Printable View
Group hallucination?Quote:
Originally Posted by cptamazing
And I have said it many times... The war in Iraq is about sand and towels for Florida. do you know who the governor of that state is? And don't even get me started on Haley Barbour's Mississippi and Biloxi Beach. Don't you know what the queers are doing to the soil?
http://queers.ytmnd.com/
I dont want to get into an arguement with you on this but i guarentee and i would bet my life on it that i can name far more things that give thr US a bad name that what do the Opposite. i hate people saying america does so much for the world so heres just a few things off the top of my head:Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal
1) Bush cleary wants iraq for oil and doesnt care about the people who live there.
2) the USA is responcible for corrupt businesses.
3) America only entered WW2 after they got bombed and didnt care that half of europe had been destroyed.
4) USA is responcibily for Hip Hop culture that encourages a life of crime and stealing.
5) USA causes trouble with all these countries like Iran and North Korea becuase they own nuclear weapons. doesnt america also?
6) Voilence Gangs started off in the US.
7) 90% of world crime comes from the US.
8) Americans are so Patriotic yet they dont seem to realise that if you step outside of your country your government is hated even amongst your allies.
America may have done good in its time but it also has alot to answer for...
Posting something like that is not a good way to get the "don't want... argument" ball rolling.Quote:
Originally Posted by cptamazing
1. Clearly? Let's see this clear proof. And did you see what the queers are doing to the soil?
2. That is quite a vague statement. Be more specific. There are lots of us, and some of us are corrupt business people. Can you find me 300 million people without a corrupt few included? My country helps your country's business. I don't know where you live, but I know that it's true.
3. Didn't care? Where do you get that? Did you read what I said about the vets I knew personally? I said that they were there, going through something absolutely horrifying, for more than U.S. interests. They had saving the world in mind. You're damn lucky they did it.
4. The U.S. is responsible for a great deal of entertainment that the world loves because we have a tax code that allows business to be extremely successful. Some of our entertainment is negative, but I know you love a whole lot of our entertainment. You don't have to admit it. I already know you do. :wink:
5. The United States does not engage in the oppression and terrorism that North Korea (mainly oppression... What kind of North Korean entertainment do you like the most?) and Iran (mainly terrorism... Do you question this?) engage in. How many times have those countries played major roles in saving the world?
6. Violent gangs existed thousands of years before the United States even existed. Next...
7. Bullshit. Where do you come up with this stuff? I will give you points for comedy, however.
8. Jealousy is the root of most evil.
You dont understand, i have nothing to be jealous about, if i could live in america for free i wouldnt. If i was jealous then i would just move there :S Ok so america has some of the best entertainment because its payed for by your corrupt corporations. regarding WW2, the Allies would have won WW2 without the help of the USA but thats besides the point, i know alot of americans died in the war fighting but when was that, rite near the end of the war after half the Population of europe had been exterminated. If it wasnt for Pearl Harbour america would have watched the rest of the world burn so i fail to see how they are the worlds saviour, the only thing i see is a country that interferes with smaller countries just to make money from them. They see themselves has supieriors and Police to the rest of the world but the rest of the world see them as an Interfering super-power that threatens with military or economy to get what they want...Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal
Yeah, yeah, whatever. After posting, I looked and saw that you live in New Zealand. Let me put it this way... You won't catch me spending much time on the internet with my mind wrapped up in New Zealand. Your conspiracy hypotheses are interesting but unfounded. Hitler was taking over countries one after another until we jumped in and made a difference. We take war very seriously, but we were pushing to get into WWII long before Pearl Harbor. I'm surprised you aren't arguing the old idea that Roosevelt allowed Pearl Harbor to happen so he would have almost full support in jumping into the war. And again... I personally knew several WWII vets. I know what they had in mind when they were fighting. It meant more to them than probably anything will ever mean to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by cptamazing
We don't see ourselves as superiors. YOU do, and that is what is really going on here. If the United States went all the way isolationist today, the world would change for the much worse. The rest of the free countries would be under much greater threat, and our biggest bashers would suddenly start screaming for us to have their backs again. Saying otherwise would be to ignore the big pink elephant in the room. Everybody knows it's there. It's just a matter of who rationalizes what.
We Americans don't put ourselves on the pedestal you put us on. We forget about all of this stuff until people like you start trashing us with so much hate. We don't walk around with our noses in the air thinking about the rest of the world's place compared to ours all day. We want to live our lives, raise our families, and have fun, just like everybody else. The difference is that we are not as obsessed with our status in the world as the rest of the world is. We want the rest of the world to adopt our economic principles and be prospering democracies. We don't want to stand out. We are doing what we wish the rest of the world was doing. So don't be jealous. Just improve your own country. You can do it too. Be the best you can be instead of just sitting there and drinking coffee and talking about how much you hate us. There's no future in it.
Edit/P.S.- If people would stop trashing my country, I would stop defending it. Insulting countries will invite the same reactions you get when you insult races and genders. It's not a very peaceful action.
I don't think it's a good thing. Life is life, and murder is murder. Saddam killed a lot of people and that's so bad. They've killed him as he killed others, it's just the same.
I prefered to get him in the prison for the rest of his life. He died without knowing that what he did was wrong, no one wins anything with that. He has been killed (or executed or murdered, it's the same) but the country have not win anything, the world haven't won anything, it continues being the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal
OK, lets go, remember to answer my question once Ive finished here.
I am not saying in any way shape or form that the Saddam regime is morally equal to the American one.
You might have voted for Bush, it doesn tmake you responsible for his actions.
It makes you what I believe to me gullable and mislead.
No, i ma not talkign about all of you,
I have American family, lots of them
thats not a lie
I harbour no ill feelings to Americans,
simply the current Administration and its role in current world affairs
which I see is hypocryitcal
i am not white, plus Hitler would never have got to India,
The soviet Union itslef was a big enough buffer zone
and also, it was the US' disgraceful treaty of Versailles after the first world war thst played a major role in the formation of the second
but that is going off topic
I agree whole hearetedly, i nthe past the US has donea lot for the world
a lot of bad and a lot of good
mostly for selfish reasons but the end result ahs been beneficial at times.
I respect that
I do not respect the current US role in world affairs
one minute they are the world policemen charging around the globe "liberating" people
then something props up in a country where there is no economic or political gain to invade and....
their role as world policemen is all but forgotten
its bloody hypocricy
on the topic of what did saddam ever do that was good
The Iraqi government also supported families of soldiers, granted free hospitalization to everyone, and gave subsidies to farmers. Iraq created one of the most modernized public-health systems in the Middle East, earning Saddam an award from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). [16] [17]
Im not defjeing him, that doesnt blaance out his acts of terror
and niether does te US prior involvement in WW2 blaance out their current cts of terror.
Ive done my best to answer your questions
Imran
Imran, I will talk more about the Cold War move of aiding in the removal (by the Shah) of Mossadeq (reported to have communist/Soviet ties that threatened our world... The fight to stop the Soviets from taking over the world was about as serious as the fight to stop the Nazis from taking over the world.), an appointed monarch (by the Shah), after you answer my big 2 questions. You talked around the topics, but you did not give me direct answers. I asked you how much you appreciate the sacrifices Americans have made to save your world. Even if you want to argue that the United States made no difference in World War II and that the Nazis would have for whatever wild reason (There is no "buffer zone" to a military that has taken over, which probably would have happened had we not led the fight in Western Europe, thereby taking away a huge chunk of Hitler's military resources.) not gotten to India and beyond, you cannot deny the fact that 1.1 million Americans were either killed or injured in the fight to stop Hitler from taking over the world and completely wiping out your race and many others. I know we were also fighting the Japanese, but fighting the Japanese had to be done partly because we could not stop Hitler without doing it. No matter what corrupt or selfish motives you assume my government had, I know for a fact what so many American soldiers were thinking about when they were fighting. I know what it meant to them. I have been asking you how much you appreciate their sacrifices. You said about the generalized idea of the U.S. having done "good" (but "bad" too), "I respect that." I am asking how much you appreciate the sacrifices, not if you "respect" them at all. I "respect" Hussein's ability to rule 25 million people with pure fear tactics, but I am worlds from appreciating it. The second question was not about what Hussein did in his own country to look good. I am asking what he did for the world. If you think he was terrible, then I challenge you to go off about that like you have gone off about the United States.
No way should he have been killed. Nobody deserves to die unnaturally.
Ok, Saddam has been condemned, and hung. I argued that George Bush deerved to face trial for war crimes alongside Saddam, much in the same way Benjamin Ferenccz did. I am making this point because he is not being trialed. Saddam is and ash been. I do not need to condemn a hung man. I have alwyas said Saddam represents everything I destest. Facism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal
It costs me nothing and it is the truth to say, I appreicate wot the US has done in the past. and that many soldiers ahve acted selflessly. That does not take away from the fact that the current administration should be trialed for war crimes. For there illegal wars.
If the ICC had a mandate to address arguments on the legality of the use of force or the crime of aggression, then it would have shown.
I am shown my apprecation for Americans
And I dont honeslty believe Saddam did much good for the world.
I dont bleieve Bush has done much good either
I beleive I have answered your questions
I will not accept your challenge to "go off on one" about Saddam, purely because of the reasons I stated at first
but I will say, i detest him, his party and his policies.
Imran
Imran,
Thanks. That sounds good. I always ask people those questions when they go off about my country and not the terrorists that were the topic of the discussion, but it looks like you probably have your priorities straight.
What I know about Mossadeq is that he was believed by U.S. and British intelligence to have threatening ties to the Soviet Union and was a communist supporter. Some sources, even major ones, now say that the intelligence was false, but as I have said, the Cold War was the biggest problem my country has ever faced aside from the Nazi world domination conquest, and it had to be treated like a war. Maybe some of my government's decisions can now be said to have been bad ones, but hindsight is 20/20. We went after other governments for the same reason, including that of Nicaragua and El Salvador. I was a young kid who didn't know the difference between El Salvador and Salvador Dali when that stuff was happening, but from what I have read, those governments were perceived as very serious Cold War threats. The Vietnam War was the most controversial Cold War move we ever made, and I really question how that situation should have been handled. What I do know is that we won the Cold War and that the Soviet Union did not take over the world and make it communist. That was their goal. Eastern Europe is free, the former Soviet states are free, the Soviets do not rule Afghanistan or anywhere else in the Middle East, and a free world is looking more and more possible. If some of the tactics we used to get here were unethical or unnecessary, then that's terrible, but the overall scheme was effective.
The Iranian terrorist who was not punished by us is something I am not that familiar with, but I believe you are referring to one of Bozo the Clinton's horrendous moves. He made many of them. You are not going to get me to take up for that schmuck. He gave military technology to China and passed up four chances to assassinate Bin Laden. Screw Bill Clinton. I am embarassed that he was ever our President.
The Oil For Food policy was a United Nations deal. I am no fan of the United Nations. They are highly corrupt and almost completely undependable. I will not take up for any of that corruption either.
The United States is not completely angelic, and we sure as Hell weren't in our early days. I just start pointing things out when people from other countries seem to have nothing but bad to say about us. The fact that both of my grandfathers fought in World War II has something to do with that, especially since it apparently left one of my grandfathers kind of messed up in the head. Also, all three of my uncles were in the military, and I know that none of them were in it to steal oil or to oppress anybody. One of them is dead now, and he was one of the greatest people I have ever known. But don't assume I am some patriotic fanatic. I have always made fun of blind patriotism. Even in high school I refused to say the Pledge of Allegience, and in college I offended some people by mocking how people act when our national anthem is sung at ball games. If I were ever drafted to fight in a war I don't believe in, I would not be one of those people who says, "My country called me to duty. I must fight." I would burn my draft card and move to Canada.
don't you think it's kind of strange how they rushed to kill saddam so quickly before people wanted to put him on trial for his war crimes during the iran-iraq war? the war during which the US supported saddam?
On the topic of the Soviets, elts not go into it, because you can tell from my signature that I have some far- left ideologies, and thts an altogether bigger discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal
Yes i'll accept you were misguided by the British because they had huge oil interests in Iran
Mossadeghs nationalization, woudned there economy drastically. They used propganda to draw the US into the conflict. He was not closely tid to the USSR at all.
Still, the US must be held accountable for there actions, misguided or not.
And Vietnam was a disgrace, the napalm and such should alwyas be looked upon as a disgusting act of hatred and terror.
Heres a little bit about Mohammad Reza Pahlavi:
With Iran's great oil wealth, Mohammad Reza Shah became the pre-eminent leader of the Middle East, and self-styled "Guardian" of the Persian Gulf. In 1975, he abolished the multi-party system of government so that he could rule through a one-party state under the Rastakhiz (Resurrection) Party in autocratic fashion, which he claimed was a response, among other things, to the Soviet Union's support of Iranian Communist militias and parties, particularly the Tudeh Party. In addition, the Shah had decreed that all Iranian citizens and the few remaining political parties must become part of Rastakhiz. [12] The Shah also authorized the creation of the secret police force, SAVAK (National Organization for Information and Security, which was organized with the help of the CIA.).This infamous agency operated its own secret prison, used torture extensively, assassinated dissidents, and kept the CIA informed.
After the Islamic Revolution, the Shah fled the country at the advice of his prime minister at the time.
Reluctantly, on 22 October 1979 President Jimmy Carter allowed the Shah to make a brief stopover in the United States to undergo medical treatment. The compromise was extremely unpopular with the revolutionary movement, which were against the United States' years of support of the Shah's rule, and demanded his return to Iran to stand trial.
Why?
Im sory but I can see no discernable diffrence between him and Saddam
except for the fact that they are the very people who placed him in power
my point is, that the US have done good, but that many of the US presidents i nthe past have not intervened at toher time andahve shown undoubted support for autocratic regimes in the East.
But qwhen it suits them, they are the world policmen,
this is not a title to be dropepd and picked up at ones own whim.
and finally, I bleieve the Iraq war to be in itslef a grave awar crime
we have already discussed the legality of the war and I do not accept that the war was legal.
The UN was just pwoerless to stop the US.
I also condemn my country
Oh and I dont doubt the soldiers were fighting for feedom of the Iraqi people, but they were iselad
I would not suggest ever arresting or condeming soldeirs that fight for there country, rather condemn there leaders
"One does not put the gun on trial, they charge the man who pulled the trigger"
Imran
It's a good thing he's dead. Yeah, so a lot of Iraq is going to be pretty ticked off about it, but can you imagine keeping the guy around so everyone stays happy? I mean, what? Since when did appeasement ever work? I don't think his video should've been broadcast so publicly: it was pretty much stooping to his level with all the insults at the noose and what not, yet, it was an emotional thing and I can understand it.
Can't help but find it a little ironic that we end a regime of death with, er, his death, but it's probably a lot better than throwing flowers at the situation. (That was overblown, but I smiled writing it).
Ragardless of the issues of, wether there are other people who should share his fate.
I sitll cant share your philosiphy. I dont think I could condone cold-blooded muder in any situation
im not saying appease him
im saying lock him away
solitary confinement
but for gods sake, why take life
it takes away our jsutification for his punishemnt
we killed this man, because he was a killer
follwing this philoshipy lets hire a man to execute the executioner?
Its non-violent people, lyk Mahatma Ghandi that get things done in life, truly just things anyway
Imran
Might = Right
but you are not right for the sake of your might.
the purpose of saddams death was nothing to do with justice, the purpose it serves is to distract you from the real issue of "cui bono?" or who benefits?
it was inevitable what happened to him, a drawn out story fed to you by those who placed and kept him in power for all these years.
the american govt installed him in power, trained his armies and armed him to the teeth to fight against a philosophical concept (peaceful islam) that didnt suit its own ends
(same thing was done in afghanistan just replace islamic concept with communism).
he is simply a scapegoat that when removed (which as i have said was inevitable) provides the american people with the belief that there govt is just and in the right to do so, even though they made him in the first place.
the three steps to absolute power
1 manufacture a problem-saddam invading kuwait (firebomb the reichstag)
2 react to problem-gulf war (introduce martial law)
3 "solve" problem-take over iraq (do what you want, hey why not invade poland)
commence new step 1(bomb new york) while step 3 in action(take over iraq) and repeat cycle till you run every country in the world and hey presto youve got world govt and absolute power!
the fact you are even interested in some tinpot puppet dictator in a country that has never been a threat to your existence or your "freedom" should ring every americans alarm bells especially as your deep in the next phase of this manipulative cycle and you have martial law in effect (patriot act) and the ultimate step 3 is like saddams deposition and execution- inevitable.
america be afraid, very afraid, not of al qaeda. basically cos they dont exist in any meaningful sense or "terrorists" cos trust me america you dont have any!
where are the follow up attacks?
why havent you had a single suicide bomber for 6 years?
even though the middle east hates you more than it ever has?
(the ira carried on bombing britain for many years thats why they call it "a campaign of terror" and we are a much smaller target, easier to defend and far more densely populated).
saddam -evil man, terrorist, tyrant etc.
bush -svaiour, great leader, defender of freedom etc.
yeah right and elvis, sheargar and lord lucan are playing poker in my shed.
ill leave you with this quote
"bin laden didnt blow up the projects, it was you niggah, tell the truth niggah, bush knocked down the towers."
and this one
" for evil to triumph all good men need to do is- nothing"
the first one is by immortal technique and mos def the second by someone years ago who had a lot of sense and probably was familiar with solid gold dictators like your mr bush.
and if you watch the propaganda and bs fed to you by cbs, fox etc. you have noone but yourselves to blame.
oh and this
"if your leader and his family have shares in oil companies and war contarctors what he fuck is he doing being your leader"
and this for those who think im full of it
"heil king bush- leader of the 'free' world and mein fuhrer" both by me 2007.
further info for those who arent sheep (and you lot are creative, freethinking dreamers may i remind you!) can be found on youtube type in "911 bush" into search and that should get you started, take the metaphorical red pill and at least take a peek down the rabbithole for the sake of the entire planet.
oh and isnt it interesting that in america you cant say the word conspiracy without someone saying theory immediately afterwards or hypothesis (thats for you univerally patrioitic mind and your need to justify and identify yourself with a political system based on richest gets the white house- you are not your govt, its not your fault and its ok to fall for it 300 million americans couldnt be wrong, Could they?) its suggestive, repeated mind control plain and simple and immediately pushes the concept of conspiracy and discussion of it into hypothetical, wishy washy territory when what you have in america is stone cold, plain as the nose on your face conspiracy fact.
"if this was a dictatorship itd be a hell of a lot easier, so long as im the dictator" - george W bush
Okay, first, your talking about the 9/11 conspiracy theory which this thread is Not about. There are other threads for that. I dont believe it, and there is just as much evidence to disprove the theory as well as "prove" it, but this is not the thread.
mohammed reza pahlavi is not related either but you didnt object to that cos it doesnt conflict your personal view. discussion evolves, healthy discussion does anyway. feel free to request its being moved but please dont have it deleted as im sure censorship isnt one of your hobbies, or is it?
The post on Mohammed Reza Pahlavi was relevant to the convorstation. Imran used it as reference and comparison. 9/11 conspiracy theories are not relevent. 9/11 itself is relevent as its what caused this war which should only be in Afghanistan, but the conspiracy theories are not. There are other threads for being an annoying ass, and ranting about conspiracies in America.
to say that the 911 conspiracy is irrelevant, scares me to death cos you are pretty smart exo and its a shame youve closed your opinion so soon just as the major evidence is coming in and the politicians have no answers to the questions being posed. take another look i implore you. but i will keep my discussion of it to the relevant topic in future but i feel that it is necessary trhat people all over the world hear the "theories" or at least consider them a possibility and my post should stay here where i feel it belongs just this once as people with an interest in an execution of an arab leader and vote on its "quality" should at least know the circumstances that led to it and possibility that all is not as it seems.
and that there are people in the world who will abstain from voting on such a devicive and inflammatory poll.
my vote is that i abstain from voting as you should all you sick puppies who did, you think that the footage of his derision and murder got out without the say so of someone who would benefit from it being so high profile? they are keeping the war going by creating a new martyr.
888 you sound like your going a bit off topic. I voted Good, he's another hitler but not as smart. I don't really care what happens to him after what he's done, hang him or toss him in prison. Given the option to have thousands women and children executed to get free, he wouldn't even blink before replying yes. He's selfish and has no remorse for anyone, so just remove him from the picture and in any way the government chooses. Sends a message to the world that evil dictators will he held responsible for their actions. Also quite good how he never saw 2007.
Exobyte is right
lets revert back to the topic shall we?
9/11 conspiracy theories are irrelevant
my referece to reza pahlavi however, was a comparison i drew
Your ideas have some basis but are far to far fetched
next you'll start telliing us about the New World Order
Create another thread if you want to talk about that.
Imran
888 had already apologised for going off topic and swiftly found his way back onto it again! Anyway, what was said about it sending a message: maybe it did, but considering how many dictators have been around, and how many have been 'brought to justice' by execution or whatever, it doesn't seem to make much difference. One might say its the risk of attempting power, and probably has no more repulsion from future dictators' actions, than the risk of dying in battle does repelling future army recruits. Just seemed like a pointless execution to me, really
Every executio nis pointless
Imran