NationStates Jolt Archive

Iran: Said to be developing Nuclear Weapons, helping Iraqi insurgancy, very represive government, human rights violations

North Korea: Has Nuclear Weapons, very very represeive, known to be selling weapons human rights violations

uzbekistan: Very very represive, human rights violations

Canada: control purposes

Who has the worst government? Please don't say US or anything else... Also canadians don't be insulted your name is there only for control purposes...

I personally feel that Uzbekistan and N.K. Are the worse here.....

Would you please define what exactly you mean by evil?

If it means oppressing your population and commiting crimes against human rights, then some African states are oviously missing from your poll.
If you mean threat to wolrd peace... ah well, you asked not to mention that nation...

I'm Sorry very vauge huh? Okay a nation that represses its people and that the US and allies should invade next..... following the bush doctrine of course(lol)..... Okay heres a definition: (dictionary.com)
1. Morally bad or wrong; wicked: an evil tyrant.
2. Causing ruin, injury, or pain; harmful: the evil effects of a poor diet.
3. Characterized by or indicating future misfortune; ominous: evil omens.
4. Bad or blameworthy by report; infamous: an evil reputation.
5. Characterized by anger or spite; malicious: an evil temper.

If you mean threat to wolrd peace... ah well, you asked not to mention that nation...
come on, the only reason why I asked that because I don't want to get into a flame/spam fight with people, not to mention its kinda moronic to imply the US is worse the N.K. But I digress... I did forget to put some african nations in there But I wanted this simplified... I should probably make a larger one (I'll start compiling the list)

North Korea poses a very grave threat, however every measure should be taken to avoid military conflict. Hopefully a diplomatic approach will mend the situation until Kim Jong Il dies and we can seize the delicate opportunity to influence the next leader in our favor.

North Korea poses a very grave threat, however every measure should be taken to avoid military conflict. Hopefully a diplomatic approach will mend the situation until Kim Jong Il dies and we can seize the delicate opportunity to influence the next leader in our favor.
thats what we said about his father.....

Zimbabwe

Zimbabwe
thats on my new list.... any other nations?

thats on my new list.... any other nations?
Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia
Yep... Someone voted for canada, now I got my margin of error! HA!

The United States of.... oh wait. :headbang:

heres what I got so far:
Iran
North Korea
China
Uzbekistan
Zimbabwe
Cuba
Saudi Arabia
Sudan
Burma
Libya
Pakistan
Turkmenistan

Thinking about adding: Syria, Congo(DR), Russia(No, not yet),

come on, the only reason why I asked that because I don't want to get into a flame/spam fight with people, not to mention its kinda moronic to imply the US is worse the N.K. But I digress... I did forget to put some african nations in there But I wanted this simplified... I should probably make a larger one (I'll start compiling the list)

To quote the general American view on this: To have a gun doesn't make you a threat yet. You have to point it at others...
And as you clearly stated, you do expect the US to invade a few countries in the near futuer. I can see neither Iran nor Uzbekistan do that, to be honest.
North Korea, I just don't know enough about in terms of aggressive politics.

To quote the general American view on this: To have a gun doesn't make you a threat yet. You have to point it at others...
And as you clearly stated, you do expect the US to invade a few countries in the near futuer. I can see neither Iran nor Uzbekistan do that, to be honest.
North Korea, I just don't know enough about in terms of aggressive politics.

I see the US invading a country coming up soon because we got Bush and well hes republican its what they do.... But to say the US is the most evil country in the world? Honestly how closed minded are you? I have many problems with the US government but its policy issues... And war can produce good (i know i know it sounds odd) but imagine that we had the political will to stop the genocide in africa during the 90's, wouldn't that be good? So the purpose of this thread is to decide what countries need to be destroyed(metaphorically!) in order to secure the world.... yeah thats it... But honestly come on if you think the US government (although not a good organization, it requires a lot of work...) is worse than oh lets say Iran or north korea you need help. And the reason why you don't see N.K. invading S.K. Is because if they do they would be destroyed by the US... you guys tend to forget that, we do do some good.

I'm making a prediction here: I'm saying that Egypt will go "evil" within the next 10 years. Keep this post in mind!!! ;)

I'm making a prediction here: I'm saying that Egypt will go "evil" within the next 10 years. Keep this post in mind!!! ;)
yes ten years from now egypt will turn... then I will go to you and worship you and your abilities as the second coming of christ!......................

I see the US invading a country coming up soon because we got Bush and well hes republican its what they do.... But to say the US is the most evil country in the world? Honestly how closed minded are you? I have many problems with the US government but its policy issues... And war can produce good (i know i know it sounds odd) but imagine that we had the political will to stop the genocide in africa during the 90's, wouldn't that be good? So the purpose of this thread is to decide what countries need to be destroyed(metaphorically!) in order to secure the world.... yeah thats it... But honestly come on if you think the US government (although not a good organization, it requires a lot of work...) is worse than oh lets say Iran or north korea you need help. And the reason why you don't see N.K. invading S.K. Is because if they do they would be destroyed by the US... you guys tend to forget that, we do do some good.

I never called it evil. I just said if your definition of "evil" s a country that invades another without provocation, take a close look at your back yard.
I refuse to call any country evil. They may be cursed with a morally corrup government, however I don't see the need to condemn the country on bahlf of that.

Bush is stupid for invading Iraq for something that was that untrue. However, Iraq deserved to be invaded for the cruelties that were happening in the country.

Whose more evil?
The person that taught you to write.

I never called it evil. I just said if your definition of "evil" s a country that invades another without provocation, take a close look at your back yard.
I refuse to call any country evil. They may be cursed with a morally corrup government, however I don't see the need to condemn the country on bahlf of that.


Okay bad word to use there... too vague..... Okay a nation that has a government that abuses its people, a nation that has no freedoms, a nation where people are killed for little or no reason, human rights violations(an inordnant amount), no democracy, no peace (i.e. police come to your house and burn you because you only said praise the leader 29 times instead of 30, and so on, just by invading a country doesn't make you evil. Although it is often related but no neccesarrly(can't spell lol), some wars are just, some wars are fought(even though they aren't just) in a civil manor(i.e. not burning down farms and raping everyone).......

So what nation is the least just?

Its not the right of the US to make these decisions. No one should invade unless there is unbelieveable reasons for it or if aggressive actions are taken. http://www.weebls-stuff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34133. (Im Simon) I say Canada, but in truth I care little. The one most likely to put a bullet in the head of that cretin the Americans call a President. :sniper:

As the Burmese people don't want to be invaded, I will say Zimbabwe and Saudi Arabia on because on human rights abuses

OK............. so canada is worse than N.K. and the US president is a retard? Oh and any kind of war is bad but you want to kill him(mind you just said he was retard thats kinda bad...)....... do you think when you type?

I see the US invading a country coming up soon because we got Bush and well hes republican its what they do.... But to say the US is the most evil country in the world? Honestly how closed minded are you? I have many problems with the US government but its policy issues... And war can produce good (i know i know it sounds odd) but imagine that we had the political will to stop the genocide in africa during the 90's, wouldn't that be good? So the purpose of this thread is to decide what countries need to be destroyed(metaphorically!) in order to secure the world.... yeah thats it... But honestly come on if you think the US government (although not a good organization, it requires a lot of work...) is worse than oh lets say Iran or north korea you need help. And the reason why you don't see N.K. invading S.K. Is because if they do they would be destroyed by the US... you guys tend to forget that, we do do some good.

Ah, so that is what you mean. Well, then that all depends on your point of view. To some (mostly various collectivists with altier motives and hidden agendas) the US is the greatest threat to “world peace” (as some so quaintly put it). However, they are not realists, and do comprehend that, without the threat of US intervention, the instances of slaverery, tyrannical government, war and genocide would rise sharply.

So, in my opinion, the greatest threat to world stability is a close tie between the insanely oppressive leader of North Korea, the fanatically suicidal populace of Iran, the economic manipulations of China and the propaganda driven brainwashed masses of Saudi Arabia. The others on your list simply don’t have enough power to much of a threat at present, although I wouldn’t mind deposing the genocidal leaders of Iran.

Russia(No, not yet),

Give it time. It will soon have a place on your list.

As the Burmese people don't want to be invaded, I will say Zimbabwe and Saudi Arabia on because on human rights abuses
Yeah I am going to start another thread on this(more refined though) maybe in a couple of hours, I want to see if this one pans out(but I doubt it)... but my canadian control seems to be doing well..

The person that taught you to write.

:D

Me spellingist and grammers are done perfuctly and youst don't known Mi and my spellings.... HOw darest you!

OK............. so canada is worse than N.K. and the US president is a retard? Oh and any kind of war is bad but you want to kill him(mind you just said he was retard thats kinda bad...)....... do you think when you type?

Ok, lets just rip through this in a few seconds.

I said Canada as a joke
Assassination is not war
Cretin means idiot, not retard

I think messing up who's and whose is pretty evil. Maybe we should invade you next?

British Socialism: Assassination can lead to war. Reference Arch Duke Ferdinand.

Ok, lets just rip through this in a few seconds.

Cretin means idiot, not retard

look the dictionary:

[French crétin, from French dialectal, deformed and mentally retarded person found in certain Alpine valleys, from Vulgar Latin *christinus, Christian, human being, poor fellow, from Latin Chrstinus, Christian. See Christian.] (dictionary.com)

I believe your test is flawed, americans have always felt a need to conquer our neighbor to the north since, well 1776 when the chose not to join the union.

However it can also be defined

cretin

n : a person of subnormal intelligence [syn: idiot, imbecile, moron, changeling, half-wit]

It may have derived from that meaning but my meaning is perfectly acceptable.

I think messing up who's and whose is pretty evil. Maybe we should invade you next?

We will fight you in the Air, We will fight you on the seas, we will fight you on the land... and well after that we will give up But you would put up a hell of a fighT!

IDIOT == A person of profound mental retardation having a mental age below three years and generally being unable to learn connected speech or guard against common dangers. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive.

British Socialism: Assassination can lead to war. Reference Arch Duke Ferdinand.

That only brought one party into the war, it did not make what it was. Anyway, George Bush living can and will lead to war

look the dictionary:

[French crétin, from French dialectal, deformed and mentally retarded person found in certain Alpine valleys, from Vulgar Latin *christinus, Christian, human being, poor fellow, from Latin Chrstinus, Christian. See Christian.] (dictionary.com)

I'm sorry but got to back my yankee cousin on this :D . Who would have thought it

However it can also be defined

cretin

n : a person of subnormal intelligence [syn: idiot, imbecile, moron, changeling, half-wit]

It may have derived from that meaning but my meaning is perfectly acceptable.

Fine I know it has both meanings but meaning an idiot is a form of slang not actual meaning... So I am right.... When you call someone a cretin the you are saying he has cretinism(can't spell OK) and by that hes retarted... now slang when you call some a cretin your saying hes below average intilligence Like a retard... Same if you call your friend a retard.

IDIOT == A person of profound mental retardation having a mental age below three years and generally being unable to learn connected speech or guard against common dangers. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive.

Now youre being pedantic, you know damn well idiot doesn't mean that commonly anymore.

Now youre being pedantic, you know damn well idiot doesn't mean that commonly anymore.
its about definition not slang, your english stop abusing it!

That only brought one party into the war, it did not make what it was. Anyway, George Bush living can and will lead to war
Wait on Party? WWI sounds famliar But I digress, Also you don't know americans too well. I hate G. Bush But if he was assainated by a foriegn power I would want that country invaded and destroy... all you would do is rally the american people to a cause(last time that happened was WWII and you saw what we did you japan)

Fine I know it has both meanings but meaning an idiot is a form of slang not actual meaning... So I am right.... When you call someone a cretin the you are saying he has cretinism(can't spell OK) and by that hes retarted... now slang when you call some a cretin your saying hes below average intilligence Like a retard... Same if you call your friend a retard.

So what youre implying is I cannot use slang in an instance of common meaning just because it has a negative derivation? To be below average intelligence does not mean you are a retard, so therefore using cretin as slang does not imply cretinism. I understand your first objection however I have explained my meaning I consider your objection to be pedantic. If you want pedantism then surely you questioning whether I think when I post implies that I am below average intelligence and therefore a retard? If not, then accept my explanation and get over the fact that pretty much everyone in England resents George Bush.

I would hope that the powers that be don't decide to enter Iran.... ever!
The reson I make this statment is because the US still hasn't finished with Afganistan or Iraq for one, secondly.....it starts to look like colinization when the countries you occupy are linked together! Everyone forgets Syria, Thats the other end of this chain of Crusading. See it starts to look like regional take over. Some of you that come off a bit blood thirsty might even cringe at a blood bath of this proportion. If the US continues to invade countries in the former Persian Empire, Regional Suport for the "axies of Evil" will happen from there nieghbors we aren't so freindly with now.

River Hawke

I'm gonna put Iran and N. Korea about on the same level because they both pose a military threat and they're run by lunatics. One exports terrorism, the other is constantly threatening an American ally, and they both have nuclear capabilities or are trying to attain them. :mp5:

its about definition not slang, your english stop abusing it!

Actually to imply slang to be improper english is incorrect. Such an implication is only true by that of the prescriptive language approach and is not necessarily true. Standard English is only what is commonly used, and if slang becomes commonly used it is therefore standard.

I am a successful English Language student, don't criticise my language skills just because you fail to understand multiple meanings.

Why'd you put those countries? i like those countries, except canada! i'd probably move to north korea if i was required to move to another country, or greenland, yes, greenland's good.

That only brought one party into the war, it did not make what it was. Anyway, George Bush living can and will lead to war

No more than assassinating the French president. George Bush living is about the dumbest anti-Bush argument ever. I'd expect something at least a little better than that, I mean that's not even insulting, it's amusing.

Whichever one has most oil. Oh yeah!!!

] If not, then accept my explanation and get over the fact that pretty much everyone in England resents George Bush.
So does everyone here... but your posts are short sighted... lets say the US elects NAder(not to bash nader just can't think of anyone) on the ticket and we become isolitionist and lets the world do what it wants... what would happen? You think africa is bad? Israel would be gone in a day? S.E. asia would go crazy... Also if country A assiantes country B's leader(however bad) country B will want revenge and country A will call in allies and so would country B and guess WHAT WORLD WAR!..... Think before you POST!

come on, the only reason why I asked that because I don't want to get into a flame/spam fight with people, not to mention its kinda moronic to imply the US is worse the N.K.

By some standards yes, it is moronic, by other standards no it isn't. Frex: how many foreign sovereign states has NK invaded?

By some standards yes, it is moronic, by other standards no it isn't. Frex: how many foreign sovereign states has NK invaded?
okay but not all wars are bad... and its about how they treat their people.

okay but not all wars are bad... and its about how they treat their people.

What gives the US the right to destabilise/invade foreign sovereign regimes on the basis of purely internal matters such as this though?

So does everyone here... but your posts are short sighted... lets say the US elects NAder(not to bash nader just can't think of anyone) on the ticket and we become isolitionist and lets the world do what it wants... what would happen? You think africa is bad? Israel would be gone in a day? S.E. asia would go crazy... Also if country A assiantes country B's leader(however bad) country B will want revenge and country A will call in allies and so would country B and guess WHAT WORLD WAR!..... Think before you POST!

As it happens, your posts seem short sighted. I said I hope AMERICA INVADES a country that will kill George Bush. Id be terrified of the invasion America might do to a country that assassinates its leader when they are at war!!! And I'm not asking for isolationism either, but invading countries because you don't like their political system is criminal.

What gives the US the right to destabilise/invade foreign sovereign regimes on the basis of purely internal matters such as this though?

Nothing absolutly nothing..... happy? we had no right to invade Iraq(on bush's evidence) But don't we, as a super power, have a responsability to help those who cannot help themselves? Since when is war a right? since when is it good to have war? War isn't good but unfortunatly it is sometimes a neccesity... The genocide in africa we could've fixed... We could stop the next hitler before he gets too powerful.. and sometimes deplomacy doesn't work.. look at chamberlain in 1939?... Okay this thread wasn't about the US but yet it is... now I am not saying that we have a perfect nation(far from it actually) but to say that we are absolute evil?...... thats doesn't need a response..... think what would happen without us....

LOL my canadian control backfired now they are the second most evil country in the world!

LOL my canadian control backfired now they are the second most evil country in the world!

Well if they are like me its because they think the US has no business invading any of them. I don't think NK being the top is a very good idea. I worry if Bush will start the Cold War again, the world needs to recognise that China could do serious damage if Communism comes under threat and Kim Jong Il is crazy enough to blow something up.

Please be the white house, Please be the white house

Awaits pissed off people who can't take jokes...

think what would happen without us....

What do you think would happen without the US?

Well if they are like me its because they think the US has no business invading any of them. I don't think NK being the top is a very good idea. I worry if Bush will start the Cold War again, the world needs to recognise that China could do serious damage if Communism comes under threat and Kim Jong Il is crazy enough to blow something up.

Please be the white house, Please be the white house

Awaits pissed off people who can't take jokes...
So what do you want he US to do? what do you want the world to do? We have no bussiness invading anyone? right? okay we don't then... and after all our tropps leave S.K. and Japan watch what happens and we will then blame you... Also N.K is one of the biggest human rights abusers today so what do you say to them? Too bad we have to reconize and respect your government? Please tell me?

Also that white house joke lol, but you have a lot of anger pointed at president bush(albeit somewhat deserved) but why?.

What do you think would happen without the US?
Well it depends. If we never enter foriegns affairs or was always canada(no offense lol),

Lets see: First off Nazi Germany wins WWII and you guys spend a couple of decades after that fighting them with underground resistance, you would win, but wait guess what then you got the USSR couple more decades... after that... Israel wouldn't exist...... there could be some food shortages in certain areas... no advanced computer technology.... I could go on forever.

Second scenerio: we just decided to retire: Right now bush says fuck it and recall every american soldier from everywhere and ends all foriegn obligations and all we do now is trade (not weapons though)...
First off: israel and Taiwan gone
Second: S.E. asian would fall apart
third: North korea would invade S. Korea
fourth: Must I continue?

What happen to our government caring about our people? All I hear from the gov. any more is "they are treated bad" or "they need help". What about US citizans....dont we count any more. Look at our minimum wage, and our lack of affordable health care and/or insurance. What about our rundown schools!!!! Or our crappy ecomomy.

River Hawke

What happen to our government caring about our people? All I hear from the gov. any more is "they are treated bad" or "they need help". What about US citizans....dont we count any more. Look at our minimum wage, and our lack of affordable health care and/or insurance. What about our rundown schools!!!! Or our crappy ecomomy.

River Hawke

Yep Thats why I said we weren't perfect: Stay on topic People Which nations need to be invaded for the good of humanity?

So what do you want he US to do? what do you want the world to do? We have no bussiness invading anyone? right? okay we don't then... and after all our tropps leave S.K. and Japan watch what happens and we will then blame you... Also N.K is one of the biggest human rights abusers today so what do you say to them? Too bad we have to reconize and respect your government? Please tell me?


You cannot say that NK will start invading everywhere for one, it wont as it cant. And anyway, you are enforcing your own kind of system upon them, not just trying to modify a government system. You can't even say that your attacks on such a place are justified by that. Remember Vietnam? The US invaded it just because it was Communist, even though the people wanted Communism. You lost which is perhaps evidence that the good will out, but anyway, communism is unfortuneately a better system for some places than democracy. Russia is crap without it, China is only good with it. Anyway, to be specific, the NK Communist regime was greatly supported. It doesn't have democracy, but not everyone wants it.?.

Also that white house joke lol, but you have a lot of anger pointed at president bush(albeit somewhat deserved) but why?.

Because he is responsible for the deaths of innocent people and because he is president even though he is an idiot. He's just president because he is part of the neo-aristocracy of America.

Now you need a freaking history book: We didn't invade vietnam we were there because the S. Vietnam Gov. Asked us too. Also most of the people in S. vietnam didn't want Communism but thats neither here nor there... Did you say the communism is better that democracy? Good for you! you just made my point. Now I am paraphrasing Vietnam because it was a rather complicated part of history and I don't feel like going into it right now. But you are the problem..... do you honestly think that everyone would be content and happy if we just left? Also N.K. would invade S.K. simply for the resources not to mention they are still at war and N.K. Reconizes S.K. As there rightful land.... Honestly your not that idealistic are you? but this thread is dead.. no one can stay on topic... B.S. I understand you don't like war but try to imagine the world if your ideas were implimented... Also... ahh forget it!

ah, forget it. The dying words of a used up debator. I don't believe communism is better than democracy, I believe communism is a valid form of government if it is wanted. And as it happens, S. Vietnam did want it, the government didnt. If you want to talk about requested support, guess why the Cuban Missile Crisis happened? You seem ignorant of everything beyond your cause. Also my reference to NK not invading SK involved the existence of America without the requirement for war without provocation. You don't invade countries because they might invade countries. What kind of insane hypocrisy is that?

If it is the duty of our gov. to obtain global humanity...they ought not commit crimes against humanity such as those committed at GITMO and Abu. And if spreading Democracy is there duty .....they ought not be so quik to abandom the democratic ideals set forth by our founding fathers though the making of the Patriot Act 1 & 2.

It starts to look like they may have other agendas in mind!!


River Hawke

The point is that you can't tell a nation that it cant' attack another nation, if you are going to do the same thing. You can't tell another nation that it cant' have nuclear weapons, while you yourself have the largest stock pile of nuclear weapons in the world. It is hypocritical to do so.

These nations, Iran, North Korea, etc.... are as evil as America is...

The point is that you can't tell a nation that it cant' attack another nation, if you are going to do the same thing. You can't tell another nation that it cant' have nuclear weapons, while you yourself have the largest stock pile of nuclear weapons in the world. It is hypocritical to do so.

These nations, Iran, North Korea, etc.... are as evil as America is...

THANK YOU! SOME SENSE FOR ONCE!

I vote for none of the above because you can't spell! It's "Who's". "Whose" means "whose is it?"...."Who's" is "Who is it".

This (http://www.freewebs.com/thegrammarphantom) could help you.

Would you please define what exactly you mean by evil?
If you mean threat to wolrd peace... ah well, you asked not to mention that nation...
Very funny. Ha. Ha.

The point is that you can't tell a nation that it cant' attack another nation, if you are going to do the same thing. You can't tell another nation that it cant' have nuclear weapons, while you yourself have the largest stock pile of nuclear weapons in the world. It is hypocritical to do so.

These nations, Iran, North Korea, etc.... are as evil as America is...
And where are you from again?

And where are you from again?

Ask yourself the same question

I'm Sorry very vauge huh? Okay a nation that represses its people and that the US and allies should invade next..... following the bush doctrine of course(lol)..... Okay heres a definition: (dictionary.com)
1. Morally bad or wrong; wicked: an evil tyrant.
2. Causing ruin, injury, or pain; harmful: the evil effects of a poor diet.
3. Characterized by or indicating future misfortune; ominous: evil omens.
4. Bad or blameworthy by report; infamous: an evil reputation.
5. Characterized by anger or spite; malicious: an evil temper.

But Evil Mass..you left out the United States....

Thats a dictionarys version but what do you think defines evil?
Leave Canada out of it. Canada rocks..if you include Canada, then you have to include the UK and all the common wealth.

ah, forget it. The dying words of a used up debator. I don't believe communism is better than democracy, I believe communism is a valid form of government if it is wanted. And as it happens, S. Vietnam did want it, the government didnt. If you want to talk about requested support, guess why the Cuban Missile Crisis happened? You seem ignorant of everything beyond your cause.
I don't have a cause. What you think I'm some flag touting Neo-con? You think I love bush without quesiton? No, I have some serouse problems with my government, I freaking hate bush(but I have real reasons unlike you), and I thought we shouldn't have gone to Iraq in the first place(not enough proof or valid reason as the government pointed out). But I don't think that we can just leave Iraq now, we destroyed their government and now we must help them rebuild, we can do some good there. IF you think that the US is nothing but Evil ignorant people you have serouse problems my friend. We tend to forget we are the worlds police(in one sense or another) I would pefer the UN be but as you may have noticed they aren't(its like asking our congress to join the army) Bush is a gun touting texan(also hes a texan trust me they aren't americans, they are the kind of americans that make the rest of us look bad). You seem to think that the world would be perfect if everyone just left eachother alone: and you blame the US for it. Okay a somewhat valid argument we are the only super power and we get involved in everyones affairs. BUT the flaw is that if we left there would be anarchy(kinda) and no one else has the political will or military power to keep the world going... This post isn't well thought out but let me say this IF we were really as evil as you say we are we would take over the world, we have the power, but we don't so think about that.. (by power I mean we could destroy the entire world 4 times over at will)...... This thread is dead......

But Evil Mass..you left out the United States....

Thats a dictionarys version but what do you think defines evil?
Leave Canada out of it. Canada rocks..if you include Canada, then you have to include the UK and all the common wealth.
canada does rock. I included it as a control... but unfortunatly it backfired and everyone voted for it.... Anyone who thinks canada is evil deserves to be sodomised by an angry dwarf..... or not

heres what I got so far:
Iran
North Korea
China
Uzbekistan
Zimbabwe
Cuba
Saudi Arabia
Sudan
Burma
Libya
Pakistan
Turkmenistan

Thinking about adding: Syria, Congo(DR), Russia(No, not yet),
Why the hell Pakistan? What because they are registered to have nukes, like america? Or because of the fear campaign in america they could be the next enemy lurking in the bushes.

You have 'sereose'? spelling problems. And if you honestly think the Iraq war was wrong how the hell can you support a war on the 3 you suggested? :headbang:

and what's with who should we invade next? im in we and i say why invade anyone at all. why have some bloated superpower and nations under fear from it change a countries system and kill lots of innocent children? Why invade anyone??????????

Why the hell Pakistan? What because they are registered to have nukes, like america? Or because of the fear campaign in america they could be the next enemy lurking in the bushes.
Pakistan? Their leader is very represive.... Someone suggested it to me, I just compiled suggestions.... If I remember correctly Pakistans Leader(can't spell his name) overthrew a democratic gov. and setup his own....

You have 'sereose'? spelling problems. And if you honestly think the Iraq war was wrong how the hell can you support a war on the 3 you suggested? :headbang:

look we are there now... If we leave it will lead to a civil war to rival Africa. We have a responability and I know I have spelling problems its my damn laptop keyboard(you know those damn dells the keys are spaced very oddly and I don't care).... Also if bush just came out and said we must destroy all tryants (starting with N.K. of course but that would lead to an extremly large war) I would've supported him(wow thats odd) but he didn't all he did was sidestep the issue when it was quite clear all he wanted was the oil.... But its too late for that now.

look we are there now... If we leave it will lead to a civil war to rival Africa. We have a responability and I know I have spelling problems its my damn laptop keyboard(you know those damn dells the keys are spaced very oddly and I don't care)

The Korean state has existed for over 60 years, how can you just claim it will deteriorate into civil war? And sereose has no keyboard excuses....

The Korean state has existed for over 60 years, how can you just claim it will deteriorate into civil war? And sereose has no keyboard excuses....
Wow know your historyL:: north korea and South korea are still at war even to this day. N.K. reconizes S.K. as part of N.(actually they don't refer to themself as N.K. Just Korea because they don't reconize the south) if the US said Fucl 'em have it they would considering their economic situation. Also to say they can't because they aren't strong enough you don't know anything about them.. they have one of the strongest armies in the world(one of the reasons why I don't think we should go to war with them without a large amount of allies, I do hope for diplomacy)

I know there are no excuses *pulls knife out and cuts open chest* happy?

Wow know your historyL:: north korea and South korea are still at war even to this day. N.K. reconizes S.K. as part of N.(actually they don't refer to themself as N.K. Just Korea because they don't reconize the south) if the US said Fucl 'em have it they would considering their economic situation. Also to say they can't because they aren't strong enough you don't know anything about them.. they have one of the strongest armies in the world(one of the reasons why I don't think we should go to war with them without a large amount of allies, I do hope for diplomacy)

I know there are no excuses *pulls knife out and cuts open chest* happy?

Yes, delighted, but it wont help your typing.

I mean that NK wont go to war because they know they will be attacked. And anyway, US troops arent stationed in SK so if they are at war then nothings giving yet.

I suggest you do read a history book EvilMass - you assume that Nazi Germany would have conquered Europe if America didn't get involved - how do you propose that Germany conquer Britain, with the latters superior navy and air force? Would have lasted longer, the iron curtain would be a lot more to the west and Britain's economies would have being even more ruined, but it wouldn't have being lost.

Also, the South Vietnamese held a vote on whether to unite with Communist North Vietnam. The government rigged it very badly, so that they got 98% of the vote. America advised they only claim it was 70% as no one would believe 98%, but Diem ignored this and no one bought it, fueling antipathy towards the government.

Yes, delighted, but it wont help your typing.

I mean that NK wont go to war because they know they will be attacked. And anyway, US troops arent stationed in SK so if they are at war then nothings giving yet.
YEs they are, 300,000(estimate) my counsin is there (not the british kind), alsom be attacked by whom? ahh thats right the US thanks for proving my point! Honestly did you mean that? NK and SK are already at WAR! Kim Jong Ill has stated many times it is koreas desitiny to be on under communist rule(kinda like manifest destiny)... I say again know your history my friend... come on if my sterotype of an englishman is correct(which it isn't) you should be sitting in a wood paneled library in your mansion reading books on cultures your people use to own........

I suggest you do read a history book EvilMass - you assume that Nazi Germany would have conquered Europe if America didn't get involved - how do you propose that Germany conquer Britain, with the latters superior navy and air force? Would have lasted longer, the iron curtain would be a lot more to the west and Britain's economies would have being even more ruined, but it wouldn't have being lost.


Not to get into a debate on theoretical history here but I was just using that as an example. But remember if the US didn't exist you wouldn't have had a proper supply line to hold out that long.. the point was US never existed, Land Lease act hmmm? but you could be right I could be right who knows it never happened:
Next debate: King George wins Revolutionary war and renames England II....

YEs they are, 300,000(estimate) my counsin is there (not the british kind), alsom be attacked by whom? ahh thats right the US thanks for proving my point! Honestly did you mean that? NK and SK are already at WAR! Kim Jong Ill has stated many times it is koreas desitiny to be on under communist rule(kinda like manifest destiny)... I say again know your history my friend... come on if my sterotype of an englishman is correct(which it isn't) you should be sitting in a wood paneled library in your mansion reading books on cultures your people use to own........

Insulting my knowledge of history is even stupider than insulting my knowledge of english. You seem to be ignorant of my posts as well. Ill capitalise so you understand. Perhaps Ill write in syllables next time if that doesn't get through. I BELIEVE AMERICA DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO INVADE COUNTRIES THAT DO NOTHING AGGRESSIVE TO PROVOKE IT. HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IS NOT AGGRESSIVE PROVOCATION. NONE OF THESE COUNTRIES HAVE DECLARED WAR, SO NOR SHOULD THE US.

Just tell me you get that now please. :headbang:

Insulting my knowledge of history is even stupider than insulting my knowledge of english. You seem to be ignorant of my posts as well. Ill capitalise so you understand. Perhaps Ill write in syllables next time if that doesn't get through. I BELIEVE AMERICA DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO INVADE COUNTRIES THAT DO NOTHING AGGRESSIVE TO PROVOKE IT. HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IS NOT AGGRESSIVE PROVOCATION. NONE OF THESE COUNTRIES HAVE DECLARED WAR, SO NOR SHOULD THE US.

Just tell me you get that now please. :headbang:
that has nothing to do with history: you said the follow: no US troops in Korea, there are! you said that N. S. korea aren't at war, THEY ARE!....

Human rights violations isn't provocation your right! but my point is that we have a responability to the world... If Nazi germany didn't invade anyone and
just had the holocaust would you let them? If you would I feel sorry for you, seeing how you would rather kill bush... also don't dare insult my intelligence only reason why I don't spell very well(and bad grammer) is that this is a message board not a thesis paper! and I didn't insult your english and your knowledge of history does deserve to be insulted because it lacks... Go back to your history teacher and smack... just like how I will go smack my english teacher deal? i don't fact check so some of my data may be off(such as dates) but you get the point..... My whole point is this:

WE ARE THE ONLY SUPER POWER LEFT IN THE WORLD, We Have the power and with power comes responability, how do we use it? Do we do nothing or do we try to help others?

ADANAC

ADANAC

Okay Obviously that's Canada, so why do you think they are the worst?

Iran: A totalitarian-religious state. Not technically evil, but very very difficult to get along with, like a born-again Christian aunt.

North Korea: Communist, therefore evil.

Uzbekistan: Run by a crazy guy with a sense of humor.

Canada: A hockey playing nation, and therefore not evil, just misguided about health care.

North Korea wins by a mile.

Okay Obviously that's Canada, so why do you think they are the worst?

YEs you won the 1000 dollar prize! I don't think they are the worst Shit I love canada. I used canada as a control to get a margin of error unfortunatly too many voted for it (joke I guess) ruining my point... my next control will be France.... But canada is awesome.... I live in N.E. And canada is like us(kinda)....

Bullshit, you arent the last super power! What the hell are England, France, China, Russia and Germany? You have no responsibility to destroy countries because you don't believe in their regime, that makes you no better than the North Korea you demonise so much right now. You try to justify invasion of countries for little more than what the US do themselves. You are a hypocrite, just like the government that is carrying this out.

Iran: A totalitarian-religious state. Not technically evil, but very very difficult to get along with, like a born-again Christian aunt.

North Korea: Communist, therefore evil.

Uzbekistan: Run by a crazy guy with a sense of humor.

Canada: A hockey playing nation, and therefore not evil, just misguided about health care.

North Korea wins by a mile.
Someone gets the point!

Someone gets the point!

Communist (by definition) = evil?

Hmm...mild prejudice. I love Americas ignorance of their indoctrination

I don't know, who does the more evil belong to?

I don't know, who does the more evil belong to?

'To whom does the more evil belong', surely?

Hmm...mild prejudice. I love Americas ignorance of their indoctrination
Hahaha funny. It is true that some Americans are ignorant, but I am not one, I try not to associate myself with the ignorant people; I don't want it to rub off on me.

Communist (by definition) = evil?

Yep.

I don't know, who does the more evil belong to?


'To whom does the more evil belong', surely?

Me. And communists apparently

The United States of America : Hell bent on controling the world.

Hahaha funny. It is true that some Americans are ignorant, but I am not one, I try not to associate myself with the ignorant people; I don't want it to rub off on me.

I cant tell if thats angry or accepting but ill take it as the latter. I dont like talking to ignorant people much. As a wise man once said, never argue with idiots. Theyll take you down to their level and then beat you

Yep.

Care to elucidate?

Communist (by definition) = evil?

In my life, I've been to four Communist nations. It's evil.

(And I will not debate "there's never been a true Communist state". Either it works outside of the classroom, or it's a useless theory and still doesn't work.)

Bullshit, you arent the last super power! What the hell are England, France, China, Russia and Germany? You have no responsibility to destroy countries because you don't believe in their regime, that makes you no better than the North Korea you demonise so much right now. You try to justify invasion of countries for little more than what the US do themselves. You are a hypocrite, just like the government that is carrying this out.

ok you guys are A. Powers not Super powers there is a difference.. Look it up I don't feel like explaining it to you but short answer is we have more ecnomic, military power than you.

Call me a hypocrite? fine thats your right.

But if you think I just want to invade countries because I like to see things blow up on CNN you have some problems. you are the problem with the world... APATHY... you want to honestly repect the government of N.K.? You aren't listening... You point is that its wrong to tell another people how to run their lives? right? your right it is wrong. But isn't wrong to sit on the sidelines and let group A kill group B, isn't it wrong to let people be repressed when you have the power to stop it? your argument is that it is their government their choice? So follow your theory, lets say blair loses his mind and turns UK into an tryanny and he had support of your paralament(that won't happen but for argument sacks) and he has control over your military they he goes to execute all the red-heads... following your ideals the US wouldn't be allowed to step in and stop him? Is that right?

Please tell me what should we do?
you seem to have a lot fo ideas of whats wrong okay? Whats RIGHT then?
Tell Me pLease!

I cant tell if thats angry or accepting but ill take it as the latter. I dont like talking to ignorant people much. As a wise man once said, never argue with idiots. Theyll take you down to their level and then beat you

It's accepting. I have heard that saying before; I would think it is probably true.

In my life, I've been to four Communist nations. It's evil.

(And I will not debate "there's never been a true Communist state". Either it works outside of the classroom, or it's a useless theory and still doesn't work.)

Communism is only evil in certain eyes. Believe it or not, but some people will put up with a lack of civil rights for a general better life. You think capitalism would work in China for example. Work for 1.5 Billion? :rolleyes:

So follow your theory, lets say blair loses his mind and turns UK into an tryanny and he had support of your paralament(that won't happen but for argument sacks) and he has control over your military they he goes to execute all the red-heads... following your ideals the US wouldn't be allowed to step in and stop him?


The US would never step in here as there is no oil in the UK....

Communism is only evil in certain eyes. Believe it or not, but some people will put up with a lack of civil rights for a general better life. You think capitalism would work in China for example. Work for 1.5 Billion? :rolleyes:
Behold an idealist who has never lived under communist rule!

Give up Civil rights for a better life? What is wrong with you! I hold our british counsins in high esteem but your really bringing down that opinion!

ok you guys are A. Powers not Super powers there is a difference.. Look it up I don't feel like explaining it to you but short answer is we have more ecnomic, military power than you.

Call me a hypocrite? fine thats your right.

But if you think I just want to invade countries because I like to see things blow up on CNN you have some problems. you are the problem with the world... APATHY... you want to honestly repect the government of N.K.? You aren't listening... You point is that its wrong to tell another people how to run their lives? right? your right it is wrong. But isn't wrong to sit on the sidelines and let group A kill group B, isn't it wrong to let people be repressed when you have the power to stop it? your argument is that it is their government their choice? So follow your theory, lets say blair loses his mind and turns UK into an tryanny and he had support of your paralament(that won't happen but for argument sacks) and he has control over your military they he goes to execute all the red-heads... following your ideals the US wouldn't be allowed to step in and stop him? Is that right?

Please tell me what should we do?
you seem to have a lot fo ideas of whats wrong okay? Whats RIGHT then?
Tell Me pLease!

Theres more than one superpower you fool. And in terms of your Blair thing, thats not support of the people. Anyway, if it was the red heads....lol

The US would never step in here as there is no oil in the UK....
Too True(with bush anyway) it was just an example....

Theres more than one superpower you fool. And in terms of your Blair thing, thats not support of the people. Anyway, if it was the red heads....lol
REally who? Who is the other super power? What other nation in the world can at will destory all of us! (not a good thought but true)

Behold an idealist who has never lived under communist rule!

Give up Civil rights for a better life? What is wrong with you! I hold our british counsins in high esteem but your really bringing down that opinion!

If it isnt the case, how come communists get elected some times? Russia for example. KPD in Germany was up to win if the Nazis didnt, who also give up civil rights for better life. Vietnam, it was supported. China, it was supported. Of course communism wouldnt be wanted in America or Britain, but thats because capitalism works for us in general.

REally who? Who is the other super power? What other nation in the world can at will destory all of us! (not a good thought but true)

You cant even do that! If you declared war on Britain alone you would be bled white before you won. A superpower is one of the strongest countries in the world, not the strongest nor one that has dominion over the world. America fits closest to that, but no one has had such power for thousands of years.

If it isnt the case, how come communists get elected some times? Russia for example. KPD in Germany was up to win if the Nazis didnt, who also give up civil rights for better life. Vietnam, it was supported. China, it was supported. Of course communism wouldnt be wanted in America or Britain, but thats because capitalism works for us in general.

Communism doesn't work... Your example china:they are taking capitalist reforms and we are trading with them thats the only reason why!.... communist being elected doesn't mean it works... Bush got elected remember that!

You still haven't answer my questions yet? Whats better than the US? What would you do? HMM? whats better?

How about not invading anyone at all, for a change?

I didnt say communism works, i said it works better than capitalism in some places which it does. If you want to know what i suggest you do I suggest stop warmongering. That goes for you Mr Who Should We Invade Next and for Bush

the us gov is a lot worse than irans and they opress a lot more than they do. i know that for a fact.

You cant even do that! If you declared war on Britain alone you would be bled white before you won. A superpower is one of the strongest countries in the world, not the strongest nor one that has dominion over the world. America fits closest to that, but no one has had such power for thousands of years.


You aren't getting it are you? super power example: Bush gets drunk one night and pushes the big red button launching all our nukes bye bye world!

Example two: bush gets drunk again and doesn't raise the debt ceiling causing world wide depression

Example Three: WE FUND HALF OF THE UN!!!

Example Four: WE GIVE THE MOSt In FORiegn Aid

Example Five: If you trade on the international level you us american dollars not Pounds! Honestly you guys are strong but not that strong!

I didnt say communism works, i said it works better than capitalism in some places which it does. If you want to know what i suggest you do I suggest stop warmongering. That goes for you Mr Who Should We Invade Next and for Bush
okay stop warmongering! What else then?
What should we do? HMm?
please outline a foriegn policy that doesn't lead to WWIII please. its very hard!

Communism doesn't work... Your example china:they are taking capitalist reforms and we are trading with them thats the only reason why!.... communist being elected doesn't mean it works... Bush got elected remember that!

You still haven't answer my questions yet? Whats better than the US? What would you do? HMM? whats better?

First of all the Untied States is not the greatest nation in the world and if you are acting like you are; I must say you are extremely ignorant my friend, and you are the people that make other countries think that in the United States we're all a bunch of ignorant morons.

You aren't getting it are you? super power example: Bush gets drunk one night and pushes the big red button launching all our nukes bye bye world!


Many people have such power, but no one else will if you get your way

Example two: bush gets drunk again and doesn't raise the debt ceiling causing world wide depression

Yeah, the world self destructed when depression happened. Its never happened before, I wonder if anyone could ever get through it. :rolleyes:

Example Three: WE FUND HALF OF THE UN!!!

And thats why they dont stop your war crimes


Example Five: If you trade on the international level you us american dollars not Pounds! Honestly you guys are strong but not that strong!

I said we were a super power, not stronger than America

First of all the Untied States is not the greatest nation in the world and if you are acting like you are; I must say you are extremely ignorant my friend, and you are the people that make other countries think that in the United States we're all a bunch of ignorant morons.
I know and i never said we were perfect! christ read my earlier posts... We need reform I know...

First of all the Untied States is not the greatest nation in the world and if you are acting like you are; I must say you are extremely ignorant my friend, and you are the people that make other countries think that in the United States we're all a bunch of ignorant morons.

No but America is an Empire. And like any other Empire it is making sure it has a stranglehold on all that it controls and wishs to controls.
But as history has shown, all empires crumble.

I see the US invading a country coming up soon because we got Bush and well hes republican its what they do.... But to say the US is the most evil country in the world? Honestly how closed minded are you? I have many problems with the US government but its policy issues... And war can produce good (i know i know it sounds odd) but imagine that we had the political will to stop the genocide in africa during the 90's, wouldn't that be good? So the purpose of this thread is to decide what countries need to be destroyed(metaphorically!) in order to secure the world.... yeah thats it... But honestly come on if you think the US government (although not a good organization, it requires a lot of work...) is worse than oh lets say Iran or north korea you need help. And the reason why you don't see N.K. invading S.K. Is because if they do they would be destroyed by the US... you guys tend to forget that, we do do some good.

And in turn China comes in a scares you off....again. Im really looking forward to China and the US having a war, I can sit back and relax in my isolated corner of the world and watch you idiots kill each other on CNN, which I imagine will change its name to CHINA NEWS NETWORK!

okay stop warmongering! What else then?
What should we do? HMm?
please outline a foriegn policy that doesn't lead to WWIII please. its very hard!
Oh sorry, i didnt see your point. Starting war prevents war! I see. God youre dumb

Say a dictator in some country, Africa for example, decides to kill every other citizen in his country. What would you do, British Socialism? Hide by insulting his spelling or would you write a strongly worded letter?

Say a dictator in some country, Africa for example, decides to kill every other citizen in his country. What would you do, British Socialism? Hide by insulting his spelling or would you write a strongly worded letter?

Id sit and have a coke. :rolleyes: Fool, no one is doing that. I said no war without major provocation

Example Four: WE GIVE THE MOSt In FORiegn Aid


Technically, as a unified body, the EU gives about twice as much.

Many people have such power, but no one else will if you get your way

Yeah, the world self destructed when depression happened. Its never happened before, I wonder if anyone could ever get through it. :rolleyes:

And thats why they dont stop your war crimes


I said we were a super power, not stronger than America
okay who else has that first power? russia? NOPE their ICMB's are all defunct(maybe a few work) a couple of other nations have nukes okay... they can maybe if they all combine destroy the US... WE can destroy the entire world three TIMES OVER!!

you don't understand what the debt ceiling is so your response is well not a response...

and if we didn't raise the debt ceiling it would lead to a depression beyond anything imaginable(worse then before, also did you just roll off a world-wide depression? wow)

your saying weren't arent the only super power okay then who else is?
Your saying that we are EVIL(we have problems but damn evil? thats a bit extreme).
your saying communism works better than capitalism(in some areas)
you want bush dead
you think all war is bad
you probably think I am some arrogant american(lol)
you think everyone will live in peace if given the chance

If I am wrong correct me: heres what I believe:

I think we have power and power leads to responability
I think we can't just leave Iraq now because it would lead to civil war(even though I opposed the war)
I think if we had the chance to stop a genocide or a tryanny we should..

Technically, as a unified body, the EU gives about twice as much.


What's the point? It damn well should give more it's 30x as many countries as the United States. Too bad the EU isn't one country and most likely never will be for at least another few lifetimes.

Id sit and have a coke. :rolleyes: Fool, no one is doing that. I said no war without major provocation

You sir are a moron, I say that in the nicest way possible... It is HAPPening Right now.. And you said without any majro provocation to yourself... its happening within their own borders. You would just let that happen? you are whats wrong with the world... you should be ashamed of yourself... Standing by and doing nothing is how WWII started!!!

you should be ashamed of yourself... Standing by and doing nothing is how WWII started!!! ..

And what the fuck did America do to stop it? Nothing! You let our people die, you let us defend Europe. You waited until you were attacked to help these people. What right have you got to shit on the graves of our soldiers and talk about us doing nothing! You are sick


I think we have power and power leads to responability
I think we can't just leave Iraq now because it would lead to civil war(even though I opposed the war)
I think if we had the chance to stop a genocide or a tryanny we should..

Fine here is what I believe.

Responsibility can and is abused
You should never have started Iraq just like you should not start again with NK or anywhere else
Genocide is not occurring in the places you suggest
Tyranny is not necessarily the case (in literal meaning of tyranny that is)
Yes, you are an arrogant American
You should stop thinking America has the right to invade just as it has responsibility
You should stop being indoctrinated
Its too late to argue with cretins
Im going to bed.

Ill prob check in the morning for whatever pathetic response you choose to make.

What's the point? It damn well should give more it's 30x as many countries as the United States. Too bad the EU isn't one country and most likely never will be for at least another few lifetimes.

It is, however, only roughly one and a half times the population of the US though, and yet gives over twice the amount the US gives.

As to what the point was - just correcting a spurious or misleading comment.

note for the advancement of the greater good:

Whose = possessive
Whose dog is that?

Who's = Who is
Who's your daddy?

---

also, since the comparison "more" only applies to two (and only two...) opposing items -- and since there were four items in this list -- this topic should have read, "Who's the most evil...?"

hehe

Lets say a house down the street is on fire: would you go in and save the baby(assuming there is a baby there) or would you watch it burn? that simple...

note for the advancement of English grammar's greater good:

Whose = possessive
Whose dog is that?

Who's = Who is
Who's your daddy?

---

also, since the comparison "more" only applies to two (and only two...) opposing items -- and since there were four items in this list -- this topic should have read, "Who's the most evil...?"

hehe

Yay, my first post and I get to lol at the USA. What a dangerous joke country; what a moronic, paranoid government; what a lame thread and poll.

The USA is in the last stages of Empire, spending an order of magnitude more on its war machine than on anything else, just like the Romans after the Republic got too big and unwieldy. The Romans then had to enforce their version of society/peace with an army that cost orders of magnitude more than any other aspect of their budget. Am I getting through here? The USA is about to implode, and it's just stupid enough and just powerful enough to take the sensible majority of the planet with it. Y'all voted for a cretin...

-w

Yay, my first post and I get to lol at the USA. What a dangerous joke country; what a moronic, paranoid government; what a lame thread and poll.

The USA is in the last stages of Empire, spending an order of magnitude more on its war machine than on anything else, just like the Romans after the Republic got too big and unwieldy. The Romans then had to enforce their version of society/peace with an army that cost orders of magnitude more than any other aspect of their budget. Am I getting through here? The USA is about to implode, and it's just stupid enough and just powerful enough to take the sensible majority of the planet with it. Y'all voted for a cretin...

-w

lol

i see we have an america hater...

The USA LOLs at you.

Id sit and have a coke. :rolleyes: Fool, no one is doing that. I said no war without major provocation


The fact that it isn't a scenario right now is irrevelant. You said, and I quote, "I BELIEVE AMERICA DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO INVADE COUNTRIES THAT DO NOTHING AGGRESSIVE TO PROVOKE IT. HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IS NOT AGGRESSIVE PROVOCATION. NONE OF THESE COUNTRIES HAVE DECLARED WAR, SO NOR SHOULD THE US."

Yep. You used all those caps. Now what do you have to say?

You said that human rights violations does not equal major provocation and now you are changing your opinion? Odd.



On another note, I find it hilarious that you use a word when you didn't know that it also meant retard and after he shows you up and PROVES YOU WRONG you throw a pussy fit about "not understanding double meanings." Yeah, alright...

Yay, my first post and I get to lol at the USA. What a dangerous joke country; what a moronic, paranoid government; what a lame thread and poll.

The USA is in the last stages of Empire, spending an order of magnitude more on its war machine than on anything else, just like the Romans after the Republic got too big and unwieldy. The Romans then had to enforce their version of society/peace with an army that cost orders of magnitude more than any other aspect of their budget. Am I getting through here? The USA is about to implode, and it's just stupid enough and just powerful enough to take the sensible majority of the planet with it. Y'all voted for a cretin...

-w

Agree.

And this thread is worse than lame - it's disgusting. The US has the yellowest, lamest military force in the World, not even setting foot into a country it's 'liberating' until every citizen of that country has either been killed, maimed and/or bereaved. And then thinking they're tough and just. I spit on it all.

And that's just the stuff that's out in the open.

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

-w

No but America is an Empire. And like any other Empire it is making sure it has a stranglehold on all that it controls and wishs to controls.
But as history has shown, all empires crumble.

yes, we're strangling the new Iraqi government, and the one in Afghanistan as well.

...we aren't really in Iraq to kill insurgents. That's a conspiracy.

lmao

we were right about Iraqis (most of them, anyway) wanting democracy/republican form of government... do you have a problem with us granting them their wish? Most of them don't.

We took down Saddam. What a HORRIBLE thing to do. (honestly, some of you sound like you're in love with the guy... i mean either that or you simply HATE the US, no matter what good we do for others)

And what the fuck did America do to stop it? Nothing! You let our people die, you let us defend Europe. You waited until you were attacked to help these people. What right have you got to shit on the graves of our soldiers and talk about us doing nothing! You are sick



Fine here is what I believe.

Responsibility can and is abused
You should never have started Iraq just like you should not start again with NK or anywhere else
Genocide is not occurring in the places you suggest
Tyranny is not necessarily the case (in literal meaning of tyranny that is)
Yes, you are an arrogant American
You should stop thinking America has the right to invade just as it has responsibility
You should stop being indoctrinated
Its too late to argue with cretins
Im going to bed.

Ill prob check in the morning for whatever pathetic response you choose to make.

You know nothing of the world Pick up a fucking BOOK!, don't call me a cretin you the one here who is displaying the least knowledge? Stop being indoctinated? I have an open mind and I see the world for what it is.. oh yeah that coming from mister Communism is good!!, I am not an arrogant american.
You give liberals a bad NAME, I'm a liberal and your making us look BAD! and Yes Genocide is happening there pick up a fucking UN report and see oh wait their "the Man" so that won't work.. How about this: you go to N.Korea live there for a couple of years and tell us how good it is.. I shouldn't be responding to you but yet I am. you have no knowledge of the world, I wouldn't be surprised if your still in secondary school, and if your not go back! yell at your teachers and tell them to teach you properly.. and if case you think their "indoctinating you" pick up a book and read for yourself.. oh then go the africa and check on the nice peaceful world right? yeah because the world is just one happy place and america's fucking it up for the rest of us right?


aglkjsdasdfl;kj

And this thread is worse than lame - it's disgusting. The US has the yellowest, lamest military force in the World, not even setting foot into a country it's 'liberating' until every citizen of that country has either been killed, maimed and/or bereaved. And then thinking they're tough and just. I spit on it all.

And that's just the stuff that's out in the open.

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

-w

the US (including me) pisses on you. If you think our military is so weak, try picking a fight with them. lmao.

You know nothing of the world Pick up a fucking BOOK!, don't call me a cretin you the one here who is displaying the least knowledge? Stop being indoctinated? I have an open mind and I see the world for what it is.. oh yeah that coming from mister Communism is good!!, I am not an arrogant american.
You give liberals a bad NAME, I'm a liberal and your making us look BAD! and Yes Genocide is happening there pick up a fucking UN report and see oh wait their "the Man" so that won't work.. How about this: you go to N.Korea live there for a couple of years and tell us how good it is.. I shouldn't be responding to you but yet I am. you have no knowledge of the world, I wouldn't be surprised if your still in secondary school, and if your not go back! yell at your teachers and tell them to teach you properly.. and if case you think their "indoctinating you" pick up a book and read for yourself.. oh then go the africa and check on the nice peaceful world right? yeah because the world is just one happy place and america's fucking it up for the rest of us right?


aglkjsdasdfl;kj

fyi

you are = you're (not "your")

oh great book reader!

hehe j/k

The fact that it isn't a scenario right now is irrevelant. You said, and I quote, "I BELIEVE AMERICA DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO INVADE COUNTRIES THAT DO NOTHING AGGRESSIVE TO PROVOKE IT. HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IS NOT AGGRESSIVE PROVOCATION. NONE OF THESE COUNTRIES HAVE DECLARED WAR, SO NOR SHOULD THE US."

Yep. You used all those caps. Now what do you have to say?

You said that human rights violations does not equal major provocation and now you are changing your opinion? Odd.



On another note, I find it hilarious that you use a word when you didn't know that it also meant retard and after he shows you up and PROVES YOU WRONG you throw a pussy fit about "not understanding double meanings." Yeah, alright...


I can't stand PPL like him.. good point... is started this thread to not talk about america but countries that are bad.... I asked everyone to be civil and look how it turned out? All I ask is that you think before you post like this quote......... I am starting a new thread on another topic... I'll check tommorow to see if BS replies.... just realised this his initials are B.S. seems fitting huh?

fyi

you are = you're (not "your")

oh great book reader!

hehe j/k
okay okay me englishness not goodest so layest of mine back!

And what the fuck did America do to stop it? Nothing! You let our people die, you let us defend Europe. You waited until you were attacked to help these people. What right have you got to shit on the graves of our soldiers and talk about us doing nothing! You are sick



Fine here is what I believe.

Responsibility can and is abused
You should never have started Iraq just like you should not start again with NK or anywhere else
Genocide is not occurring in the places you suggest
Tyranny is not necessarily the case (in literal meaning of tyranny that is)
Yes, you are an arrogant American
You should stop thinking America has the right to invade just as it has responsibility
You should stop being indoctrinated
Its too late to argue with cretins
Im going to bed.

Ill prob check in the morning for whatever pathetic response you choose to make.




I appologize, this is the funniest thing I have ever read.


Watch this...

"And what the fuck did America do to stop it? Nothing! You let our people die, you let us defend Europe. You waited until you were attacked to help these people."


That same person, ladies and gentlemen, said this, "I BELIEVE AMERICA DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO INVADE COUNTRIES THAT DO NOTHING AGGRESSIVE TO PROVOKE IT"


Wait, Mr. Liberal, Jimmy has a question.
Yes, Jimmy.
Ah, thank you. My name is Jimmy and I am in the second grade. Why, Mr. Liberal, should America defend Europe if Germany did nothing to provoke it? Actually, didn't you just say that America doesn't have the right to defend Europe because that would be hypocritical?

yes, we're strangling the new Iraqi government, and the one in Afghanistan as well.

...we aren't really in Iraq to kill insurgents. That's a conspiracy.

lmao

we were right about Iraqis (most of them, anyway) wanting democracy/republican form of government... do you have a problem with us granting them their wish? Most of them don't.

Are you really naive enough to believe these are independant governments?
These are puppet regeimes that answer to America, nothing more and nothing less.

okay okay me englishness not goodest so layest of mine back!

eye eye!

hehe

Are you really naive enough to believe these are independant governments?
These are puppet regeimes that answer to America, nothing more and nothing less.

Really?

Did we stuff their ballot boxes?

Or order all those newly freed people as to how they were to vote?

lmao

you really hate us

the above is based on logic, not naivete

We took down Saddam. What a HORRIBLE thing to do. (honestly, some of you sound like you're in love with the guy... i mean either that or you simply HATE the US, no matter what good we do for others)

Who is America to take down the leader of another country?
The UN might, and i say might, have the power to do that. But one country
has no right to do that to another country.

But this example, it woudl now be ok for China to invade the US, and install a pupper regime here, because they don't like the way we are running this country.

B.S. gives good liberals like me a bad name! Hes the reason why Bush won the election all he needs to do is point to people like him and he wins!

Really?

Did we stuff their ballot boxes?

Or order all those newly freed people as to how they were to vote?

lmao

you really hate us

the above is based on logic, not naivete


You're going outside of his territory. He uses conspiracy and proof based on what he hears from Michael Moore. Using logic will just confuse him.

Of course the people of Iraq wanted democracy and they got it, I guess he thinks that the "puppet government" pays the insurgents to attack innocent Iraqis.

People like him are so full of it that they will never learn.

I appologize, this is the funniest thing I have ever read.


Watch this...

"And what the fuck did America do to stop it? Nothing! You let our people die, you let us defend Europe. You waited until you were attacked to help these people."


That same person, ladies and gentlemen, said this, "I BELIEVE AMERICA DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO INVADE COUNTRIES THAT DO NOTHING AGGRESSIVE TO PROVOKE IT"


Wait, Mr. Liberal, Jimmy has a question.
Yes, Jimmy.
Ah, thank you. My name is Jimmy and I am in the second grade. Why, Mr. Liberal, should America defend Europe if Germany did nothing to provoke it? Actually, didn't you just say that America doesn't have the right to defend Europe because that would be hypocritical?

I think we should just sit back and watch the world destroy itself... then laugh when these left-wing nutjobs whine and ask for our help.

Europe without the US in the 1940s?

Hitler wins.

Europe without the US after WW2?

Stalin/Communism conquer all of Europe.

US without France in US Revolutionary War?

US takes far longer to break away from Great Britain.


The history of the world is full of examples of countries coming to the aid of others... which is what we have done in the cases of Afghanistan (to oust the awful Taliban) and Iraq (to oust the awful Saddam Hussein).

So... why do some of you really hate us?

look I disagreed with the Iraq war, we didn't have enough evidence to attack.. but we are there now... And their democracy is functinal and it works if they say get the FUCK out Americans we will, Bush doesn't have the political will to defy them really learn about our politics if the Iraqi Gov says get out we will. but If we leave now, in these early stages there would be civil war that would make lebonon in the 80's look like a picnic..

Actually to imply slang to be improper english is incorrect. Such an implication is only true by that of the prescriptive language approach and is not necessarily true. Standard English is only what is commonly used, and if slang becomes commonly used it is therefore standard.

I am a successful English Language student, don't criticise* my language skills just because you fail to understand multiple meanings.

*criticize

Sorry about the late post. I just read this at aprx. 5:30 Central Time.

North Korea: has concentration camps, keeps food from its millions of starving people, civil and human rights nightmare

NK hands down

look I disagreed with the Iraq war, we didn't have enough evidence to attack.. but we are there now... And their democracy is functinal and it works if they say get the FUCK out Americans we will, Bush doesn't have the political will to defy them really learn about our politics if the Iraqi Gov says get out we will. but If we leave now, in these early stages there would be civil war that would make lebonon in the 80's look like a picnic..

Sure, if Iraqis want us to leave, then we should go.

Hopefully they'll be able to stomp their own insurgency.

(and if their police/armed forces get to that point, even if they don't ask us to leave, we should leave anyway... this is not intended to be an occupation, but a measure of defense for Iraqis so that their new way of life/government can have a chance to overcome the insane fanatics who oppose freedom.)

Don't get me wrong Fangland, I was just pointing out his own hypocracy. I am not an isolationsist liberal.


Alright, Masood, say a leader...Oh, I don't know, gasses his own people because they happen to be kurds. Gasses his own people. What would you sugest we do to this leader?

*criticize
Actually criticise is the correct British spelling. It is spelled with a z only in American English.

btw

i think that of the countries listed, North Korea is the worst.

Don't get me wrong Fangland, I was just pointing out his own hypocracy. I am not an isolationsist liberal.


Alright, Masood, say a leader...Oh, I don't know, gasses his own people because they happen to be kurds. Gasses his own people. What would you sugest we do to this leader?

i know... i didn't mean to point that at you.

B.S. gives good liberals like me a bad name! Hes the reason why Bush won the election all he needs to do is point to people like him and he wins!

I agree with TheEvilMass. Moderate liberalism and moderate conservatism are good things and both need to be applied in order to create a sort of balance. But then you get these radicals like British Socialism that are too hidebound to realize that they may be wrong. Extreme liberalism and extreme conservatism will be the bane of us yet.

Don't get me wrong Fangland, I was just pointing out his own hypocracy. I am not an isolationsist liberal.


Alright, Masood, say a leader...Oh, I don't know, gasses his own people because they happen to be kurds. Gasses his own people. What would you sugest we do to this leader?

as to the latter...

we should laud him! What an incredible guy. How could any country want someone like that out of power!? EGADS!

hehe

This is my first post but, i have to admit, the US is only seeming to invade countries that have or had oil in them, im in the UK and i live near this big fat white radar for this 'Star Wars' program. either thts gonna get us killed or the defence budget may make something that helps defend us, kinda unsettling how we're being used as a shield. however it occured to me, if a missle is launched, who would it come from? and wouldnt it destroy the UK before the US had time to react? also if the koreans launch a nuke at the US its goin to hit the west coast so star wars will do nothing 4 them. and whoever said the russians have defunct ICBMs, i admit thats true, but they still have more sphisticated rocket engines even after 30 yrs of rusting in a warehouse. i agree with masood to, these maybe 'free' yet they seem to be oddly controlled by the US? seeing as they seem to have the last say in what happens and also provide money for that person to get into office. its democracy verging a little on totalinarianism. and 1 other thing, if the US wants world peace, what about israel and places? they provide the israelis weapons with which they destroy palestinians with, and since the palistinians actually not having any weapons, they have 2 resort to suicide bombing. for example 1 boy was shot by a soldier because he threw a rock at him, isnt tht a little OTT? i feel the US could be the next empire but if its economy continues to grow it will collapse under its own weight and oil isnt getting easier to find. if anything, the russians will have the last remaining oil stocks along with the middle east. and as much as i hate to say it, the US wont remain the only super power in the world in a few years, china will b able to expand anywhere it wishes as it has the population like a flood of ants. and also, if the US is hunting for WMD's, y the hell does the US seem to have 25,000 more than the rest of the world? makes them a danger to themselves doesnt it? plus everyone violates human rights, like capital punishment, that is commiting the same crime for what the person is convicted 4.

All you have to do is look at the past, to see what we are doing in the present.

We have backed governements/rebels that surved our purpose.

We backed the Shah of Iran.
We backed the overthrow of the elected Algerian Government.
We back the monarcy in Saudi Arabia.
We backed bin-ladin when he was fighting the Russians.
We backed Saddam and urged him to have a war with Iran, because they overthrew the Shah.
In pakistan now we back a general who overthrough a democratically elected goverment.
In Egpyt, we back a president, who is essentialy a dictator.
In South America, we ahve done the same, but I dont' know the specifics there.

In afghan, the president elect is a man that has live in America for 20+ years, has contacts with the CIA and was a consultant to Cheyney's oil company. No concidence here ?

Not sure what is going to happen in Iraq, but be assured that it will be a governmant that we can control.

My point here though is that we put into power people that suppress their people, because it is in our best interest. Afterall it is easier to control a country when you have a totalitarian goverment, rather then a free one.

All you have to do is look at the past, to see what we are doing in the present.

We have backed governements/rebels that surved our purpose.

We backed the Shah of Iran.
We backed the overthrow of the elected Algerian Government.
We back the monarcy in Saudi Arabia.
We backed bin-ladin when he was fighting the Russians.
We backed Saddam and urged him to have a war with Iran, because they overthrew the Shah.
In pakistan now we back a general who overthrough a democratically elected goverment.
In Egpyt, we back a president, who is essentialy a dictator.
In South America, we ahve done the same, but I dont' know the specifics there.

In afghan, the president elect is a man that has live in America for 20+ years, has contacts with the CIA and was a consultant to Cheyney's oil company. No concidence here ?

Not sure what is going to happen in Iraq, but be assured that it will be a governmant that we can control.

My point here though is that we put into power people that suppress their people, because it is in our best interest. Afterall it is easier to control a country when you have a totalitarian goverment, rather then a free one.

if that's the case, why didn't we just buy off Saddam? He was already installed as dictator.

----------------------------

for levity: (lol, check this out... it's an AP story)

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160267,00.html

Don't get me wrong Fangland, I was just pointing out his own hypocracy. I am not an isolationsist liberal.


Alright, Masood, say a leader...Oh, I don't know, gasses his own people because they happen to be kurds. Gasses his own people. What would you sugest we do to this leader?

First of all, why would someone do that? (other than Hitler) They are only making their economy worse by killing their own people.

Don't get me wrong Fangland, I was just pointing out his own hypocracy. I am not an isolationsist liberal.


Alright, Masood, say a leader...Oh, I don't know, gasses his own people because they happen to be kurds. Gasses his own people. What would you sugest we do to this leader?

Its all in the motive of why we would remove the person from power.
Yes, if a person is killing his own people, i would say hell yes remove him from power, kill him, whatever. If it was so simple.

But this isnt' the reason we are there.

In my opinion the number 1 reason, we are in Iraq is because Sadam Hussain became a liability. We could not control him anymore as we did when we were funding him to fight Iran.

if that's the case, why didn't we just buy off Saddam? He was already installed as dictator.

----------------------------

for levity: (lol, check this out... it's an AP story)

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160267,00.html

You can only do that for so long. People get sick of being told what to do.
This is what happened with bin-Ladin as well as Saddam

In my opinion the number 1 reason, we are in Iraq is because Sadam Hussain became a liability. We could not control him anymore as we did when we were funding him to fight Iran.

Oh and don't forget the oil; Bush is all for the big companies/industries and such

I think that we should be very careful before we invade another country.
I have done some reading on Nepolian and I think his reasons for invading the countries around him were some what just. I also think that Germany and Austria's reasons for entering into WWI were just. However, History has proven that most of the time if you go invading country after country eventually you will get squashed.

Oh and don't forget the oil; Bush is all for the big companies/industries and such

Yes, it was all planed all of it(evil laugh) they can't stop us now!!! Lol yeah probably for the oil but we are there now.... Hmm this thread is so off-topic....

Sorry about that, he asked this post to be about those three countries and it was turned into an anti-America debate right away.

For the record, North Korea is a much more insane and twisted regime. They got my vote.

Sorry about that, he asked this post to be about those three countries and it was turned into an anti-America debate right away.

For the record, North Korea is a much more insane and twisted regime. They got my vote.
funny thing is that I specifically asked to not mention the US because of this... what are you going to do? see in general I can't ask a mod to ban him becuase its open... too bad huh?, so instead of discusing what countries need to be dealt with I was stuck defending my country! WTF!

Canada got 30% of the vote!!!! just proves morons attend these forums!

funny thing is that I specifically asked to not mention the US because of this... what are you going to do? see in general I can't ask a mod to ban him becuase its open... too bad huh?, so instead of discusing what countries need to be dealt with I was stuck defending my country! WTF!

I think the examination of US policies here was justified: after all you did start with the stated assumption that the US shouild invade someone next.

Lets look at it from a different perspective: if someone started a thread concerning whether Israel should invade Jordan, Syria or Egypt next, wouldn't you want to ask why they should be invading anywhere?

I think the examination of US policies here was justified: after all you did start with the stated assumption that the US shouild invade someone next.

Lets look at it from a different perspective: if someone started a thread concerning whether Israel should invade Jordan, Syria or Egypt next, wouldn't you want to ask why they should be invading anywhere?
yeah but I asked that to avoid a flame war, which it turned into... now if everyone could remain open and inteligable i would welcome it.. but BS open up with lets kill bush or something similar, i knew it was going to happen so I thought about stoping it before it happened... you have a valid point there but some people just believe what they believe and nothing else Case and point BS while others keep an open mind... If I could get an inteligent conversation on the topic not just flame I would welcome it...

If I could get an inteligent conversation on the topic not just flame I would welcome it...

Okay: why should the US be invading anywhere?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9110406&posted=1#post9110406

join me here I can use a good debate... and if you want an answer read the thread

... and if you want an answer read the thread

I've read most of it, having dipped in and out as it went along. but still haven't seen the justification for use of force.

Canada got 30% of the vote!!!! just proves morons attend these forums!

Or it proves that Canada is really, really evil. ;)

I will tell you my pick in a way that won't offend you or violate your rules, I'll do a word jumble!

Can you guess what it is?

of States United America

Hmmm... a quandry... :)

okay here it is:

The US is the only super power left in the world therefore we have a lot of power. With power comes responability, how do we use it? I suggest we use it for the good. If your neighbors house was on fire would you go in and save the baby(assumming the baby is in there) or would you watch it burn? People are being repressed, there are genocide, there are tryannies, what should we do? should we watch them die or should we use our power for the good? I ask you these things as a moral decision is it justified enough to just save on life? Was is not good in fact all wars are inherently bad BUT sometimes they are inevitable, if you were given power how would you use it?

is that good enough if it is not tell me...

I am going to say Korea as our biggest threat, however, I think that they are also the most dangerous to invade, especially if China gets involved. I read today that China is preparing a big military build up, eventhough our relations with china are the best they have been in many years.
Iran is also pritty bad, I heard that the people there love us, though, at least they like our culture. I haven't heard much about Uzbechistan.

I am going to say Korea as our biggest threat, however, I think that they are also the most dangerous to invade, especially if China gets involved. I read today that China is preparing a big military build up, eventhough our relations with china are the best they have been in many years.
Iran is also pritty bad, I heard that the people there love us, though, at least they like our culture. I haven't heard much about Uzbechistan.
Chinas military buildup is for taiwan, a soveign democratic nation(that is in disput)

If your neighbors house was on fire would you go in and save the baby(assumming the baby is in there) or would you watch it burn?

To be honest, I'd invade my neighbors house, imprison the father, appoint the gardener as the next father and set up myself in the master bedroom for an indefinite amount of time. Then I'd pork my neighbors wife... in the name of sexual freedom, of course. What about you?

To be honest, I'd invade my neighbors house, imprison the father, appoint the gardener as the next father and set up myself in the master bedroom for an indefinite amount of time. Then I'd pork my neighbors wife... in the name of sexual freedom, of course. What about you?
LOL>>>>>.>>>>

I just want to throw in my two cents here. Then I'll leave. I wish certain people would stop saying, explicitly or implicitly, that America is the most evil country in the world. Obviously this excludes those who meant this as a joke, but you must realize that you are not funny. Regardless of what you think of the current administration, President Bush, the war in Iraq, or the situation in North Korea. Most of the world owes America for its economic, military, political, and most importantly, cultural support. Because some people resent the fact that America is the only global superpower, there are enemies who will say that America is evil. Now honestly, based on the definition on the first page, can anyone tell me that the United States of America is an evil nation?

I just want to throw in my two cents here. Then I'll leave. I wish certain people would stop saying, explicitly or implicitly, that America is the most evil country in the world. Obviously this excludes those who meant this as a joke, but you must realize that you are not funny. Regardless of what you think of the current administration, President Bush, the war in Iraq, or the situation in North Korea. Most of the world owes America for its economic, military, political, and most importantly, cultural support. Because some people resent the fact that America is the only global superpower, there are enemies who will say that America is evil. Now honestly, based on the definition on the first page, can anyone tell me that the United States of America is an evil nation?
exactly..... thank you

First of all EvilMass, have you ever lived in Communist China? If not, then I suggest you stop commenting on how bad China is. Sure, in China you cannot swear and point your middle finger at the political leaders, but is that really a violation of human rights???

Yes, their political systems are rigged and flawed; British Socialism isn't entirely right. But he was right in mentioning that communism works for some countries, and that's correct from what I've seen in China (I lived in China for 3 years). As long as you don't attempt to overthrow the government or commit crime, no police will burn your house down. And considering China's massive population, capitalism just doesn't seem to work out.

And guess what, in China and probably NK also it is actually a privilege to be part of the Communist party. As ridiculous as it sounds, not everyone can be a communist member in China and NK, and I know there are about 60 million communist party members in China; that's fairly small comparing to its 1.5 billion population. If communism is really as evil as some of you said it would be, why is it that only some selected people are accepted into the party.

As for those who said that NK starves millions of people and has concentration camps all over the nation, you are just trying to fool others who've never been to NK. Yes, their leader is a psychotic dumbass; yes they possess nukes; yes they have quite a bit of human rights problems; but Kim Joon Il (i think that's how you spell it) is not the Cambodian psycho Pol Pot. There are always poor (and a fair number of them too) people in NK, but not everybody starves to death, or otherwise the army will just overthrow the governement. Kim Joon Il doesn't throw people in concentration camps for no reason, as much as you want to believe it.

I also have to agree US has taken quite a few selfish and stupid actions in the past:
1. US joined WWI for profit purposes only;
2. It dropped the A-bomb on Japan just to show off to Soviets;
3. It only joined WWII because they were actually attacked;
4. It developed Marshall Plan only to stop (theoretically) communist influence;
5. It joined the Vietnam War just to crush the communist influence;
6. It created Israel not to help Jewish, but to exert control over the middle east;
7. It trained Osama Bin Laden to fight the Soviets, yet blamed him for all the terrorist activities;
8. It practically started the Iran-Iraq war;
9. It declared war on Iraq to get its oil;
Must I go on?

Oh yeah, who said only US can destroy the world? DO YOU ACTUALLY KNOW HOW MANY NUKES CHINA POSSESSES!?!? Even if it doesn't have enough to nuke the world once, China at least has enough to destroy almost of Europe and North America, and that's not a super power?

ALL NATIONS HAVE THEIR SHORTCOMINGS; STOP ACTING EVERYTHING IN ANOTHER COUNTRY IS WRONG!!!

okay I only mentioned china once or twice they are getting better, my main problem was. N.K. Notice I didn't add china on list.... because they are getting better, hey if your trying your not on the list... and that list was just suggestions...

ANd I never said any other country was wrong for christ sakes read the thread please... I ask of you.... Stop being angry with me, I never challenged china!

:sniper: Oh yeah forgot to add: THIS IS A FORUM FOR DISCUSSIONS, NOT INSULTS!!!

Bodies Without Organs can I have you answer?

:sniper: Oh yeah forgot to add: THIS IS A FORUM FOR DISCUSSIONS, NOT INSULTS!!!

stop saying I was the bad guy here read the thread and you will see it kinda exploded on me, i never brought the us here, it was about Iran, Uzbekastan and N. Korea and who is worse that is it? but it blew up!

Sorry EvilMass for exploding on you.

I guess I would go for NK.

But invading NK might be a bad idea: if China gets involved, what happens?
:eek:

Sorry EvilMass for exploding on you.

But invading NK might be a bad idea: if China gets involved, what happens?
:eek:
I know bad shit happens, that why we need china with us, maybe if we convince china to drop support we can get them to surrender(N.K.) before war happens but if war doest happen it won't be nearly as bad if china is on our side.

I wouldn't mind if US invaded the Canada.

We might have a real economy for once.

It seems kinda retarded that most people would vote for Canada & US as the most evil nations in the world though.

(.)(.) Dumb people and their dumb sense of humour.

It seems kinda retarded that most people would vote for Canada & US as the most evil nations in the world though.

(.)(.) Dumb people and their dumb sense of humour.
some people believe it though I.e. B.S.

LOL
US invade Canada? Dude what century are you in? The 1800s?
:headbang:

LOL
Unless the US has another civil war, that's not likely going to happen. Not any time soon.
I don't know I think Texas is going to invade mexico and name it texas II and that could start a new civil war (Texas I vs Texas II)

LOL
US invade Canada? Dude what century are you in? The 1800s?
:headbang:
who are you talking too....

I don't know I think Texas is going to invade mexico and name it texas II and that could start a new civil war (Texas I vs Texas II)

ROFL
LOL

ROFL?

Hey I am still awaiting your answer!

That Garas guy changed his post from "what if US invade US" to "what if US invade Canada"

That Garas guy changed his post from "what if US invade US" to "what if US invade Canada"

OMG YOU ARE SO COOL.

It's called "Typo"

what where? on you on the right thread? oh forget it

Sure Garas: a typo, yes, that sure explains it!
THere is no way in hell i am believing you can type US into Canada

Sure Garas: a typo, yes, that sure explains it!
THere is no way in hell i am believing you can type US into Canada
okay both of you seem rather new to this.... A. It doesn't matter B. It doesn't mater C. It was a joke D. It still doesn't matter E. calm down, you seem to jump the gun too easily you liable to get moded for flaming and such...

(.)(.) Dumb people and their dumb sense of humour.


Yeah I know what you mean "O>O" -----> (.)(.)

I also have to agree US has taken quite a few selfish and stupid actions in the past:
1. US joined WWI for profit purposes only;
2. It dropped the A-bomb on Japan just to show off to Soviets;
3. It only joined WWII because they were actually attacked;
4. It developed Marshall Plan only to stop (theoretically) communist influence;
5. It joined the Vietnam War just to crush the communist influence;
6. It created Israel not to help Jewish, but to exert control over the middle east;
7. It trained Osama Bin Laden to fight the Soviets, yet blamed him for all the terrorist activities;
8. It practically started the Iran-Iraq war;
9. It declared war on Iraq to get its oil;
Must I go on?



No, please don't go on, because your points are extremely simpleminded. I don't want to spend too much time on this, so I'll posit a short criticism of SOME of your theories.

2. The theory that the U.S. dropped atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki JUST to impress or intimidate the Soviets is quite misguided. Certainly the demonstration of nuclear power was a motivation to use atomic weapons. However, to say it was the ONLY motivation is misleading and foolish. Obviously, the main motives of the U.S. were to end the war quickly, and to avoid the hundreds of thousands of military casualties from the U.S. alone that would have resulted from a land invasion. Also, the continuation of the conventional bombing of Japan would have wasted United States resources and needlessly prolong the conflict. Your theory implies that even in 1945, the sole motivation of the U.S. was to stop communism from spreading. I believe this is an overly broad view of the situation.

4/5. Communism has killed over 10 million people worldwide. Stalin alone killed more people than Hitler. Not that Hitler's actions were excusable or should be made light of, but communism was even more brutal, perhaps, than fascism. Vietnam was a horrible conflict, and a war that the U.S. lost. That does not mean that the goal of stopping communism from its aggressive expansion was a poor goal in any sense.

6. The United States did not "create" Israel. Its independence was forged mainly by its own leaders, or revolutionaries, depending on one's perspective, and by European nations. Immediately attacked and reviled by its Arab neighbors, Israel won several wars against the combined forces of the entire Middle East by virtue of American weapons and some American training, and by the simple fact that the Israeli generals were more skilled than any of their Arab counterparts. Also, don't you think that if the United States wished to "exert contol over the Middle East," they would do something like "declare war on Iraq to get its oil?" If America legitimately wanted to create a puppet nation in the Middle East, it would make one that was larger, controlled more resources, it would give Israel even more support than it does today, and it would reinforce Israel with its own military in the several wars that Israel won anyway.

9. I will refrain from discussing your position on Iraq in detail, suffice to say that the U.S. went to war because it had intelligence that mistakenly indicated that Iraq had possession of stockpiles of WMD. Iraq did have the capability to manufacture such weapons. Also, the U.S. went to war to depose Saddam Hussein, one of the most brutal, unstable, and aggressive dictators of the post WWII era. Finally, the importance of Iraq's oil is not just to America, but to the world. Having a democratic government installed in Iraq is better for the global oil market than having a psychotic despot in control of such oil reserves.

In conclusion, it would appear that you are listing a series of OPINIONS that have no proof, and are too broad and over-simplified to be seriously considered as valid.

I say we invade Cannuckada!!!! Mainly because someone I don't like lives there :mad:

No, please don't go on, because your points are extremely simpleminded. I don't want to spend too much time on this, so I'll posit a short criticism of SOME of your theories.

2. The theory that the U.S. dropped atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki JUST to impress or intimidate the Soviets is quite misguided. Certainly the demonstration of nuclear power was a motivation to use atomic weapons. However, to say it was the ONLY motivation is misleading and foolish. Obviously, the main motives of the U.S. were to end the war quickly, and to avoid the hundreds of thousands of military casualties from the U.S. alone that would have resulted from a land invasion. Also, the continuation of the conventional bombing of Japan would have wasted United States resources and needlessly prolong the conflict. Your theory implies that even in 1945, the sole motivation of the U.S. was to stop communism from spreading. I believe this is an overly broad view of the situation.

4/5. Communism has killed over 10 million people worldwide. Stalin alone killed more people than Hitler. Not that Hitler's actions were excusable or should be made light of, but communism was even more brutal, perhaps, than fascism. Vietnam was a horrible conflict, and a war that the U.S. lost. That does not mean that the goal of stopping communism from its aggressive expansion was a poor goal in any sense.

6. The United States did not "create" Israel. Its independence was forged mainly by its own leaders, or revolutionaries, depending on one's perspective, and by European nations. Immediately attacked and reviled by its Arab neighbors, Israel won several wars against the combined forces of the entire Middle East by virtue of American weapons and some American training, and by the simple fact that the Israeli generals were more skilled than any of their Arab counterparts. Also, don't you think that if the United States wished to "exert contol over the Middle East," they would do something like "declare war on Iraq to get its oil?" If America legitimately wanted to create a puppet nation in the Middle East, it would make one that was larger, controlled more resources, it would give Israel even more support than it does today, and it would reinforce Israel with its own military in the several wars that Israel won anyway.

9. I will refrain from discussing your position on Iraq in detail, suffice to say that the U.S. went to war because it had intelligence that mistakenly indicated that Iraq had possession of stockpiles of WMD. Iraq did have the capability to manufacture such weapons. Also, the U.S. went to war to depose Saddam Hussein, one of the most brutal, unstable, and aggressive dictators of the post WWII era. Finally, the importance of Iraq's oil is not just to America, but to the world. Having a democratic government installed in Iraq is better for the global oil market than having a psychotic despot in control of such oil reserves.

In conclusion, it would appear that you are listing a series of OPINIONS that have no proof, and are too broad and over-simplified to be seriously considered as valid.


Thanks for your well stated rebuttal to those ignorant and stupid opinions. You said what I wanted to say, but my response would have been filled with obsecenities and insults.
Well done.

Thanks for your well stated rebuttal to those ignorant and stupid opinions. You said what I wanted to say, but my response would have been filled with obsecenities and insults.
Well done.

Thank you very much. I like to keep things on an impersonal, factual, and intelligent basis. I'm just glad someone appreciates the effort, as well as the thinking behind it.

Example Four: WE GIVE THE MOSt In FORiegn Aid

Wrong. Japan does. Not the most aid to GNP, (That title goes to Sweden, IIRC.) but the most foreign aid period.

Labelling nations as "evil" is simplistic and dangerous. Evil is an abstract concept, and labelling nations as evil seems a little too like justification for "holy war" to me...

Perhaps it would be better phrased as "which nations have the worst human rights records" or "which nations are the biggest threat to global peace".

In any case, the poll choices above are extremely limited, and weighted towards a certain result. I didn't bother voting...

we are so freakin' stupid :headbang: that we just deserve to bomb the shit out of ourselves...so im gonna put my money on the U.S.

come on, the only reason why I asked that because I don't want to get into a flame/spam fight with people, not to mention its kinda moronic to imply the US is worse the N.K. But I digress... I did forget to put some african nations in there But I wanted this simplified... I should probably make a larger one (I'll start compiling the list)
I do personally believe that the USA under it's current administration is the greatest threat to world peace at the moment - simply by virtue of it's apparent willingness to enforce it's will upon other nations with both military might and economic power. You may disagree, but that's what opinions are all about, yes?

we are so freakin' stupid :headbang: that we just deserve to bomb the shit out of ourselves...so im gonna put my money on the U.S.

Spoken so eloquently...

Next time you have a thought...don't.

Spoken so eloquently...

Next time you have a thought...don't.


your an ass....ya...thats alll...


you really have to consider it though. we, the us, are a great threat to the world, and right now have a very trigger happy administration. this is a very bad sign for everyone else in the world. think about what we are doin. research it, its not very pretty. by the way, next time you have a thought, think about it...and in the end...don't.

It's quite amazing how many U.S. citizens have decided to brand their own country as the biggest threat to world peace at the moment, and blame this on the "current administration." What does that even mean? The Federal Executive Branch, headed by George W. Bush? The Congress, either Senate or House? The Supreme Court? State legislature? Specify who or what you think is the "reason" the U.S. is a threat to global peace. Don't just assume that everyone will take "the current administration" to mean the presidency of George W. Bush. His administration is not a specific, coherent object, it is a group of people assembled as part of the bureaucracy of the Executive Branch.

If you think that the U.S. is a "threat to world peace," and you are a U.S. citizen, you are in effect doing nothing but complaining needlessly. Maybe if you don't like the way the country is going, you should vote. I realize that many of the people who hold this view are minors and cannot actually vote, but you could do something to encourage participation in democracy, even if it's just signing a petition or buying a 'Rock the Vote' t-shirt. If you are under 18 and do not engage in political activism, don't just aimlessly criticise the government.

Oh, and maybe have a little faith that the majority of U.S. citizens are more intelligent than you and will not elect a government that will be a threat to global security. And you could have some faith in the current government, the military, and countless foreign nations.

Does anyone read the thread? What has been said in the last couple posts have already been postes.... the US is the biggest threat to world security(with no proof mind you) the Us is the most evil nation in the world(again no proof).... If you just read the thread before you post you will realise this has already been stated and rebuted but no you just want to repeat it.... Does anyone here have anything oringinal to add here? Now read my reasons (a couple posts back) on why I think we have a responsability... now don't randomly quote this post... quote the earlier one(too tired to put it into words here)...... Just honestly think before you post I ask of you.....

It's quite amazing how many U.S. citizens have decided to brand their own country as the biggest threat to world peace at the moment, and blame this on the "current administration." What does that even mean? The Federal Executive Branch, headed by George W. Bush? The Congress, either Senate or House? The Supreme Court? State legislature? Specify who or what you think is the "reason" the U.S. is a threat to global peace. Don't just assume that everyone will take "the current administration" to mean the presidency of George W. Bush. His administration is not a specific, coherent object, it is a group of people assembled as part of the bureaucracy of the Executive Branch.

If you think that the U.S. is a "threat to world peace," and you are a U.S. citizen, you are in effect doing nothing but complaining needlessly. Maybe if you don't like the way the country is going, you should vote. I realize that many of the people who hold this view are minors and cannot actually vote, but you could do something to encourage participation in democracy, even if it's just signing a petition or buying a 'Rock the Vote' t-shirt. If you are under 18 and do not engage in political activism, don't just aimlessly criticise the government.

Oh, and maybe have a little faith that the majority of U.S. citizens are more intelligent than you and will not elect a government that will be a threat to global security. And you could have some faith in the current government, the military, and countless foreign nations.

Well said you sir are a credit to your people...... also good job at being civil in an argument, unlike some of our friends....... anyway well thought out.

Because N. Korea keeps the people poor and with no liberty, I say we invade them next. I'm also getting sick of hearing about the N. Korean government's nukes. Lets find out. I think it is a big bluff to extort money from the west.

China will not get involved with any conflict with N. Korea. Thier military sucks compaired to the U.S. With air, space, and naval power, we isolate China to China. In addition, China has no economic interest in N. Korea. N. Korea puts a drain on China's economy.

okay.... is china on the poll?(I know some people mentioned china but they were dealt with).

Invading China would be political and military suicide. They could place their entire fighting population on leaky rafts and send them over to the Pacific and the few that slipped through would still be enough to invade our country. We're talking about 40% of 1.2 Billion people.

okay.... is china on the poll?(I know some people mentioned china but they were dealt with).

China can't qualify as evil anyway. They own too much of our debt.

Old Yankee proverb say: "Don't declare war on your credit card company, they might reduce your limit."

Now North Korea on the other hand.... ;)

Oh, and maybe have a little faith that the majority of U.S. citizens are more intelligent than you and will not elect a government that will be a threat to global security. And you could have some faith in the current government, the military, and countless foreign nations.
Do US citizens even elect the government any more? The last couple of elections have had...problems? :p

Does anyone read the thread? What has been said in the last couple posts have already been postes.... the US is the biggest threat to world security(with no proof mind you) the Us is the most evil nation in the world(again no proof).... If you just read the thread before you post you will realise this has already been stated and rebuted but no you just want to repeat it.... Does anyone here have anything oringinal to add here? Now read my reasons (a couple posts back) on why I think we have a responsability... now don't randomly quote this post... quote the earlier one(too tired to put it into words here)...... Just honestly think before you post I ask of you.....
So very sorry for stating my humble opinion.

Perhaps you only want people who share your exact point of view to post in your thread?

I'm making a prediction here: I'm saying that Egypt will go "evil" within the next 10 years. Keep this post in mind!!! ;)

Only if they find oil under the valley of the kings will America be brainwashed into thinking Egypt is (LMAO) evil.

Do US citizens even elect the government any more? The last couple of elections have had...problems? :p

Yes, citizens like me and my circle of acquaintances do in fact elect the U.S. government. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

I appologize, this is the funniest thing I have ever read.


Watch this...

"And what the fuck did America do to stop it? Nothing! You let our people die, you let us defend Europe. You waited until you were attacked to help these people."


That same person, ladies and gentlemen, said this, "I BELIEVE AMERICA DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO INVADE COUNTRIES THAT DO NOTHING AGGRESSIVE TO PROVOKE IT"


Wait, Mr. Liberal, Jimmy has a question.
Yes, Jimmy.
Ah, thank you. My name is Jimmy and I am in the second grade. Why, Mr. Liberal, should America defend Europe if Germany did nothing to provoke it? Actually, didn't you just say that America doesn't have the right to defend Europe because that would be hypocritical?

So you are comparing the dictatorial regime of Iraq to the genocide and mass warfare of the Nazis? And as it happens Jimmy, no I didn't. I said America hasnt got the right to invade countries for protection from what has not happened. Europe never even came into it. Bad luck Jimmy. The first gulf war was right, this one was about oil and finishing what daddy did not. Damn, and I was wondering whether it is right to dislike Americans in general. I barely see one with intelligence beyond average. I can't really be bothered to return for another....i dont know would you call this a debate? Ill just say that EvilMass needs to volunteer for the army so he can get killed in one of the wars he wants so much. Also what does BS mean, I didnt actually notice why thats relevant.

Communism is only evil in certain eyes. Believe it or not, but some people will put up with a lack of civil rights for a general better life. You think capitalism would work in China for example. Work for 1.5 Billion? :rolleyes:

Er... Capitalism IS working in China. That much is obvious.

What I wish is that they'd get Democratic/a free government. Remember, Capitalism is an economic model, one that works with any given form of government. Communism is a political system modeled on an economic system (that has yet to work).
My fear is that a totalitarian Communist/Capitalist state may become too entrenched to ever liberalize and have human rights & freedom. :(

BTW, there is a good spread in this week's TIME magazine on China.

Hmm...mild prejudice. I love Americas ignorance of their indoctrination

I love Euros whom assume Americans never leave the States and live by some kind of rote philosophy. In my 32 years, I've been to three continents and seventeen nations, including yours. (I'm only counting stays of 3+ days, where I actually saw something of a country. I don't count, for example, DeGaulle Airport as having been to Paris.) :)

I say we invade canada. Too much freedom...too many civil rights.
What's that all about?

North Korea: has concentration camps, keeps food from its millions of starving people, civil and human rights nightmare

NK hands down

Good G*d, that's three things we've agreed on in as many days...

))(looks out of window for flying pigs)((

hmm... well, it *is* a full moon.. ;)

North Korea Is Auviusly the worst. Just Look At It!!!
A Phsycotic dictator developing nukes and violating almost every human rights law is auviusly evil!!!

What's Wrong With Canada?

All I Know about uzbekistan is where it is and how to spell it;s name.

Iran Is being reformed and the insurancy is almost defeated.

Auviusly, North Korea is the worst. :cool:

(forgive my spelling of auviusly :rolleyes:

I say we invade canada. Too much freedom...too many civil rights.
What's that all about?

I agree with Jihad. I don't see anything wrong with canada being invaded by the u.s. It Sure Would make the u.s. a hell of a big country though! ;)

I agree with Jihad. I don't see anything wrong with canada being invaded by the u.s. It Sure Would make the u.s. a hell of a big country though! ;)

woohoo my big 50! :cool: :D :p

For example Russia or Israel. I mean, your list it's tipically US close mind, but in Chechenia or Gaza suffer as much as in NK or Uzbekistan and much more than in Teheran. And as a threat to the world we can say the same.

<snip for brevity>
As for those who said that NK starves millions of people and has concentration camps all over the nation, you are just trying to fool others who've never been to NK. Yes, their leader is a psychotic dumbass; yes they possess nukes; yes they have quite a bit of human rights problems; but Kim Joon Il (i think that's how you spell it) is not the Cambodian psycho Pol Pot.

Um... yeah... I think you're a bit off...
At one camp, Camp 22 in Haengyong, 50,000 prisoners toil each day in conditions that U.S. officials and former inmates say result in the death of 20 to 25 percent of the prison population every year.
http://www.nkfreedom.org/NKFactSheet.html

http://www.hrnk.org/

http://www.time.com/time/asia/magazine/article/0,13673,501041213-880315,00.html

There are always poor (and a fair number of them too) people in NK, but not everybody starves to death, or otherwise the army will just overthrow the governement. Kim Joon Il doesn't throw people in concentration camps for no reason, as much as you want to believe it.

They *feed* the Army. :rolleyes:
No, they throw them in for complaining about the lack of food for their children.

I also have to agree US has taken quite a few selfish and stupid actions in the past:
1. US joined WWI for profit purposes only;

Ah. So the U-Boat attacks on neutral shipping & the Zimmerman Telegram don't figure into the equation? Never mind the US was *already* making a profit selling material to Europe as a neutral.

2. It dropped the A-bomb on Japan just to show off to Soviets;

How about saving 250.000 US lives and over a Million Japanese? Look at the Battle of Okinawa, then multiply for the population. An invasion of the home islands would have been a bloodbath.

3. It only joined WWII because they were actually attacked;

Is there a better reason? The US had no common defense treaties in 1939.

4. It developed Marshall Plan only to stop (theoretically) communist influence;

False. Poland, Czechoslovakia and all European nations were offered Marshal Plan funding. Stalin had different ideas.

5. It joined the Vietnam War just to crush the communist influence;

Somewhat false. That because the REASON we stayed in Viet Nam. The original reason was Kennedy HAD to do it in a show of support to DeGaule to keep France in NATO.

6. It created Israel not to help Jewish, but to exert control over the middle east;

Israel was created by the UN.

7. It trained Osama Bin Laden to fight the Soviets, yet blamed him for all the terrorist activities;

He *did* fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. We also funded Saddam to fight the Iranians. What they did after those encounters does not make them free of blame. The US didn't fund Saddam to kill Kurds, nor did we fund Osama to attack the West. :rolleyes:

8. It practically started the Iran-Iraq war;

That is not true, it'd been brewing forever. We just funded the side that wasn't calling us the "Great Satan".

9. It declared war on Iraq to get its oil;

Right. That's why I'm paying $1 more per gallon?
*IF* that were true, don't you think we'd have just invaded Iraq back when we had the coalition during the First Gulf War? The whole concept is a silly one. The accounting is transparent, and it's been pointed out time and time again that the US has spent $85+ BILLION on Iraq.
If we wanted the oil, it'd have been much cheaper to buy it from Saddam.

Must I go on?
If you need further correction, please do. :D

Oh yeah, who said only US can destroy the world? DO YOU ACTUALLY KNOW HOW MANY NUKES CHINA POSSESSES!?!? Even if it doesn't have enough to nuke the world once, China at least has enough to destroy almost of Europe and North America, and that's not a super power?

True. But in actuality, China, the UK & France can't actually blow up the planet, they can just make huge swatches of it unliveable. The US and Russia could, in a total exchange, actually knock the Earth off of it's axis.

Further, China, at this time, lacks a delivery system to hit Europe or most of North America. Likewise, the UK and France have no intercontinental delivery systems. They must all deploy nukes "in theatre".

No, China is a power (like UK/France/Russia), not yet a super-power. Time will tell (say the next 15-20 years) if it will reach parity with the US or implode.

ALL NATIONS HAVE THEIR SHORTCOMINGS; STOP ACTING EVERYTHING IN ANOTHER COUNTRY IS WRONG!!!

This makes sense.

No, please don't go on, because your points are extremely simpleminded. I don't want to spend too much time on this, so I'll posit a short criticism of SOME of your theories.

<snip! You're on the money!>

4/5. Communism has killed over 10 million people worldwide. Stalin alone killed more people than Hitler.


The actual number is unknown, but is likely above 30 million, if you count Russia/USSR 1918-1990, Cambodia, China and Viet Nam alone.
If you add in the various African, Cuban and South American violence, North Korea, and other European (ie: Greece, minor episodes like 1968 Czechoslovakia, 1956 Hungary...) it probably exceeds 50 million.

North Korea must be destroyed!!! those damn communist should be vanished, for god's sake the URSS is dead, besides I hate asians, they are ugly, barbaric, bloodthirsty people, -THEY ARE A PEST!!!! AND SHOULD BE ELIMINATED DOWN TO THE LAST CHINK, KOREAN, JAP... ALL OF THEM!!!!!!!! NOW!!!!

If Bush wants the job done he should invade China really, they're catching up really fast

North Korea must be destroyed!!! those damn communist should be vanished, for god's sake the URSS is dead, besides I hate asians, they are ugly, barbaric, bloodthirsty people, -THEY ARE A PEST!!!! AND SHOULD BE ELIMINATED DOWN TO THE LAST CHINK, KOREAN, JAP... ALL OF THEM!!!!!!!! NOW!!!!

If Bush wants the job done he should invade China really, they're catching up really fast

Always nice to see a lucid, well thought out point of view delivered eloquently... :rolleyes:

British Socialism: Read your threads and tell me that your intelligent:: You say on one hand that the only provacation for war is direct threat and human rights violations aren't a Provocation:: while on the other hand you say that human rights violations are a provocation, make up your mind:: Also did you say that americans aren't intelligent, far from it my friend:: must I inform you that we have some of the best colleges in the world:: Many of the worlds many modern inventions come from the US, hell the computer you were typing that message on you were probably using a program written by an american programmer:: Also did you tell me to go join the army, hmmm too late I am in the army soo.... You were saying what?

you type before you speak, you ideals are the world are idealistic and If the world was perfect it would work but it isn't...

Also why do you keep bringing Iraq into this, I said many times here that I didn't support that war but yet you still keep using it. See unlike you I take the responable approach you probably think we should just leave there right now, causing a massive civil war rather than helping them rebuild:. y
you seem to think that we are only there for oil, that may be somewhat true, we are helping them rebuild their oil industry, we aren't stealing it though.
But we are also helping them establish a democracy, build a secruity force, rebuild infrastructure, setup basic civil rights, or is this all bad?, I have a friend in Iraq, well was in Iraq, we was guarding a road block near a school and he was shot,his left leg,.. Is that evil? Is it really evil to protect those people? he wasn't in it for the oil, he was there because it was his duty, and that he thought he could help people that couldn't help themselves... Also if you think that the Iraqis don't want us there, thats only a very small sunni minority, you know the ones who had it good under sadaam...

I can't change your mind far as your concered we are the most evil people on the planet:: Now I think that a bit ignorant especially considering your saying that we are worse than N.K. and many other illustirous nations::

Thats all I got to say,

(also someone posted earlier that I didn't like opinions other than my own, thats not true. I only reason I asked people to make oringinal posts because all the stuff you were saying was already hashed out)

Thank you,

Why aren't Sudan, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Turkmenistan, China, or Saudi Arabia on the list?

Why aren't Sudan, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Turkmenistan, China, or Saudi Arabia on the list?
I wanted a short list, but I agree they should (except China and maybe cuba)

The actual number is unknown, but is likely above 30 million, if you count Russia/USSR 1918-1990, Cambodia, China and Viet Nam alone.
If you add in the various African, Cuban and South American violence, North Korea, and other European (ie: Greece, minor episodes like 1968 Czechoslovakia, 1956 Hungary...) it probably exceeds 50 million.

Its probably more than that. Stalin killed about 20 million, as did Mao. I should expect more like 70 million in total.