fadedsteve
GOP Sympathizer
+266|6733|Menlo Park, CA

Kmarion wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

A US invasion of any country in the EU would be devastating for the US.
Surely you mean the entire world.
We arent going to fucking invade a European country, ARE YOU GUYS HIGH??

It would never happen again!! Why?? Because we see the "thanks" you guys give us on a daily basis the last time we bailed you guys out. . . . You know how much money the US spent to help rebuild Europe after the worst war EVER in human history??? Yet you guys demonize us like were a bunch of fucking monkeys with our heads up our asses! WE KNOW WERE NOT PERFECT GUYS!!!!! WE DONT CLAIM THAT WE ARE ALL KNOWING EITHER, give it a rest!

Stop the USA bashing, it makes you guys seem like a bunch of liberal pussies with too much time on your hands!!  Like I say everytime some turtle necked european liberal douchebag starts to bash the USA, I always ask them. . . What is your plan then OTHER THAN bashing us and ours???
jonsimon
Member
+224|6738

fadedsteve wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

A US invasion of any country in the EU would be devastating for the US.
Surely you mean the entire world.
We arent going to fucking invade a European country, ARE YOU GUYS HIGH??

It would never happen again!! Why?? Because we see the "thanks" you guys give us on a daily basis the last time we bailed you guys out. . . . You know how much money the US spent to help rebuild Europe after the worst war EVER in human history??? Yet you guys demonize us like were a bunch of fucking monkeys with our heads up our asses! WE KNOW WERE NOT PERFECT GUYS!!!!! WE DONT CLAIM THAT WE ARE ALL KNOWING EITHER, give it a rest!

Stop the USA bashing, it makes you guys seem like a bunch of liberal pussies with too much time on your hands!!  Like I say everytime some turtle necked european liberal douchebag starts to bash the USA, I always ask them. . . What is your plan then OTHER THAN bashing us and ours???
What if we are the pricks they see us to be? The egotistical are to vain to realize their own plight.

Last edited by jonsimon (2006-08-19 07:09:21)

sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7000|Argentina

jonsimon wrote:

fadedsteve wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Surely you mean the entire world.
We arent going to fucking invade a European country, ARE YOU GUYS HIGH??

It would never happen again!! Why?? Because we see the "thanks" you guys give us on a daily basis the last time we bailed you guys out. . . . You know how much money the US spent to help rebuild Europe after the worst war EVER in human history??? Yet you guys demonize us like were a bunch of fucking monkeys with our heads up our asses! WE KNOW WERE NOT PERFECT GUYS!!!!! WE DONT CLAIM THAT WE ARE ALL KNOWING EITHER, give it a rest!

Stop the USA bashing, it makes you guys seem like a bunch of liberal pussies with too much time on your hands!!  Like I say everytime some turtle necked european liberal douchebag starts to bash the USA, I always ask them. . . What is your plan then OTHER THAN bashing us and ours???
What if we are the pricks they see us to be? The egotistical are to vain to realize their own plight.
As long as Krusty is at the White House I think nobody is safe.  If you pay tribute to him, you may be, if you don't, just pray.

Last edited by sergeriver (2006-08-19 07:14:27)

Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6785|Texas - Bigger than France

Bertster7 wrote:

I'm not all over the place at all. I've been very consistent in everything I've said.

I never said I agreed getting rid of Saddam was a good idea. He was not a nice guy, but I've also pointed out that his brutal regime kept Iraq in line and terrorist free. Why did you get rid of him? That's a very good question, I wish I knew the answer - it doesn't make any sense to me, the whole Iraq war seems very badly thought through.

There is no link between Saddam and Islamic terrorist groups, which is pretty much all of them. I would have nothing against any suggestions that Saddam was planning terrorist attacks with his own troops, but there has never been any evidence to suggest that was the case. Therefore there is nothing linking Saddam to terrorism - other than dubious reports from the Bush administration, eager to validate their war on Saddam.

Saddam had no links with any Islamic groups, terrorist or otherwise. All the terrorist groups in the region are extremist Islamic radicals. Therefore Saddam had no links to terrorism. It is possible that Saddam had aspirations to launch a terrorist attack against the US, but there has been no evidence to suggest that.

The Islamic state leaders do/did hate Saddam. By removing him from power the US has created more terrorists by:

1) Allowing extremist Islamic movements, banned under Saddam to be formed in Iraq. Under Saddam these sorts of extremist movements were deemed dangerous and the members arrested and tortured - not very nice, but it put people off terrorism. Now that Iraq is no longer under Saddams iron grip, Iranian terrorist groups have moved in. It's all about religion.

2) Bombing cities and occupying Iraq. Always creates terrorists - look at Israel/Palestine. Many of the Iraqis may have been happy about it - but lots aren't, look at the number who are blowing themselves up to get rid of US troops.

If you really believe there was more terrorism after Kuwait, then just consider that 651 Americans were killed by terrorists over the 80's - more than 3 times the number killed in the 90's.
Sorry, I thought that when I asked whether we should ask whether we should put Saddam back in power, you said don't be foolish.  I took that as meaning you agreed with his removal.  My fault.

I see your point now...I'm surprised to say the least - I've never heard anyone saying that Saddam was good for the region.  I am also surprised - I'm the kind of guy that wants leaders who kill their own populace out of office, not replaced by another brutal dictator.  I'm also surprised that when we do the region a favor by getting rid of Saddam, they take offense to this and form more terrorist organizations.

And I guess, if you believe Saddam/brutal dictator who kills thousands to be named later should still be in power the logical conclusion is that the Iraqi War was not worth the effort.  I however, do believe that brutal dictators should not be in power, and therefore disagree with the base argument that the war was a waste of time.

I'm not arguing about creating more terrorists - I'm just pissed that we do them a favor and they thank us by creating more terrorists.

Also, 651 in the 80's...make sure to include 9/11 in your figures...

Anyhow, we disagree on the basic level, so it's time to stop talking about it and name calling if you wish...

Last edited by Pug (2006-08-19 11:50:56)

|AIA| DAS
Member
+23|6740|Me Dad's Wilkins

Bertster7 wrote:

|AIA| DAS wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:


Ah, when cost is not an issue - you didn't mention that. Because it is well known that top holiday destination for UK holidaymakers is Spain. Most Europeans spend their holidays in Europe.

A third world country with more than 300 million population - India and China are the only countries with a larger population than the US. Both of those are considered to be 3rd world countries.

The UK has a population of 60 million, double that of Canada for example. Size of a nation means nothing when determining population.

Oh, and with reference to France - of course nothing happened. France are a member of the UN security council and a top nuclear power with probably the 4th largest nuclear arsenal in the world. Of course the US won't mess with them - they can fight back.
There are ways to "mess" with a country without fighting them...The US vs. France, yes that would take long, Pfft.

Third world countries are considered to be weak economically and technologiclly, and Neither China nor India are considered to be either.

Who said anything about the size of a nation determining population, the size of the UK was brought about to mean that there is not much land mass to explore IN the UK thus the reasoning for needing a passport.
Trying to invade France would be stupid. They're fed up with being invaded and they wouldn't put up with being invaded by the US and knowing they would lose in a straight fight they would start using nukes, they've got lots of them - every major US city would be hit and levelled, the US would retailliate - it would be catastrophic.

China and India are both considered 3rd World Countries. In both the human development index and the human poverty index as commisioned by the UN - both come in the low end of the middle development scale. The term 4th world has been brought into use for a number of African states that are the worst off because of the appalling conditions there. Brazil is termed 3rd world and is higher in both development listings than either China or India. It is beyond any question that China and India are 3rd world states. India is ranked 2 places behind Namibia for fucks sake.

I take your point about land mass - fair enough.
According to the CIA World Factsbook Both China and India's GDP are larger than the UK.  I consider that to mean non third world and as there is no other definition to clarify other than economically and technologically weak.  I stand by that statement.

No country would risk thermonuclear annihilation, IMO.  I meant sanctions and embargo's, I guess I forgot the /sarcasm, but I did have the pfft.
jonsimon
Member
+224|6738
I'd trust the UN over the CIA, personally.
|AIA| DAS
Member
+23|6740|Me Dad's Wilkins

jonsimon wrote:

I'd trust the UN over the CIA, personally.
Big Surprise.

Thats why all corporations only do in house audits.... Not!

Get a clue.

Last edited by |AIA| DAS (2006-08-19 08:48:43)

Vilham
Say wat!?
+580|7009|UK

|AIA| DAS wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

I'd trust the UN over the CIA, personally.
Big Surprise.

Thats why all corporations only do in house audits.... Not!

Get a clue.
Your an idiot...

GDP is gross demostic product, ofcourse China or India has a larger GDP than the UK, but that isnt how you measure poverty, its GDP per capita that you use to measure poverty and China and India have a much lower GDP per capita than the UK.
|AIA| DAS
Member
+23|6740|Me Dad's Wilkins

Vilham wrote:

|AIA| DAS wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

I'd trust the UN over the CIA, personally.
Big Surprise.

Thats why all corporations only do in house audits.... Not!

Get a clue.
Your an idiot...

GDP is gross demostic product, ofcourse China or India has a larger GDP than the UK, but that isnt how you measure poverty, its GDP per capita that you use to measure poverty and China and India have a much lower GDP per capita than the UK.
Nice on the personal Slam

He stated the country was a third world country, although many economists think China is the next economic super power.  Not third world in my book

If I want your opinion next time I'll beat it out of you.

BTW it's You're an idiot... Morononic git.

Last edited by |AIA| DAS (2006-08-20 14:01:12)

|AIA| DAS
Member
+23|6740|Me Dad's Wilkins
you forgot that both China and India have 20 times the population as well.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6824|SE London

Well it is the UN who defines what is and isn't a 3rd world country. The UN say that both India and China are 3rd world countries. It is not economic power or technological advancement that determine whether a nation is classed as being a 3rd world country at all, you have misinterpreted that. It is all about the proportion of the population with access to this wealth and technology. In India and China very few people have access to (lots of) money or technology.


People on these forums keep making obvious mistakes like that. Generally, the US spends the most on this, the US spends the most on that - when all of these things boil down to either a percentage of GDP or an index per capita.
a fly
Member
+105|6887|The netherlands
not reading much after post 1.

i dont like america for 1 reason: the goverment.

they checked EVERYTHING we done in europe, EVERYTHING, crediccard numbers, transactions, sites you viset, any info about you that is digital.

i do not trust america cause of that, they had no permision. my own goverment doesent even check that much on me.

the thing that i think why many people dislike the us: they dont give us anything we can trust them on. im sure alot of people agree with that.
Vilham
Say wat!?
+580|7009|UK

|AIA| DAS wrote:

Vilham wrote:

|AIA| DAS wrote:

Big Surprise.

Thats why all corporations only do in house audits.... Not!

Get a clue.
Your an idiot...

GDP is gross demostic product, ofcourse China or India has a larger GDP than the UK, but that isnt how you measure poverty, its GDP per capita that you use to measure poverty and China and India have a much lower GDP per capita than the UK.
Nice on the personal Slam

He stated the country was a third world country, although many economists think China is the next economic super power.  Not third world in my book

If I want your opinion next time I'll beat it out of you.

BTW it's You're an idiot... Morononic git.
Yes... it's a third world country because it has a low GPD per capita... Large GDP divided by Huge population = low GPD per capita compared to UK which is large GDP divided by small population = high GDP per capita...

By the way it's Moronic git... if we are going to be pedantic.
aardfrith
Δ > x > ¥
+145|7035

|AIA| DAS wrote:

He stated the country was a third world country, although many economists think China is the next economic super power.  Not third world in my book
Hold on a mo'.  If it's going to be the NEXT economic super power, that means it's not yet an economic super power so it could well be third-world.  Anyway, IIRC China was part of the second world, i.e. the communist countries so unless they've changed their ideology, this is a moot point.
UON
Junglist Massive
+223|6896

fadedsteve wrote:

We arent going to fucking invade a European country, ARE YOU GUYS HIGH??
ha, you just reminded me of something... in the New Stateman 2006 stage show, the (now) New Labour Alan B'Stard persuades Condi to attack Norway because of those evil Vikings who rape and pillage their way round Europe... of course, the major selling point is the natual reserves of oil in Norway, which can be liberated from this evil Viking regime... the invasion doesn't go well....  the marines assumed it would be like fighting in the middle-east and turned up in their desert camo... funny stuff...
mafia996630
© 2009 Jeff Minard
+319|7006|d
YEAAAAAAAAAAAA, finally finished reading all of this F'in post.

Why wont it die, COS CameronPoe started it, and last i remember Cameron is "Fair and balanced" :p (i fink that wot it is).

i think this thread needs to be closed, its going way of topic and all reasons why people hate/dislike america have been said and justified.

Last edited by mafia996630 (2006-08-20 15:26:21)

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard