Last edited by ghettoperson (2006-09-11 11:26:07)
You are dancing with words, we both no the point you were trying to get across is that we are not as concerned. Painting Americans as being selfish. BTW I didn't label you Anti-American. That statement was perceived as an derogatory statement against my country and yours. You did infact label me as the typical "if you don't agree with me your anti-American". All you have to do is go through and read some of my post to know this is not true. [Sarcasm]I respect your opinion no matter how wrong it is [/Sarcasm]Spearhead wrote:
I said I see no one weeping. That's not saying they don't care, but I saw the entire country weeping on 9/11 for 3,000 dead civilians. I see no one weeping now for what we've done in the middle-east. Again, just stating facts. Where did I say "No Americans care?". Caring and weeping are pretty far apart on the "Feeling sad" scale.Kmarion wrote:
You addressed "Americans" in a manner that displays no way of caring for 40,000 dead. Since you chose to use the term American in a sense of not caring about any of the other 40k dead I deemed your post to be anti-American unless you realized it or not.Spearhead wrote:
I'm in no way shape or form anti-American. You are probably one of the several million of other Americans who everyday use the word anti-American to label anyone you see who disagrees, contradicts, or point out something you don't like. America does not equal the Republcian party, America is every citizen who lives in the country. You are anti-American for calling me anti-American, and you will probably never realize that. It is so f*cking ironic, you and people like you are the very reason why the country has become what it is, and the only way you could ever be anti-American is by labeling other Americans with the exact same phrase.
So, instead of acknowledging the fact that you yourself see no Americans weeping over tens of thousands of innocent civilians dead, you label me anti-American because I stated a fact
Last edited by Kmarion (2006-09-11 11:31:03)
Last edited by FourthHorseman (2006-09-11 11:40:29)
I'm no Republican apologist, but the IRA never bombed in the name of Christianity. That is not to devalue the very valid point you make however that Americans funded terrorists for years in the UK..aardfrith wrote:
Since the thread has been derailed, I might as well post this rebuttal before I go out for beers.rawls2 wrote:
They are dying over there so you and your mate can get shitfaced drunk with out the fear of getting blown up by a islamic terrorist.aardfrith wrote:
Go on, tell me, why are your fellow Americans dying in Iraq on a daily basis?
I, for one, will be out drinking beers and celebrating tomorrow night. It is, after all, my best mate's birthday.
The only terrorists that have struck in Leeds in the time that I have lived here were Christians, not Muslims. Fuck the IRA and fuck the Americans who supported them.
Last edited by IG-Calibre (2006-09-11 11:49:33)
Last edited by Kmarion (2006-09-11 11:42:13)
Last edited by Poseidon (2006-09-11 13:38:35)
Bibi, can I take that list and put it in my original post?BiBi wrote:
We will never forget those that lost their lives and families that horrible day, God Bless and Rest in Peace.
Last edited by Miller (2006-09-11 15:17:04)
Sandriatinhi wrote:
Then you just don't go as a president. He didn't care at all. (like he knew it)
Last edited by Kmarion (2006-09-11 15:42:26)
B-E-A-utiful!Kmarion wrote:
http://www.oe-hq.com/2/hug.jpgSandriatinhi wrote:
Then you just don't go as a president. He didn't care at all. (like he knew it)
http://www.oe-hq.com/2/thumb.4493660e7a … ccd112.jpg
This is him not caring.
Thats because your canadian.....and from Montreal at that....isnt that mostly a french area?JimmyBotswana wrote:
I saw the two towers collapse so quickly and said "bullshit."
And I still say bullshit.
Last edited by AlbertWesker[RE] (2006-09-11 21:37:31)
Beautifully said, RE4EChrisRedfield[RE] wrote:
I do not ask you to do this for Americans, but for the human beings, the brothers and sisters of your own race, who so many have lost ones dear to them.
First of all i would like to remember all unneccesary lost lives cause of the terrorist attacks, wars of religion, power and money.Miller wrote:
B-E-A-utiful!Kmarion wrote:
http://www.oe-hq.com/2/hug.jpgSandriatinhi wrote:
Then you just don't go as a president. He didn't care at all. (like he knew it)
http://www.oe-hq.com/2/thumb.4493660e7a … ccd112.jpg
This is him not caring.
Last edited by Sandriatinhi (2006-09-12 03:12:51)
No I think YOU don't get my line of thinking. Yes the army protects your freedoms. It does that by merely existing as a deterrent and by shedding blood in battles of self-defence. It doesn't do it by needlessly shipping out to some dustbowl thousands of miles from 'home', starting a war of aggression, creating twice as many terrorists as there were previously, giving the long established terrorists a new base and making every arab in the region incredibly irate due to the impression in their minds that the US are acting imperialistically. It doesn't help that the US claims to want 'freedom' for Iraq and yet calmly overlooks the misery served upon the Palestinians day after day since 1948.usmarine2005 wrote:
You dont get it do you. It is an ALL voluntary military. If people wouldn't volunteer, they would be drafted or forced into service. So yes, they are dying so they can sit home and drink. It is a valid point and the truth hurts sometimes.CameronPoe wrote:
LOL. If you think you are any less likely of being attacked because your fellow countrymen are dying out in some dusty distant country then you have issues. Tell the same thing to the bereaved from the Madrid and London bombings. Offence is not the best defence. DEFENCE is the best defence.rawls2 wrote:
They are dying over there so you and your mate can get shitfaced drunk with out the fear of getting blown up by a islamic terrorist.
It made you afraid to take a plane? Then the film should never have been made. That is exactly what terrorists want. That is what terrorism is, the blowing people up part of it is entirely to create the environment of fear. You are many times more likely to die in a car accident than be killed by terrorists, yet are people afraid to go in cars?deadawakeing wrote:
I just finished watching UNited 93 today, wow I have absoultely no idea what I would do in their situation god bless them , im sorry but that movie hate muslims i hope they all die. Also it made me afraid to take a plane.
I don't think the US went into Iraq for the money from oil. At least not overall (maybe Cheney got big kickbacks from Haliburton for all the contracts they got - money into Cheneys pocket always did keep him happy, why should he care about state costs - it's not his money), the war in Iraq costs the US $1.5 billion a day. How will they make a profit out of that on oil? Oil they don't even have actual control over, influence over, but not actual control. The US can't sell Iraqi oil.Sandriatinhi wrote:
Totally agree, but in our first world we remember the ones who didn't survive.Bertster7 wrote:
So what. That's unrelated.delta4bravo*nl* wrote:
he its not over yet, don't forget that over 22000 us service had injuries some severe others light,, some of those have to life the rest of there life with that handicap.
Lots of those injuries are from Iraq. Which Bush tells us was totally unconnected to Al-Qaeda.
How is any of this relevant?
A couple of thousand people died. That's not such a big deal - much worse stuff happens. The worst of it being ethnic cleansing. The alienation of other nationalities and cultures - a lot like the demonising of muslims happening these days. Virtually all the wars throughout the last century have been about ethnicity, about the belief that one group of people is better than another. 9/11 reinforces my belief that Americans are seen as being in some way special, they aren't. An average American is no more special than a starving child in the 3rd world. Yet no one remembers about the massacres in these countries.
On the other hand compare the WTC with Iraq.
Why are the US involved in Iraq? Yep the MONEY = OIL! You've got it right. Not for the people, cause otherwise there would have been some help in Darfur or Sri Lanka, where people really get butchered. And not a bit supressed like in Iraq. The best statement i've heard: "With 10 percent of the money put into Iraq by the US, they could have helped whole Africa from hunger!"
Please discuss...
How many private trips did he take to the families of fallen soldiers?(look it up)Sandriatinhi wrote:
First of all i would like to remember all unnecessary lost lives cause of the terrorist attacks, wars of religion, power and money.Miller wrote:
B-E-A-utiful!Kmarion wrote:
http://www.oe-hq.com/2/hug.jpg
http://www.oe-hq.com/2/thumb.4493660e7a … ccd112.jpg
This is him not caring.
The pictures really looks caring. And of course, it are his people! But doesn't he HAS to do that in front of a camera? Otherwise he will be flamed by the media.
How many private trips did he make a year again? Golfing or something? And why are there so many Texan (Oil)companies in Iraq when Saddam fell? And why does he keep sending his soldiers to those awful areas? He does care, huh? And why didn't Europe know about those international prisons around the world for terrorists?
How about the foltering there? What about the international propaganda the US pulls out? In the US this is forbidden, but information goes so fast the US has companies whom release propaganda overseas which will certainly reach the US... and so on!
I'm only flaming the policy...not the USA!
Sorry for the offtopic. Oil isn't the big reason, but it's has got to do with it of course. Cause the US thought they will be out of there in a few weeks. Now there's still no peace and Bush can't leave till peace is reached.Bertster7 wrote:
I don't think the US went into Iraq for the money from oil. At least not overall (maybe Cheney got big kickbacks from Haliburton for all the contracts they got - money into Cheneys pocket always did keep him happy, why should he care about state costs - it's not his money), the war in Iraq costs the US $1.5 billion a day. How will they make a profit out of that on oil? Oil they don't even have actual control over, influence over, but not actual control. The US can't sell Iraqi oil.Sandriatinhi wrote:
Totally agree, but in our first world we remember the ones who didn't survive.Bertster7 wrote:
So what. That's unrelated.
Lots of those injuries are from Iraq. Which Bush tells us was totally unconnected to Al-Qaeda.
How is any of this relevant?
A couple of thousand people died. That's not such a big deal - much worse stuff happens. The worst of it being ethnic cleansing. The alienation of other nationalities and cultures - a lot like the demonising of muslims happening these days. Virtually all the wars throughout the last century have been about ethnicity, about the belief that one group of people is better than another. 9/11 reinforces my belief that Americans are seen as being in some way special, they aren't. An average American is no more special than a starving child in the 3rd world. Yet no one remembers about the massacres in these countries.
On the other hand compare the WTC with Iraq.
Why are the US involved in Iraq? Yep the MONEY = OIL! You've got it right. Not for the people, cause otherwise there would have been some help in Darfur or Sri Lanka, where people really get butchered. And not a bit supressed like in Iraq. The best statement i've heard: "With 10 percent of the money put into Iraq by the US, they could have helped whole Africa from hunger!"
Please discuss...
This is getting quite a way off topic though. Maybe a different thread would be better for all this talk of war for oil in Iraq.
So have the British, the french, the Germans, etc.CameronPoe wrote:
It doesn't help that the US claims to want 'freedom' for Iraq and yet calmly overlooks the misery served upon the Palestinians day after day since 1948.
