Happy Birthday ya Dutch bastard!

Maybe so, I certainly missed it I probably would still have missed it with the emoticon though.

All the Dutch people I know speak perfect English, and maybe even better than I do, so you really could have been serious!

Dutch friends correct my English. and I'm English. I kinda wanna learn Dutch just so I don't feel inferior

Even I think Dutch is an insanely hard language. And I am Dutch!
So many rules and exceptions to rules.

Example: Let's say you want to wright down 'pancakes' in Dutch. A decade ago that word just changed in all dictionaries, because it used to be 'pannekoeken' (pancakes) and now we need to write 'pannenkoeken' (panscakes!?). All because you can bake pancakes in multiple pans. I'm not making this up.

One more actual commonly needed rule:
If you combine a word consisting of two parts of which one is an animal and the other an animal, you need to write plural for the first word.. (I'm not kidding, this an actual rule)
So, for example 'paard' (horse) and 'bloem' (flower) in English becomes 'horseflower'.. We need to make it plural, so in English it would be horsesflower (paardenbloem in Dutch)

Just don't even try to learn the language, we all speak decent English and most also speak French and German, so we'll just adapt to you, that's better for all of us.

" I just quoted you claiming that Napolitano believes that the Lincoln pursued the war to restore the union, when that's exactly what he's not saying here."

Where did you quote me? I missed that.

I am not "attacking" the "comedians." I quoted/"plagiarised" Thomas DiLorenzo who pointed out "[Jon Stewart's] "hit" was about how the Judge wrote in one of his publications that the U.S. probably could have ended slavery the same way that New York, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and all the other Northern states did, as well as the British empire, Spanish empire, the French, Danes, Dutch, Swedes, and others during the nineteenth century did: namely, peacefully. . . . " and that Stewart (in his inimitable wisdom as an historical scholar) was wrong in his assertion that war was the way to go.

And, whatever Lincoln's reasons were for going to war, of course there are always options other than imperialism (despite what manifest destiny might have you believe). Same as Truman having options other than nuking Japan. Or Bush the second having options other than invading Iraq and Afghanistan.

Whatever Lincoln's "reasons" were for going to war and thereby leading to the slaughter of 620,000 people and the maiming/disfigurement of over 800,000+ others, these reasons are not the same as what his options were, and the white washing of history does not change this very basic fact.

Delaware is considered a northern state. Maybe not by you but by others.
And when I lived in Maryland, everyone there seemed to consider it a northern state too. But ok, you don't consider it a northern state. Cool.
(Ask anyone in Boston if he is a "Yankee" and see how that goes!)

But what's your point now? You agree that the Civil War was a "War to preserve the Union, not a Lincoln crusade to end slavery". That's why he did not invade or interfere with the border states. They did not secede. So how is this relevant to the original point about Jon Stewart thinking otherwise and going off on Andrew Napolitano about it? And are you now trying to claim that the north was acting in "self-defense" because of southern attacks on federal forts?


"In 1862, the General Assembly replied to Lincoln's compensated emancipation offer with a resolution stating that, "when the people of Delaware desire to abolish slavery within her borders, they will do so in their own way, having due regard to strict equity." And they furthermore notified the administration that they regarded "any interference from without" as "improper," and a thing to be "harshly repelled.""

The proposal was never put to a vote. It was not tried in other states. And it was not addressed directly to the slave owners but to politicians in the Assembly. No effort was put into it.

Among the tactics employed by the British, French, Spanish, Dutch, Danes, and others were slave rebellions, abolitionist campaigns to gain public support for emancipation, election of anti-slavery politicians, encouragement and assistance of runaway slaves, raising private funds to purchase the freedom of slaves, and the use of tax dollars to buy the freedom of slaves.

The most charitable thing I could say is that Lincoln tried but failed to come up with and implement any other way to end slavery but to engage in 'bloodshed and violence' (putting aside that he claimed to not care to end slavery except as a way to get one over on the South).

Still, that only says something about his competency, his "political genius" as some say (or lack of it), but not about whether there were other options available that could have worked without the 620,000 dead and 800,000+ more maimed-or-disfigured-for-life.

Of course, there is no empirical way to 'prove' or 'disprove' that any more than there is any empirical way to 'prove' or 'disprove' that, without two nukes, Japan would have lost the war, or that without the Korean war, the Communists would have taken over the world, or that without the Iraq invasion, Saddam would not have built "weapons of mass destruction" to unleash on the world.

What if 'peaceful secession' would have neutered the federal enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act (which Lincoln strongly supported), creating a flood of runaway slaves that could not have been stopped and would have broken the back of the slave system'?

The Soviet Union collapsed on its own without the US and its allies going into a bloody war against it. Maybe if the US had started a third world war with the USSR, it would have collapsed sooner. But it certainly would not have been worth the 'blood and violence'. And it is far from certain that the 5 years of Civil War accelerated the end of slavery, while it has certainly served to bolster and continue the decades of segregation, discrimination, and abuse that followed.

The first Republican president seems to have set a precedent for later Republican neocons. When faced with a problem ---> go to war.

Hmm, so Stewart and Wilmore seem to be saying that the U.S. couldn't have ended slavery in the same way that New York, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and all of the other Northern states did (not to mention the British empire, the Spanish empire, the French, the Danes, the Dutch, the Swedes, and many many others during the nineteenth century), namely, peacefully. (For reference, see Jim Powell's Greatest Emancipations: How the West Ended Slavery; and Joanne Pope Melish's Disowning Slavery: Gradual Emancipation and Race in New England, 1780-1860).

Rather, Stewart and Wilmore seem to be saying that 750,000 dead Americans (and even more than double that number maimed for life), to say nothing of the total destruction of the voluntary union of the founders, was in fact the only way to end slavery. Southerners (only six percent of whom actually owned slaves) were, according to Stewart and Wilmore, "willing to die to preserve slavery" and so, therefore, the Great Oz (er, I mean, The Great Abe) did what was necessary...

So says this renowned historical sage, Jon Stewart, and his cast of clowns...

Makes me proud to be Dutch!

confirmed fake:

Dutch Newspaper

Your video, Dutch Navy Marines storms a German cargo ship., has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Commented version from the actual Dutch Navy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IcqZKBJMNhI

(Today I learned: you can be a ministry of defense and have an official channel on Youtube.)

Basically they went ahead and stormed the ship because the crew had time to retreat to their "safe room" before the pirates took over.

Raising Arizona

H.I.: Wake up, Son.

[aims gun at the clerk]

H.I.: I'll be taking these Huggies and whatever cash ya got.

Ed McDonnough: [sees H.I. from the car] That son' bitch. That son of a bitch! You son of a bitch!

H.I.: Better hurry it up, I'm in dutch with the wife.

But if the Dutch ever get swarmed by ten foot long flies, they're all set!

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) — A court convicted six people Friday in what prosecutors said was the largest case of human trafficking ever brought to trial in the Netherlands.
Experts said the case could have an impact on Dutch policy because the crimes were committed after brothels were legalized in 2000 in the hope that legitimacy would make it easier for the police to monitor prostitution.

Five of the six convicted men were found guilty of participating in a large, well-established network that kept women in prostitution by force — and with extreme violence.

Some of the victims were compelled to have breast enlargement surgery, and one defendant was convicted of forcing at least one woman to have an abortion. Women were beaten and forced to sit in icy water to avoid bruising. They also were tattooed.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-07-11-Dutch-human-trafficking_N.htm

and of course, Stephen Fry can speak Dutch... damnit Stephen, you could leave some small amount of being smart (see, I can't even phrase that well) for the rest of us!