Should this thread be renamed? Maybe "The US has stopped more aggression than any other nation in the 20th century'? After all, Italy and France are no longer goose stepping....
Time for me to calm down now, and I have some public annoucements Seervices for you all:
1. This thread has taught me a bit about world history, and I ready to admit that I was very wrong about the some facts about the said bombings and other US activities
BUT
I still do not think that the US should have nuclear bombed those two cities, and I still think that attackinng targets that knowingly or otherwise cause civilian deaths is one of the lowest things that can be done in a war, njo matter who is killing who. To KillerAFET, yes I have heard of the Rape of Nanking. If you had been reading my posts before you would have noticed that I said killing civilians is atrocious, no matter who is killling who.
2. I apologise for going off at AFET like that, but in my books a nazi supporter is one of the worst things you can be called. Still dont see why you had to bring my stats into the debate though... but anytime that you want to rumble check my stats page and you'll see which servers im on, and you are more than welcome to kill me over and over again (Im not one of those fools who are like "Ill get you all the time")
3. Call me all those communist, left wing, Michael Moore supporter, Bush basher names you want, its all true.
4. Just to clear that thing up about the quote (dont worry, I was still rigtht, just going to put in the exact words and date now that I have the Bulletin magazine sitting right here):"Al Qaeda and Taliban individuals under the control of the Department of Defense are not entitles to prisoner - of - war statusfor purposes of the Geneva Convention of 1949" - Donald Rumsveld, Defense secretary, Jan. 19, 2002
So basically, sorry, see the point of you guys, still think that they should not have been bombed though.
And nehil, I hear you man, I hear you
Thanks,
SharkyMcshark
1. This thread has taught me a bit about world history, and I ready to admit that I was very wrong about the some facts about the said bombings and other US activities
BUT
I still do not think that the US should have nuclear bombed those two cities, and I still think that attackinng targets that knowingly or otherwise cause civilian deaths is one of the lowest things that can be done in a war, njo matter who is killing who. To KillerAFET, yes I have heard of the Rape of Nanking. If you had been reading my posts before you would have noticed that I said killing civilians is atrocious, no matter who is killling who.
2. I apologise for going off at AFET like that, but in my books a nazi supporter is one of the worst things you can be called. Still dont see why you had to bring my stats into the debate though... but anytime that you want to rumble check my stats page and you'll see which servers im on, and you are more than welcome to kill me over and over again (Im not one of those fools who are like "Ill get you all the time")
3. Call me all those communist, left wing, Michael Moore supporter, Bush basher names you want, its all true.
4. Just to clear that thing up about the quote (dont worry, I was still rigtht, just going to put in the exact words and date now that I have the Bulletin magazine sitting right here):"Al Qaeda and Taliban individuals under the control of the Department of Defense are not entitles to prisoner - of - war statusfor purposes of the Geneva Convention of 1949" - Donald Rumsveld, Defense secretary, Jan. 19, 2002
So basically, sorry, see the point of you guys, still think that they should not have been bombed though.
And nehil, I hear you man, I hear you
Thanks,
SharkyMcshark
Last edited by SharkyMcshark (2005-11-26 07:04:34)
Wonderful!!! See how adult conversations can go when the vulgarisms are removed? Good for you!!!
And, as a final note, you should thank the United States Navy for stopping the Japanese invasion of Austrailia in the Battle of the Coral Sea. I imagine that the Japanese would have treated an occupied Canberra with the same honor and respect they treated all the other occupied cities like Manila, Singapore, Shanghai, etc. Maybe then your thought process would have been altered because it was your blood that was spilled by the barbaric Bushido. The best way to put it is that a nation that is the victim does not turn the other cheek if it has the means and will to respond. Human nature. If you are slapped by a person inferior to you in strength and stature you will slap back and not cower.
FIN
And, as a final note, you should thank the United States Navy for stopping the Japanese invasion of Austrailia in the Battle of the Coral Sea. I imagine that the Japanese would have treated an occupied Canberra with the same honor and respect they treated all the other occupied cities like Manila, Singapore, Shanghai, etc. Maybe then your thought process would have been altered because it was your blood that was spilled by the barbaric Bushido. The best way to put it is that a nation that is the victim does not turn the other cheek if it has the means and will to respond. Human nature. If you are slapped by a person inferior to you in strength and stature you will slap back and not cower.
FIN
While I agree that killing civilians is a shitty thing to do, and while I still consider those bombings acts of terrorism by definition, I still see them as necessary evils because a lot more civilians on both sides would've died had the war not been ended. Had the Japanese ever made it to US shores they would've brutally murdered every civilian in sight if given the chance. An extended ground war on the Japanese mainland would've seen US troops having to kill civilians that took up arms, as was expected of the majority of the Japanese people. Either the west coast would've suffered civilians casualties or the Japanese people would've lost the majority of their population. They would've damn near fought to the last man standing. Only a sign that we could wipe out the entire nation in the blink of an eye was enough to reign in such a blood thirsty enemy.SharkyMcshark wrote:
I still do not think that the US should have nuclear bombed those two cities, and I still think that attackinng targets that knowingly or otherwise cause civilian deaths is one of the lowest things that can be done in a war, njo matter who is killing who.
But I do understand your point, killing civilians is just about the worst thing any nation can do in war. Unfortunately war can't always follow rules and, as in nature, the only thing that truly matters in the end is who survives.
I'd rather call someone a communist than a Michael Moore supporter. At least communists have genuine ideals and beliefs on how they'd like the world to function, at least communists can be good hearted decent people that would simply prefer a different kind of society.3. Call me all those communist, left wing, Michael Moore supporter, Bush basher names you want, its all true.
Michael Moore is a lying, hypocritical, fat, disgusting, sorry excuse for a human being.
The fact that Rumsfeld is allowed to get away with crap like this sickens me. At least Pedilla was finally charged with a fucking crime; granted, it was pretty clear cut that he did it but to keep a US citizen in holding without ever being charged with a crime shows just how corrupt we allow our politicians to become. This nation's foreign policy is an experiment in blatant hypocrisy and unabashed irony.4. Just to clear that thing up about the quote (dont worry, I was still rigtht, just going to put in the exact words and date now that I have the Bulletin magazine sitting right here):"Al Qaeda and Taliban individuals under the control of the Department of Defense are not entitles to prisoner - of - war statusfor purposes of the Geneva Convention of 1949" - Donald Rumsveld, Defense secretary, Jan. 19, 2002
I never said that I support Saddam, I think that he should be put on trial and go to prison. Invading Iraq wasen't so smart from my point of view, what should be done was to wait for the UN decision and support a civil revolution.n1nj41c l337ne55 wrote:
So you SUPPORT Saddam and his many many torture chambers? And the genocide? And all the other shit?Nehil wrote:
So, to prevent another 9-11, where some 3.000 people died you killed a total of 60.000 (10.000 civilians) and lost around 2.000 of your own. Wow if I know anything about these numbers it's which is greater. And Dizik you linked to a site (wikipedia) that also show civilwars. And it only shows 1990-2002. Seriously how can the American people (some) support a invasion of two countrys? Just cuse the MIGHT attack you and MIGHT harbour terrorists? Wouldn't that be like me going down the street and killing some guy cuse I see he has a gun or looks like a terrorist or funds them? That's not really selfdefense. That's murder. And by the way, why don't you invade your friends Saudi Arabia? Nearly all the terrorists from 9-11 were from Saudi Arabia. But I guess you can't really make the oil efficiency biggger there cuse they already are an opressing country loyal to you. But I thought the big bringer of democracy was the Almighty USA, can't you please invade them and bring democracy? Could anyone pro-war please anwser this?
Its not that said guy down the street has a gun, it's that hes pointing it a a 12-year old girls head while he rapes her. There. That is sufficiently graphic to make my point, even if it is a little off.
And what UN resolution to go to war with Iraq do you wish to use? Resolution 687? 1441, 1447 or 1454? Maybe one of the other 15 resolutions for Iraq to stop their WMD efforts and to disarm? So next is the no WMD arguement - remind those who had family killed from chemical attacks in Kurdish Iraq that Iraq possessed no WMDs.Nehil wrote:
I never said that I support Saddam, I think that he should be put on trial and go to prison. Invading Iraq wasen't so smart from my point of view, what should be done was to wait for the UN decision and support a civil revolution.
You gotta stop reading the Helsinki Inquirer and go back to school.
Um....he is being put on trial. Without that invasion and subsequent removal of his supporters from power he never would've gone on trail. Wait for a UN decision? Decision to do what, send him another angry letter? The UN wasn't going to do shit, they're never going to do shit, and the US should've renounced membership long ago.Nehil wrote:
I never said that I support Saddam, I think that he should be put on trial and go to prison. Invading Iraq wasen't so smart from my point of view, what should be done was to wait for the UN decision and support a civil revolution.
The UN is essentially crippled without the support of the US forces and would've done nothing but wait until Saddam had killed more of his people. The whole WMDs bullshit still bothers me; while I certainly agree that he needed to be removed from power it bugs me that we were lied about the reason for it. It also bothers me that the whole "terrorist link" is still believed by the sheeple of this nation. We didn't even come close to finishing the job in Afghanistan, to "catching the evil-doers" of 9/11.
The UN would've supported a civil revolution but it never would've happened. Again, this is why the right to bear arms is crucial to the safety and liberty of a nation; the majority of the people in Iraq that were actually willing to fight in a civil revolution were completely unarmed and would've simply been decimated. It's only the equipment and training (albiet meager training considering the few number of Iraqi squads at level 1...and the number actually went down from three to one in the course of a few months) that gave them the chance to fight back.
I'm not happy with the administration misleading us into this war, lying about the reasons, making shit up, subverting our civil rights for this stupid "war on terror" or "struggle against global extremism" or whatever the fuck they want to call it but I still believe that it was something that had to be done. Just wish it hadn't been done by these lying bastards.
If you took offense from my post, then I sincerely apologise. None was intended.dshak 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.
I shall ellaborate the point I was trying to make:
You are quite clearly thinking of just the bad that Hitler did. Yes, he was an insane evil dictator who truly deserved worse than death. But, he did bring Germany out of depression, he sorted out it's economy, and built and rebuilt 'his' country. His people loved him. Even the Jews, up until the time he started killing them. He was rebuilding Germany after what we did to it after WWI, with our enforced 'treaty'. Cutting Germanies military to such a small amount that any neighbouring aggressor could of walked in and siezed it with minimal effort (Fair enough on this though..), making them pay us, giving them a debt of 'war damages' - This, this I think was our mistake.
...Bush and Blair going to Iraq...for oil. Basically. They lied about WMD's, they lied about Saddam's link to terrorism, and when that was brought to light, they changed their reason to 'take out this evil man and insert a democracy' - Which, I may point out, they have failed to do thus far (on the latter part, obviously), in part due to the two warring Muslim factions within the country, and, of course, terrorism.
In short: Hitler didn't lie. He told his people straight. Even one of the most evillest men in the history of this world did not lie to his people. That, that was my point.
Just something someone mentioned to me earlier...
Do the people in Iraq want a democracy? Has anyone ever bothered to ask them prior to invasion?
Is the 'war' in Iraq what they want, or what we want?
Of course, it's too late for such questions now. It's happened.
Another question, posed to all those Americans who feel that the US has and is helping the world by 'interfering':
If you so want to help this world to be a better place, a place of Freedom, then why oh why does your Government refuse to cancel 3rd World debt? This would solve so many problems. Instead of spending the sheer amount of money you have on Iraq (Britain included), why not put this into helping save lives, rather than destroying them? I mean...I can't remember the amount the Iraqi war has cost so far, but...if Saddam and his Government really needed to be removed, couldn't someone have payed an Assassin? Gotta be someone out there...
Last edited by -=Meshekal=- (2005-11-25 10:03:13)
Hitler didn't lie? My knowldge of history is a bit rusty but didn't he tell the Nazi Reichstag that poland had tryed to invade germany, afer the SS took twelve prisoners out of Buchenwald and forced them to take poison, shot them after they had put on Polish uniforms. An SS Officer yelled in Polish into a radio that they had come to invade Germany, and then the SS fled.-=Meshekal=- wrote:
In short: Hitler didn't lie. He told his people straight. Even one of the most evillest men in the history of this world did not lie to his people. That, that was my point.
Along with 3rd world debt, 3rd world aide should be nixed as well. It's time to stop giving money to countries that will only use it to throw themselves deeper into a pit of poverty. Hell, stop giving them money and keep the debt. Stop allowing the leaders of those corrupt African nations to profit off the suffering of their people and force them to actually start producing something of value in their shithole corners of the earth.-=Meshekal=- wrote:
If you so want to help this world to be a better place, a place of Freedom, then why oh why does your Government refuse to cancel 3rd World debt?
IF you want to talk about liars take a look at clinton. Lied through his whole term and people just praised him for it! Now when a good president is in office and isnt lieing he will be accused of it and people will hate him! Where are any morals on the left wing, i havent seen any. Correct me if I am speaking only of the mainstream but when there are no morals how could you run a country? In short american people were stupid enough to vote for clinton and put him in office again. Your not allowed to bad mouth a president in times of war in front of a camera or the public. Just go watch Off to War. its a perfect example. Now when my father was in the navy he would badmouth clinton PRIVATELY with others who hated serving under him. Clinton is a fat pig who couldn't wipe his ass if he could tunr his head all the way around. Michael Moore is just as bad if not worse, anyone who looks up to him is like him. Ill even give you a quote from a book ive read. "They are quite possibly the dumbest people on the face of the earth." Michael Moore speaking of his fellow americans. I hope Michael Moore is assassinated by someone, we might actaully say Good job terrorists!
I think a lot of this whole "aggressor" thing is true. But go back through all of time and tell me how many times the greatest military power in the world has just sat on its hands?
Name me a politician that hasn't lied. Don't get me wrong, I certainly would never praise him for lying but it's nothing unique in the Presidency or anywhere in our government. I would've been perfectly fine had he just come and said from the beginning what he was doing. No one bitched about the Kennedy's tapping Marilyn.Miller wrote:
IF you want to talk about liars take a look at clinton. Lied through his whole term and people just praised him for it!
Excuse me? And why the hell not? I should be allowed to badmouth the president for any reason at any time in front of anyone I damn well please. If it's not slander then it's covered under freedom of speech. Military personnel, on the other hand, are the exception to the rule but there is absoutely nothing at all wrong with critisizing the administration in times of war or peace or any other time.Your not allowed to bad mouth a president in times of war in front of a camera or the public.
That show is a perfect example of what? Clinton may have been a lot of things but he was still the President, a bit more than anyone can say for any of us.Just go watch Off to War. its a perfect example. Now when my father was in the navy he would badmouth clinton PRIVATELY with others who hated serving under him. Clinton is a fat pig who couldn't wipe his ass if he could tunr his head all the way around. Michael Moore is just as bad if not worse, anyone who looks up to him is like him. Ill even give you a quote from a book ive read. "They are quite possibly the dumbest people on the face of the earth." Michael Moore speaking of his fellow americans. I hope Michael Moore is assassinated by someone, we might actaully say Good job terrorists!
Michael Moore, on the other hand, is a douche bag and a half.
Isn't it great to live in a country, where you can be on TV, be in the military, be on the frontlines, and STILL critisize the person that sent you there in the first place? Thats freedom, if I ever heard of it!Just go watch Off to War. its a perfect example. Now when my father was in the navy he would badmouth clinton PRIVATELY with others who hated serving under him.
Last edited by freebirdpat (2005-11-25 15:41:17)
WTF are you talking about? Am I the only one that remembers This?USonuMabeaCh wrote:
You see its disgruntled crazy fucks like me that have pulled columbines, CO. you never hear about shit like this in UK, Germany, France, Australlia.
If you so want to help this world to be a better place, a place of Freedom, then why oh why does your Government refuse to cancel 3rd World debt? This would solve so many problems. Instead of spending the sheer amount of money you have on Iraq (Britain included), why not put this into helping save lives, rather than destroying them? ...
Last edited by -=Meshekal=- (Today 13:03:13)
I have a better Idea, why dosn't your country Give away money and then not ask for repayment?
Last edited by -=Meshekal=- (Today 13:03:13)
I have a better Idea, why dosn't your country Give away money and then not ask for repayment?
I think the US has been more then generous in its rebuilding of countries and giving countries free things. (Rebuilding of Germany, Japan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Korea...) The list probably goes on and on...Horseman 77 wrote:
If you so want to help this world to be a better place, a place of Freedom, then why oh why does your Government refuse to cancel 3rd World debt? This would solve so many problems. Instead of spending the sheer amount of money you have on Iraq (Britain included), why not put this into helping save lives, rather than destroying them? ...
Last edited by -=Meshekal=- (Today 13:03:13)
I have a better Idea, why dosn't your country Give away money and then not ask for repayment?
The US is one of the best suppliers of FOREIGN AID, yet we always get the shit end of the stick and bitched about because we don't give enough. I wish we would have pulled out of Germany and Japan 50 years ago[both would have been invaded in weeks, by Russians and Chinese], along with Korea, and we should have just let Iraq have Kuwait in '91. And we should have disarmed Afghanistan and didn't help them rebuild or give them a dime.
What I want to know is why the fuck does the rest of the world let China get away with so much shit, but the US is an "EVIL EMPIRE".
Oh, and nobody moaned about Stalin or wanted to do anything against Stalin even though he essentially murdered millions of people.
Last edited by freebirdpat (2005-11-26 00:43:33)
Well, firstly, UK is not as well off economically as the US - In part, because we are ALOT smaller, and we've got a tourist attraction monarchy to feed and house etc. Secondly, we were willing to (hence the G8 (3?) Conference hosted in Scotland. And if you'd have read what you quoted properly, you'd have seen the (Britian included) comment.Horseman 77 wrote:
If you so want to help this world to be a better place, a place of Freedom, then why oh why does your Government refuse to cancel 3rd World debt? This would solve so many problems. Instead of spending the sheer amount of money you have on Iraq (Britain included), why not put this into helping save lives, rather than destroying them? ...
Last edited by -=Meshekal=- (Today 13:03:13)
I have a better Idea, why dosn't your country Give away money and then not ask for repayment?
I say something about helping others for free, putting yourself out for others, and some one gets arsy about it...way of this world..
To freebirdpat: Because, simply, the US is in the news more often :p
And I wouldn't consider America to be an Evil Empire - You're not evil, and your not an Empire. Double whammy of not. In Britain, at least in my area, Americans are percieved to be like there President. So, at the moment, most tend to think Americans are dumb fuckers. No offense, this isn't my belief. This is probably to do with TV and British programming (Ie, shit)...
And Stalin....No, sorry. I'm thinking of Lenin. Yes, Stalin was bad, he twisted communist ideals into a harsh socialist dictatorship....socialist is probably the wrong word there, thinking about it. I think the reason nobody did anything about it was because, at the time, Russia was considered Communist, and given the harsh views of American, sorry, Western business towards this ideal, I assume Stalin was left alone because he was only killing what where percieved as communists, so nothing to worry about. Just my opinion.
Oh, and don't get me wrong people. I'm not a patriot. I'll bitch and moan at my own country as much as any other - if not more, acutally :p
And to whoever mentioned that Hitler did lie: Not what I was taught, though I could be mistaken....damn, now you've gone and made me want to look through years of history school work...
Last edited by -=Meshekal=- (2005-11-26 04:26:08)
Off the top of my head 3 incidents in Aus., I not goona provide likns but if you want to do a search try "Hoddle Street Shootings", "Queen Street Shootings" & "Port Arthur Massacre"Dizik wrote:
WTF are you talking about? Am I the only one that remembers This?USonuMabeaCh wrote:
You see its disgruntled crazy fucks like me that have pulled columbines, CO. you never hear about shit like this in UK, Germany, France, Australlia.
If you don't want the US to mess with you then Don't Mess with the US.
Shit, I said that I supported the wrong guy.
I meant Nehil, I hear you man, nehil.
My bad sorry for any ensuioing confusion
And monk, I know that Michael Moore is a whiny bastard, but some of the points he makes do have validity (Bowling for Colombine anyone??)
I meant Nehil, I hear you man, nehil.
My bad sorry for any ensuioing confusion
And monk, I know that Michael Moore is a whiny bastard, but some of the points he makes do have validity (Bowling for Colombine anyone??)
Last edited by SharkyMcshark (2005-11-26 07:06:15)
Eh well, a large justification for the 9/11 attacks was that we backed out on our promise to help them rebuild after giving them the training and equipment to push back the soviets. You do make a good point though.freebirdpat wrote:
And we should have disarmed Afghanistan and didn't help them rebuild or give them a dime.
Why can't we just stop foreign aide completely? It doesn't help, it makes things worse for everyone but the corrupt leaders of those crappy little countries. Starvin Marvin isn't getting our help, President Mufasa Clickclick McDouchebag is the one that profits.
A good portion of the "facts" in that movie were blatant lies, the rest were over sensationalized. Trying to get Kmart to stop selling ammunition because that's where the kids happened to buy it? What a fucking moron. Michael Moore is a hypocrite, a lying fat bastard. Some of the points he makes have validity only because he's parroting what others have been saying for ages; he hasn't come up with anything new.SharkyMcshark wrote:
And monk, I know that Michael Moore is a whiny bastard, but some of the points he makes do have validity (Bowling for Colombine anyone??)
Kinda OT, but does anyone have any numbers on how many people are shot each year in US?
Stay strong SharkyMcshark.
Stay strong SharkyMcshark.
Roughly thirty thousand each year. Huge number, right? Consider that we have about three hundred million people in this country and it's quite a small percentage. Then you have to take into account the fact that all firearm deaths are included in these tallies, including criminals being shot by police officers, home invaders being shot by home owners, suicides, and accidental discharges.