Tascar Posted May 28, 2004 Author Report Posted May 28, 2004 Well, this was a nice conversation but we got way off topic. As for nin, I think you have a split anger. You hate the USA because your currency is depreciating through "the corruption of the administration that lost in the 16 May elections plus some global factors". I'm !@#$%^&*uming that the corruption of your government is USA's fault. You hate USA's "neocolonialism" as you say, but demand that USA brings its education to you. Summarizing that: it appears that you want to learn how USA conducts its medicine, business, and ethics thus tossing "neocolonialism" out the window. What is your real argument? Do you want the USA to help your country or leave it alone....or are you cherry picking? (cherry picking is a term used to describe someone who wants only the best cherries from the orchard)
»nintendo64 Posted May 28, 2004 Report Posted May 28, 2004 Tascar, i can only say re-read what i said. There's no split anger here, and There's not USA is at fault at everything countries do, There's just stating the facts.. -nintendo64
MonteZuma Posted May 28, 2004 Report Posted May 28, 2004 Diplomatic missions open opportunities for trade agreements between countries. Bases are located in strategic locations to support the nations who need them. I didn't say we couldn't use resources from the rest of the world - everyone wins in that case, however, Soldier stated that the US has interest in colonizing some foreign land -- simply absurd. You need to aim your arrows straight before shooting them toward USA for all your problems.Bases are NOT only located in strategic locations for the countries that need them. I can think of half a dozen bases just off the top of my head that are on foreign soil for nothing else but US self-interest. Any support given to other countries by these facilities is simply a co-benefit. You need to look up neo-colonialism in a dictionary.
A Soldier Posted May 29, 2004 Report Posted May 29, 2004 I just saw I've made a big mistake... when refering to Chavez, I meant he was president of Venezuela, not Brazil.. my big bad
»ZiGNoTZaG Posted May 29, 2004 Report Posted May 29, 2004 being inconsiquential is only good until all others of consequence are gone. You think even if by some absolute science-fiction fashion, such as lets say DUNE, these primates manage to overcome the US that it will end there? no, for there are many countries that hold alot of the ideals of the US. and its these ideals, that the so called "fighters of god", are attacking. will we get attacked again? most likely. will the retribution be harder and faster each time? yes. i agree. there is a point where being a civilian is of little consiquence. And genocide becomes the plan. some of these cavemen believe that 4 million american deaths would be the proper revenge for the killing weve done on their soil so far. sounds about like a nuke going off in New York. And that is this only way such a thing could happen. On a normal field of battle and In the cities fighting using guerilla tactics they are totally outclassed. just look at the numbers. And also agreed, i dont think any of us want that to happen, the results of that could be catastropic. Mid-Eastern Parking Lot. They cant be trained to "fight for god" if they dont exist.
Tascar Posted May 29, 2004 Author Report Posted May 29, 2004 I agree - I do think that we would destroy Iraq, Afghanistan, and probably bully every nation to hunt down every terrorist until they realize what they have accomplished -- nothing.
A Soldier Posted May 30, 2004 Report Posted May 30, 2004 I agree - I do think that we would destroy Iraq, Afghanistan, and probably bully every nation to hunt down every terrorist [...]Which is a bad thing... right?
Tascar Posted May 30, 2004 Author Report Posted May 30, 2004 That is a horrible thing! Why would anyone, any reasonable, rational person want to have continued turmoil. I am willing to bet that 99% of the world desires peace, harmony, and freedom. Is that what war will bring? No -- but I'm saying that I think the 'chess game' would continue despite how much I, or you, or any of us would like it to cease today.
Slowking Man Posted May 30, 2004 Report Posted May 30, 2004 That is a horrible thing! Why would anyone, any reasonable, rational person want to have continued turmoil. I am willing to bet that 99% of the world desires peace, harmony, and freedom. Is that what war will bring? No -- but I'm saying that I think the 'chess game' would continue despite how much I, or you, or any of us would like it to cease today.Mmm, Chamberlain-style. Peace in our time, eh? I mean, it's obvious that everyone would just leave us alone and love us if the U.S. pulled out of every country tomorrow and went back to 1920s isolationism. The whole world would be just one big happy place.
Recommended Posts