| Author | Comment | Digital
Guardian
Posted: 29 Mar 2004
11:19 GMT
Total Posts: 1051 | Keep 'em coming! | dysfunction
Goliath
Posted: 29 Mar 2004
17:48 GMT
Total Posts: 122 | Just for clarification... the United States put Saddam Hussein in power. In 1963 the Kennedy administartion funded the Baath Party's rise to power. When Hussein rose to leadership f the party, the United States government gave Iraq three billion dollars worth of funding, U.S. Special Forces, weapons, and training Hussein's terrorists to fight a terrorist war against Iran. We ARE a terrorist nation. Ever hear of the School of Americas? It is a training camp in Georgia (the U.S. state, not the Eastern European country) to train mostly Hispanics- many on the UN's most wanted list of human rights violators- as terrorists. We set up terrorists, then knock 'em down when they go against us. Try to refute THAT, calcfreak, with some ultra-patriotic BS. I've got the sources to prove it.
Info about the SOA: http://www.soaw.org/new/type.php?type=8
List of infamous SOA graduates: http://www.derechos.org/soa/index.html | Digital
Guardian
Posted: 29 Mar 2004
18:01 GMT
Total Posts: 1051 | He's been banned multiple ways. That was just a kid pulling everyone's leg. I remember that we did put him into power, just not at the time I wrote the post. | Lunchbox
Carrier
Posted: 3 Apr 2004
19:45 GMT
Total Posts: 2007 | lol, are we on the fourth now? i'm having a hard time keeping track of all of 'em :) | Lunchbox
Carrier
Posted: 3 Apr 2004
20:00 GMT
Total Posts: 2007 | "We ARE a terrorist nation"
WRONG!!!!
The United States is not, i repeat NOT, a terrorist nation. That is not an opinion, it is a known fact. So we helped Saddam rise to power, that's because he was our ally at the time!! wtf gave you the insane notion that we, The United States of America, the most free country in the world, are a terrorist nation? WITH OUR SUPREME MILITARY FORCE AND AMPLE FUNDS WE SMITE TERRORIST PARTIES, LEAVE THEM TO ROT, AND HELP REBUILD THEIR COUNTRIES FROM ASH AND DUST!! I AM OUTRAGED THAT ANY MAN [OR WOMAN] COULD EVEN THINK TO SAY THAT THE US IS A TERRORIST NATION. AMERICA IS THE HEIGHT OF CIVILIZATION RIGHT NOW, AND FAR BE IT FOR SOMEONE TO DISGRACE IT UNJUSTLY WITH NOTHING TO BACK IT UP [that site you said is a site about a school for training COUNTER-terrorists {a.k.a. anti-terrorist soldiers}]. LET ME OFFER YOU PROOF THAT THE US IS NOT A TERRORIST NATION:
Definition of terrorism:
the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion [coercion = domination by force] <http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=terrorist>
Now dysfunction, if you can seriously tell me when the US has acted as such, i will probably die out of disbelief. if not, my point has been made.
VIVA AMERICA!! | BullFrog
Wraith
Posted: 3 Apr 2004
21:02 GMT
Total Posts: 623 | The sad thing about the Internet is that it's really difficult to know the validity of your information.
That's the great thing about the United States. Saddam was probably better than the Iraqi government of the time he came to power. Eventually, his government got bad enough that we decided to set up a new government. The US isn't a terrorist nation, it's a police nation.
---
"Men are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds." -Franklin D. Roosevelt | allynfolksjr
Administrator
Posted: 4 Apr 2004
11:44 GMT
Total Posts: 1892 | A police nation that doesn't belong in every area that we think we should be in: It really looks like the Iraq's appreceate us destorying their country... | spiral
Wraith
Posted: 4 Apr 2004
12:34 GMT
Total Posts: 958 | Actually allyn, a majority of iraqis now are in favor of the United States taking over iraq. | BullFrog
Wraith
Posted: 4 Apr 2004
12:58 GMT
Total Posts: 623 | That's one of the bad things about the media, they can only cover so much. And what do they cover? The stuff that'll get them ratings. So, all we hear from Iraq is the protests and killings and whatever else like that, but never of any of the good that's been done.
Make one simple comparison between Saddam's rule, and how things are now. The people can actually express themselves, however violent that may be. At least they can enjoy some basic freedoms Americans take for granted every day.
---
"Men are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds." -Franklin D. Roosevelt | Barrett
Administrator
Posted: 4 Apr 2004
13:23 GMT
Total Posts: 1676 | that's why you watch fox news... you hear the good stuff in the o'reilly factor and you hear the bad stuff in some of the other programs.
---
-Barrett A | Lunchbox
Carrier
Posted: 4 Apr 2004
17:34 GMT
Total Posts: 2007 | Thank you, bullfrog!!! That is a great point about the media, and nice comment B. So true :)
BTW, how long is the freak of calcness banned for, if anyone wants to tell me, or it may be none of my business, but whaever. I thought i'd ask | Digital
Guardian
Posted: 4 Apr 2004
17:46 GMT
Total Posts: 1051 | permanently | spiral
Wraith
Posted: 4 Apr 2004
19:21 GMT
Total Posts: 958 | "So we helped Saddam rise to power, that's because he was our ally at the time!!"
Obviously an ally the United States shouldn't have made. Saddam was the US's ally against Iran. The US also gave him chemical weapons to use on Iranian soldiers. The United States also helped develop these chemical weapons.
"WITH OUR SUPREME MILITARY FORCE AND AMPLE FUNDS WE SMITE TERRORIST PARTIES, LEAVE THEM TO ROT, AND HELP REBUILD THEIR COUNTRIES FROM ASH AND DUST!!"
your rhetoric sounds a lot like the terrorist who say "WE WILL DESTROY THE BLASPHEMOUS NATION THE UNITED STATES." or words to that extent. And btw, if a country was reduced ash and dust, there wouldn't be any people left.
"AMERICA IS THE HEIGHT OF CIVILIZATION RIGHT NOW"
Snicker...have you traveled the world much? How many times have you even left the United States (besides mexico/canada)? America is definately better than a lot of places, but it's very far from the height of civilization. The Scandinavian countries have some of the best lifestyles (and lowest corruption ratings, US is 17th or something), I think Luxembourg has the highest per capita GDP.
"[that site you said is a site about a school for training COUNTER-terrorists {a.k.a. anti-terrorist soldiers}]"
Too often, people who are "Counter-terrorist" are no better than the terrorist. For example, the US trained cuban rebels specifically to kill fidel castro.
"LET ME OFFER YOU PROOF THAT THE US IS NOT A TERRORIST NATION:
Definition of terrorism:
the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion [coercion = domination by force] <http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=terrorist>"
giving the definition isn't proof, unless the definition said "terrorism-blah blah, what the United States isn't"
"terrorism - The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons." from dictionary.com
Under the main definition of dictionary.com, the United States easily qualifies as a terrorist nation. Just look at the Iraqi War.
threatened use of violence - the army camping for months in Kuwait to pressure Iraq
organized group - United States army
Intimidating government - Iraq government into giving up (non-existent) WMD's
political reasons - a) because they just didn't like Hussein (see Dick Clarke) b) trying to make themselves look good for reelection c) divert attention from the ailing war on terror
"Make one simple comparison between Saddam's rule, and how things are now."
but policemen are being killed nearly everyday, infrastructure isn't still back in place yet. The picture in Iraq is far from rosy under the United States.
I think fox news is pretty lame, a bit too biased. CNN or C-SPAN for me. | Lunchbox
Carrier
Posted: 4 Apr 2004
20:54 GMT
Total Posts: 2007 | "terrorism - The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons." from dictionary.com
Under the main definition of dictionary.com, the United States easily qualifies as a terrorist nation. Just look at the Iraqi War."
look at the part that says "intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments". Did we have thew intention of doing that? How would one even know? if you can't answer that, then you can't state that America is a terrorist country.
"For example, the US trained cuban rebels specifically to kill fidel castro."
And...your point is? Fidel Castro is a flagrant dictator who has been in power and abusing it for nearly 45 years.
"Iraq government into giving up (non-existent) WMD's"
Ummmmm...that is what the UN wanted to do [us too, but] we wanted to go about it in a, shall i say, more precise manner. So, if you want to say we are a terrorist nation, then you must certainly say that the UN is an organized terrorist syndicate, right?
"Snicker...have you traveled the world much? How many times have you even left the United States (besides mexico/canada)? America is definately better than a lot of places, but it's very far from the height of civilization. The Scandinavian countries have some of the best lifestyles (and lowest corruption ratings, US is 17th or something), I think Luxembourg has the highest per capita GDP."
Again, i could care less about per capita income and corruption rate in regards to the peak of civilization. What i mean when i say "Height of civilization" is that we are the most governmentally advanced society in the world.
"giving the definition isn't proof, unless the definition said "terrorism-blah blah, what the United States isn't"
that's why i said this: "Now dysfunction, if you can seriously tell me when the US has acted as such, i will probably die out of disbelief. if not, my point has been made."
You may stop snickering now Spiral :)
-Lunchbox
EDIT: Added smileys
[Edited by Lunchbox on 05-Apr-04 05:54] | allynfolksjr
Administrator
Posted: 4 Apr 2004
22:22 GMT
Total Posts: 1892 | Hehe, I think I'll refute your argument, as I'll be gone a few days...
>look at the part that says "intention of intimidating or coercing
>societies or governments". Did we have thew intention of doing that?
>How would one even know? if you can't answer that, then you can't
>state that America is a terrorist country.
Yah, I think overthrowing an entire government with one of your own design is 'coercing'. And we did have the intention of doing that.
>And...your point is? Fidel Castro is a flagrant dictator who has been
>in power and abusing it for nearly 45 years.
So it's okay to train terrorists...if the US trains them?.
>Ummmmm...that is what the UN wanted to do [us too, but] we wanted to
>go about it in a, shall i say, more precise manner. So, if you want
>to say we are a terrorist nation, then you must certainly say that
>the UN is an organized terrorist syndicate, right?
Actually, the UN didn't support the US's Iraq invasion, so you really can't say that.
>Again, i could care less about per capita income and corruption rate
>in regards to the peak of civilization. What i mean when i say
>"Height of civilization" is that we are the most governmentally
>advanced society in the world.
Who says we're the most gov't advanced society in the world? Our gov't is massiley(forgive my spelling) corrupt, unlike such governments as Swedens (Which I have researched quite extensively on).
[Edited by allynfolksjr on 05-Apr-04 07:23] | Lunchbox
Carrier
Posted: 5 Apr 2004
11:25 GMT
Total Posts: 2007 | I.
">look at the part that says "intention of intimidating or coercing
>societies or governments". Did we have thew intention of doing that?
>How would one even know? if you can't answer that, then you can't
>state that America is a terrorist country.
Yah, I think overthrowing an entire government with one of your own design is 'coercing'. And we did have the intention of doing that."
1. You didn't answer my question of "How would one even know?"
2. Definition of coerce:
"To force to act or think in a certain way by use of pressure, threats, or intimidation; compel."
Under said definition, since the United States did not FORCE [keyword] anyone to "act or think in a certain way", we did not 'coerce' anyone and that being your only offered proof of U.S. terrorism, means that we are NOT a terrorist country
<http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=coerce>
II.
">And...your point is? Fidel Castro is a flagrant dictator who has been
>in power and abusing it for nearly 45 years.
So it's okay to train terrorists...if the US trains them?."
No. But we didn't train terrorists. We trained Counter-Teerrorists Definition of counter-Terrorism:
"Action or strategy intended to counteract or suppress terrorism"
<http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=counter-terrorism>
Definition of Terrorism:
"The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons."
Now, i would, and so would most of the world, define Fidel Castro's rule as a Terrorist rule under this definiton. And since we trained
people to act against him, they would be therefore considered COUNTER-terrorists.
<http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=terrorism>
III.
">Ummmmm...that is what the UN wanted to do [us too, but] we wanted to
>go about it in a, shall i say, more precise manner. So, if you want
>to say we are a terrorist nation, then you must certainly say that
>the UN is an organized terrorist syndicate, right?
Actually, the UN didn't support the US's Iraq invasion, so you really can't say that."
I didn't say that the UN supported Iraq's invasion, but they did support sending people in to look for WMD's. The U.S. got fed up with the lack of progress that the U.N. was amking, and so we decidwed to go to war.
IV.
">Again, i could care less about per capita income and corruption rate
>in regards to the peak of civilization. What i mean when i say
>"Height of civilization" is that we are the most governmentally
>advanced society in the world.
Who says we're the most gov't advanced society in the world? Our gov't is massiley(forgive my spelling) corrupt, unlike such governments as Swedens (Which I have researched quite extensively on)."
Maybe i have been phrasing this wrong. What i mean wwhen i go on those rants about the U.S. government, is that it allows us the most freedom to do anything we want that is in our power, so long as it doesn't restrict other people's freedoms.
Lunchbox
P.S. I don't think we're ever going to finish this debate, we might as well devote a new section in the forums to it entirely :)
P.P.S. I bet we get to at least Debate Thread(12) before next christmas. :santa: | dysfunction
Goliath
Posted: 5 Apr 2004
15:50 GMT
Total Posts: 122 | Let me clear something up, a misconception that Americans tend to have. Fidel Castro is not a communist. He is a socialist. Yes there is a difference. China is communist, Sweden is socialist. BIG diference. Castro only became allies with Russia after the U.N. placed economic sanctions on Cuba, making Russia the only trading partner available. And what did Russia want in return? Missile bases.
Lunchbox, you said that Iraq is better now than under Saddam's fist. I'll agree with you on that one. Saddam DID need to be taken out. But we put him in power with a full knwoledge of what he would do. The United States fueled a Kurdish uprising against the Baath Party, then leaked the information to Saddam's military, leading to the death by chemical weapons (which we built for Saddam) of thousands of Kurds. Saddam also waged a TERRORIST war on Iran, funded by $3 billion of U.S. money. And where ARE the WMDs? CIA director George Tenet Told Bush that there was not enough justification for war in Iraq. So did all the UN weapons inspectors. There were none. Iraq ould never harm the U.S. It has no long range weapons, only scuds tha only have about as much range as a cruise missile and are horribly inaccurate. They have no real Airf Force to deliver them here. What could Saddam have done to us? Pre-emptive war is terrorism.
Shortly after Chile had its first democratic election, the United States sent assassins to kill Salvador Allende, the first President of Cuba, while U.S. navy ships anchored offshore and 32 U.S. military aircraft set down in nearby Argentina. After he was killed, the U.S. set up a fascist dictataorship led by Augusto Pinochet. In case you were wondering what fascism is, Hitler and Mussolini were fascists. The School of Americas trains Pinochet's Secret Police.
Why would we do such a thing? Because Allende was a socialist; he intended to drive out U.S. businesses with a tariff that would boost his country's economy. Businesses inclusing Pepsi Cola, which paid Chilean workers FAR below minimum wage, well below poverty level in fact.
What further proof do you need that the U.S. is a terrorist nation? Google for Salvador Allende, Augusto Pinochet, etc, and you will see the facts. It's even in history books. The U.S. is not a wonderful country. Sure, we white or asian people have rights here, but think of all the people of Arabic descent locked in prison after Spetember 11th. Many are STILL there, with NO charges against them, with NO trial, no right to a lwayer, no phone call to family, etc. How does our government justify this? They say the do not want the al-Qaeda leaders to know who we have caught. Yet when we actually DO catch somebody important it's all over the newspaper. I was recently talking to a Muslim friend of mine whose father is currently behind bars at Quantico. She hasn't seen him since he was taken away, at night, less than a month after September 11th. We ARE a terrorist naton.
[Edited by dysfunction on 06-Apr-04 01:01] | Digital
Guardian
Posted: 5 Apr 2004
17:06 GMT
Total Posts: 1051 | small word of advice to some of you out there (pick one, contextually they mean the same) 1) relativity, 2)P.O.V. | Lunchbox
Carrier
Posted: 5 Apr 2004
18:09 GMT
Total Posts: 2007 | I.
I know the difference between socialism and communism. :)
Also, i know what facism is, but good explanation Dysfunction.
II.
"The U.S. is not a wonderful country."
How can you say that? As i said before in a post, [check debate threads 1 or 2] everything is relative. So, the U.S. is not wwonderful compared to what? another country? your perception of a perfect country? If you answered "my perception of a perfect country", then we get into opinion. Then, you could say that the U.S. is a terrorist country. IN YOUR OPINION, not necessarily to other people, but in retrospect, all of these 4 debate threads have been about opinions :robot: .
EDIT: By the way Z, which one of these [1, 2, 3, or 4] is the longest so far?
[Edited by Lunchbox on 06-Apr-04 03:11] | dysfunction
Goliath
Posted: 5 Apr 2004
18:25 GMT
Total Posts: 122 | The U.S. is not a wonderful country because of what it has done to other countries. Again, you ignore the main content of my post. Read it again, and this time PAY ATTENTION to all the bad shit America has done. We really screwed some other countries over. | Digital
Guardian
Posted: 5 Apr 2004
18:32 GMT
Total Posts: 1051 | We also helped a lot, or at least tried. | Lunchbox
Carrier
Posted: 5 Apr 2004
19:35 GMT
Total Posts: 2007 | ya, listen to digital Dysfunction. at least the effort was there. | BullFrog
Wraith
Posted: 5 Apr 2004
19:47 GMT
Total Posts: 623 | Why do you focus so much on the bad things that countries, or even people, have done? Why not look at the good instead?
---
"Men are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds." -Franklin D. Roosevelt | spiral
Wraith
Posted: 5 Apr 2004
21:38 GMT
Total Posts: 958 | "ya, listen to digital Dysfunction. at least the effort was there."
"Effort" is good for nothing than a word at the end of the day. Misguided effort causes harm, no matter how beneficial the intentions where, in the end, if harm is done, the effort doesn't matter.
Wizard's Second Rule by Terry Goodkind "The greatest harm can come from the best intentions" (paraphrased)
Just because there was effort doesn't mean it was a good thing, sure we tried, but we still harmed people.
United States is also one of the most wasteful countries in the world. In energy, solid waste, gas, etc. | Digital
Guardian
Posted: 5 Apr 2004
22:35 GMT
Total Posts: 1051 | paraphrased again: "Crap happens, doesn't matter what you meant to do."
Personally I have more of the attitude of "ok, so something got messed up, quit moaning and continue on." Though a lot of wisdom can be learned from the past, to much time there will cause most to loose (sp?) sight of the present and future therefore endangering more by doing nothing.
(Brain went too quick)
[Edited by Digital on 06-Apr-04 07:35] | Lunchbox
Carrier
Posted: 6 Apr 2004
09:17 GMT
Total Posts: 2007 | It never fails to amaze me, especially after skimming thru the previous debate threads, how we can be so involved in one topic, and someone says someething controversial that sparks us onto the next topic. The other thing that amazes me so, is that no matter how hard i try to prove my point, no matter how much quoting/researching/analyzing i do, someone always comes up wiwth something to 'disprove' it. | BullFrog
Wraith
Posted: 6 Apr 2004
09:37 GMT
Total Posts: 623 | Welcome to reality.
---
"Men are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds." -Franklin D. Roosevelt | Digital
Guardian
Posted: 6 Apr 2004
11:11 GMT
Total Posts: 1051 | Let me be the second to do so as well | dysfunction
Goliath
Posted: 6 Apr 2004
13:18 GMT
Total Posts: 122 | Although no one's seemed to disprove my point yet. I've thoroughly disproved your point with irrefutable evidenc several times, Lunchbox: you're just not listening. We didn't just make a few mistakes. We sent in soldiers to kill innocent people, to install dictators ten times worse than Saddam Hussein (not that he wasn't a bad guy). What good have we really done the world? We took out Hussein, but we also set him up in the first place. We didn't make a mistake: the U.S> government knew full well what Hussein intended to do with his power. When Hussein attacked Iran, we HELPED him. But when he attacked Kuwait, we couldn't have that. Why did we care so much about Kuwait? Because of the OIL. That's the ONLY reason for Operation Desert Storm. What good have we done? We also took down the Taliban, but we also set them up in the first place. We defended the Taliban in their war against the USSR, using the logic that if they;re against the Communists they're our allies. We also befriended Saudi Arabia, a nation with a FAR more brutal regime than Iraq. In Saudi Arabia, it is legal for a man to beat or even kill his wife. Women must be covered except for their eyes. Iraq, by contrast, was one of the most progressive countries in the Middle East. The only reason the people were so poor was because of UN economic sanctions that did not affect Hussein, they only made the people starve. The monthly rations doled out by the UN in the "Food for Oil" program were enough to feed a family for FOUR DAYS. Out of a month. In other words, people starved. And it's our fault.
So Lunchbox, I ask you, what good HAS Americ done? Admittedly, we surpass almost every other country in the world with the human rights we take for granted here. Yet that seems hypocritical when we think about the BLATANT disregard for human rights we have shown in our dealings with other nations. So there is a little good, in that our people are free, even though we take away the freedoms of those in other countries. But does that outweigh all the horrible things we have done, not by "mistake," but with full, greedy, intention? Can we justify terrorism because its in the name of freedom?
Just as so many millions were slain or persecuted in the name of God by Christians for thousands of years (the Crusades, pogroms, the Holy Inquisition, the Holocaust, the Ku Klux Klan, etc.), we are now slaying and persecuting people in the name of freedom. The Land of the Free was born in bloodshed; it has waged illegal war against Mexico, Spain, Hawaii, the Phillipines, etc. with the sole purpose of gaining territory and "spheres of influence;" it has drastically lowered the standards of living in South American, African, and Asian coutries to increase the labor force and decrease wages so that American compnies may prosper while those countries economies are destroyed; it has nearly EXTERMINATED the first people to settle this continent. But you believe that this is all in the oast, that it won't happen again, that we're wiser now. But no. That is what people have said before, and look what our government has done. The genocides in history are repeated over and over again because of the peoples' willingness to forget the past. It is NOT over. Our government leaders are every bit as corrupt as they ever have been. Unjusitfiable wars will continue, are continuing. Unless people like you wise up. Start reading the newspaper every day. I do, cover to cover. Learn a little bit about what the world is really like, not just the common misconceptions of Americans.
One question: what justifiable good can you see out of theSchool of Americas, mentioned in several above posts? How can a nation that could stand for such an institution claim to be fighting terror?
[Edited by dysfunction on 06-Apr-04 22:19] | BullFrog
Wraith
Posted: 6 Apr 2004
14:14 GMT
Total Posts: 623 | Lunchbox, if you haven't noticed, arguing with dysfunction is useless. He is dedicated to his point of view that America hasn't done good in this world. Just leave it alone and move onto a different topic of discussion. Arguing further won't accomplish much, if anything at all.
---
"Men are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds." -Franklin D. Roosevelt | Digital
Guardian
Posted: 6 Apr 2004
19:31 GMT
Total Posts: 1051 | [Attempting to prevent a falme war]
Its time to expicitly state a rule that should be followed. Though it has been said before, I have a different take on it for enforcement. No personal attacks are allowed. I'm not fluent on legal speak but you all know what I mean, no belittling, demeaning, or otherwise defaming remarks towards others that either support or oppose your viewpoint(s). "Arguing with dysfunctional is useless" falls into this catigory. I'll give one warnig (for a chance to convince me otherwise) and if it persists, I'll delete your post(s) even though there may be worthwhile content in them.
I'm doing this to try and keep the playing field level and as objective as possible. | Lunchbox
Carrier
Posted: 6 Apr 2004
19:55 GMT
Total Posts: 2007 | I have noticed, and as he is dedicated to his point of view, so am I!!!! I will not surrender my beliefs to a few paltry scraps of evidence. If he is anti-America, then so be it. I happen to like America and I am very thankful for all it has done for me and given me the right to do. Just because Dysfunction THINKS he has proven his point, doesn't mean i have to think it. and i woould like to address some key issues he has brought up:
1. "We sent in soldiers to kill innocent people, to install dictators ten times worse than Saddam Hussein (not that he wasn't a bad guy). What good have we really done the world?"
Ya, who would you be talking about here Dysfunction? Let me know so i can further broadeen my knowledge of U.S. 'terrorist' acts. until then, i can't argue with you about this.
2. "Why did we care so much about Kuwait? Because of the OIL"
WrOnG!1! in case you didn't know, there was a coalition of about 40 countries that went into Kuwait, not just the U.S. Saddam invaded Kuwait because: 1) He accused Kuwait of slant-drilling 2) He believed, that since Kuwait was originally part of Iraq, they still were and he had the right to control them. The U.N. spearheaded Op: DS because Saddam had gone against U.N. warnings. HAD THE WAR BEEN ABOUT OIL, THE 'MONEY-HUNGRY' U.S. WOULD HAVE GONE IN ALONE.
3. "Iraq, by contrast, was one of the most progressive countries in the Middle East"
That, my dear Dysfunction, is a facade. A false front, set up by the government of Iraq to make us, the common American people, think highly of Iraq and protest [even more] the war.
4. "it has waged illegal war against Mexico, Spain, Hawaii, the Phillipines, etc"
Illegal war? I don't think there is such a thing. "All is fair in love and war" says the tried and true saying.
5. "it has drastically lowered the standards of living in South American, African, and Asian coutries to increase the labor force and decrease wages so that American compnies may prosper while those countries economies are destroyed"
Blah Blah Blah...Have you ever thought about this, Dysfunction? What jobs would those mentioned people have IF American companies hadn;t gone in? Ya, none. N-O-N-E. Granted, their jobs aren't the best, but it's better than no job at all. We're not destroying their economies, THEY WERE ALREADY DEVASTATED! We're helping the get back on track, but Rome wasn't built in a day you know. Things like that take time.
6. "Unless people like you wise up. Start reading the newspaper every day. I do, cover to cover. Learn a little bit about what the world is really like, not just the common misconceptions of Americans."
I will ask you to please refrain from making such insulting personal comments. Else i reserve the right to make unjustified comments
about you
7. One question: IF YOU HATE AMERICA SO MUCH, WHY ARE YOU STILL LIVING HERE?!? IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, THEN GO TO LUXEMBOURG AND HAVE YOUR HIGHEST PER CAPITA INCOME, OR GO TO ANOTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRY AND HAVE YOUR LOW CRIME RATE. IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, THEN EITHER LEAVE OR LEARN TO LIVE WITH IT.
GO AMERICA!!
-Lunchbox | spiral
Wraith
Posted: 6 Apr 2004
23:03 GMT
Total Posts: 958 | "no matter how much quoting/researching/analyzing i do, someone always comes up wiwth something to 'disprove' it."
As BF/D said, that's life, it isn't black and white, right and wrong. There are infinite of shades of grey.
"Ya, who would you be talking about here Dysfunction? Let me know so i can further broadeen my knowledge of U.S. 'terrorist' acts. until then, i can't argue with you about this."
Maybe you should check out some of my past posts, United States' intervention policies, although not generally regarded as terorrism (just overbearing police state/empire building), have caused plenty of suffering, Bowling for Columbine has some good numbers. It is a pretty interesting documentary. And go do some more "research," a good example is Contra Wars and Iran/Iraq history.
"'Iraq, by contrast, was one of the most progressive countries in the Middle East'
That, my dear Dysfunction, is a facade. A false front, set up by the government of Iraq to make us, the common American people, think highly of Iraq and protest [even more] the war."
A lot of the hardships in Iraq (and Cuba) have been caused by American/UN sanctions, which have thus far, generally failed to take rulers out of power, allowed the elite to continue an extravagent lifestyle and only causing the masses to suffer. On the topic of this quote Iraq was easily equal to many other Muslim countries in several areas. We're very friendly with Saudia Arabia, and they have a significant history of human rights violation.
"Illegal war? I don't think there is such a thing. 'All is fair in love and war' says the tried and true saying."
It's a saying, but that doesn't mean it's true. Try murdering for love, and then quote that to a Judge. And it is possible to have illegal war, there are guidelines to war, many set by the Geneva Convention.
"Blah Blah Blah...Have you ever thought about this, Dysfunction? What jobs would those mentioned people have IF American companies hadn;t gone in? Ya, none. N-O-N-E. Granted, their jobs aren't the best, but it's better than no job at all. We're not destroying their economies, THEY WERE ALREADY DEVASTATED! We're helping the get back on track, but Rome wasn't built in a day you know. Things like that take time."
A mocking "blah blah blah" fits under the "belittling" definition. And it also doesn't reinforce your arguement. You appear to only be looking at Iraq (and possibly Afghanistan) when you speak of rebuilding economies. The United States financed Contras put Nicaragua into civil war, completely wrecking any economy it had for many years, the United States didn't help rebuild it. Chile, which was trying to recover it's economy had its popularily-elected president killed by United States-financed rebels. The United States didn't help Vietnam of Norht Korea either. North Korea takes equal blame from both the United States and Russia for dividing Korea after World War 2, the north has suffered. Vietnam and Cambodia were both invaded during the Vietnam War by the United States. Killing of many civilians and dropping Agent Orange, and just creating a massive battlefield out of Vietnam didn't help it's economy i'm sure. Following World War I, America created a massive tariff tax on any imported goods. Recovering European nations couldn't recover, they had a surplus of industrial goods with nobody to sell it to, this ended up hurting the United States (Great Depression) and led to World War II.
You consider American Companies (though I wonder which companies you consider American) outsourcing to be positive? You're taking two opposite views at the same time. Outsourcing hurts the United States labor, yet you say Go America... two conflicting arguements. I don't consider exploiting labor, such as fruiting picking for pennies to be "helping" a nation. It's a form of economic slavery.
"I will ask you to please refrain from making such insulting personal comments. Else i reserve the right to make unjustified comments
about you"
You admit yourself that you are ignorant ("Let me know...until then i can't argue with you about this"). Btw, if everybody is an "eye for an eye," then "the world would be blind" - Gandhi.
"IF YOU HATE AMERICA SO MUCH, WHY ARE YOU STILL LIVING HERE?!?...IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, THEN EITHER LEAVE OR LEARN TO LIVE WITH IT."
First off, I don't hate America, I just think it is a place that is (often) misguided and overly biased. Being raised here and not yet an adult, do you expect me to move myself elsewhere? Also, there's a little thing late introduction of foreign languages in American schools, which limits options to live. Finally, just because I see faults with America doesn't mean I have to pack up and leave. Nor does it mean I have to deal with it. I can try beat some sense into ignorant people to try to make this a place that I don't see as many faults with. | dysfunction
Goliath
Posted: 7 Apr 2004
08:06 GMT
Total Posts: 122 | You made a lot of good points, spiral. Actually, you did as well, Lunchbox. if I ever say something demeaning, please keep in mind I didn't mean it. Also keep in mind that if I call you ignorant it is not necessaily an insult, just my opinion.
I agree with your last point, spiral. I am struggling for social justice in this country. I am a member of my school's branch of Amnesty Internationl, and a member of a very active Unitarian Universalist society. I don't hate this country, I merely wanto to fix its flaws. Patriotism is not about waving a flag and saying how much you love your country; it is trying to help your country be the best nation it can be. And patriotism applies to the whole world, as well. We all need to lose our nationalistic viewpoints and consider things from an international perspective. Now to address Lunchbox's arguments:
"What jobs would those mentioned people have IF American companies hadn;t gone in? Ya, none. N-O-N-E. Granted, their jobs aren't the best, but it's better than no job at all. We're not destroying their economies, THEY WERE ALREADY DEVASTATED!"
Actually, that's no true. Consider the price of chocolate. Over the last few years, chocolate prices have DRASTICALLY risen. yet the wages paid to African and South American cocoa farmers have LOWERED. They are employed by mostly American companies, or third-party corporations dealing with American companies. These companies are supported by the government. DON'T SUPPORT ECONOMIC OUTSOURCING! It loses American jobs and forces foreign workers to take jobs for lower wages. You have to understand the workings of economics, Lunchbox. If Americn companies offer lower wages in certain countries, other companies must lower their wages to compete. If workers will not take such low wages, there are others who will take their jobs, so that they can survive. People in other countries often make less than ! DOLLAR AN HOUR. Minimum wage in the U.S. is $6.75. Under $6.00 an hour is poverty wages. One dollar an hour is not just poverty wages; it's starvation wages. Have you ever seen how people live in Mexico? It is because of our ruthless economic domination. A movie I recommend to anyone is Bread and Roses, it addresses this very well. I also recommend Bowling for Columbine, though Michael Moore annoys me; he tends to make arguments by insulting people rather than with facts.
You still haven't answered my question at the end of my last post. I really want yo to consider how a country that could run a terrorist organization like SOA could consider itself anti-terrorist.
| Lunchbox
Carrier
Posted: 7 Apr 2004
13:33 GMT
Total Posts: 2007 | Well Dysfunction, you still haven't answered my question about "What kind of jobs would those people have IF American/intl. businesses hadn't come in?". I think i know what you're going to say, but i want to hear you say it yourself. Sorry about the comments, i kinda use this as a channel for anger from outside sources, and, being human, i tend to go overboard sometimes. But a question about the SOA: Does the government really run it? or is it a separate organization, merely recieving government funding? I would say the latter option. Also, good point about the Vietnam war Spiral. That is one of the major problems i have about America, we try to police the world as if it's our 'duty', thinking we help, but we don't.
BTW, what happened to your avatar, Dysfunction? | spiral
Wraith
Posted: 7 Apr 2004
15:40 GMT
Total Posts: 958 | "What kind of jobs would those people have IF American/intl. businesses hadn't come in?"
They could still have the same or similar jobs. Industry doesn't rely on international companies or Americans to be started. For example, educating citizens in a first-world country, and then bringing them back to help modernize the nation is a fairly common practice. | allynfolksjr
Administrator
Posted: 8 Apr 2004
12:51 GMT
Total Posts: 1892 | Hunh, miss a couple of days, and look what happens:
BTW: I didn't read the couple dozen (maybe not that many) posts that were longer than a paragraph...
| Lunchbox
Carrier
Posted: 8 Apr 2004
16:20 GMT
Total Posts: 2007 | "For example, educating citizens in a first-world country, and then bringing them back to help modernize the nation is a fairly common practice."
That's a pretty good idea, but some countries are very proud and think they can do it on their own.
"BTW: I didn't read the couple dozen (maybe not that many) posts that were longer than a paragraph..."
You should, Allyn.
1. that's about all we've been doing for the last 2 days or so
2. they have some very pertinent information about the subject at hand. | spiral
Wraith
Posted: 8 Apr 2004
20:50 GMT
Total Posts: 958 | "That's a pretty good idea, but some countries are very proud and think they can do it on their own."
Such as? I haven't heard of any country that does so. | dysfunction
Goliath
Posted: 9 Apr 2004
07:55 GMT
Total Posts: 122 | ""That's a pretty good idea, but some countries are very proud and think they can do it on their own."
Such as? I haven't heard of any country that does so."
Actually, many African nations do, for one.
"But a question about the SOA: Does the government really run it? or is it a separate organization, merely recieving government funding?"
Actually, it's run directly by the CIA. Even if it did only receive government funding, how could you live with a nation that even funded such an organization?
And now I will answer your question. In some countries, many people would not have jobs at all except for the United States. I will give you that. However, just because they have jobs because of us does not give us the right to force starvation wages on them. That's like a foster parent starving their adopted child and saying, "If it wasn't for me, you wouldn't be eating at all." And there are many unemployed, starving, or dead as a result of U.S. terrorism and economic imperialism.
| spiral
Wraith
Posted: 9 Apr 2004
16:05 GMT
Total Posts: 958 | "Actually, many African nations do, for one."
No...African countries are trying to get their citizens who traveled abroad to return to their respective nations. They aren't trying to do it on their own, they're trying to get their western-educated citizens to return. It's the same in Taiwan, where teachers who know Chinese and English really well can get very good salaries. China in the past had state-sponsored programs. Japan used it a lot to catch up to the western world in the Meiji revolution. Btw, about Africa:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3524710.stm | Lunchbox
Carrier
Posted: 9 Apr 2004
22:00 GMT
Total Posts: 2007 | Thanks for the Clarification D.
BTW, i don't support said organization. After reading of there horrific doings, i have changed my opinion.
EDIT: I think we're gonna have to:
1. Start a new forum soon
2. get a new topic, this one's getting old
[Edited by Lunchbox on 10-Apr-04 07:01] | dysfunction
Goliath
Posted: 10 Apr 2004
14:42 GMT
Total Posts: 122 | I agree. It's starting to take my browser more than 5 seconds to load it. ;) We've pretty much debated this topic out. Any ideas for a new one? | allynfolksjr
Administrator
Posted: 11 Apr 2004
10:55 GMT
Total Posts: 1892 | Um....I don't think theres anything left to debate, maybe something about the 9-11 commision, and The NSA (National Security Advisor/National Security Administraion). Okay, I can't spell Rices first name... | BullFrog
Wraith
Posted: 11 Apr 2004
11:55 GMT
Total Posts: 623 | How about something to do with school?
---
"Men are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds." -Franklin D. Roosevelt | dysfunction
Goliath
Posted: 11 Apr 2004
20:14 GMT
Total Posts: 122 | Do you realize that COMINTERN has been reorganized after 20 yhears? It was disbanded after a Congressional investigation. Its jobs is to hamper 'terrorist' groups (mstly peaceful organizations such as Greenpeace, the Communist and Socialist parties, Amnesty Internationl, etc). Except now they can spy on you by watching you every move on your computer, or with security cameras, or bug your phone. And its all legal thanks to the PAtriot act. | BullFrog
Wraith
Posted: 11 Apr 2004
21:02 GMT
Total Posts: 623 | Wonder if we're going to have another McCarthy type scare.
"Bagh! :eek_a: Terrorist!! Arrest him, arrest him!" <-(Just a general statement.)
Edit: How about flag burning for a new topic of discussion?
[Edited by BullFrog on 13-Apr-04 01:57]
---
"Men are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds." -Franklin D. Roosevelt | BullFrog
Wraith
Posted: 12 Apr 2004
17:01 GMT
Total Posts: 623 | Need to make a new post so as to catch everyone's attention...
Flag burning, global warming, capital punishment, world population. Any of those worth debating?
---
"Men are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds." -Franklin D. Roosevelt | spiral
Wraith
Posted: 12 Apr 2004
17:12 GMT
Total Posts: 958 | i like world pop.
edit: followed by warming.
[Edited by spiral on 13-Apr-04 02:12] | dysfunction
Goliath
Posted: 12 Apr 2004
18:19 GMT
Total Posts: 122 | I don't care. Frankly, I debated myself out. |
|
