NationStates Jolt Archive

:) http://www.reseauvoltaire.net/bushregimedeck.html

Well, the US extreme right government asked for it, just the way that I would counterattack any other regime.

Sweet!! :D

A behind the scenes look of the Bush administration reveals a team of cronies, carrying out a "neo-conservative" revolution in total opposition with the History and Values of their country.

George W. Bush seized power with the complicity of the Supreme Court and despite electoral results that were against him ; a global citizensurveillance system was set up through the USA Patriot Act ; the Army was allowed to intervene in domestic policy ; a propaganda machine was set up ; the country abdicated its right to self-rule and has launched itself into a series of colonial campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. What we are witnessing is not simply a change in policies but the emergence of a new regime that threatens Liberty in America and Peace in the rest of the world.
I feel deep pity for anyone who believes that.

I feel deep pity for anyone who believes that.

No problem maaaaan, it is just our Kwangistar who speaks. (says enough for the free world). Common, your regime just did the same and had it co :p min

I feel deep pity for anyone who believes that.

Nope, you had it coming after the months of French bashing. Just goes to show, The French can do it in a much more tasteful way (perhaps they are more cultured?) and do not have to resort to stereotypes to do so.

No problem maaaaan, it is just our Kwangistar who speaks. (says enough for the free world). Common, your regime just did the same and had it co :p min
What the hell are you talking about? What regime? What did they do that is the same as this?

You feel deep pity for people who believe the truth? Are you George Bush?

You feel deep pity for people who believe the truth? Are you George Bush?
No. He's just a loyal drone.

Found an error already, Osama wasn't a CIA agent. Until this document gains some credibility and gets all their facts straight, don't bother reading it.

What the hell are you talking about? What regime? What did they do that is the same as this?

You don't like it? Says enough about you in the free world. But I like it that you and your regime don't like it :rolleyes: You had it "commin" :p

The pot and the cattle

I've seen these before!!

You don't like it? Says enough about you in the free world. But I like it that you and your regime don't like it :rolleyes: You had it "commin" :p

The pot and the cattle
No seriously, what the hell are you talking about?

Nope, you had it coming after the months of French bashing. Just goes to show, The French can do it in a much more tasteful way (perhaps they are more cultured?) and do not have to resort to stereotypes to do so.
Who needs stereotypes when you can resort to downright lies.

I would support a full scale strategic nuclear strike on France just to show them Americans do not take kindly to that.

So, a few of the French want war? Bring it on, you s.o.b's. We're ready.

Found an error already, Osama wasn't a CIA agent. Until this document gains some credibility and gets all their facts straight, don't bother reading it.


Actually, Osama did work with the CIA in the 80's. Whether or not you want to call him an "agent" is purely a matter of semantics. The CIA, like most government agencies, places several levels of bureaucrat-speak between itself and the truth. He got both money and intelligence from the CIA which was funneled through a front in Pakistan. Much as the U. S. supported Saddam in the 80's, we also supported Osama and his cohorts. Whoops.

Actually, Osama did work with the CIA in the 80's. Whether or not you want to call him an "agent" is purely a matter of semantics. The CIA, like most government agencies, places several levels of bureaucrat-speak between itself and the truth. He got both money and intelligence from the CIA which was funneled through a front in Pakistan. Much as the U. S. supported Saddam in the 80's, we also supported Osama and his cohorts. Whoops.
The USA funded native Afghani resistance vs the Soviets. The Saudis were the ones who, in large, funded Arabs who went to Afghanistan to fight the USSR. Bin Laden was in the second group. Of course there is some overlap, however, Bin Laden himself said he never had any connection with the USA.

I would support a full scale strategic nuclear strike on France just to show them Americans do not take kindly to that.

Ow, that is intelligent (fits the intelligence of the regime :p

I would support a full scale strategic nuclear strike on France just to show them Americans do not take kindly to that.

Really?

How do you think the French took it after the countless instances of French-Baiting, even by your own Clownish Government. Or what about the fact that a couple of French-American kids were beaten up in an American High School? Change your attitude, you are fast becoming the laughing stock of the World.

Really?

How do you think the French took it after the countless instances of French-Baiting, even by your own Clownish Government. Or what about the fact that a couple of French-American kids were beaten up in an American High School? Change your attitude, you are fast becoming the laughing stock of the World.

Who cares we still need to kill them for hateing us.

Really?

How do you think the French took it after the countless instances of French-Baiting, even by your own Clownish Government. Or what about the fact that a couple of French-American kids were beaten up in an American High School? Change your attitude, you are fast becoming the laughing stock of the World.
And of course the daily anti-American scenes complete with Uncle Sam burnings give us a valid reason to hate the rest of the world, right?

And of course the daily anti-American scenes complete with Uncle Sam burnings give us a valid reason to hate the rest of the world, right?

Nope, what you have just given me is more commonly known as rhetoric. The daily 'anti-American' scenes, are furthered by your Media to give you that impression, secondly, many of the reasons for these 'Anti-American' Scenes are perfectly valid, and as 'Uncle Sam' represents everything right-wing America stands for, I feel it would be fitting to burn an effigy of him.

Who cares we still need to kill them for hateing us.

hey man, you and adolf would make really good friends.

Really?

How do you think the French took it after the countless instances of French-Baiting, even by your own Clownish Government. Or what about the fact that a couple of French-American kids were beaten up in an American High School? Change your attitude, you are fast becoming the laughing stock of the World.
Probably earned it, talking crap about america. Do you have a source for this?

Nope, what you have just given me is more commonly known as rhetoric. The daily 'anti-American' scenes, are furthered by your Media to give you that impression, secondly, many of the reasons for these 'Anti-American' Scenes are perfectly valid, and as 'Uncle Sam' represents everything right-wing America stands for, I feel it would be fitting to burn an effigy of him.
Unfortunately, you're wrong as usual in everything you say.

And of course the daily anti-American scenes complete with Uncle Sam burnings give us a valid reason to hate the rest of the world, right?

You are far more intelligent then this bullshit. :)

First: those "daily" scenes never hapen in France or other EU allies of the US.
Second: stop thinking that the neutral behavior of the EU in the middle East is not one. The US role is not neutral.

Silly Mountain Walks

Probably earned it, talking crap about america.

I wasn't aware that america had repealed the right to free speech.

You are far more intelligent then this bullshit. :)

First: those "daily" scenes never hapen in France or other EU allies of the US.
Second: stop thinking that the neutral behavior of the EU in the middle East is not one. The US role is not neutral.

Silly Mountain Walks
Its not only in the EU that I was talking about. It happens everywhere. One big one is Pakistan, but they do happen in places like France and Germany. A full quarter of the French were on Saddam Hussein's side in the Iraq war.

NWV makes the assertion that its wrong for the US or its citizens to make fun of France because we disagree with their policies, yet its perfectly fine for the opposite to happen.

Its not only in the EU that I was talking about. It happens everywhere. One big one is Pakistan, but they do happen in places like France and Germany. A full quarter of the French were on Saddam Hussein's side in the Iraq war.

NWV makes the assertion that its wrong for the US or its citizens to make fun of France because we disagree with their policies, yet its perfectly fine for the opposite to happen.

No, I make the assertion because you were the first to start such childish, immature actions. And so far the French have been remarkebly tolerant about it. And plus, thier attack back was a lot more tasteful than 'freedom fries'.

Probably earned it, talking crap about america. Do you have a source for this?

Unfortunately not, it was a story on the BBC a while back. I searched thier website for it but I dont think they cover all thier human interest stories.

Unfortunately, you're wrong as usual in everything you say.

Oh wow!

You've really convinved me I am... But unfortunately as usual I am right.

No, I make the assertion because you were the first to start such childish, immature actions. And so far the French have been remarkebly tolerant about it. And plus, thier attack back was a lot more tasteful than 'freedom fries'.
And, if this deck of cards is their attack back, it isn't more tasteful than simply renaming fries, because its simply lying in some cases. I don't know who was the first to start, and I dbout you do, either.

And, if this deck of cards is their attack back, it isn't more tasteful than simply renaming fries, because its simply lying in some cases. I don't know who was the first to start, and I dbout you do, either.
Unfortunately it is not lying, Osama was, technically a CIA operative as the funds diverted to first helping the Afghan Trap, a War started by the US, later stated as the War had begun, in thier report into where the funding was going, that some was going to Islamic Fundamentalist Groups - In the sub-categories, one known as 'The Base' (Al-Qaeda) was mentioned. So the US had prior knowledge they were funding Al-Qaeda.

No, I make the assertion because you were the first to start such childish, immature actions. And so far the French have been remarkebly tolerant about it. And plus, thier attack back was a lot more tasteful than 'freedom fries'.

Off course, and those frie sare Belgian, that is what I try to explain to my US cclimber clients in years (why do they call French , when the first "frirkot" allready existed in 1843, in Brussels? :rolleyes: ) Think, they just use it as a political weapon (we EU know that it is or Spanish or Belgian) against our nuclear friends: La France.

And, if this deck of cards is their attack back, it isn't more tasteful than simply renaming fries, because its simply lying in some cases. I don't know who was the first to start, and I dbout you do, either.
Unfortunately, in your logic 'starting' this immature exchange of words started when France opposed an imperialist invasion of Iraq. Basically, opposition to the US in your mind is 'starting' something.

Unfortunately it is not lying, Osama was, technically a CIA operative as the funds diverted to first helping the Afghan Trap, a War started by the US, later stated as the War had begun, in thier report into where the funding was going, that some was going to Islamic Fundamentalist Groups - In the sub-categories, one known as 'The Base' (Al-Qaeda) was mentioned. So the US had prior knowledge they were funding Al-Qaeda.
Interesting. Got any credible sources for this besides your backside? That seems to be where you're pulling it all from.

Who cares we still need to kill them for hateing us.


Go sit in the corner and keep your mouth shut. Its people like you that give the rest of us Bush-Supporters a bad name.

Interesting. Got any credible sources for this besides your backside? That seems to be where you're pulling it all from.

Its common knowledge that the CIA reports on the sub-categories of where its funding for such groups is going. And its also common knowledge that they knew they were supporting (through Saudi Arabia) a group known as 'The Base'.

Unfortunately, in your logic 'starting' this immature exchange of words started when France opposed an imperialist invasion of Iraq. Basically, opposition to the US in your mind is 'starting' something.
Really, did I say that. Show me were. Cause I just said I don't know who was the first to start it. Apparently you know for me, though.

Its common knowledge that the CIA reports on the sub-categories of where its funding for such groups is going. And its also common knowledge that they knew they were supporting (through Saudi Arabia) a group known as 'The Base'.
I see. So your admitting its bullshit.

:) http://www.reseauvoltaire.net/bushregimedeck.html

Well, the US extreme right government asked for it, just the way that I would counterattack any other regime.
The french hit back... Peacefully. I would not even call it a hit, it is more like a complaint. That is as far as the french will go.

Really, did I say that. Show me were. Cause I just said I don't know who was the first to start it. Apparently you know for me, though.
You said that I could not decide who 'started it'. I therefore assumed, through logic, that you believed the French 'started it' because of thier opposition to the War - I couldn't really put my finger on anything else.

I see. So your admitting its bullshit.

Well if bullshit is fact and fact is bullshit... Then yes.

But what could we expect from a supporter of Reagan anyway? The IQ of such people to be drawn into the recent PR exercise must be extremely low. But hey! At least he's dead now - The Alzheimer's ridden, Unust War on Central America making, Workers rights taking bastard that he was.

Hmm nice topic that hits them where it hurts. They started it. "Een koekje van eigen deeg" ;) )

Hmm nice topic that hits them where it hurts. They started it. "Een koekje van eigen deeg" ;) )

If you don't mind me asking, what country are you from....

And what are your opinions on the EU? (Asking as one European to another).

http://www.francesucks.com/

I would support a full scale strategic nuclear strike on France just to show them Americans do not take kindly to that.

*History of the World, 2004-5*

-September 10th, 2004.

President Jacques Chirac publically denounces america's move to let the military use a method of total warfare in iraq, to deal with the massive amounts of Insurgents. Earlier in the week, President bush had said it was nessecary to protect the iraqi civilians, and american troops in Iraq, and had allowed the use of artillery on areas of cities where americans had been indiscriminatly attacked. This was adopted after a spectacular failure in Nassiryah to re-establish control by paratroopers. No response was given to the french president, though many closed meetings were held after Chirac compared President bush to Hitler, and his merciless seiges of Leningrad and other cities.

- September 11th, 2004.

One B-2 Stealth bomber launchs from the east coast of america, and a Military airbase in Brittany(France) is hit by a nuclear bomb of 0.2megatons. Awacs from Britain and France are immediatly activated, and in cooperation with visual and satellite viewing, the B-2 is traced back to america, although it was obvious from visual that it had to be a B-2. No comment is given by America, although American Forces in Europe are prepared and America is brought to Defcon 1. The leadership of america is brought under protection, secretly. Public outcry is great.

-September 12th, 2004

At 0200 Eastern time, with the permission of President Chirac, All French Nuclear submarines reach the range of america, and fire their full loads of nuclear weapons. Patriot missiles take out about 10% of the French missiles, but most get through. Nuclear silo's all over america begin to launch ICBM's at France, while every major city on the East and West coast of america are obliterated, over 60m are killed. France is completely obliterated, and the fallout of both nations effects europe and north america very quickly. Britain launches its missiles at america after ICBM's hit the north coast of France and american begins launching at britain, although it takes hours to respond as american command is devistated. The world begins to become unstabilized at this point, with so many nuclear missiles thrown.

September 13th

The world is cleansed of all life. People blame President bush for the few minutes they live.

You said that I could not decide who 'started it'. I therefore assumed, through logic, that you believed the French 'started it' because of thier opposition to the War - I couldn't really put my finger on anything else.
Thats some crazy logic you have.

Well if bullshit is fact and fact is bullshit... Then yes.

I know, all we expect is some proof, man are we crazy.

Thats some crazy logic you have.


I know, all we expect is some proof, man are we crazy.

Firstly, I read it in Hegemony or Survival, where it quotes with a footnote that the source was an interview with 2 ex CIA employees, and to quote the passage coherently it would take me a long time. Therefore I am not going to bother. But the jist of it was the US knew full well that they were supporting fundamentalist groups - and that the regime that would follow would be a lot worse.

Oh and please, if you did not mean the opposition to the War of France, what other 'reasons' could there be for such a low blow attack on French culture? Please, tell me the reasons.

If you don't mind me asking, what country are you from....

And what are your opinions on the EU? (Asking as one European to another).

I'll send a private message,. I am born in Flanders but live since long in the Alps, in a country wich is allways the victim of US republican bashing. Says enough?

Firstly, I read it in Hegemony or Survival, where it quotes with a footnote that the source was an interview with 2 ex CIA employees, and to quote the passage coherently it would take me a long time. Therefore I am not going to bother. But the jist of it was the US knew full well that they were supporting fundamentalist groups - and that the regime that would follow would be a lot worse.
And this equals Osama being a CIA Agent? Hardly. Although you still are at a loss for evidence. Suprising, wait, no its not.

I'll send a private message,. I am born in Flanders but live since long in the Alps, in a country wich is allways the victim of US republican bashing. Says enough?

I totally understand, most, if not all Europeans stand by the French in thier oppositon to the War, and despise the US.

Some of the stuff on those cards is complete BS, but hey, they're funny I guess.

And this equals Osama being a CIA Agent? Hardly. Although you still are at a loss for evidence. Suprising, wait, no its not.
Read Hegemony or Survival, I can't be bothered to quote out a long passage. And yes it does equate to Osama being an operative of the CIA, as he was operating under US money and arms channelled through Saudi Arabia.

I totally understand, most, if not all Europeans stand by the French in thier oppositon to the War, and despise the US.
So you admit that they're Anti-American, presumably including you?

Read Hegemony or Survival, I can't be bothered to quote out a long passage. And yes it does equate to Osama being an operative of the CIA, as he was operating under US money and arms channelled through Saudi Arabia.
Sorry, I don't buy books just to please a troll on the internet.

So you admit that they're Anti-American, presumably including you?

Oh indeed, if being anti-american equates to despising their ultra right Government, thier imperialist Foreign Policy and thier Wars then I would put myself down on a list of being 'Anti-American'. There is nothing to admit there, my small brained friend.

Oh indeed, if being anti-american equates to despising their ultra right Government, thier imperialist Foreign Policy and thier Wars then I would put myself down on a list of being 'Anti-American'. There is nothing to admit there, my small brained friend.
You said despising America. Not despising their government.

Sorry, I don't buy books just to please a troll on the internet.

And I don't quote out entire passages to please an American, simply because he is too short sighted to see that what his Government does under the jurisdiction of enforcing thier Foreign Policy. Oh, and I don't do it especially if they are Republican. Sorry :D

You said despising America. Not despising their government.

When you talk about a Country - you tend to naturally mean thier Government. After all, if I wanted to launch a stinging attack on the US people themselves, I would state 'The populace of the US' - Its not as if I have anything to hide, unlike your current Administration.

NWV, could you give me a background on these wars in South America that you claim Reagan started? Being the young'un I am, I know very little about such a thing.

When you talk about a Country - you tend to naturally mean thier Government. After all, if I wanted to launch a stinging attack on the US people themselves, I would state 'The populace of the US' - Its not as if I have anything to hide, unlike your current Administration.
Well you do, because its obvious that you're either :
A.) An annoying troll
B.) Blatantly Anti-American

Now, time for that logic you were talking about earlier. Using disjunctive syllogism, we can tell that your not B, because people like that can put together coherent thought processes. That leaves A, which you are.

NWV, could you give me a background on these wars in South America that you claim Reagan started? Being the young'un I am, I no very little about such a thing.

For example the War in Nicaragua - The support of a sadistic group of people there responsible for mass genocide solely to protect the interests of the US, which furthered into Direct Involvement. The War itself was dismissed as 'International Terrorism' by the ICJ and a subsequent UN Resolution calling on all Countries to abide by International Law was vetoed by the US soon after.

IT WAS A JOKE

http://www.aperfectworld.org/clipart/entertainment/clown.gif
http://www.arch.usyd.edu.au/kcdc/cbd96/billi_a/joke.jpg
http://www.corston-oliver.com/Simon/CookIslands/Small/ChickenCrossingRoad.jpg
http://www.ssta.sk.ca/graphics/laughing.jpg
http://www.mikerobertsonline.com/seinfeld.jpg[/img
[img]http://www.barryandandy.com/images/funnys/funny.jpg
http://www.delos.fantascienza.com/delos57/img/christian/battlefield-earth.jpg
http://images.ibsys.com/2002/0411/1394436.jpg
http://magazine.uchicago.edu/0202/features/images/0202_feature-punchline-kant.jpg

Well you do, because its obvious that you're either :
A.) An annoying troll
B.) Blatantly Anti-American

Now, time for that logic you were talking about earlier. Using disjunctive syllogism, we can tell that your not B, because people like that can put together coherent thought processes. That leaves A, which you are.

Oh but I am blatantly anti-American, I make no illusions about that as do most Europeans. We are not stupid enough to put blind trust in a Government for the sole reason of being 'patriotic'.

For example the War in Nicaragua - The support of a sadistic group of people there responsible for mass genocide solely to protect the interests of the US, which furthered into Direct Involvement. The War itself was dismissed as 'International Terrorism' by the ICJ and a subsequent UN Resolution calling on all Countries to abide by International Law was vetoed by the US soon after.
For once I'm going to have to agree with NWV on this. As I'm sure he'll tell you, the Sandistas were nice guys who had turned Nicaragua into a utopia, until the big bad USA came in and started it all.

Some of the stuff on those cards is complete BS, but hey, they're funny I guess.

Some of the stuff is perhaps.Surely your carts are bullshit Most stuff on the French cards is reallity. BTW where are your WMD'S :confused: Oh yeah, I allready posted something nice about that (against the regime )

Oh but I am blatantly anti-American, I make no illusions about that as do most Europeans. We are not stupid enough to put blind trust in a Government for the sole reason of being 'patriotic'.
My mistake. Instead of adressing you with troll, I'll be sure to use bigot next time, a title you gladly hold.

Relax, the USA won't invade France, France has nukes, the USA only goes to war with countries that can't fight back. *silly people* I must admit, this spoof certainly was more clever then "freedom fries" :D

My mistake. Instead of adressing you with troll, I'll be sure to use bigot next time, a title you gladly hold.

Hmm think there is only one one troll here, the guy who statred flaming, so our eternal extremist Kwangistar. :p Come one eat some fish, your mom just made them for ya. :rolleyes: :p

Your eternal mountainguide:

Silly Mountain Walks

Hmm think there is only one one troll here, the guy who statred flaming, so our eternal extremist Kwangistar. :p Come one eat some fish, your mom just made them for ya. :rolleyes: :p

Your eternal mountainguide:

Silly Mountain Walks
I'm just going by the definitions, no more.

For once I'm going to have to agree with NWV on this. As I'm sure he'll tell you, the Sandistas were nice guys who had turned Nicaragua into a utopia, until the big bad USA came in and started it all.
And the Somoza's were better? No, in fact they were much worse, they committed mass murder and brutally tortured political opponents. A dictatorial regime far worse than The Sandistas, and to say otherwise would be a direct contradiction of historical fact.

My mistake. Instead of adressing you with troll, I'll be sure to use bigot next time, a title you gladly hold.

Haha, now this is starting to get humerous, in his eyes, critiscm of a countries Government equates to being a bigot. Please continue - You are absolutely hilarious :D

And the Somoza's were better? No, in fact they were much worse, they committed mass murder and brutally tortured political opponents. A dictatorial regime far worse than The Sandistas, and to say otherwise would be a direct contradiction of historical fact.
Unfortunately Somoza was overthrown in 1979, under Carter's administration, not Reagan's.

I'm just going by the definitions, no more.

To be anti-American is not trolling, I'm just going by the rules no more.

Stephanie
Game Moderator.

Haha, now this is starting to get humerous, in his eyes, critiscm of a countries Government equates to being a bigot. Please continue - You are absolutely hilarious :D
No, you said :
Oh but I am blatantly anti-American, I make no illusions about that as do most Europeans. We are not stupid enough to put blind trust in a Government for the sole reason of being 'patriotic'.
Of course, you tried to BS your way out of it earlier saying that simply saying "America this America that" is really only in reference to their government. However, if you wanted to say that you were opposed to that you would have said you were Anti-America, not anti-American, much like someone saying "I'm anti-France" and "I'm anti-French". I would expect someone with such superior intellect to myself to know that.

Reagan was convinced that the Sandinistas coming to power would spark revolution in the rest of South America. Wouldn't this have threatened other countries like the US?

To be anti-American is not trolling, I'm just going by the rules no more.

Stephanie
Game Moderator.
Indeed its not. Thats why I said I'd stop calling him a troll.

Unfortunately Somoza was overthrown in 1979, under Carter's administration, not Reagan's.

Yes but Reagan used the National Guard (A sadistic group - evacuated from Nicaragua using Red Cross Planes, a War Crime) to launch a terrorist War on Nicaragua, combined with economic warfare that was far more lethal. You also intimidated other countries so they would not send aid. Regan effectively used these ex-commanders to become guerilla fighters and attack Nicaraguan Civilians, with terrible results, for just a single example: The killing of a group of radio station employees broadcasting news that was, shall we say, not to thier liking. Reagan committed acts of International Terror - This is plain from his support of The ex-National Guard commanders in Nicaragua, and how ironic is it that they declared a war on terror in 1981 with pretty much the same rhetoric that they used when they re-declared it in September 2001.

No, you said :

Of course, you tried to BS your way out of it earlier saying that simply saying "America this America that" is really only in reference to their government. However, if you wanted to say that you were opposed to that you would have said you were Anti-America, not anti-American, much like someone saying "I'm anti-France" and "I'm anti-French". I would expect someone with such superior intellect to myself to know that.

Hehehehe, what do you mean no-brain? I'll put it in big letters if you do not understand.


I AM ANTI-AMERICAN

But that does not equate with hating the populace of an entire nation. Its relative to thier Government.

Yes but Reagan used the National Guard (A sadistic group - evacuated from Nicaragua using Red Cross Planes, a War Crime) to launch a terrorist War on Nicaragua, combined with economic warfare that was far more lethal. You also intimidated other countries so they would not send aid. Regan effectively used these ex-commanders to become guerilla fighters and attack Nicaraguan Civilians, with terrible results, for just a single example: The killing of a group of radio station employees broadcasting news that was, shall we say, not to thier liking. Reagan committed acts of International Terror - This is plain from his support of The ex-National Guard commanders in Nicaragua, and how ironic is it that they declared a war on terror in 1981 with pretty much the same rhetoric that they used when they re-declared it in September 2001.
Reagan supported the Contras but wasn't the mastermind sitting at the head ording everything around. Of course facts mean little to you, I'll bet you'll have some more surefire sources that just can't make it to the internet to prove anything you post...

Hehehehe, what do you mean no-brain? I'll put it in big letters if you do not understand.


I AM ANTI-AMERICAN

But that does not equate with hating the populace of an entire nation. Its relative to thier Government.
You said "I make no illusions about that as do most Europeans". Most Europeans don't make illusions that they're against Bush & co. That leaves you very little room to manouver, O Great One.

Why do you guys even bother to try and defend America? It's like Saddam trying to convince everyone he's a nice guy. Or Bush trying to pass third grade. It's pointless. The only way you can even remotely save face is to be an anti - bush American. If Bush wins the next election, two types of people win. The richest 10% and terrorists. That's it. Even the middle class are worse off with him in government. Oh and if you're wondering about terrorists, he's made many many new enemies for America without apparently doing much to Al Quaeda (how many terror alerts have there been?). Killing innocents creates hatred against America, which creates soldiers for terrorists. If an American bomb killed my family i'd do whatever it took to get revenge. A 'war' on terrorism will never ever solve the problem. Give people something to live for, and say bye to suicide bombings.

Reagan supported the Contras but wasn't the mastermind sitting at the head ording everything around. Of course facts mean little to you, I'll bet you'll have some more surefire sources that just can't make it to the internet to prove anything you post...

I'm pretty sure he knew what was going on. After all he is the President, and he recieves updates about such things. For example under the era of Carter's crimes, the Ambassador in Nicaragua sent a telegram to Carter stating that it would be "ill advised" to tell the National Guard to stop thier bombings of residential areas within the Neighbourhoods of Managua - Which resulted in the deaths of several thousands of people. Therefore why should Reagan not know about the killings performed by his own Terrorist Army?

You said "I make no illusions about that as do most Europeans". Most Europeans don't make illusions that they're against Bush & co. That leaves you very little room to manouver, O Great One.

You failed to make a point that I had not already addressed... Oh well, no brain, no intellect as they say :D

I'm pretty sure he knew what was going on. After all he is the President, and he recieves updates about such things. For example under the era of Carter's crimes, the Ambassador in Nicaragua sent a telegram to Carter stating that it would be "ill advised" to tell the National Guard to stop thier bombings of residential areas within the Neighbourhoods of Managua - Which resulted in the deaths of several thousands of people. Therefore why should Reagan not know about the killings performed by his own Terrorist Army?
He probably did know about the civil war going on in Nicaragua.

Ok guys, you're both coming very close to flaming each other..consider this a caution. I don't want to have to warn you both.

Thank You.
Stephanie
Game Moderator

You failed to make a point that I had not already addressed... Oh well, no brain, no intellect as they say :D
And with this, folks, I leave the thread and NWV earns a spot on my ignore list.

He probably did know about the civil war going on in Nicaragua.

Ahahahaha, You mean he didn't know about the Leaders of The National Guard who were airlifted out of Nicaragua under Red Cross colours under the Carter Administration (A war crime)? Or that he didn't know about the use of them in the Contra Conflict and it was all done (The Planning, The Execution, The Funding e.t.c) behind his back? My God your stupid!

He probably did know about the civil war going on in Nicaragua.

Wich was done by the US: deadsquads trained in Honduras and paied by US money by the CIA that only killed the native poor (for a US republican "poor" means "communist" and "communist" means a licence to kill regardless age, thank's God that we live in the free world and are aware).
Again the aAlliende story, but here in Nic. the people libareted themselves by a left revolution from a dictator that was in charge with $. Alliende: the CIA organises a truckdriverstrike (vital to ruin the land) and sends in "specialists" (killer thugs) to overtrow a democratic elected left president and replaces him by their scum champ Pinochet. That is the truth, if you think different, you neglact the facts and are a anti democratic person and liar. Plain and simple, the thruth.

BTW same thing for sponsoring the upper class and their tughs in Venezuela, bunch of negationists.

My God your stupid!

I just warned you both to stop. Consider yourself now warned.

Stephanie.
Game Moderator

I just warned you both to stop. Consider yourself now warned.

Stephanie.
Game Moderator

I made perfectly valid points, and when he was defeated in the argument. He resorted to nonsensical hypothetical situations such as the fact that Reagan 'May not have known' about this own terrorist army.

I made perfectly valid points, and when he was defeated in the argument. He resorted to nonsensical hypothetical situations such as the fact that Reagan 'May not have known' about this own terrorist army.

I have no problem with you arguing a point of view. What you don't have a right to do is call people names, we call it "flaming" if you haven't yet, I suggest you read the rules. You can attack the argument, you can't attack the poster.

Stephanie
Game Moderator

I have no problem with you arguing a point of view. What you don't have a right to do is call people names, we call it "flaming" if you haven't yet, I suggest you read the rules. You can attack the argument, you can't attack the poster.

Stephanie
Game Moderator

He resorted to calling me a 'bigot' because I gladly considered myself Anti-US, in my mind, that is flaming too.

He resorted to calling me a 'bigot' because I gladly considered myself Anti-US, in my mind, that is flaming too.

He was cautioned to stop at the same time you were, He stopped. You didn't.

If you have an issue with this please take it to moderation.

Thank You
Stephanie
Game Moderator

I just warned you both to stop. Consider yourself now warned.

Stephanie.
Game Moderator

Steph , I hope that when you give a warning to him, you also give one to the opponent who used much more hard words and started it...Just a fact of being neutral (I read it over now and must say that NWV is less flamming then his opponent) :confused:

He was cautioned to stop at the same time you were, He stopped. You didn't.

If you have an issue with this please take it to moderation.

Thank You
Stephanie
Game Moderator

Hmm, you are wright, he stoped, great women of the North :fluffle: