Full Version: Liberal Media Bastards
Everywhere you go you read how the GOP controlled senate rejected Democratic proposals for the US to get out of Iraq. The vote was 86-13. the problem with this is that there are more than 13 Democrats in the Senate and only 55 Republicans. So it appears that 31 Democrats voted with the Republicans. So maybe some Democrats also rejected the Democratic proposal. But the media only report it as the GOP controlled Senate rejected the proposal. And some say the media is not biased. BULLSHIT.
For once I gotta agree with you.
And despite me being opposed to the war, pulling out would be a lot more fucked up than staying there.
And despite me being opposed to the war, pulling out would be a lot more fucked up than staying there.
Everybody was opposed to the war, but the way the world works, it doesn't mean shit what we want...
Anyways, the american army has NO business in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan or anywhere else outside of the US, so obviusly, any withdrawal would be good.
The US of A should do like every other country in the world, and only use their army for defence...
Anyways, the american army has NO business in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan or anywhere else outside of the US, so obviusly, any withdrawal would be good.
The US of A should do like every other country in the world, and only use their army for defence...
Which is exactly what the US is doing. Self-defense.
Europe can't defend itself, they are all wimps. History proves that. Europe has never defended itself.
Europe can't defend itself, they are all wimps. History proves that. Europe has never defended itself.
QUOTE(artzelda @ Jun 24 2006, 01:56 PM)
Self-defense.
Excuse my ignorance, but could you reitenerate the threat Iraq posed to the United States?
QUOTE(artzelda @ Jun 24 2006, 03:56 PM)
Which is exactly what the US is doing. Self-defense.
Agressive selfdefence... Riiight...
QUOTE
Europe can't defend itself, they are all wimps. History proves that. Europe has never defended itself.
History? I know americans think the world began in 1492 when Columbus discovered america, but that is not true... 600 years earlier the vikings ruled the continent, and more than 2000 years ago, the Romans almost conquered the intire known world.
Besides, where do americans originate from? Aha, Europe!
I think there is even a country in Europe that has never been conquered.. 
but the attitude of US president bugs me a lot. They might be powerfull but hey, they arent dominating the world like he seems to think :S That kind of thing will only launch nuclear war sooner or later and such actions ENCOURAGES COUNTRIES TO DEVELOPE NUCLEAR WEAPONS! After all, that seems to be the only damn way to stop US from thinking of the country as their postal office or something...
but the attitude of US president bugs me a lot. They might be powerfull but hey, they arent dominating the world like he seems to think :S That kind of thing will only launch nuclear war sooner or later and such actions ENCOURAGES COUNTRIES TO DEVELOPE NUCLEAR WEAPONS! After all, that seems to be the only damn way to stop US from thinking of the country as their postal office or something...
What the world began before 1492. Wow what a revelation. Lets see what existed before 1492. Inquisitions, crusades, slavery, caste systems, autocratic rulers. All existed in Europe I believe. England had the first parliment but not a democracy as is practiced today. By the way the Europeans that first came to America brought slavery with them. It was the later immigrants that eliminated it.
Would any one classify the Vikings or Romans as Eropeans. If so they would be very disappointed in their decendents. They are nothing like them.
By the way most American are decendents of Europeans who hated the European system and left Europe because of its elitism. And most Americans think of Europeans the same way, people to be tolerated but not emulated. Look at the difference in the way America treated its immigrants and the way Europe treats its immigrants. We even have a governor of a major state (California) who is a immigrant. Let's see is there an equivalent in Europe. I think not.
The problem with America today is the lack of will to use the military power it has. Anyone who believes America is the problem needs to get his head examined and not follow the faddish thinking now prevalent in Europe. Europe has had a taste of terrorism and buries its head thinking it will go away. Keep thinking that way and Europe is in for a shock.
Would any one classify the Vikings or Romans as Eropeans. If so they would be very disappointed in their decendents. They are nothing like them.
By the way most American are decendents of Europeans who hated the European system and left Europe because of its elitism. And most Americans think of Europeans the same way, people to be tolerated but not emulated. Look at the difference in the way America treated its immigrants and the way Europe treats its immigrants. We even have a governor of a major state (California) who is a immigrant. Let's see is there an equivalent in Europe. I think not.
The problem with America today is the lack of will to use the military power it has. Anyone who believes America is the problem needs to get his head examined and not follow the faddish thinking now prevalent in Europe. Europe has had a taste of terrorism and buries its head thinking it will go away. Keep thinking that way and Europe is in for a shock.
nah, in my opinion US should re-think the ways it is forcing for everyone. It's ridiculous what kind of things they do for no apparent reason. For example, my friend had been working in the US for a year as an Au Pair. Now she went to England for a week to see that country as well. When she came back, she was held at the airport for 6h. Because she was originally malaysian, apparently. They asked her nothing, they explained her nothing... just held her there. And then released, again without saying anything.
In my beliefs, if someone is held for a reason x, then one should also KNOW WHY. Heard of a debate over "secret laws" on US ? scary it even MIGHT be possibility. I'm not saying europe is all that better thought.. For example here in Finland they really screwed up: something was legal before, but the new law says that if you did so in the past, it was illegal, and you could (in theory) be sanctioned for it now. If you act based on what law says to be ok, you cannot be held for it later on when the law has changed in the future, that's way too bizarre thinking for me.
Neither I'm saing that US is all bad, but I dont like the directions its going on. The was they declared was pretty obviously for their own needs of fossil fuels, nothing else. And the 911.. well, debatable. It really happening was awful, but why it indeed happened might be even more awful. And after that the world has gone a lot back towards the dark centuries in my opinion...
In my beliefs, if someone is held for a reason x, then one should also KNOW WHY. Heard of a debate over "secret laws" on US ? scary it even MIGHT be possibility. I'm not saying europe is all that better thought.. For example here in Finland they really screwed up: something was legal before, but the new law says that if you did so in the past, it was illegal, and you could (in theory) be sanctioned for it now. If you act based on what law says to be ok, you cannot be held for it later on when the law has changed in the future, that's way too bizarre thinking for me.
Neither I'm saing that US is all bad, but I dont like the directions its going on. The was they declared was pretty obviously for their own needs of fossil fuels, nothing else. And the 911.. well, debatable. It really happening was awful, but why it indeed happened might be even more awful. And after that the world has gone a lot back towards the dark centuries in my opinion...
I guess Deepy and me are pretty much on the same wavelenght... So, What he said ^^
^^
I can see this thread has completely left the subject matter of its title, but meh the debate here is more interesting. 
So, does the US have the right to run around the world with its big stick? It depends on your point of view, heh. Some say yes, some say no. How can you determine which is the right side of the argument? Personally, I don't think we should have messed around in Iraq... but mainly because I think it's too much of a tremendous waste of tax dollars. BUT, did we have the right to do it? It doesn't matter if we did or not because, frankly, we did it because we can do it. Other countries can rant as much as they want about U.S. imperialistic attitudes or whatever, but, really, what the fuck are they going to do about it? They're not going to do anything because, frankly, they can't.
Moving on, you may think "agressive self-defense" may make no sense, but consider that a best defense is a good offense. If you strip someone of power before that power grows large enough to threaten you, it's self-defense. Did Iraq seriously pose any threat to the United States even in the near future? Hell no. The backwards Arabs are still killing people they deem religious infidels, and they weren't even close to developing any sort of weapon capable of reaching the United States. Yet, previous military actions against countries in the name of American self-defense can be justified. Vietnam and Korea. We had every right to go to those places to try and stop the USSR from gaining more influence across the world. It would have been horribly stupid for the U.S. to ignore the spread of communism and allow the entire eastern hemisphere to turn red overnight. So, don't rule out offensive self-defense as a foolish notion.
Alright, so Deep touched on some cloak-and-dagger stuff concerning the battle between "national security" and basic civil rights. I have never heard anyone ever anywhere give a reasonable solution to that debate. You can't can't can't can't completely ignore your domestic security in order to grant your people infinite liberty and privacy. At the same time, if you dump the privacy and take the Big Brother stance, you're running through totalitarian territory. Honestly, so many people complain about how the U.S. Govt. is destroying what it means to be a free citizen, but, if they turned their backs and stopped covering their asses, what would those people really think if a major incident occured that could have been prevented with stricter security policy? (and yeah, Deep, I realized you may not have been remotely talking about what I am, but meh )
If you just struggled through all the crap I just wrote in terribly large paragraphs, I salute you.
So, does the US have the right to run around the world with its big stick? It depends on your point of view, heh. Some say yes, some say no. How can you determine which is the right side of the argument? Personally, I don't think we should have messed around in Iraq... but mainly because I think it's too much of a tremendous waste of tax dollars. BUT, did we have the right to do it? It doesn't matter if we did or not because, frankly, we did it because we can do it. Other countries can rant as much as they want about U.S. imperialistic attitudes or whatever, but, really, what the fuck are they going to do about it? They're not going to do anything because, frankly, they can't.
Moving on, you may think "agressive self-defense" may make no sense, but consider that a best defense is a good offense. If you strip someone of power before that power grows large enough to threaten you, it's self-defense. Did Iraq seriously pose any threat to the United States even in the near future? Hell no. The backwards Arabs are still killing people they deem religious infidels, and they weren't even close to developing any sort of weapon capable of reaching the United States. Yet, previous military actions against countries in the name of American self-defense can be justified. Vietnam and Korea. We had every right to go to those places to try and stop the USSR from gaining more influence across the world. It would have been horribly stupid for the U.S. to ignore the spread of communism and allow the entire eastern hemisphere to turn red overnight. So, don't rule out offensive self-defense as a foolish notion.
Alright, so Deep touched on some cloak-and-dagger stuff concerning the battle between "national security" and basic civil rights. I have never heard anyone ever anywhere give a reasonable solution to that debate. You can't can't can't can't completely ignore your domestic security in order to grant your people infinite liberty and privacy. At the same time, if you dump the privacy and take the Big Brother stance, you're running through totalitarian territory. Honestly, so many people complain about how the U.S. Govt. is destroying what it means to be a free citizen, but, if they turned their backs and stopped covering their asses, what would those people really think if a major incident occured that could have been prevented with stricter security policy? (and yeah, Deep, I realized you may not have been remotely talking about what I am, but meh
)If you just struggled through all the crap I just wrote in terribly large paragraphs, I salute you.
well its true that the countries cant. some inviduals do something about it thought, and we end up with .. (Osama Bin Laden)²
oh and just wait for the day that oil countries turn down the valves of oil and cause some quite huge havoc in the western countries.. hehe. they cant? no, i rather would wonder why they havent yet done so. but with the israel and everything, i dont see it very unlikely that those countries possessing most of the oil production these days unite, shut the valves down and start to storage the oil. prizes go up, and they get more money later on. plus they get to hit western pretty hard.
if that leads to a war.. it will cripple western countries none the less - even worse, because most likely the plants and pipes and everything would be destroyed in the process..
oh and twink.. before we start about MAYBE having to regret to have rights of being free.. what in the first place causes those things ? I mean, why would we need to regret? it all comes to your actions in the first place I think...
oh and no need to salute really - got enough of that crap at the army already
oh and just wait for the day that oil countries turn down the valves of oil and cause some quite huge havoc in the western countries.. hehe. they cant? no, i rather would wonder why they havent yet done so. but with the israel and everything, i dont see it very unlikely that those countries possessing most of the oil production these days unite, shut the valves down and start to storage the oil. prizes go up, and they get more money later on. plus they get to hit western pretty hard.
if that leads to a war.. it will cripple western countries none the less - even worse, because most likely the plants and pipes and everything would be destroyed in the process..
oh and twink.. before we start about MAYBE having to regret to have rights of being free.. what in the first place causes those things ? I mean, why would we need to regret? it all comes to your actions in the first place I think...
oh and no need to salute really - got enough of that crap at the army already
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.