Of course we made money from WW2. We rebuilt Germany and Japan. Maybe I was a little extreme by saying how did we profit from WW2. We were the only country that was capable of doing so. England was in pieces, France was fucked up as was the rest of Europe. I'm not saying we didnt make money from WW2 all i'm saying is if we didnt the somebody else would have. As far as England, we did sell them weapons and supplies but at a substantially lower cost due to the fact that you were our ally. Hell we even let you pay us back at your own pace. Ok lets just say that your right about those WMD's that were found in Iraq. Do you honestly believe that Saddam had no WMD's? Its been proven he had them, the question is where the hell did it all go? Syria maybe?Vilham wrote:
Sorry to burst your bubble Arabeater but America made huge financial gain from WWII:arabeater wrote:
First of all there was no EU in WW1. Germany vs. rest of Europe.venom6 wrote:
WW1=Getting a lot of money from Eu...you guys sold them bombs and weapons
WW2=Same thing happend again...money and again money
VIETNAM=Testing new weapons and it was during the cold war...enemy was Russia
IRAQ=Usa needs Oil what means money and thats the only thing why they attacked iraq in 2003.Mass destructive weapons...where are they ? Lies all lies...it was a fake reason to start war for OIL...
So stfu..
Next, we gave weapons and supplies to England (who BTW was our ally) at a very low cost. How did we profit in WW2 at all. We were fighting all over the world spending millions of dollars and then were nice enough to help rebuild the countries we had destroyed.
Vietnam was fought to help stop the spreading of communism and stop the VC from killing innocent civilians in S. Vietnam.
Last but not least Iraq. Show me where we have taken any of the oil from Iraq. We buy the oil from Iraq. We do not steal it. I have personally guarded these oil fields in Iraq and can tell you the only people that were taking it were Kuwaiti oil companies that purchased it from Iraq and Iraqi oil compnanies that were taking it to be refined so it could be sold to the US. We have found WMD's in Iraq you twit but for some reason nobody has made a big deal about it. I'll even give you some links. So stfu!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun2006 … _5547.html
1. It lead to huge industrialisation of America, turning it into the rich country it is today.
2. England just paid off our debt from WWII this year. Other countries have yet to do so.
Those "WMD's" found were old shells mainly from the first Gulf war that were tipped with depleted uranium and mustard gas bombs that were also from the first Gulf war, it was all over the British news because Blair tried to claim they were WMD's.
Blair and Bush invaded on the basis that Iraq had WMD's that could hit Europain countries which was a complete and utter lie.
Poll
Should the U.S. sit and a let it happen or start bombing now?
| U.S. shouldn't say anything about others nukes | 31% | 31% - 40 | ||||
| The U.N. should provide warheads to those who want them | 2% | 2% - 3 | ||||
| We should just nuke them now. | 25% | 25% - 33 | ||||
| We should cease all foreign aid and fund Star Wars | 40% | 40% - 51 | ||||
| Total: 127 | ||||||
my point exactly. +1.arabeater wrote:
Yea in any conventional war Israel would stomp the shit outta the arabs. The only way the arabs can beat Israel is to nuke them off the face of the earth, in which case the land would be inhabitable for some time kinda negating the reason for wanting to get rid of Israel.Des.Kmal wrote:
as a very devout Christian. i sure as hell hope it doesnt happen.arabeater wrote:
If that does happen then that region would be fucked from nuclear fallout for years. However I wouldnt be surprised if it happened, by some idiotic radical islamic fucked up jihadist retard group. But if they did do it then maybe they would accidentally kill themselves in the process which would be sweet.
though im sure isreal would stomp ass if it were not a nuke and they didnt get headshotted.
as they have done all the times they have been engaged.
err... tomorrow. i already gave u karma. lol
Add me on Origin for Battlefield 4 fun: DesKmal
Well there own writings and the writing of most religions point to just those same facts. So where is he wrong? Its also pretty palinly written in there Ummm Holy writings that killing christians, jews and westerners is a good thing. Id say hes hit the nail pretty much right on the head.jonsimon wrote:
Once again more unfounded racist and discriminatory generalizations about muslims from ATG.ATG wrote:
I suspect more there would be dancing in the muslim street.
But...if we let them have it sooner or later the world will find out what it means to let Islamofacist have a nuke.
The problem with these people as the see a nuclear doomsday scenario as something they want.
I don't agree with him that often, but that really is the best thing.CameronPoe wrote:
Cease all foreign aid and concentrate on a missile defence system. Simple as. No brainer.
They want nuclear power, not weapons. They aren't going to burn their oil to make power because they can sell it to the rest of the world and make lots of money that way.
Iran also wants nuclear power, not weapons. Iran also isn't going to burn its oil to make power because, like the Arab states, it too can sell it to the rest of the world and make lots of money. Isn't there also a fatwa against nuclear weapons in Iran?
Instead of trying to stop them getting any nuclear technology, the west should be honouring the agreement it signed to provide assistance with the development of nuclear power in those countries. What happened to being true to your word?
Iran also wants nuclear power, not weapons. Iran also isn't going to burn its oil to make power because, like the Arab states, it too can sell it to the rest of the world and make lots of money. Isn't there also a fatwa against nuclear weapons in Iran?
Instead of trying to stop them getting any nuclear technology, the west should be honouring the agreement it signed to provide assistance with the development of nuclear power in those countries. What happened to being true to your word?
They already are here. Nuclear power is also illegal. Bringing in those laws cost us a military alliance with the US (and associated benefits), was the cause of a small act of terrorism by the French government and caused a lot more smaller problems, BUT it was enough for the Russians to stop targetting us with their nukes.sergeriver wrote:
Nukes should be banned for every country in the world, US included. You can't accuse someone of doing the same thing you do.
Those people that subscribe to the theory that because one nation has nukes they have no right to discriminate against anyone else having a nukes do not rationalize very well in my opinion. I have made this analogy before and I'll make it again. Just because the Police have guns does not mean we should go around passing firearms out to everyone. I agree that in a perfect world no one would have this devastating technology but we have to be real when using logic. It's never going to happen. You cant apply the same kind of moral equivalence to everyone. I know there are probably people waiting in line to point out that the US is the only nation that has ever used them. The use of it is debatable in itself with regards to how many lives would have been lost if there was an invasion of Japan.
We have to think in todays times though. There is one thing I do know and that is at that time the bombs fell the term "Mutual Assured Destruction" was non existent. If you don't think that changes the game plan you are seriously mistaken. Even the Anti-American crowd who would like to see it's demise has to wake up and imagine what would happen if someone did take a serious shot like Nuclear weapons on American soil. We are not talking about IED's any more we are talking about ICBM's now. Are you prepared to put your faith on the existence of civilization into the hands of a leader who already has an "Army of Martyrs" ?
We have to think in todays times though. There is one thing I do know and that is at that time the bombs fell the term "Mutual Assured Destruction" was non existent. If you don't think that changes the game plan you are seriously mistaken. Even the Anti-American crowd who would like to see it's demise has to wake up and imagine what would happen if someone did take a serious shot like Nuclear weapons on American soil. We are not talking about IED's any more we are talking about ICBM's now. Are you prepared to put your faith on the existence of civilization into the hands of a leader who already has an "Army of Martyrs" ?
Last edited by Kmarion (2006-11-04 20:18:46)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Try and see it from Irans side. Their next door neighbour has just been invaded on a flimsy premise with no evidence by its arch enemy. If Iraq had had a nuclear arsenal, the US wouldn't have invaded. If I were Iranian, I would be doing everything I could to get nukes to prevent the same thing happening. The deterrent of mutually assured destruction doesn't exist when only one side has them.
Last edited by thanks_champ (2006-11-04 21:47:44)
I say we just blow up every church, mosque, synagogue, temple, and whatever other name there is for religious buildings. We then burn every document of every religion, regardless of age; nothing should remain.
Then we put all religions and religious people on notice. Any continued practice of religion is immediate grounds for the death sentence. That means men, women, and children, regardless of age. DEAD! Lets see how long it lasts then.
Religion in general will be the end of the human species. It doesn't matter. Unless we completely wipe out all religion (christians, jews, muslims, etc.) they will kill us all. They will be the end of human kind. They will artificially bring about their lies of the "End of day".
Then we put all religions and religious people on notice. Any continued practice of religion is immediate grounds for the death sentence. That means men, women, and children, regardless of age. DEAD! Lets see how long it lasts then.
Religion in general will be the end of the human species. It doesn't matter. Unless we completely wipe out all religion (christians, jews, muslims, etc.) they will kill us all. They will be the end of human kind. They will artificially bring about their lies of the "End of day".
Ummm...thats probably the dumbest post I think I've ever read anywhere. How will that solve anything? By abolishing all forms of religion will solve absolutely nothing. People will always find other reasons to fight. I'm pretty sure WW1 and WW2 were not wars based on religion. And dont tell me the Germans killing the jews made it a religious war because thats not why the war started.Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
I say we just blow up every church, mosque, synagogue, temple, and whatever other name there is for religious buildings. We then burn every document of every religion, regardless of age; nothing should remain.
Then we put all religions and religious people on notice. Any continued practice of religion is immediate grounds for the death sentence. That means men, women, and children, regardless of age. DEAD! Lets see how long it lasts then.
Religion in general will be the end of the human species. It doesn't matter. Unless we completely wipe out all religion (christians, jews, muslims, etc.) they will kill us all. They will be the end of human kind. They will artificially bring about their lies of the "End of day".
Would abolishing religion force Israel out of Palestine? Would it disarm nuclear bombs? Would it jam our rifles?Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
I say we just blow up every church, mosque, synagogue, temple, and whatever other name there is for religious buildings. We then burn every document of every religion, regardless of age; nothing should remain.
Then we put all religions and religious people on notice. Any continued practice of religion is immediate grounds for the death sentence. That means men, women, and children, regardless of age. DEAD! Lets see how long it lasts then.
Religion in general will be the end of the human species. It doesn't matter. Unless we completely wipe out all religion (christians, jews, muslims, etc.) they will kill us all. They will be the end of human kind. They will artificially bring about their lies of the "End of day".
It's silly to think conflicts like these are over religion, there may never have been one. Deep down, few humans believe to the point of action, and as such, conflicts must find further motivation than old books.
You guys are so stupid. Yes, there would still be strife in the world. However, at least we can quantify other reasons, such as greed, politics, or even fighting over a woman.
If there was a button I could push that would eliminate all religion, including the people involved, I would do so and not lose 1 second's sleep. And before you say anything more stupid than that which you have already stated, my mother's family is Mormon and my dad's family is Catholic.
Yes, I would become the single largest mass murderer in human history. I would likely be condeming 90% if the worlds population to death. But, if you were to ask me what thing I hate, the thing I dispise most in this entire world, the answer would be simple....RELIGION!!!!
If there was a button I could push that would eliminate all religion, including the people involved, I would do so and not lose 1 second's sleep. And before you say anything more stupid than that which you have already stated, my mother's family is Mormon and my dad's family is Catholic.
Yes, I would become the single largest mass murderer in human history. I would likely be condeming 90% if the worlds population to death. But, if you were to ask me what thing I hate, the thing I dispise most in this entire world, the answer would be simple....RELIGION!!!!
lol....we should rename this part of the forum to how scared can we make ourselves and how blindly can we react to how scared we made ourselves.
Iran's nuclear capabilities are at least 10 years away...
Iran's populace does not all agree on the ultra conservative stance that the leadership has...
US does NOT have the means to assault another other nation, let alone Iran. If we can barely handle Iraq a country with 25million people how in the hell are we going to take on a country who's size is substantially bigger. 70 million people with its infrastructure through out the country...please...wake the fuck up action by us will not be plausible.
Iran's nuclear capabilities are at least 10 years away...
Iran's populace does not all agree on the ultra conservative stance that the leadership has...
US does NOT have the means to assault another other nation, let alone Iran. If we can barely handle Iraq a country with 25million people how in the hell are we going to take on a country who's size is substantially bigger. 70 million people with its infrastructure through out the country...please...wake the fuck up action by us will not be plausible.
lol you are the anti-thesis to what religion stands for....ironicAgent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
You guys are so stupid. Yes, there would still be strife in the world. However, at least we can quantify other reasons, such as greed, politics, or even fighting over a woman.
If there was a button I could push that would eliminate all religion, including the people involved, I would do so and not lose 1 second's sleep. And before you say anything more stupid than that which you have already stated, my mother's family is Mormon and my dad's family is Catholic.
Yes, I would become the single largest mass murderer in human history. I would likely be condeming 90% if the worlds population to death. But, if you were to ask me what thing I hate, the thing I dispise most in this entire world, the answer would be simple....RELIGION!!!!
Your a fucking idiot. If I had a button to push to get rid of all fucking idiots in the world I wouldnt push it because diversity is what makes this world great. I hate fucking idiots but that doesnt mean that I want them all dead or abolished. Hell people such as yourself make me look smart, but what would the world be without a few idiots. You sound like a fucking Nazi. Sometimes you atheists crack me up with the shit you guys say. Lets kill all religions! Why dont you just go join up with your local hate group and let the mass killings begin. You fucking idiot! You give atheism a bad name!Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
You guys are so stupid. Yes, there would still be strife in the world. However, at least we can quantify other reasons, such as greed, politics, or even fighting over a woman.
If there was a button I could push that would eliminate all religion, including the people involved, I would do so and not lose 1 second's sleep. And before you say anything more stupid than that which you have already stated, my mother's family is Mormon and my dad's family is Catholic.
Yes, I would become the single largest mass murderer in human history. I would likely be condeming 90% if the worlds population to death. But, if you were to ask me what thing I hate, the thing I dispise most in this entire world, the answer would be simple....RELIGION!!!!
There is a fine line between being scared, blind and aware, composed.Fen321 wrote:
lol....we should rename this part of the forum to how scared can we make ourselves and how blindly can we react to how scared we made ourselves.
.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I disagree, the US could walk all over Iran, its just hanging around and rebuilding that would be the hard part.Fen321 wrote:
US does NOT have the means to assault another other nation, let alone Iran. If we can barely handle Iraq a country with 25million people how in the hell are we going to take on a country who's size is substantially bigger. 70 million people with its infrastructure through out the country...please...wake the fuck up action by us will not be plausible.
Define assault I guess. Our Navy/Airforce would do what it does for a couple weeks and pave the way for an invasion. Diplomatically the US may not have the means.Pubic wrote:
I disagree, the US could walk all over Iran, its just hanging around and rebuilding that would be the hard part.Fen321 wrote:
US does NOT have the means to assault another other nation, let alone Iran. If we can barely handle Iraq a country with 25million people how in the hell are we going to take on a country who's size is substantially bigger. 70 million people with its infrastructure through out the country...please...wake the fuck up action by us will not be plausible.
I must tell you by no means should Iran be underestimated. In case you did not know they have the largest military in the world in terms of troops. (Well, if you count paramilitary..most dont)
As far as Military spending (You probably have seen this before)
Alot of this is invested in Technology which is really why it is at the forefront.
The problem is no matter how Big and Bad it is the military should never be involved in nation building.
Last edited by Kmarion (2006-11-05 00:26:09)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I agree with that, I'm just sick of people saying that the US won the World War, when there were many other countries involved. Besides, no-one won the war, it was lost when it started...Turquoise wrote:
Good point, and probably true... Russia took most of Eastern Europe right after the war.arabeater wrote:
True, but dont you think that Russia wouldve taken all of Europe if the US wasnt there. I think they wouldve tried and more than likely won. But just my opinion.Gawwad wrote:
The Russians were already winning germany when the US stepped in...
I'm not saying that we won the war all on our own, im just saying that by the US having a pressense in Europe helped defeat Germany and after the war prevented the Soviet Union from taking all of Europe. Which if the US had not been there I think they wouldve done with ease.Gawwad wrote:
I agree with that, I'm just sick of people saying that the US won the World War, when there were many other countries involved. Besides, no-one won the war, it was lost when it started...Turquoise wrote:
Good point, and probably true... Russia took most of Eastern Europe right after the war.arabeater wrote:
True, but dont you think that Russia wouldve taken all of Europe if the US wasnt there. I think they wouldve tried and more than likely won. But just my opinion.
Omg in the first WW Germany,Italy,Austria,Hungary,Bulgary,Romania were fighting against the Uk,France,Russia so you fail by saying only germany against the whole Eu.
After the Lusitania was shoot by german submarines the Usa also joined WW1.And u also should know that the Lusitania was transporting guns,ammo to the Uk so it was a reason to shoot it.
The Usa got money from the 1st and 2nd WW...rebuilding germany ? Yes and germany had to pay to France and the Uk who paid money (loan) back to the Usa so your country just Win from the 2 wars.
I can give you links too...you know read some other websites not the usa ones only...one sided propaganda.
Im european and belive me I know it mostly better.
After the Lusitania was shoot by german submarines the Usa also joined WW1.And u also should know that the Lusitania was transporting guns,ammo to the Uk so it was a reason to shoot it.
The Usa got money from the 1st and 2nd WW...rebuilding germany ? Yes and germany had to pay to France and the Uk who paid money (loan) back to the Usa so your country just Win from the 2 wars.
I can give you links too...you know read some other websites not the usa ones only...one sided propaganda.
Im european and belive me I know it mostly better.
the star wars option was to tempting sry i think the rest of the world needs to start getting ready to do something about them though
Other thing.Why is USA so good ?
In the world Nuclear bomb was used twice in a war and that was the Usa who used it against Japan.
Hirosima and then Nagasaki just why not.The second bomb was not needed.Only Usa was using nuke in the history against ciliv cities.And now they order teh east to stop making bombs.Its like "only the usa can own nuclear bombs..others dont" yeah right.....nc
In the world Nuclear bomb was used twice in a war and that was the Usa who used it against Japan.
Hirosima and then Nagasaki just why not.The second bomb was not needed.Only Usa was using nuke in the history against ciliv cities.And now they order teh east to stop making bombs.Its like "only the usa can own nuclear bombs..others dont" yeah right.....nc
Yes in Iraq the goverment is in conntact with Usa and they will sell u the oil for minimal prize.arabeater wrote:
First of all there was no EU in WW1. Germany vs. rest of Europe.venom6 wrote:
WW1=Getting a lot of money from Eu...you guys sold them bombs and weaponsnorge wrote:
and we had just lots fucking tons of soldiers in WW2, then another 480,000 soldiers in the korean war ended in 1950, and we were starting to engage in the vietnam war. did any of those countries have oil? no so stfu
WW2=Same thing happend again...money and again money
VIETNAM=Testing new weapons and it was during the cold war...enemy was Russia
IRAQ=Usa needs Oil what means money and thats the only thing why they attacked iraq in 2003.Mass destructive weapons...where are they ? Lies all lies...it was a fake reason to start war for OIL...
So stfu..
Next, we gave weapons and supplies to England (who BTW was our ally) at a very low cost. How did we profit in WW2 at all. We were fighting all over the world spending millions of dollars and then were nice enough to help rebuild the countries we had destroyed.
Vietnam was fought to help stop the spreading of communism and stop the VC from killing innocent civilians in S. Vietnam.
Last but not least Iraq. Show me where we have taken any of the oil from Iraq. We buy the oil from Iraq. We do not steal it. I have personally guarded these oil fields in Iraq and can tell you the only people that were taking it were Kuwaiti oil companies that purchased it from Iraq and Iraqi oil compnanies that were taking it to be refined so it could be sold to the US. We have found WMD's in Iraq you twit but for some reason nobody has made a big deal about it. I'll even give you some links. So stfu!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun2006 … _5547.html
Yeah it was also in a film...the Tanks went on ground in Iraq and after the tanks the engineers were looking where to find oil so they can start pumping it out...and bring it home..
Vietnam:Again it was a strategical war for the us to test all kinda weaponst and chemical shit.You know that there are places today in vietnam where nothing is growing in the forrest ?
Because usa used all kinda shitty chemical weaponst...good testing by ruining the earth there.
Last edited by venom6 (2006-11-05 07:04:20)
What a pile of crap. A nation of terrorists? Where did you come up with this? Prove it. You are the one always blaming others of flaming and not providing evidence. Now its your turn to try and prove your mindless slander.Fancy_Pollux wrote:
Wake up, buddy. If Iran gets nukes, they can easily supply them to terrorists (they are a terrorist nation, you know). Terrorists will not hesitate to use nukes and there will be no country to accurately pin the blame on if they do so.-=raska=- wrote:
I voted A
The US intervention in Irak is now a mess.. And I dont want that to be repeated in Iran. I dont think it will nuke USA. Many countries have the nuclear bomb since the cold war and there hasnt been any launch. I think its more a psychological weapon.
It's your turn to wake up, buddy. The US invaded Afghanistan based on a goddamn videotape, where alledgedly Bin Laden takes responsibility for 9/11, and some passports that were more resilient than black boxes. The US invaded Iraq for NO reason at all. Tehran has done no such thing to date.
Next time you characterize somebody, or an entire nation of being terrorists, you had better have some strong evidence proving it.
And for the sake of an argument, I can't believe you're all falling into ATG's little trap here... I mean cmon! Nukes? Does anyone remember Chernobil? The amount of radiation emmited was less than if a nuclear bomb had exploded, yet the incident effected almost the entire European continent. Anyone seriously discussing about nukes clearly does not have any idea of its effects. Not to mention retaliation. Even if Iran or any other country for that matter had nukes (which some of them do *cough NK cough*) they would be in no position of actually using them because that would kick off a chain reaction that would affect the entire planet.
Last edited by oug (2006-11-05 07:53:29)
ƒ³
Why is the US so good? Well because militarily nobody can stop us. We have the most powerful military in the history of the world. Yea we had no choice but to nuke Japan. It was either have 1,000,000 dead marines and troops of drop 2 bombs to end the war. Not much of a choice. The only people that should have nukes are people that can be trusted with them.venom6 wrote:
Other thing.Why is USA so good ?
In the world Nuclear bomb was used twice in a war and that was the Usa who used it against Japan.
Hirosima and then Nagasaki just why not.The second bomb was not needed.Only Usa was using nuke in the history against ciliv cities.And now they order teh east to stop making bombs.Its like "only the usa can own nuclear bombs..others dont" yeah right.....nc