See that^ is typicly american, put people to the wall with the passed history from other country to just say, we are right, you are wrong. You do the same with France and keep doing it with Germany. Seriously this is really low guys.
I really dont want to be mean but I understood very little. Did you use a transelator?MooseRyder wrote:
See that^ is typicly american, put people to the wall with the passed history from other country to just say, we are right, you are wrong. You do the same with France and keep doing it with Germany. Seriously this is really low guys.
What the hell are you talking about, that is a perfectably acceptable sentence with one tiny little spelling mistake on the word 'typically' and a missing pluralisation on 'country'. Don't worry MooseRyder, everyone else understands you. Notice he'd rather pretend he can't understand you than refute the claim that using past war crimes to justify current ones is low.specops10-4 wrote:
I really dont want to be mean but I understood very little. Did you use a transelator?MooseRyder wrote:
See that^ is typicly american, put people to the wall with the passed history from other country to just say, we are right, you are wrong. You do the same with France and keep doing it with Germany. Seriously this is really low guys.
Let me clarify. UnOriginalnuttah, you're correct in saying that using past warcrimes to justify current ones is low. Pardon my earlier comments about Germany, but they were meant sarcastically and born out of 19 years of frustration. And to clarify for that wanker Trekkie.
I was born in germany a US citizen, raised in germany, went to german school, etc. Before the age of 19 when i left for good, i had only spent a few months in the US and yet all throughout my time in germany I had to listen to the whining, bitching and complaining about how "My country" and "me and my people" treated the world so unfairly. When the US acted the germans bitched, when the US didn't act, the Germans bitched. If you've got such a moral problem with the way the US handles their affairs, then boycott us, it's your right, problem is our economies are so closely linked it might actually cost you. So wise up to the fact that "extra oil" for the US is good for europe down the line as well, and that you're benefitting just as much from the "evils of america" as I am. And for Gods sake, I don't want to hear about the fucking Kyoto protocol anymore. Germany decomissions their nuclear plants to be more environmentally friendly, is thus forced to import energy from France, who in turn builds more nuclear plants. Way to set an example. Having been emersed in the German social system I can tell you it's utopian thinking, wishful dreaming, but not grounded in any common sense or logic, which is why your economy is going down the tubes. Focus on your own damn problems and inconsistencies in the meantime, the US may be a country of self-righteous bastards but having experienced both for any significant amount of time i can assure you europe is no better. And if you want details on any of that feel free to ask. As for me, i cast my votes, i pay taxes, i have every right and the responsibility to criticize my own govt. and their actions. Everyone else, if we're not stomping you at the time, step off, your country has enough for you to worry about.
I was born in germany a US citizen, raised in germany, went to german school, etc. Before the age of 19 when i left for good, i had only spent a few months in the US and yet all throughout my time in germany I had to listen to the whining, bitching and complaining about how "My country" and "me and my people" treated the world so unfairly. When the US acted the germans bitched, when the US didn't act, the Germans bitched. If you've got such a moral problem with the way the US handles their affairs, then boycott us, it's your right, problem is our economies are so closely linked it might actually cost you. So wise up to the fact that "extra oil" for the US is good for europe down the line as well, and that you're benefitting just as much from the "evils of america" as I am. And for Gods sake, I don't want to hear about the fucking Kyoto protocol anymore. Germany decomissions their nuclear plants to be more environmentally friendly, is thus forced to import energy from France, who in turn builds more nuclear plants. Way to set an example. Having been emersed in the German social system I can tell you it's utopian thinking, wishful dreaming, but not grounded in any common sense or logic, which is why your economy is going down the tubes. Focus on your own damn problems and inconsistencies in the meantime, the US may be a country of self-righteous bastards but having experienced both for any significant amount of time i can assure you europe is no better. And if you want details on any of that feel free to ask. As for me, i cast my votes, i pay taxes, i have every right and the responsibility to criticize my own govt. and their actions. Everyone else, if we're not stomping you at the time, step off, your country has enough for you to worry about.
Oh im sorry if my english is not perfect, maybe because its only my second language...let me translate it for you in a language i know betterspecops10-4 wrote:
I really dont want to be mean but I understood very little. Did you use a transelator?MooseRyder wrote:
See that^ is typicly american, put people to the wall with the passed history from other country to just say, we are right, you are wrong. You do the same with France and keep doing it with Germany. Seriously this is really low guys.
"Tu vois ceci est typiquement américain. Mettre la population de pays étrangère au pied du mur en utilisant le passé historique militaire, pour tout simplement dire, nous avons raison, vous avez tord. Vous faites ceci sans arrêts avec L'Allemagne et la France. Sérieusement, c'est vraiment dégradant et stupide."
Happy now?
Then WHAT authority did the US have?wannabe_tank_whore wrote:
The same UN that has picked Zimbabwe, China, Libya, Burma, and Uzbekistan to make up the Human Rights Council? Good logic there, bud.Spark wrote:
Well, lets have a look
1. Just cause: Well, I suppose if you wanted to get rid of Saddam. But that's not what you said! So no.
2. Legitimate authority: Um, NO. The 'legitimate authority' in question is the UN.
3. Proportional response: I don't think so. Did you really need a few hundred thousand troops? And did you need to kill thousands upon thousands of innocent people with bombs/missles?
4. Reasonable chance of success: um, YES!
5. If someone attended the CGS Yr 8 Rave day, can you give me no. 5?
I'm afraid that the US alone does not constitute an 'authority'. In this case, an INTERNATIONAL authority with an array of nations!A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority. Even just causes cannot be served by actions taken by individuals or groups who do not constitute an authority sanctioned by whatever the society and outsiders to the society deem legitimate
NO!
---
Oh, and I remember No. 5.
5. Last resort. I do not think that the US tried all means other than force, don't you think?
---
Ummm.... "This is typical American. Look at (?) their population's military history (?) and pass it on and say we're right, you are wrong. You are doing it go Germany and France. Seriously, this is degrading and stupid.Tu vois ceci est typiquement américain. Mettre la population de pays étrangère au pied du mur en utilisant le passé historique militaire, pour tout simplement dire, nous avons raison, vous avez tord. Vous faites ceci sans arrêts avec L'Allemagne et la France. Sérieusement, c'est vraiment dégradant et stupide.
How'd I go?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
I'm really sick of everyone bitching about the US this and the US that. Here is what I think our new foreign policy should be. FUCK OFF YOUR ALL ON YOUR OWN. You build something we don't like....we'll fuck you up and leave you in shambles. That sounds fair to me. And to all the Germans bashing us this is the first time in my life that I am not proud to be an Aryan German. You should be thankful for what we did after WWII cause in all right we could have made you pay repairations that would still not be paid off to this day. We rebuilt your economy and kept Berlin from falling completely under Soviet control. We made you an industrious nation that rivaled with most of the worlds. The rebuilding we helped you accomplish allowed you to flourish by rebuilding your countries infrastructure. I can't believe I'm going to tell my own flesh and blood this as much as it pains me but...FUCK OFF YOU UNGRATEFUL BITCHING GERMANS. YOU THINK YOU CAN DO BETTER THEN LETS SEE YOU DO OUR JOB. DON'T CRITICIZE WHAT YOU HAVE NO EXPERIENCE IN DEALING WITH.
We didn't really help rebuild Germany out of the kindness of our hearts. We did so because we wanted to avoid creating another kind of strained, angry populace that was post WW1 Germany's (due to the victors screwing Germans over royally).2ndLt.Tucker wrote:
You should be thankful for what we did after WWII cause in all right we could have made you pay repairations that would still not be paid off to this day. We rebuilt your economy and kept Berlin from falling completely under Soviet control. We made you an industrious nation that rivaled with most of the worlds. The rebuilding we helped you accomplish allowed you to flourish by rebuilding your countries infrastructure.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-03-22 23:28:01)
None the less we didn't have to help them by any means. We could have just pulled out entirely but we chose not to. We also stayed there because the Brits, French, and Russians would not have been to kind to the german population after the last 2 conflicts they had caused...correct me if im wrong because by all history accounts those 3 countries held a major grudge against germany and its people.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
We didn't really help rebuild Germany out of the kindness of our hearts. We did so because we wanted to avoid creating another kind of strained, angry populace that was post WW1 Germany's (due to the victors screwing Germans over royally).2ndLt.Tucker wrote:
You should be thankful for what we did after WWII cause in all right we could have made you pay repairations that would still not be paid off to this day. We rebuilt your economy and kept Berlin from falling completely under Soviet control. We made you an industrious nation that rivaled with most of the worlds. The rebuilding we helped you accomplish allowed you to flourish by rebuilding your countries infrastructure.
Which is why we have the international councils and courts, so that these things can be dealt with by fair trial, not just by the victors concept of justice. What's the point in claiming to know about history if you are unable to draw any lessons from it?2ndLt.Tucker wrote:
None the less we didn't have to help them by any means. We could have just pulled out entirely but we chose not to. We also stayed there because the Brits, French, and Russians would not have been to kind to the german population after the last 2 conflicts they had caused...correct me if im wrong because by all history accounts those 3 countries held a major grudge against germany and its people.
One step forward, two steps backward, down in a Babylon.
Oh and BTW, 'in the English language, the use of the word "Aryan" when referring to an ethnic group or race (or even a linguistic group) is no longer in technical use and is sometimes considered unacceptable because of the Nazi associations.' I personally consider the way you describe yourself as using a word which the Nazi party believed meant racially superior highly offensive. Believing that you are part of some kind of made-up superior race and that other ethnic groups are somehow inferior is racism.
Unfortunately it used to not be considered as such the same as the swaztika which was originally a peace symbol. It wasnt untill the Nazi regime that it became a symbol of hate. As for offending you I apoligize I did not mean it in such a way. I meant to imply that I am the stereotypical Blonde hair blue eyed german that always gets made fun of. And the definition of an ethnic group is a group of people who share or have similar traits. And I am by no means superior to anyone and for you to say thats what I am implying is wrong. Lol believe me I know that there are plenty of people out there that are better than me. If i was to imply that there is a superior race then that would just be out of complete arrogance on my part. Each race has benefited modern day society in multiple ways from architecture, arithmatic, engineering, aerospace, the list goes on.UnOriginalNuttah wrote:
Which is why we have the international councils and courts, so that these things can be dealt with by fair trial, not just by the victors concept of justice. What's the point in claiming to know about history if you are unable to draw any lessons from it?2ndLt.Tucker wrote:
None the less we didn't have to help them by any means. We could have just pulled out entirely but we chose not to. We also stayed there because the Brits, French, and Russians would not have been to kind to the german population after the last 2 conflicts they had caused...correct me if im wrong because by all history accounts those 3 countries held a major grudge against germany and its people.
One step forward, two steps backward, down in a Babylon.
Oh and BTW, 'in the English language, the use of the word "Aryan" when referring to an ethnic group or race (or even a linguistic group) is no longer in technical use and is sometimes considered unacceptable because of the Nazi associations.' I personally consider the way you describe yourself as using a word which the Nazi party believed meant racially superior highly offensive. Believing that you are part of some kind of made-up superior race and that other ethnic groups are somehow inferior is racism.
Now back to you international councils and courts, did those even exhist post WW2. I'm not sure if they did please let me know on this one.
Regardless, my point stands, and I agree that the US has enough faults for a life-time of criticism, however, every country has those same issues, in one form or another internal and otherwise, and it is for each individual countries citizens to work them out. My beef is with those that would claim some kind of moral superiority allowing them to constantly point the finger at others. America's shortcomings should be dealt with by Americans first and foremost and I think it's fair to say that there are opposing views on most issues at hand. What disagrees with me is the notion that expressing disapproval with my own governments actions automatically sides me with a host of other countries that would do best to mind their own business. Let the Germans and French worry about their own countries inconsistencies and shortcomings and stop using the US as the chosen focal point for criticism.
In my opinion every single action the US has taken is selfishly motivated on some level or another and I wouldn't have it any other way. What's fine for mother Teresa can't work long term for any establishment that hopes to outlive the generation that founded it. I could care less if Iraq was for oil, an advanced military base, a scenic vacationing spot, I could give a damn, I assume we gained something of value and any humanitarian service to the Iraqis came secondary.
Every country acts on behalf of it's own interests, to whatever capacity it is capable of. Neither America nor any of the European nations became powerful because of good deeds, cheritable actions and a moral compass that guided them to green pastures, or for that matter good weather and conveniently located natural resources. And don't even get me started on the Arab world which is far beyond reproach as well. What confuses me is how anyone dares think they're the exception to the rule.
In my opinion every single action the US has taken is selfishly motivated on some level or another and I wouldn't have it any other way. What's fine for mother Teresa can't work long term for any establishment that hopes to outlive the generation that founded it. I could care less if Iraq was for oil, an advanced military base, a scenic vacationing spot, I could give a damn, I assume we gained something of value and any humanitarian service to the Iraqis came secondary.
Every country acts on behalf of it's own interests, to whatever capacity it is capable of. Neither America nor any of the European nations became powerful because of good deeds, cheritable actions and a moral compass that guided them to green pastures, or for that matter good weather and conveniently located natural resources. And don't even get me started on the Arab world which is far beyond reproach as well. What confuses me is how anyone dares think they're the exception to the rule.
To the best of my knowledge only the League of Nations, which was replaced by the U.N. after WWII having failed in it's primary goal of avoiding a further global conflict.
"The diplomatic philosophy behind the League represented a fundamental shift in thought from the preceding hundred years. The old philosophy, growing out of the Congress of Vienna (1815), saw Europe as a shifting map of alliances among nation-states, creating a balance of power maintained by strong armies and secret agreements. Under the new philosophy, the League was a government of governments, with the role of settling disputes between individual nations in an open and legalist forum. The impetus for the founding of the League came from Democratic U.S. President Woodrow Wilson although the United States never joined the League of Nations." -A book that states it far better than I ever could
"The diplomatic philosophy behind the League represented a fundamental shift in thought from the preceding hundred years. The old philosophy, growing out of the Congress of Vienna (1815), saw Europe as a shifting map of alliances among nation-states, creating a balance of power maintained by strong armies and secret agreements. Under the new philosophy, the League was a government of governments, with the role of settling disputes between individual nations in an open and legalist forum. The impetus for the founding of the League came from Democratic U.S. President Woodrow Wilson although the United States never joined the League of Nations." -A book that states it far better than I ever could
Hmmm, you know it's wrong but it makes you unhappy that people in other countries say it is wrong.duka wrote:
Regardless, my point stands, and I agree that the US has enough faults for a life-time of criticism, however, every country has those same issues, in one form or another internal and otherwise, and it is for each individual countries citizens to work them out. My beef is with those that would claim some kind of moral superiority allowing them to constantly point the finger at others. America's shortcomings should be dealt with by Americans first and foremost and I think it's fair to say that there are opposing views on most issues at hand. What disagrees with me is the notion that expressing disapproval with my own governments actions automatically sides me with a host of other countries that would do best to mind their own business. Let the Germans and French worry about their own countries inconsistencies and shortcomings and stop using the US as the chosen focal point for criticism.
If you really believed you were in the wrong then international affirmation and other people who share your views would only serve as a positive reinforcement. It sounds like you just dislike having shared views with people in other countries. There's a word for that: Xenophobic.
I for one welcome sharing views and insights on the problems my government creates, the outside perspective helps to gain clarity.
At least you admit it. That's the first step to getting help.duka wrote:
In my opinion every single action the US has taken is selfishly motivated on some level or another and I wouldn't have it any other way. What's fine for mother Teresa can't work long term for any establishment that hopes to outlive the generation that founded it. I could care less if Iraq was for oil, an advanced military base, a scenic vacationing spot, I could give a damn, I assume we gained something of value and any humanitarian service to the Iraqis came secondary.
"They started it." Playground mentality. And I've never claimed to support what my government does here in the UK, but then I didn't vote for them or their policies so why should I?duka wrote:
Every country acts on behalf of it's own interests, to whatever capacity it is capable of. Neither America nor any of the European nations became powerful because of good deeds, cheritable actions and a moral compass that guided them to green pastures, or for that matter good weather and conveniently located natural resources. And don't even get me started on the Arab world which is far beyond reproach as well. What confuses me is how anyone dares think they're the exception to the rule.
UnOriginalNuttah. I will try and clarify further. I believe that at the heart of hearts, every country and each individual is either selfish or in denile. If I have any objection to my governments policies abroad they are in noway motivated by a genuine sense of moral obligation to anyone other than myself and those close to me. I believe this is true across the board. I refuse to live the lie of enjoying the luxuries of western life and yet denouncing the policies that sustain that lifestyle. If I have any complaints about how this country is being run, they spring from the belief that we are doing ourselves more damage than good. If invading another country is necessary to keep me safe, my job well-paying or even just my car running, than so be it, but don't do so and tell me we're out for the freedom and well-being of others. It's insulting. This is why listening to our leaders makes me sick to my stomach. This is also why listening to the self-righteous ramblings of other countries makes me equally sick. Don't tell me our conduct and motivation is any different than your own. Debate all you want, criticise all you will, but don't do so from the assumed moral high ground. Insisting on that has absolutely nothing to do with any "playground mentality", but rather we're all in this together, one way or another, so be careful who you point your finger at, for what reasons, and on what grounds.
PS: Xenophobia has do do with fear of the strange and foreign or unfamiliar, not with a dislike for shared views with other countries.
PSS the "playground mentality" for me implies things said and done whereas my take is more "they're doing it, too, mommy, why can't I?" lol
They held grudges against eachother, not just Germany. But in spectator hindsight, I wish we wouldn't have let the Soviets dominate eastern Europe. By all rights, we should have continued the war with them with Japan and Germany (once they were humbled) as newly-recruited allies. Should never have allowed them to recover from the beating they took from the axis powers. The Ruskies killed more civilians than freaking Hitler...2ndLt.Tucker wrote:
None the less we didn't have to help them by any means. We could have just pulled out entirely but we chose not to. We also stayed there because the Brits, French, and Russians would not have been to kind to the german population after the last 2 conflicts they had caused...correct me if im wrong because by all history accounts those 3 countries held a major grudge against germany and its people.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-03-23 04:06:47)
Stalin was no doubt just as bad as hitler in his political killings. But honestly a war with Russia at the time was not looked at as a possibility considering how many men had already been lost. We didnt want to see more casualties of the same number. We were already morale stricken and to have another 4 year long war would have been bad for us.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
They held grudges against eachother, not just Germany. But in spectator hindsight, I wish we wouldn't have let the Soviets dominate eastern Europe. By all rights, we should have continued the war with them with Japan and Germany (once they were humbled) as newly-recruited allies. Should never have allowed them to recover from the beating they took from the axis powers. The Ruskies killed more civilians than freaking Hitler...2ndLt.Tucker wrote:
None the less we didn't have to help them by any means. We could have just pulled out entirely but we chose not to. We also stayed there because the Brits, French, and Russians would not have been to kind to the german population after the last 2 conflicts they had caused...correct me if im wrong because by all history accounts those 3 countries held a major grudge against germany and its people.
You should be proud, you are just as ignorant as your buddies in France. Way to raise the bar for Montreal, if there was even a bar that could be risen for that part of Canada. So for example say if I murdered somebody 30 years ago and I said it happened in the past and its irrelevant that they should let me go? Europe has committed horrible acts in the past so I feel next time they remind us of what we are doing wrong we should pull out a history book and remind them of all the horrible acts they have committed across the ages.MooseRyder wrote:
See that^ is typicly american, put people to the wall with the passed history from other country to just say, we are right, you are wrong. You do the same with France and keep doing it with Germany. Seriously this is really low guys.
Last edited by Renegade2k9 (2006-03-23 14:15:27)
You know what else is low, taking your blind anger out against a group of people because you don't like their leader. So now I guess Europe, you, and this guy are just as low as me.UnOriginalNuttah wrote:
What the hell are you talking about, that is a perfectably acceptable sentence with one tiny little spelling mistake on the word 'typically' and a missing pluralisation on 'country'. Don't worry MooseRyder, everyone else understands you. Notice he'd rather pretend he can't understand you than refute the claim that using past war crimes to justify current ones is low.specops10-4 wrote:
I really dont want to be mean but I understood very little. Did you use a transelator?MooseRyder wrote:
See that^ is typicly american, put people to the wall with the passed history from other country to just say, we are right, you are wrong. You do the same with France and keep doing it with Germany. Seriously this is really low guys.
I really dont know why you got mad... I was just kinda confused by the scentence... I got the general idea...MooseRyder wrote:
Oh im sorry if my english is not perfect, maybe because its only my second language...let me translate it for you in a language i know better
"Tu vois ceci est typiquement américain. Mettre la population de pays étrangère au pied du mur en utilisant le passé historique militaire, pour tout simplement dire, nous avons raison, vous avez tord. Vous faites ceci sans arrêts avec L'Allemagne et la France. Sérieusement, c'est vraiment dégradant et stupide."
Happy now?
and this has gone way off topic, the vietnam war was and hopefully will be the only war where the Americans had to withdrawl from a war because of mounting casualties and pressure at home. We also did not complete a large portion of our objectives. In Iraq we are facing a low amount of casualties and very few civilian casualties compared to many wars. Also our adverseries in Vietnam were not trying to kill civilians unlike the motives behind our curent peeps.
Let's take the first google define:xenophobiaduka wrote:
PS: Xenophobia has do do with fear of the strange and foreign or unfamiliar, not with a dislike for shared views with other countries.
fear or dislike of strangers or the unknown, often used to describe nationalistic political beliefs and movements
stfu
If you've got caught or turned yourself in, been found guilty, admitted you are wrong, and served your sentence then yes, you have repayed your debt to society. That murder is then irrelevant to future crimes, if you kill again you go back to step one (if you didn't get executed when you got caught the first time). If you've admitted to a murder you've done 30 years ago which was never solved, then start at the "turning yourself in" bit then once you get to the bit where you've served your sentence you are free to decry others who murder. You have been reformed by your time in prison (unless it's America, where you have been executed).Renegade2k9 wrote:
You should be proud, you are just as ignorant as your buddies in France. Way to raise the bar for Montreal, if there was even a bar that could be risen for that part of Canada. So for example say if I murdered somebody 30 years ago and I said it happened in the past and its irrelevant that they should let me go? Europe has committed horrible acts in the past so I feel next time they remind us of what we are doing wrong we should pull out a history book and remind them of all the horrible acts they have committed across the ages.MooseRyder wrote:
See that^ is typicly american, put people to the wall with the passed history from other country to just say, we are right, you are wrong. You do the same with France and keep doing it with Germany. Seriously this is really low guys.
Renegade: I'm not angry, Spec made a cheap shot at MooseRyder with a reference about using a translator (which spec even spelt wrong) for a near perfect sentence. The language I used was even quite mild. He should have read it carefully before posting that he couldn't understand it. I considered that to be deliberately antagonistic, and so I pointed that out to him. What group of people are you talking about Renegade2k9, surely you don't mean the American people who I have absolutely nothing against? I didn't say anything about my agreeing with what he said that the comment made was a typically American view, and neither do I share that view. I believe that is a stereotypically American view, would never judge an entire population of a country to confirm to a stereotype, only individuals who demonstrate conformance through their actions.
You say 'what else is low', is that an admission or a slip-up?