NationStates Jolt Archive

The American constitution was based both on British and French principles. Very little of it was actually new. In fact pretty much none of it.
Did I say it wasn't?

Really? Name one other country in the world which has a presidential systerm with a bichameral legislature.

Most countries have a parlimentary system. Americans are for the most part dumb, watching Nascar and stuffing their faces with fried lard, but there are a lot of them so their are enough diamonds in the rough to keep things functioning somewhat smoothly.NASCAR fans are a minority in America. O_o

(Excepting those people who are actually talking about interesting things, like the inventor of the first computer, although I consider Turing and Babbage to be the fathers of the computer, not Zuse)

Neither did Zuse himself, apparently, but the question was about who invented the first electronic computer, and that was Zuse.

Americans are given bad names because they are arrogant, is what I think. Such as when one of them say their nation is great because of something.

I am american, and I am becoming ashamed to live here. I, personally, hate Bush, and all his cronies, but what can we do. The majority of america is too dumb and lazy to look up the facts and listen to the world around them. When half the world says you are wrong, maybe you are the one wrong and not them.

I just wish America could go back to being the nation that people respected.

I didnt say that!!!!! Someone else did, I am aware of world politics and am aware that many Western European countrys have nearly the same rights as us, and same with Japan.

'Nearly the same rights'? What the fuck are you talking about? ...NEARLY?! My Lord. Coming from someone in a nation where the most pathetic things are censored on TV... where you DON'T have the right to free speech thanks to a political correctness in society that has gone too far and where the educational system doesn't really seem to match up... I don't think the word 'nearly' is one that should be used. To this day I have yet to see why America is FREE-ER than any other developed leading nation in the world. It's just crap. So please... don't talk down.

Neither did Zuse himself, apparently, but the question was about who invented the first electronic computer, and that was Zuse.

Fair enough. I think it's safe to say that many different inventins went into the production of modern computers, and assigning responsibility with a single person or invention is oversimplifying a complex history.

Did I say it wasn't?
You implied it/

Why do you think America has so many immigrants (and even immigrants that don't become criminals, like here in Europe.) Why do you think you watch their movies. Why do you think I have never seen anything from sweden (well except Zlatan Ibrahimovic) and I see something from the USA every day? The Dutch Republic was one of the few things that matched the USA in excellence, but we had to become monarch. I'm not saying the USA is perfect, or that there hasn't ever been a better nation to live in.

What I am saying is that the USA doesn't deserve the beating it gets from most of Europe, since we rely on them heavily, since we owe our freedom (and the possibility to even offend them) to them. What I am saying is that Western Europe should quit flaming the US and look at their own mistakes before that. Then they would see how close-minded they are (basicly, I get insulted on forums daily by socialists for being a libertarian, and no that isn't a small group. It's a big group.) Then they would see how fast they are to make generalizations (omg americans are all fat redneck cowboys) Then they might even see the problems they have at home (the problems with immigrants, the bad economy (which will only become worse with the kyoto pact (which the americans were so smart to stay out of.))

From a European point of view there aren't that much differences between the freedoms in america and the freedoms here, in america there's censorship, well here in the Netherlands too (a few weeks ago a minister tried to make insulting god illegal, here in the netherlands during royal marriages protesters weren't allowed to protest.) we have freedom of drugs, the americans have something similiar, free gunownership. America has lower taxes then in Europe (which makes you free to spend your money like you see fit) America has the patriot-act, well I have got to say that I hate the Patriot Act and it's basicly one of the few reasons why I would say no to Bush, however it still doesn't goes far enough to say GO 4 REGIME CHANGE NOW or DIE BUSH DIE like the things I have heard people (even members of the dutch parliament) say.

You implied it/
No, I didn't, I really hope you don't work as a detective.

Why do you think America has so many immigrants (and even immigrants that don't become criminals, like here in Europe.) Why do you think you watch their movies. Why do you think I have never seen anything from sweden (well except Zlatan Ibrahimovic) and I see something from the USA every day? The Dutch Republic was one of the few things that matched the USA in excellence, but we had to become monarch. I'm not saying the USA is perfect, or that there hasn't ever been a better nation to live in.

What I am saying is that the USA doesn't deserve the beating it gets from most of Europe, since we rely on them heavily, since we owe our freedom (and the possibility to even offend them) to them. What I am saying is that Western Europe should quit flaming the US and look at their own mistakes before that. Then they would see how close-minded they are (basicly, I get insulted on forums daily by socialists for being a libertarian, and no that isn't a small group. It's a big group.) Then they would see how fast they are to make generalizations (omg americans are all fat redneck cowboys) Then they might even see the problems they have at home (the problems with immigrants, the bad economy (which will only become worse with the kyoto pact (which the americans were so smart to stay out of.))

The same reason Britain has so many? O.o If you want to use them as an example to prove America is coo', you can have ours too. They piss me off. It's win win. America looks even cooler with so many more immigrants and Britain finally gets rid of a burden. Note: I am referring to illegal immigrants... You know? The ones who seem to be a majority of immigrants here nowadays?

[QUOTE=Ultra Cool PeopleLook, Bush may do some stupid crap, (OK so he can't help it), but it's the EU that enables him. If that wasn't the case the EU would start hitting the US and the UK with trade embargoes and port strikes. The entire population of the EU has complicity in everything the US does.
/QUOTE]


You are blaming a huge commitee (and remember when the devil didnt want anything to happen he created....) for inaction, instead of the people of that actually voted him into power?, and that for "moral" reasons? (yes the idea that gay people have to right to marry must have the wasp population frothing at the mouth)

Um, no... the american masses should and do have the blame that... and as to the EU attacking the US.... all we need then is for the Asians to create a "union" of theyre own...
(anybody here read a little book called 1984?)

aright, thats all i can bothered writing right now...

I disagree with the whole 'Americans are stupid' thing. The most intelligent americans are not stupid. However, there exists an ever-widening gap between rich and poor which the US' apparent money-orientated politics in many ways fail to address. The Ivy League universities are comparable to and/or better than many other universities. On top of this the State universities provide a 'good' level of education to hundreds of thousands of others which overall, combined with the 'flag-waving', "GOD BLESS AMERICA!" mass-media machine leads to a very effective overall economy in terms of efficiency and output. (A worker in the UK, for example, only has an average productivity of 78% that of his/her american counterpart - although this is largely due to the enthusiasm with which american businesses have integrated the internet).

I think the main thing that leads to the stereotype of 'dumb americans' is:
a) Waving of flags and "GOD SAVE AMERICA!", (PS. I love that one.) And the perception of foreigners that the general belief of Americans, taken in by the mass media, is that America is the best at everything, did everything first, and will be the best forever, because it's america, and that's how america is.

b) Those in america who are truly stupid, which seem to make up plenty of people. A good example of this is when some French men were protesting against the war: a small group elevated minor trade barriers in their local region etc. and stopped purchasing American goods. A local American response to this was to buy a host of the finest and most expensive french wines and then pour them down the sink. In private. Well thought out that one. Give them a little boost to their economy. (I don't think it really damaged French pride much, haha, they would've been laughing too much at the stupidity.)

c) The way America repeatedly enforces its own 'oh so high' moral standards on the rest of the world then fails to agree to a whole host of pollution reduction pacts // give even the most basic freedoms to detainees who, for the most part, seem to being treated as though they are "guilty until proven innocent". And then resort to aggression before diplomatic routes have been deemed improbable. I personally supported this war but only because it was to remove Saddam Hussein. The connection to 9/11 is sketchy to say the least and there aren't that many weapons of mass destruction cropping up. However, I did personally support the war...cause i don't much like dictators, or the possibility of weapons of mass destruction in the wrong hands, but I can still see why many people didn't // don't. Oh yeah combine that with the exploitation of cheap overseas labour // third world labour and the procurement of weaponry for sales worldwide...all those lovely little third world countries...killing each other...and themselves...with american weapons...

d) WHY THE F*** DO YOU KEEP PRODUCING THESE **insert expletives // colourful euphemism here** teen movies and then sending them all over the world. Man they annoy me.

Anyway, I quite like America, there are plenty of not-stupid people there. Only the intense ego is frustrating: "TEAM AMERICA" - oh man, that takes brain-washing to the max.

And whats all this "evolution can't possibly exist" stuff...there's new evidence being found that supports and extends the theory every day. And all attempts at rational disproof are flawed: most entertaining being the "second law of thermodynamics disproof" where the law is stated without the essential "in a closed system" and the definition of "entropy" is twisted to the extent it is something entirely different to that which it actually is. After evolution there's going to be hot debate on the quantum theory of time as well.

PS: GOD BLESS (brainwashed) AMERICA.

The majority of the people in the world are stupid, america included. You do not have to be from a certain country to be an idiot, and instead of saying that all americans are idiots try looking out your window. That said I have some of the biggest dumbasses I have ever met who live next door to me and I live in the U.S. But a few streets over there lives somebody who is incredibly intelligent.

Why do you think America has so many immigrants (and even immigrants that don't become criminals, like here in Europe.)

Wow, I'll let that xenophobic statement speak for itself, as well, not mentioning that immigration is not an American phenomenon.

Why do you think you watch their movies.

I don't watch American movies. Not because I go out of my way not to do it, but because they never seem to attract my attention.

Why do you think I have never seen anything from sweden (well except Zlatan Ibrahimovic) and I see something from the USA every day?

Because you have poor tastes? How should I know. Your limited cultural experiences are not my problem.

The Dutch Republic was one of the few things that matched the USA in excellence, but we had to become monarch.

Haha. The Dutch Republic? Are you serious? Talk about pointless blip in history. :rolleyes:

What I am saying is that the USA doesn't deserve the beating it gets from most of Europe, since we rely on them heavily, since we owe our freedom (and the possibility to even offend them) to them.

No, no we don't. They didn't make Europe free, nor did they keep it free. The people of Europe did that. And the US fought a common enemy with them, after some delay.

What I am saying is that Western Europe should quit flaming the US and look at their own mistakes before that.

Heck, give me a Western European country to criticise, and I will. This thread is about the US, remember?

Then they would see how close-minded they are

Hypocrite.

(basicly, I get insulted on forums daily by socialists for being a libertarian, and no that isn't a small group. It's a big group.)

I'm sorry you're a libertarian. It's probably not your fault. Maybe you parents did something?

Then they would see how fast they are to make generalizations (omg americans are all fat redneck cowboys)

Nothing I recognise.

Then they might even see the problems they have at home (the problems with immigrants, the bad economy (which will only become worse with the kyoto pact (which the americans were so smart to stay out of.))

Nothing affecting my country, where the economy is booming at the moment, the Kyoto accord's targets being easy for us to meet and immigrant related crimes aren't that much of a problem.

the bad economy (which will only become worse with the kyoto pact (which the americans were so smart to stay out of.))
The economy has been exceptional over the past year.

Fass I love your country. Sweden is cool.

Fass, we should englighten the American to the high levels of education and welfare available in your country and the exceptional standard of living (second highest in the world).

==> Back to the debate.

Americans aren't all stupid or fat. Well...quite a lot of them are fat. I believe many are taken to be stupid because they appear 'brainwashed' by the media. But I've met a lot of intelligent americans too :p

"Then they might even see the problems they have at home (the problems with immigrants, the bad economy (which will only become worse with the kyoto pact (which the americans were so smart to stay out of.))"

When will you see that there is more to life than a booming economy? It's not helping the most impoverished of the country anyway. Worsening pollution will make us all pay in the end; it is this kind of naivety that makes people say american's are stupid.

Fass I love your country. Sweden is cool.

Fass, we should englighten the American to the high levels of education and welfare available in your country and the exceptional standard of living (second highest in the world).

Meh, I don't want to toot our horns, unlike others. It's so undignified.

Meh, I don't want to toot our horns, unlike others. It's so undignified.

Yeah I know, and I wasn't even going to go into the beautiful women..

Praetonia, you are wrong and you know it. While it was true that both France and Britain had nuclear deterrents LATER ON in the Cold War, what Quantrix is trying to say is true. If there had been no American involvement in WWII, Hitler still would have lost, due to his lack of military forsight (The defeat of the Wermacht in Soviet Russia set the irreversible decline of Hitler's "empire" in motion). But you know as well as I do that Stalin would not have stopped in Berlin, he would have kept on going, ending WWII with his borders extended all the way to the channel. At the time it was the Americans who had developed the atom bomb, they had the only deterrent, and were well prepared to use it if Stalin decided that he wanted the rest of Europe. If the Americans hadnt entered WWII in the first place, if Japan never attacked Pearl Harbor, then it is likely that we wouldnt have developed nuclear weapons until we had a reason to. Basically, if the United States of America had stayed out of WWII, then we would be facing an entirely Communist Eastern Hemisphere, as well as communist renegades in Central and South America. You know that we wouldnt stand a chance in that scenario. We couldnt match the sheer economic and military strength of an entire world united under communism. If there is anyone out there who truly believes that The United States of America is either stupid or not the GREATEST country on this planet, let me know which country is better and I'll respectfully disagree with you.

Guys, guys, guys! You're all losing sight of the big picture: One day, a man with the impressive title of Smelly Pirate Hookers used the excellent powers of the brain that undoubtedly allowed him to come up with such a mind-blowingly great name to show us all that Americans were stupid. I mean, these days, you could see people with names like- Smelly Pirate Hookers or something! And needless to say, I do sit in front of the TV watching Nascar and eat fried lard. Yeah, SPH. Fried lard. Good one. So let's all respect this great nation, this nation whose very name instills fear into my soul: SMELLY freakin' PIRATE HOOKERS. I wish I had a name that cool...

Praetonia, you are wrong and you know it. While it was true that both France and Britain had nuclear deterrents LATER ON in the Cold War, what Quantrix is trying to say is true. If there had been no American involvement in WWII, Hitler still would have lost, due to his lack of military forsight (The defeat of the Wermacht in Soviet Russia set the irreversible decline of Hitler's "empire" in motion). But you know as well as I do that Stalin would not have stopped in Berlin, he would have kept on going, ending WWII with his borders extended all the way to the channel. At the time it was the Americans who had developed the atom bomb, they had the only deterrent, and were well prepared to use it if Stalin decided that he wanted the rest of Europe. If the Americans hadnt entered WWII in the first place, if Japan never attacked Pearl Harbor, then it is likely that we wouldnt have developed nuclear weapons until we had a reason to. Basically, if the United States of America had stayed out of WWII, then we would be facing an entirely Communist Eastern Hemisphere, as well as communist renegades in Central and South America. You know that we wouldnt stand a chance in that scenario. We couldnt match the sheer economic and military strength of an entire world united under communism. If there is anyone out there who truly believes that The United States of America is either stupid or not the GREATEST country on this planet, let me know which country is better and I'll respectfully disagree with you.

*scoffs*

OK look, i genuinly don't mean to be crass here but your points precisly prove why i hate americans, of course there are other examples but there has never before been a nation that has actually EMBRACED the will to power and control as wholly as america does. Its peoples own blinkered belief in what uncle sam has taught them is why they are, as i say, stupid. (humorous again)

Wow, ever since the soviet union disintergrated. maybe. USSR spent much more time conquering, and enslaving people. as for HATING americans, well how many have you talked to? other than on forums. I HATE no man until they have personally harmed me. HATE is to strong a word to use in place of dislike, or even contempt. stereotypes are pure poison. lets do away with them, shall we. Please explain why you HATE ALL AMERICANS. i am curious. i don't HATE any nation or people. can you assist me in understanding your HATE. :confused: :(

Japan? Who would have stopped Russia? All the U.S. did by entering the war (at least as far as Europe was concerned) was start the Cold War.

I guess we must have forgotten all the american soldiers that died in europe? we assisted in the win in europe with our allies, not america by itself but ALLIES. ohh yah and lets not forget if amrica hadn't assisted in putting pressure on germany they would have had the a-bomb before anyone and then it would have been bratwurst for everyone.

Over 50% of you voted Bush.

Not during the first election ;)

If we are so stupid why does everyone else come to our colleges?

If we are so stupid why did 50% vote for Bush?

If we are stupid how did we end Nazism?
If we are so stupid why is the Soviet Union now gone?
If we are so stupid why do we make billions of $$$ all at your expense?

PS-JK on that last one ;)

Hello ignorant,stupid american here.
we did not end nazism. it still exsists in the form of neo-nazism

the soviet union collapsed under its own weight because communism, simply can not work as a valid political system for anything bigger than a smallish town.

and just because we have the some of the best colleges does not mean that everyone in america is intelligent.

and for all those people out there who insult this nation, go fuck yourselves, EVERY nation has made mistakes and had the wrong leaders (chosen or otherwise) so get off you high-fucking hobby horse, and just chew on the end of a shotgun, and hit that trigger with your toe please.
(please excuse the vehemence of this post, as i have had a bad day) :headbang:

Wow, why havent the M0ds locked this yet?

Again, people like this drive negative sterotypes. Why is it that only immature kids get on the internet?

there are no positive stereotypes. in my experience.

Without the U.S. there would be no voting

Democracy is NOT an American idea. America may use it now, but they were not the first people to use it. The earliest form of Democracy I am aware of is the Athenian system of direct democracy. The earliest parliament is to be found in Iceland. If anything, democarcy is a European idea (though I dont think you can find two more diffrent European nations than Iceland and Greece), so would Americans please be aware of that for future referance.

Praetonia, you are wrong and you know it. While it was true that both France and Britain had nuclear deterrents LATER ON in the Cold War, what Quantrix is trying to say is true. If there had been no American involvement in WWII, Hitler still would have lost, due to his lack of military forsight (The defeat of the Wermacht in Soviet Russia set the irreversible decline of Hitler's "empire" in motion). But you know as well as I do that Stalin would not have stopped in Berlin, he would have kept on going, ending WWII with his borders extended all the way to the channel.

As a fellow historian, I very much doubt that Stalin would have continued his conquest of Europe for the simple reason that the only reason he was marching across it to begin with was to stop Hitler and the Germans and then wipe them out. Britain and Canada could have marched a D-Day landing without the help of the US, the only diffrence would be that we would have had to do even more preperation bombings. Stalin would not have continued across past Germany because he knew that would provoke Britain and he did not want a war with Britain as well. The war with Germany had created a great deal of problems for Russia as it was, and so they were not going to continue fighting.

Actually it was not US pressure that set back the Nazi A-Bomb, it was our (UK) Special Operations Executive agents who blew up a Nazi heavy water plant, which set back the A-bomb by months, if not years.


PS: Ha-ha.

The UK is far better.The US spent a lot of it's time copying the UK.

Delta Force?
SAS

Rangers?
SAS

FBI?
MI5

CIA?
MI6

Cheese?
Uhh....Scratch that one....
EDIT:I just saw the Black Imperium's comments on immigrants here in the UK and I must say:
What the hell?Are you with the BNP or something?The vast majority of immigrants are LEGAL, and there is a VERY small minority of immigrants who want to get into the UK, for perfectly valid reasons but CAN'T because of Blunkett's over-harsh immigration laws.

First of all kyoto pact means nothing with one volcanic eruption, one small chough of a volcano and billions of euro's/dollars/roubels/marks/whatever are flushed down the toilet. That is, if the greenhouse effect is true (many climatologists do not believe in the greenhouse effect, that many people (thanks to the media and thanks to charities (who make money out of it)) believe it doesn't make it true.) Second of all, yeh the economy is very important. It's what makes the difference between North and South Korea.

Just to get back on topic between the two off-topic thingies, I don't support Bush. I disagree with the Patriot Act, I disagree with the War in Iraq. Probably if I was a US Citizen I wouldn't have voted for him (BADNARIK YEH!) however I am against this whole anti-american thing. By doing that stuff we are no inch better then the anti-french thing the Americans are doing, if we Europeans are so enlightened and intellectual, then we should know we are above that. Let those Americans flush wine down the toilet, who cares? Let them re-elect Bush, are they whining if we elect some leftie?

Now, to get back off-topic one of my favourites (although i'm not a expert on it, although I love to read it,) Alternative History! It's my guess (as a non-historian, but with a good intrest for history) that the sphere of influence, without american intervention of either the Soviet Union or the Nazi's would be bigger, and I think that's for sure. American Support helped the SU alot to get back on it's feet and push back the nazi invasion from the borders of Moscow (who knows what would've happened if they had captured it) and the same thing counts for Britain. I guess that the war would've lasted for a couple of years longer (much of this depends on Hitlers mental state and who takes control if Hitler is just too crazy or too dead to be in control.) and Europe would be ravaged. Extremist/Radical groups like Communism and Fascism would get in control easier, I guess that in Western Europe (which is probably totally ravaged by the germans) will turn communist and that Eastern Europe tries to become fascist (considering the hatred of the SU there) but fails and become a part of the SU. GB will probably remain democratic/capitalist although they will have suffered much of the war. Concluding this will mean a communist continental Europe, probably under SU influence (the communists of WWII all supported Stalin (mainly because his genocides weren't known back then)) so in the end the SU will rule.

I am an American.

I will be till the day I die.

I am also not stupid.

I voted for Bush.

I hate NASCAR and fried lard.

You all are stupid for even caring if we are a little weird.

The British drink too much tea.

The French are wusses.

The German's have anger management problems.

Spain allows their citizens to be gorged by bulls.

Italy smells like a boot. (I've been there)

We should all shut up and smile cause we're stuck together.

I'm proud to be an American.

At least I have balls!!!

KISS MY AMERICAN ASS!!!

The British drink too much teaa?Have you ever seen a British person???I think you may have the present day UK mixed up with 1700's Britain :D. Anyway, our Empire was bigger than yours. Th same thing that happened to us will happen to the US, just not as obviously.In fact, it's happening now.

*sees a sniper aiming*

Menwith Hill.How I hate Menwith Hill.Possibly the biggest violation of the UK ever. America gets to spy on all of our communications except the most top-level, and for what?No reason, really.

YOU STOLE OUR HILL!

WE WANT IT BACK!

GIVE US BACK OUR HILL!

There is no US in Menwith Hill!

PLease give us our hill back, we want our privacy.

The majority of america is too dumb and lazy to look up the facts and listen to the world around them. When half the world says you are wrong, maybe you are the one wrong and not them.


Thats actually impossible, because Ignorance is opinitated and therefore there is no formal definition of it and one cannot officially label someone ignorant.
So we come to a world where there are two choices:
A. Everyones Ignorant.
or
B. No ones ignorant.

Both have their merits. But perhaps the it is the latter, (no ones ignorant), because every action has some kind of cause. Therefore no one is truly ignorant because they have there own reasoning in the things they do. There reasoning may be different than yours, but that doesnt make them ignorant. To put it simply, we live in a flucating(sp?) society. There will be good times and bad, so, get over it.

I don't think that anyone can judge a whole set of people just because of where they live. I think that just like any other nationality some American's are smart and some are not. Anyway who cares, being clever doesn't determine who you are, whether you're nice or not is far more important. As soon as the world starts getting on with one an other the better!!!!

However I can't believe so many American's could vote for Bush.

I don't think that anyone can judge a whole set of people just because of where they live. I think that just like any other nationality some American's are smart and some are not. Anyway who cares, being clever doesn't determine who you are, whether you're nice or not is far more important. As soon as the world starts getting on with one an other the better!!!!

However I can't believe so many American's could vote for Bush.

We had our reasons. And trust me, we dont like him as much as you think we do. We realize he has faults...okay, lots of faults. But I didnt think John Kerry would've had any real revolutionary ideas.

[QUOTE=Pschycotic Pschycos]

The British drink too much tea.

QUOTE]

I hate tea

We had our reasons. And trust me, we dont like him as much as you think we do. We realize he has faults...okay, lots of faults. But I didnt think John Kerry would've had any real revolutionary ideas.

What kind of ideas, attacking other countries???

Pschycotic Pschycos just proves my point, we europeans are above that. If we are so intellectual and stuff then let's prove it be being above that and not making the same generalizations as he does, no and don't come with that BS 'but they started it!' Now go out there and read von Hayek, Friedman, Rand, Nozick and other great books.

I hate tea


I LOVE TEA! ;););)!

Long live tea!

I LOVE TEA! ;););)!

Long live tea!


Down with tea, down with tea

Pschycotic Pschycos just proves my point, we europeans are above that. If we are so intellectual and stuff then let's prove it be being above that and not making the same generalizations as he does, no and don't come with that BS 'but they started it!' Now go out there and read von Hayek, Friedman, Rand, Nozick and other great books.

Man who was it that wrote "All Quiet on the Western Front". I really love that book. But I always forget the author. And the title in german, grrr!

You can moan all you want, but America is like baseball and the yankees. Nobody will like us, but sorry were the strongest.

Down with tea, down with tea
Is iced tea OK?

Over 50% of you voted Bush.


50% of the electorate... NOT 50% of americans.. most non-voters tend to be Democrat..

Down with tea, down with tea

UP WITH THE TEA UP WITH THE TEA!!

GET UP WITH YOUR CUP OF TEA...UP WITH A CUP OF TEA...

This kind of poetry should win prizes...for urm...tea poetry...

(Iced tea is allowed...but heavily taxed...because it...urm...offends Her Royal Majesty the Queen)

Is iced tea OK?

The peach flavour is quite nice

UP WITH THE TEA UP WITH THE TEA!!

GET UP WITH YOUR CUP OF TEA...UP WITH A CUP OF TEA...

This kind of poetry should win prizes...for urm...tea poetry...

(Iced tea is allowed...but heavily taxed...because it...urm...offends Her Royal Majesty the Queen)


There should be a tea poetry competition!!!!!!!!!!!!

50% of the electorate... NOT 50% of americans.. most non-voters tend to be Democrat..
Have anything to back that up?

I sense you are perverting the original intention of the tea which was to be enjoyed while watching cricket. This iced tea clearly promotes promiscuity, offends Her Royal Majesty, and is not even drunk warm, (SIN! [gasps]...[oooooohs]...[aaaaaahs]!) Tighter taxes will especially have to be imposed on the peach flavours of the drink because they distort the ordinarily dark, murky and brown texture of the tea: chosen to represent the great British Oak. :D

Tea For Me. Tea For You, Oh Wait You Are Me 3. Tea For Me. Tea For Me 3. That Is Clearly The Way To Be!

EDIT:I just saw the Black Imperium's comments on immigrants here in the UK and I must say:
What the hell?Are you with the BNP or something?The vast majority of immigrants are LEGAL, and there is a VERY small minority of immigrants who want to get into the UK, for perfectly valid reasons but CAN'T because of Blunkett's over-harsh immigration laws.
Are you telling me the media here doesn't make the illegal immigrants look like they outnumber the legal ones? And does it give a good name to any of them? I'm bitter, yes, but not racist. See, as far as I'm concerned, for every illegal immigrant and asylum seeker coming here and not elsewhere because our benefit programmes suit them down to the ground - a young adult will struggle to pay off university fees for years after they have left. It's not a secret asylum seekers and illegal immigrants are draining our economy unnecessarily. While it may not make up all the funds needed to abolish fees for everyone who gets into university, it should contribute towards it. As it would seem, I am not one who enjoys living in a Britain that loves to be kind to everyone - maybe that will help you understand my stance.

Summary:
Legal immigrants = Good - they'll contribute just like anyone else.
Asylum seekers and illegal immigrants = Scary - and preventing me from going to university and qualifying as something that will allow me to help society for free, as it should be.

Erich Maria Remarque

I sense you are perverting the original intention of the tea which was to be enjoyed while watching cricket. This iced tea clearly promotes promiscuity, offends Her Royal Majesty, and is not even drunk warm, (SIN! [gasps]...[oooooohs]...[aaaaaahs]!) Tighter taxes will especially have to be imposed on the peach flavours of the drink because they distort the ordinarily dark, murky and brown texture of the tea: chosen to represent the great British Oak. :D

I think that normally tea should be heavily taxed instead because it has to be drunk hot and so is clearly very dangerous. Iced tea on the other hand is drunk at a far more resnable temperature, and the peach flavour should be encouraged because it promotes healthy eating.

Tea For Me. Tea For You, Oh Wait You Are Me 3. Tea For Me. Tea For Me 3. That Is Clearly The Way To Be!

Tea is brown,
it makes me frown,
tea is hot ,
it tastes like snot

(that was all I could think of)

We are not the best, I don't pretend for us to be the best. All of humanity sucks ass because in a way, we all are stupid, and are stereotyped at one point in time. We also all stereotype others at one point in time. Remember, we are all humans, and therefore are subject to the same things. All of us have our stupid moments, and our intellectual moments. We are all the same. If you insult one people, you therefore insult all humans, and therefore, you are doing nothing but insulting yourself. So I now say, stop insulting all people.

Thanks Chomskonia.

Tea is brown,
it makes me frown,
tea is hot ,
it tastes like snot

(that was all I could think of)

oooh, that's good actually. hmmm.

A Tea Poem. (By Hughski and Me 3)

Tea is brown,
it makes me frown,
tea is hot,
it tastes like snot.

If it's grey,
it causes much dismay,
and if it's white,
you're not alright.

Ive been all over this country, I have not seen too many dumb people.

Really? Cause every time I walked out my door in my own country I meet stupid people, they are every where, not just the United States!

I think that normally tea should be heavily taxed instead because it has to be drunk hot and so is clearly very dangerous. Iced tea on the other hand is drunk at a far more resnable temperature, and the peach flavour should be encouraged because it promotes healthy eating.

Her Royal Majesty suggests that in order to provide for those who wish to eat healthily, one may dip a small - highly taxed - peach into a warm, brown tea. Such a peach may only be purchased exclusively during Cricket games, excepting such times as Her Majesty so desires that such a peach may be required so as to increase the morale of troops. A good example would be in order to raise the moral of the Buckingham Palace guard during times of great tourism and consequent hardship on the guard's ability to withhold movement.

[FONT=Arial]Oh too much america hating in here, hahaha, I fear the left is taking over! I am a US Army wife of a soldier currently deployed to Iraq, we proudly voted for Bush! I have lived in Europe, and although I loved Germany and Austria, USA is and always will be my home :)

Uh oh, other people think i'm stupid. Since when did I start caring of what other people thought of me/the US.

Because when other people have different opinions as me, I label them stupid and a lesser being that should not exist as a human.

And you sir are exactly why everyone thinks Americans are stupid. On a side note, I'm guessing you're also a Christian too with that attitude. You see, this is why I think that people with less than a 120 IQ shouldn't be allowed to vote. Then maybe we would stop electing morons...
Besides, humanity is in its very nature stupid. The leading cause of death in this nation is accidents, or as I call it, stupidity. The reason there are so many stupid people today is 1)They tend to have more children than smarter people because of their lack of enough common sense to use birth control, 2)the rules of survival of the fittest don't apply anymore because of our medical knowledge keeps stupid people alive by taking them to the ER and patching them up so they can go do stupid things again. 3)We as humanity are too greedy to live wthout a few of the "finer things" in life so that we can give a little more tax money to education and thus improve our own children's future so they don't grow up to be a dumba** like us.
And also, people on this thread are too stupid to use a spellcheck.

Have anything to back that up?

No its true, we Democrats are a pathetic spineless party, the Republicans are more agressive.


I am going to stop this thread right now, whatever it will do to my nation. Goodbye. I just want the argueing to stop.

As a fellow historian, I very much doubt that Stalin would have continued his conquest of Europe for the simple reason that the only reason he was marching across it to begin with was to stop Hitler and the Germans and then wipe them out. Britain and Canada could have marched a D-Day landing without the help of the US, the only diffrence would be that we would have had to do even more preperation bombings. Stalin would not have continued across past Germany because he knew that would provoke Britain and he did not want a war with Britain as well. The war with Germany had created a great deal of problems for Russia as it was, and so they were not going to continue fighting.

Well you have to consider a few things first. Stalin wasnt so much on a conquest to defeat the Germans as he was to spread communsim through out Europe. While he originally started out with the defeat of Nazi Germany, which was inevitable except under one condition, but thats besides the point, I think the main underlying goal of the Soviet offensive was to secure a communist stronghold in Europe. The only thing that stopped him was the fact that the Americans were willing to defend western europe with the atom bomb. Why else would Stalin march on Berlin with 1,250,000 men if he hadnt planned on going further. We both know that it would have taken a substantially less amount of men to complete the task of conquering half of a war torn Germany. The Soviet Army vastly out numbered the Allies' Army, which wouldnt have stood a chance had Stalin decided to continue pushing past Germany. Like I said, the only thing that stopped him was nuclear deterrent. Second point. Most of Europe was ravaged by the Wermacht. After the way France fell without a struggle to the Germans, it most certainly wouldnt have put up any resistance to a much larger Soviet Force. And while it may have been true that Stalin wanted to avoid a war with England, there wouldnt have been much England could have done if Stalin pushed his troops to the English Channel. One more thing, it is doubtful if Great Britain and Canada could have succeeded with the D-day invasion. They might have been successful with the initial invasion, due to Britian's naval power, but as soon as their soldiers pushed inland they would have been defeated by the entrenched Germans. While England had the most powerful navy, the English Army was not something to be extremely proud of, atleast not compared to the U.S. Army or the German Army. And Canada, well....

the reason there are so many sterotypes is because


The dumbest people have the loudest voice, and the moneyquote by: some dude over the internet.

I am an American.

I will be till the day I die.

I am also not stupid.

I voted for Bush.

I hate NASCAR and fried lard.

You all are stupid for even caring if we are a little weird.

The British drink too much tea.

The French are wusses.

The German's have anger management problems.

Spain allows their citizens to be gorged by bulls.

Italy smells like a boot. (I've been there)

We should all shut up and smile cause we're stuck together.

I'm proud to be an American.

At least I have balls!!!

KISS MY AMERICAN ASS!!!

Twat

The British drink too much tea.



I hate tea
So wait, you're saying broad sweeping generalizations about a populace are unfounded? The devil you say.......

Just calm down! Come on, now I know all that blind anti-americanism can upset you but just let them talk, in the end they live in some sucky country like france or netherlands and you live in the USA. Those anti-americanists can talk all they want but it isn't going to change one damn thing. Because all of the european governments are too damn pussy to become a enemy of the Americans, and no single anti-americanist will be able to change that.

As a fellow historian, I very much doubt that Stalin would have continued his conquest of Europe for the simple reason that the only reason he was marching across it to begin with was to stop Hitler and the Germans and then wipe them out. Britain and Canada could have marched a D-Day landing without the help of the US, the only diffrence would be that we would have had to do even more preperation bombings. Stalin would not have continued across past Germany because he knew that would provoke Britain and he did not want a war with Britain as well. The war with Germany had created a great deal of problems for Russia as it was, and so they were not going to continue fighting.
Indeed. AND I very much doubt that Stalin would have won. At least not immediately... people dont realise just how close the Wehermacht was to winning in Russia, and without the second fron created by D-Day it's unlikely to that the Soviets would have won. They may have done, but it would have taken much longer and really we cant comment on what may or may not have happened.

Still, I dont see how that makes Americans any less thick. I mean they elected GW Bush for god's sake! What more proof do you want?

Praetonia, someone who votes for someone you don't like isn't directly stupid. Now I'll be the first to agree that Geogre W. Bush isn't exactly the best choice for president (Libertarians woohoo) however you should respect the choice of those people who voted for him, and it's very unreasonable to call someone stupid just because he/she doesnt agrees with you.

I can't believe I actually read thru this whole thread up to now! One thing I seem to see from both sides is stereotyping, and lots and lots of name-calling, particularly "stupid". "Stupid" is a weak arguement. I believe all purple people should be killed. "That's stupid, You're stupid, etc". Why is that stupid? What arguements do you have against killing all the purple people? Are you too stupid to come up with a real arguement, or is the best you can do is to call me stupid? The same goes for the stereotypes: "All Americans are stupid because they watch NASCAR"; "Frenchies are all wimps because they won't fight", etc. Why is watching NASCAR stupid? Why is a Frenchman a wimp because he does not want to go to war? Really, I guess my expectations of people are too high on this forum - I expected more intelligent debate.

Praetonia, someone who votes for someone you don't like isn't directly stupid. Now I'll be the first to agree that Geogre W. Bush isn't exactly the best choice for president (Libertarians woohoo) however you should respect the choice of those people who voted for him, and it's very unreasonable to call someone stupid just because he/she doesnt agrees with you.
I was, of course, being sarcastic. Although... surely the Republican Party could have chosen someone who could speak English as their candidate?

Just 4 years and then some new guy will be chosen, and let's just hope he's in the libertarian wing of the republican party.

HAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA.

Hehehehe, No. There is no libertarian wing.

Unless you mean the libertarians who want to ban gay marriage. :rolleyes:

Bush would be a better leader than any of you guys. I'd give you about 3 weeks in the Presidency before either A) you're assasinated, B) you're impeached, or C) you resign.

Indeed. AND I very much doubt that Stalin would have won. At least not immediately... people dont realise just how close the Wehermacht was to winning in Russia, and without the second fron created by D-Day it's unlikely to that the Soviets would have won. They may have done, but it would have taken much longer and really we cant comment on what may or may not have happened.

Still, I dont see how that makes Americans any less thick. I mean they elected GW Bush for god's sake! What more proof do you want?

I was just countering someone who thought that Russia would have swept across Europe without America being involved in WW2

1) Democracy is not an American idea, the first parliament was in Iceland and the oldest democracy (I can think of) is the Athenian system of direct democracy

2) Freedom is not an American idea, it is an inherantly human idea

3) The Internet was not invented by Americans, but the British

4) The Computer was not invented by Americans, but the British

5) Rock and roll was not invented by Americans, but the British

6) It is possible that WW2 could have been won without American involvement

1) Democracy is not an American idea, the first parliament was in Iceland and the oldest democracy (I can think of) is the Athenian system of direct democracy

2) Freedom is not an American idea, it is an inherantly human idea

3) The Internet was not invented by Americans, but the British

4) The Computer was not invented by Americans, but the British

5) Rock and roll was not invented by Americans, but the British

6) It is possible that WW2 could have been won without American involvement

Um Wrong! Rock N' Roll is a United States Made, it was suplemented by great bands like The Who and etc. But it started in the 1900's-1940's(one of the times, and YES before Elvis), by African American Bands.

And the Internet Im pretty sure is American made... Ill look into it.

God damn it, what the fuck are all of you people doing? You're arguing if a nation is stupid? Oh, yea, that's not stereotyping.

This is as retarded as arguing if members of [insert ethnicity, nation, or religion here] are stupid.

Ok, I found it, this is how the internet was born:
"It grew out of an Expierment begun in the 1960's by the U.S. Department of Defense. The DoD wanted to create a computer network that would continue to function in the event of diaster, such as nuclear war. If part of the network was damaged or destroyed the rest of the system still had to work. That network was ARPANET, which linked U.S. Scientific and academic researchers. It was the forerunner of todays internet."

God damn it, what the fuck are all of you people doing? You're arguing if a nation is stupid? Oh, yea, that's not stereotyping.

This is as retarded as arguing if members of [insert ethnicity, nation, or religion here] are stupid.
This is as retarded as arguing if members of Stupid Land are stupid

Well actually if you replace it with right words its common sense :)

And the Internet Im pretty sure is American made... Ill look into it.

No, the internet was invented by the British Physicist Tim Berners-Lee.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Berners-Lee

http://www.ibiblio.org/pioneers/lee.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3357073.stm

No, the internet was invented by the British Physicist Tim Berners-Lee.

No it was made in the 1960s by the American Department of Defense, Lee may have made it in its current form, but the real internet was made by the DoD. I made a post about it on the last page.

Hmmmm....
I wonder who made it first, Lee in 1980 or the DoD in 1960's the Time Difference is just too close.

Ok, I found it, this is how the internet was born:
"It grew out of an Expierment begun in the 1960's by the U.S. Department of Defense. The DoD wanted to create a computer network that would continue to function in the event of diaster, such as nuclear war. If part of the network was damaged or destroyed the rest of the system still had to work. That network was ARPANET, which linked U.S. Scientific and academic researchers. It was the forerunner of todays internet."

The Aboves just for reference.

Berners-Lee did not invent the Internet Protocol. That was the US DoD. Berners-Lee invented HyperText Transfer Protocol.

And as far as computers go, Im looking at it right now, and basically all these computer advances happened at around the same time in England and America, so for that Im willing to say no one really made it first.

Scary isn't it?
what will the idiots do next? uggh. I shudder to think!

Yeah and only 11% of people voted for Bush because they are stupid.

The others did it because of moral issues.

I hate to admit it, he is the best on those.

So now we have 11% of Americans are stupid.

Ive been all over this country, I have not seen too many dumb people.

Obviously, youve never been to South Carolina. It's like a fuckin asylum down here.

If we are so stupid, how come so many nations have been following our Democratic procedures? And other procedures for many a decade?
because we invaded them and forced them to dumbass

No, the internet was invented by the British Physicist Tim Berners-Lee.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Berners-Lee

http://www.ibiblio.org/pioneers/lee.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3357073.stm


Actually, if you read the links you provided, you will see that Berners-Lee invented the World Wide Web and the protocols to go with it which made it much easier for the average joe citizen to use a computer online. Since the first site using WWW protocols was placed on an already existing internet in 1991 (according to your own source) and AOL had been around for almost a decade at that time, not only did he not invent the internet, he wasn't even close in the time frame.

Now, having said that, the vast majority of the world uses the WWWC rules for websites, since having a standardized format does make things easier on the average person. It was a great idea and he doesn't get near the recognition he should. Essentially, Berners-Lee didn't invent the internet, he simplified it or dumbed it down so more people could use it. Before his creation of the WWW protocols, the most frequent users of the internet were the NATO military, Western Universities, and American, Canadian and Japanese hobbyists. In other words, the "dumb" Americans were already online and Berners-Lee helped everyone else get there too. :)

Actually, if you read the links you provided, you will see that Berners-Lee invented the World Wide Web and the protocols to go with it which made it much easier for the average joe citizen to use a computer online. Since the first site using WWW protocols was placed on an already existing internet in 1991 (according to your own source) and AOL had been around for almost a decade at that time, not only did he not invent the internet, he wasn't even close in the time frame.

Now, having said that, the vast majority of the world uses the WWWC rules for websites, since having a standardized format does make things easier on the average person. It was a great idea and he doesn't get near the recognition he should. Essentially, Berners-Lee didn't invent the internet, he simplified it or dumbed it down so more people could use it. Before his creation of the WWW protocols, the most frequent users of the internet were the NATO military, Western Universities, and American, Canadian and Japanese hobbyists. In other words, the "dumb" Americans were already online and Berners-Lee helped everyone else get there too. :)

Does or does not the source say that he invented the first web site?

Does or does not the source say that he invented the first web site?
Thats not the internet, thats the first web site. Nice try though.

Bush would be a better leader than any of you guys. I'd give you about 3 weeks in the Presidency before either A) you're assasinated, B) you're impeached, or C) you resign.

that doesn't mean shit. that's like me saying Ron Artest plays basketball like an idiot. But I know i would get schooled on the court with him. So far, I haven't read one reply in which one person has said that they could seriously be a better president than Bush. All they're saying is that compared to previous presidents, Bush is a damn moron who has srewed america (and I don't mean all past president's. Take Nixon for example, may he die in pain).

Does or does not the source say that he invented the first web site?

Typical stupid question. Yes it says he put up the first web site. But, my deluded poster, it went up on an already existing internet. What do you think AOL and Compuserve users were doing in the late 80s if there was no internet?

The initial claim was that he invented the Internet which is entirely different from saying he put up the first WWW web site. Further, depending on the definition of "web site," the statement in the wikipedia is false. If by web site you mean first site using WWW protocols, then yes, he did put up the first "web" site. But since normal civilians in many countries had be on the Internet for over a decade, he didn't invent the Internet. He developed a system to make it easier for people to make internet sites and for others to find those sites. If, however, by web site, you mean the old internet site term, then no, he was off by two decades.

Again, what he did was make something already in use easier to use and in so doing created a system that has almost entirely replaced the old Internet. But he did not create the internet , which was the claim made originally. Understand the difference or is that beyond you?

Thats not the internet, thats the first web site. Nice try though.

The internet "In its current form" is what created the revolution. Without "Its current form" the system we are disscussing on would not exist. You can say that you developed the original form, but I can also say the Chinese developed the first gunpowder, but that doesnt mean they knew its true potential when applied to weaponary. Taking already existing ideas and reworking them to make them better is one method of inventing. Considering Berners-Lee created the internet "in its current form" and "its current form" is radically diffrent to the old form and is far more applyable to everyone, I think it is safe to credit him with the revolution we have in communication. If the Americans had come up with this change then of course we would credit them with it, but they didnt.

that doesn't mean shit. that's like me saying Ron Artest plays basketball like an idiot. But I know i would get schooled on the court with him. So far, I haven't read one reply in which one person has said that they could seriously be a better president than Bush. All they're saying is that compared to previous presidents, Bush is a damn moron who has srewed america (and I don't mean all past president's. Take Nixon for example, may he die in pain).
Yeah, do you know that Nixon handeled Vietnam the best out of all the Presidents before him? For that he deserves some respect, I mean who else had the Balls to bomb Cambodia?

I would say humans in general are stupid. Want proof? Look at all those who stick their gum on handrails and armrests for others to get their arm stuck in. How much common sense does it take for someone to throw it in the damn garbage can.

The internet "In its current form" is what created the revolution. Without "Its current form" the system we are disscussing on would not exist. You can say that you developed the original form, but I can also say the Chinese developed the first gunpowder, but that doesnt mean they knew its true potential when applied to weaponary. Taking already existing ideas and reworking them to make them better is one method of inventing. Considering Berners-Lee created the internet "in its current form" and "its current form" is radically diffrent to the old form and is far more applyable to everyone, I think it is safe to credit him with the revolution we have in communication. If the Americans had come up with this change then of course we would credit them with it, but they didnt.
*sarcasm*Yes your right, im sorry, Remaking things to make them better is better than the actual invention. I mean if you take away Lees WWW protocal you get this little crappy internet thing, but if you take away the normal internet you get this really cool and useful like of WWW protocal. Your so right. *sarcasm*

P.S. Refer to the post on the last page.

Typical stupid question. Yes it says he put up the first web site. But, my deluded poster, it went up on an already existing internet. What do you think AOL and Compuserve users were doing in the late 80s if there was no internet?

The initial claim was that he invented the Internet which is entirely different from saying he put up the first WWW web site. Further, depending on the definition of "web site," the statement in the wikipedia is false. If by web site you mean first site using WWW protocols, then yes, he did put up the first "web" site. But since normal civilians in many countries had be on the Internet for over a decade, he didn't invent the Internet. He developed a system to make it easier for people to make internet sites and for others to find those sites. If, however, by web site, you mean the old internet site term, then no, he was off by two decades.

Again, what he did was make something already in use easier to use and in so doing created a system that has almost entirely replaced the old Internet. But he did not create the internet , which was the claim made originally. Understand the difference or is that beyond you?

Just for reference buddy.

The internet "In its current form" is what created the revolution. Without "Its current form" the system we are disscussing on would not exist. You can say that you developed the original form, but I can also say the Chinese developed the first gunpowder, but that doesnt mean they knew its true potential when applied to weaponary. Taking already existing ideas and reworking them to make them better is one method of inventing. Considering Berners-Lee created the internet "in its current form" and "its current form" is radically diffrent to the old form and is far more applyable to everyone, I think it is safe to credit him with the revolution we have in communication. If the Americans had come up with this change then of course we would credit them with it, but they didnt.

Well, to be honest, us "dumb Americans" had no trouble being online without the WWW. Hundreds of thousands of Americans used the Internet for well over a decade before Berners-Lee dumbed it down to allow the average European to get online. His creation made it possible for even dumber people to get online and spout off their beliefs, though. As is evidenced by this entire thread. ;)

PS: In case you don't get it, that's sarcasm. :) I am engaged to a Russian, after all, so I can't say I hate Europeans. And my lady is much smarter than I am...

We(Americans) also invented the first video game, which was somewhat like pong but used for a teaching method.

If we are so stupid, how come so many nations have been following our Democratic procedures? And other procedures for many a decade?

If we are going to be honest, Democracey is a Greek invention. And the Americans system is losely based on the British, seperation of powers, representative goverment etc.

Perhaps a more helpful question would of been 'why is Amrica seen as as arragant?' Might of got some more intelligent responses. But then again probably not, it would seem that 'America bashing' is just to fashionable these days.

Also you add in Auto-Mobiles, and you get the Main Transportation found around the world in civilized coutries.

No, the internet was invented by the British Physicist Tim Berners-Lee.
What are you talking about?!

Al Gore invented the internet!

If we are going to be honest, Democracey is a Greek invention. And the Americans system is losely based on the British, seperation of powers, representative goverment etc.

Perhaps a more helpful question would of been 'why is Amrica seen as as arragant?' Might of got some more intelligent responses. But then again probably not, it would seem that 'America bashing' is just to fashionable these days.
Greek democracy was even less of a democracy then our democracy. Only a couple % of the residents were allowed to vote.
As far as the arrogance, I would say it is because we are the ONLY remaining superpower, and we have already seen that the Europeans can't handle things (WW1 and WW2 for instance).

Well, to be honest, us "dumb Americans" had no trouble being online without the WWW. Hundreds of thousands of Americans used the Internet for well over a decade before Berners-Lee dumbed it down to allow the average European to get online. His creation made it possible for even dumber people to get online and spout off their beliefs, though. As is evidenced by this entire thread. ;)


Ahem. Europe was online before Berners-Lee too. And dont forget that it was the British who first invented the computer.

What are you talking about?!

Al Gore invented the internet!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

and we have already seen that the Europeans can't handle things (WW1 and WW2 for instance).

America couldn't handle vietnam and is now in a shitty mess in Iraq. Europe didn't need ur help in ww1. U only came in ww2 cause u were bombed by the japanese and then hitler declared war on you. so stop the bitching on europe

Greek democracy was even less of a democracy then our democracy. Only a couple % of the residents were allowed to vote.
As far as the arrogance, I would say it is because we are the ONLY remaining superpower, and we have already seen that the Europeans can't handle things (WW1 and WW2 for instance).

Obviously you know nothing about the Anchient Greek democratic system. Theirs was possibly the most democratic system ever known to Mankind. It was an example in what is known as "Direct democracy" This is how it worked

Every citizen was a member of one of ten tribes. From that, a council of 500 was chosen by lot and from that council a presiding council was chosen by lot, which would set the adgenda of the assembly's discussion. The Assembly is the key. Every Greek citizen had the right to attend this. Obvioulsy there was a limit to how many people would fit in. And in these assmebly meetings, the citizens then passed votes on every law proposed by the presiding commite.

It should be pointed out that women, children and slaves were not considered citizens at this time, but for the period in history this was set up in this is very advanced. I would therfore ask you, Arragoth, to retract your statement

America couldn't handle vietnam and is now in a shitty mess in Iraq. Europe didn't need ur help in ww1. U only came in ww2 cause u were bombed by the japanese and then hitler declared war on you. so stop the bitching on europe

Vietnam? Get your history straight, first off, the french retreated from their colonies in Vietnam.

Europe-0
America-1

Secondly, the reason we lost Vietnam is because our military was being run Politically, we could have won if the Army was able to fight on its own. Then theres the small factor we couldnt attack cambodia, and it was a little thing called Guerilla Warfare(Hardest to Fight), along with a strong Central enemy army,(allowing the VC to have more of an impact when added with the guerrillas.) Yeah next time you want to put down the USA with a country that you Eurpoens retreated from in the first place. READ YOUR HISTORY BOOK!

You were eager to get ur asses out of nam too

Greek democracy was even less of a democracy then our democracy. Only a couple % of the residents were allowed to vote.
As far as the arrogance, I would say it is because we are the ONLY remaining superpower, and we have already seen that the Europeans can't handle things (WW1 and WW2 for instance).

I do not want to sit here and criticise America here, because there are enough idiots out there who will do that regardless. However when you consider the Electrial Collage system it does serve to dissinfrancise a lot of voters. IIRC Texas has 30 electrial votes, Texas has a Republican majority. Yet a third of Texans vote Democrat, but because all the votes go to one party - in most states, some do use PR - GOP gets all 30 votes, dispite only two thirds voting for them. This only applies to Presidential elections of course. The same situation though in reverse is seen in California or New York. Bush of course would still have been elected with a popular vote, since he did get the popular vote - in 2004 - the first President since his dad.

Vietnam? Get your history straight, first off, the french retreated from their colonies in Vietnam.

Europe-0
America-1


1) That was the French. Please do not tar all of Europe with their, rather soilded millitary record. Were not including Canada and Mexico in this debate so seperate out Europe please

2) Two diffrent wars. The French's retreat did not make it difficult for you to fight Vietnam later. You both had the same problem, gurrila warfare. And neither of you could deal with it. The British on the other hand, have been very sucessful in previous gurrila campaingns and also, their sector of Iraq is far less attack ridden than the American sector.

So whose gonna win the Daytona 500, personally i'm gunning for Stewart, but its gonna be rough with all the young guns...


BOOHOO, I hate America, they are fat and stupid...

:p

America couldn't handle vietnam and is now in a shitty mess in Iraq. Europe didn't need ur help in ww1. U only came in ww2 cause u were bombed by the japanese and then hitler declared war on you. so stop the bitching on europe
Yes you did need out help in ww1. Even before we entered, we still were supplying weapons and stuff. Perhaps we should have let you hand you ungreatful dumbass.

Ahem. Europe was online before Berners-Lee too. And dont forget that it was the British who first invented the computer.

Actually, the first invention of the computer is in dispute, but the Brits have a good claim. So do the Poles. And the Germans. And the Greeks. And let us not forget that while Europe was online before the Berners-Lee WWW, you have people claiming he invented the Internet. :)

*sarcasm*Yes your right, im sorry, Remaking things to make them better is better than the actual invention. I mean if you take away Lees WWW protocal you get this little crappy internet thing, but if you take away the normal internet you get this really cool and useful like of WWW protocal. Your so right. *sarcasm*


I am right. Without the WWW protocal there would be no websites and so no globally accesable internet. Ok yes a few Western governments and civilans may be able to use it but Lee made it far more accesable.

Actually, the first invention of the computer is in dispute, but the Brits have a good claim. So do the Poles. And the Germans. And the Greeks. And let us not forget that while Europe was online before the Berners-Lee WWW, you have people claiming he invented the Internet. :)

Charles Babbage, that name mean anything to you?

You were eager to get ur asses out of nam too

Oh yeah! Thats what explains why it was the Longest U.S. War in history. Damn what an educated statement!

I do not want to sit here and criticise America here, because there are enough idiots out there who will do that regardless. However when you consider the Electrial Collage system it does serve to dissinfrancise a lot of voters. IIRC Texas has 30 electrial votes, Texas has a Republican majority. Yet a third of Texans vote Democrat, but because all the votes go to one party - in most states, some do use PR - GOP gets all 30 votes, dispite only two thirds voting for them. This only applies to Presidential elections of course. The same situation though in reverse is seen in California or New York. Bush of course would still have been elected with a popular vote, since he did get the popular vote - in 2004 - the first President since his dad.
I didn't say we had a true democracy. That is impossible. But even if you factor in the electoral system, more then 3-4% of our population's votes count.

I think people ignored this last time I posted it so I will post it again

Greek democracy was even less of a democracy then our democracy. Only a couple % of the residents were allowed to vote.
As far as the arrogance, I would say it is because we are the ONLY remaining superpower, and we have already seen that the Europeans can't handle things (WW1 and WW2 for instance).

Obviously you know nothing about the Anchient Greek democratic system. Theirs was possibly the most democratic system ever known to Mankind. It was an example in what is known as "Direct democracy" This is how it worked

Every citizen was a member of one of ten tribes. From that, a council of 500 was chosen by lot and from that council a presiding council was chosen by lot, which would set the adgenda of the assembly's discussion. The Assembly is the key. Every Greek citizen had the right to attend this. Obvioulsy there was a limit to how many people would fit in. And in these assmebly meetings, the citizens then passed votes on every law proposed by the presiding commite.

It should be pointed out that women, children and slaves were not considered citizens at this time, but for the period in history this was set up in this is very advanced. I would therfore ask you, Arragoth, to retract your statement

I didn't say we had a true democracy. That is impossible. But even if you factor in the electoral system, more then 3-4% of our population's votes count.

I don't know, the Athenian system comes close

1) That was the French. Please do not tar all of Europe with their, rather soilded millitary record. Were not including Canada and Mexico in this debate so seperate out Europe please

2) Two diffrent wars. The French's retreat did not make it difficult for you to fight Vietnam later. You both had the same problem, gurrila warfare. And neither of you could deal with it. The British on the other hand, have been very sucessful in previous gurrila campaingns and also, their sector of Iraq is far less attack ridden than the American sector.

Yes, I know that, and I dont want to bash you guys over frances mistake. But the guy who posted that, said America was stupid and lost Vietnam and not to bash Europe, I took advantage of that and made a rebuttal with it. So please excuse me, it was not directed at you, it was just to show why that was an uneducated post. Well thats interesting, Guerilla warfare poses no threat, it is hard to destroy, but no real threat is given from it. Now, when you have a Major Army with Guerilla warfare, then you have something very hard to fight succesfully.

I am right. Without the WWW protocal there would be no websites and so no globally accesable internet. Ok yes a few Western governments and civilans may be able to use it but Lee made it far more accesable.

It doesnt matter, you said Internet, and like (Insert that ones guys name here, sorry I forgot it), said, there were hundreds of thousands of computer people on the Internet before Lees acomplishment.

Yes you did need out help in ww1. Even before we entered, we still were supplying weapons and stuff. Perhaps we should have let you hand you ungreatful dumbass.
Yes, but you were supplying weapons to both sides. Sort of makes a mockery of the whole supporting the allies idea?...Dumbarse

So whose gonna win the Daytona 500, personally i'm gunning for Stewart, but its gonna be rough with all the young guns...


BOOHOO, I hate America, they are fat and stupid...

:p

Excuse me, but...

1) I am not fat and I'm taking that personally.

2) I am not stupid, my IQ is probably higher than yours, young cockroach.

3) I hate you, and whatever country you're from.

1) That was the French. Please do not tar all of Europe with their, rather soilded millitary record. Were not including Canada and Mexico in this debate so seperate out Europe please

Wait, you don't want to be judged on the merits of a select group within the whole? Why, why-thats crazy.....what if we all stopped doing that-we wouldn't even have this stupid fucking thread....

Vietnam? Get your history straight, first off, the french retreated from their colonies in Vietnam.

Europe-0
America-1

Secondly, the reason we lost Vietnam is because our military was being run Politically, we could have won if the Army was able to fight on its own. Then theres the small factor we couldnt attack cambodia, and it was a little thing called Guerilla Warfare(Hardest to Fight), along with a strong Central enemy army,(allowing the VC to have more of an impact when added with the guerrillas.) Yeah next time you want to put down the USA with a country that you Eurpoens retreated from in the first place. READ YOUR HISTORY BOOK!

And our retarded protestors encouraged the viets to keep fighting. If those idiots would have just kept their mouths shut the war would have ended much earlier, with a war for us.

I suppose the UK are stellar intellects for picking Blair?

What about the Russians? They elected a gangster who wants to be a Czar.

Look, Bush may do some stupid crap, (OK so he can't help it), but it's the EU that enables him. If that wasn't the case the EU would start hitting the US and the UK with trade embargoes and port strikes. The entire population of the EU has complicity in everything the US does.

No population has been all that successful in picking leaders lately, why single out the US..


Oh dear, you are just falling into thier hands by what you have just said!

To sink into the mud for a second, to the brits that are attacking the US based on NASCAR I have only this to say-
Trainspotting.

You have people that fucking watch trains go by.

Glass houses, folks.

Obviously you know nothing about the Anchient Greek democratic system. Theirs was possibly the most democratic system ever known to Mankind. It was an example in what is known as "Direct democracy" This is how it worked

Every citizen was a member of one of ten tribes. From that, a council of 500 was chosen by lot and from that council a presiding council was chosen by lot, which would set the adgenda of the assembly's discussion. The Assembly is the key. Every Greek citizen had the right to attend this. Obvioulsy there was a limit to how many people would fit in. And in these assmebly meetings, the citizens then passed votes on every law proposed by the presiding commite.

It should be pointed out that women, children and slaves were not considered citizens at this time, but for the period in history this was set up in this is very advanced. I would therfore ask you, Arragoth, to retract your statement


The whole problem with that is that only about 3% of the populations were citizens, so I will retract nothing.

The whole problem with that is that only about 3% of the populations were citizens, so I will retract nothing.

More like 20%. Athens was not Sparta, they did not have many slaves, the risk of civil disorder was too great. Also a lot of the 'slave work' was done by convicts.

I am right. Without the WWW protocal there would be no websites and so no globally accesable internet. Ok yes a few Western governments and civilans may be able to use it but Lee made it far more accesable.

You are indeed correct, there would have been no web sites , they would have been Internet sites . But you are not correct in saying he invented the Internet. Again, Lee dumbed it down so the average person could use it. And if it hadn't been Lee, one of the ISPs for private use would have done the same eventually.

What you are doing is refusing to admit your original claim was false and are now making a different argument to save face. You sure you aren't an American Democrat?

Charles Babbage, that name mean anything to you?

Yeah, didn't he start to design a computer and not finish it? Yup, that's him. Never got one to work. Man, if all you have to do is say, "I think we could do this" to be an inventor, I want in on the action.

The Germans have Wilhelm Schickard in their corner, who built a non programable computer in 1623. Babbage's computer was designed, but never finished, 200 years later. And the first programmable computer wasn't built until 1941 by the German Konrad Zuse (known as the Z3, it was destroyed in WWII.)

Babbage = British Failure.

Next...

Wrote a load of rubbish so am deleting it.

Excuse me, but...

1) I am not fat and I'm taking that personally.

2) I am not stupid, my IQ is probably higher than yours, young cockroach.

3) I hate you, and whatever country you're from.
Judging by the smily at the end of the post you responded to, I'm guessing it was actually a poor attempt at humor rather than an insult...
Just a tip.
;)

I agree. The WHOLE stupid America thing has to stop. While, much of America may be stupid, the WHOLE thing isn't. There are plenty of people like me that would agree with foreigners on just about every single issue, other than the one that all Americans are stupid. I believe that our stupidity factor rises and falls from time to time. Currently, we are about 70%-75% stupid. The stupid people are those who voted for Bush (for whatever reason) and the people who didn't vote at all.

Babbages 'Difference Engine' was built, though not by Babbage but by Georg and Edvard Schuetz, and it did work.

But with regard to the original question its irelevent. Are Americans dumb, yes they are, just like any other nation on Earth. At the end of the day a person is smart, or not. But people, now there dumb.

Yup, meaning we could also argue for Sweden as having the first computer.

Excuse me, but...

1) I am not fat and I'm taking that personally.

2) I am not stupid, my IQ is probably higher than yours, young cockroach.

3) I hate you, and whatever country you're from.
I agree with you that what Red1stang was wrong and unfair, but so was your reply. You don't like the fact that he generalized all Americans as stupid and fat, while many of us (like you and I) are not. So your first two points are valid. The last one is the one i have a problem with. How can you hate this person for hating ALL Americans, then say that you hate this person's entire country? It's rather contradictary.

Yup, meaning we could also argue for Sweden as having the first computer.

I was not strictly correct with what I wrote, what was constructed was not Babbages computer as I understand it. Though one of his was made in modern times, and it worked.

Also its worth pointing out that most of the people who worked on the early electronic computers were unfamiliar with Babbages work.

I agree with you that what Red1stang was wrong and unfair, but so was your reply. You don't like the fact that he generalized all Americans as stupid and fat, while many of us (like you and I) are not. So your first two points are valid. The last one is the one i have a problem with. How can you hate this person for hating ALL Americans, then say that you hate this person's entire country? It's rather contradictary.

...

Judging by the smily at the end of the post you responded to, I'm guessing it was actually a poor attempt at humor rather than an insult...
Just a tip.
;)

Really, it seemed pretty obvious to me that the post we are discussing was an attempt at humor...

Over 50% of you voted Bush.

Yeah, we have a special word for those people over here. I'll spell it, so they won't get offended. EMM-OHH-ARR-OHH-ENN-ESS.

Yes you did need out help in ww1. Even before we entered, we still were supplying weapons and stuff. Perhaps we should have let you hand you ungreatful dumbass.

We too would've needed help if we were fighting Germany, Austria-Hungary, etc. Hell, we can't even handle Iraq on our own. And worse, we shunned everyone away at the beggining, with the arrogance that we would be able to fight in on our own. Now Bush has turned back to the UN for help. The same UN he and the GOP over-rode to get to Iraq and still says it hurts the world more than it helps. I could go on, but this isn't the issue of this thread.

We too would've needed help if we were fighting Germany, Austria-Hungary, etc. Hell, we can't even handle Iraq on our own. And worse, we shunned everyone away at the beggining, with the arrogance that we would be able to fight in on our own. Now Bush has turned back to the UN for help. The same UN he and the GOP over-rode to get to Iraq and still says it hurts the world more than it helps. I could go on, but this isn't the issue of this thread.


Amen :)

Yeah, 13% of FRANCE liked Bush!!!!

17% of GERMANY liked Bush!!!

11% of IRELAND liked Bush!!!



Proving my point, all around the world, there are stupid people!!!!!!!

You can't use those statistics and compare them to America. Remember, most of those people may like him for moral issues. So really they're all in the 4 -5 percent range of stupidity.

(NB. I actually don't care about the topic at hand, I've met smart Americans and those who just didn't have a clue...)

EDIT: I don't think anyone IS stupid for voting for Bush, even if I wouldn't have voted for him.

You can't use those statistics and compare them to America. Remember, most of those people may like him for moral issues. So really they're all in the 4 -5 percent range of stupidity.

(NB. I actually don't care about the topic at hand, I've met smart Americans and those who just didn't have a clue...)

Um, you also have to factor in that the majority of Americans voted for Moral Issues as well.

Um, you also have to factor in that the majority of Americans voted for Moral Issues as well.

He had already done that, that's where he came up with the 11 percent...

I was just pointing out that he hadn't factored that in for the other countries.

He had already done that, that's where he came up with the 11 percent...

I was just pointing out that he hadn't factored that in for the other countries.

Oh ok, my fault.

Pschycotic Pschycos, the sarcasm train came rolling through, and you missed it. And for the record, i'm in Texas, your in Detroit, its understandable that you may hate me. But if your gonna let someone you will never ever meet in the real world offend you, then you seriously need to seek some help. On the record, hey, I voted for Bush, I think he has done a good job protecting my country. I understand that there are folks out there that think i'm the scum of the earth now for that. Fine with me, its ok. I'll live with it. Your opinion, my opinion, everyone has them, some same, others different, but in the end, we all bleed red and we all pretty much look alike, and we are all in this together, so why don't we learn to get along.

Oh ok, my fault.
No problems, it was 24 pages ago ;-), I didn't realise that the thread was 27 pages long until too late :(

Over 50% of you voted Bush.

A good idea, considering Kerry would have waited for UN approval before acting in defense of the United States. We are the United States of America, not the United States of Those who Bow to the United Nations.

A good idea, considering Kerry would have waited for UN approval before acting in defense of the United States. We are the United States of America, not the United States of Those who Bow to the United Nations.

Perhaps the United States of Those Who Get It Wrong Because They Don't Listen to the United Nations.

or The Unites States of Those Who Now Believe That the United Nations are Mean and Nasty Because They Wouldn't Do What We Said and Then They Made It Worse By Being Right

or The United States of Those Who Tell Fibs ABout Weapons of Mass Destruction

or The United States of Those Who Won't Listen to Anybody Anyway

or The United States of Those Who Know They Must Be Right Because They Are The United States

Perhaps the United States of Those Who Get It Wrong Because They Don't Listen to the United Nations.

or The Unites States of Those Who Now Believe That the United Nations are Mean and Nasty Because They Wouldn't Do What We Said and Then They Made It Worse By Being Right

or The United States of Those Who Tell Fibs ABout Weapons of Mass Destruction

or The United States of Those Who Won't Listen to Anybody Anyway

or The United States of Those Who Know They Must Be Right Because They Are The United States

Because the UN has been right in the past 10-12 years about anything? Lets no forget the US thought there were weapons in Iraq because of dated UN reports from 91-98..but hey whatever, guess we should have ignored UNSCOMs reports.

Jesus Christ, can't you all just shut up or something. Both sides just try to say the other side is stupid, pussy, wrong, hippy or whatever. Just STFU, who cares. Both side makes generalizations. America is stupid and is proud of it and is proud to make generalizations, Europe pretends to be intellectual but meanwhile does exactly the same what they call America stupid for.

"America is stupid and is proud of it"

That is true stupidity.

If we are so stupid, how come so many nations have been following our Democratic procedures? And other procedures for many a decade?Dude, shut up.
You're not helping.
America didn't invent democracy and you implying that we did doesn't make us look any brighter. We didn't invent it, we haven't perfected it and we're not even a true democracy. We've been screwing with our 'procedures' for 200 years trying to get them right and we're still arrogant enough to think we have the best and can force others to adopt our style of government. No wonder we're perceived as idiots.

Dude, shut up.
You're not helping.
America didn't invent democracy and you implying that we did doesn't make us look any brighter. We didn't invent it, we haven't perfected it and we're not even a true democracy. We've been screwing with our 'procedures' for 200 years trying to get them right and we're still arrogant enough to think we have the best and can force others to adopt our style of government. No wonder we're perceived as idiots.


Oh stop being hard on him. We forced our will onto Japan and they're doing rather nicely. What was the name of their constitution again?

According to a multitude of standardized tests, I'm in the top 2% brains-wise. Considering the mess I frequently make of things, that really frightens me. :eek: You mean 98% of the country are bigger dumbasses! Crap! this country is in a lot of trouble. :rolleyes:

I'm an American. Reading the posts by many of my fellow Americans in this thread makes me sigh in despair. We had the potential to be a great nation, but we've long since lost it. The last election only proved the fact that the tyranny of the idiot majority is firmly in place now. I hope Canada annexes the state I live in, or that we secede. Failing that, I'm leaving the USA. I don't want to be ruled by warmonger religious fundamentalists who think that "morals" consitutes blowing up Iraqi civilians and executing criminals while hypocritically decrying abortion. "Morals" is giving giant corporations a free run at anything they wish while average Americans see their living standards decline sharply and more and more of us are without health insurance...even our children. Kramer, the people who voted for Bush for his "morals" are bigger idiots than the rest.

I'm an American. Reading the posts by many of my fellow Americans in this thread makes me sigh in despair. We had the potential to be a great nation, but we've long since lost it. The last election only proved the fact that the tyranny of the idiot majority is firmly in place now. I hope Canada annexes the state I live in, or that we secede. Failing that, I'm leaving the USA. I don't want to be ruled by warmonger religious fundamentalists who think that "morals" consitutes blowing up Iraqi civilians and executing criminals while hypocritically decrying abortion. "Morals" is giving giant corporations a free run at anything they wish while average Americans see their living standards decline sharply and more and more of us are without health insurance...even our children. Kramer, the people who voted for Bush for his "morals" are bigger idiots than the rest.
This is a perfect example of what really pisses me off. You see problems with the USA? Fine. But don't run away from them. Try to fix them! I also love how liberals somehow think that the Bush re-election is this harbringer of the future of the United States. We've had bigger idiots elected before Bush, and we'll have bigger idiots after him. Things will not always be this way, I promise. I swear, if past generations had seen how quickly people are giving up they would have given us all a swift kick in the ass.

We've had bigger idiots elected before Bush, and we'll have bigger idiots after him.


Nice to know you aim high.

Nice to know you aim high.
What in blue blazes are you talking about? I never said he was a good president. I think he's an awful president. I just said there have been worse, which I believe to be true. I'm just trying to get across the point that it's not the end of the world or the country just because he got re-elected.

What in blue blazes are you talking about? I never said he was a good president. I think he's an awful president. I just said there have been worse, which I believe to be true. I'm just trying to get across the point that it's not the end of the world or the country just because he got re-elected.

It was a joke. Don't worry, I'll not do one again. :)

It was a joke. Don't worry, I'll not do one again. :)
Yeah, I saw your sig after I posted and I thought to myself, "Crap, he wasn't serious, was he?"

Please, don't stop having fun on my account!

I have predicted the death of this thread for how many times ?

In after a whole bunch of stupid posts and three good ones.

A good idea, considering Kerry would have waited for UN approval before acting in defense of the United States. We are the United States of America, not the United States of Those who Bow to the United Nations.

If you sign up to something like the UN, you have to listen to what it says. Not only when it suits you, but also when it doesnt

If you sign up to something like the UN, you have to listen to what it says. Not only when it suits you, but also when it doesnt

The US had a hand in CREATING the UN, FYI. It isn't a world government and shouldn't operate like one.

The US had a hand in CREATING the UN, FYI. It isn't a world government and shouldn't operate like one.


No, it's not a world government and it doesn't act like one. It does, however, determine if an invasion is LEGAL, one of the things the US was so anxious to have it for so as to stop the Russians invading everyone.

Can't have one law for everyone else and the US do what it likes.

The US had a hand in CREATING the UN, FYI. It isn't a world government and shouldn't operate like one.

If the US had a part in the creation of the UN then that all the more reason it should obey it. My point stands, sign up to a club = obey the rules.

No, it's not a world government and it doesn't act like one. It does, however, determine if an invasion is LEGAL, one of the things the US was so anxious to have it for so as to stop the Russians invading everyone.

Can't have one law for everyone else and the US do what it likes.
But the USSR had a veto, so it didn't really matter :p

But the USSR had a veto, so it didn't really matter :p

Had being the oprative word

Had being the oprative word
What does that have to do with anything? Russia (naturally) has the veto now.

What does that have to do with anything? Russia (naturally) has the veto now.

I meant it was the USSR... (but isnt anymore)

Well you have to consider a few things first. Stalin wasnt so much on a conquest to defeat the Germans as he was to spread communsim through out Europe.

This is only true to an extent, he was more concerned to create a barrier between East and West so as to prevent a future invasion of the USSR. The rest is mainly the result of foreign policy misunderstanding between the USA and the USSR combined with the western mass-media machine.

No, it's not a world government and it doesn't act like one. It does, however, determine if an invasion is LEGAL, one of the things the US was so anxious to have it for so as to stop the Russians invading everyone.

Can't have one law for everyone else and the US do what it likes.

I don't recall this. I also don't recall the Soviet Union ever giving a crap about any sort of legalities.

oK, Here are my 2 cents. I voted for Bush, not because I am stupid or for moral reasons. I voted Bush into office because my husband is military, as a matter of fact he is in Iraq for his 4th time in his career. The reason that I believed in Bush is because I see the results he brought to the military families. I have seen nicer housing, more money for housing, huge pay increases, bigger bonuses and just because I think he cares about our men and women in uniform. I have lived in Europe, and it is a wonderful place, but USA will always be home. I can have respect for other cultures other then my own without sacrificing pride in my country. I wish that some other people could do the same.

Christine
Proud army wife
Proud american
Proud Bush supporter!

oK, Here are my 2 cents. I voted for Bush, not because I am stupid or for moral reasons. I voted Bush into office because my husband is military, as a matter of fact he is in Iraq for his 4th time in his career. The reason that I believed in Bush is because I see the results he brought to the military families. I have seen nicer housing, more money for housing, huge pay increases, bigger bonuses and just because I think he cares about our men and women in uniform. I have lived in Europe, and it is a wonderful place, but USA will always be home. I can have respect for other cultures other then my own without sacrificing pride in my country. I wish that some other people could do the same.

Christine
Proud army wife
Proud american
Proud Bush supporter!

Bribing millitary families isnt exactly the best way of grabing votes. Just because he cares about the army, does not mean that he is a supiror leader. Quite the oppisite infact. By supporting said millitary families he is just proving how bent he is on using it to solve the worlds problems.

Bribing millitary families isnt exactly the best way of grabing votes. Just because he cares about the army, does not mean that he is a supiror leader. Quite the oppisite infact. By supporting said millitary families he is just proving how bent he is on using it to solve the worlds problems.

So let me get this straight...paying our troops a decent salary is actually supporting war?

Weeelllllllllllllll...

If you (as leader of your country) support your military over more internal organisations / government policies, it's not hard to construe that you prefer taking the military solution to problems.

Weeelllllllllllllll...

If you (as leader of your country) support your military over more internal organisations / government policies, it's not hard to construe that you prefer taking the military solution to problems.


Riight..because pay raises=preferance of military. Sorry those two dont add up. It also really doesnt make much sense. Those pay raises were a campaign promise from the 2000 election before Bush decided to use the US military anywhere. They werent indicative that the President had a preference for anything.

Bush raises military salaries, but destroys your social security budget therefore people vote for him. That just makes no sense.

Bush raises military salaries, but destroys your social security budget therefore people vote for him. That just makes no sense.

Hmm. How is it again that Bush is solely responsible for destroying the social security budget?

When did he destroy it? If it's destroyed, why don't I see big stories on TV showing sad seniors crying about not getting that government check anymore?

The trust fund will stop bringing in a surplus in 2012 - and is not scheduled to actually run out of money (where it will have to pay benefits solely on the basis of what money comes in) until nearly 2050. Then it will have to reduce benefits to 75% because it will have to pay out what it gets in immediately.

Social security is Not Destroyed. Sorry. Nope.

That makes your reasoning rather specious. And if you think that people were stupid for voting for Bush, then your illogical and unfounded argument makes you...

People call people stupid, to make themselves feel better about being stupid. Really am I, an American, supposed to be impressed that you are somehow smarter for thinking differently? I am stupid because you know and do what? I am stupid because you wanted us to vote for Kerry. I see how it is.

Sometimes know-it-alls should really just shutup. You really don't know anything at all. What is in your own mind hasn't become reality. Booohoobityhoo. Namecalling will help you along your empty life. Even a fool is considered wise when he holds his tongue.

So let me get this straight...paying our troops a decent salary is actually supporting war?

No, paying them an above avarage salary is supporting use of war. The original poster said

I have seen nicer housing, more money for housing, huge pay increases, bigger bonuses and just because I think he cares about our men and women in uniform

Which would suggest to me that there are above avarage salary increases for these people. Now the "They're risking their lives" arguement doesnt hold water because so are firefighters, police officers, paramedics (in some cases), charity officals, missionaries (in some cases) etc. So why arn't you raising their salaries or if the salaries are not governmentally controlled, giving them a government subsidy for the work they do. So, you have got to ask yourself, why is Bush doing this.

On this planet, 80% of people are stupid. 15% of people complain about the stupid people. 10% of people are intelligent. And 5% of people realise that stupid people are necessary to the way society works.

And I just made a stupid joke that wasn't funny!

The point is, stupid maths aside, most Americans are either stupid or lazy. But the same is true for every (Western, at least, I don't think people in some countries can afford to be lazy for very long) country. People who fail to recognise this can go on the 'stupid' pile.

If we are so stupid, how come so many nations have been following our Democratic procedures? And other procedures for many a decade?
YOUR democratic procedures? The ones based on the British and French systems? Or democracy as a concept, which was invented by the ancient Greeks?

*rubs bleary eyes* Sorry about being so late on this one but:

Really? Name one other country in the world which has a presidential systerm with a bichameral legislature.

Most countries have a parlimentary system. Americans are for the most part dumb, watching Nascar and stuffing their faces with fried lard, but there are a lot of them so their are enough diamonds in the rough to keep things functioning somewhat smoothly.

Brazil

YOUR democratic procedures? The ones based on the British and French systems? Or democracy as a concept, which was invented by the ancient Greeks?
When you improve on something, it does become "yours". The Republic is certainly an improvement over democracy. It beats the parliment system, too. Lords and Commons, come on!

On this planet, 80% of people are stupid. 15% of people complain about the stupid people. 10% of people are intelligent. And 5% of people realise that stupid people are necessary to the way society works.

And I just made a stupid joke that wasn't funny!

The point is, stupid maths aside, most Americans are either stupid or lazy. But the same is true for every (Western, at least, I don't think people in some countries can afford to be lazy for very long) country. People who fail to recognise this can go on the 'stupid' pile.
Who was it that coined the phrase "Useful Idiots"? Lenin?

When you improve on something, it does become "yours". The Republic is certainly an improvement over democracy. It beats the parliment system, too. Lords and Commons, come on!

Not to mention the whole "subjects" thing. Sheesh!

When you improve on something, it does become "yours". The Republic is certainly an improvement over democracy. It beats the parliment system, too. Lords and Commons, come on!

Frankly I dont see why yours is an improvement. Your constitution takes ages to respond to anything. At least the Parliament system ensures direct representation. And the original Greek democracy was far more advanced than any current system, and much more democratic (the only flaw was the limited paricipation, but even then it was good. All male non-slaves over 20. Ok not the best but considering how long it took most countries to become proper democracies, it is a great achievement). The Athenian system was the first example of direct democracy. The government itself was voted in, but any laws passed were voted on by the people themselves. Any Citizen could attend the final vote whether or not to make the legislation into actual law or not. This is what was so amazing.

I'm an American. Reading the posts by many of my fellow Americans in this thread makes me sigh in despair. We had the potential to be a great nation, but we've long since lost it. The last election only proved the fact that the tyranny of the idiot majority is firmly in place now. I hope Canada annexes the state I live in, or that we secede. Failing that, I'm leaving the USA. I don't want to be ruled by warmonger religious fundamentalists who think that "morals" consitutes blowing up Iraqi civilians and executing criminals while hypocritically decrying abortion. "Morals" is giving giant corporations a free run at anything they wish while average Americans see their living standards decline sharply and more and more of us are without health insurance...even our children. Kramer, the people who voted for Bush for his "morals" are bigger idiots than the rest.
(my emphasis) What tyranny of the majority? Bush won popular vote. He won electoral vote. That's kind of the way the whole thing works, isn't it.

Please don't answer with election stealing conspiracies, I'm just interested in what "tyranny of the idiot majority" means.

When you improve on something, it does become "yours". The Republic is certainly an improvement over democracy. It beats the parliment system, too. Lords and Commons, come on!
Okay, so if I were to... glue a cupholder onto my computer, the design of the whole thing would become mine?

Also, ever heard of this little thing that was popular a while back, it was called "Rome"? A eeriely similar governmental system to modern day US. Not identical of course, but I hardly think you can be justified in calling the USA the first Republic.

Frankly I dont see why yours is an improvement. Your constitution takes ages to respond to anything. At least the Parliament system ensures direct representation. And the original Greek democracy was far more advanced than any current system, and much more democratic (the only flaw was the limited paricipation, but even then it was good. All male non-slaves over 20. Ok not the best but considering how long it took most countries to become proper democracies, it is a great achievement). The Athenian system was the first example of direct democracy. The government itself was voted in, but any laws passed were voted on by the people themselves. Any Citizen could attend the final vote whether or not to make the legislation into actual law or not. This is what was so amazing.
We do have direct representation. That's called the House of Representatives. We sort of have direct representation with the Senate, too, although that is a new wrinkle in the government. Up until 75 years ago(?) Senators were appointed by the state Governor. More sensible, but not populist. At least our President doesn't have to form a coalition to take power and then sit through no-confidence votes.

One thing I'd like to see in US Federal government...The "ask the PM" sessions I see on C-Span. Wouldn't it be fun to see the President grilled by Congress in open sessions? If you don't know what I'm talking about, one of our British colleagues should fill us in on it.

(my emphasis) What tyranny of the majority? Bush won popular vote. He won electoral vote. That's kind of the way the whole thing works, isn't it.

Please don't answer with election stealing conspiracies, I'm just interested in what "tyranny of the idiot majority" means.
The electoral college reduces the tyranny of the majority, it doesn't eliminate it.

Tyanny by majority is when the majority imposes its will on a minority, usually to the minority's detriment. The best that can be realistically hoped for is equality, or a kind of benevolant despotism. I believe Carpatho-Rusyn was suggesting that this is very unlikely if the majority itself is comprised of stupid people.

Okay, so if I were to... glue a cupholder onto my computer, the design of the whole thing would become mine?

No. If you changed the design of a computer to use an XYZ processor instead of a Motorola or Intel processor, yes.

Also, ever heard of this little thing that was popular a while back, it was called "Rome"? A eeriely similar governmental system to modern day US. Not identical of course, but I hardly think you can be justified in calling the USA the first Republic.

Didn't call it the first republic. Just the best republic. We don't have a god in charge. Just got our rights and liberty from Him.

One thing I'd like to see in US Federal government...The "ask the PM" sessions I see on C-Span. Wouldn't it be fun to see the President grilled by Congress in open sessions? If you don't know what I'm talking about, one of our British colleagues should fill us in on it.
Prime Minister's questions, yes, its good. I really don't see Bush lasting long up there though.

No. If you changed the design of a computer to use an XYZ processor instead of a Motorola or Intel processor, yes.
Well, frankly, I don't think that the changes were quite as sweeping as that.

Prime Minister's questions, yes, its good. I really don't see Bush lasting long up there though.
I think you're wrong about that. He was lousy during the Presidential debates, but I think in a less formal setting, he'd be tough.

Didn't call it the first republic. Just the best republic. We don't have a god in charge. Just got our rights and liberty from Him.
You said:
When you improve on something, it does become "yours". The Republic is certainly an improvement over democracy. It beats the parliment system, too. Lords and Commons, come on!

Even accepting this statement as valid (improvement->ownership) surely you don't believe that you can claim ownership if someone else improves something, right? So doesn't that blow the claim that its the USA's democracy out of the water, if it wasn't the first one?

The electoral college reduces the tyranny of the majority, it doesn't eliminate it.

Tyanny by majority is when the majority imposes its will on a minority, usually to the minority's detriment. The best that can be realistically hoped for is equality, or a kind of benevolant despotism. I believe Carpatho-Rusyn was suggesting that this is very unlikely if the majority itself is comprised of stupid people.
I was more interested in the way Neo Cannen used the phrase. I guess I won't be treated to a response, though.

I think you're wrong about that. He was lousy during the Presidential debates, but I think in a less formal setting, he'd be tough.
Tough... maybe. But articulate? Engaged? Witty?

A person in smart. People are stupid. This thread proves it.

I was more interested in the way Neo Cannen used the phrase. I guess I won't be treated to a response, though.
?

You quoted Carpatho-Rusyn

A person in smart. People are stupid. This thread proves it.
Lets all play nice now children.

Lets all play nice now children.
I am.

You said:


Even accepting this statement as valid (improvement->ownership) surely you don't believe that you can claim ownership if someone else improves something, right? So doesn't that blow the claim that its the USA's democracy out of the water, if it wasn't the first one?

Just say Democratic Republic. We should never be so unlucky as to live in a democracy. Where else has there been a three branch system of government like this, elected President, elected legislature, appointed judiciary. All roughly equal in power. The executive figure in most governments was a monarch. Maybe a dictator. Maybe an emperor. Sometimes the executive was a god. That's one of the unique things about the US government, the executive branch isn't omnipotent.

?

You quoted Carpatho-Rusyn
I hate being stupid. I hate losing my place even more.

Tough... maybe. But articulate? Engaged? Witty?
Probably not by British standards, but you guys set a pretty high standard with Benny Hill.

Just say Democratic Republic. We should never be so unlucky as to live in a democracy. Where else has there been a three branch system of government like this, elected President, elected legislature, appointed judiciary. All roughly equal in power.


There are sevearl other countries with an elected head of government, elected legislature and apointed judicary. Britain being one. The office of the Prime Minister may not be directly elected but I consider that an edge over the American system. Since it means that you can be certian that the leader is the leader of the majority party, unlike the American system.


The executive figure in most governments was a monarch. Maybe a dictator. Maybe an emperor. Sometimes the executive was a god. That's one of the unique things about the US government, the executive branch isn't omnipotent.

Excuse me, let me just get this right. You are judging the American system as supiror because unlike other nations, when its political system was founded you didnt have any of the old style monarch/dictator/theocratic governmental systems in the executive. HELLO! How old is the US? 200 years aprox. Thats how old. You started on the back everyone elses achievemet. Thats like everyone else having to run a marathon and you only starting two feet away from the finishing line and claiming your better than them because you arn't tired.

Just say Democratic Republic. We should never be so unlucky as to live in a democracy. Where else has there been a three branch system of government like this, elected President, elected legislature, appointed judiciary. All roughly equal in power. The executive figure in most governments was a monarch. Maybe a dictator. Maybe an emperor. Sometimes the executive was a god. That's one of the unique things about the US government, the executive branch isn't omnipotent.
Well, the original claim (1st post of this thread) was about the US exporting democracy, nevertheless, consider my post suitably adjusted and continue.

it is difficult to classify a whole continent of people to being stupid, to those extremists your racist (btw im bot an american im british) ha. americans are not generally stupid the bad presentation that is recieved by other countries hekps to show this picture however the culture tht many americans find themselves in help to mean a dumbing down of their abilities which is a shame as being the PRESENT (not for long) super power then they as all empires before have the chance to change the world for better or for worse but its probably the latter if the majority of their population is conned by the media and doomed by the culture.

fu

you're wrong, all of you.
If America is so stupid, then why do we have the strongest economy, military, and global market in the world. You'd have to dumb, or a democrat to deny that, cuase it's a fact, look it up. You should be feeling lucky to live in a free, strong nation like America.

Probably not by British standards, but you guys set a pretty high standard with Benny Hill.
Also Ricky Gervais, who just won a couple of your Golden Globes.

Or is it completely irrelevant to trot out random examples?

Really? Name one other country in the world which has a presidential systerm with a bichameral legislature.

Most countries have a parlimentary system. Americans are for the most part dumb, watching Nascar and stuffing their faces with fried lard, but there are a lot of them so their are enough diamonds in the rough to keep things functioning somewhat smoothly.

How can you call america stupid when you dont even understand basic spelling, dingusface. "...there are a lot of them so ___their___ are enough diamonds in the rough..."

Yeah maybe you should learn how to spell before you start dealing with grown up people stuff like america's complete superiority to the other retarded nations of the world (exluding great britain) ESPECIALLY FRANCE. Maybe you should go to france with the other retards of the world.

you're wrong, all of you.
If America is so stupid, then why do we have the strongest economy, military, and global market in the world. You'd have to dumb, or a democrat to deny that, cuase it's a fact, look it up. You should be feeling lucky to live in a free, strong nation like America.
Yay! You can kick the crap out of anyone who opposes you, or just buy and sell their ass! USA! USA!

How can you call america stupid when you dont even understand basic spelling, dingusface. "...there are a lot of them so ___their___ are enough diamonds in the rough..."

Yeah maybe you should learn how to spell before you start dealing with grown up people stuff like america's complete superiority to the other retarded nations of the world (exluding great britain) ESPECIALLY FRANCE. Screw you and France shut up dingusface.
Once again, can we all please play nice in the sandbox of (mostly) grown up debate?

Once again, can we all please play nice in the sandbox of (mostly) grown up debate?

you grow up and worship america please.

This whole thread hurts me.

Kramer, shut up, you're just making things worse.

Dirk, you're wrong about most Americans. The average American fits steriotypes about Americans about as well as the average French person fits steriotype about French people. People love to take the worst aspect of a society and generalize it onto every member of the society, it's simply not true. People don't give the average person enough credit because there are some really really really stupid people out there that make everyone look bad.

i dunno i saw a hell of a lot of mimes and artists in france

i dunno i saw a hell of a lot of mimes and artists in france

France is stupid and it smells like french people.

There are sevearl other countries with an elected head of government, elected legislature and apointed judicary. Britain being one. The office of the Prime Minister may not be directly elected but I consider that an edge over the American system. Since it means that you can be certian that the leader is the leader of the majority party, unlike the American system.

And I consider it an advantage to split the control of the government, on occasion. When Clinton was President and the Congress was a Republican majority, government didn't grow nearly as quickly as is has over the last four and a half years. Things just slow down.


Excuse me, let me just get this right. You are judging the American system as supiror because unlike other nations, when its political system was founded you didnt have any of the old style monarch/dictator/theocratic governmental systems in the executive.
Yes. We didn't adopt any of those old trappings of government. It was kind of innovative at the time.


HELLO! How old is the US? 200 years aprox. Thats how old. You started on the back everyone elses achievemet. Thats like everyone else having to run a marathon and you only starting two feet away from the finishing line and claiming your better than them because you arn't tired.
Like I said, when you improve on something, it becomes yours. More like evolution than running a race.

By the way, I am sorry I referred to you when I should not have. I hope that isn't what is making you so belligerent.

you grow up and worship america please.
Nobody feed the troll, please.

Nobody feed the troll, please.

You are the troll.

For fun? Reckognizing the near universal stupidity of the human race is not nearly as entertaining as bothering intelligent people by implying that they, and no one else, is stupid.

will you marry me? :cool:

I think I get it now. I'm not sure, this is just a hypothesis.
Everyone in one country, as a generally applicable rule, can be counted on to hate people from other countries, simply because they don't live there, and they think they're better.
Now, there will, of course, be exceptions (Blair in the UK, and UK OK folks in the US for examples), but I'm assuming this is a pretty good assumption to go on, right?
If I'm not, please let me know.
I'm DYING to figure out why everyone hates everyone here, and why so many disgruntled non-Americans (or whoever you are) continue to post their already well-worn opinions about Americans and how much they suck. It's getting rather annoying to se the same topic over and over.

What if you were born in America... Your Mum is from Britian.. Dad is from America.. Yet you now live in Canada.. Does that mean I am safe from being stupid. If so... whew.. I was soo worried.... I thought I was going to be dumb and sterotyped. Thank god!! I almost thought I was going to lose sleep over this. I mean this is the most important thread I have ever read in my entire life! ;)

I'm DYING to figure out why everyone hates everyone here, and why so many disgruntled non-Americans (or whoever you are) continue to post their already well-worn opinions about Americans and how much they suck. It's getting rather annoying to se the same topic over and over.

That's not the only topic. There are several that get rehashed to death.

Democrats vs. Republicans
Left vs. Right (not quite the same thing)
Guns are good vs. guns are evil
Creationism vs. evolution
Religion vs. atheism
Hate Muslims Now
Christianity sucks
Christianity isn't so bad
America sucks
The American war on (terror, iraq, you name it) sucks

Like I said, when you improve on something, it becomes yours. More like evolution than running a race.
Yes, thats that statement again that I found fault with; you have to make a major change. The US was not the first society not to have rulers appointed for life. The Romans and the Ancient Greeks to name just two. If you don't have that change, then on what basis do you claim this?

Like I said, when you improve on something, it becomes yours. More like evolution than running a race.


Would you stop saying that. You HAVENT improved on it. Improvement is reletive to the task you are doing. Certianly all democracies in the world today are in very few ways an improvement on the orignal Athenian system. And in terms of democratic nature, it is extremely debateable as to whether or not the US system is better/worse than any other system. Democracy is a Greek invention. Stop claiming it to be American.


Yes. We didn't adopt any of those old trappings of government. It was kind of innovative at the time.


The American system was BASED on the French and UK systems. It was not inovative at all. The Monarchy as an absolute power did not exist at this time. Look at your history. Who colonised America the most? EUROPE! Who did you base your democratic system on? EUROPE! The only reason that European governments ever had Kings/Kaisers/Tsars/Emperors etc is because we actually have a history that streches back further than 200 years. American democracy was not inventive, nor was it original. Democracy is and always will be a European idea (more specificly the Greeks). You have adopted it. You did not invent it, nor have you improved upon it. You have modified it to suit your needs but whether its an improvement is another matter entirely.

New Topic...

I call it.

SEX IS GREAT!! MAKE LOVE NOT WAR!!! WHERE IS ALL THE DRUGS!!!

OR THESE!!

REGULAR SEX VS. ORAL SEX!!!
CAPITAL LETTERS VS. NON-CAPITAL LETTERS!
SANTA CLAUS VS. THE TOOTH FAIRY (THIS ONE IS REAL IMPORTANT)
WHO CARES VS. THE PEOPLE WHO DO NOT CARE
SUN VS. MOON
EARTH VS. MARS
SANDWICH VS. HAMBURGER
PINEAPPLE VS. ORANGE

EWWWW!! I HAVE MORE! :p

retarded nations of the world (exluding great britain) ESPECIALLY FRANCE. Maybe you should go to france with the other retards of the world.

what the hell are you talking about, god damm americans just becuase they refused to go to war with you and hey guess what it turned out to be the right choice so didnt end up goin 2 war for a fake reason

why do the americans hate the french so much u always go on about ur constitution and how u won it but u wouldnt have been able to beat the biritsh if it hadnt been for the military aid given by the french army and navy

so who r the side changing cowards now

america has the power to make the world a better place but decides to destroy the world and i mean every sense of the word

becuase starving africans will thank us so much for starbucks mmmmm........................

fu

ps check out the pic if it worked

I'm DYING to figure out why everyone hates everyone here, and why so many disgruntled non-Americans (or whoever you are) continue to post their already well-worn opinions about Americans and how much they suck. It's getting rather annoying to se the same topic over and over.
I'm not american, but I'm not anti american. I am actually very fond of the US, but I do have a problem with the vast swathes of people I see around here waving their patriotism like a flag and maintaining, often with great pride, a lack of knowledge of history, geography, sociology or economics. I'm not an expert in any of these areas, but I'm well versed enough to know that the US's position as supreme guardian of freedom and democracy and possessor of all that is great and good in this world is not a scientific fact, but an ill-educated opinion.

what the hell are you talking about, god damm americans just becuase they refused to go to war with you and hey guess what it turned out to be the right choice so didnt end up goin 2 war for a fake reason

why do the americans hate the french so much u always go on about ur constitution and how u won it but u wouldnt have been able to beat the biritsh if it hadnt been for the military aid given by the french army and navy

so who r the side changing cowards now

america has the power to make the world a better place but decides to destroy the world and i mean every sense of the word

becuase starving africans will thank us so much for starbucks mmmmm........................

fu

ps check out the pic if it worked

IT DID NOT WORK!! NOOO!! POST IT THOUGH!.... Also you need to go get laid. It will make you feel better.... then you will not worry about this.
:fluffle:

The American system was BASED on the French and UK systems. It was not inovative at all. The Monarchy as an absolute power did not exist at this time. Look at your history. Who colonised America the most? EUROPE! Who did you base your democratic system on? EUROPE! The only reason that European governments ever had Kings/Kaisers/Tsars/Emperors etc is because we actually have a history that streches back further than 200 years. American democracy was not inventive, nor was it original. Democracy is and always will be a European idea (more specificly the Greeks). You have adopted it. You did not invent it, nor have you improved upon it. You have modified it to suit your needs but whether its an improvement is another matter entirely.
A little shrill, but mostly correct. Improvement is in the eye of the beholder. I don't believe that there is a perfect way for people to govern other people.

A little shrill, but mostly correct. Improvement is in the eye of the beholder. I don't believe that there is a perfect way for people to govern other people.

Yes there is... FREE LOVE!! w00t YAY!!!! Lots of..... well... drugs... hypnotherapy......Then I will be SUPREME DICTATOR!! MU HA HA HA HA!! or not... :confused:

That's not the only topic. There are several that get rehashed to death.

Democrats vs. Republicans
Left vs. Right (not quite the same thing)
Guns are good vs. guns are evil
Creationism vs. evolution
Religion vs. atheism
Hate Muslims Now
Christianity sucks
Christianity isn't so bad
America sucks
The American war on (terror, iraq, you name it) sucks

Ah, thanks. Nice to know my hypothesis is generally correct.

sorry pandaia bout the pic dam pc but off to see bout ur other advice

Yes, thats that statement again that I found fault with; you have to make a major change. The US was not the first society not to have rulers appointed for life. The Romans and the Ancient Greeks to name just two. If you don't have that change, then on what basis do you claim this?
We put a lot of parts together to give us a workable and adaptable government. We were certainly unique at the time, in that we realized the government served the citizens, not the other way around. We were also unique because we realized that the citizens were granted their rights and liberty by God, not by the government. I don't think you or Neo Cannen can tell me that there were other governments doing the same thing in 1789, or earlier.

i just wanted everyone to know:
you can look this up:
france has been caught dealing weapons to saddam hussein, and it now turns out that that was why they didn't want to go to war originally. they were afraid that we would find out, and we did. you should also know that the french president jacques shiraqe (sp??) has been caught stealing money from the UN oil for food program, as well as germany and russia being in on the whole thing. by the way, maybe last crusaders would feel better if his country could win a war, they're like 0-8.
thanks guys
USA

it pisses me off that you think you won WW2 on your own m8 so dont try and claim victory solely for america cos that is BS. You didnt....

In the Pacific we pretty much did win it on our on. In Europe though, the Brits and Americans fought side by side to beat Hitler as did the ussr.

OK look, i genuinly don't mean to be crass here but your points precisly prove why i hate americans, of course there are other examples but there has never before been a nation that has actually EMBRACED the will to power and control as wholly as america does. Its peoples own blinkered belief in what uncle sam has taught them is why they are, as i say, stupid. (humorous again)
How about Britain, France, Germany... how about colonialism, imperialism, fascism, naziism, Stalinism, World War 1, World War 2, the Napoleanic Wars, the Boer War, the Crimean War,the Opium War, how about going back further to Rome, even Assyria... no one has ever embraced the will to power before? We have many faults, but this notion of the US as a uniquely evil force in world history is well beyond asinine.

Actually, I'm saying we probably should have entered the war earlier, but that boat sailed, as did the option not to enter the war at all. What I'm saying, is that things in general did not go ideally for a while there, and thinking that they did, and glorifying the actions of anybody at the time is stupid.

Blame FDR (A democrat for all you european and lefty people)! Anyone hear of The Neutrality Act?

We put a lot of parts together to give us a workable and adaptable government. We were certainly unique at the time, in that we realized the government served the citizens, not the other way around. We were also unique because we realized that the citizens were granted their rights and liberty by God, not by the government. I don't think you or Neo Cannen can tell me that there were other governments doing the same thing in 1789, or earlier.
John Stuart Mill, Plato and the French Revolution are all of that era or before and contain elements of the things you mention. There are two philosophers up there for a good reason: government serving its citizens and rights & liberty guarenteed by god are principles which, although they exist in spirit in the US constutition and The DoI, but they are not enshrined in law. They are part of the philosophy of your government.

i just wanted everyone to know:
you can look this up:
france has been caught dealing weapons to saddam hussein, unsubstiantiated and the US did it tooand it now turns out that that was why they didn't want to go to war originally. Speculation based on facts not in evidencethey were afraid that we would find out, and we did. you should also know that the french president jacques shiraqe (sp??) has been caught stealing money from the UN oil for food program, unsubstiantiatedas well as germany and russia being in on the whole thing. unsubstiantiatedby the way, maybe last crusaders would feel better if his country could win a war, they're like 0-8.
thanks guys
USA.

About 65% of Americans actually believe that God created the Universe in 7 days and that the Biblical flood actually occured and God put all the animals in a single wooden boat....so please tell me again that most Americans don't have a problem with thier reasoning ability. Thats 65% of Americans. Think about it.
there is actually quite a lot of evidence that supports the biblical flood. Most scientists believe that flood did occur in one way or another.

We put a lot of parts together to give us a workable and adaptable government. We were certainly unique at the time, in that we realized the government served the citizens, not the other way around. We were also unique because we realized that the citizens were granted their rights and liberty by God, not by the government. I don't think you or Neo Cannen can tell me that there were other governments doing the same thing in 1789, or earlier.

You are definitely not unique in any of those respects. The Athenain system was a provision based government as well, not a service based one. In fact, though their health technology wasnt as advanced as now, their provision was far better in terms of what they charged than the US. The Greeks charged very little for their medical treatment and before you say "It was primitive so it didnt cost alot" it was not primitive, and it was expensive. Some of the drugs were made from plants imported from a great distance.

there is actually quite a lot of evidence that supports the biblical flood. Most scientists believe that flood did occur in one way or another.
Yes, but it wouldn't be a world covering flood now would it? And certainly no-one got two of every species in an ark

John Stuart Mill, Plato and the French Revolution are all of that era or before and contain elements of the things you mention. There are two philosophers up there for a good reason: government serving its citizens and rights & liberty guarenteed by god are principles which, although they exist in spirit in the US constutition and The DoI, but they are not enshrined in law. They are part of the philosophy of your government.
The French revolution definitely followed ours. And they screwed it up. I mean was killing all the nobles necessary? I don't think so. Then they elected President Napoleon. And what came next? Emperor Napoleon. How's that for a government of the people?

The US Constitution IS the law that all other law in the US must be tested against. I'd say the principles of Mill and Plato are pretty well enshrined into law!

You are definitely not unique in any of those respects. The Athenain system was a provision based government as well, not a service based one. In fact, though their health technology wasnt as advanced as now, their provision was far better in terms of what they charged than the US. The Greeks charged very little for their medical treatment and before you say "It was primitive so it didnt cost alot" it was not primitive, and it was expensive. Some of the drugs were made from plants imported from a great distance.
Doggone it! I knew healthcare was going to get into this. Now we will have to debate gun control and capitalism, too. Didn't we do this a couple hundred posts ago?