America - The Problems

  • Thread starter Thread starter ALPHA
  • 122 comments
  • 3,222 views
well I tried to put my arguement across but your still gonna go through with americas war good luck to you mate I have had enough arguing all I hope is now that you guys don't **** up and makes us the general public pay for the bill or I will find a way to kill our faggot of a prime minister Tony Blair I promise you that
 
Oh and remember this "The World would begin its own destruction with a war in the middle-east and a person named maddaS"
Nostre Dames!!!!!!!!
 
Originally posted by milefile
Violence...

Does anyone really believe there will ever be a world devoid of violence? That mentality is the same mentality that sues McDonalds over a hot coffee. They want that there will be no risk in life, that diplomacy will do all the work and make the world safe, and it can, but not always. War is part of what human's do.

I love when people throw the word "violence" around like it's automatically someone's fault and something that can be eradicated.
Click to expand...

stop putting words into my mouth

:mad:

When did I bloody say ANYTHING about a world of non violence I already know that a utopian soceity is impossible :banghead: get it right
 
Originally posted by keeno_uk
Oh and remember this "The World would begin its own destruction with a war in the middle-east and a person named maddaS"
Nostre Dames!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Heh... right. And Allah is kicking back with all his palastinian martyr buddies, rooting for Iraq, too.
 
Originally posted by keeno_uk
stop putting words into my mouth

:mad:

When did I bloody say ANYTHING about a world of non violence I already know that a utopian soceity is impossible :banghead: get it right
Click to expand...

I draw inferences from what people say especially when having a non-confrontational discussion turns into heebie-jeebie threats of the impending apocolypse as forseen by a parlour trick jester, and assasination threats.

Violence = necessary. Prove it wrong.
 
Milefile -- Bit strong old chap.

Sure us Brits have made a few boo boos in our time. After all we're the nation that invented concentration camps, not something to be proud of really.

But you're the guys that put small pox in blankets and handed them over to the indigenous population of north america.

Sure we're the guys that turned up in northern Ireland to protect the Catholics form the Protestants, and now the tables have turned, we can't leave. Particularly seeing as the major funding of at least one paramilitary organisation came from your good selves. But don't worry we don't hold it aginst you!

But you're the guys that continue to keep the reservations a sad, cruel, unusual and strange punishment to a people who after all fought by your sides to throw off the tyranny of London.

Oh and there are times when i come to work in London, when you can tell there's rumours that the mad paddys are on the loose again because skip lorrys and transit vans get stopped at the ring of steel roadblocks, and the police wear their bullet proof vests and carry Glocks and MP5's. And it makes me wish i worked somewhere else....

Now we can go on trading punches along these lines if you wish and I'm sure we could go on for quite some time.

But hey, let's leave it alone shall we?
 
Right I understand Violence is necessary when it coms down to it. but saddam wasnt doing anything at all. And to say that the UN inspectors wasnt working well in the last 12 years non of this so called WOMD that he has hasnt been seen or heard of at all infact their has been nuthing from iraq up until now. Do you remember when Suddam Condembed the attacks on 9/11 and then bush and his administration have the gall to say that he works with terrorists infact lately I think 2000 their was supposed to be a UN inspection of all US military facilities but your government ended that quickly without much chaos. In all my aguement is that some double-standards are in place and also 1 rule for the US and 1 rules for the rest of the world
 
Somewhere in the middle of that arguemnt with Keeno I remembered I have nothing against Britain and was basically reacting to him. I actually have thought long and hard about how cool it is that our two countries are so close, and that our histories are intertwined the way they are. It's a special realtionship/partnership that I can't find an analogue or antecedent to elsewhere in the world.

I would react as stongly to an American who is as narrow-minded and refexively one way.

And yes, the reservations and our entire history with the Indians makes me sick and sad.
 
Thank God for that.

I was begininng to wonder why I'd come to like Americans so much! :)

Well played Milefile, old son. 👍

Now, if you and Keeno (me old mucker) could just cut down on your caffine intake maybe we can all get along?


Pretty please?

(come on you don't want to see a grown man beg do you?)
 
I don't think there should be one set of rules for all countries. It would be like telling your 12 year old he can stay up until 10:00 and telling your 5 year old they can, too. It's not fair, or wise.

I seriously wish, and I'm sure I'm not alone, that the U.S. could wriggle free of all of its obligations and expectations placed on it by the world.

I had a dream last night about the war. I dreamed that Saddam used weapons of mass destruction in Baghdad. The U.S. responded with nukes. It was a very visual realistic dream. I didn't remember it immediately upon waking, but after I was at work and started reading news about the war. And the dream representation of total horror ripped through me. Does that sound dramatic? Like how Rumsfeld said the response would be to a WMD attack? I'm afraid of seeing mass carnage from WMD on MSNBC. I'm afraid of seeing Baghdad engulfed in a mushroom cloud. What would the world do then?

If Nostradamus was right we are all so screwed. Start tying up your loose ends and say your goodbyes.

We shouldn't have to worry about things like this. We shouldn't have to be afraid. And I can't justify the belief that America is at fault, is evil, and deserves destruction.

So there. I said it. The war scares me. I'm not ashamed of it and I think if it doesn't you're a calloused, souless person. And yet I believe it is right. We can't shrink away from fear.

...talk about "off-topic." Oh well, that's were it happened.

Submit reply.
 
Originally posted by keeno_uk
you haven't seen then that majority of people who have been talking to Sky news over the Iraq war said "no we don't want bush attacking our country" and secondary school children holding guns and having dug-outs just outside their school prepared for battle
Click to expand...

I don't know what the "Sky News " Is or when the interviews of the citizens of Iraq took place. I do know what I am seeing as it happens on T.V. though. I have seen a lot of the citizens cheering and shaking the hands of the soldiers.Maybe that's what they want us to see.Who knows.

I do think it's appauling that school children are being used as soldiers though. Which I'm guessing is your point about the children.

One last thing. Sadaam used banned missles to fire at their neighboring country. But he is a saint and we shouldn't blame him for a minor infraction should we? After all, I'm sure if the war wouldn't have started he could have saved it to use on his own citizens as he has in the past.They deserve his very best don't they? What a great leader he is. No wonder his citizens want to defend him. :lol:
 
Originally posted by slip2rock
But you're the guys that continue to keep the reservations a sad, cruel, unusual and strange punishment to a people who after all fought by your sides to throw off the tyranny of London.
Click to expand...
slip - not to jump in here after feelings are soothed, but I have to clear up one misconception that even Americans get wrong, let alone others.

Native Americans - Indians, if you wish - are in no way required to stay on the reservations, and they haven't been since the beginning of the 20th century. As unacceptable as federal treatment of the native population was , it was really nothing out of the ordinary for all of human history up to about the last 100 years or so. Reservations, which were originally intended as a native ghetto, have for many many years been a place where Indian nations are allowed a degree of autonomy and self government, within an area that is dedicated to their sole use and ownership.

I'm not trying to paint the reservations as government-subsidized spa resorts for the native Americans, because they aren't. But it is important to note that the native individuals are free to come and go as they please and are not restricted to living or staying on the reservations. It's merely a protected place where they can carry on their traditions and society.

And in America's defense on this subject, I'd also like to say that there are a heck of a lot more Native Americans alive in the United States than there are Incas and Aztecs in Central and South America.
 
Originally posted by Pako
Do you think that Bush was sitting in his chair, sipping on his coffee, thinking....

"hummm..., these gas prices could be a lot lower if we just sent in our troups....., sons, daughters, fathers, and mothers and sacrifice their lives and effect the lives of millions to save a few bucks. Yeah, that's what I'll do. Oh looky here, the twin towers are gone, now I have an excuse to finish what my dad started and get gas prices reduced. It's only gonna cost some lives...."
Click to expand...

Actually, yes.
 
Then you are even stupider than you pretend to be, Klos. I see you're entering the downswing phase again. That's too bad.
 
No, I'm not more stupid than I pretend to be. I'm in a perpetual downward and upward swing and there ain't a thing I can do about it. I'll rebound though.
 
Originally posted by Pako
I thought I was done, but not quite. Do you think that Bush was sitting in his chair, sipping on his coffee, thinking....

"hummm..., these gas prices could be a lot lower if we just sent in our troups....., sons, daughters, fathers, and mothers and sacrifice their lives and effect the lives of millions to save a few bucks. Yeah, that's what I'll do. Oh looky here, the twin towers are gone, now I have an excuse to finish what my dad started and get gas prices reduced. It's only gonna cost some lives...."
Click to expand...

No - and it would be literally stupid to say 'yes.' But it would be almost as stupid to believe oil isn't a part of this war at all.
 
Originally posted by DGB454
I do think it's appauling that school children are being used as soldiers though. Which I'm guessing is your point about the children.
Click to expand...

well its not lil 10 yr old school like what they have in Columbo. since your not from england I would use the american term. They are all "HIGH" school kids ranging from 15 to 18 just a lil bit younger than me. The teenes all seem eager for war but I reckon they might have been brainwashed by saddam education
 
I hate it when this happens

1. I don't come to the forum for like two days and look what i miss. Dang It !!! Now if i try to post something i'll look stupid (OH, Too late. Dang it!!)

2. I haven't read the whole thread yet but please forgive me if i'm repeating someone but here are my feelings or feeling on the war. Iraq or Saddam in particular has had 12 yrs. to disarm and he hasn't. Every time the U.N says "Now Saddam...Buddy...we need you to give up your weapons, UmKay." he relents and gives up a missle or two. But now we've been waiting too long and we have to take them from him. I am not one to run out scream to "Go get'em" but here is my main statement I know war is not good and i don't think anybody wants it (down inside at least) but sometimes war is necessary and this just happens to be one of those times. There I said it.

(I Know i'm late, I'll be sure to check the forum atleast once a day from now on)
 
Okay, maybe that isn't the only reason for this war, but I'm sure the oil is a big factor. Bush clearly wanted a war and just needed a reason to go into a small war where very few people will die and he can make a little money. But, I think this war is actually needed to disarm Saddam if he in fact does have those big mother weapons. Even if he doesn't have weapons of mass destruction (love that euphemism), it's wise to go in and take care of him. He's clearly someone that isn't needed on this planet.

Bushie ain't as bad as I've pretended he is, but he certainly is no angel either. There is definitely a lot of corruption surrounding him.

Well, whatever.
 
This is not directed at any particular person.

Before deciding whether to believe Bush or those claiming it is about oil, one should consider the costs and rammifications of trying to obtain oil in the way Bush is alleged to be doing, during, before and after this endevour; that is how to view things objectively. If you agree with Bush based solely on claims and ignore evidence which contradicts them, or if you agree with the idea that it is about oil based only on the fact that it's there, then your logic would be simplistic. Oil may be a reason for going in, it may even be about control, about weakening OPEC as some have speculated, but it ignores the fact that it cannot invalidate what the administration claims as its reasons for going into Iraq. Dubious evidence on the part of the administration may be able to, but all oil does is provide a possible alternative reason. And, in light of the fact that intelligence integrity makes the divulgence of stronger evidence difficult, a reasonable presumption, no one, short of someone who really knows, can discount all that has been said, or at least tried to be implied, about the danger Saddam poses and the justification of attempting to remove him from power. What matters is whether or not the reason is good enough for war and if the rammifications are small enough to support war still. If you cannot argue against war on that last point I made, then it seems to me that the use of oil in an anti war argument is mostly about the expression of your bias and perhaps hatred.
 
And yes, to the far left, most notably in Europe, you may thank me for enlightening you on your seemingly fallacious and specious reasoning.
 
GREAT POWER COMES WITH GREATER RESPONSIBILITIES

SADAM sure did not harass French, China, russia. why they care. French says we are lovers not fighters. aye so they get ****ed by germans, just bunch of pu$$ies tying to be nice guy. Chinese leaders are soft hearts. they would only kill chinese students who protest to make goverment better. anyother killings, they start saying Budah says blah blah blah blah. heh heh russians ? they even use chemical weapon to kill hostages and hostage takers, what would they care about sadam has bio weapon or not.

We americans belive 1 man rules all is wrong. people have the rights to pursuit happiness. all man all created equal by god.
the system is not perfact. but it's the best yet. im prode to be an American.
 
This is a fun argument I'm getting owned!

Bomber is a stoner, don't listen to him, he is only good for laughs.
We don't have Channel Z here anymore, we got The Edge,
Click to expand...

I haven't been listening to him - Thank God!

If you recall we tried that and alot of the countries that approved with the agreement 12 years ago backed out on their word.(got cold feet). Besides, why do we need anyones approval to protect our interest and our safety?
Click to expand...

That was 12 years ago people change, why you need everybodys approval is so that we know that you can be controlled and not go to all extents and blow half the world in half. :rolleyes:

Has anyone been watching the news? Seems that the citizens of Iraq are cheering our troops as they ride in.
I also saw on CNN I believe a Kurdish family who had named their son Dick Cheney 9 years ago and they are expecting another baby soon and are naming him George Bush. This is a far cry from what the anti-war movement wants to believe. They want you to believe that the Iraqi people are happy and safe and see our forces as invaders and terrorist on their happy home.
Click to expand...

Well isn't that nice, I am not one of those radical protestors, I just think the war needs more backing and approval.
I think Saddam and his sons need to be removed from power.
If the war continues on Iraqis will soon see the war as a war against Iraq not Saddam.
 
Originally posted by Talentless
And yes, to the far left, most notably in Europe, you may thank me for enlightening you on your seemingly fallacious and specious reasoning.
Click to expand...

Talentless by name.......

Less than half of us even vote over here, so by simple reasoning less than half of us are intrested in polotics. Of the remaining half I'd say that less than half of those voting even have a basic understanding of why and who they're voting for and vote out of social conditioning rather than from reason.

I appreciate that you have some sort of issue over us "pinko" Europeans, but give us a damn break, have you any idea what kind of hole us Brits have dug for ourselves by backing up you Americans in this little war of yours? We've dug a social grave for ourselves as far as Europe is concerned.

So keep your damn petty snipes to yourself
 
Neon,

Many thanks, although i know very little about the current situation regarding the native American, i was only vaguely aware that they weren't restricted to reservations. It is yet another area of 20th century history that i really should read up on. I hate commenting on subjects i don't really understand.
 
Originally posted by ALPHA



That was 12 years ago people change, why you need everybodys approval is so that we know that you can be controlled and not go to all extents and blow half the world in half. :rolleyes:
[/B]
Click to expand...

It started 12 years ago and has been an ongoing problem since then.

Again, We don't need approval from anyony to protect our interest and safety. I wouldn't expect your country to ask permission to protect itself. Maybe ask for helpbut not permission.
 

Latest Posts

Back