[Leica] Geesh - and we though camera people had it tough

[doubs43 at cox.net (Walker Smith)]

>
>
>Walker,
>
>Just to side step the origins of this discussion a bit, does this mean that
>you feel that morals and ethical behaviour do not apply to "commerce"?
>  
>
Not at all. It very much depends upon specifics. During WW1 when we were 
"neutral", I think it's factual to say that our sales to the Europeans 
heavily favored the Allies; Britain and France. Not that we didn't sell 
some goods to Germany  but they were effectively blockaided by sea and 
there weren't many options for delivery to them. Unofficially, we 
favored the Allies in spite of heavy pressure from pro-German groups to 
remain essentially neutral. While Allied propaganda painted the Germans 
as beasts, there wasn't the clear-cut difference as provided by WW2 and 
large numbers of German-Americans favored the Tri-Powers. It was a 
political feat to give the appearance of neutrality while actually 
supporting our future allies. Our entry into the war sealed the fate of 
Germany.

While raw materials can be turned to any purpose, the US wasn't capable 
of turning out large numbers of arms for the most part. A British 
contract for the Pattern-1914 rifle was granted to Winchester, Remington 
and Eddystone Arsenal, a sub-corp of Remington. It was later cancelled 
because the Brits were able to produce the No. 1, Mk. III and MK. III* 
rifles quickly enough to satisfy their needs. No Pattern-1914 rifles 
were ever issued to front-line troops. The design was later modified and 
manufactured as the Model of 1917 US Rifle and was used by more troops 
in France than our official issue 1903 Springfield. The 1917 was 
commonly called the "US Enfield". We manufactured no artillery tubes and 
machineguns for our troops only late in the war.

During WW2, scrap iron and other materials we sold to Japan came back at 
us as ships, planes and shells. Silk sales to Nazi Germany provided them 
with parachute materials. No one in government imagined that those sales 
would come back to haunt us.

>Is there a different set of rules for social, political or commercial
>behaviour?
>  
>
Of course. It depends upon who is your "friend" at the moment and 
circumstances. When Iran was our clear enemy, we sold war supplies to 
Iraq with the intent of killing as many Iranians as possible. The three 
"allies" of ours who refused to cooperate with the US in the invasion 
and overthrow of Saddam Hussain were doing back-door deals with Iraq in 
violation of UN sanctions and to the detriment of the US and the Iraqi 
people. Our "friends" weren't interested in "right" but in their billion 
dollar deals and illegal sales to a madman. They also didn't want the 
world to know of their duplicity and underhanded behavior. That's why 
they're pissed...... they were caught red-handed. It's the age-old game 
that Europeans play and the same sort of crap that has caused war after 
war between their nations.

>I guess the point of asking is that maybe this is the philosophical
>difference between conservatism and liberalism in American culture and
>history. ...and possible the world
>  
>
IMO, it's the difference between a nation founded on the principles of 
hard work, independence and self-reliance as opposed to those who feel 
that somehow, because you occupy space and breath, you're entitled to a 
middle-class life at the expense of those who actually earn their way. 
It's a difference between decisions made using common sense and 
pragmatism as opposed to decisions made largely on emotions. At this 
juncture in time, 48% of all working Americans pay ZERO income tax! Many 
receive money back in "Earned Income Credits" that they didn't earn. The 
examples of creeping Socialism are everywhere and as politicians gain 
power through the votes of those who become "entitled", it's going to 
get worse. If history has taught us anything, it's that Communism and 
Socialism are damned poor choices for nations to adopt if they want to 
advance. Killing the ambition of those who want to excell ultimately 
kills the goose that lays the golden egg. I often think of the Indian 
who wanted to immigrate to American, the only nation where the poor are 
actually fat. I have little sympathy for people who waste their lives 
before it's begun by throwing away their one chance to escape their 
"poverty" when they refuse to educate themselves. I could tell you a few 
stories about growing up poor but I won't bore you. My youngest son 
became the first Smith in our family's history to get a four year degree 
from a University and my eldest son completed a four year degree in less 
than 3 years while working full time. His wife completed her degree at 
the same time and next Spring my son will have earned an MBA from Notre 
Dame. My granddaughter entered first grade in a magnet school reading at 
a third grade level. In spite of their extremely busy schedules, they 
take the time to make certain that their daughter has the right attitude 
about education and learning.

Someone commented about the American Indian and genocide. You could not 
mistake my maternal grandmother for anything except American Indian; VA 
& NC Cherokee. She was actually only half Indian but she sure looked to 
be 100%. My grandparents were farmers who lived in post-Reconstruction 
1880's Civil War Virginia. They raised 13 children and their 9th move in 
19 years brought them to a farm of their own in 1927. The move across 
the Potomac River was made in wagons pulled by horses and held every 
possession they owned. They were attacked by a gang of thugs who wanted 
to steal their property and the thugs got the whipping of their lives. 
My grandparents improved their lot through hard work and discipline and 
for the most part their children did quite well in life. Now people 
whine a lot and want a free ride on the backs of someone else. It's 
primarily the emotional Liberal who gets their guilt complex going in 
overdrive and thinks society owes such people a living. I don't. Use 
some self discipline, work hard and earn your own way.

As for the guilt trips over past injustices in America, get over it! You 
can't undo it and no one alive today is responsible for what happened to 
the Indians or Slavery or most of the other things Liberals want to cry 
about. Government is NOT the answer. Every time government gets 
involved, it's a sure recipe for mismanagement and screw-ups.

>...and the only reason I specify American is that other western democracies
>seem to have a more diverse political spectrum and broader cultural "tonal
>graduation" to use a photography analogy.
>  
>
Ah, yes....... culture. European leaders especially like to look down 
their noses at we uncouth Americans and claim that we're "uncultured". I 
look at the history of Europe and their endless conflicts, wars, 
betrayals and genocides that make our American Indian affair look like 
amature hour and wonder what they have to be so arrogant about. American 
may be uncouth and uncultured but who, exactly, do they think they owe 
their very freedom - the freedom to be arrogant snots - to? Without the 
United States, Europe today would be dominated by either Germany or the 
Soviet Union. Our neuclear umbrella kept the Soviets out for over half a 
century. I'm not trying to rub anyone's nose in it. That's simply 
historical fact. Their "superior culture" has caused infinitely more 
deaths than anything the US has done.

I'd be very pleased if the US pulled every last troop we have out of 
Europe and finally let those countries foot the full cost of their own 
defense.

The average European is, in my experience during a rather lengthy stay 
there (6 1/2 years), a decent person with whom I got along great. I 
actually felt more at home in Germany than in England because I grew up 
in a predominantly German area of my home state..... not to mention that 
my paternal grandmother came from a German family. (I don't speak German 
but the customs and food were so much like home it was scary at times.) 
I have fond memories of my times there and I saw an awful lot of 
beautiful places and have associated with really great individuals. I 
managed to mostly ignore the few arrogant or obnoxious ones. A former 
WW2 Kreigsmarine once got me so drunk on schnapps that the next day I 
thought that HE had won the war! He and a couple of his war-time buddies 
were kind enough to invite three Yanks to share their table and drinks. 
A great memory and kindness extended to three foreigners in their 
country before the Cold War ended. I also have many fond memories of, 
and friends in, England.

Where I normally have my problem with Europe is with their socialistic 
societies and the idea that government should provide everything to 
everyone. I abore the idea that if Joe does 50% of the work while Ted 
does 35% and Sam does only 15%, they essentially get the same thing at 
the end of the day. Or Fred can sit on his butt and draw a living wage. 
"From each according to his means and to each according to his needs" 
may be a great  way to view the world for Liberals and Socialists but 
it's justification for governmment to steal (extort) from those who 
produce to subsidize those who don't, and often won't, work.

I'm more than willing to pay for those things governments is mandated to 
provide for the country or their state, county etc. That includes 
defense, infrastructure, security, education and a few other things. 
Otherwise, if I earn it, I want it. If someone else wants it, they can 
go earn it themselves.

BTW, "democracy" is a word the Liberals love to toss around but the US 
is NOT and never has been a democracy. We are a Representative Republic. 
Always have been. The term democracy was not used to describe the US 
until WW2. It's not correct.... then or now.

Now, aren't you glad you asked?  LOL :^)

Walker

>
>Greg Locke
>