algeria, etc.), but we seem to need a refresher course in reality. "some of the very things we are criticized for came about because of the imperialistic bents of countries such as england and france... they both have empires in their histories... we don't" Utter nonsense. In addition to the armed robbery and genocide of Native Americans, there are the Phillipines, plus the more than 100 "interventions" in Latin America, not to mention the instllation and support of corrupt dictatorships in the Middle East. Peter

"We need Bond wheeling out the Keycard." Bond is old and tired. How about Quentin Tarantino - Killing Defence At Bridge? Peter

"america is no more right in her policies 100% of the time than any other country" I agree with this, but the Bush administration would not. Hence Iraq. We go wrong when we believe the "greatest country in the history of the world" nonsense, and do bad things in the name of our national destiny, our entirely fictitious cultural and moral superiority, etc. We aren't the first, nor will we be the last, to fall victim to imperial hubris. It is always sad when a good country (and we can be a VERY good country indeed) commits bad acts. It's especially sad to see Americans who won't abide legitimate criticism of their country, from foreigners or U.S. citizens. This very common attitude perpetuates our mistakes. IMO the main (only?) reason Europe suffers less from national hubris is that the horrible experience of two world wars on their soil made them much humbler. What will we have to experience in order to come to our senses? The Iraq horror will probably slow us down for a bit. However, I fear that we are headed for nuclear catastrophe, possible in any event, but made much more likely by the very policies designed to stop it. I really wish that this was a conspiracy theory. Peter

"Waters/watresses in good resturants actually make quite a good living and the job requires quite a deal of professionalism." They are the outliers. I read a few years ago that waitress was the lowest-paid job in the U.S. Peter

"I do suggest that you stop feeling guilty for things that other people do who happen to be citizens of the same country." My guilt is conveniently abstract - I hardly feel bad at all :) Peter

"We blame USA for Vietnam, Chile, Argentina, Haiti, Korea etc. We blame USA for General Franco, General Pinochet, for Salazar. We blame USA for Guantanamo, Abu Graibh. We blame USA death penalties." As a good U.S. liberal, I accept, and indeed, wallow in guilt for these things. Now, what do Europeans blame themselves for? Peter

"Quite simply, global warming is a farce." How dramatic! How convincing! ;) Peter

North, for opening a 2 suited 21 count 2C. Open it 1D. Peter

"I expect alot of neg x's here but I thought 3clubs has a lot going for it." 3C would have more going for it if the hand and suit were stronger. 5C figures to be pretty tough if pd has a minimum. Make the clubs AKJ54, then 3C and double are close. Peter

Depends on what pd expects. If she can expect this on 1S, I bid 1S. Otherwise, I bid 2S. I am not as disciplined a bidder as Richard. No way I pass this one, in any system I would choose to play. Peter

"The overwhelming majority of climate scientists while not agreeing on every detail of the dynamics between co2 production and global warming agrees that there is a strong relationship between them, and have built climate models that appear to model recent history in addition to longer term trends (estimates as to temperature and other factors comes from geological and biological evidence)." This is true. It is also true that global warming has, in the last 15 years, gone from a new theory, which was greeted with much skepticism, to the overwhelming consensus in the field, based on modelling as well as new data. I don't see that any of the posters claim to be a climate scientist. Most seem to have significant scientific training, however. Given this training, it is puzzling to me why those who seem to think it is hogwash (perhaps based on political biases) ignore the validity of domain expertise. Peter

"Playing in fear is no way to win." Mike, you say this to LUIS? Pistols at dawn :) Peter

Pass is reasonable, but I would bid 4S. There are probably 18 total tricks, so this is wrong only if both sides can make 9 tricks, assuming we aren't doubled (reasonable, not certain). It's also vul at IMPs. Peter

"The effort to open a blog is no greater than the courtesy required in order to occasionally honor a polite request to leave a thread alone." Would that the request had been polite.... Peter

"This is an open forum and you are free to quote anything in any of the I-ABC lesson threads and debate the content openly and freely. I completely fail to understand why is this unacceptable?" What I found unacceptable was bobh's response to Adam's post. Peter

1H seems clear to me, but then I overcall at the one level on a lot less than this :P Peter