NationStates Jolt Archive

all americans are unreasonable fools


happy? ;) :p
u must be jokin, either that or ur nazi

If you think saying your "arguments" are straw men is insulting you, then you really need to google it. No debate classes in pol-sci?

No...of course not... *rolls eyes once more*

But I'll tell you what...I'm leaving now...but i'll google it and get back to you...

No, international concensus in history books is that the US lost those.

exactly

If Bush can't pronounce it, he sure as hell ain't going there.


damnit, somone said it b4 me!

u must be jokin, either that or ur nazi
three things you missed:

The post by Steel Butterfly that i quoted
;)
:p

now reconsider your post

No, international concensus in history books is that the US lost those.

no not rly, the us left vietnam after they saw they couldnt do much
and canada, britian and the us kind of stopped

Well, I think we kind of hit a wall here. I am going to go read Skapedroe's post and get a good laugh.

or how about not French, British....you know, the ones who went into Iraq with you?

Blair and his presidential illusions and his toadies in the cabinet, please, not Britain.... A lot of us Brits are appalled at being dragged into this. And for your information re the holocaust memorial stuff, Blair did his bit with the Queen and other wasters (Sven-Goran Erikkson???), but was later seen in more comfortable territory hobnobbing with Bono pretending to care about Africa

No...of course not... *rolls eyes once more*

Just asking. A straw man is such a common fallacy that it's one of the first you learn to identify in debates. But the US educational system is, hmm, different...

But I'll tell you what...I'm leaving now...but i'll google it and get back to you...

No probs. Feel free to.

The point is, big powers always see themselves as saviors...

think about England during the 19th century
or France during the 17th and 18th
or Spain during th 16th

or the United States during the 20th - 21st

patriotism is a nuisance

Blair and his presidential illusions and his toadies in the cabinet, please, not Britain.... A lot of us Brits are appalled at being dragged into this. And for your information re the holocaust memorial stuff, Blair did his bit with the Queen and other wasters (Sven-Goran Erikkson???), but was later seen in more comfortable territory hobnobbing with Bono pretending to care about Africa
i know, im British, but it still doesnt excuse the contempt for the efforts of the British troops in Iraq and Afghanistan shown by Hong Apoe


i dont support the war in Iraq, but ill still support the troops there

no not rly, the us left vietnam after they saw they couldnt do much
and canada, britian and the us kind of stopped

You urged him to pick up a history book and that's what the history books say. The US is seen as the loser in those conflicts.

The point is, big powers always see themselves as saviors...

think about England during the 19th century
or France during the 17th and 18th
or Spain during th 16th

or the United States during the 20th - 21st

patriotism is a nuisance

yes patriotism is a nuiscance and dictatorship under nazis is the road the human race will take to succed...

patriotism is a nuisance

You are so right.

You urged him to pick up a history book and that's what the history books say. The US is seen as the loser in those conflicts.

Indeed

But as all losing superpowers, they try not present these as defeats

You urged him to pick up a history book and that's what the history books say. The US is seen as the loser in those conflicts.

nooooooooooooooo how can we lose a war we just decided to leave because we werwent makin a diffrence

nooooooooooooooo how can we lose a war we just decided to leave because we werwent makin a diffrence

The official, American view is similar to that, yes. Nobody else is buying it, though.

And America has won every war in its history as a country!

I guess Vietnam doesn't count as a war then, you little child.

nooooooooooooooo how can we lose a war we just decided to leave because we werwent makin a diffrence

you sound like a brainwashed android

I guess Vietnam doesn't count as a war then, you little child.

i agree america is a powerful nation but it isnt invulnerable, though i never think we "lost" a war

you sound like a brainwashed android

that comment didnt even make sense...

i agree america is a powerful nation but it isnt invulnerable, though i never think we "lost" a war

Seriously, man. America lost the war in Vietnam, and pretty much everyone agrees on that fact except brainwashed patriots with an appetite for ignorance.

actually the swastika is a jewish symbol, the nazis just mest it up and spread it so now everyone doesnt notice about its jewish origins

A swastika is an Indian symbol, and it is still in use. Hitlers perversion of it notwithstanding.

The US lost the Viet-Nâm war
You missed the point. I never said we didn't.


And didn't exactly win the Gulf war (Saddam was still ruling Irak until 2003)
The goals of the war were achieved. Saddam was pushed back into Iraq. Poppy Bush at least was smart enough to see there was no decent peace time plan and chose to not try to take over the country.


The US lost against British forces in Canada during the 1812 war...
Battles yes. We also won a couple. Fact is it ended in a draw.

you sound like a brainwashed android
you might even say a paraniod android?

You urged him to pick up a history book and that's what the history books say. The US is seen as the loser in those conflicts.

Well you might check out a few others as well(refering to 1812). What territory did we loose to the English? Between the two countries it was a draw. We got to shove the First Nations people out of their lands(which England backed) and England got a promise that we would never make an attempt on Canada again.

Everyone who replied "So what?" still doesn't get it. It's not just this particular event. I'm trying to illustrate why exactly we are thought of so poorly by the rest of the world.

Saying "who cares?" only bolsters my arguement. The rest of the world sees us as insensitive self centered assholes. Saying you don't care only proves them right.

Someone on Cheney's staff realized his error. He changed into a formal coat later and ditched the knit cap.

Pity, they didn't act sooner.

So basically, you and that blitering idiot of a "Skepedro" are basically just being critical of a guy who didn't want to be cold while standing outside for a ceremony in Germany in the Winter. So because he didn't like being cold, you accuse him of making the USA 'look like a bunch of assholes," and the dimbulb "Skepadro" accuses him of endorsing Nazism ( during a ceremony honoring Holocaust victims ) because his coat was green and his knit cap looked like a Nazi helmet?

I am seriously, seriously worried about your sanity. It's far too late to worry about Skepedro's. :(

And now, who's most threatening country for the US ?

Economy = China
Military = China and North Korea

Human rights in those coutries are by far worse than in Iraq before Saddam's fall... and even now. Being the «protectors of the world», as the leaders see themselves, would mean that they'd have to attack those countries. But sure, Iraq was an easy target.

Fascinating how people build their pride on supposedly easy wins

sounds like he was dressed to be warm and healthy to me. It would have been nice if bush could have attended. however, vp is the second in command. so him being there is fine with me.

A swastika is an Indian symbol, and it is still in use. Hitlers perversion of it notwithstanding.

Now the .20 question. Which Indian? ;)

Well you might check out a few others as well(refering to 1812). What territory did we loose to the English? Between the two countries it was a draw. We got to shove the First Nations people out of their lands(which England backed) and England got a promise that we would never make an attempt on Canada again.

Well... a defeat doesn't mean a loss of territory. Just having your army defeated and withdrawing from a country is a military defeat.

This is hilarious and a complete waste of time

If you hate America, you are probably more apt to think that such a story is a big deal.

If you like America (as I do), you will be more apt to dismiss it with a "what the F does this have to do with anything...?".

I agree with the person who said that if this is big news... it must have really been an uneventful news day. This is ridiculous.

Soon we'll hear about how Cheney didn't shake hands with everyone else who was there... or how he dropped his napkin at the group picnic... or how he threw up on the Japanese attache.

hehe

How'd you explain Iraq then?

he aint dumb hes just a bastard

.

And your VP looked like a tramp at a mourning ceremony. The shame is on your nation.

The shame is on the people/nations who commited those atrocoties and those that enabled them.

I think the descendants of those being remembered know which countries and politicians are their friends/allies and which are not, both in the past and in the present; despite whatever attire individuals were or were not wearing at the ceremony.

Seriously, man. America lost the war in Vietnam, and pretty much everyone agrees on that fact except brainwashed patriots with an appetite for ignorance.

We would have won if not for all the freaking nut-job hippies defaming our troops and our cause. We were trying to stop communism from taking yet another country. (at least ostensibly)

And everyone knows we didn't use all of our power... not even close. Had we done so, there wouldn't be a Vietnam. (I use "we" lightly... I wasn't alive during 'Nam)

Cheney going in place of Bush isn't especially great, but it's excusable.
What's not is the fact that Cheney used it as an opportunity to make a speech to further the "fight against evil" campaign. Auschwitz survivor Franczisek Josefiak put this in perfect perspective:

"Today I'm remembering my father, gassed here. I'm remembering the atrocious things they did to us here. The message today is: No more Auschwitz, but the world has learned nothing so far - you see they are fighting and killing each other everywhere in the world. Today they are saying a lot because of the anniversary, but tomorrow they will forget."

Well... a defeat doesn't mean a loss of territory. Just having your army defeated and withdrawing from a country is a military defeat.

True. I never said we never lost a battle. The war of 1812 was more then the invasion of Canada. If England had stopped at the borders and a treaty was signed, then yes it would register as a loss.

A swastika is an Indian symbol, and it is still in use. Hitlers perversion of it notwithstanding.

The swastika outdates the romans. Goes WAY back beyond the anglo-saxons...the swastika has been a symbol throughout history having nothing to do with racism or semitsm since no one can remember.


Back on topic. Bush and Chenney are worthless. The probability of Bush sending his minor counterpart was quite possibly due to his having gone on a long golf trip. And yes. I'm an American.

Either way. Who cares what he wore? He went. I could wear an effin' pink tutu and if it meant that's how I showed my personal respect to such an event, so then who are you to say it's inappropriate? Ohhhh right. I forgot...what's fashionably "in" is just the way to go.... :rolleyes:

Stop basing an entire nation on the drones who lead it. We are fortunatly and unfortunatly a democracy. We don't all chose the the individual who sits at the head of the table.

Had we held a memorial here in america, and laid millions of dollars in funding to set up a memorial...would you all have expected the worlds leaders to pay their respects here?

No....no you wouldn't. Auschwitz was one of many.

We would have won if not for all the freaking nut-job hippies defaming our troops and our cause. We were trying to stop communism from taking yet another country. (at least ostensibly)

And everyone knows we didn't use all of our power... not even close. Had we done so, there wouldn't be a Vietnam. (I use "we" lightly... I wasn't alive during 'Nam)

oh yeah...lol

The man whose father was gassed at Auschwitz... did he know about the thousands of Kurds who were gassed by Saddam? Or who it was who removed Saddam?

Being a lamb and wanting war to end does not make peace appear out of broad daylight. Force is required for relative peace to be maintained. If no force were used the world would be run by the Saddams and Hitlers of the world.

Well, it's nice to see that threads still get derailed, re-railed, and derailed again here. ^_^

It's been a while.

Well, first off, on the topic of the thread... well the official one anyway:

I fail to see how the attire of an individual effects the entire country. So the Vice President chose attire that he deemed warm and handy, rather than going out and insulating a tuxedo. But in all seriousness, he did, as someone pointed out, stick out like a sore thumb. That's fine. So what? Has international politics and opinion suddenly taken a trip to a common US public high school to update their reasoning skills?

Geez.

---

Now, for the topic which has sprung up from the debate:

The War of 1812 was technically a defeat, given the objective of the US' forces. But from an overall view, the British forces that invaded into Washington and sacked the White House were pushed back and the United States lost little to no territory. Therefore, it wasn't a tactical loss, at most a draw.

The Battle of Britain is one of my most studied historical events from World War II. The only reason Britain was not invaded by the German army was due to the fact that Hitler changed the tactics of the Luftwaffe to assault urban targets, rather than the RAF's airfields. This gave the RAF the time they needed to reform and knock the Luftwaffe from their industrial goals, and kicking the window for the German invasion shut, as the RAF was not out of action. It's really humorous because the whole reason that the bombing targets was switched was due to the fact that a Heinkel was blown off course, dumped their load so they could get back to Germany, and accidentally bombed a civilian area. Britain responded by bombing Berlin, which infuriated Hitler, who then ordered the bombing of London, again rather than the RAF airfields.

Now the .20 question. Which Indian? ;)

The properly named ones.

Just thought I'd post as I don't, often, owing to the fact that the forum members seem to be mainly right wing American republicans.
People who are saying that Dick Cheney wore the cloths he did for the warmth etc seem to think that there are scores of people demanding that he were black attire, wearas people mainly seem concerned that presedent Bush did not turn up.
just my two cents... well, pence...

Actually, I belive that both the Indians and the Native American Tribes had the swastika as a symbol. Probably called it something different, but hey.

It's not enough to have liberated it 60 years ago. And then to have been the dirivng force behing the formation of Israel. But now his topcoat isn't good enough.

The olive drab topcoat was good enough for the survivors when they saw U.S. troops coming through.

This is not news.
:rolleyes:

We would have won if not for all the freaking nut-job hippies defaming our troops and our cause. We were trying to stop communism from taking yet another country. (at least ostensibly)

And everyone knows we didn't use all of our power... not even close. Had we done so, there wouldn't be a Vietnam. (I use "we" lightly... I wasn't alive during 'Nam)

I already knew you weren't alive during 'Nam. It shows.

It's ridiculous how you people blame everything on either the hippies or the communists. McCarthyism is still alive and well, I see.

Well, Bush will be Bush. =P

I've not actually read any documentation on the ceremony, but from what I've gathered other nations were represented by people that were not the heads of their government. I don't think the Queen of England or the Prime Minister was there. >_>

Force is required for relative peace to be maintained. If no force were used the world would be run by the Saddams and Hitlers of the world.

if no force was used how would hitler and saddam get into power?

Well, Bush will be Bush. =P

I've not actually read any documentation on the ceremony, but from what I've gathered other nations were represented by people that were not the heads of their government. I don't think the Queen of England or the Prime Minister was there. >_>
I'm pretty sure the queen was.

Well I'm an American (bluestater and proud) and I have to say...Wow. 90% of the posts by Americans in this thread are pure Dumbass. I can't think of a more fitting term at the moment, so suggestions are welcome.

Hitler came up with an efficient solution, but never understood the problem itself. If you want a superior race, you have to get rid of all the stupid people. Not the jews/gays/gypsies/etc. In our "modern" global society, things such as safety labels have worked against the evolutionary process (to all you creationists out there who would dispute this, keep in mind: you're all examples of this). The stupid have been allowed to propogate, and are taking over. I, for one, would support mandatory IQ testing of entire populations. If you're below a certain score, you have two years to study up and try again. If you're still unable to pass the test, it's off to the Death Camps with ye.

(before I get flamed to kingdom come, please note that occasional sarcasm was inserted)

I guess you could say we freed them... (http://www.iraqbodycount.net/) :mp5:

Heck why stop in Iraq? Next stop, Israel! We're providing a mass murderer (Ariel Sharon) with billions in military aid in much the same way we did with Saddam Hussein and Osama Binladen...if a few thousand Israeli civilians die from friendly fire, atleast we removed their dictator ruler! That's the price of freedom! [/sarcasm]

Ah, then I strike my statement.

Like I said, I've not seen a document that says who was and was not there, so I'm going by what I've read in here. ^_^

The properly named ones.

Ahh but it predates them as well. The Aryans that Hitler used were in Central Asia.

What startled me was seeing it on an Apache Belt from 1849.

I have wondered how they got ahold of it. Did it come across? An idea somebody just thought up? Never looked into it. Someday I might.

Well I'm an American (bluestater and proud) and I have to say...Wow. 90% of the posts by Americans in this thread are pure Dumbass. I can't think of a more fitting term at the moment, so suggestions are welcome.

Hitler came up with an efficient solution, but never understood the problem itself. If you want a superior race, you have to get rid of all the stupid people. Not the jews/gays/gypsies/etc. In our "modern" global society, things such as safety labels have worked against the evolutionary process (to all you creationists out there who would dispute this, keep in mind: you're all examples of this). The stupid have been allowed to propogate, and are taking over. I, for one, would support mandatory IQ testing of entire populations. If you're below a certain score, you have two years to study up and try again. If you're still unable to pass the test, it's off to the Death Camps with ye.

(before I get flamed to kingdom come, please note that occasional sarcasm was inserted)

I guess you could say we freed them... (http://www.iraqbodycount.net/) :mp5:

Heck why stop in Iraq? Next stop, Israel! We're providing a mass murderer (Ariel Sharon) with billions in military aid in much the same way we did with Saddam Hussein and Osama Binladen...if a few thousand Israeli civilians die from friendly fire, atleast we removed their dictator ruler! That's the price of freedom! [/sarcasm]

sorry, forgive my ignorance, what parts of that were and wern't sarcasm?

boo hoo...because he wore a coat and boots. There are plenty worse things he could do...you know...like selling weapons to our enemies (france?) or committing the war crimes in the first place (germany?). I'm sorry if you don't understand that the US president has more important things to do that attend ceremonies. If he has the time, great, but unfortunately, he has a world to run.

Don't forget during WW2 when the japs wern't in on the action yet the german boats filled up on fuel from american companies

Ahh but it predates them as well. The Aryans that Hitler used were in Central Asia.

What startled me was seeing it on an Apache Belt from 1849.

I have wondered how they got ahold of it. Did it come across? An idea somebody just thought up? Never looked into it. Someday I might.

Didnt know those 2 tidbits. I might consider asking around, given that I see a swastika every day

sorry, forgive my ignorance, what parts of that were and wern't sarcasm?

Part of the IQ testing bit. In reality I doubt we'd have the time/money to allow repeat IQ tests... :D

[QUOTE=Javea]
Hitler came up with an efficient solution, but never understood the problem itself. If you want a superior race, you have to get rid of all the stupid people. Not the jews/gays/gypsies/etc. In our "modern" global society, things such as safety labels have worked against the evolutionary process (to all you creationists out there who would dispute this, keep in mind: you're all examples of this). The stupid have been allowed to propogate, and are taking over. I, for one, would support mandatory IQ testing of entire populations. If you're below a certain score, you have two years to study up and try again. If you're still unable to pass the test, it's off to the Death Camps with ye.


XXXXXXX = sarcasm (although I'm fond of the IQ test idea ;) )

I think IQ testing should be necessary as far as reproduction purposes yes...if you can't pass the test you shouldn't have kids...but as far as sending someone to death for being stupid...no....not so much.

Intelligence isn't really determined by genetics, in most cases anyway. You could have two people that are dumb as a box of rocks that reproduce and have a genious child. It's completely possible. Of course some genious children are considered stupid (IE: Einstein).

Reading through the first page of this thread, raised a question: How would it matter that anyone was attired in a particular way? :rolleyes:

My question is why not also visit other places of infamy?

how come no one visits Drogheda, the English slaugtered all those defenceless Irishmen there. And I can name hundreds of other places. I'll tell you why. We are still universally licking the Englishman's ass, and its time we pointed out they commited worse crimes than Hitler could imagine( and that's pretty horrible). We have to denounce the filthy English for the scum they are!!!

Reading through the first page of this thread, raised a question: How would it matter that anyone was attired in a particular way? :rolleyes:

because it was a solemn and poignant memorial service to the over one million jews, gipseys etc., who lost their lives in a most meaningless and unhuman fashion.

i don't see any way of defending the guy here - what a ninny

Well, everyone has their regrets. The Russians have Stalin's slaughters, the English have the Scots and the Irishmen, Americans have the Native Americans and Japanese, so on and so forth.

My question is why not also visit other places of infamy?

how come no one visits Drogheda, the English slaugtered all those defenceless Irishmen there. And I can name hundreds of other places. I'll tell you why. We are still universally licking the Englishman's ass, and its time we pointed out they commited worse crimes than Hitler could imagine( and that's pretty horrible). We have to denounce the filthy English for the scum they are!!!

now the point of it was to remember the people who died, and to pay our respects.
yes, many atrocities have been committed in war - and the english / british rank pretty high up there. but as far as 99.9% of the world is concerned, hitler's actions were the worst - no other nation has killed as many people in such a way before - including the english.

and secondly, do the english still do what they did anymore? no. it's in the past, as is the nazi atrocities, so you need to look at them in that way, not as if they were done yesterday

Intelligence isn't really determined by genetics, in most cases anyway. You could have two people that are dumb as a box of rocks that reproduce and have a genious child. It's completely possible. Of course some genious children are considered stupid (IE: Einstein).


ahh yes...however it's been scientifically proven, and statistics show that (for example only...this is not condoning the actions of Adolf Hitler) instances of Mental retardation and other physical and mental deformities are much much much much lower in those euorpean countries in which Nazi regim grasped a firm foothold, than in any other part of the world.

Hitler went through and wiped out those who were not mentally and physically adequate. And no...intellectualism is not *primarily* genetic, but it does have a tendancy to fall under quite the same circumstances as husbandry in domesticated animals. Personality traits and succeptability to aquire knowledge *are* inherited traits.

now the point of it was to remember the people who died, and to pay our respects.
yes, many atrocities have been committed in war - and the english / british rank pretty high up there. but as far as 99.9% of the world is concerned, hitler's actions were the worst - no other nation has killed as many people in such a way before - including the english.

and secondly, do the english still do what they did anymore? no. it's in the past, as is the nazi atrocities, so you need to look at them in that way, not as if they were done yesterday

Actually, Stalin slaughtered many more of his countrymen than Hitler. Hitler was an ameteur compared to Stalin. However, no one ever says anything because Russia was allied with the UK and US when this was happening.

George Bush knows heaps about WW2, especially D-Day because it's the only WW2 event that he can spell.

OK for hundred's of years the English have slaughtered thousands for pure profit and greed, the germans have only had a few incidents. The English are pure imperialistic monsters. If you knew anything you'd understand that the manner in which you died at english hands would be just as painful and degrading as the nazi's. (may I point out concentration camps were established by the British in south africa during the Boer war, and they filled it up with women and children!!! they died in their thousands from starvation, disease, and neglect!!)

Russija - Are you seriously suggesting that anything that the English have ever done was worse than killing 12 million people? (That's 6 million Jews + about another 6 million others). Pull your head out of your arse immediately.

As Fenwick says, no nation has a clean past, and I won't defend the British record in Ireland, but the reason that we remember Auschwitz and the Holocaust is that it is the tragic nadir of human morality. Not much else has come close to it. It shows that mankind is capable of terrible things, and therefore very probably always will be. It is not simply about recognising that it was wrong and finding culprits (meaning that we should also recognise everything else that was wrong, which would take far too long given mankind's history). It is about our future, not our past.


And the coat - considering that we have absolutely no idea who decided that he should wear that particlaur coat and why this is a totally pointless discussion in the specific sense, even before we argue about whether wearing it was appropriate in the first place.

Didnt know those 2 tidbits. I might consider asking around, given that I see a swastika every day

If you could. I would be interested out of curiosity.....

wow this threads gone way off since i last checked

(may I point out concentration camps were established by the British in south africa during the Boer war, and they filled it up with women and children!!! they died in their thousands from starvation, disease, and neglect!!)

And not by being herded up for the specific purpose of being gassed. They were indeed concentration camps and do the British no credit, but they were not extermination camps. Hitler himself tried to use the British example as justification for his own camps. Don't fall for that rubbish.

Ireland, India, South Africa, China, North America, Scotland, and Wales.

all areas of English brutality for hundreds of years. Hitler was a warm up act compared to the English.

Not extermination camps? So the british neglected the Boers so they wouldn't die?

they were trying to force the Boer men to submit by wiping out their families and means of support, because they couldn't defeat them elseways.

wow this threads gone way off since i last checked
No kidding!

:headbang: I can't believe out of all the topics I ever brought up on this forum, this one gets the most responses.

And no one even seems to care about the real issue I was trying to highlight by bringing up Dicks fashion faux pas.

No kidding!

:headbang: I can't believe out of all the topics I ever brought up on this forum, this one gets the most responses.

And no one even seems to care about the real issue I was trying to highlight by bringing up Dicks fashion faux pas.
yea...from what i can tell, theyre now condemning every nation in the world....

Russija, explain exactly why what the British did was worse than what Hitler did. Not just why it was bad - we all know it was. Say why it was worse than killing 12 million people mostly for no other reason than that they had the wrong genetic code. Say why it was worse than the experiments that the Nazis carried out on living people. I can't believe that you can seriously justify that view.

Ultimately, it doesn't even matter. The Holocaust is a symbol because most of the world, your sweet little ass excepted, regard it as the worst thing that mankind has done so far.

The reason the Holocaust is viewed as a horror is because it was all at once, but like I said, the atrocities carried out by our Russian allies in WWII are largely ignored. The Russians killed more than the Germans did.

And if we're comparing Hitler and the entire history of the British Empire, Hitler is at a loss by far.

Intelligence isn't really determined by genetics, in most cases anyway. You could have two people that are dumb as a box of rocks that reproduce and have a genious child. It's completely possible. Of course some genious children are considered stupid (IE: Einstein).

Seen it myself.

Two semi-retarded parents have a "normal" child.

Two ugly parents with a beautiful daughter.

The reason the Holocaust is viewed as a horror is because it was all at once, but like I said, the atrocities carried out by our Russian allies in WWII are largely ignored. The Russians killed more than the Germans did.

And if we're comparing Hitler and the entire history of the British Empire, Hitler is at a loss by far.

Just considering the numbers, it's hard to say. Even if you include the Irish Potato famine, I'm not sure that you could say that the British ever murdered 12 million people during the whole history of their empire. The British Empire was for the most part a fairly hands-off affair until the late 19th century, marred by individual notorious incidents, such as Amritsar and the concentration camps in South Africa, and repression of dissidents. It isn't clear because I don't think we know too much about a lot of native losses, such as the Australian Aboriginals, but their initial populations were very small.

If you include the WWII military losses and the Soviet civilians who died then Hitler goes far ahead numerically I suspect, and far ahead of Stalin, incidentally.

Seen it myself.

Two semi-retarded parents have a "normal" child.

Two ugly parents with a beautiful daughter.


Genetics is a chancey thing to place bets on. I'd rather take my risk on breeding two pretty horses to get a pretty foal then two ugly ones.

If you irradicate the ugly ones theres much less of a chance of you ending up with one.

Same goes for the stupids.

Who cares about the Holohoax?
It was 60 years ago!
Tell the Jews to stop crying and get over it

Do society a favour and kiss a Mack Truck while it's doing 90km/h.

Who frickin cares who killed more? All genocides suck >:-(

A very good point, Superpower, and I shall concede and stop here. ^_^

You're right Superpower, they do all suck, and past a certain point the numbers game is very academic and somewhat misses the point. But when someone starts saying that the British in Ireland were like the Nazis that pisses me off. It's pretty offensive because it isn't based on any kind of fact but on prejudice - that someone hates the British (i.e. me), and doesn't appreciate just how cold-blooded the Nazis were. I'm not the sort of person to let that sort of thing go unchallenged. People can criticise the British Empire all they like - I do - but when people say 'forget the Nazis, what about the British,' then that's something else. So that's why I went into the numbers, because they are important. They illustrate the real point.

Genetics is a chancey thing to place bets on. I'd rather take my risk on breeding two pretty horses to get a pretty foal then two ugly ones.

If you irradicate the ugly ones theres much less of a chance of you ending up with one.

Same goes for the stupids.

Oh I know.

I wasn't suggesting it was guaranteed. Just that it can happen.....

I believe the burning of the white house by Canadians (People living in the Canadian colonies) was done in retaliation for the burning of York (Toronto) by Americans. With the aid of the British attacking the major American cities, the Canadians with the help of the British burned Washington. The Canadian/British forces captured a few forts in Michigan. But all land and forts were given back to each side once a peace treaty was signed.

I wouldn’t call it an “Ass kicking” either.

Canada didn’t exist at that time, but many of the people that helped to attacked Washington were living in “Canada” and would have become official Canadians at confederation or at least there decadence would have.

Everyone who replied "So what?" still doesn't get it. It's not just this particular event. I'm trying to illustrate why exactly we are thought of so poorly by the rest of the world.

Saying "who cares?" only bolsters my arguement. The rest of the world sees us as insensitive self centered assholes. Saying you don't care only proves them right.

Someone on Cheney's staff realized his error. He changed into a formal coat later and ditched the knit cap.

Pity, they didn't act sooner.

Actually Lost Planet, the photos of Cheney in the dark overcoat were taken before the photos of him sitting for several hours while a few Germans spoke about the event. He might have had the overcoat on under the parka. I say who cares because the only people keeping this in the news cycle are a few fashion editors and some other haters who have nothing else to do. The man was cold. The rest of the world sees what it wants until it asks us for money. And the rest of the world does and will ask for money. Guess what? We will still be giving it out at the end of the day. Therefore, I suggest again, "get over it."

BTW, the world press isn't writing about this: a few lib rags are.

You are so right.
Except your patriotism of course.

In continuation to the Britain / Canada / U.S. dialogue, the United States was involved in a defensive war against Britian which had not given up its aim to maintain its Empire, relegate the United States revolution to the dustpin of failed rebellions. Britain began attacks on the U.S. from their holdings in what is now called Canada (despite the fact that Canada is not an independent country) and the United States defeated the British goals by driving them back.

In the end, the United States won the war of 1812 because British conditions for victory were not met and United States agenda for the survival of the fragile and young Union were.

-end of debate.

In continuation to the Britain / Canada / U.S. dialogue, the United States was involved in a defensive war against Britian which had not given up its aim to maintain its Empire, relegate the United States revolution to the dustpin of failed rebellions. Britain began attacks on the U.S. from their holdings in what is now called Canada (despite the fact that Canada is not an independent country) and the United States defeated the British goals by driving them back.

In the end, the United States won the war of 1812 because British conditions for victory were not met and United States agenda for the survival of the fragile and young Union were.

-end of debate.

The United States absolutely did not win the war of 1812; At most it was a tie. The US goals of the war (which it started) were to invade and take over the remaining British Colonies in North America. Did they succeed in there goals? No.

Yes, I think this is one of those things that doesn't matter.

I'm glad Bush didn't go. he probably would have compared the liberation of the concentration camps to the invasion of Iraq.
Who cares about the Holohoax?
It was 60 years ago!
Tell the Jews to stop crying and get over it
Excuse me, you Nazis are the ones who lost WW2.
The fact that he stuck out like sore thumb had nothing to do with it.
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20050127/capt.aus11701271515.poland_auschwitz_anniversary_aus117.jpg
And Americans wonder why the rest of the world has such a low opinion of us.
He looks like a total idiot there, but the reason why the rest of the world has such a low opinion of America is more to do with the wars and arrogance than with your VP's coat.
thats the problem u idiot is that we dont care a bout the rewst of the world
If you don't care about the rest of the world, please stop interfering in it.
If the rest of the world hates us for the clothing our VP wears, I say please hate us more. If the only thing going for those Europeans are their sense of fashion, I'll laugh and continue to poke fun at those inbred Europeans.
Inbred? Europe isn't the place that counts Appalachian mountain hicks as its citizens.

The United States absolutely did not win the war of 1812; At most it was a tie. The US goals of the war (which it started) were to invade and take over the remaining British Colonies in North America. Did they succeed in there goals? No.
While the Europeans were busy driving British imperialism from Europe, Britain attempted once again regain control of the United States by squashing the still young nation. Using Canada as a launch point for various skirmishes, the British began to position regiments and other soldiers along the British border with the United States. The British forces were sent in to conduct raids and the United States fought them off, but the British were able to make their way to the capital in an attempt to 'decapitate' the government and complete their agenda of recapturing the American territories. Amazing that the British had a sizeable force in Canada before the war ever began, thus proof enough that Britain started the war in flagrant violation of the Treaty of Paris. This move was designed because France was occupied with the Napoleanic Wars and the British calculated that with France bogged down in Europe and experiecing tension from the revolution there still that they would not be able to assist the United States again. This war, required the United States to fight by itself against its former oppressor. Once the British began launching their attacks, the United States realized that Britain would not give up on its aim to reconcur America. The United States then attempted a campaign to simultaneously defend itself from the British aggression and at the same time win support from 'Canada' in order that the British would not be able to use it as a staging ground for future attacks.

The United States accomplished its defensive aim and after doing left Britain to concede its attempts to re-integrate the United States under its tyrannical monarchal system. The United States failed in its objective to bring Canada into the Union, but this was merely a secondary goal.

Britain started the war. To state otherwise is historical revisionism and proof of propagandistic lies in British / Canadian history to falsely portray America as the aggressor in the war when it was in fact the other way around.

America looks like an ass.........again
Acually it looks more like a colorful deformed poatatoe See:http://img159.exs.cx/img159/5310/usa1ug.gif

Acually it looks more like a colorful deformed poatatoe See:http://img159.exs.cx/img159/5310/usa1ug.gif
I really don't know what kind of potatoes you grow where you're from... but that's one funny-looking potatoe.
:p

I really don't know what kind of potatoes you grow where you're from... but that's one funny-looking potatoe.
:p
Emphasis on colorful and deformed ;)

Emphasis on colorful and deformed ;)
Oh. Riiiight. I can see that. First thing that popped to my mind looking at a map of the US. :p

Oh. Riiiight. I can see that. First thing that popped to my mind looking at a map of the US. :p
Nothing really popped into my mind so I used something random. Doesn't look like much

Nothing really popped into my mind so I used something random. Doesn't look like much
what about a deformed, funny looking guy (http://www.geocities.com/sozialanthropologie/OhneTitel-1Kopie.gif) ?

...eh...it's the best I could come up with right now. I'll admit, it's not a masterpiece. ..I could post it in the 'best artwork' thread, though :D

what about a deformed, funny looking guy (http://www.geocities.com/sozialanthropologie/OhneTitel-1Kopie.gif) ?

...eh...it's the best I could come up with right now. I'll admit, it's not a masterpiece. ..I could post it in the 'best artwork' thread, though :D

Hahaha I love it.

"Inbred? Europe isn't the place that counts Appalachian mountain hicks as its citizens."

Hey now, that's just a bad stereotype. Now if you want proof of inbreeding, look at the Hapsburgs, which ruled several of the major powers of Europe for a while. They've even got a genetic mutation named after them, the "Hapsburg Jaw". Can't say I've heard anything about the "Appalachian Foot" or anything like that... Maybe the Appalachian intelligence... ^_^;

The United States declared War on Great Britain on June 12, 1812. The war was declared as a result of long simmering disputes with Great Britian. The central dispute surrounded the impressment of American soldiers by the British. The British had previously attacked the USS Chesapeake and nearly caused a war two years earlier. In addition, disputes continued with Great Britain over the Northwest Territories and the border with Canada. Finally, the attempts of Great Britain to impose a blockade on France during the Napoleonic Wars was a constant source of conflict with the United States.

On July 12, 1812, forces under General Hull crosses into Canada at Sandwich. The invasion is quickly stopped, and American forces are forced to withdraw. By August 16, Hull surrenders Detroit.

On August 19, 1812 the USS Constitution defeats the Guerriere, off the coast of Nova Scotia. The battle lasts for an hour, and was a great victory for the US Navy.

American forces were defeated on October 13, 1812 at a battle near Niagara Falls, on Queenston Heights. The American officers were unable to convince militia troops to cross over to Canada and bring sufficient reinforcements to carry the day.

On October 25, 1812, the US frigate United States defeated the HMS Macedonian. The battle takes place off the coast of Africa.

On January 21, 1813, the Battle of Raisin River takes place. The American force, commanded by General Winchester, surrenders to British Colonel Henry A Proctor and loses 600. One hundred are dead and 500 captured.

On April 27, 1813, American forces, under General Henry Dearborn, captured the British base at York, Canada. This is made possible by close cooperation between the Navy and the Army.

In May 1813, Fort Meig, commanded by General Harrison, handily withstands a siege by the British and the Indians. When a relief column arrives, the British and the Indians withdraw.

Shall I continue the history lesson? ^_^;

History establishes that the US did in fact declare the war, but only after British aggression.