|
| Thread: The US always pissing and moaning about countries pissing and moaning about the US |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
SwampLord
Supreme Hero
Lord of the Swamp
|
posted May 17, 2007 09:12 PM |
|
|
We were already sending aid to England, and we didn't trade with Hitler. I firmly believe we would have gotten involved even without Pearl Harbor.
I'm curious, what are these innocents we've butchered? I don't remember reports of American soldiers wantonly slaughtering Iraqis. The news never shows the positive aspects, only the negative.
|
|
Vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted May 17, 2007 09:17 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Well yeah but that's because Iran and Korea actually HAVE nuclear weapons...
Iran does not have nuclear weapons.
|
|
SwampLord
Supreme Hero
Lord of the Swamp
|
|
posted May 17, 2007 09:19 PM |
|
|
|
Korea has no need for them, neither does Iran. Only ones that really "need" (i know they're not actually needed) are the major powers, US and Russia, as deterrent to keep the others from using theirs. What practical application could North Korea have for nuclear bombs?
|
|
Lith-Maethor
Honorable
Legendary Hero
paid in Coin and Cleavage
|
posted May 17, 2007 09:38 PM |
|
|
hmm...
Quote:
For any of you who still believe that 9/11 was caused by the American government, you need to grow up.
we will never know for sure, but they exploited it fully in ways that were definitely not for the best of the american people
Quote:
Governments don't attack their own people.
now, who needs to grow up?
Quote:
Also, if we wanted the oil, why are our oil prices going up? Why are all the dems screaming to pull out, if we want the oil? Again, regarding the 9/11 "conspiracy", pure "junk".
you seem to misread the "we" in "we wanted the oil" ...think a bit higher than Joe Sixpack in the hierarchy of the US of A
Quote:
I don't see any other countries rushing to help out in Africa either. So, normally, we're not allowed to be world police, except when people need us? It's like the point RSF was trying to make in the original thread.
as others said already, you started it, can't pick and choose
Quote:
Also, you guys would still be living under Hitler if it wasn't for us. A little gratitude would be nice.
as the history buffs have pointed out in threads past, thats questionable
Quote:
On the subject of the Chinese Army. There's a difference between "quality" and "quantity", as the Chinese found out in World War Two, where much smaller amounts of Japanese troops ripped huge, ill-equipped Chinese armies to pieces.
there is a limit to that... even the 300 fell eventually
____________
You are suffering from delusions of adequacy.
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted May 17, 2007 09:38 PM |
|
|
Quote:
We were already sending aid to England, and we didn't trade with Hitler.
Wow... You didn't trade with them... Millions of people in concentration camps surely had much use of that... 
Quote:
Iran does not have nuclear weapons.
Yes it does. At least they say they do
Quote:
Only ones that really "need" (i know they're not actually needed) are the major powers, US and Russia
And China. China even more than Russia perhaps, since the Soviet Union broke up
Quote:
What practical application could North Korea have for nuclear bombs?
They can make a lot of tests so that Godzilla comes to life.
That would be SO cool 
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted May 17, 2007 09:49 PM |
|
|
Quote:
And who asked them. This is for the interestof US so why should they care about what other countires think about the bases. I often said that if action is of benefit to a country and to its people than the government should carry it out.
Nazis said the same.
Quote:
Well we got rid of another country that was saying no to US all the time. US can move its military out of Saudi Arabia into Iraq and maybe some of terrorist groups will calm down.
US can nuke all Muslim countries down, too. That will ultimately get rid of all who oppose America!
...
"Kill all who dare to say that our country sucks." - don't you think it's a bit too much?
Quote:
One of the big oil producers's governments will feel eternaly grateful to US, and express gratitude with oil. And if they want well than US will change the government again or let it fall. And yes US needs that oil, even during the embargo days the oil from Iraq was exchanged for food, and Saddam was selling oil illegally outside the embargo and number of oil companies in US openly said that they bought it.
These are spoils of war.. The American people don't benefit from it. Come on, petrol price gets higher every day!
Quote:
Civilians dead. Well lets put myself into president's shoes. Civilians are dead. wait those are Iraqi civilians. Are they citizens of US? Are they paying taxes? Do tehy vote in US elections? No. Let me check the consitution and other legislations. Can't find anything about me being concerned about other countries' citizens. Or wait but that should make me feel bad on personal level as a human. Wait I am supposed to separate my personal feelings from political responsabilities. So final result I should not care.
Hitler? Stalin? Pol-Pot? Idi Amin? What do they have in common? Well, they never cared for human life and cared only for their political responsibilities. You don't want the US president to become like them, do you..
Quote:
Well when did US troops ever get out of the contries they enter. There are still bases in Cuba, Phillipines, South Korea, Japan, UK, Germany, Italy, Turkey and now in Poland, Czech republic. Vietnam and France are the only eamples when US troops packed up and left.
Those bases are quite different since countries you mention are allied with US.. more or less. Makes a big difference..
Swamplord: Government does not attack its own people? hah. Remember deus ex?
Ok, this is just a game. But do you know what Idi Amin did in his country?
His acolytes kidnapped people off streets and killed them; yes, their own people. then sold the bodies to their families. The price was very high. Since in uganda people care for the bodies of their family members pretty much, that was an excellent business. Unbought carcass was thrown into the river; that constantly blocked up the turbines of their hydro plant with decaying bodies. :-X
Ridiculous story, unfortunately, true.
So, do you still think governments don't attack their own ppl?
|
|
SwampLord
Supreme Hero
Lord of the Swamp
|
|
posted May 17, 2007 09:57 PM |
|
|
|
I meant most governments. Sorry, but conspiracy theories like that really anger me. On the subject of WWII, what could we do about the camps? Send Hitler a strongly worded letter? We eventually freed them. It's not like we could just tell Hitler to stop. In no way can you blame the US for not stopping the camps. That's ridiculous. People in the US don't like other countries sometimes because we help them, and all we get is whining.
|
|
Ted
Promising
Supreme Hero
Peanut Exterminator
|
|
posted May 17, 2007 09:57 PM |
|
|
Here is a picture that just suites this thread
____________
Visit my Site!
|
|
Shai-Hulud
Known Hero
Sicomor
|
|
posted May 17, 2007 09:58 PM |
|
|
I am no american , I trully dislike american politics and they way they are handled, but... it's just they way.
Humans love power. Americans are humans. Americans love power.
I dislike USA cause they hold the lead and can do whatever they want. Of course, if Romania would have hold the power, I would be happy.
So most americans are happy cause they hold the lead. Though beacuse times have changed since the 2 WW, generally now, population really hates having the army away, are very suspicious about politics and think war is bad. And since 80-90% of the population being active in OSM( and generally HC ) is quite smart and generally litterate, you are from the class of people not being happy
In reality, if many in the 6 billion people in this world ( in our case americans) would be put with two choices :
"1.Kill thousands of people, but hold world power!"
"2.Don't kill thousands of people, but lose world power!"
would probably choose the first one.
I know, i know.. You will come up and say :"Nooo.. I wouldn't blah blah..". Well, you are not the one holding the power in your country, now are you ?
And now, same people will come up and say : "Noo.. I am sure I wouldn't". Then tell me... How are country leaders born? It just happens that all leaders are evil and want world power for their country?!? Didn't YOU vote for your president?
You think the other guy(Kerry I presume) who lost to Bush would have done the other way? I am most certainly sure no.
It's a world race without a finish line!
History has for sure shown us more power-hungry leaders then love-caring leaders. That's why they are leaders. They need to lead the population supporting him to power. And to lead to power you need goals. And goals are achieved with much sacrifice.
Of course, it happened to have leaders loved by the population and all that, who were compassionate, one example is Asoka. But those kind of times are long gone and forgotten.
Others before them acted like this. Why not USA? Napoleon did it. Ottomans did it. URSS did it. Why not the americans?
"the ends justifies the means... The world consists mainly of vulgar people and the few who are honorable can safely be ignored when so many vulgar rally around the prince" Niccoḷ Machiavelli.
The only thing that is wrong is that americans do it the evil way. They bring up peace-caring motives for their personal gains, unlike others who clearly put in front their real motives.
Also....
Democracy in USA is NO Democracy.
So their you have it... Think well.. Think very well. Take your time. Don't answer hastly being sure of your answer. Think of all the implications being a leader has...
"1.Kill thousands of people, but hold world power!"
"2.Don't kill thousands of people, but lose world power!"
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted May 17, 2007 09:59 PM |
|
|
|
Actually, the allies could do a lot: bombard the infrastructure of the camps and the railways. of course nobody cared for civilans, so nobody did it.
|
|
Vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted May 17, 2007 10:01 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Iran does not have nuclear weapons.
Yes it does. At least they say they do
No, they don't. They have been developing uranium enrichment technology and insist it's for peaceful purposes.
|
|
SwampLord
Supreme Hero
Lord of the Swamp
|
|
posted May 17, 2007 10:58 PM |
|
|
Bombard the camps? Kill people that might yet survive? That's sure caring for those people. FYI, the US bombed the crap completely out of the German railroad system. Almost nothing was left.
I also dislike American politics.  However, Democracy in America=No Democracy? Huh? That makes no sense.
Are you saying I'm not smart or literate? I'm also perfectly happy, FYI, and am not nervous having the military away. That has nothing to do with it.
Everyone thinks war is bad. No one wants it.
Please clarify your post, I understand most of what you're getting at, but not the "democracy in USA= no democracy" and the reasons americans are upset?
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted May 18, 2007 12:08 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Send Hitler a strongly worded letter?
Perhaps declare war upon him in time so that you defeat him before he hurts them more?
Quote:
We eventually freed them.
No. You didn't. The Soviets freed them.
And Soviet freedom is probably worse than death.
Quote:
They have been developing uranium enrichment technology and insist it's for peaceful purposes.
Ah. I see. Uranium is well known for its peaceful purposes.
Quote:
FYI, the US bombed the crap completely out of the German railroad system. Almost nothing was left.
The railroad, along with unrelated infrastructure. In occupied Serbia, for example.
FYI, your bombings of "infrastructure" (nice word for civilian buildings) in Serbia brought more non-nazi civilian casualties than nazi bombings while Yugoslavia was at war with Germany. Belgrade, Podgorica and many other cities full of people who showed resistance to the Germans. Probably same in some other countries. But that's liberation...
First the nazis butcher our people, then we get bombed by the allies, and finally the commies get to us. Just our freaking luck.
Quote:
However, Democracy in America=No Democracy? Huh?
He was merely finding similarities between American democracy and certain... let's just say less democratic systems
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
Shai-Hulud
Known Hero
Sicomor
|
|
posted May 18, 2007 12:26 AM |
|
|
1.I was not saying that all americans are upset. Just a part of them related to the recent 7 years events.
And you are not unhappy that the military is away? So you and the rest of the population is COMPLETELY FINE with the fact that you or maybe your son is in another country with a high risk ending up with a bullet in his head. Way to go.. nothing more to add
2. Democracy in USA is not a democracy anymore, beacuse of all the "wheels" behind. Excessive use of intelligence service, as history has shown us, is firstly bad to its own population. So many suspicions.
I am sure you will repgunate this, and of course the main idea is a bit exaggerated, but the fact that USA democracy got too much "dirt" on it should be considered.
Do you think that Military Commision Act of 2006 and John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007 are clean acts in the name of democracy?
May 11, 2006: This bill passed in the House of Representatives by roll call vote. The totals were 0 Ayes, 0 Nays.
Jun 22, 2006: This bill passed in the Senate by Unanimous Consent. A record of each representative's position was not kept.
Sep 29, 2006: After passing both the Senate and House, a conference committee is created to work out differences between the Senate and House versions of the bill. A conference report resolving those differences passed in the House of Representatives, paving the way for enactment of the bill, by roll call vote. The totals were 398 Ayes, 23 Nays, 12 Present/Not Voting.
After passing both the Senate and House, a conference committee is created to work out differences between the Senate and House versions of the bill. A conference report resolving those differences passed in the Senate, paving the way for enactment of the bill, by Unanimous Consent. A record of each representative's position was not kept.
398 Ayes Versus 23 Nays. Over a law encouraging 'martial law' to be put by the president, to be able to station troops in USA anywhere, without the consent of the governor when the "public order has been lost". Why would now after so many years of democracy in USA, public order be lost. As I see it may be lost beacuse some acts of the president and the fact that the population doesn't like it? Why now? 6 years have passed since 9/11.
P.S.
Thinking you won't read trough all of it... I will quote a few passages
"prison system outside the rule of law (as Bush put it, he wanted the American detention centre at Guantánamo Bay to be situated in legal "outer space") - where torture takes place." Why do you need a secret prison? Why so much controversy over this place?
"In 2005 and 2006, when James Risen and Eric Lichtblau wrote in the New York Times about a secret state programme to wiretap citizens' phones, read their emails and follow international financial transactions, it became clear to ordinary Americans that they, too, could be under state scrutiny." Is New York Times a 2nd hand newspaper?
"It can be trivial: a church in Pasadena, whose minister preached that Jesus was in favour of peace, found itself being investigated by the Internal Revenue Service, while churches that got Republicans out to vote, which is equally illegal under US tax law, have been left alone." Insecurity for population, used as an excuse for surveillance? Now everyone can be a terrorist right?
"In 2004, America's Transportation Security Administration confirmed that it had a list of passengers who were targeted for security searches or worse if they tried to fly. People who have found themselves on the list? Two middle-aged women peace activists in San Francisco; liberal Senator Edward Kennedy; a member of Venezuela's government - after Venezuela's president had criticised Bush; and thousands of ordinary US citizens."
"Professor Walter F Murphy is emeritus of Princeton University; he is one of the foremost constitutional scholars in the nation and author of the classic Constitutional Democracy. Murphy is also a decorated former marine, and he is not even especially politically liberal. But on March 1 this year, he was denied a boarding pass at Newark, "because I was on the Terrorist Watch list"." So actually Princeton University is a terrorist base?
"The John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007 gave the president new powers over the national guard. This means that in a national emergency - which the president now has enhanced powers to declare - he can send Michigan's militia to enforce a state of emergency that he has declared in Oregon, over the objections of the state's governor and its citizens.
Even as Americans were focused on Britney Spears's meltdown and the question of who fathered Anna Nicole's baby, the New York Times editorialised about this shift: "A disturbing recent phenomenon in Washington is that laws that strike to the heart of American democracy have been passed in the dead of night ... Beyond actual insurrection, the president may now use military troops as a domestic police force in response to a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, terrorist attack or any 'other condition'." ----> Give absolute power to a single person?
We judge the facts. It's a clean democracy or just a world feeling to take out bull**** about USA?
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
posted May 18, 2007 02:45 AM |
|
|
On That Map
There is a location that says, "Don't Go Here". I want to know what their trying to hide. Why can't I go there?
Vlaad you know Iranians have nuclear weapons. But what you don't know is they use them underground to blow glass. They have a lot of sand and a lot of 'nukiness'. (I ought to be president with a word like that) Put the two together and your deductive reasoning would dictate they need it for making glass. Glass can be a major economic export when used in making pipes.
____________
Roses Are Red And So Am I
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted May 18, 2007 03:15 AM |
|
Edited by Binabik at 03:17, 18 May 2007.
|
Consis, do you mind if I help spam this thread?
Is there anything worth reading here? I mean have you found someone who actually knows what the hell they're talking about? I just kinda spot checked it, so I might have missed something. Like does anyone here think about what they write and use something resembling logic? Is there somebody here who actually researches their "facts" before posting? Oh yea, hearing it from that guy down the street makes it a fact....especially when the guy down the street agrees with their own narrow view of the world.
Um, I guess that's all.
Oh yea, did you hear about that guy in the military who sits next to the big red button that launches nukes? He fell asleep at his desk and fell over, accidently hitting the big red button. Fortunately his buddy caught it in time and avoided a launch. Boy, that was close. I read it on the internet, I'll send you a link if I can rememeber where I read it. The site was completely legitimate, they said so.
____________
|
|
SwampLord
Supreme Hero
Lord of the Swamp
|
|
posted May 18, 2007 03:40 AM |
|
|
Well, I dunno, I live in the US, and it sure seems like a democracy to me.
We entered the war about a year and a half later. It's not our fault the French couldn't fight well. FYI, the allies did liberate many prison camps- they made it halfway through Germany. We couldn't do anything to stop Russia.
Comparing the US to a fascist government? That's totally, utterly, completely ridiculous. What country do you live in? See, in our "democracy" as you seem to doubt it, certain people run for office. You vote for the person you think represents your position on issues. This way, you get a say in government. That seems like democracy to me. If it isn't, I don't know what is. We were one of, if not the first, modern democracy.
As TPAM pointed out, just because you saw something on the Internet doesn't make it true. My friend makes up total "junk" all the time, and justifies it by saying "found it on the Internet". The internet is the least reliable source. Again, I'm not seeing the America=Fascist Dicatorship. Seems like a democracy to me. I would know.I live here.
Public order could be lost in things like massive riots, etc. It doesn't have to be a terrorist threat.
I would also like to point out that the president lacks the power to make laws. He can only approve them. Also, it's impossible for a law to be made "in the dead of night". Do you know how much whining the opposite party does whenever the one in power does something they don't like (in general, not referring to any specific party!) Try living here before you make assumptions like that. Because remember what happens when we assume!
Oh my, wikipedia articles! Such a valid source of unbiased information!
Again, it is impossible for a law to be made "in the dead of night". Trust me, it doesn't happen. There's press coverage for everything, minority party whining, anyone opposed to it is all over the news, etc.
Again, I doubt they passed with unaniamous consent. This seems like a load of fake stuff to me. Sources and proof, please? We didn't even enter World War Two with a unanimous vote, and I find it hard to believe any vote today would be unaniamous.
What do you mean, 329 Ayes, 28 Nays? A BILL HAS TO PASS IN BOTH HOUSES. Again, unaniamous vote= not possible, especially on something that you claim is so "controversial".
This country seems a heck of a lot like a democracy to me, and I'm proud to live here.
GIVE ME PROOF OF ALL THOSE STATEMENTS AND "FACTS",AND MAYBE THEN I'LL BELIVE YOU. Sorry if I got a little angry/overpatriotic, but you have noproof for these claims.
|
|
yasmiel
Supreme Hero
Former Chessmaster
|
|
posted May 18, 2007 05:02 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Now we are in what is starting to look like a never ending war with Iraq. I thought personally that the reason for that war was to remove Saddam from power and replace him with a working democracy. We did that didn't we? Then why are we still there? We won. It's over.
You managed to remove Saddam, but did not manage to establish any kind of working democracy, so its not over, nor it is won.. its much closer to a defeat.
The ones that suffer the most are innocent Iraqi people, which are now caught living in a state that has no future in at least a decade.
Should they be thankful?
As someone would say, its all fun and games until someone loses an eye, or a trade center.
|
|
Colonel_here
Adventuring Hero
Descendant of Ghengis Khan
|
|
posted May 18, 2007 07:06 AM |
|
|
Ok to explain my position and where I am coming from. I am using the idea of "Social contract" that was created by John Locke. I would love to see all countries with leaders that are like Mother Teresa, but that is not going to happen. The government is responsable to its people, its people interests are its concern, not the neighbouring countries people not the other countries.
Do not compare my philosophy to that of Nazis. They turned on their own people.
Neither does this philosphy means that it is right to just nuke the Middle East. The world than will either turn on US (not good for the Americans) or turn away from them (also not very good for Americans).
It is not only US who follows this philosphy. All countries do but not all of them have the means that US does.
Example: UK and France with agreement with Israel were involved in Suez Canal affair. France and UK done that why because the canal was of interest for them. They did not care about Egypt and its interests or its people. And their motive was to separate the Israelian and Eyptian armies and thus create seize fire. In reality they wanted to seize canal militarily. If they would have declared that in the open they would have been accused of colonial ambitions.
France's secret agents sunk Rainbow Warrior (boat that prevented them from nuclear bomb tests in pacifics) and killed one of the crew member of the ship. Also acted in its interests and gave a damn about the people in pacific who had to live with the nuclear fallout. And when New Zealnd arrested the secret service agents on charge of murder, France threatened New Zealand by putting veto on its meat product imports into EU.
And examples could go on.
As for the fact that American bases are located in allied countries with US. Cuba is allied country? and why are there no UK, Japanese, South Korean, Phillipinian, German, Italian, Saudi Arabian, polish and Czech bases on the territory of US?
As for oil prices. In Iraq US secured Oil reserves but it did not secure the price. Price changes when ever Saudi King sneezes, Iranian president makes a new speach, Nigerian rebells attack an oil well, US find barrels missing in its strategic reserve and China drinks few barrels too many, etc.
As for Chinese military lacking quality well I can say that out of all US military machine quality could be found mostly in Air force and Navy. US army of one (as they call themselves) is not that good. I would take Chinese soldiers over American any day. They have great endurance for harsh conditions and their weaponry might not be high tech but it is very reliable. Back during the day even Soviet Union was scared of Chinese soldiers.
____________
"The job of saving the lives of those who are sinking is the task of those who are sinking" - Ostap Bender
"Only a fool fights a battle he knows he can not win" - Ghengiz Khan
|
|
Vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted May 18, 2007 08:23 AM |
|
Edited by Vlaad at 08:27, 18 May 2007.
|
Quote:
Quote:
They have been developing uranium enrichment technology and insist it's for peaceful purposes.
Ah. I see. Uranium is well known for its peaceful purposes.
That's not the point. You wrote that Iran has nuclear weapons and that they said so - both of these statements are false.
Quote:
FYI, your bombings of "infrastructure" (nice word for civilian buildings) in Serbia brought more non-nazi civilian casualties than nazi bombings while Yugoslavia was at war with Germany.
Again, not true. The allies killed 1,200 when they bombed the German forces in Belgrade in 1944. In addition, about 5,000 civilians were killed during the NATO airstrikes in 1999. On the other hand, the Germans killed 17,000 people when they bombed Belgrade in April, 1941.
Off topic, I agree with Consis - this thread belongs to Volcanic Wastelands.
|
| |
|
|
