NationStates Jolt Archive

You're the cause of me to post for the first time in the forum after a month of just reading topics...

Your mentality is for the greater good of your country, not the greater good of humanity... If you have to kill a few thousand children and elect psycho dictators because it's in America's greater good, why not?

You, make me sick, and it's people like you that have destroyed our world. Thank you.

Ive said it before, I guess I have to give another go. In order to be a superpower, you have to have a little blood on your hands. We do not destroy the world, we ensure peace and safety for the US. Im sorry if that makes you sick.

I refer you to the lightbulb joke:


How many members of the Bush Administration are needed to replace a lightbulb?

The Answer is SEVEN: (1) One to deny that a lightbulb needs to be replaced, (2) one to attack and question the patriotism of anyone who has questions about the lightbulb, (3) one to blame the previous administration for the need of a new lightbulb, (4) one to arrange the invasion of a country rumored to have a secret stockpile of lightbulbs, (5) one to get together with Vice President Cheney and figure out how to pay Halliburton Industries one million dollars for a lightbulb, (6) one to arrange a photo-op session showing Bush changing the lightbulb while dressed in a flight suit and wrapped in an American flag, (7) and finally one to explain to Bush the difference between screwing a lightbulb and screwing the country.




Who cares if you die?



You obviously don't know the first thing about Iraq.
Wow, 1st I was a fascist, then a terrorist, now Im like a lightbulb, I wonder what I'll be next :rolleyes:

I actually dont care if I die, so I dont know what your getting at

I actually know quite a bit about Iraq

I somehow feel it's rather pointless to continue arguing.
UN abassadorship seems to have the sole aim in life to unite not only the rest of the world, but also the majority of his own countrymen against him. I don't really know what form of psychosis that is, although it does seem pretty self-destructive.
On the other hand, maybe he's just getting off on the patriotic big talk.
You just dont want to debate because you are losing, your position doesnt hold water, I understand. I dont know what the rest of the world thinks, however many Americans agree with me, if you have noticied Im not the only one defending my position on here. Im not crazy, and Im not getting off on "patriotic big talk". Im defending my nation against vicious attacks, something Im sure I will one day go down in a blaze of glory doing.:D That would be a proud day indeed

America is necessary in the global climate. The world needs a superpower but that does not mean it is a super country. There are far greater countries such as Sweden, where the system of government is more practical and creates a far better envrironment for its citizens. Inequality is rife in America and its conservative values are severly dated.

Is this thread a joke or what? This guy cannot be serious, there can't actually be people walking the streets with these points of view. Reading through this stuff I have formed the opinion that The UN abassadorship must be some form of super mutated troll. In addition, I don't think The UN abassadorship is American at all. Afghan or Iranian maybe, trying to stir up a bit of hate against Americans.
BTW, what is an abassadorship?
Why cant I be serious, I know plenty of people like myself. I am no troll and Im 100% AMERICAN, Im almost offended you would suggest otherwise. An abassadorship is a renagade version of an Ambassadorship, bent on end of the UN and international coporation that will not only bring down my nation on nationstates and in RL as well. By the way the UN, much like in RL is ineffective on here. My nation recently passed child labor legalization laws and a program to keep the UN abassadorship pure. Both of which go against UN law.:p

You just dont want to debate because you are losing, your position doesnt hold water, I understand.
Well, that was funny. :D
I dont know what the rest of the world thinks, however many Americans agree with me, if you have noticied Im not the only one defending my position on here. Im not crazy, and Im not getting off on "patriotic big talk". Im defending my nation against vicious attacks, something Im sure I will one day go down in a blaze of glory doing.:D That would be a proud day indeed
Do me a favour, make that day come fast. You are so bloody stupid it hurts.

Well, it was fun... for three or four pages.

Now please, let this thread die. It deserves to be put out of it's misery, the poor thing :(

a lot of people want to be like us. God bless America![/QUOTE]

Fat?

Fat?

Lol. That is the perceived impression but we should not generalise. If we all stuck to our perceived impressions the world would think everyone in Britain was happy would they not? This is not the case, only last week I saw a very unhappy couple at London Airport. They were foreign tourists having to go home at the end of their holiday :p

Soldiers are some of the best people in world(I come from a military family, and may join) Soldiers ARE the reason your free.

Soldiers aren't the reason I am free. Live with it. Soldiers aren't good people. Live with it.

I'd like you to give me one piece of evidence that I am free because of soldiers. So far, everything points toward dedicated civilians interested in maintaining the rights of humanity. Not soldiers. Mind you, soldiers are people, and as people, they can be good or bad, but as soldiers, they're definitely not good.

How someone can question the sacrifice made by those who serve is something I will never understand. Maybe its because you Europeans have no sense of honor or duty to your countries. Sitting back, relaxing have no problem disgracing people who stand for something. maybe Im wrong, but thats I what Im seeing.
no, I have no problem seeing the sacrifice every soldier makes. I was wondering if you europeans really have no sense of honor or duty to your countries because thats what it seems like to me.

I question it because:
Duty, the act of sticking a bayonet into an enemy soldier.
Glory, having a loved one cry over your coffin.
And many more... can't really remember them all right now, they were good pictures though.

I disgrace you because you stand for what is wrong in this world. You want war, blood and suffering. I might understand you if you thought they were inevitable, but you've made yourself perfectly clear: you want war, blood and suffering.

Nationalism is not a bad thing, there is nothing more beautiful than to kill and die for your country(which makes up a large part of you are). If my country dies, I die, so I might as well die defending it.

If your country dies, you will still be alive. Nationalism is bad, as can be seen from the past 100 years. Ever listened to any nationalist political parties? You'll find they're not the pleasant kind of people.

I love how people with no willingness to stand up for their homeland automatically to go nazi references.
Look, if you peace fanatics want to keep going back to ww2 because you cant back up your position any other way but to call me a facist and a nazi, fine. I think a few points ll duce made werent that far off though. He says we cant have perpetual peace, I disagree however I think war might be the only way to achieve that. In a way I feel sorry for you since you have no sense of honor or duty.
Christ, can you people not use Hilter or ww2 just one time when your trying to defend your "position"

As has been said, you are coming across as a nationalist person. You are quasi-nazi, if not fully.

Are you aware that you are saying a fascist was right? That just improves our argument that you are a quasi-nazi.

See above to see why Duty is wrong.

Sometimes people have to die or get hurt, its as simple as that.

They don't have to. They just do, it happens, but they certainly don't have to die or get hurt.

If you move around alot I can understand your lack of loyalty. However, Im born and breed here so its much easier for me.

Loyalty to a country? hmm... what's that called again? oh yeah! Nationalism. One more point for the quasi-nazi argument.

Your not making our stronger, you are weakening us and our resolve to fight this war. It is a very real war that threatens our very exsistence, no matter how many quotes you put it. I can tell you exactly who we are fighting, every islamic extremist in the world and it will not be over until will kill them all or make it impossible for them to hurt us. It will be a long, hard fought war, but as Americans we need to be ready to serve.

No one is taking away your freedoms, they are nessecary tools to fight terrorism, what are you afraid of? are you a terrorist or something?

Actually we can do what we want, we are a superpower remember?

Those issues SHOULDNT have been made public, it hurts our efforts to fight this murderous foe. There is so much most civilians dont know or would understand, its better that way. You should just let it go

You want to call me a terrorist!:mad: I am a PATRIOT, I would give my life for this country, I would kill for this country!! Im not pissing on freedom, I am defending it, which is more than I can say for you.

Somebody is taking away your freedoms apparently. Like it or not, the government of the US is supposed to be a democracy, which means that when a majority do not want to go to war, don't bloody well go to war!

You will never defeat terrorism. It's been around forever and will continue to be around forever. As it is, you are feeding it. Don't feed the troll.

You can't do what you want. The more the world opposes you, the less of a superpower you become.

It doesn't hurt any of your efforts, because your efforts hurt themselves enough already. In fact, being hypocritical is worse.

Your last paragraph is pretty much what every terrorist/nationalist would say. Besides, patriotism is blind faith, not much better, is it? Oh yeah, terrorists are patriots too! So are nationalists... get it now?

Not a better place? we got rid of Hilter, prevented S.Korea from falling into communism and stopped the spread of communism in vietnam. We freed millions of Iraqis and Afghanis from murderous regimes, as well as disrupting and destroying groups like al-Qeada.

Gas Chambers? I swear the nazi references never stop. Thats a little extreme and I think you know that. The simple fact is that its better for some things to remain secret to ensure the safety of the nation. As for the ammendent issue this is the first Im hearing of this so I cant comment.

You spread dictatorships to stop democratic communism in some cases, good job! stop communism! stop democracy! let's have some dictatorships we can rule over! (see the hypocrisy?)

You never bothered about the IRA? or the ETA? or any other terrorist group that didn't threaten the US, did you?

Those millions are in as much danger now as they ever were. You haven't really improved their lifestyle one bit, and should have left them to fight for themselves, or at least wait until they ask for your help.

Gas chambers was an extreme example. If you found out that the US had secretly been funding Gas chambers, would you be outraged? My bet is no, because you don't care, you don't give a damn. You just want to be safe, right?

Bush isnt a nazi, not even close, so it annoys me when him or our country is compared to one. At least you put forth a semblence of what could be seen as an argument w/o the nazi stuff, however:
1)Bush laid out a clear plan on how to get off oil, it going to work
2) we have no real allies with the execption of the maybe the British
3)Id be happy if we didnt get any new immigrants to tell you the truth. If people cant understand that the war after 9/11 doesnt stop at Afghanistan, so be it.
4)Terrorist are being killed off quicker than they can be recruited and "trained"
5)If Russia becomes a problem, we with deal with them
6)The Chinese are going to collapse soon
7)I agree with you there, campigan reform is important
8)I admit our environmental policy does need a little revision
9)Why should we give money to ineffective, dangerous, or corrupt governments or countries?
10)Is that why foreigners are dying to get into American universities? The fact is they are the best in the world.

1) He's not the type.
2) Maybe you would've... if you hadn't pissed everyone off. Oh, you forgot the danish? see, pissing off your allies again, huh?
3) How is this coherent?
4) Heh, that'd mean you are killing more people than are being born. 1 killed = 10 new, give or take a few.
5) not if they deal with you first. Wouldn't it be better if you were on good terms with them?
6) The chinese are less likely to collapse than you are.
7) I ignore this, because I have no idea what it's about
8) Definitely, I have a cute picture of a tree dying next to the environmental protection agency. It was taken last summer. It's very real, the tree is right next to this building and it's half-dead. Because there's a steam vent right next to it. Shows how much the US cares about the environment, huh?
9) you shouldn't, you should be trying to (diplomatically) make them less-dangerous, more effective and more democratic, as that seems to be your goal. Learn to use non-military means, please.
10) You always say this. I think this is true for most universities. People are dying to get an education Anywhere. There is a shortage in world-wide education. The US isn't the only country that gets lots of students. Per capita, it probably doesn't get the most.

I am interested in the fact that you use the word "we" in sense that your actually American. If thats the case, how can you hate your country that much? You disgrace this nation and everything it stands for.

In fact about 75% of the country is stable with almost no attacks, its not a total war zone. You make it seem like the whole place is a mess and thats just flat out false, talk to anyone thats been there or a Iraqi on the street and chances are they'll tell you they're better off now then before.

We won the Veitnam war, whether you like to admit it or not. The US won EVERY SINGLE ENGAGMENT with the vc. Also if you remember the mission wasnt to defeat the north or even to make the south democratic, it was to prevent the spread of communism, mission accomplished.

My patriotism doesnt need to be fought against, its people like me that keep this country safe. What need to be fought against are people like you with no sense of pride or responsbility to the nation that has given so much and all you do whine, not giving anything back.

He's not disgracing anything. He's standing up for freedoms that he believes he has lost. Until he can get them back, I doubt you'll find that people like him are going to shut up. They want the freedom to say that America sucks. That doesn't mean they'll say it if they have that freedom.

I hear the US is the one with the most troubles there. Hmm, did you pick the most dangerous zones or do people just plain hate you more than everyone else? I think the latter, considering your posts. You probably don't mind either.

The US lost in Vietnam. Most of Indo-China became communist, therefore, you lost.

Last paragraph: Quasi-nazi.

Call me what you want, wanna make me out to be the bad guy because I stand for something, fine

Why are they appalling, those men are true patroits willing to do whatever nesscary to defend America.

Actually I think we'd be better of without immigrants, they take American jobs and threaten our security.

You stand for nationalism. Another argument for you being quasi-nazi.

True patriots don't go to war in another country, they stay at home and defend it from invasions.

Hmm, again, that immigration thing... Nationalism, Another argument for quasi-nazi.


You must be one of those lower life forms that considers brave soldiers "baby killers"

Not even close, talk any average Iraqi. They dont have to worry about being killed for expressing there religious or political views and no longer fear a hated government.

I told you before the objective wasnt to make the south democratic or beat the north, it was stopping it from spreading out of vietnam. Granted the south fell, but it didnt go past that point did it? You even said it, winning war is achieving the objective, we did. Do the math we won that war. The only reason we had to leave was because of the hippies back home messing with our resolve, same crap thats what is going on now.

why? sometimes wars need to be fought and people have to die to protect the country. This doesnt ruin the country, it strenghtens it.

You know, soldiers typically aren't brave, most of them just want to stay alive. Calling them baby killers is sometimes crossing the lines. Sometimes, they really are baby killers, and that needs to be brought out into the open If they are.

I wonder if you talk to the average Iraqi very often. Hmm, I don't think neither of us do, so your argument is mute.

Now you admit that the south fell to communism and despite the objective being that it shouldn't, you Still say you won?

I'd like to see the USA after it gets invaded and the many changed perceptions. Wars don't need to be fought. Wars are a want, not a need.

There are always reasons for the wars we fought, not always transparent reasons, but always good valid ones. Independance wasnt about taxes, it was freedom. They should be glad we got rid of hilter.

Be more transparent. Independence was about taxes, not freedom, you had freedom. Tell me, which freedoms didn't you have?

You helped, you never did get rid of him, the russians made a stronger effort than you did over a longer period of time. They got rid of him. In fact, he got rid of himself.

It doesnt matter why the independence war was fought, it was still a great war. The greeks didnt give us democracy the founding fathers did, and the French havent given us anything but headaches and frustration.

War isn't great. That idea died with WWI (aka, the Great War).

The Greeks invented democracy. You copied them, as did every other democratic nation.

The French helped you gain your independence. The French are a market for your goods. The French gave you the statue of liberty. The French gave you some good nuclear scientists in the 1940s. The French gave you some necessary materials and technology for the nuclear bomb. You seem to love it so much afterall... why not love the people who helped build it?

I know what your getting at, because people like you wont shut up about this. We thought Iraq had WMD's so did ALL of Europe, he had used them before. The intel was wrong, get over it. We have an important job to do now and it doesnt mean we were any less wrong about going in there and taking care of business.

Belgium didn't, the Dutch didn't, the Danish didn't (the defense minister went in Anyway, annoying guy), the Germans didn't, the French didn't, the Spanish didn't, the Italians didn't... in fact, only the UK actually believed the US, and even then, the people were opposed. People everywhere in the EU were opposed to this war and you say we thought they did have them? you speak bullshit good sir, because very people thought that Iraq was actually a threat to us, or even that they had any WMDs.

Just because the Greeks invented it doesnt mean they gave it to us directly in the way we directly removed hilter.

You didn't directly remove Hitler.

I could care less about a UN mandate, what are they gonna do about it? We have all the justification we need.

No, you don't. You have fewer friends as a result.

I answer this, so Im not ignoring it. you lose on those odds. The US may have not "physically" removed him, but our hard fighting made it possible. To put it this way, we pumped 30 rounds into the body of the Germans and the Russians just gave that one kill round, we would have gotten to him but the soviets were faster since they were closer. This whole direct indirect thing stems from the fact Europe should be thanking us for being that war, but if you want to be ungratful about it, fine.

The Russians died in far greater numbers than you did. They made a far greater sacrifice and the whole war was a bloody disgrace to humanity. Hitler shouldn't have happened in the first place.

The Americans helped, but don't come here and say you did much more than the Russians or anyone else, that is blatantly untrue.

I dont remember caring whether we had allies...

You should. You're part super power because of it. You might just lose that status.

We would won that war whether the french helped us or not.

I doubt it. The French got the entire British fleet to decide not to go, because they were worried the French might invade. Imagine if the entire British army had gone to beat the colonists into a bloody pulp, what then?

capitalist regimes are always better than communists ones because they better serve our interests.

Socialist regimes are always better than capitalist regimes because they better serve our interests. It's as valid as your statement, probably more so.

[QUOTE=Monsai]
North Korea is a different situation but it has nothing do to with oil

When it comes to fighting terrorism, I think that issue is a blurred line in sense

I dont see what the problem is with napalm, it could come in handy in the middle of baghdad,ya know

Iraq is a threat with wmd's, ours are a deterent

N.Korea has got nukes, they were blatantly saying it. Iraq didn't have nukes, they were saying they didn't. You trusted neither and invaded the wrong country. Well done!

You can't fight terrorism, start to realize it. You can fight terrorists, but not terrorism.

Oh, just that Napalm burns into your skin, leaving you permanently disfigured, harming civilians, spreading carelessly, destroying the ground, destroying the vegetation, destroying all buildings. "I don't see what the problem is with napalm, it could come in handy in the middle of New York, ya know."

Iraq had no WMDs, the US was among the only to believe that they did.

I have a realist worldview instead of the idealist nonesense you believe in

no, I told you before who and what we are exactly fighting, look it up

Your realist worldview is based on idealism. Way to shoot down your own argument!

You are, however, fighting an ideal and not a bunch of people. Because the bunch of people you fight, will only be defeated individually, not collectively, because their ideal becomes stronger for each that you kill.

Actually I am right and a patriot, unlike you. And you didnt answer my question about why hate America so much.

So what you're saying is, "I have no counter to your cold facts, so I will just give up." Fair enough.

Cold facts? if your idea of cold facts are radical left-wing consparcy theories, fine/

you should check the objectives agian pal.
Its people like me that prevent people from crashing planes into us.

so no sense of pride or responbility to your country? thats what I thought

You owe your freedom, way of life, standard of living, safety, everything to this country, and all you've done is pay taxes, big freaking wow. Whatever happen to "ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country"

"The holder of this card is always right. If this should not be the case, see the card"

And that patriot thing: another argument for quasi-nazi.

Your facts aren't cold, they are very patriot indeed: blind faith, quasi-nazi.

You are fully unwilling to admit how wrong you are, despite numerous proofs that you are.

It's people like you who will be crashing planes into buildings if they ever got the chance.

You want to know what happened? Nationalism, nazi, fascism, patriotism... all those things happened, they're bad to the core as can be proven by WWII. You are ignoring this, saying we are just making idle references. We are not, we're being dead serious about this.

Ive said it before, I guess I have to give another go. In order to be a superpower, you have to have a little blood on your hands. We do not destroy the world, we ensure peace and safety for the US. Im sorry if that makes you sick.

And in doing so, you destroy the world. You are not sorry, it's easy enough to tell from the rest of your posts.

Wow, 1st I was a fascist, then a terrorist, now Im like a lightbulb, I wonder what I'll be next :rolleyes:

I actually know quite a bit about Iraq

Oh, still a fascist, nationalist, terrorist, because that's what you are! just read all your posts. You'll see.

You probably know as much about Iraq as everyone else who isn't there... nothing! I know very little, you probably know as much as I do.

You just dont want to debate because you are losing, your position doesnt hold water, I understand. I dont know what the rest of the world thinks, however many Americans agree with me, if you have noticied Im not the only one defending my position on here. Im not crazy, and Im not getting off on "patriotic big talk". Im defending my nation against vicious attacks, something Im sure I will one day go down in a blaze of glory doing.:D That would be a proud day indeed

Glory, a loved one crying over your coffin, because they bloody damn well didn't want you to go and get yourself killed!

Our position holds more water, because of WWII and similar occurrences. You are the only one defending Your position. Your position is a uniquely nationalist and quasi-nazi. It's one of the worst I have ever seen.

Why cant I be serious, I know plenty of people like myself. I am no troll and Im 100% AMERICAN, Im almost offended you would suggest otherwise. An abassadorship is a renagade version of an Ambassadorship, bent on end of the UN and international coporation that will not only bring down my nation on nationstates and in RL as well. By the way the UN, much like in RL is ineffective on here. My nation recently passed child labor legalization laws and a program to keep the UN abassadorship pure. Both of which go against UN law.:p

You can't be serious, because everything points to you being quasi-nazi, yes! I am serious!

You are a troll, I mean, look at what you made me do :P

The UN is voluntarily, start acting in it please, or you'll soon have very few friends left.

Once again, I hereby declare you a Nationalist. That's a Bad thing.

I somehow feel it's rather pointless to continue arguing.
UN abassadorship seems to have the sole aim in life to unite not only the rest of the world, but also the majority of his own countrymen against him. I don't really know what form of psychosis that is, although it does seem pretty self-destructive.
On the other hand, maybe he's just getting off on the patriotic big talk.
That's the reason he's on my ignore list. There's no point arguing with him so why bother? The only thing you need to do is post in his threads some disclaimer about him being a troll or wrong on every subject and leave it at that.

But he is one of the all-time greatest troll. I mean, 52 pages? That's quite a feat.

That's the reason he's on my ignore list. There's no point arguing with him so why bother? The only thing you need to do is post in his threads some disclaimer about him being a troll or wrong on every subject and leave it at that.

But he is one of the all-time greatest troll. I mean, 52 pages? That's quite a feat.

52? I got it at 51. But anyway, perhaps my post will kill this thread :D I hope so. It should be too long to read and reply to.

52? I got it at 51. But anyway, perhaps my post will kill this thread :D I hope so. It should be too long to read and reply to.
Actually, I got it at 26 but I fiddled with the settings, so... ;)

And mark my words... It will go up to 52. If I have to drag the thread with me to do it, damnit. :sniper:

Edit: Wow, I actually used a gun smilie. I feel so dirty.

I answer this, so Im not ignoring it. you lose on those odds. The US may have not "physically" removed him, but our hard fighting made it possible. To put it this way, we pumped 30 rounds into the body of the Germans and the Russians just gave that one kill round, we would have gotten to him but the soviets were faster since they were closer. This whole direct indirect thing stems from the fact Europe should be thanking us for being that war, but if you want to be ungratful about it, fine.
Sorry, did you just say that. Russia killed the Germans, just as the Americans defeated the japs, When Germany went into Russia the russians lost around 30 milllion men, but killed 4 or 5 million Germans, they did the hard fighting, stalingrad? For 4 years they forght the Germans of and inch by inch they took easten Europe back, finallt taking Berlin itself. The US frst forght the Germans in 1944, if anything it was the other way round, the russians fired 30 rounds into the Germans-the US (Wiuth Britian and Canda) just stepped in at the last moment.

You must be one of those lower life forms that considers brave soldiers "baby killers" yeah, the US got rid of the guy that had rape rooms and mass graves and we are the bad guy, please.
Tell me somthing, if a US soildier kills a child (As they have done-don't deny it. Children died in Iraq and Vietnam-hundreds of thousands of children in 'Nam in fact) then they are child killers. A soildier is a killer.

Me, I don't balive in killing, not even in a war. I hate death and pain, we can't stop people dieing from war and disise, but we can stop them from dying from a American weapon.

Not even close, talk any average Iraqi. They dont have to worry about being killed for expressing there religious or political views and no longer fear a hated government.
Don't fear it, you do realise that a religious/political civil war is breaking out at the moment between the Sunni and Shias, don't you. The goverments hated as a puppet goverment of the US.

I was talking about 75% of the cities, in the Kurdish north and Shi'ia south it is almost completely safe, these areas have large international make up in terms of sercurity forces, if you remember it wasnt just the US that went in. 3 or 4 central cities are still giving us some trouble but we are making progress, its cliche but we do have to stay the course.
Strange that A)The British seem to own the ones that are safe.
B)The Kurds are basically a indipentant state-and have been for many years.




I told you before the objective wasnt to make the south democratic or beat the north, it was stopping it from spreading out of vietnam. Granted the south fell, but it didnt go past that point did it? You even said it, winning war is achieving the objective, we did. Do the math we won that war. The only reason we had to leave was because of the hippies back home messing with our resolve, same crap thats what is going on now.
Yes it did, Loas, Cambdia. Your job, your madate (You've said so on this thread) was to stop the Communists taking the south, you failed at that, and containment.

why? sometimes wars need to be fought and people have to die to protect the country. This doesnt ruin the country, it strenghtens it.
I don't balive this. Wars don't have to be forght, how many wars going on in the world today could be olved by nagotiation-all of them, but unfortuntly people, people like you, seem to balive that the only way to win if through bloodshed. After all being a diplomat isn't heroic.

Sorry, did you just say that. Russia killed the Germans, just as the Americans defeated the japs, When Germany went into Russia the russians lost around 30 milllion men, but killed 4 or 5 million Germans, they did the hard fighting, stalingrad? For 4 years they forght the Germans of and inch by inch they took easten Europe back, finallt taking Berlin itself. The US frst forght the Germans in 1944, if anything it was the other way round, the russians fired 30 rounds into the Germans-the US (Wiuth Britian and Canda) just stepped in at the last moment.

I'm never one to downplay the role Western forces had in WWII, but I'm afraid Aust is correct here. Russia defeated Germany after four years - we fought hard, but the Russians did the majority of the work. They would have won the conflict against Germany anyway, it merely would have taken a year or so longer by most historical views. Your view of history is as appalling as your nationalistic viewpoint. Also, you wouldn't have won the War of Independence despite your nationalistic bombast - without thw French, the US would be a British colony to this day.

Umm, Aust - sorry to be a History Nazi (An odd word, but meh), but the US actually first fought the Germans in early 1942 - The Kasserine Pass in North Africa. Sorry, but doing History at Uni makes me point out mistakes more. No offense, I hope

I'm never one to downplay the role Western forces had in WWII, but I'm afraid Aust is correct here. Russia defeated Germany after four years - we fought hard, but the Russians did the majority of the work. They would have won the conflict against Germany anyway, it merely would have taken a year or so longer by most historical views. Your view of history is as appalling as your nationalistic viewpoint. Also, you wouldn't have won the War of Independence despite your nationalistic bombast - without thw French, the US would be a British colony to this day.

Umm, Aust - sorry to be a History Nazi (An odd word, but meh), but the US actually first fought the Germans in early 1942 - The Kasserine Pass in North Africa. Sorry, but doing History at Uni makes me point out mistakes more. No offense, I hope
I've only got a GCSE in Modern world and an A-level in Classical-sorry. :oops:

Tell me somthing, if a US soildier kills a child (As they have done-don't deny it. Children died in Iraq and Vietnam-hundreds of thousands of children in 'Nam in fact) then they are child killers. A soildier is a killer.
No, they arent. If kids die, just a unfortunate side effect.

Me, I don't balive in killing, not even in a war. I hate death and pain, we can't stop people dieing from war and disise, but we can stop them from dying from a American weapon.
This is why if it came down to just you and me, I would win since Im not afraid to pull the tigger. War leads to peace, pain leads to happiness. No one can stop anyone from dying from an American weapon

Don't fear it, you do realise that a religious/political civil war is breaking out at the moment between the Sunni and Shias, don't you. The goverments hated as a puppet goverment of the US.
And you question why are there? We have to make sure civil war doesnt break out. They do like their government, just look at the amount of people who voted

Strange that A)The British seem to own the ones that are safe.
B)The Kurds are basically a indipentant state-and have been for many years.
Thats because we give the british the easier areas, they couldnt handle the tough stuff;) Yes, but Kurds dont attack because they know we are far better than Saddam.

Yes it did, Loas, Cambdia. Your job, your madate (You've said so on this thread) was to stop the Communists taking the south, you failed at that, and containment.
Left-wing propaganda again, 1 has nothing do to with the other

I don't balive this. Wars don't have to be forght, how many wars going on in the world today could be olved by nagotiation-all of them, but unfortuntly people, people like you, seem to balive that the only way to win if through bloodshed. After all being a diplomat isn't heroic.
thats because the only way to win, is through bloodshed. Diplomats are just hot air in suits. They just need to get out of our way and let us take care of business.

thats because the only way to win, is through bloodshed. Diplomats are just hot air in suits. They just need to get out of our way and let us take care of business.

Someone's been reading a few too many David Weber books I think...

We would won that war whether the french helped us or not.

Not true in the least.


The quality of life would be better if they werent commis, I dont see what the problem is with napalm

No, the reason the quality of life is so low is because of decades on colonization, and all the rice and crop killing pesticides the US dopped on the North in an attempt to starve them out.


Actually I am right and a patriot, unlike you. And you didnt answer my question about why hate America so much.

Why do I hate America? What is America? Is it the physical land? I have no opinion towards that. Is it each and every person who lives there? I know several Americans who I like, and several who I hate. I judge each person indevidually, not based on contry of origin. Is it the government? I don't know each and every member of the government. I'm sure there are ones I'd like, and ones I'd hate.

What I hate is blind nationalism, what I hate is people who cause suffering for their own gain, what I hate is muder, what I hate is liars and people who distort the truth. What I love is freedom, what I love is happyness, what I love is people living together in those things, what I love it truth.

I think how to defend freedom

Wrong, you think how to defend American supremicy. They are not the same thing. Evedenced by all the dictaters and butchers we put into power, who you seem to have no problem with.


They are all carefully screen actually

Wrong





Americans arent shooting at everything in the streets, why is it that you never see the videos of Americans building state of the art hospitals?

In Fallujia, Ramalli, and throught the "Sunni Triangle" US soldiers were told to ignore rules of engamement, and were given instructions to shoot at anything that moves in the streets. Should I link you to a story reported in several news outlets, including the BBC, the news of our ally in the war, of a international doctor that had a small boy die in his arms because they couldn't get him to a hospital because the American troops had opend fire on their ambulance?

Yes, the Americans are building hospitals and doing good, I never said they weren't doing any good. But they are doing a shitload of bad, as well.



So what you're saying is, "I have no counter to your cold facts, so I will just give up." Fair enough.

Ha! I've been giving you nothing but facts. You have been repeating your position without support over and over like it's dogma.

By the by, are you a Christain, out of curiosity?




Cold facts? if your idea of cold facts are radical left-wing consparcy theories, fine/

Radical left-wing conspericy theories? No, if I claimed that the US military was behind 9/11, that'd be a radical conspericy theory. Everything I said was true. Cheany is still on Halliburton payrole. Bush senior sits on the board of directors of the Carlyle group. These are facts.




you should check the objectives agian pal

I'll be right back with Kissinger's take int he objectives. Seeing as he was a policy maker at the time, and you were not.


Its people like me that prevent people from crashing planes into us.

Wrong. You make people want to attack us. No one attacks Sweaden. No one attacks Denmark. They don't have runaway military budgets. It's because they don't fuck around with other people why they don't get attacked.



so no sense of pride or responbility to your country? thats what I thought

Exactly. Only things that earn my respect get it.


You owe your freedom, way of life, standard of living, safety, everything to this country, and all you've done is pay taxes, big freaking wow

How exectly do I owe everything to this country? That's bullshit.

I owe my way of life to my own decisions, and to God.

I owe my freedom to no one, it is intrensically mine, and I will fight any and everyone who trys to take it from me, including this government.

All I'm obligated to do is pay taxes. Like I said, most of the money I pay goes to stuff that doesn't benefit me in the least.

And that's not "all I do." I give back to my community. I build wheelchair ramps for the disabled into their homes free of charge. 20% of my income goes to helping the poor. I volenteer my time at a Christain ministry for the poor. I help those who need and deserve it.






If those people serve our interests well, I dont see the problem.

That is a problem.

Here is the part where I have the biggest problem with your position. "Our intrests" isn't an end unto it's self as you present it to be. The ends must be promoting freedom, promoting equality, helping those who need it, and bettering the human race as a whole. What you say, "it doesn't matter if we stomp on freedom and murder hundrends of thousands, as long as it's in our intrest" just doesn't add up.


You claim to love freedom, but you have no problem with it being stomped on and having people murdered for "our intrests."

Ninja Pride!

Hell yes!

You just dont want to debate because you are losing, your position doesnt hold water, I understand. I dont know what the rest of the world thinks, however many Americans agree with me, if you have noticied Im not the only one defending my position on here. Im not crazy, and Im not getting off on "patriotic big talk". Im defending my nation against vicious attacks, something Im sure I will one day go down in a blaze of glory doing.:D That would be a proud day indeed

Are you a soldier, by the way?

1) As a greater deterent and varity in strength and deployments methods to fit every sceranio.

2) Ive been to every country in North America, my major in college is International studies, so all I do is study all aspects of other nations. Im going to aust. this summer and will be doing a 2 year term with the peace corps when I graduate.

I disagree with your economy claim we have a very strong economy and will only get stronger.


wow, your school must have a very, very, weak international studies program if this is what a sophmore IS major has to say. So much ignorance is impressive, but really doesn't help your point much.

btw, i find it amusing that a "realist" (I actually would dissgree with you being a realist) whom is supportive of massive military spending and large quantities of ICBMs is joining the peace corps. Irony...

Not true in the least.



No, the reason the quality of life is so low is because of decades on colonization, and all the rice and crop killing pesticides the US dopped on the North in an attempt to starve them out.




Why do I hate America? What is America? Is it the physical land? I have no opinion towards that. Is it each and every person who lives there? I know several Americans who I like, and several who I hate. I judge each person indevidually, not based on contry of origin. Is it the government? I don't know each and every member of the government. I'm sure there are ones I'd like, and ones I'd hate.

What I hate is blind nationalism, what I hate is people who cause suffering for their own gain, what I hate is muder, what I hate is liars and people who distort the truth. What I love is freedom, what I love is happyness, what I love is people living together in those things, what I love it truth.



Wrong, you think how to defend American supremicy. They are not the same thing. Evedenced by all the dictaters and butchers we put into power, who you seem to have no problem with.




Wrong







In Fallujia, Ramalli, and throught the "Sunni Triangle" US soldiers were told to ignore rules of engamement, and were given instructions to shoot at anything that moves in the streets. Should I link you to a story reported in several news outlets, including the BBC, the news of our ally in the war, of a international doctor that had a small boy die in his arms because they couldn't get him to a hospital because the American troops had opend fire on their ambulance?

Yes, the Americans are building hospitals and doing good, I never said they weren't doing any good. But they are doing a shitload of bad, as well.





Ha! I've been giving you nothing but facts. You have been repeating your position without support over and over like it's dogma.

By the by, are you a Christain, out of curiosity?






Radical left-wing conspericy theories? No, if I claimed that the US military was behind 9/11, that'd be a radical conspericy theory. Everything I said was true. Cheany is still on Halliburton payrole. Bush senior sits on the board of directors of the Carlyle group. These are facts.






I'll be right back with Kissinger's take int he objectives. Seeing as he was a policy maker at the time, and you were not.




Wrong. You make people want to attack us. No one attacks Sweaden. No one attacks Denmark. They don't have runaway military budgets. It's because they don't fuck around with other people why they don't get attacked.





Exactly. Only things that earn my respect get it.




How exectly do I owe everything to this country? That's bullshit.

I owe my way of life to my own decisions, and to God.

I owe my freedom to no one, it is intrensically mine, and I will fight any and everyone who trys to take it from me, including this government.

All I'm obligated to do is pay taxes. Like I said, most of the money I pay goes to stuff that doesn't benefit me in the least.

And that's not "all I do." I give back to my community. I build wheelchair ramps for the disabled into their homes free of charge. 20% of my income goes to helping the poor. I volenteer my time at a Christain ministry for the poor. I help those who need and deserve it.








That is a problem.

Here is the part where I have the biggest problem with your position. "Our intrests" isn't an end unto it's self as you present it to be. The ends must be promoting freedom, promoting equality, helping those who need it, and bettering the human race as a whole. What you say, "it doesn't matter if we stomp on freedom and murder hundrends of thousands, as long as it's in our intrest" just doesn't add up.


You claim to love freedom, but you have no problem with it being stomped on and having people murdered for "our intrests."



Hell yes!



Are you a soldier, by the way?


I just wanted to quote what you put here to show you how long it was

I just wanted to quote what you put here to show you how long it was
How stupid are you exactly? :confused:

How stupid are you exactly? :confused:

That could be seen as trolling.

That could be seen as trolling.

No.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzistanza
Not true in the least.



No, the reason the quality of life is so low is because of decades on colonization, and all the rice and crop killing pesticides the US dopped on the North in an attempt to starve them out.




Why do I hate America? What is America? Is it the physical land? I have no opinion towards that. Is it each and every person who lives there? I know several Americans who I like, and several who I hate. I judge each person indevidually, not based on contry of origin. Is it the government? I don't know each and every member of the government. I'm sure there are ones I'd like, and ones I'd hate.

What I hate is blind nationalism, what I hate is people who cause suffering for their own gain, what I hate is muder, what I hate is liars and people who distort the truth. What I love is freedom, what I love is happyness, what I love is people living together in those things, what I love it truth.



Wrong, you think how to defend American supremicy. They are not the same thing. Evedenced by all the dictaters and butchers we put into power, who you seem to have no problem with.




Wrong







In Fallujia, Ramalli, and throught the "Sunni Triangle" US soldiers were told to ignore rules of engamement, and were given instructions to shoot at anything that moves in the streets. Should I link you to a story reported in several news outlets, including the BBC, the news of our ally in the war, of a international doctor that had a small boy die in his arms because they couldn't get him to a hospital because the American troops had opend fire on their ambulance?

Yes, the Americans are building hospitals and doing good, I never said they weren't doing any good. But they are doing a shitload of bad, as well.





Ha! I've been giving you nothing but facts. You have been repeating your position without support over and over like it's dogma.

By the by, are you a Christain, out of curiosity?






Radical left-wing conspericy theories? No, if I claimed that the US military was behind 9/11, that'd be a radical conspericy theory. Everything I said was true. Cheany is still on Halliburton payrole. Bush senior sits on the board of directors of the Carlyle group. These are facts.






I'll be right back with Kissinger's take int he objectives. Seeing as he was a policy maker at the time, and you were not.




Wrong. You make people want to attack us. No one attacks Sweaden. No one attacks Denmark. They don't have runaway military budgets. It's because they don't fuck around with other people why they don't get attacked.





Exactly. Only things that earn my respect get it.




How exectly do I owe everything to this country? That's bullshit.

I owe my way of life to my own decisions, and to God.

I owe my freedom to no one, it is intrensically mine, and I will fight any and everyone who trys to take it from me, including this government.

All I'm obligated to do is pay taxes. Like I said, most of the money I pay goes to stuff that doesn't benefit me in the least.

And that's not "all I do." I give back to my community. I build wheelchair ramps for the disabled into their homes free of charge. 20% of my income goes to helping the poor. I volenteer my time at a Christain ministry for the poor. I help those who need and deserve it.








That is a problem.

Here is the part where I have the biggest problem with your position. "Our intrests" isn't an end unto it's self as you present it to be. The ends must be promoting freedom, promoting equality, helping those who need it, and bettering the human race as a whole. What you say, "it doesn't matter if we stomp on freedom and murder hundrends of thousands, as long as it's in our intrest" just doesn't add up.


You claim to love freedom, but you have no problem with it being stomped on and having people murdered for "our intrests."



Hell yes!



Are you a soldier, by the way?



Harric I just wanted to quote what you put here to show you how long it was

THAT, could be seen as trolling.

And what are you anyway, the forum gestapo?

That could be seen as trolling.
And reposting a post just to show how long it is isn't? :rolleyes:

No, they arent. If kids die, just a unfortunate side effect.

I think our friend needs to take a class on morals.


This is why if it came down to just you and me, I would win since Im not afraid to pull the tigger. War leads to peace, pain leads to happiness. No one can stop anyone from dying from an American weapon


Yet, the person you are talking to would die a good man/woman. You, however, would not.

And you question why are there? We have to make sure civil war doesnt break out. They do like their government, just look at the amount of people who voted
Bush cheated. He didn't win.



Left-wing propaganda again, 1 has nothing do to with the other

And you are right wing propaganda.



thats because the only way to win, is through bloodshed. Diplomats are just hot air in suits. They just need to get out of our way and let us take care of business.No value for human life, eh? That's absolutly disgusting.

I don't think this thread is going anywhere. I shot lots of debating-ammunition, but as is the case so often, UN Ambassadorship doesn't engage in actual debate.
He closes his mind, repeating mantras again and again.

I reckon the people who were calling for this thread to die are right.

Someone's been reading a few too many David Weber books I think...

They just don't realize that the military is nothing more than the long arm of diplomacy. It's just another tool in some statesmen's tool kit.

And reposting a post just to show how long it is isn't? :rolleyes:

That is more along the lines of spamming.

As for when I said Trolling, I meant trollbaiting.

Why do you hate America. The government has the right to observe communication between citizens and those overseas. The torture issue and the secret prisons should never have been made public. Theres somethings the public doesnt need to know(believe me). You may not understand how the world works, sometimes bad people need to be hurt or killed for the safety of others.

China will not take over, when they let their dollar hit the market, it will colapse, along with the economy. The US will be #1 for a long time, dont worry.

You have got to be *&$#% kidding me. America will not have the best economy for a long time. I give it about 20-30 years before China takes over. We are in the TRILLIONS when our deficit is concerend. The government has about no money and all the money that they are usingis borrowed from places like China and England.

The populace should know about pretty much everything that the government does and the policies it implements (a huge reason why FDR was so popular). We are not idiots. We now how the world works (and it's really not so much as how the world works, but as how human nature works). Most people actually don't enjoy the deaths of other:eek: . Personally i think that in most cases torture is wrong but in extreme cases (such as if we don't get this information some country or another is going to be totally destroyed) you can torture but not kill.

The government doesn't have the right to veiw communications at home, over seas, from hoem to over seas and vice versa, without the communicator and the communicatee both agreeing to it unless congress passes a bill that allows that.


P.S. you are Republican, aren't you?

I don't think this thread is going anywhere. I shot lots of debating-ammunition, but as is the case so often, UN Ambassadorship doesn't engage in actual debate.
He closes his mind, repeating mantras again and again.

I reckon the people who were calling for this thread to die are right.
I am engaging in actual debate, or at least trying to. Im getting attacked from all sides here. I have an open mind, maybe tis you who does not? Im waiting for a clear argument on why I am wrong. If someone presents one, I may have a different veiw.

P.S. you are Republican, aren't you?
Im a reg. Democrat actually, I happen to be very liberal on social issues

I am engaging in actual debate, or at least trying to. Im getting attacked from all sides here. I have an open mind, maybe tis you who does not? Im waiting for a clear argument on why I am wrong. If someone presents one, I may have a different veiw.
Yet people have actually done so. Read the book Empire of Debt. That may convince you. Or Superstate, explaining why the EU is in its ascent and the USA is slowly declining.

I have an open mind, maybe tis you who does not? Im waiting for a clear argument on why I am wrong. If someone presents one, I may have a different veiw.
I tried, mate.

I tried it on a theoretical, historical argument, which you rejected by just yelling "Don't call me a Nazi!"
And then I tried with a practical, real life analysis, which you rejected and just said "Not true!"

I have yet to see a single post from you to actually bring about an argument for why the US is so great which incorporates the concerns people have voiced in the now 53 pages of this thread.

I am engaging in actual debate, or at least trying to. Im getting attacked from all sides here. I have an open mind, maybe tis you who does not? Im waiting for a clear argument on why I am wrong. If someone presents one, I may have a different veiw.
Well, obviously you are not WRONG. You just have a very peculiar world view. I strongly suggest you read the previous 52 pages to find out why people think that. There are some very clear arguments there...

You have got to be *&$#% kidding me. America will not have the best economy for a long time. I give it about 20-30 years before China takes over. We are in the TRILLIONS when our deficit is concerend. The government has about no money and all the money that they are usingis borrowed from places like China and England.?

China's economy is one of the worst charades in the world. It is literally hanging on by a few threads and a foreign investment bubble that is approaching manic status, and at the same time the government is intentionally covering up all of the fundamental weaknesses behind it...crippling poverty, high unemployment, plunging wages, and a deflationary recession (likely to become depression) in rural China are the products of that "boom". We're lucky if it stays afloat until 2010...if you want to see one of the future economic superpowers, look to India.

China's economy is one of the worst charades in the world. It is literally hanging on by a few threads and a foreign investment bubble that is approaching manic status, and at the same time the government is intentionally covering up all of the fundamental weaknesses behind it...crippling poverty, high unemployment, plunging wages, and a deflationary recession (likely to become depression) in rural China are the products of that "boom". We're lucky if it stays afloat until 2010...if you want to see one of the future economic superpowers, look to India.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_pop_bel_pov_lin
The percentage seems to be lower than America's. Doesn't look like a massive poverty problem. And don't give me the excuse of population size. If that was the case it would still have to be larger.

Not true in the least.

yes it is actually

No, the reason the quality of life is so low is because of decades on colonization, and all the rice and crop killing pesticides the US dopped on the North in an attempt to starve them out.
we have nothing to do with their problems, its been what 30yrs? they should have rebounded by now



Why do I hate America? What is America? Is it the physical land? I have no opinion towards that. Is it each and every person who lives there? Iknow several Americans who I like, and several who I hate. I judge each person indevidually, not based on contry of origin. Is it the government? I don't know each and every member of the government. I'm sure there are ones I'd like, and ones I'd hate.
America, like it or not, makes you who you are. By not defending it, you are not defending yourself.

What I love is freedom, what I love is happyness, what I love is people living together in those things, what I love it truth.
yeah, maybe we can hold hands, dancing as little bunnies hop through the meadows:rolleyes:


Wrong, you think how to defend American supremicy. They are not the same thing. Evedenced by all the dictaters and butchers we put into power, who you seem to have no problem with.

your right, I dont have a problem with it because it is for American sumpremicy, Ive said b4, the US must do anything to maintain that.



In Fallujia, Ramalli, and throught the "Sunni Triangle" US soldiers were told to ignore rules of engamement, and were given instructions to shoot at anything that moves in the streets. Should I link you to a story reported in several news outlets,
Dont bother, I believe you. I dont see what the problem is. Its war you know, its fair that thing that moves might be the thing that kills them if they dont shoot.

Yes, the Americans are building hospitals and doing good, I never said they weren't doing any good. But they are doing a shitload of bad, as well.

Good out weighs the bad



Ha! I've been giving you nothing but facts. You have been repeating your position without support over and over like it's dogma.

By the by, are you a Christain, out of curiosity?

If you have been giving facts, theres alot of spin attached to them. And Im not a Christian, Im an Atheist, religion scares the crap out of me.




Radical left-wing conspericy theories? No, if I claimed that the US military was behind 9/11, that'd be a radical conspericy theory. Everything I said was true. Cheany is still on Halliburton payrole. Bush senior sits on the board of directors of the Carlyle group. These are facts.

yeah, but they are already rich, do you really think they would sacfrice American lives for money? That would make them some of the worst people on the planet.


Wrong. You make people want to attack us. No one attacks Sweaden. No one attacks Denmark. They don't have runaway military budgets. It's because they don't fuck around with other people why they don't get attacked.

Denmark pissed off Arabs with the cartoons, so they are on the hit list. You dont think they mess with people? All western countries do, its a matter of survival, only difference between the US and Sweden is the US prisoner treatment went public.



Exactly. Only things that earn my respect get it.

wow


How exectly do I owe everything to this country? That's bullshit.

I owe my way of life to my own decisions, and to God.

I owe my freedom to no one, it is intrensically mine, and I will fight any and everyone who trys to take it from me, including this government.
really, if you were in China, you'd be shot for saying the stuff you say. So you at least owe your freedom to the US. Dont believe go to Iraq in the Saddam days, go to North Korea, China, Cuba, Syria. Speak out against the government and say your freedom is yours and no one can take it. see what happens



Here is the part where I have the biggest problem with your position. "Our intrests" isn't an end unto it's self as you present it to be. The ends must be promoting freedom, promoting equality, helping those who need it, and bettering the human race as a whole. What you say, "it doesn't matter if we stomp on freedom and murder hundrends of thousands, as long as it's in our intrest" just doesn't add up.


You claim to love freedom, but you have no problem with it being stomped on and having people murdered for "our intrests."

Let me rephrase; I'll do anything to ensure AMERICAN freedom and interests



Are you a soldier, by the way?
not yet, maybe soon

only difference between the US and Sweden is the US prisoner treatment went public.
How does one 'sig' this stuff..?

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_pop_bel_pov_lin
The percentage seems to be lower than America's. Doesn't look like a massive poverty problem. And don't give me the excuse of population size. If that was the case it would still have to be larger.

China's official poverty line is $1/day. Even adjusted for PPP, that is still a crippling level of poverty for those people, and is not comparable to poverty in the United States by any degree. Furthermore, it's an official statistic; you literally cannot believe anything the government supplies as data because they don't allow independent investigation.

This also doesn't reflect the income inequality in China; the top urban 10% control 45% of the wealth while the bottom 20% control only 3.4%. Even compared to the US, that is incredibly bad. Combine it with 25+% unemployment in rural regions, and you can see why the Chinese are trying to cover up the unrest in their country; the people getting richer are the ones who already have money.

I'm not saying that China's growth isn't reducing poverty, and it's not totally unsustainable. However, the way the growth is occuring and the way it is being distributed lead me to conclude that unless they make adjustments, it will collapse in on itself and will bring the government with it...and that would be an economic disaster.

China's official poverty line is $1/day. Even adjusted for PPP, that is still a crippling level of poverty for those people, and is not comparable to poverty in the United States by any degree. Furthermore, it's an official statistic; you literally cannot believe anything the government supplies as data because they don't allow independent investigation.

This also doesn't reflect the income inequality in China; the top urban 10% control 45% of the wealth while the bottom 20% control only 3.4%. Even compared to the US, that is incredibly bad. Combine it with 25+% unemployment in rural regions, and you can see why the Chinese are trying to cover up the unrest in their country; the people getting richer are the ones who already have money.
Indeed. I will be surprised if China does not fragment at some point if things go on this way.

EDIT: Ah, then I seem to have misread your post then. Never mind.

I am interested in the fact that you use the word "we" in sense that your actually American. If thats the case, how can you hate your country that much? You disgrace this nation and everything it stands for.

Im no better than bin Laden? You do realize I support the people that hand out the candy to kids, not the murderous fools that blow them up. We didnt hire back butchers, we brought free elections to a long oppressed people. Their intastructure isnt in shambles, it is getting built up more and more, it just doesnt make the news because they only like to cover the negatives. In fact about 75% of the country is stable with almost no attacks, its not a total war zone. You make it seem like the whole place is a mess and thats just flat out false, talk to anyone thats been there or a Iraqi on the street and chances are they'll tell you they're better off now then before. That whole "bush did it to get rich" b.s. is so stupid Im not even going to waste my time.

We won the Veitnam war, whether you like to admit it or not. The US won EVERY SINGLE ENGAGMENT with the vc. Also if you remember the mission wasnt to defeat the north or even to make the south democratic, it was to prevent the spread of communism, mission accomplished.

My patriotism doesnt need to be fought against, its people like me that keep this country safe. What need to be fought against are people like you with no sense of pride or responsbility to the nation that has given so much and all you do whine, not giving anything back.

All because you don't think that the country that you live in is the best country doesn't mean that you hate it. You are correct in one though, he does disgrace everything that this country stands for (violence, lack of freedoms, personal advancement above all else).

Learn your history you fucking dumbass. WE LOST THE FUCKING VIETNAM WAR! WE GOT OUR FUCKING ASSES KICKED! WHY THE HELL ELSE WOULD WE HAVE BACKED OUT OF THE CONFLICT? :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

It's not people like you who keep this country safe. It's people like you who say that they would die and kill for there country. Yet you say this from the safety of your home or your school or your work. If you actually had the guts to kill and be killed for this country the JOIN THE FUCKING MILITARY AND DO IT! :mad: :mad: :mad:. No one should be needed to be fought against. You do sound like a dictator (Joseph Stalin in this case more than Hitler i think though). If you don't like what you gov't does then you don't deserve to live is the message that i am getting from you. The last thing we need right now is to have a civil war.

Indeed. I will be surprised if China does not fragment at some point if things go on this way.
But they've been making arguments like these for decades now. From the day Mao won, people have been saying that it won't last.
Then they reformed, and people said the Communist Party would collapse.
And now they've been talking about how it's overheating and unequal for years.

I believe it when I see it - so far I have to assume that the Chinese have some very capable people at the helm, know the problems and will try to get them fixed.

Not to forget that the Chinese people have more that holds them together than money and political pressure. They're a pretty nationalist bunch.

But they've been making arguments like these for decades now. From the day Mao won, people have been saying that it won't last.
Then they reformed, and people said the Communist Party would collapse.
And now they've been talking about how it's overheating and unequal for years.

I believe it when I see it - so far I have to assume that the Chinese have some very capable people at the helm, know the problems and will try to get them fixed.

Not to forget that the Chinese people have more that holds them together than money and political pressure. They're a pretty nationalist bunch.
Yes, but now they are actually seeing how much better others have it. Their economy has opened, for both better and worse. The population is becoming increasingly unruly, and from what I have read riots are all the more frequent. Extreme poverty can turn even the biggest nationalist into a revolutionary.

All because you don't think that the country that you live in is the best country doesn't mean that you hate it. You are correct in one though, he does disgrace everything that this country stands for (violence, lack of freedoms, personal advancement above all else).

Learn your history you fucking dumbass. WE LOST THE FUCKING VIETNAM WAR! WE GOT OUR FUCKING ASSES KICKED! WHY THE HELL ELSE WOULD WE HAVE BACKED OUT OF THE CONFLICT? :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

It's not people like you who keep this country safe. It's people like you who say that they would die and kill for there country. Yet you say this from the safety of your home or your school or your work. If you actually had the guts to kill and be killed for this country the JOIN THE FUCKING MILITARY AND DO IT! :mad: :mad: :mad:. No one should be needed to be fought against. You do sound like a dictator (Joseph Stalin in this case more than Hitler i think though). If you don't like what you gov't does then you don't deserve to live is the message that i am getting from you. The last thing we need right now is to have a civil war.

I can understand why he would think America won the Vietnam war. Battlefield wise, America won every single battle, but the North vietnamese were fighting the war on an entirely different scale.

Yes, but now they are actually seeing how much better others have it. Their economy has opened, for both better and worse. The population is becoming increasingly unruly, and from what I have read riots are all the more frequent. Extreme poverty can turn even the biggest nationalist into a revolutionary.
Either that, or (which is what I hear more of) it gets the people to work with even more fervour to allow China to enjoy the same standards that other nations have.

It is true that sometimes there have been clashes - but as far as I can tell they were not about macro issues, but about things like villages being relocated for a dam.

As I said, people have been interpreting little signs like that for decades, and been wrong every time. I'll reserve my judgement on this, but I maintain that China has what it takes to be great, if it is managed properly.

As I said, people have been interpreting little signs like that for decades, and been wrong every time. I'll reserve my judgement on this, but I maintain that China has what it takes to be great, if it is managed properly.
Agreed, yet time will tell. I would like to believe the same about the EU. :)

Don’t have the right to freedom because they are not US citizens? That is about the most arrogant comment I've ever read on these forums. Still, I have visited many countries in the world including America and I am aware not all Americans share your ( worrying ) view. America would not be my first choice to live in if I decided to move out of the UK (even if I became a citizen with a 'right to freedom' because it lacks something. The thing is, I cannot put my finger on what it is. Maybe I should visit it again and try another area. No, I think there are still some other places I'd like to visit (and re-visit).

not all americans share this persons views. personally i think that he is crazy.

After having waded through more unintelligent, semi-intelligent, and even a few intelligent arguments, I now must present my next topic of discussion in relation to this thread.

Admittedly, many of us do not like Bush. That's great. Some may support him. Also great. However, let's look at the bigger picture. According to the rules and regulations of American government, Bush is no longer allowed to run for the Presidential office. Therefore, why not do what we can to maintain the civil rights of all humans (note, not just Americans) but also look forward to correcting the problems in the long run? Attacking Bush and his policies now will only solve short-term issues. Instead, Americans, and non-Americans should converse together over whom would best fit the next presidency. Whom shall American citizens vote for in order to repair damages obtained? Whom shall American citizens vote for to renew the overall view of the United States of America?

Granted, as I've stated before, I am American, but I also truly think that this nation needs a huge dose of realism. I am a realist, and I often make a concerted effort to stand back and take a look at what is going on in the world, and the flow of cause and effect. After doing so, I then make an educated effort to find some means of action that will benefit all involved the most.

Such a perspective has helped me well as a shift manager at a local restaurant (it's a temporary job while I'm trudging through university). It may only be a restaurant, but on a much smaller scale, it's a nation unto itself. What will one do to improve the economy? What will one do to ensure the company/nation will survive through the tough times? What does it take? What will be the resulting effects on everything you do (not just on the immediate consequences, but also on collateral consequences)?

I'll tell you.

Intelligence, and down-to-earth understanding of the world around oneself.

EDIT: I half wonder if I should become a political science major in conjunction with being a fine arts major...

I agree wit you on all points (including becominga political science major). the only problem is is that there are too many Americans like UN Ambassadorship who think that only Americans know whats best for America, nay, the world.

You know what, UN? I went away all forulating my next arguments, ready to re-say what I've re-said and re-prove what I've re-proven, but something happened to me, and I realised, you don't matter. Or more procisly, I was never arguing against just you. I was arguing against a mindset, against a way of thought. I was fighting something so broad as the very idea that the "national good" is more important then freedom, then human life, the idea the country is something sacred and special. But I realised, you don't matter. You, your country, your ideas of state superemicy, everything you stand for, it has no power over me. I am part of something more real and more powerful then you could ever know. For you, state fills the void where this thing should be. And I pity you. But I do not fear you, and I sure as hell don't have to prove anything to you. So go feel like I big man. I know what matters. You are not the majority. So from this moment on, you and your whole way of thinking have no power over me. You are both irellivent.

I truly do wish you the best in life, I hope someday you can find real happyness. This is the last you will be hearing of me on this thread. Go ahead, claim victory, it doesn't matter. You will be yelling into the dark, with only yourself to hear you.

Goodnight, and good luck.

Originally Posted by The UN abassadorship

your right, I dont have a problem with it because it is for American sumpremicy, Ive said b4, the US must do anything to maintain that.



People... that sentence alone should make everyone nod their head in disgust, think poorly of him, and MOVE on by not engaging in this debate anymore... He will obviously not change his opinion on any of this and if we've learned anything from these 55 pages, it's that he is very uneducated in world affairs and completely CLOSED minded, although he'll deny both of these statements.

I'm going to name 2 things that suck and their leaders...
White Supremacists - KKK
Aryan Race Supremacy - Hitler

You, are an American Supremacist, and although you're not the leader, you're just another pawn in the sick game. I piss on your views.

People... that sentence alone should make everyone nod their head in disgust, think poorly of him, and MOVE on by not engaging in this debate anymore... He will obviously not change his opinion on any of this and if we've learned anything from these 55 pages, it's that he is very uneducated in world affairs and completely CLOSED minded, although he'll deny both of these statements.
You people refuse to change YOUR opinion, you are also closed minded towards my vision. Why do I disgust you, it appears I come off as a hitler like figure although Im not sure why, I havent advocated genocide or anything
I'm going to name 2 things that suck and their leaders...
White Supremacists - KKK
Aryan Race Supremacy - Hitler

You, are an American Supremacist, and although you're not the leader, you're just another pawn in the sick game. I piss on your views.
You guys are getting creative with the Hilter references. Im not a pawn nor is this a game, this is real life, if you lose you die. I dont piss on your views, why dont piss on mine?

I think our friend needs to take a class on morals.
most "morals" are outdated

Yet, the person you are talking to would die a good man/woman. You, however, would not.
Yet, I still be alive, you'd be dead.


And you are right wing propaganda.
Im not right wing at all

No value for human life, eh? That's absolutly disgusting.
Thats not true at all, I value some life

most "morals" are outdated

That's what the Nazis said. That's why they had boys go out and shoot Jews: to toughen them and rid them of any clinging code of morality they might adhere to.

Yet, I still be alive, you'd be dead.

Not if someone replaced your grey matter with lead and air.

Im not right wing at all

You're right, you're a facist.

Thats not true at all, I value some life

Like the Nazis. I wonder why it is that people keep on comparing you to Nazis. Could it be that, maybe *gasp!* they're right?

You people refuse to change YOUR opinion, you are also closed minded towards my vision. Why do I disgust you, it appears I come off as a hitler like figure although Im not sure why, I havent advocated genocide or anything

No, just killing people for the national good.


You guys are getting creative with the Hilter references. Im not a pawn nor is this a game, this is real life, if you lose you die. I dont piss on your views, why dont piss on mine?

Actually, you do.

You, your country, your ideas of state superemicy, everything you stand for, it has no power over me.
not yet...
I am part of something more real and more powerful then you could ever know. For you, state fills the void where this thing should be. And I pity you.
What exactly is thing your apart of, this void you say I have. And I do not need pity

You are not the majority. So from this moment on, you and your whole way of thinking have no power over me. You are both irellivent.
In my country, I am the majority. Wow I didnt know I had power over you before hand. In way it makes sense since Im American, your not.
I truly do wish you the best in life, I hope someday you can find real happyness.
Happiness will be when the vision or the solution is realized

Go ahead, claim victory
Victory is mine

In my country, I am the majority. Wow I didnt know I had power over you before hand. In way it makes sense since Im American, your not.

HA! You represent yourself. Unless you miraculously get ~116 million votes. But if that were true, I'd have to kill ya.

Happiness will be when the vision or the solution is realized

Jawohl, Herr Fuehrer! Wenn die Amerikaner Reich is establish, we will have viele, viele happiness und our Reich will stand for ein tausent Jahren!

Victory is mine

What's this? I just snatched your victory? I'm so sorry. Better luck, next time.

No, just killing people for the national good.
Did hilter advocate killing for the nation or for his race?


Actually, you do.
This is not my intention

Did hilter advocate killing for the nation or for his race?


Both. So, advocating just one makes you in any way better?

That's what the Nazis said. That's why they had boys go out and shoot Jews: to toughen them and rid them of any clinging code of morality they might adhere to.
I didnt say all morals were outdated


Not if someone replaced your grey matter with lead and air.
fair enough, it would be an honorable death however


You're right, you're a facist.
facists are right-wing, I said Im not right-wing

Both. So, advocating just one makes you in any way better?
If its the right one, yes. Let me ask you something, is there anything you feel is worth killing for?

I didnt say all morals were outdated

Nor did the Nazis. The only morality that they supported, however, was one that looks frighteningly similar to the one you propose as being the best, or most up-to-date.

fair enough, it would be an honorable death however

That's what hangings were invented for.

facists are right-wing, I said Im not right-wing

So you've gone so far to the right that you're coming out on the left, did ya?

If its the right one, yes. Let me ask you something, is there anything you feel is worth killing for?

Freedom is worth killing for. A nation is not.

If its the right one, yes. Let me ask you something, is there anything you feel is worth killing for?

No. Dying, yes. Plenty of things. Killing, no.
It's pretty simple, really. If I have to kill in order to get something, I was never meant to have it at all.
There is no "right" reason to kill, although defense can be excused, if it remains adequate to the aggression of the attacker.

Freedom is worth killing for. A nation is not.
So how is it that Im radical because I support killing to ensure the safety of the one nation that is the very embodyment of freedom?

So how is it that Im radical because I support killing to ensure the safety of the one nation that is the very embodyment of freedom?

No nation embodies freedom. Freedom is nationless, landless.

And if you think the United States is the embodiment of freedom you:
A-Haven't been paying attention to the news;
B-Have never even glanced at a law book, or;
C-Are completely naive.

No. Dying, yes. Plenty of things. Killing, no.
It's pretty simple, really. If I have to kill in order to get something, I was never meant to have it at all.
There is no "right" reason to kill, although defense can be excused, if it remains adequate to the aggression of the attacker.
Im just wondering, why are you willing to die, but not to kill? If you have to die for something, were you meant to live for it or have it? to me its an interesting distinsction you make.

Terrorists have viciously attacked us and our so called allies, this is aggression of the attacker if you like. The US needs to defend itself through military action from this attack(not only in Afghanistan). I wonder why you will excuse killing for defence, but not excuse me or my Nation for seeing the importance of defence in this war we need to fight.

No nation embodies freedom. Freedom is nationless, landless.

And if you think the United States is the embodiment of freedom you:
A-Haven't been paying attention to the news;
B-Have never even glanced at a law book, or;
C-Are completely naive.
We have an enormous amounts of freedom in our lives, a democratic Government, and free markets. In a sense we invented this idea that people could be free, I dont see how this is a bad thing to sacrifice for when you yourself said freedom is worth the cost of life.

We have an enormous amounts of freedom in our lives, a democratic Government, and free markets. In a sense we invented this idea that people could be free, I dont see how this is a bad thing to sacrifice for when you yourself said freedom is worth the cost of life.

We didn't invent the damned thing! It was always there, we just were the first people to have the gall to claim to have it.

And like I said, a nation is not worth killing for, freedoms are. That means defending my home from foreign aggressors. It means fighting the government and killing its agents, if I must. It does not mean waging wars of aggression, just because it suits our mood!

Im just wondering, why are you willing to die, but not to kill? If you have to die for something, were you meant to live for it or have it? to me its an interesting distinsction you make.

Terrorists have viciously attacked us and our so called allies, this is aggression of the attacker if you like. The US needs to defend itself through military action from this attack(not only in Afghanistan). I wonder why you will excuse killing for defence, but not excuse me or my Nation for seeing the importance of defence in this war we need to fight.

If I decide to die for something, it is my own decision. It is my life, and I'm free to do with it whatever I please. I have no such right over the lifes of others.

Terrorists have attacked you. Therefore, the war on Afghanistan was justified as an attempt to bring the perpetrators to justice. A failed attempt, unfortunately.
Iraq never posed a threat, neither to you nor to your allies. This is something that even your administration now grudgingly admits, there were no WMDs, there was no plan to attack or invade anywhere. It was not a war to defend yourself, it was a war of aggression, spreading anti-American sentiment around the world and in the long run only ensuring that you now really may have the enemies you were only imagining before.
Europe has helped defend you, and it will do so again, but if you're set on self-destruction and won't listen to advice, you're on your own...

Jawohl, Herr Fuehrer! Wenn die Amerikaner Reich is establish, we will have viele, viele happiness und our Reich will stand for ein tausent Jahren!

English please

So how is it that Im radical because I support killing to ensure the safety of the one nation that is the very embodyment of freedom?

Actually... I'd say the fact that a hippy in Ireland and a redneck in Montana being allied against you in this would have you tell you something about where you are.

English please

It's bastardized German/English. You should be able to figure it out without too much trouble. Hell, nearly all the German words in that are cognants of English words or English words made to look more German.

Actually... I'd say the fact that a hippy in Ireland and a redneck in Montana being allied against you in this would have you tell you something about where you are.
wait, are you a liberalredneck from Montana, a rare breed indeed

wait, are you a liberalredneck from Montana, a rare breed indeed

Let me assure you, hippies in Ireland are even rarer. And yet, my opinion on this is the opinion of the majority here :D

wait, are you a liberalredneck from Montana, a rare breed indeed

Not really. Democrats in Montana share most of the same views I do. And if you think that Democrats are rare in Montana, well, our state is run by the Democratic Party. Why? Because we got our very own little Bushevik. And Montanans, being the wonderful geniuses they are (except for those Eastern Montanans :rolleyes: ) voted her out of office and elected a Democrat! And Democrats control the State Legislature. And our Consititution, one of the most liberal in the Union (and protecting of more freedoms than the US Constitution: including an actual right to privacy and the right to a decent education, in addition to the usual thing about keeping guns) was penned thirty years ago... by Democrats.

If I decide to die for something, it is my own decision. It is my life, and I'm free to do with it whatever I please. I have no such right over the lifes of others.

Terrorists have attacked you. Therefore, the war on Afghanistan was justified as an attempt to bring the perpetrators to justice. A failed attempt, unfortunately.
Iraq never posed a threat, neither to you nor to your allies. This is something that even your administration now grudgingly admits, there were no WMDs, there was no plan to attack or invade anywhere. It was not a war to defend yourself, it was a war of aggression, spreading anti-American sentiment around the world and in the long run only ensuring that you now really may have the enemies you were only imagining before.
Europe has helped defend you, and it will do so again, but if you're set on self-destruction and won't listen to advice, you're on your own...
The war on terror has many battlefields, not just Afghanistan. A stable Iraq will give the US an ally in the heart of the middle east, making the US safer in the long run.

The war on terror has many battlefields, not just Afghanistan. A stable Iraq will give the US an ally in the heart of the middle east, making the US safer in the long run.

While simultaneously providing one of the best training grounds known to man for would-be terrorists and rebels. :rolleyes:

Not really. Democrats in Montana share most of the same views I do. And if you think that Democrats are rare in Montana, well, our state is run by the Democratic Party. Why? Because we got our very own little Bushevik. And Montanans, being the wonderful geniuses they are (except for those Eastern Montanans :rolleyes: ) voted her out of office and elected a Democrat! And Democrats control the State Legislature. And our Consititution, one of the most liberal in the Union (and protecting of more freedoms than the US Constitution: including an actual right to privacy and the right to a decent education, in addition to the usual thing about keeping guns) was penned thirty years ago... by Democrats.
I always thought of you as a red state, guess I was wrong

I always thought of you as a red state, guess I was wrong

We are a Red State. Mostly thanks to the East, though.

Keep in mind, a left of center Montanan makes for a right of center American. :p

The war on terror has many battlefields, not just Afghanistan. A stable Iraq will give the US an ally in the heart of the middle east, making the US safer in the long run.

How do you know that? As far as I understand, you are about to install a democratic system in the country. Do you honestly think that the people will actually seek their invaders as allies??? Would you??? Or would you condem them for bombing your house to the ground, crippling your children and killing your wife? Wouldn't you then go on to join the underground in an attempt to get back at the country that caused so much suffering for your family?

I think you'd be just the person who would do that...

While simultaneously providing one of the best training grounds known to man for would-be terrorists and rebels. :rolleyes:
granted this may be happening now, however in the long run, Iraq will not be a place for terrorists. Already your seeing the vast majority of Iraqis rejecting the terrorists as well as the terrorists fighting each other. groups like al-Qeada are being attacked by Iraqi nationalists who see them as nothing more than thugs. The nationalists are losing support as well the more Iraqis see how we are helping them.

granted this may be happening now, however in the long run, Iraq will not be a place for terrorists. Already your seeing the vast majority of Iraqis rejecting the terrorists as well as the terrorists fighting each other. groups like al-Qeada are being attacked by Iraqi nationalists who see them as nothing more than thugs. The nationalists are losing support as well the more Iraqis see how we are helping them.

The irony here is, it wasn't a place for terrorists before, either...

granted this may be happening now, however in the long run, Iraq will not be a place for terrorists. Already your seeing the vast majority of Iraqis rejecting the terrorists as well as the terrorists fighting each other. groups like al-Qeada are being attacked by Iraqi nationalists who see them as nothing more than thugs. The nationalists are losing support as well the more Iraqis see how we are helping them.

Well, this does remind me: Where's Osama? And what the fuck are we doing in Iraq, when we still haven't caught him? Why did we invest more resources into tracking down Saddam Hussein than to Osama bin Laden? Why is it that bin Laden is hiding out in a cave somewhere, while Saddam rots in the clink?

The irony here is, it wasn't a place for terrorists before, either...

ZING!

How do you know that? As far as I understand, you are about to install a democratic system in the country. Do you honestly think that the people will actually seek their invaders as allies??? Would you??? Or would you condem them for bombing your house to the ground, crippling your children and killing your wife? Wouldn't you then go on to join the underground in an attempt to get back at the country that caused so much suffering for your family?

I think you'd be just the person who would do that...
Admittedly I would do that, I understand why they would be upset that we are there. However as time goes on and we continue to do all the good things we are doing, people will warm to us. And as we draw down as the Iraqis have a larger presence, we will be seen less as occupiers and more as the good people who got rid of Saddam. you remember how happy people were when we 1st got there taking down statues and the like. These things take time tough.

The irony here is, it wasn't a place for terrorists before, either...
is that why Zarqawai moved freely through Iraq with Saddams knowledge before the war?

Admittedly I would do that, I understand why they would be upset that we are there. However as time goes on and we continue to do all the good things we are doing, people will warm to us. And as we draw down as the Iraqis have a larger presence, we will be seen less as occupiers and more as the good people who got rid of Saddam. you remember how happy people were when we 1st got there taking down statues and the like. These things take time tough.

Decades. If your intention really is to bring justice to terrorists, this particular strategy will be rather ineffective, as the culprits will have died of old age...

is that why Zarqawai moved freely through Iraq with Saddams knowledge before the war?

It would explain why al Qaeda was formed in the first place: to fight the Iraqis.

Well, this does remind me: Where's Osama? And what the fuck are we doing in Iraq, when we still haven't caught him? Why did we invest more resources into tracking down Saddam Hussein than to Osama bin Laden? Why is it that bin Laden is hiding out in a cave somewhere, while Saddam rots in the clink?
Your right, the Afghanistan operation isnt over more resources do need to be there, but its tricky. If Osama is in pakistan, we cant touch him and alot of pakistanis like him. so will catch him but its going to be tough.

is that why Zarqawai moved freely through Iraq with Saddams knowledge before the war?
This (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6189795/) Zarqawi?

Your right, the Afghanistan operation isnt over more resources do need to be there, but its tricky. If Osama is in pakistan, we cant touch him and alot of pakistanis like him. so will catch him but its going to be tough.

So, if we can't go into Pakistan because they don't like us... what's the point of supporting the tyranical dictator of Pakistan, again? Oh, and we actually are in Pakistan: to help with earthquake relief. I have a friend who's going over there who's in the Air Force.

Everything I said was true. Cheany is still on Halliburton payrole. Bush senior sits on the board of directors of the Carlyle group. These are facts.


yeah, but they are already rich, do you really think they would sacfrice American lives for money? That would make them some of the worst people on the planet.


And thats exactly what they are doing! Get a grip! If you really would be a patriot you would do anything to get these arrested! They started a war killing thousands of innocents AND american soldiers just to get money through their links to the military industry! THAT'S what I call sick and plain evil. These people will never have "enough" money or power. That capitalism really is a b.tch, ain't it?



Oh please just let it die...This thread along with UN.

Just look at what his views are if he would be real:

"All action determined to make America stronger is right by definition" Free quote, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

So, wouldn't it be good for the american economy to get rid of all these unproductive handicaped people? Or old ones? So, for the good of the USA just kill them. As they are Americans too (and according to you the majority shares your views) they would understand and happily end their lives.

And if we're on this path already, wouldn't it be the "Endlösung" for American security and world leading role just to nuke the rest of the world if you could do it without the danger of any counter attack? So it would be right after your definition! After all, you just care about the US, so nuke the rest...

THAT is what you stand for. And that is why I cannot believe that you are anything but a overacting Troll. Else you wouldn't be able to open your mouth in the public while keeping your teeth.


I don't think this thread is going anywhere. I shot lots of debating-ammunition, but as is the case so often, UN Ambassadorship doesn't engage in actual debate.
He closes his mind, repeating mantras again and again.

I reckon the people who were calling for this thread to die are right.


And as always you're right on this. We all had a "good" time arguing (well, except UN as I didn't see any arguments from him). He is bound to get the troll of the month award, and thats it. We should feel happy for helping such a lonely little troll, it must be cold alone under the bridge.

No, they arent. If kids die, just a unfortunate side effect.
The death of somone, an unfortunate side efrfect, like measles or somthing. Death isn't a side effect for that eprson death is the end! You take a life you can't give it back.


This is why if it came down to just you and me, I would win since Im not afraid to pull the tigger. War leads to peace, pain leads to happiness. No one can stop anyone from dying from an American weapon

You remind of 1984, war is Peace, freedom is Slavery, Ignorence is Strenght, you seem to embody the party. Youc an stop it by NOT making weapons!

And I'm not afraid to pull the trigger, I'm a farmer, I've killed hudnreds of times, dogs, ship, foxs, rabbets. I'm a good shot with the shotgun.

And you question why are there? We have to make sure civil war doesnt break out. They do like their government, just look at the amount of people who voted
Look at the amount that refused to vote, that have died. Look at how many voted for extreamist partys


Thats because we give the british the easier areas, they couldnt handle the tough stuff;) Yes, but Kurds dont attack because they know we are far better than Saddam.
Yeah sure, if you say so. The Kurds have wanted an indepdent nation for eyars,m there best chacne is with the Americans in there, thats why they support it, not ebcause your any better.

Left-wing propaganda again, 1 has nothing do to with the other

YOU CAUSED LAOS TO FALL! You Indvaded it, I say that had somthign to do with the Vietnam war!

thats because the only way to win, is through bloodshed. Diplomats are just hot air in suits. They just need to get out of our way and let us take care of business.
Diplomats saved your bacon mroe times than a soildier did-look at the cuban misiles crisis, if the military had it's way we'd all be radioactive particals by now.

Only Vatican City beats the US of A

Diplomats start wars, not the military you incompetent radical.

Winston Churchill once said "Old men start wars, but it is the young who fight and die"
Also, Vestigus said "Let he who desires peace prepare for war"
And using your logic, you might agree with Joseph Stailn's saying,
"The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of 100,000,000 is a statistic."
Don't military bash. If it wasn't for them, you wouldnt be allowed to do said military bashing

Also, name 1 time in modern history when the military, acting independently from the government, has plunged a nation into an unwanted war, excluding coup de etats

Also, name 1 time in modern history when the military, acting independently from the government, has plunged a nation into an unwanted war.
Greece had a military coup which led to the Junta taking effective control of the government. Its actions caused Turkey to invade Cyprus, so it caused a war between the two.

Coups are a bit different, they are internal conflicts, sorry I should have been more specific.

Also, name 1 time in modern history when the military, acting independently from the government, has plunged a nation into an unwanted war, excluding coup de etats
Manchurian Crisis 1933, Peral Harbour 1942 Abyssianian crisis 1925, Etrian_Ethiopian wars.

Your right, the Afghanistan operation isnt over more resources do need to be there, but its tricky. If Osama is in pakistan, we cant touch him and alot of pakistanis like him. so will catch him but its going to be tough.

then, applying your notion of foreign policy, the USA should immediately strike at pakistan. the USA's pawn there appears unable to to root bin laden out or control his own country's al-qaeda links. ...and pakistan has definate and confirmed al-qaeda links, unlike iraq.

additionally, the same reasoning applies to saudi arabia. the governemnt seems unwilling to deal with its terrorism links. remember the majority of al-qaeda operatives in the 9-11 bombing were saudi - as is bin laden.

so, you now have two confirmed enemies of the USA. one's who are contributing considerably more than iraq to direct attacks against domestic US assets.

you'd best break out the nuclear weapons, as well, because pakistan has them and I doubt that they'll hesitate to use them. you'd best solicit india's help because china may not care much for a US occupation of pakistan and the use of any nuclear weapons so close to their borders. incidendally, china's missiles would be able to reach US forces in that region.

you csan use your base in iraq to stage your attack on saudi arabia. they'll likely fall fast but occupation will be a nightmare. you'd best hit iran at the same time as you don't want them to develop nuclear weapon technology.

I think you're running out of troops.

Admittedly I would do that, I understand why they would be upset that we are there. However as time goes on and we continue to do all the good things we are doing, people will warm to us. And as we draw down as the Iraqis have a larger presence, we will be seen less as occupiers and more as the good people who got rid of Saddam. you remember how happy people were when we 1st got there taking down statues and the like. These things take time tough.
Finally! We might actually be able to have an actual debate yet!

So, if we can't go into Pakistan because they don't like us... what's the point of supporting the tyranical dictator of Pakistan, again? Oh, and we actually are in Pakistan: to help with earthquake relief. I have a friend who's going over there who's in the Air Force.
We are helping with the earthquake, but not conducting military operations since we have to protect pakistan's "soveriegnity". Pakistan's president is an "ally" to us, so hes alright. Its the Pakistani sercurity forces that maybe sympathic towards bin Lidan, making getting him difficult.

then, applying your notion of foreign policy, the USA should immediately strike at pakistan. the USA's pawn there appears unable to to root bin laden out or control his own country's al-qaeda links. ...and pakistan has definate and confirmed al-qaeda links, unlike iraq.

additionally, the same reasoning applies to saudi arabia. the governemnt seems unwilling to deal with its terrorism links. remember the majority of al-qaeda operatives in the 9-11 bombing were saudi - as is bin laden.

so, you now have two confirmed enemies of the USA. one's who are contributing considerably more than iraq to direct attacks against domestic US assets.

you'd best break out the nuclear weapons, as well, because pakistan has them and I doubt that they'll hesitate to use them. you'd best solicit india's help because china may not care much for a US occupation of pakistan and the use of any nuclear weapons so close to their borders. incidendally, china's missiles would be able to reach US forces in that region.

you csan use your base in iraq to stage your attack on saudi arabia. they'll likely fall fast but occupation will be a nightmare. you'd best hit iran at the same time as you don't want them to develop nuclear weapon technology.

I think you're running out of troops.
Are you advocating that the war on terror doesnt stop at Afghanistan? Are you coming over to the "dark side"? we wont run out of troops with the draft.

We are helping with the earthquake, but not conducting military operations since we have to protect pakistan's "soveriegnity". Pakistan's president is an "ally" to us, so hes alright. Its the Pakistani sercurity forces that maybe sympathic towards bin Lidan, making getting him difficult.

We mayn't be conducting military operations there, but our military is there on a humanitarian mission.

The death of somone, an unfortunate side efrfect, like measles or somthing. Death isn't a side effect for that eprson death is the end! You take a life you can't give it back.
maybe side effect was a poor choice of words, however you get the idea, its an accident, move on


And I'm not afraid to pull the trigger, I'm a farmer, I've killed hudnreds of times, dogs, ship, foxs, rabbets. I'm a good shot with the shotgun.
How you kill a ship, and why do you kill dogs? Im glad your a good shot with a shotgun, Im a good shot with an AK from 150 yards away, I think Id win that engagement.


Yeah sure, if you say so. The Kurds have wanted an indepdent nation for eyars,m there best chacne is with the Americans in there, thats why they support it, not ebcause your any better.
You just we are their best chance, they were oppressed by Saddam, so how arent we better?

YOU CAUSED LAOS TO FALL! You Indvaded it, I say that had somthign to do with the Vietnam war!
We didnt cause it to fall

We mayn't be conducting military operations there, but our military is there on a humanitarian mission.
True, but those are different, they dont consider it a violation when are there just to help, it still doesnt get us closer to bin Laden

maybe side effect was a poor choice of words, however you get the idea, its an accident, move on

Dropping a bomb on people and then calling it an accident that people die...

Where's the difference to flying a plane into a building and calling it a justified act of war?

True, but those are different, they dont consider it a violation when are there just to help, it still doesnt get us closer to bin Laden

Assuming we aren't quietly condusting SpecOps while we're there.

Assuming we aren't quietly condusting SpecOps while we're there.
True, that would I good idea, I say we need SpecsOps in as many countries as possible.

Dropping a bomb on people and then calling it an accident that people die...

Where's the difference to flying a plane into a building and calling it a justified act of war?
If you cant tell the difference between civilians accidentially being killed in an operation to take out terrorists and terrorists intentially killing civilians, then you maybe retarded(no offense).

maybe side effect was a poor choice of words, however you get the idea, its an accident, move on
But it isn't always an accident is it, thats the problem.


How you kill a ship, and why do you kill dogs? Im glad your a good shot with a shotgun, Im a good shot with an AK from 150 yards away, I think Id win that engagement.

Typo. Dogs worry the sheep and livestock so we, as farmers, have a right to shoot any dog that is off the lead on our farm-if they are causing trouble. A dog off the lead in lambing season can cause sheep to lamb early, which kills the lambs.

Year, an AK, sure. lamping we use a hunting rifle, I use a night scope as well, dead shot within 200 meters, on a rabbit-at night. I win. But who cares?


We didnt cause it to fall
Invading and taking out there goverments so communists can take over isn't casing a palce to fall to communism? At the same time as increasing the emathy of the common epople against the US troops-not a good idea.

If you cant tell the difference between civilians accidentially being killed in an operation to take out terrorists and terrorists intentially killing civilians, then you maybe retarded(no offense).

Let's see.... 2,794 dead civilians, 31,891 dead civilians. Yes, I can see the difference indeed.

Let's see.... 2,794 dead civilians, 31,891 dead civilians. Yes, I can see the difference indeed.
yes and: Flying planes into buildings, cluster bombing/naplaming/mining villages that might harbour enermys. I stress the might.

True, that would I good idea, I say we need SpecsOps in as many countries as possible.

Er... no. It makes sense to have SpecOps or BlackOps in Pakistan and Iran, but not to have them running all over the place and everywhere.

If you cant tell the difference between civilians accidentially being killed in an operation to take out terrorists and terrorists intentially killing civilians, then you maybe retarded(no offense).
You're aware that 9/11 wasn't about civilians, right? It was about symbolism.

If they had wanted to kill lots of people, they could've flown the planes into a baseball stadium. Instead they chose the Pentagon, presumably the White House and the symbol of American economic might, the WTC (in the morning, before most people were at work).

In a way, the dead people on that day were unfortunate collateral damage.

You're aware that 9/11 wasn't about civilians, right? It was about symbolism.

If they had wanted to kill lots of people, they could've flown the planes into a baseball stadium. Instead they chose the Pentagon, presumably the White House and the symbol of American economic might, the WTC (in the morning, before most people were at work).

In a way, the dead people on that day were unfortunate collateral damage.

Actually, there were predictions that there would be in excess of 30,000 dead after the collapse, because the planes struck right after nearly everyone had gotten to work that day. If they wanted to minimized collateral damage, they would have struck in the middle of the night.

Actually, there were predictions that there would be in excess of 30,000 dead after the collapse, because the planes struck right after nearly everyone had gotten to work that day. If they wanted to minimized collateral damage, they would have struck in the middle of the night.

I'd say they had no interest in minimizing collateral damage, and striking in the middle of the night would have posed some major problems presumably. It's not as if there was an illuminated flight path into the twin towers, really.
On the other hand, I think it wasn't their objective to kill as many civilians as possible, either. They were clearly after symbols (something that puzzeled me from the begining). If they wanted a few hundred thousand dead, flying those planes into nuclear power plants would have been infinitely more effective.

I'd say they had no interest in minimizing collateral damage, and striking in the middle of the night would have posed some major problems presumably. It's not as if there was an illuminated flight path into the twin towers, really.
On the other hand, I think it wasn't their objective to kill as many civilians as possible, either. They were clearly after symbols (something that puzzeled me from the begining). If they wanted a few hundred thousand dead, flying those planes into nuclear power plants would have been infinitely more effective.

Except it's New York City... it's fully lit day and night. Between that and the fact that the WTC was where the only two skyscrapers were with in a large area, it woulda been obvious which building(s) to hit. But, yes, they were probably going primarily for symbolism. They probably also wanted to kill as many infidels as they could, too.

Except it's New York City... it's fully lit day and night. Between that and the fact that the WTC was where the only two skyscrapers were with in a large area, it woulda been obvious which building(s) to hit. But, yes, they were probably going primarily for symbolism. They probably also wanted to kill as many infidels as they could, too.

Even assuming it would have been a clear, moonlit night, it still would have been tricky. Imagine you are above a sea of tiny lights, trying to find the cluster of lights you want to hit, and consider the speed you're going at.
And there would have been no way of predict the weather conditions, or of simply postponing the attack until the fog clears or the rain lets up...

Actually, there were predictions that there would be in excess of 30,000 dead after the collapse, because the planes struck right after nearly everyone had gotten to work that day. If they wanted to minimized collateral damage, they would have struck in the middle of the night.
I remember the predictions. Turned out mighty wrong, didn't they?

There weren't as many people in there as there would have been at 2 or 3 in the afternoon, let's say it like that.

Even assuming it would have been a clear, moonlit night, it still would have been tricky. Imagine you are above a sea of tiny lights, trying to find the cluster of lights you want to hit, and consider the speed you're going at.
And there would have been no way of predict the weather conditions, or of simply postponing the attack until the fog clears or the rain lets up...

Meteorologists try to predict weather conditions. If the weather conditions aren'y favorable when they show up at the airport, they enact a Plan B: they stay on the airplane, remain calm, get off at the airplane's destination and then fly or drive back to their city of origin to wash, rinse, repeat.

Skyscrapers are fitted with lights intended to tell pilots where the skyscraper is. Usually so that they don't run into it. Which is beside the fact that if they're half-decent terrorists, they would know which direction the plane will be going and where the plane will be when they hijack it and in which direction to turn to get on target.

I remember the predictions. Turned out mighty wrong, didn't they?

There weren't as many people in there as there would have been at 2 or 3 in the afternoon, let's say it like that.

There probably aren't any trans-Atlantic or trans-Continental flights at 1400 or 1500....

Meteorologists try to predict weather conditions. If the weather conditions aren'y favorable when they show up at the airport, they enact a Plan B: they stay on the airplane, remain calm, get off at the airplane's destination and then fly or drive back to their city of origin to wash, rinse, repeat.

Skyscrapers are fitted with lights intended to tell pilots where the skyscraper is. Usually so that they don't run into it. Which is beside the fact that if they're half-decent terrorists, they would know which direction the plane will be going and where the plane will be when they hijack it and in which direction to turn to get on target.

Obviously extra planing involved... never underestimate the amount of coordination an attack like this requires.

Also, if you're after symbols, you want to make an impression on the public. It's hard to make an impression on the sleeping public, every performer will tell you that. You want daylight, so news teams can shoot footage and broadcast live reports. And you want virtually everybody to see it. Nighttime would be a disatvantage.

I'm not saying they went out of their way to protect civilians, definitely not. It's just that killing as many as possible wasn't their aim.

Obviously extra planing involved... never underestimate the amount of coordination an attack like this requires.

Also, if you're after symbols, you want to make an impression on the public. It's hard to make an impression on the sleeping public, every performer will tell you that. You want daylight, so news teams can shoot footage and broadcast live reports. And you want virtually everybody to see it. Nighttime would be a disatvantage.

I'm not saying they went out of their way to protect civilians, definitely not. It's just that killing as many as possible wasn't their aim.

I think it woulda been more frightening at night. Just imagine it, you're walking down a street, you hear an explosion, but you can't see where it was. Then an hour or two later, you feel the earth quaking and you turn and all that you can see is a cloud of darkness billowing towards you. Much more frightening, in my opinion.

Are you advocating that the war on terror doesnt stop at Afghanistan? Are you coming over to the "dark side"? we wont run out of troops with the draft.
You're advocating the draft? You are nuts.

I think it woulda been more frightening at night. Just imagine it, you're walking down a street, you hear an explosion, but you can't see where it was. Then an hour or two later, you feel the earth quaking and you turn and all that you can see is a cloud of darkness billowing towards you. Much more frightening, in my opinion.

True, but THAT would have only worked for New Yorkers. The rest of the world wouldn't have noticed till the next day, there would be no miles of film showing the planes hitting and the towers collapsing from every angle, there wouldn't have been thousands, maybe millions of people sitting at home staring at the TV in utter disbelieve... I know I did. If those two towers had just disappeared overnight, it wouldn't have been half as traumatic for me....

If you cant tell the difference between civilians accidentially being killed in an operation to take out terrorists and terrorists intentially killing civilians, then you maybe retarded(no offense).
DEFINE "terrorists". Read this and TRY to understand it from the terrorists point of view (they ACTUALL ARE human beings although depicted as monsters, and therefore HAVE the ability to think. Just like yourself): "One mans terrorist is another mans freedomfighter."

SECOND: View this from civilian Iraqis point of view.. what would you do think a situation like that? You've been living a country with no political freedom, but a relatively safe one. (as long as you don't say anything stupid) Then you're thrown into a war by the US because you are to be liberated. You get some more political freedom (SOME ssince saying anything that might be regarded anti-US might get you imprisoned and tortured. Surely, that's not freedom), but what does SOME political freedom matter when your existance is threatened? And who can be blamed for doing this to your life?

then you maybe retarded(no offense).

Is this a joke?

Actually, the US did caus the downfall of Laos. By authorising US Special Forces to enter the country and conduct SpecOp missions, your country gave the Communists the excuse they needed to enter Laos themselves; with the withdrawal of US SpecOp teams and military support, the Laos government fell and you lost Laos. Just like the US lost Vietnam.
Face it, Vietnam cannot be seen as a victory in any sense. You lost hundreds of thousands of casualties, restricted civil rights, installed a corrupt regime against a democratic vote that wanted another government. You lost a large amount of international prestige in that war as well. And don't say you stopped Communism spreading, because you didn't; it wasn't going to spread anyway. You did, however, help it spread into Laos and the other neighbouring countries, indirectly causing the deaths of millions more innocent civilians. Good job...

Face it, Vietnam cannot be seen as a victory in any sense.

YES it can! Just look at the body count! The US soldiers killed many more vietnamese soldiers and civilians, than vietnam soldiers killed US soldiers and... ehemm.. civilians.

Er... no. It makes sense to have SpecOps or BlackOps in Pakistan and Iran, but not to have them running all over the place and everywhere.
Why not, it would help our security

If they had wanted to kill lots of people, they could've flown the planes into a baseball stadium. ...the WTC (in the morning, before most people were at work).
yeah your right, it was just THOUSANDS of people, not tens of thousands, sorry for thinking those people how did it were bad:rolleyes:

In a way, the dead people on that day were unfortunate collateral damage.
In a way, thats a horrible thing to say, not to mention completely unaccurate. Collateral damage are people or property destroyed that werent the main target. the people in the buildings were the main target. I love how IM the one painted as the crazy one on here.

yeah your right, it was just THOUSANDS of people, not tens of thousands, sorry for thinking those people how did it were bad:rolleyes:

Oh, so you DO know that killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians is a bad thing? Take a look at the number of casualties in Iraq, then, please.


In a way, thats a horrible thing to say, not to mention completely unaccurate. Collateral damage are people or property destroyed that werent the main target. the people in the buildings were the main target. I love how IM the one painted as the crazy one on here.

Actually, if people had been the target, there would have been more effective ways to kill more people. They weren't the target, the buildings were. The terrorists in this case didn't care if they killed a few hundred, a few thousand, or a few ten thousand people. What they cared about was destroying a building.
Very much like the US in Iraq, bombing factories they consider a strategical target without giving two thoughts about the number of civilians this attack will kill.

America: The only country where the person with the most votes loses

Oh, so you DO know that killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians is a bad thing? Take a look at the number of casualties in Iraq, then, please.
Of course I know the death of innocence is a very bad thing. Every time I see an Iraqi hurt by US action I feel horrible. But the US makes every effort to afford civilian losses, it wouldnt be just if they didnt. However the only way to prevent these things from happening is to have no military operations, no wars. This would be great however its not possible right now. If we stop, the terrorists are free to plan and carry out 100's more 9/11's. This can not be allowed in anyway. Ive said b4, and I know you hate the idea, but sometimes the only way to peace is through however sad that is.


Actually, if people had been the target, there would have been more effective ways to kill more people. They weren't the target, the buildings were. The terrorists in this case didn't care if they killed a few hundred, a few thousand, or a few ten thousand people. What they cared about was destroying a building.
Very much like the US in Iraq, bombing factories they consider a strategical target without giving two thoughts about the number of civilians this attack will kill.
If they wanted to attack symbols or structures,they would have attacked the statue of liberty or the Washington monumont if they didnt want to kill lots of people. Actually the US DOES try to avoid civilian harm, and will very often strike a building when they think the fewest number of people are inside based on intel.

yeah your right, it was just THOUSANDS of people, not tens of thousands, sorry for thinking those people how did it were bad

In a way, thats a horrible thing to say, not to mention completely unaccurate. Collateral damage are people or property destroyed that werent the main target. the people in the buildings were the main target. I love how IM the one painted as the crazy one on here.
yeah, excuse me but didn't YOU just say that the death of tens of thousands of civillians (Specifically children) was just 'collateral damage' from the iraq war and the vietnam war? And wern't there deaths an accident.

How does it feel being a hypocrit?

Of course I know the death of innocence is a very bad thing. Every time I see an Iraqi hurt by US action I feel horrible. But the US makes every effort to afford civilian losses, it wouldnt be just if they didnt. However the only way to prevent these things from happening is to have no military operations, no wars. This would be great however its not possible right now. If we stop, the terrorists are free to plan and carry out 100's more 9/11's. This can not be allowed in anyway. Ive said b4, and I know you hate the idea, but sometimes the only way to peace is through however sad that is.

Seriously, I don't see how attacking a sovereign country that posed no threat to you and wasn't in any way related to the terrorist attacks is a way to ensure peace.
On the contrary... what this has effectively done is create more enemies, more fanatists and eventually more possible suicide bombers.
Face facts, your country has killed more innocent people than any terrorist could ever hope to. And the survivors will hate your guts for that for a very long time indeed.



If they wanted to attack symbols or structures,they would have attacked the statue of liberty or the Washington monumont if they didnt want to kill lots of people. Actually the US DOES try to avoid civilian harm, and will very often strike a building when they think the fewest number of people are inside based on intel.

Neither of them were nearly big enough, and you know it.

And you still can't argue the fact that your troops killed over ten times more civilians than the terrorist did.

yeah, excuse me but didn't YOU just say that the death of tens of thousands of civillians (Specifically children) was just 'collateral damage' from the iraq war and the vietnam war? And wern't there deaths an accident.

How does it feel being a hypocrit?
How am I hypocrite? I said the people attacked on 9/11 were the main target, and thus not collateral dammage. their deaths werent an accident. the causalities of war, were unfortunate and unintended. Im sure you were trying to get at something and Im sorry if I missed what that was.

How am I hypocrite? I said the people attacked on 9/11 were the main target, and thus not collateral dammage. their deaths werent an accident. the causalities of war, were unfortunate and unintended. Im sure you were trying to get at something and Im sorry if I missed what that was.

The fact that you call the deaths of 30,000 innocents "accident", when you have troops bombing their schools and hospitals..... :rolleyes:

How am I hypocrite? I said the people attacked on 9/11 were the main target, and thus not collateral dammage. their deaths werent an accident. the causalities of war, were unfortunate and unintended. Im sure you were trying to get at something and Im sorry if I missed what that was.
You claim that calling civillian deaths in 11/9 'collateral damage' horrable, when thats what they wehre-the rtagets where symbols (The twin towers, Americas economic might, thePentagon Americas Military might, The White House Americas goverment) yet you then say that the killing of civillians by American forces in Vietnam and Iraq was 'collateral damage' and a 'accident'

I felt like making a post about all the good America does. We have the biggest and best economy with by far the biggest GDP of any country. We the strongest military and we spend 400 billion dollars a year on it(I think it should be more) and have over 3,000 nukes(should be more). We also have alot of freedom and a great quality of life. Our entertainment is the best in world and alot of people want to be like us. God bless America!

I hate to break it to you but very few people in the world want to be like America. Those that don't actively hate you have a strong dislike for you. Even your closest allies don't exactly sing your praises.

As for doing good in the world that’s quite laughable, America does what’s best for itself (perhaps unsurprising for any nation in such a position really) and what its politicians need to pacify American popular opinion. American freedom? Yeah right that’s a myth. America is one of the most restrictive nations in the west, and what freedoms you have a largely based on English common law and the Magna Carta. As for entertainment American sport is amongst the most boring on the planet. American news broadcasting is appalling and rarely reports accurately on issues outside of the US, which it rarely does at all. As such many Americans have an extremely skewed view of the world around them.

America is the largest single cause of pollution in the world, has the highest national debt of any country in the world (which incidentally is also rapidly increasing) so you’re spending far more money than you’re getting in. Pray you don't have another major economic crash. And I would genuinely like to hear of any major good deeds done by the US recently, that’s not me being sarcastic by the way I simply can't think of any off the top of my head.

It is also a nation that supports torture, one of the only western nations to do so, it blatantly flouts international law, in both economic and sovereignty issues, and has the highest rates of poverty, illiteracy and lowest standards of education in the English speaking world. Only something like 4% of Americans owns a passport and America also has the highest rate of obesity in the world, as well as possibly the greatest number of racial issues of any other western nation.

The US also has a rather alarming tendency to religious fundamentalism, illustrated by the teaching of so called "Intelligent design" and the description of Darwinism as theory not fact, as well as their portrayal of the world as being divided into good and evil. America is good of course and anyone who is opposed to them or markedly different in culture is of course "evil".

Americans both population and government has long supported and sponsored terrorism, note the IRA (sponsored and armed by American citizens rather than government) who in addition to murdering men women and children of both the Catholic and Protestant communities in Northern Ireland and the Republic, control the drug and organised crime trade within Ireland. In addition they have killed literally hundreds of others, and carry out "punishment beatings" to keep their own communities in line, although my personal favourite is their knee capping and crucifixions. If they just don't like you they’ll shoot out your knee caps if they really don't like you they’ll use an electric drill from the rear of the knee cap. And let us not forget the crucifixion of the two Catholic teenagers to a farm gate, because they were "disruptive elements" within the community, i.e. they sold drugs and didn't pay the IRA its cut. And of course there is that beloved organisation Al Qaeda which was set up with American support not to mention the Taliban and god only knows how many other such organisations they set up and funded over the years.

As to American nuclear weapons yes you have a lot, however you do not actually have the largest arsenal in the world, surprisingly Kazakhstan has. Its a fairly moot point anyway as you don't really need that many to send the world into a nuclear holocaust, and most nuclear powers in the world have enough to do that, with the exception of some of the newer ones.

I'm going to cut this one short, as it could go on forever, and I’m quite sure that this will be swamped by a deluge of flag waving Americans within seconds of it being posted as it is. Just to end it though, its interesting to note that believe it or not I’m not markedly anti American, certainly on an individual level I get along well with the Americans I meet. Much of the above is playing devils advocate, and to be honest I do even understand many of the reasons why America does what it does, and I could have been much harsher. The fact is however that the back slapping self congratulatory statements like the one that this is in response too are just wrong, and irritating as hell. America is not the beloved benefactor that likes to portray itself as. I could have brought up the whole Israel/Palestine thing if I really wanted to spark off the torrents of abuse. But the point is that I generally don't mind America that much, just imagine what those who actively hate America would have to say.

Im sorry to comment on grammar, but that block of text is a bit much. Paragraphs?

You might just be ignorant about how the world works, no offense. Theres alot that goes that you dont know about, its better that way. that spy thing should never been made public, we keep handing the terrorists our playbook, and we are gonna get burned. Also those bad people do not have the right to freedom as they are(in most cases) not US citizens.

Oh so your idea of freedom is that US citizens should be able to butcher and torture people... as long as their not other US citizens. And who exactly decides who the bad people are? You either have freedom or you don't. You might try reading up on your history, how do you think the Nazis justified their actions? In fact every major abuse of power and despotic regime has used the "necessity card" and the fact that not everyone is entitled to human rights. Why do think the Geneva convention etc. was created, there’s a reason its not called the American citizens convention, it applies to all.

Im sorry to comment on grammar, but that block of text is a bit much. Paragraphs?

good point

nobody likes a show-off

The fact that you call the deaths of 30,000 innocents "accident", when you have troops bombing their schools and hospitals..... :rolleyes:
No one is bombing schools and hospitals, thats that 'baby killer' argument again

You claim that calling civillian deaths in 11/9 'collateral damage' horrable, when thats what they wehre-the rtagets where symbols (The twin towers, Americas economic might, thePentagon Americas Military might, The White House Americas goverment) yet you then say that the killing of civillians by American forces in Vietnam and Iraq was 'collateral damage' and a 'accident'
I was arguing that they were the main target. people in veit and Iraq werent. I wasnt being a hypocrite

Neither of them were nearly big enough, and you know it.

And you still can't argue the fact that your troops killed over ten times more civilians than the terrorist did.
Sure they were, they are the very symbol of America, if they wanted symbols not innocent people they would hit those.

America is a corporate theocratic dictatorship, held under the name democracy by the republicans who keep winning because they cannot bribe and blackmail enough votes, so they rig the box wherever they can.

America works with socialism, unlike our United Kingdom which works better with Consevatism.

And with that pointed out I subject myself to say this: Most americans are cocky, arrogant, culture less, MacDonal loving, Imperialist, fat, repulsive, idiotic, prejudiced, yokel-like slobs. The rest are Democrats.

I hate America(ns)....:mp5:

No one is bombing schools and hospitals, thats that 'baby killer' argument again

In one devastating US attack on April 9, cluster bombs hit the Ghazaliya civilian district of Baghdad. As Newsday’s James Rupert reported on April 22, they “fell into large suburban neighbourhoods like explosive rain, blasting craters and spewing steel shrapnel into homes, schools and civilians”.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/may2003/clus-m06.shtml

Jan 6 (South News) - US and British strikes last month flattened an agricultural school, damaged at least a dozen other schools and hospitals and knocked out water supplies for 300,000 people in Baghdad, according to a preliminary report by UN agencies issued Wednesday.
http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/990106-unicef.htm

Just because you don't like the argument doesn't change the facts...

Sure they were, they are the very symbol of America, if they wanted symbols not innocent people they would hit those.

It would be virtually impossible to deliberately hit them with a Boeing 767, they are too small. And neither of them would have made such an impression, would it?

I've said it a number of times before, the terrorists had no reason to go out of their way to avoid civilians' deaths, but they weren't their prime target, either.

I felt like making a post about all the good America does. We have the biggest and best economy with by far the biggest GDP of any country. We the strongest military and we spend 400 billion dollars a year on it(I think it should be more) and have over 3,000 nukes(should be more). We also have alot of freedom and a great quality of life. Our entertainment is the best in world and alot of people want to be like us. God bless America!

Hate to agree with Mr. Rumsfeld but America can fight smarter with technology and that doesn't require more money it requires smarter people.

The number of nukes 3000 is too much (3 for every nation (and yes we should keep the 3 for Somalia even if we aim it at China)) , should be enough, its not like nukes are like milk and spoil but we should upgrade our nukes on a regular basis an keep the number low

We also need to think about what happens to all that nuclear waste in the America of 10,000 years from now (can't guarantee we will even speak the same language (as the warning signs that are probably in English and Spanish) ) although we should have a national language, if you want to move here the least you can do is learn the language (even if we vote on it being Spanish).
just a thought
Steven

I was arguing that they were the main target. people in veit and Iraq werent. I wasnt being a hypocrite

They weren't.
The attacks with the planes were so acurate, they were almost surgical. And for the potential they had, they actually killed surprisingly few people.
Flying each single one of those planes into nuclear power plants anywhere in the states would have given you a problem you still would be sorting out, and an exponentially higher number of casualties.

It would be virtually impossible to deliberately hit them with a Boeing 767, they are too small. And neither of them would have made such an impression, would it?

I've said it a number of times before, the terrorists had no reason to go out of their way to avoid civilians' deaths, but they weren't their prime target, either.
too small, they are gaint structures that go far into the sky. they were able to hit a small building like the pentagon thats near the ground, but arent able to hit the statue of liberty? hard to believe. If you've bin Laden talk about the attacks shortly after the attack, you'd know they were.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/may2003/clus-m06.shtml


http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/990106-unicef.htm

Just because you don't like the argument doesn't change the facts...
ok, no one is bombing those places intentially

too small, they are gaint structures that go far into the sky. they were able to hit a small building like the pentagon thats near the ground, but arent able to hit the statue of liberty? hard to believe. If you've bin Laden talk about the attacks shortly after the attack, you'd know they were.

The pentagon is low, but very wide and as such easier to hit than slim structures.
And as I said, who would have actually cared about these symbols? You didn't even need a plane for those, a simple home-made bomb would do just fine.
Of course the terrorist didn't care who they killed, nobody is saying anything different. It's just that they obviously didn't want to kill as many people as possible. Which leads to the conclusion that their main objective was the symbols.

Honestly, why else would they attack the Pentagon? Crashing the plane on some highway would have caused more casualties than that.

ok, no one is bombing those places intentially

Well, cluster bombing suburbia doesn't sound like somebody cares too much about civilians, either.

Honestly, why else would they attack the Pentagon? Crashing the plane on some highway would have caused more casualties than that.
how do you figure?

Well, cluster bombing suburbia doesn't sound like somebody cares too much about civilians, either.
Maybe they missed their target...

how do you figure?

Collisions. It would be a domino effect... even without a plane crash, collisions on highways can claim dozens of lifes at once.

Collisions. It would be a domino effect... even without a plane crash, collisions on highways can claim dozens of lifes at once.
I doubt could kill hunreds of people like what happened at the pentagon.

Maybe they missed their target...

Cluster bombs don't have one specific target, they have a target area. And to drop something like that over any part of a town is clearly targeting civilians.

Linky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_bomb)

I doubt could kill hunreds of people like what happened at the pentagon.

125 people? Easy...

Cluster bombs don't have one specific target, they have a target area. And to drop something like that over any part of a town is clearly targeting civilians.

Linky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_bomb)
I doubt the target area would have been a civilian area

I doubt the target area would have been a civilian area

*sigh...

Read the first article again... http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10405513&postcount=904

They droped cluster bombs (please notice the plural) in a civilian area. If they had a single, specific target there, cluster bombs wouldn't make much sense at all.
They killed civilians and destoyed homes and schools.

*sigh...

Read the first article again... http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10405513&postcount=904

They droped cluster bombs (please notice the plural) in a civilian area. If they had a single, specific target there, cluster bombs wouldn't make much sense at all.
They killed civilians and destoyed homes and schools.
you got from a socialist or commi site, so I wouldnt be sure about how accurate it is, it could just propaganda

you got from a socialist or commi site, so I wouldnt be sure about how accurate it is, it could just propaganda

You, sir, will never listen to an argument that you disagree with, regardless of whether it bears truth or not.

I swear, you'll never seriously consider an argument that you disagree with. It might be true or false, but you will never agree with it.

Therefore, stop arguing, you're bad at it. However, you win troll of the month.

you got from a socialist or commi site, so I wouldnt be sure about how accurate it is, it could just propaganda

And what makes you think that there isn't any propaganda in the US's popular media? Because there is. But before you go jumping on me for being a commie or something, think about this. Propaganda is systematic promoting of a cause, or doctrine, or government that reflects the interest and views of the people who are promoting it! The word propaganda tends to have a negative connotation, but it shouldn't. :-)

you got from a socialist or commi site, so I wouldnt be sure about how accurate it is, it could just propaganda

Well, it was based on a press conference given by US General Meyers. But here you go, and independent sources about the same incident:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030422-cluster01.htm

http://www.comw.org/pda/fulltext/0305iraqcasualtydata.pdf
(this one's a pdf, don't know if your browser can handle it)

http://www.comw.org/pda/0305iraqcasualtydata.html

I felt like making a post about all the good America does. We have the biggest and best economy with by far the biggest GDP of any country. We the strongest military and we spend 400 billion dollars a year on it(I think it should be more) and have over 3,000 nukes(should be more). We also have alot of freedom and a great quality of life. Our entertainment is the best in world and alot of people want to be like us. God bless America!

Given that I couldn’t remember what page the specific post by yourself was on (and that I really cannot be bothered sifting through 60+ pages to find it) I'm replying using your first one.

In one of your postings you stated that you were from a military family and were planning on joining up etc. I also happen to be from a military family, albeit a British one, as such I have moved roughly every 2 years of my life, and I and members of my family have seen a huge amount of the world because of this. I have huge respect and affection for those Officers etc that I have known in this time and hope to attend Sandhurst soon.

However certainly in the British army and specifically in Sandhurst there is a huge amount of emphasis on ethics, honesty and the upholding of international conventions and very much on moral and character integrity. The selection to become an officer in the British (and I would hope the American) army is very difficult, with a whole series of tests of both mental and physical fitness, however above all on moral fibre etc. because at the end of the day you want someone on the front line, regardless of political pressure and whatever sadistic nutcase is in power or whom you are forced to deal with, who is not going to loose their head become psychotic. Certainly not go on some ideological rampage.

You to be frank are just the sort of person who should never be let near the armed forces, and would crash and burn on the RCB boards. I fervently hope that you never get near the trigger end of a rifle or worse, and above all I honestly hope that your posts and beyond extremist views are not taken by others as a reflection of a military upbringing or the armed forces themselves. You are exactly the sort of person that causes massacres and some of the most horrendous war crimes we have yet seen.

Well, it was based on a press conference given by US General Meyers. But here you go, and independent sources about the same incident:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030422-cluster01.htm

http://www.comw.org/pda/fulltext/0305iraqcasualtydata.pdf
(this one's a pdf, don't know if your browser can handle it)

http://www.comw.org/pda/0305iraqcasualtydata.html

Alright, fine you win this one, it still doesnt make what the US does on a whole bad.

You to be frank are just the sort of person who should never be let near the armed forces, and would crash and burn on the RCB boards. I fervently hope that you never get near the trigger end of a rifle or worse, and above all I honestly hope that your posts and beyond extremist views are not taken by others as a reflection of a military upbringing or the armed forces themselves. You are exactly the sort of person that causes massacres and some of the most horrendous war crimes we have yet seen.
Are you saying Im a war criminal? I think not. Although, in a weird way I take it as a compliment.

Alright, fine you win this one, it still doesnt make what the US does on a whole bad.

Let's see... your arguement was that the terrorists are bad for attacking and killing around 3000 innocent people.
You claim the the USA is good and right for killing 30 000 innocent people.

Maybe it's time you define "good" and "bad"

Although I suspect it's going to be something like "Good is everything the US does, bad is everything the US says is bad"

Are you saying Im a war criminal? I think not. Although, in a weird way I take it as a compliment.

He said you are not. But simply for lack of opportunity.

how do you figure?
The Pentagons one of the most well armed and armoured structures on the planet, which is why the attack didn't do as much damage as it could have done. If they wanted casultys why attack the most well defended and equipped place on the planet?

Alright, fine you win this one, it still doesnt make what the US does on a whole bad.
:eek: I would never never have imagined (or even hoped) to ever see that. I don't know what to say... I'm so happy!

Cabra, you are officially my hero. Thank you. :)
And now, please, please let that be the final word! This thread is done and finished (and should have been put to rest a long time ago).

:eek: I would never never have imagined (or even hoped) to ever see that. I don't know what to say... I'm so happy!

Cabra, you are officially my hero. Thank you. :)
And now, please, please let that be the final word! This thread is done and finished (and should have been put to rest a long time ago).
The rest of us helped, and I agree. UJN let this thread die!

Let's see... your arguement was that the terrorists are bad for attacking and killing around 3000 innocent people.
You claim the the USA is good and right for killing 30 000 innocent people.

Maybe it's time you define "good" and "bad"

Although I suspect it's going to be something like "Good is everything the US does, bad is everything the US says is bad"

Bad= senseless murderous attacks
Good=defending people from murderous attacks, even if it causes some causalties.

Good=defending people from murderous attacks, even if it causes some causalties.
Like shooting down US Jets? :confused:

You just admitted that Cabra was right and the US did indeed bomb hospitals and schools, and not by accident. So how is that not a murderous attack, particularly knowing that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11?

ok if america is soo great why is it tenth on the United Nations' Human Developmeant index? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index
HUM HUM?? i dont think so...

Like shooting down US Jets? :confused:

You just admitted that Cabra was right and the US did indeed bomb hospitals and schools, and not by accident. So how is that not a murderous attack, particularly knowing that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11?
Im sure they had a good reason to do what they did, perhaps there were terrorists inside? Iraq had everything to do with 9/11, some sources say Saddam came up with the idea.

Bad= senseless murderous attacks
Good=defending people from murderous attacks, even if it causes some causalties.

So, senselessly killing 3000 is worse than having an excuse for killing 30 000?

Im sure they had a good reason to do what they did, perhaps there were terrorists inside? Iraq had everything to do with 9/11, some sources say Saddam came up with the idea.

Quote them, please.
If one Arab country had nothing to do with religious fanatism and the related attacks, it was Iraq.

So, senselessly killing 3000 is worse than having an excuse for killing 30 000?
If the excuse is valid, like the national interest.

Quote them, please.
If one Arab country had nothing to do with religious fanatism and the related attacks, it was Iraq.

I too would just love to see credible evidence of this. Evidence of Saddam, a man who loathed Al Quaeda and who was loathed back, having involvement in any way with the plot. Please, show us.

Quote them, please.
If one Arab country had nothing to do with religious fanatism and the related attacks, it was Iraq.
I cant quote, because dont remember the source. But Iraq was a threat, a part of the axis of evil. They needed action to be taken against them.

I cant quote, because dont remember the source. But Iraq was a threat, a part of the axis of evil. They needed action to be taken against them.

If you want to keep an ounce of credibility here, take the trouble and go looking for it.
You saying that Iraq was a thread is insufficient justification for 30 000 innocents slaughtered.

If the excuse is valid, like the national interest.

As an excuse, that is about as good as religion...

How exactly was Iraq a threat? Hell, there were threats much nearer than the Middle East than Iraq that could hurt the US. North Korea anyone? And if there had to be a target - why not Iran or Saudi Arabia? Because Iran was more powerful than Iraq, and Saudia Arabia has oil and is a US ally. Face it - Iraq was attacked because it was the weakest country in the Middle East, and there had been prior wars against it.

How exactly was Iraq a threat? Hell, there were threats much nearer than the Middle East than Iraq that could hurt the US. North Korea anyone? And if there had to be a target - why not Iran or Saudi Arabia? Because Iran was more powerful than Iraq, and Saudia Arabia has oil and is a US ally. Face it - Iraq was attacked because it was the weakest country in the Middle East, and there had been prior wars against it.
It was attacked because freedom is on the march and we need a stable democracy in the middle east. (we also they had wmd)I would remind people we were not in Iraq on 9/11 which shows it doesnt lead to attacks. We will stand down as Iraqis stand up, we must stay the course. Being against this war is like being against freedom. Iran is up next and Saudi Arabia is ok because they give us oil.

It was attacked because freedom is on the march and we need a stable democracy in the middle east. (we also they had wmd)I would remind people we were not in Iraq on 9/11 which shows it doesnt lead to attacks. We will stand down as Iraqis stand up, we must stay the course. Being against this war is like being against freedom. Iran is up next and Saudi Arabia is ok because they give us oil.
Democracy. Right. That solves everything. That's why we have a terrorist group in charge of Pakistan: democracy.

It was attacked because freedom is on the march and we need a stable democracy in the middle east. (we also they had wmd)I would remind people we were not in Iraq on 9/11 which shows it doesnt lead to attacks. We will stand down as Iraqis stand up, we must stay the course. Being against this war is like being against freedom. Iran is up next and Saudi Arabia is ok because they give us oil.

Ahhhh, the hypocrisy at work. So Iraq - a country which in Middle Eastern terms actually had decent rights under Saddam, has to go down but Saudia Arabia, a corrupt country with human right abuses, and from which most of the 9/11 bombers came, is okay because they give the US oil.

Well, thats fine then. Long live freedom...

If you want to keep an ounce of credibility here, take the trouble and go looking for it.
You saying that Iraq was a thread is insufficient justification for 30 000 innocents slaughtered.
I did look for it, I was unable to find what I was looking for. Why do we even need "justification" for people to be removed if it makes the US safer in the long run?

I did look for it, I was unable to find what I was looking for. Why do we even need "justification" for people to be removed if it makes the US safer in the long run?

And you actually wonder why people compare you to Hitler???

Ok, let's get this from the start : You propose that killing 30 000 people is going to make the USA safer in the long run. What do you base that assumption on?

Ahhhh, the hypocrisy at work. So Iraq - a country which in Middle Eastern terms actually had decent rights under Saddam, has to go down but Saudia Arabia, a corrupt country with human right abuses, and from which most of the 9/11 bombers came, is okay because they give the US oil.
"decent rights" your kidding right? what about the gasing kurds, rape rooms, secret police, mass graves, the list goes on. How are those decent rights? bin Laden hand picked those hijackers in an effort to drive a wedge between our countries. Besides its in our interests to have a good relationship with Saudi arabia


Well, thats fine then. Long live freedom...
Long live AMERICAN freedom.

I did look for it, I was unable to find what I was looking for. Why do we even need "justification" for people to be removed if it makes the US safer in the long run?
God, you are a Nazi. Don't get offended, because that is the exact same attidue Hitler had.

It was attacked because freedom is on the march and we need a stable democracy in the middle east. (we also they had wmd)I would remind people we were not in Iraq on 9/11 which shows it doesnt lead to attacks. We will stand down as Iraqis stand up, we must stay the course. Being against this war is like being against freedom. Iran is up next and Saudi Arabia is ok because they give us oil.

You really are a parody aren't you? Nobody with even the smallest modicum of sense could say all of that with a straight face.

1. America doesn't care if a country's free as long as they support American interests.
2. Iraq did not have WMD.
3. What the hell are you talking about when you say 'I would remind people we were not in Iraq on 9/11 which shows it doesnt lead to attacks'?
4. Being against the war is nothing like being against freedom.
5. Your closing remark about Saudi Arabia seems to confirm my first point.

And you actually wonder why people compare you to Hitler???

Ok, let's get this from the start : You propose that killing 30 000 people is going to make the USA safer in the long run. What do you base that assumption on?
That most those people were, or could one day become, terrorists. And outside for the fact we are both nationalist and arent afraid of a little bloodshed, I dont see how I am like ol' Adolf.

You really are a parody aren't you? Nobody with even the smallest modicum of sense could say all of that with a straight face.

1. America doesn't care if a country's free as long as they support American interests.
2. Iraq did not have WMD.
3. What the hell are you talking about when you say 'I would remind people we were not in Iraq on 9/11 which shows it doesnt lead to attacks'?
4. Being against the war is nothing like being against freedom.
5. Your closing remark about Saudi Arabia seems to confirm my first point.

With this I:
1) agree, as far as the government goes at least. Considering how little the american people trust their government, it makes me wonder if this is what most americans what, as UN claims.
2) agree, and further emphasize that most european countries believed that they did not have WMD and/or were not a threat. If you had lived here during that time, you would have known this: never once did a european politician (barring British and Danish) ever say "yes, we honestly believe they have WMD)
3) agree, you are rather unclear
4) fully agree. Ehm, this war has very little to do with freedom, especially according to you UN. The reconstruction process does, but the fighting of insurgents, does not.
5) agree.

That most those people were, or could one day become, terrorists. And outside for the fact we are both nationalist and arent afraid of a little bloodshed, I dont see how I am like ol' Adolf.

Well, let's see...

..."These people are going to destroy our country! we must eliminate them all before they became more of a threat!"...

...slightly paraphrased, but that's the idea, and yes, you do compare quite nicely to Hitler.

Oh yeah, jews, they were and still are people, just like everybody else.
Those iraqi civilians? they were and still are people (some of them recently dead people), just like everybody else.

These iraqis are honestly not a threat to you, they can barely even afford to go the US.

I am wondering if you aren't some sort of puppet trying to probe the radical opinions of NS posters.

It was attacked because freedom is on the march and we need a stable democracy in the middle east. (we also they had wmd)I would remind people we were not in Iraq on 9/11 which shows it doesnt lead to attacks. We will stand down as Iraqis stand up, we must stay the course. Being against this war is like being against freedom. Iran is up next and Saudi Arabia is ok because they give us oil.

It is evident to see that Freedom is indeed "on the march", hence the repressive measures announced in western democracies, election of Hamas in Palestine, and hardening of Arabic sentiment towards the west. I daresay you rather imply that US foreign policy is about to be altered to encorporate Iran, and accordingly, freedom, with the slaughtr of innocents and an increase in insurrection and political deaths, is on the march.

Moreover, Saudi Arabia is most certainly not "ok" (hums MCR tune), it is an oligrachic anacronism, that remains in power precisely because it proffers you oil, whereas Iran, whom you have no incontravertible proof intends to acquire nucleur armaments, is detestable since it lacks oil. Brilliant, logical and inspired foreign policy.

That most those people were, or could one day become, terrorists. And outside for the fact we are both nationalist and arent afraid of a little bloodshed, I dont see how I am like ol' Adolf.
And now the survivors are 30 times more likely to become terrorists. You don't understand the world, do you? Dictators hate terrorist. They hurt their power center.

That most those people were, or could one day become, terrorists. And outside for the fact we are both nationalist and arent afraid of a little bloodshed, I dont see how I am like ol' Adolf.

So, the only way to ensure the safety of the USA, in your mind, would be to kill of everybody living in any other country on the planet? And that of course would be totally justified, as it serves America's interest.

And the simple fact that you don't have Hitler's mustache doesn't make much difference, really. Everything else seems almost identical.

Come to think of it... you just have to be a troll. Nobody outside a mental institution could bring up arguments like that...

Can I just ask, does The UN abassadorship believe that an American human life is worth more than the human life of a citizen of any other country?

Can I just ask, does The UN abassadorship believe that an American human life is worth more than the human life of a citizen of any other country?

Excellent question. Let's hear the answer...

You really are a parody aren't you? Nobody with even the smallest modicum of sense could say all of that with a straight face.

I am no parody, I am but a simple red-blooded American

1. America doesn't care if a country's free as long as they support American interests.
I stated this before, I dont see the problem. Im for American interests above all else.
2. Iraq did not have WMD.
we thought they did
3. What the hell are you talking about when you say 'I would remind people we were not in Iraq on 9/11 which shows it doesnt lead to attacks'?
I heard people on here say "Iraq has led to more attacks and terrorists." I was pointing out this is false as we werent Iraq on Sept. 11
4. Being against the war is nothing like being against freedom.
says the America hater
5. Your closing remark about Saudi Arabia seems to confirm my first point.
ok.....

I am no parody, I am but a simple red-blooded American

I stated this before, I dont see the problem. Im for American interests above all else.

we thought they did

I heard people on here say "Iraq has led to more attacks and terrorists." I was pointing out this is false as we werent Iraq on Sept. 11

says the America hater

ok....."Says the America hater"
Yeah, because killing people is really good for freedom! Yay!

"Says the human hater"
Edit: What the hell does 9/11 have to do with it? They attack our fucking troops every day you idiot!

Can I just ask, does The UN abassadorship believe that an American human life is worth more than the human life of a citizen of any other country?
the "value" of human life is only the value one puts on it, so its kind of difficult question to answer. I dont know if I would say if its worth more, but I would support certain actions against those who threaten the nation.

I am no parody, I am but a simple red-blooded American

And I can tell you, a lot of Americans would take offence at your statement and distance themselves from you. Thereby, your argument that many americans are like you, is down the drain. (I would like to have one american claim that they fully support this guy)

I stated this before, I dont see the problem. Im for American interests above all else.

And so, you would value an american life above that of... well, anyone else I suppose?

we thought they did

You thought they did, Almost everyone else said they didn't. Even they said they didn't

North Korea said they did, Pretty much everyone said they did.

So when North Korea is "we know they have them", while Iraq is "we think they have them"... why did you pick Iraq? It makes no sense.

I heard people on here say "Iraq has led to more attacks and terrorists." I was pointing out this is false as we werent Iraq on Sept. 11

However, I was in Belgium on sept 11, I was still in Belgium the next sept 11, yet it didn't happen again, why didn't it? I mean, by your logic, it should've.

Oh right! those guys who flew the plane... they died, and didn't it take years to train them? And didn't most of them come from Saudi Arabia?

So in other words, while you Did present an argument, it was logically fallible and incorrect.

says the America hater

not a valid argument.

ok.....

not a valid argument.

I heard people on here say "Iraq has led to more attacks and terrorists." I was pointing out this is false as we werent Iraq on Sept. 11


Sept. 11 was not the only terrorist attack to ever happen in the whole history of the world, nor - unfortunately- was it the last. I think they are referrinmg to attacks on America and its allies - not just on home ground. It can't be denied that terrorists can use Iraq to try to justify their attacks and gain more support for them.

1) agree, as far as the government goes at least. Considering how little the american people trust their government, it makes me wonder if this is what most americans what, as UN claims.

That was what I intended to say, apologies if I was unclear.

"Says the America hater"
Yeah, because killing people is really good for freedom! Yay!

"Says the human hater"
Edit: What the hell does 9/11 have to do with it? They attack our fucking troops every day you idiot!
Killing certain people is good for freedom. Im not sure what you mean by the 9/11 line.

Killing certain people is good for freedom. Im not sure what you mean by the 9/11 line.

And yet you attest to not being Facist.:rolleyes:

Killing certain people is good for freedom. Im not sure what you mean by the 9/11 line.

Yet killing certain people for freedom isn't good.

It means: you've lost about as many people trying to attack Iraq as you did when the terrorists (who were hardly iraqis or supported by iraq), attacked you.

Killing certain people is good for freedom. Im not sure what you mean by the 9/11 line.
Let's see...the roadside bombs in Iraq? That's terrorism, you idiot!

And, no killing innocent people does no such thing. I've got a question. If a child was put in front of you, and the president handed you a gun and told you to shoot her because she is an obstacle to freedom, would you do so?

I am no parody, I am but a simple red-blooded American

Simple certainly...

I stated this before, I dont see the problem. Im for American interests above all else.

Didn't you just claim that 'freedom is on the march'? Are you admitting that that was a lie?

we thought they did

Nope, the administration twisted evidence to persuade 'simple' Americans such as yourself that there were WMD in Iraq. If you'd been watching the news this week you'd have seen a statement from a former CIA agent supporting this statement.

I heard people on here say "Iraq has led to more attacks and terrorists." I was pointing out this is false as we werent Iraq on Sept. 11

You really are a parody, are you really telling me that you didn't hear about the Madrid bombings or the 7/7 attacks?

says the America hater

I have nothing against Americans but I detest the actions of America with good cause.

ok.....

And again you admit to being no better than the dictators you topple.

Lots of people really dont like our current administration do they...

Not saying I do, don't get me wrong, but with the criticisms I always see on the boards, it seems like we're the only country that is run poorly. Probably just because its easier to argue about America rather than North Korea because there are quite a few Americans, and not a lot of North Koreans on these boards. Just wish we wern't always yelled at.

Let's see...the roadside bombs in Iraq? That's terrorism, you idiot!
So admit there are terrorists in Iraq. then why do you question our involvment there?

And, no killing innocent people does no such thing. I've got a question. If a child was put in front of you, and the president handed you a gun and told you to shoot her because she is an obstacle to freedom, would you do so?

If thought it was, then yes. Freedom isnt free you know.

So admit there are terrorists in Iraq. then why do you question our involvment there?


If thought it was, then yes. Freedom isnt free you know.
I admit that there are NOW terrorists in Iraq. There weren't before we went there. And you would really kill a three year old girl? You are one deranged SOB.

If thought it was, then yes. Freedom isnt free you know.

*lol

Ok, now it's official. You ARE a troll.

Lots of people really dont like our current administration do they...

Not saying I do, don't get me wrong, but with the criticisms I always see on the boards, it seems like we're the only country that is run poorly. Probably just because its easier to argue about America rather than North Korea because there are quite a few Americans, and not a lot of North Koreans on these boards. Just wish we wern't always yelled at.

The point is that America combines poor management with superpower status. Not a good combination by any measure.

The point is that America combines poor management with superpower status. Not a good combination by any measure.
Whole heartedly agreed.

the "value" of human life is only the value one puts on it, so its kind of difficult question to answer. I dont know if I would say if its worth more, but I would support certain actions against those who threaten the nation.

So 25,000 Innocent Iraqi civilians were killed in the Iraq war: Do you think this amount of people could possibly have been killed in a terrorist attack on the U.S.A. if Iraq had not been invaded?

So 25,000 Innocent Iraqi civilians were killed in the Iraq war: Do you think this amount of people could possibly have been killed in a terrorist attack on the U.S.A. if Iraq had not been invaded?
Knowing abassadorship, I think that's a yes.

Do you consider having a Government which is allowed to spy on you without authorisation freedom? Do you consider having a Government which is allowed to transfer people to a country where torture is allowed without authorisation or hold people prisoner in secret prisons without authorisation freedom?

And how long do you think the US will be able retain the strongest economy before China takes over?

The truth is so refreshing.

Be careful though, you don't to end up like that old man from Oakland in Farenheit 9/11 who had some "fellow gym users" turn him in to the FBI.

America USED TO BE nice, unless you were a negro. Now it sucks for everyone. I just love being stopped by the police because I "fit the description"...

The truth is so refreshing.

Be careful though, you don't to end up like that old man from Oakland in Farenheit 9/11 who had some "fellow gym users" turn him in to the FBI.

America USED TO BE nice, unless you were a negro. Now it sucks for everyone. I just love being stopped by the police because I "fit the description"...
Oh...negro...shoot, are we be invading by white nationalists?
http://s3.invisionfree.com/nationstates/index.php?showtopic=1580 ;)

I saw Death of a Salesman at the weekend, which is suppoesed to be a withering attack on capitalism and the American Dream. It just seemed to be about some loser lost. I guess if someone as eloquent as Arthur Miller cannot convince me of folly of American ideology nobody can. My problem is with how American is today in practice and it has lost its original ideals of individual liberty.

*lol

Ok, now it's official. You ARE a troll.
How, just because I would whats right for the nation?

How, just because I would whats right for the nation?
Hitler did what was right for his nation. Does that make him good? No.

I admit that there are NOW terrorists in Iraq. There weren't before we went there. And you would really kill a three year old girl? You are one deranged SOB.
See, I was right we ARE fighting terrorists in Iraq, in defence of the attacks on 9/11. You argee with me more than you'd like to admit. When did she become a girl and when did she become 3? All you said was a child, not that it makes a difference, I still do what I had to. Im not deranged, wouldnt you kill to protect your parent, spouse, child? I think you would, I think most people would. You and me are no different when it comes down to it.

See, I was right we ARE fighting terrorists in Iraq, in defence of the attacks on 9/11. You argee with me more than you'd like to admit. When did she become a girl and when did she become 3? All you said was a child, not that it makes a difference, I still do what I had to. Im not deranged, wouldnt you kill to protect your parent, spouse, child? I think you would, I think most people would. You and me are no different when it comes down to it.
No. I would say screw my country and leave. I'm not going to kill some kid for it. That makes me no better than the enemies of our country.

Also, you are twisting my words. We created those terrorists when we took out Saddam.

Didn't you just claim that 'freedom is on the march'? Are you admitting that that was a lie?
Its on the march where we need it to, so its no lie


Nope, the administration twisted evidence to persuade 'simple' Americans such as yourself that there were WMD in Iraq. If you'd been watching the news this week you'd have seen a statement from a former CIA agent supporting this statement.
Im not simple, there were wmd in Iraq, he used them, and wanted to use them on us, we stopped just in time. That CIA agent was probably a foreign spy.


You really are a parody, are you really telling me that you didn't hear about the Madrid bombings or the 7/7 attacks?
I did, but they have nothing to do with Iraq, as I said b4, I will remind you we werent in Iraq on 9/11


And again you admit to being no better than the dictators you topple.
We are alot better

Im sure they had a good reason to do what they did, perhaps there were terrorists inside?
You didn't read the links, did ya?
They were bombing an outbound street in Baghdad because Iraqi Forces were retreating that way - but instead of using precision bombs or something like that, they used missile launchers to drob bomblets on a street - in the middle of a civilian area. None of the "durrn turrists", no matter how standard an excuse that may have become these days.

Iraq had everything to do with 9/11, some sources say Saddam came up with the idea.
Just as everyone else, I'd love to see those sources. Indeed, I think the US Government would also love to see those sources, because they sure as hell need them.

Its on the march where we need it to, so its no lie


Im not simple, there were wmd in Iraq, he used them, and wanted to use them on us, we stopped just in time. That CIA agent was probably a foreign spy.


I did, but they have nothing to do with Iraq, as I said b4, I will remind you we werent in Iraq on 9/11


We are alot betterWTF are you talking about? It's been proven that Saddam had no WMDs. And what the hell are you talking about 9/11? 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq, besides for what Bush wants it to have been.

If you want to debate, learn facts, and learn grammar.

No. I would say screw my country and leave. I'm not going to kill some kid for it. That makes me no better than the enemies of our country.

Also, you are twisting my words. We created those terrorists when we took out Saddam.
I didnt ask if you would kill for your country, I know you'd say know. I was asking if you'd kill for your loved one, total seperate question. We didnt create terrorist, they were always there and it was only a few like Mr. Bush who had the wisdom to see such thing, he should be glorified, not bashed.

I didnt ask if you would kill for your country, I know you'd say know. I was asking if you'd kill for your loved one, total seperate question. We didnt create terrorist, they were always there and it was only a few like Mr. Bush who had the wisdom to see such thing, he should be glorified, not bashed.
I wouldn't kill a kid. Maybe a full grown person who might be a terrorist, but I wouldn't kill a kid.

They were bombing an outbound street in Baghdad because Iraqi Forces were retreating that way - but instead of using precision bombs or something like that, they used missile launchers to drob bomblets on a street
but they were aiming at the terrorists

Just as everyone else, I'd love to see those sources. Indeed, I think the US Government would also love to see those sources, because they sure as hell need them.
I looked and I couldnt find them, but I'll keep checking

but they were aiming at the terrorists


I looked and I couldnt find them, but I'll keep checking
Thats because those sources are etheir complete idiots, or they don't exist.

WTF are you talking about? It's been proven that Saddam had no WMDs. And what the hell are you talking about 9/11?
Did have them, I have sources. the 9/11 reference was to the bombings in Madrid and London. People say they only got hit because they were in Iraq. Im saying they werent, we werent in Iraq on 9/11 and still got hit.

So 25,000 Innocent Iraqi civilians were killed in the Iraq war: Do you think this amount of people could possibly have been killed in a terrorist attack on the U.S.A. if Iraq had not been invaded?
sure, with a wmd attack, easily.

Did have them, I have sources. the 9/11 reference was to the bombings in Madrid and London. People say they only got hit because they were in Iraq. Im saying they werent, we werent in Iraq on 9/11 and still got hit.
Your sources are some weirdo on crack. Because I don't think your sources are better than the CIA.

but they were aiming at the terrorists
Okay, tell me now: Whose puppet are you?

There were no terrorists in Iraq in 2003. Saddam didn't like terrorists, and he didn't like radical Muslims. Bin Laden and his group had offered the Saudis to attack Iraq to drive them out of Kuwait in '91 and was rejected by the Saudi royal family. So they didn't like Saddam either.

We are talking about regular Iraqi troops retreating from, or into, the city. A normal thing to do in warfare.

The thing that tells me that US Forces obviously couldn't give a shit about who dies is that they would use a weapon like cluster bombs in a civilian area like this.

I wouldn't kill a kid. Maybe a full grown person who might be a terrorist, but I wouldn't kill a kid.
What if the kid was pointing an ak at you or was threatening?

Okay, tell me now: Whose puppet are you?
no ones

There were no terrorists in Iraq in 2003. Saddam didn't like terrorists, and he didn't like radical Muslims. Bin Laden and his group had offered the Saudis to attack Iraq to drive them out of Kuwait in '91 and was rejected by the Saudi royal family. So they didn't like Saddam either.
They each other alot, I dont know where you get your info from

We are talking about regular Iraqi troops retreating from, or into, the city. A normal thing to do in warfare.
And dropping clusterbombs on said retreating troops is normal in warfare too

What if the kid was pointing an ak at you or was threatening?
For one, most kids couldn't hold an AK. For two, I could easily hit the kid and take the gun.

For one, most kids couldn't hold an AK. For two, I could easily hit the kid and take the gun.
Why not kill it, so you dont run the risk of getting shot.

Why not kill it, so you dont run the risk of getting shot.
Because I'm not some weirdo who hates human rights. And he/she is not an "it."