I do not remember that in a period from 1999 till 2004 or even later, there were any news sayin that Iraq attacked kuwait or jordan. I am sure that the resources you would like me to google are from highly credible, independed sources but I just can't do it now. but look at first one: 1.77 tons of uranium - the only uranium iraq could have would be the remains of enriched uranium shells that US used to pound this 3rd world country! And that is why there is A GULF SYNDROME and stuff... how could you support state that deliberatly kills own soldiers prepared, if necessary to die for their country?! What kind of s**te is that?!wannabe_tank_whore wrote:
the "A THREAT TO THE REST OF THE WORLD." could be Kuwait, Iran, Jordan, and many other countries next to Iraq. You're illogical in your thinking. Just because they can't reach Japan doesn't mean the world is not at threat by the WMDs.1234BGD wrote:
In first Gulf War, Saddam might have had WMD and US knew that because they were probably helping him develop it to defend iraq from iran ever since 80's. Also, it was very unlikely that any of that weapons survived the first gulf war. After that, without appropriate support - it is not possible to develop that kind of weapons. The fact is, less than 20 countries in the world have capacity to make such weapons and put them on ICBM's or something AND MAKE THAT CHEMICALS A THREAT TO THE REST OF THE WORLD. Their missiles cound not even reach Europe, not to metion US. The only realistic missile threat to the us can come from Russia and China - forget the rest. It is all in technology. Plust - how they are going to guide their missiles to target?! Tv controlled no, they need a satellite - and who would give them that?! There are another 100 reasons why they lied and they knew that.wannabe_tank_whore wrote:
On October 9, 1998 some members of the U.S. Senate sent a letter to Bill Clinton expressing their concerns about Saddam and his weapons program. That letter contained this paragraph:
"We urge you, after consulting with Congress and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction program."
That letter was signed by Tom Daschle, Carl Levin and John Kerry.
***************************
Bill Clinton, speaking from the Oval Office in 1998:
"Saddam must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons."
***************************
So, did these guys lie?
But, please don't feel personally offended or anything - there is nothing you could do to stop suffering of that people. Supporting the war would be the wrong thing. There are many other ways of exerting pressure on countries. If there was no oil for food programme (which also stuffed pockets of some men) I am sure people would have overthrown Saddam himself. Nothing beats the hunger... but no - greed is enemy of the free world.
Actually speaking of greed - in BF2 greed of my opponents is my ally. I kill a guy, and I see medic running to revive him - greedy medic, wants some points. I do not shoot him before he revives the friend, but toss a grenade... that is how in BF2, greed of oponents is my ally.
Again...
Google these:
• Found: 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium
• Found: 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons
• Found: Roadside bomb loaded with sarin gas
• Found: 1,000 radioactive materials--ideal for radioactive dirty bombs
• Found: 17 chemical warheads--some containing cyclosarin, a nerve agent five times more powerful than sarin
• Found: 1.77 metric tons of enriched uraniumNehil wrote:
Ok, first off: Aren't they allowed to have nuclear power plants now? What's next? They can't have iron cuse it might be used to make a knife? Second, Chemical weapons? Anything is actually chemical, even water you dimwit. Tell me what the found EXACLY! Then the "RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL" well oh shit, a fucking smoke detector is radioactive in small doses HOLY SHIT BLOW UP MY TOWN CUSE I MIGHT MAKE A DIRTY BOMB OUT OF IT!!wannabe_tank_whore wrote:
the "A THREAT TO THE REST OF THE WORLD." could be Kuwait, Iran, Jordan, and many other countries next to Iraq. You're illogical in your thinking. Just because they can't reach Japan doesn't mean the world is not at threat by the WMDs.1234BGD wrote:
In first Gulf War, Saddam might have had WMD and US knew that because they were probably helping him develop it to defend iraq from iran ever since 80's. Also, it was very unlikely that any of that weapons survived the first gulf war. After that, without appropriate support - it is not possible to develop that kind of weapons. The fact is, less than 20 countries in the world have capacity to make such weapons and put them on ICBM's or something AND MAKE THAT CHEMICALS A THREAT TO THE REST OF THE WORLD. Their missiles cound not even reach Europe, not to metion US. The only realistic missile threat to the us can come from Russia and China - forget the rest. It is all in technology. Plust - how they are going to guide their missiles to target?! Tv controlled no, they need a satellite - and who would give them that?! There are another 100 reasons why they lied and they knew that.
But, please don't feel personally offended or anything - there is nothing you could do to stop suffering of that people. Supporting the war would be the wrong thing. There are many other ways of exerting pressure on countries. If there was no oil for food programme (which also stuffed pockets of some men) I am sure people would have overthrown Saddam himself. Nothing beats the hunger... but no - greed is enemy of the free world.
Actually speaking of greed - in BF2 greed of my opponents is my ally. I kill a guy, and I see medic running to revive him - greedy medic, wants some points. I do not shoot him before he revives the friend, but toss a grenade... that is how in BF2, greed of oponents is my ally.
Again...
Google these:
• Found: 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium
• Found: 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons
• Found: Roadside bomb loaded with sarin gas
• Found: 1,000 radioactive materials--ideal for radioactive dirty bombs
• Found: 17 chemical warheads--some containing cyclosarin, a nerve agent five times more powerful than sarin
Can you instead say what was found, when, where so I can see if your bullshitting or bullshitting. If Iraq had any WMD they got it in the 80's from the US, as 12345BGD said. They used it all against Iran. I know of only one country who has WMD and has used it, we should invade that country cuse the might use it against ME! Know of what country I'm thinking of?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle … 872201.stm
• Found: 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons
http://www.boston.com/news/world/articl … d_in_iraq/
• Found: Roadside bomb loaded with sarin gas
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle … 722255.stm
• Found: 1,000 radioactive materials--ideal for radioactive dirty bombs
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar … 4Jul6.html
• Found: 17 chemical warheads--some containing cyclosarin, a nerve agent five times more powerful than sarin
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c … DT0516.DTL
America? i,m not impressed by there tactics in war. American Way of war is the AMOUNT of weapons, soldiers etc etc. but strategies? nah! i have seen them blowing the most amounts of bombs on a german line in italy in WW2 and still they were having problems getting that cathedral LOL! No Tactics No Victory For You.
the only american general i respect is Patton. and i think america is easy in creating a war then solve the fucking problem we have with terrorists. and about Bush , gosh hes the dumbest presiden i ever seen! the only word he can get out of his mouth are : Terrorists. 9/11, Christ, War, IRaq, Saddam, Osama, Al qaida and OIL. and btw World War 3? blame america for it
ps. here a small vid about how dumb the Presidend Bush is http://edge.channel4.com/news/2005/11/w … 0_bush.wmv
(Radio Noise) Fuckerrrrrrr Out
the only american general i respect is Patton. and i think america is easy in creating a war then solve the fucking problem we have with terrorists. and about Bush , gosh hes the dumbest presiden i ever seen! the only word he can get out of his mouth are : Terrorists. 9/11, Christ, War, IRaq, Saddam, Osama, Al qaida and OIL. and btw World War 3? blame america for it
ps. here a small vid about how dumb the Presidend Bush is http://edge.channel4.com/news/2005/11/w … 0_bush.wmv
(Radio Noise) Fuckerrrrrrr Out
hello play game battlefield 2??? and produces
Amen there brother. Many times i think they forget how we saved there ass. Except for england that is our best allyj-bass wrote:
easy there lefty. I think it would be more accurate to say the U.S. has responded to more aggression than any other country. All of Europe would be speaking German right now if not for the United States.
Are you trying to say that it took them only 7 years to develop WMD?! with no money, with no resources - with NO FOOD! they must have the world's greatest sciencists - educated in public schools. How come they always bring up stuff when it is "the right time". What about other threats?! What about a threat from starvation of millions in Africa?! What about that?! Is that a threat?! Aids spreading all over the continent... is that a threat?!And another thing... 1998 was ~7 years after the Gulf war which was in 1991. I had to do the math for you because you seem to be educated by a public school.
If you have any questions or my education I will gladly share some of the points from my CV. Like having studied at Oxford, being fluent in 4 foreign languages 2 of which I speak as native speaker. got my BA as second of the generation at the age of 21. When you beat that, maybe your Harvard education explains that someone is educated IN a public school, not BY a public school. BTW that kind of remarks are just rude and immature and I would expect an apology.
1"• Found: 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle … 872201.stm
• Found: 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons
http://www.boston.com/news/world/articl … d_in_iraq/
• Found: Roadside bomb loaded with sarin gas
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle … 722255.stm
2• Found: 1,000 radioactive materials--ideal for radioactive dirty bombs
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar … 4Jul6.html
3• Found: 17 chemical warheads--some containing cyclosarin, a nerve agent five times more powerful than sarin
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c … .DTL"
Well "1 and 2" are the same and to quote the source "He said it would keep "potentially dangerous nuclear materials out of the hands of terrorists"." And "The material was taken from a former nuclear research facility" That means they aren't any WMD. It was probably material from a nuclear power plant research facility. If you consider that being WMD then even fucking Sweden has a buttload of WMD. I'll ask if I get some from my local power plant.
3, "Terrorists may have been close to obtaining" <- They didnt GET any, the didn't have it. They don't even tell who was selling it! Sounds pretty thin to me, could even be YOU!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle … 872201.stm
• Found: 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons
http://www.boston.com/news/world/articl … d_in_iraq/
• Found: Roadside bomb loaded with sarin gas
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle … 722255.stm
2• Found: 1,000 radioactive materials--ideal for radioactive dirty bombs
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar … 4Jul6.html
3• Found: 17 chemical warheads--some containing cyclosarin, a nerve agent five times more powerful than sarin
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c … .DTL"
Well "1 and 2" are the same and to quote the source "He said it would keep "potentially dangerous nuclear materials out of the hands of terrorists"." And "The material was taken from a former nuclear research facility" That means they aren't any WMD. It was probably material from a nuclear power plant research facility. If you consider that being WMD then even fucking Sweden has a buttload of WMD. I'll ask if I get some from my local power plant.
3, "Terrorists may have been close to obtaining" <- They didnt GET any, the didn't have it. They don't even tell who was selling it! Sounds pretty thin to me, could even be YOU!
When Saddam has a scientist's family held hostage at gunpoint you would be surprised how fast one could produce results. And who said they had to develop them? You can buy anything you want with money. Ask the german and france douche bags that got paid in the oil for food program. What is the threat from millions starving in Africa? The US, British, and Australia supplies thousands of tons of food to Africa but the corrupt governments of africa destroy it or don't give it out. AIDS is a threat? Since when? Try not having sex with multiple partners. That should stop that 'spread' very quickly. Again, very illogical in your thinking.1234BGD wrote:
Are you trying to say that it took them only 7 years to develop WMD?! with no money, with no resources - with NO FOOD! they must have the world's greatest sciencists - educated in public schools. How come they always bring up stuff when it is "the right time". What about other threats?! What about a threat from starvation of millions in Africa?! What about that?! Is that a threat?! Aids spreading all over the continent... is that a threat?!And another thing... 1998 was ~7 years after the Gulf war which was in 1991. I had to do the math for you because you seem to be educated by a public school.
If you have any questions or my education I will gladly share some of the points from my CV. Like having studied at Oxford, being fluent in 4 foreign languages 2 of which I speak as native speaker. got my BA as second of the generation at the age of 21. When you beat that, maybe your Harvard education explains that someone is educated IN a public school, not BY a public school. BTW that kind of remarks are just rude and immature and I would expect an apology.
WOW! Where do i start??? Iraq doesn't have a nuclear power plant so why would they need a research facility? Also, once you have nuclear rods it takes several months to make those rods into weapons grade.Nehil wrote:
1"• Found: 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle … 872201.stm
• Found: 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons
http://www.boston.com/news/world/articl … d_in_iraq/
• Found: Roadside bomb loaded with sarin gas
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle … 722255.stm
2• Found: 1,000 radioactive materials--ideal for radioactive dirty bombs
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar … 4Jul6.html
3• Found: 17 chemical warheads--some containing cyclosarin, a nerve agent five times more powerful than sarin
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c … .DTL"
Well "1 and 2" are the same and to quote the source "He said it would keep "potentially dangerous nuclear materials out of the hands of terrorists"." And "The material was taken from a former nuclear research facility" That means they aren't any WMD. It was probably material from a nuclear power plant research facility. If you consider that being WMD then even fucking Sweden has a buttload of WMD. I'll ask if I get some from my local power plant.
3, "Terrorists may have been close to obtaining" <- They didnt GET any, the didn't have it. They don't even tell who was selling it! Sounds pretty thin to me, could even be YOU!
What color is the sky? What color is the sky when it's raining outside? Just because terrorist didn't get their hands on any WMDs (except the sarin gas roadside bomb) doesn't mean the WMDs didn't exist. BTW, the answer is blue to both questions. Rain clouds are gray but the sky is still blue.
So to sum it up, we should not waste money to save those who already have AIDS now? Damn, that's smart! And why should one only have sex with one person? Becuse it's that way in your culture? Becuse of your religion? What about the mormons? Nah, fuck them! They are savages!wannabe_tank_whore wrote:
When Saddam has a scientist's family held hostage at gunpoint you would be surprised how fast one could produce results. And who said they had to develop them? You can buy anything you want with money. Ask the german and france douche bags that got paid in the oil for food program. What is the threat from millions starving in Africa? The US, British, and Australia supplies thousands of tons of food to Africa but the corrupt governments of africa destroy it or don't give it out. AIDS is a threat? Since when? Try not having sex with multiple partners. That should stop that 'spread' very quickly. Again, very illogical in your thinking.1234BGD wrote:
Are you trying to say that it took them only 7 years to develop WMD?! with no money, with no resources - with NO FOOD! they must have the world's greatest sciencists - educated in public schools. How come they always bring up stuff when it is "the right time". What about other threats?! What about a threat from starvation of millions in Africa?! What about that?! Is that a threat?! Aids spreading all over the continent... is that a threat?!And another thing... 1998 was ~7 years after the Gulf war which was in 1991. I had to do the math for you because you seem to be educated by a public school.
If you have any questions or my education I will gladly share some of the points from my CV. Like having studied at Oxford, being fluent in 4 foreign languages 2 of which I speak as native speaker. got my BA as second of the generation at the age of 21. When you beat that, maybe your Harvard education explains that someone is educated IN a public school, not BY a public school. BTW that kind of remarks are just rude and immature and I would expect an apology.
WAIT A SECOND, about the part with nuclear research facility. So, Iraq has no nuclear power plants (I doubt that) then they might need something to help them develop one...maybe a FUCKING NUCLEAR RESEARCH FACILITY!?!?!? I'dont really know, I don't have and fancy degree to wave with. Just a guess.
Last edited by Nehil (2005-11-22 06:37:14)
So, a simple and economical answer to the spread of AIDS couldn't and shouldn't solve the problem just because they want to have sex with numerous people?? WOW good thinking there. How much money should be spent on AIDS? Bush has budgeted 10 Billion. How much has your country sent? Why so silent on that one? Why won't you ridicule your own country? Just another America basher.Nehil wrote:
So to sum it up, we should not waste money to save those who already have AIDS now? Damn, that's smart! And why should one only have sex with one person? Becuse it's that way in your culture? Becuse of your religion? What about the mormons? Nah, fuck them! They are savages!wannabe_tank_whore wrote:
When Saddam has a scientist's family held hostage at gunpoint you would be surprised how fast one could produce results. And who said they had to develop them? You can buy anything you want with money. Ask the german and france douche bags that got paid in the oil for food program. What is the threat from millions starving in Africa? The US, British, and Australia supplies thousands of tons of food to Africa but the corrupt governments of africa destroy it or don't give it out. AIDS is a threat? Since when? Try not having sex with multiple partners. That should stop that 'spread' very quickly. Again, very illogical in your thinking.1234BGD wrote:
Are you trying to say that it took them only 7 years to develop WMD?! with no money, with no resources - with NO FOOD! they must have the world's greatest sciencists - educated in public schools. How come they always bring up stuff when it is "the right time". What about other threats?! What about a threat from starvation of millions in Africa?! What about that?! Is that a threat?! Aids spreading all over the continent... is that a threat?!
If you have any questions or my education I will gladly share some of the points from my CV. Like having studied at Oxford, being fluent in 4 foreign languages 2 of which I speak as native speaker. got my BA as second of the generation at the age of 21. When you beat that, maybe your Harvard education explains that someone is educated IN a public school, not BY a public school. BTW that kind of remarks are just rude and immature and I would expect an apology.
You need to really think about personal responsibility. When you can define it and use it in a sentence, you're half way there.
OMFG... seriously you have to stop debating this 1234BGD guy. He is from Sweden. The Swedes are the biggest bunch of pussies in the world. If there was a country where every single person was named Labia Vagina, Sweden would still beat them out for having more pussies living there. The last time Sweden ever helped out in the International Community (except in a coward pussy way) was when Napolean was making his bid for world domination. You want facts. here you go............................
- Sweden harbors war criminals saving them from prosecution. These war criminals included Nazis and most currently Afghanies, Iraqies, and other terrosist groups. The Swedish Goverment doesn't go as far as to sanction harboring terrorists, but they only assign one person for the whole country to look into it. ??? Believe?
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/4C3311B8-7F11-48C5-9CD2-DFDECA17FF12.htm
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/124006.php
How about Swedens view of WW2
Sweden during World War II
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The policy of Sweden during World War II was to remain neutral. The Swedish neutrality had been in use for more than a century, since the end of the Napoleonic Wars.
When hostilities began on 1 September 1939, the fate of Sweden was unclear. Eventually, only five nations were capable of sustaining a policy of neutrality throughout the entire war, even though 20 nations had held a policy of neutrality in September 1939. Sweden was one of those countries able to maintain this delicate balance and avoid engagement in the European Theatre. Sweden owed this to its northerly location in the Scandinavian Peninsula, its long-held neutral stance in international relations, a dedicated military build-up and to an unpredictable course of events which went in its favour. Another factor was that the Swedish government made concessions to Nazi Germany, such as allowing the Wehrmacht to use Swedish railways to transport an infantry division from Norway to Finland and to transport soldiers on leave between Norway and Germany
My favorite is the last part about helping transport Nazi divisions from Norway to Finland and on leave between Norway and Germany......... can anyone say PUSSY.
I am sure there will be alot of replies from the Swedes but my American Ass doesn't GIVE A @*%$. Grow some balls and help out in the world.
- Sweden harbors war criminals saving them from prosecution. These war criminals included Nazis and most currently Afghanies, Iraqies, and other terrosist groups. The Swedish Goverment doesn't go as far as to sanction harboring terrorists, but they only assign one person for the whole country to look into it. ??? Believe?
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/4C3311B8-7F11-48C5-9CD2-DFDECA17FF12.htm
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/124006.php
How about Swedens view of WW2
Sweden during World War II
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The policy of Sweden during World War II was to remain neutral. The Swedish neutrality had been in use for more than a century, since the end of the Napoleonic Wars.
When hostilities began on 1 September 1939, the fate of Sweden was unclear. Eventually, only five nations were capable of sustaining a policy of neutrality throughout the entire war, even though 20 nations had held a policy of neutrality in September 1939. Sweden was one of those countries able to maintain this delicate balance and avoid engagement in the European Theatre. Sweden owed this to its northerly location in the Scandinavian Peninsula, its long-held neutral stance in international relations, a dedicated military build-up and to an unpredictable course of events which went in its favour. Another factor was that the Swedish government made concessions to Nazi Germany, such as allowing the Wehrmacht to use Swedish railways to transport an infantry division from Norway to Finland and to transport soldiers on leave between Norway and Germany
My favorite is the last part about helping transport Nazi divisions from Norway to Finland and on leave between Norway and Germany......... can anyone say PUSSY.
I am sure there will be alot of replies from the Swedes but my American Ass doesn't GIVE A @*%$. Grow some balls and help out in the world.
Last edited by CausticMarmot (2005-11-22 06:49:13)
http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php … Itemid=182
Wannabe_tank_whore, take a good look.
It just makes me wanna cry.
How much does Sweden spend on AIDS? I have no idea. I don't bash america for fun. I bash it becuse I know there are smart people in the USA (including you) that could use thire power to make something good, but can't becuse you're being manipulated by your politicans. Open your eyes!
One thing I can tell you about Swedens expenses is this:
$0 - The number of dollars spent on abroad wars.
Wannabe_tank_whore, take a good look.
It just makes me wanna cry.
How much does Sweden spend on AIDS? I have no idea. I don't bash america for fun. I bash it becuse I know there are smart people in the USA (including you) that could use thire power to make something good, but can't becuse you're being manipulated by your politicans. Open your eyes!
One thing I can tell you about Swedens expenses is this:
$0 - The number of dollars spent on abroad wars.
Yes I live in the US, I have a I have a degree in History and a Minor in Military History. While the German Nuclear Program was not a total success by 1945, given more time the conclusion by most professionals is the Germans would have developed a Nuclear weapon.SlartyBartFast wrote:
RC-combat...let me guess you reside in th US? Interesting speculation. I understood that many German scientist went to the US (by thier choiceor not I don't know) to work on the US space program (later to become NASA). These guys were working on jet planes, with some limited sucess, in order to reclaim the skies, by gaining dominance in the air for the Luftwaffe. Whilst they did have a nuclear program I don't remember any great success. I just can't see your connection to the Germans developing and using Nuclear weapons had the US not been involved in WWII, but you may be able to educate me
So here is how it goes if the US had stayed Neutral.
1. There would have been no Lend-Lease Program between the US and UK/Russia. Without this supply of munitions, medical supplies, petrol, airplanes, and armor the UK and Russia would not have been able to hold on until the arrival of the US.
2. While Russia may have been able to counter-attack, the Germans would have been able to shift more resources to that front eventaully it most likely have stalemated into a trench warfare situation. The UK would have been under siege and slowly starved to death without ever mounting the resources or man power to invade.
3. The French, Viche France had already capitulated and while the french resistance was a thorn in the Germans side, that is all it was as they could never mount a true offensive versus the Nazi War Machine.
4. German Scientists, would have had years longer to advance Air, Armor, Rocket, and Nuclear Research. And Hitler has proven he would have employed any new weapon that he believed would hurt his enemies.
5. The 8th Air Force would not have pounded the most industrialized country in Europe into dust, therefore allowing the Germans to continued
The US provided the means of supply for the UK from 1939 until after the end of the War. Without this the islands under siege would have fell there is no doubt. Russia would most likely have survived but it's Eastern Provinces most likely including Moscow would have fell.
Through the use of Lend-Lease and the Supply of troops, the timeline for reasearch the Nazi's had was drastically shortened. Without it the US would have never developed our own Nuclear Program. People ask whay about the Japs, we still would have a Nuclear Program because of them. While this is an opinion most likely it would not be a true one. The US Nuclear Weapon Program was spurred on by Intelligence gathered on the German Program. Also if the US shifted its full resources to the War in the Pacific, Nuclear arms would not have been needed as the Japs could not have fought the US successfully for long. The Japs were almost positive if they attacked us we would get involved in the war in Europe, many of their Admirals and Generals warned Tojo that if we did not get involved in Europe that their Empire was surely doomed.
Hey, you forgot that we sold steel to the natzis too! Yes, all of the above is true about Sweden. That's how this country became rich. But what should we have done? Go to war with 2000 soldiers? So that the natzi could kill all civilians too? Yes, let us grow some balls, if you first fill your head with other then air. What we did during the second world war thats strangely not mentioned here is that we accepted opressed people from Germany/Poland during wartime with open arms.CausticMarmot wrote:
OMFG... seriously you have to stop debating this 1234BGD guy. He is from Sweden. The Swedes are the biggest bunch of pussies in the world. If there was a country where every single person was named Labia Vagina, Sweden would still beat them out for having more pussies living there. The last time Sweden ever helped out in the International Community (except in a coward pussy way) was when Napolean was making his bid for world domination. You want facts. here you go............................
- Sweden harbors war criminals saving them from prosecution. These war criminals included Nazis and most currently Afghanies, Iraqies, and other terrosist groups. The Swedish Goverment doesn't go as far as to sanction harboring terrorists, but they only assign one person for the whole country to look into it. ??? Believe?
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ … 17FF12.htm
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/124006.php
How about Swedens view of WW2
Sweden during World War II
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The policy of Sweden during World War II was to remain neutral. The Swedish neutrality had been in use for more than a century, since the end of the Napoleonic Wars.
When hostilities began on 1 September 1939, the fate of Sweden was unclear. Eventually, only five nations were capable of sustaining a policy of neutrality throughout the entire war, even though 20 nations had held a policy of neutrality in September 1939. Sweden was one of those countries able to maintain this delicate balance and avoid engagement in the European Theatre. Sweden owed this to its northerly location in the Scandinavian Peninsula, its long-held neutral stance in international relations, a dedicated military build-up and to an unpredictable course of events which went in its favour. Another factor was that the Swedish government made concessions to Nazi Germany, such as allowing the Wehrmacht to use Swedish railways to transport an infantry division from Norway to Finland and to transport soldiers on leave between Norway and Germany
My favorite is the last part about helping transport Nazi divisions from Norway to Finland and on leave between Norway and Germany......... can anyone say PUSSY.
I am sure there will be alot of replies from the Swedes but my American Ass doesn't GIVE A @*%$. Grow some balls and help out in the world.
You seem to read what you want to see.wannabe_tank_whore wrote:
When Saddam has a scientist's family held hostage at gunpoint you would be surprised how fast one could produce results. And who said they had to develop them? You can buy anything you want with money. Ask the german and france douche bags that got paid in the oil for food program. What is the threat from millions starving in Africa? The US, British, and Australia supplies thousands of tons of food to Africa but the corrupt governments of africa destroy it or don't give it out. AIDS is a threat? Since when? Try not having sex with multiple partners. That should stop that 'spread' very quickly. Again, very illogical in your thinking.
1. Have you got any evidence that this man's family was at gunpoint. Have you seen that?! How can you be sure?! Or u saw it on TV and decided that it was the truth?!
2. Where did saddam get the money from?! Not the US, surely....
3. Now you revail your true selfish little nature - the threat of starving millions is threat to THEM. Same threat, to loose their lives as Jordanians had. However, their threat is real. Why you don't care about wars in Africa and poverty there? what are thousands of tons of food for a continents that has more people than europe?! the government are corrupt because they want to be like people somewhere esle - like in us or Europe and they need to afford it. Their country can not afford it to pay them that well and that is why they are corrupt. They are impatient victims of their greed which is ultimately inflated by people like yourself - "look what I've got" type of people. BTW they would not destroy it (who's illogical now) but sell it - because they are corrupt.
4. Having PROTECTED AND SAFE sex with multiple partners is the best thing in the world, it is like speaking foreign languages, tasting different cusines, it is like widening your views on the world! Like it outscores BF2 a zillion times. Keyword - safe and protected. That means EDUCATION and PROTECTION, which costs money and don't you tell me, that you can't pay! Did you know that US is, in percentage, of their GDP one of "least caring countries" in the world. Just compare US and Norways expenditure in percentage of their gdp for aid and you will see how caring you are!
Wannabe, face it - no matter what you say, you can not persuade me that your country is doing ANYTHING for the better tomorrow of the world in which we all live. I mean, of course, I could change my views - I just do not think that you have that capacity to make me change my views. Maybe, public education has something to do with it. BTW, in many countries in the world, public eduction is quite good. I remember, students from Russian public schools absolutely ruled in many subject, like physics and some other things... or is it the US Education underfunded so we, rest of the world, have to deal with people like you?!
Just for the record I am from Belgrade, Serbia and I would give you and your friend wannabe 50 bucks each if you know where that is without consulting google firstCausticMarmot wrote:
OMFG... seriously you have to stop debating this 1234BGD guy. He is from Sweden. The Swedes are the biggest bunch of pussies in the world. If there was a country where every single person was named Labia Vagina, Sweden would still beat them out for having more pussies living there. The last time Sweden ever helped out in the International Community (except in a coward pussy way) was when Napolean was making his bid for world domination. You want facts. here you go............................
- Sweden harbors war criminals saving them from prosecution. These war criminals included Nazis and most currently Afghanies, Iraqies, and other terrosist groups. The Swedish Goverment doesn't go as far as to sanction harboring terrorists, but they only assign one person for the whole country to look into it. ??? Believe?
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ … 17FF12.htm
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/124006.php
How about Swedens view of WW2
Sweden during World War II
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The policy of Sweden during World War II was to remain neutral. The Swedish neutrality had been in use for more than a century, since the end of the Napoleonic Wars.
When hostilities began on 1 September 1939, the fate of Sweden was unclear. Eventually, only five nations were capable of sustaining a policy of neutrality throughout the entire war, even though 20 nations had held a policy of neutrality in September 1939. Sweden was one of those countries able to maintain this delicate balance and avoid engagement in the European Theatre. Sweden owed this to its northerly location in the Scandinavian Peninsula, its long-held neutral stance in international relations, a dedicated military build-up and to an unpredictable course of events which went in its favour. Another factor was that the Swedish government made concessions to Nazi Germany, such as allowing the Wehrmacht to use Swedish railways to transport an infantry division from Norway to Finland and to transport soldiers on leave between Norway and Germany
My favorite is the last part about helping transport Nazi divisions from Norway to Finland and on leave between Norway and Germany......... can anyone say PUSSY.
I am sure there will be alot of replies from the Swedes but my American Ass doesn't GIVE A @*%$. Grow some balls and help out in the world.
That, unfortunately, couldn't be more true...comes down to the greater good...when there is only one country that can/will step in to do what it takes to satisfy the greater good it is their moral obligation as human beings to do so...kilroy0097 wrote:
If we do help we are considered war mongers who can't keep our noses out of other people's business. If we do not help then we are considered horribly callous inhumane monsters who do not care about the suffering of others.
dshak wrote:
ug. I will say only this.... Iraq is not Vietnam, its nothing like Vietnam, not even close... not the same ball park, not the same game, not even the same sport. can't even watch it on the same channel. Iraq is something different, but Vietnam it ain't.
- the fundamental difference, the majority of Vietnamese did not support US intervention and the "Vietnamese Government" we endorsed and fought for did not represent the population at all. in Iraq the majority of people were brutally oppressed under the regime of Saddam and they welcomed liberation, regardless of how the media attempts to slant it. In Vietnam we were fighting Vietnamese on their home turf, in Iraq a majority, yes MAJORITY, of the insurgents fighting us today aren't even Iraqi. Don't take my word for it, do a little research of your own.
Personally, I think generalizing two totally different conflicts like this is disrespectful to both the men who died in Vietnam and the men dying in Iraq. You can't just strip an event of all of its historical context to make a cheap soundbite and a 45 cent bumper sticker. Its a totally innacurate comparison and nothing short of bastardizing history.
I'm too tired to respond to the rest of this stuff, except to say life would be a lot different in EVERY part of the world had the US not been invovled in WWII, and its riduculous to call us the biggest aggressors of the last century when twice there was a GLOBAL CONFLICT caused by the krauts. I'm sorry, but Korea and Vietnam don't hold a candle to WWI and WWII, I'm afraid the bratworsts take the the title of greatest aggressors of the last century right to the bank.
Finally, in true spirit of my typical posts... I have to scold that guy above, South Vietnam???? Pretty much every single aspect of your post, intelligent and meaningful or not, flies right out the window when you say "South Vietnam wouldn't be possible today either." If you're going to talk about something as if you are educated on the subject, do everyone a favor and first make sure you ARE educated on the subject.
dshak, thanks...you saved me a lot of typingdshak wrote:
holy crap dude...
I want to make sure I read that right... hitler had a reason, and it was better than the reasons bush and blair gave for going into Iraq? I'm actually genuinely scared to ask what, within the confines of your mind, that better reason was...
I can't believe you would make a statement like that. thats disgusting. I got sick to my stomach when I read that. I really don't care what you think of Bush, America, Iraq, or anything else for that matter. What a truly, truly, horrible thing to say.
I'm not Jewish, but my grandfather was... my family tree only has branches on one half because of hitler and his better reasons. You win two awards with your post.
1) saying that the American intervention in WWII helped is clearly the understatement of the century.
2) comparing the US intervention in Iraq to Hitlers invasion of Poland, and stating that Hitler was more justified in his actions is the most uneducated, ignorant, and maginifcently assanine thing ever posted on this forum.
As far as the swedish intervention in this thread, weak at best...i think your best option at this point is to spend your time (which is not used on anything exept helping yourselves) doing some research before you get into conversations that you have a) no experience with and b) have no knowledge about...don't criticize a country or government if you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, it makes you look ignorant...when you are in a country that cares for noone but it's self it's easy to get wrapped up in the "they shouldn't have done that" or "it was all about oil" etc., but the facts about the state of Iraq before US troops went in is well documented, the treatment of the Iraqi people of any other religous faction other than that of Saddam is well documented, not only well documented but absolutely disgusting and horrible...to claim that Iraq, or should I say Saddam didn't have the money to develop WMDs is absolutely idiotic...and to hold the US in contempt for going into Iraq and ending decades of genocide, then turn around and say we should be in Africa solving all their problems is beautiful, so now it's ok to get involved in another countries affairs, or isn't it...just sounds like a lot more double talk from the perspective of someone that finds comfort sitting on the outside looking in...
Why don't you make some effort to end other decade long genocides, like in Sudan?!||BFA||xZeler8 wrote:
As far as the swedish intervention in this thread, weak at best...i think your best option at this point is to spend your time (which is not used on anything exept helping yourselves) doing some research before you get into conversations that you have a) no experience with and b) have no knowledge about...don't criticize a country or government if you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, it makes you look ignorant...when you are in a country that cares for noone but it's self it's easy to get wrapped up in the "they shouldn't have done that" or "it was all about oil" etc., but the facts about the state of Iraq before US troops went in is well documented, the treatment of the Iraqi people of any other religous faction other than that of Saddam is well documented, not only well documented but absolutely disgusting and horrible...to claim that Iraq, or should I say Saddam didn't have the money to develop WMDs is absolutely idiotic...and to hold the US in contempt for going into Iraq and ending decades of genocide, then turn around and say we should be in Africa solving all their problems is beautiful, so now it's ok to get involved in another countries affairs, or isn't it...just sounds like a lot more double talk from the perspective of someone that finds comfort sitting on the outside looking in...
Lucky us, europeans, our debate counterparts are all PhDs in international politics and similar stuff. Phd's from the university of CNN....
gotta go - it was pleasure debating with you gentlmen. will have pleasure to poison you with lead on our first bf2 encounter enjoy...
Yes, damn, please teach ME about ignorance! Sorry but no, USA is the most ignorant country in the world.||BFA||xZeler8 wrote:
As far as the swedish intervention in this thread, weak at best...i think your best option at this point is to spend your time (which is not used on anything exept helping yourselves) doing some research before you get into conversations that you have a) no experience with and b) have no knowledge about...don't criticize a country or government if you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, it makes you look ignorant...when you are in a country that cares for noone but it's self it's easy to get wrapped up in the "they shouldn't have done that" or "it was all about oil" etc., but the facts about the state of Iraq before US troops went in is well documented, the treatment of the Iraqi people of any other religous faction other than that of Saddam is well documented, not only well documented but absolutely disgusting and horrible...to claim that Iraq, or should I say Saddam didn't have the money to develop WMDs is absolutely idiotic...and to hold the US in contempt for going into Iraq and ending decades of genocide, then turn around and say we should be in Africa solving all their problems is beautiful, so now it's ok to get involved in another countries affairs, or isn't it...just sounds like a lot more double talk from the perspective of someone that finds comfort sitting on the outside looking in...
About the treatment of civilians in Iraq, it's true they were not treated good. Heard that 1/3 of the Iraq population think that it was better when Saddam ruled then today? Maybe that's becuse over 10.000 civilians were killed, thats 3 times your horrible 911. So does that mean they can start 6 diffrent wars? (Iraq&Afghanistanx3) Or maybe you fucked up the contry? There are suicide bombings every day, shootings in the streets. The whole infrastructure is fucked up now. Your going to mess up the country and leave it. Heard of Vietnam? And helping out countrys and invading them is not the same thing, not matter what you americans think. Get off your fat asses and take a look around, the world is on fire, buring under the siege of USA. A crusade for oil under the name of "Freedom Inc." Take your freedom fries and shove it.
Last edited by Nehil (2005-11-22 07:43:03)
>1. Have you got any evidence that this man's family was at gunpoint. Have you seen that?! How can you be sure?! Or u saw it on TV and decided that it was the truth?!1234BGD wrote:
You seem to read what you want to see.wannabe_tank_whore wrote:
When Saddam has a scientist's family held hostage at gunpoint you would be surprised how fast one could produce results. And who said they had to develop them? You can buy anything you want with money. Ask the german and france douche bags that got paid in the oil for food program. What is the threat from millions starving in Africa? The US, British, and Australia supplies thousands of tons of food to Africa but the corrupt governments of africa destroy it or don't give it out. AIDS is a threat? Since when? Try not having sex with multiple partners. That should stop that 'spread' very quickly. Again, very illogical in your thinking.
1. Have you got any evidence that this man's family was at gunpoint. Have you seen that?! How can you be sure?! Or u saw it on TV and decided that it was the truth?!
2. Where did saddam get the money from?! Not the US, surely....
3. Now you revail your true selfish little nature - the threat of starving millions is threat to THEM. Same threat, to loose their lives as Jordanians had. However, their threat is real. Why you don't care about wars in Africa and poverty there? what are thousands of tons of food for a continents that has more people than europe?! the government are corrupt because they want to be like people somewhere esle - like in us or Europe and they need to afford it. Their country can not afford it to pay them that well and that is why they are corrupt. They are impatient victims of their greed which is ultimately inflated by people like yourself - "look what I've got" type of people. BTW they would not destroy it (who's illogical now) but sell it - because they are corrupt.
4. Having PROTECTED AND SAFE sex with multiple partners is the best thing in the world, it is like speaking foreign languages, tasting different cusines, it is like widening your views on the world! Like it outscores BF2 a zillion times. Keyword - safe and protected. That means EDUCATION and PROTECTION, which costs money and don't you tell me, that you can't pay! Did you know that US is, in percentage, of their GDP one of "least caring countries" in the world. Just compare US and Norways expenditure in percentage of their gdp for aid and you will see how caring you are!
Wannabe, face it - no matter what you say, you can not persuade me that your country is doing ANYTHING for the better tomorrow of the world in which we all live. I mean, of course, I could change my views - I just do not think that you have that capacity to make me change my views. Maybe, public education has something to do with it. BTW, in many countries in the world, public eduction is quite good. I remember, students from Russian public schools absolutely ruled in many subject, like physics and some other things... or is it the US Education underfunded so we, rest of the world, have to deal with people like you?!
By your own logic you rebut your own points. Have you searched for WMDs in Iraq? Have you even been to Iraq? NO! You see and read and take it for the truth and now you accuse me of the same? WOW how the world would be so much better if the pot stopped calling the kettle black. Utter hypocrisy!
2. Gee... France, Germany, Russia and countless others didn't buy oil from Iraq?? Learn to think first.
3. I do care but what should be done? You want us to give more food? More money? We've given more food and money than any country in the world, combined. You don't want us to topple another regime so there is nothing more we can do. Your hypocrisy runs deep my friend.
4. Well just have to put condom dispensers everywhere instead of giving 10 billion then.
You're right, you are too ignorant to know what all America has done for the world.
So now I turn it to you, what has your country done? Again, silence...
Just a question to those who believe America should stay out of the world's affairs.
Do you get a flu shot and why?
Do you get a flu shot and why?
Well for one thing we dont invade %random country%. We do donate money but I can't give you any numbers (yet). If you checked out the page I linked to earlier you can see that if you had not started the war in Iraq you could have fully funded the world-wide AIDS programs for 22 years. Instead you drink your beer and eat your freedom fries. Sure you do some (minimal) good in the world, but that ain't the presidents doing. I'll be back after my patriotic meal of freedom toast, until then please don't invade any other country even tho you have the biggest hardon for war.wannabe_tank_whore wrote:
So now I turn it to you, what has your country done? Again, silence...
I find it terribly ironic that an anti-war person plays a game based on war where the objective is to kill your opponent to secure a control point...Nehil wrote:
Well for one thing we dont invade %random country%. We do donate money but I can't give you any numbers (yet). If you checked out the page I linked to earlier you can see that if you had not started the war in Iraq you could have fully funded the world-wide AIDS programs for 22 years. Instead you drink your beer and eat your freedom fries. Sure you do some (minimal) good in the world, but that ain't the presidents doing. I'll be back after my patriotic meal of freedom toast, until then please don't invade any other country even tho you have the biggest hardon for war.wannabe_tank_whore wrote:
So now I turn it to you, what has your country done? Again, silence...
Yep, we're the aggressor alright. After all, we invaded France in 1917 and 1944, Germany in 1818 and 1944. Damn we Yankee Imperialists for interfering in the Eurpoean wars. Damn us for stopping German U-Boats from starving the English twice. We should be brought up on charges in the World Court for ridding Norway of Quisling and France of the Vishay.SlartyBartFast wrote:
Interesting opinion j-bass. I would actually argue that reason all of Europe is not speaking German is largely due to the British, French & Russian forces and the reason Australia (and the rest of the Asia-Pacific rim) is not speaking Japanese is largely due to the US. The battle of the Coral Sea (can't remeber if before or after Midaway) probably saved Australia from invasion. So thanks for that! Don't get me wrong, being from Down Under I am not in love with the Brits or the US (the Brits have used us as cannon fodder...ever heard of Gallipoli? and we usually just blindly follw the US regardless).
I don't see the US as an agressor. I do think that what gets up the nose of non-US people is that they see the US as a self proclaimed Judge, Jury & Executioner of the world...e.g. Your form of Government is a dictactorship and this is wrong you should have a democracy, so we will overthrow the dictatorship and install a democratic government. Who is to say this is right? This is an observation not an opinion.
Of the recent conflicts Desert Storm was required. Saddam (sic?) had invaded Kuwait and his forces were raping and pilaging that country. I think the mistake here was not continuing on and rolling the Tanks into Bagdad and ousting Sadam then, and then leave them to implent a new dictator. I am sure the new dictator having seen what happended to the previous would have been very careful. This didn't happen as this was a UN action and the UN mandate was to remove them from Kuwait
As for the recent conflict, yes Saddam is an evil, evil but did the coalition (Australia included) make the right decision in the means to remove him? I do find it Ironic that in the Desert Storm conflict the UN mandate was followed to the letter, yet this time it was ignored (they said don't do it), but the Brits, US Australia, Spain, etc still went ahead.
In the end I am very glad to be Down Under....nicely isolated from it all and nearly everyone forgets about us!! Very handy in the current world climate
Damn, we should be punished for supplying Europe with arms and raw materials during the Second World War. The Brits flying P-51 Mustangs, B-24 bombers, C-47 transports, defending their coasts using surplus American destroyers and feeding them as well. Shame on us. The Soviets also received supplies from us at great cost. Too bad we Americans still hold territiories in Europe. No wait, they're called cemetaries holding the dead of the aggressor.
France?? Really?? Thought the French lost in June 1940, scuttled their fleet to keep it from falling into German hands. Thanks goodness the French were there for the Normandy invasion. No, wait, that was England, USA, and Canada! Also, thank goodness France left Indo-China in 1954 as a winner. No, wait, they left after their nose was bloodied at Dien Bien Fu and allowed the communists to take another country.
To make things worse, after the war those damned Americans sent tons of food to Europe in CARE packages, kept the Soviets from taking Berlin by making an air bridge of supplies for 18 months, funding the rebuild of Europe to the tune of billions of 1946 American dollars. After all, we bombed Germany, we were responsible for rebuilding it. Tell me, what side of Germany was more prosperous in 1985 - East or West?
Coral Sea was before Midway by the way. Was the first naval battle where ships did not engage, only the aircraft.