Print

[Lizard_King]

QUOTE (pjclark1 @ Mar 9 2003, 08:47 AM)

My Xbox has made in china written on it. OK so some of my posts were a little too difficult for some of you to answer. Here is an easy one. Name 5 good things America has done for the world? (good can't involve killing people or otherwise breaking the 10 commandments)

Your request is ridiculously phrased, as if killing people were not sometimes both necessary and good. As if a million great things done by America would affect your preconceived notions about its role in history. At any rate, your conditions are still easily met:

1. The system of mass-production as well as that of standardized parts were created by Americans.

2. The world's economy and corresponding improvements in living standards could not be sustained without American involvement, both as an investor and as a consumer.

3. The internet's groundwork was largely laid down by the American military as a fail-safe for post-nuclear war communication.

4. The Marshall plan, rebuilding Europe and Japan, preventing the economic collapse of a large part of the world.

5. Xerox, an American company, came up with the concept of a GUI which both Apple and MS used to create their revolutionary OS's.  


Now, what was the point of this?  You'll detail 5 things you think are bad, and so on and so forth.  And if you really can't understand how the Xbox wouldn't have existed without America, as if Chinese laborers would have simply come up with it themselves, you've got issues.

[Achtung]

QUOTE

QUOTE  And as for that quote you keep going back to if you would actually read the whole thing I was responing too which you never actually do you'd see what I was referring too once again, your arguments would carry much more weight if the were coherent and understandable. If French is your primary language, all excuses allowed. If not, like I suspect, I recommend some remedial work, perhaps summer school? QUOTE  And take a long look at who manufacters Xbox or any so called american product just because it says made in the USA on it doesnt mean thats who design it or manufacter it. actually the point was that the Xbox was a product of american origin, or, the culture which you despise, which it is. I'll put this in terms you can hopefully understand. You are an idiot. You cannot refute one single argument. You cannot support one of your misguided ideas. You cannot read, extract, and respond to one point anyone here makes. Maybe when you turn 15, your ideals and values will closer resemble reality. Maybe you need to stop acquiring your insight from the bitter elderly in your inbred family. Until then, just leave politics to the adults.

Now my responses

QUOTE

God you are one stupid Individual, you are like a little 3 year old thats is saying " I know you are but what am I" you clearly do not have the mental capacity to debate any of the stated facts people put against you so you just spit out your a idiot or a morons or some meaningless pro American crap to make yourself feel good again. Like I said in my first reply I expected nothing less from people like you and trust me I have no lack of options to continue my statements just a knowledge that they are being wasted on people like you who cant see past your own nose. You have bashed anyone who has apposed your view that is how this all got started and people are not just going to sit here and listen to propaganda crap

QUOTE

I never thought it was possible for someone to miss the point of ever single response but you have some how succeeded. I have only argued the points people respond to incorrect about history and what the US is doing and not what is showing on TV to its people. In all your responses you pick one piece of a entire point which you can some how make a comment about but ignore the entire point of the response ( Look at the last 3 if you need someone to point them out) and make some comment that people are either idiotic, jealous some way of the States. You even did it above with the comment about you acting like a 3 year old saying I know you are but what am I, you even edit it to your own needs. that was not the reply nearly a point of the entire response

Ooh how you show your advanced “Adult” mind, if you could actually right back something that I haven’t clearly commented about you before I would be in complete shock.
You blatantly just retype my comments as some kind of pitiful way to insult me, which is just amusing “I know you are but what am I”. I particularly like that last comment “insight from the bitter elderly in your inbred family” which is then followed by “leave politics to the adults”. Wow, what superior intellect and credibility you display with such adult minded responses. Pat yourself on the back,  man you just showed me.

[jasonmvt]

QUOTE

Can you not understand that when you say things like Americans are so stupid, they only know what they see on tv, etc., etc... that those are far from educated responses. All I am asking for here is some basic adherence to logic. A person who claims to have a superior intellect should not be make statements like the aforementioned. If those statements were made about Canada (FOR THE 3RD TIME) would you not respond against them? And finally, you support someone who claims the moon landing was faked?

I have asked you these questions, and other, countless times.  Other people have asked you for responses as well.  You never answer with anything but

QUOTE

God you are one stupid Individual, you are like a little 3 year old

all of your responses have been based on this syle of whining and bitching.  If you could have provided at least some sort of argument along with your comments, that would be fine, and I am certain that myself and others would actually take you a little more seriously.  You complain because I quote them, but the rest of the response I quote contains nothing that varies from the quote itself.  Not one answer to one question, like I stated before.  You want to talk about adult responses???  Every single response I have made, even the last one, has attempted to extort some sort of backing from the statements you have made.  Re-read the thread and you will see this.  And to act like my last response was so childish when ALL of yours have been that way?  I clearly stated that it seemed to be the only way to relate to you;  to reply in the same standards from which you post.  This is why everyone that reads this thread, being American or not, understands that you are a complete joke and waste of time.

[Dark Schneider]

Ignoring all the blatant bullshit,propaganda, and popular "America" bashing , here is the response to the original point of this thread. North Korea is more of a threat than Iraq.

Yes at the moment through their blatant bluffing, and posturing , North Korea does indeed look to be more of a threat to the U.S.A. than Iraq. Infact I would agree with that statement. However you must take into account the proximety to China, and also the indication that N. Korea is so desperate for economic help/welfare that this is their best way to get world wide attention. Yes it is an odd way to do it, but effective.

Now why do we have all of our forces centered on Iraq, when N. Korea has basically callled the U.S. out to a fight, and double dog darring them to do something about it.

Pull up a map people, and look at the distance from the forces around Iraq, and then proceed to draw a line to the Korean Peninsula. Incase you cannot see it for yourself, the bases in Saudi Arabia,Qatar,Turkey are an excellent staging ground for an attack on N. Korea if need be without jeopordizing the core strength and operations of those forces. They could have an attack force landing within hours of a conflict with N. Korea if need be, and bombers are already stationed in Guam, and you damn well know there is atleast one aircraft carrier in the China Seas, and submarines with Tomahawk cruise missiles ready to deploy. These bases are close enough to get there fast, and far enough away to be safe from an attack to disrupt them.

Any responses to this should be from people with atleast a "C" grade or better in history, and tactics, not to mention geography. =)

From the staging point in the Middle East, the U.S. and British forces have a command over the rest of the world. That is why this area is so important, and that is why the troops are stationed there. Pretty darn smart of those yanks ehhh you troll bashers?

And as for all these personal attacks that I see going on here, I believe a long time ago we all voted that these were banishable offenses. What has become of this board as of late?

[jasonmvt]

Dark Schneider,

I just get really tired of the, "bush sucks," and, "Americans are stupid," posts that do nothing to further or enrich the discussion.  Your points are legitimate, and I thank you for that.  I think you'll see that Lizard, myself, mage and others do try to reason with these zealots, only to meet with more of the same.  There comes a point where there is nothing left to say to them.  I am sure if one of us proffered the same incendiary remarks about their country of origin (unfounded and insulting) you would see attempts to refute them.  I'm not really sure what side of this issue (the achtung's and pjclark1's, or myself Lizard and others) you are directing this at, though, so I guess that's all I can really comment on.

[Dark Schneider]

QUOTE (jasonmvt @ Mar 9 2003, 08:59 AM)

Dark Schneider, I just get really tired of the, "bush sucks," and, "Americans are stupid," posts that do nothing to further or enrich the discussion.  Your points are legitimate, and I thank you for that.  I think you'll see that Lizard, myself, mage and others do try to reason with these zealots, only to meet with more of the same.  There comes a point where there is nothing left to say to them.  I am sure if one of us proffered the same incendiary remarks about their country of origin (unfounded and insulting) you would see attempts to refute them.  I'm not really sure what side of this issue (the achtung's and pjclark1's, or myself Lizard and others) you are directing this at, though, so I guess that's all I can really comment on.

You know I'm 100% behind those that defend the U.S.A. when need be =) The others are all a bunch of trollers that need to be taken care of swiftly. Those are the ones who the "banning" was being directed to.

[jasonmvt]

 I can't tell you enough how refreshing it is to hear that.  I mean, you made an intelligent post and how long will it be before someone responds to it with

QUOTE

You ignorent Americans make me sick you go off on how great your Country is when you do not know anything about History other then what they tell you On TV

This is the kind of comment that saturates this thread, and ruins any chance of debate.  My whole point is that if you are going to say things like the above quote, at least be able to support them with something resembling a fact.   Or, better yet, leave the inflammatory remarks aside and actually make some sort of case for your point.  The requests for common sense and logic go largely ignored, and the rabble contiue on.

[Mage]

QUOTE (Achtung @ Mar 9 2003, 09:41 AM)

First I never said all Americans are so stupid, they only know what they see on TV

Oh the irony.  Americans only know what they see on TV?  As if Canadians, Brits, or Germans, are somehow more enlightened and do not get their information from the press?  Mind you, what do you think are non-biased sources of information.  Think hard and long before you answer.
When someone reports on some event, were you there to see how it happened?  

I'll leave your points to be refuted by someone else, business/finance/ee(cs) are my main areas of knowledge.
Except point 2 can be answered easily.

QUOTE

What gives the United states the right to tell the world who and how they should be governed, Is that not up to there own people? what is to stop the states after the destry the Iraq government to go after ever other government that does not suppost them 100%.

If, this was an ideal world, then countries wouldn't need to worry about such things, hell countries wouldn't exist.  We'd just be the human race that spans the Earth.  However such is not the case, and if there are people in this world who have enough power to do things that could signifigantly cause harm to other people, then it is fine for other countries to step in and 'de-fuse' the situation, so to speak.  Or, would you rather wait until said person and/or country builds some nuclear weapons?  
The actions of others can affect even those that wish not to see them.

[Dark Schneider]

This should end it right here.

You can criticise another persons country when yours is perfect.

Man is it gonna be a while before anything ever gets said again isn't it?

I find it funny how some of you think that the U.S. acts alone all by itself all the time. Nah Germany NEVER sold any materials that could be turned from regular medicine producing plants into biological warfare sites...nah. The Russians would never sell nuclear material to a rogue state like Iran or Iraq now would they? And the the French, they wouldn't sell weapons to just anyone with the cash in hand would they?

The Saudi's funding terrorist cells...no way! That's not fair..because right there I am being a racist right...can't blame the Saudi's..not like 95% of the terrorists that slammed the planes into the world trade centers were saudi murderers were they? My god that is just so unpolitically correct!

Then there's the CIA...lol..Intelligence my foot! Yeh we all know what they did, and we all know why. Yes they are supplying warlords in AFghanistan...which will turn on the U.S. at the first sign that they can. Yes Saddam was used as a pawn to destabilize the region and keep the oil prices down. He has passed his use though, and here we are now.

As far as the U.S. poking it's nose in everything, and wanting to get things it's own way. It's called business pure and simple. They do it because they can. When you have the money, the firepower, and the ability to use it when needed...you do. When someone starts fucking with your business, you show them the way to enlightenment. The Germans did it when they were on top, the British did it when they ruled the world, the French...well...they're French...what more can I say.

The world is not fair, the strong will survive, and the weak shall perish. Remember these words and you will do well.

[Lizard_King]

QUOTE (Achtung @ Mar 9 2003, 05:41 PM)

1. Saddam Hussain, put in charge and supplied by CIA Bin Ladin and terrorist cells supplied with weapons and training by the US government back in the 80's when they were then Freedom fighters, then when apose the US they are turned  into  Terrorists and must be taken out. Now The US is supplying other cells and other regimes with the same like pakistan to fight against them do you not think eventually they too will also have a dissagrement with the US ie pakistan on India and the US will be put back with the same problem. Do you not see the problem with this.   Is this not supporting the terrorism that you say you are fighting against.

Once again, look at the time frame.  Saddam Hussein and Bin Laden were an unknown factor we were backing against a known enemy, the Soviet Union.  In retrospect, it is easy to see that as a totally wrong move; however, we'd all be singing a different tune had the Soviets succeeded in establishing a dominant foothold in the Middle East and had their foot on America and the rest of the world's throat.  You can bet it would have taken a good deal longer for them to collapse.

As I continually say, there are rarely objectively, purely good choices available to world leaders.  Usually, all they have open to them is the lesser of two evils.  In that time frame it was correct.

QUOTE

2. What gives the United states the right to tell the world who and how they should be governed, Is that not up to there own people? what is to stop the states after the destry the Iraq government to go after ever other government that does not suppost them 100%.

Up to their own people?  So obviously you think Saddam Hussein stays in power due to his people thinking he is doing a great job?  Should we have let the French work out that whole Nazi thing themselves as well?

As to the second part of your question, there is nothing material to stop America, now or afterwards.  However, unless a compelling interest can be proved to the nation, which as you can see with Iraq and Afghanistan is no mean task.  I think we'll have our hands full for a good long time.

There are good questions to ask about the problems a doctrine of preemption can create, but that is a much longer discussion even than this one.

QUOTE

3. How about the terrorist acts by the US in Niceragua and assassination attempts on countless people that have done no real crime but apose the US. example Castro.

Have you been to Cuba?  Because I have, and let me tell you, the only people that think American opposition to Cuba is wrongheaded are those that have the luxury of living outside of that hellhole.  I have a great deal of admiration for how the Cuban people have persevered despite half a century of oppression, but to say Castro is blameless in the equation is absurd.  

Nicaragua is a very complicated situation.  It is clear to those of us that have lived next door to it as I did most of my life that there were no good guys to back in that situation; however the Sandinistas were definitely more wrong, as was proved after a decade under them managed to make the country even more poor, miserable and oppressed.  The Contras were no prize, either, but in the context of the Cold War the decision to support anti-Communists was an easy one for Reagan to make.  

QUOTE

Im willing to turn this back into a credible debate, and hope to see real answers to the questions not only by Jasonmvt but to anyone that has a reply to it and not have to see personal attacts because of someones stand on the subject.

Personal attacks aren't going anywhere.  They are a staple of an anonymous discussion like this.  Sometimes, no matter how hard you try, someone's attack hits a nerve, and the situation degrades.  Makes you wish we were just talking about video games, sometimes.

[Achtung]

QUOTE

Once again, look at the time frame. Saddam Hussein and Bin Laden were an unknown factor we were backing against a known enemy, the Soviet Union. In retrospect, it is easy to see that as a totally wrong move; however, we'd all be singing a different tune had the Soviets succeeded in establishing a dominant foothold in the Middle East and had their foot on America and the rest of the world's throat. You can bet it would have taken a good deal longer for them to collapse. As I continually say, there are rarely objectively, purely good choices available to world leaders. Usually, all they have open to them is the lesser of two evils. In that time frame it was correct.

Now I want you to know I understand what your saying and comming from, but my point  to your answer is do you not see the vicious circle to this. Seeing how it back fired on them already they are repeating that mistake again supplying Pakistan with all kinds of weapons and other rebel factions to fight off there last mistake. And what happens when India and Pakistan issue escalates and the united states ignores it and Pakistan then becomes hostile towards them. Suddenly the same problem arises and countless others.

QUOTE

Up to their own people? So obviously you think Saddam Hussein stays in power due to his people thinking he is doing a great job? Should we have let the French work out that whole Nazi thing themselves as well? As to the second part of your question, there is nothing material to stop America, now or afterwards. However, unless a compelling interest can be proved to the nation, which as you can see with Iraq and Afghanistan is no mean task. I think we'll have our hands full for a good long time. There are good questions to ask about the problems a doctrine of preemption can create, but that is a much longer discussion even than this one.

I want to see the same thing happen here as what happened with Yugoslavia, the problem was geniside not regime, and that was taken care of and the former government was defeted by there own people there was no force of regime change as the US is planning with Iraq. Your point of the french and the Nazi's that was a invation by the Nazis and Forced a regime change in France, exactly what the US is doing against Iraq.
Yes your right there is nothing to stop them now or afterwards, Thats why this can not be allowed to happen by the UN, because if this is suitable solution for the US then why not for any other nation to do the same. What if N korea decides well America can go and change a goverment when ever they feel is right there going to take S korea the same way and so on and so on.

QUOTE

Have you been to Cuba? Because I have, and let me tell you, the only people that think American opposition to Cuba is wrongheaded are those that have the luxury of living outside of that hellhole. I have a great deal of admiration for how the Cuban people have persevered despite half a century of oppression, but to say Castro is blameless in the equation is absurd. Nicaragua is a very complicated situation. It is clear to those of us that have lived next door to it as I did most of my life that there were no good guys to back in that situation; however the Sandinistas were definitely more wrong, as was proved after a decade under them managed to make the country even more poor, miserable and oppressed. The Contras were no prize, either, but in the context of the Cold War the decision to support anti-Communists was an easy one for Reagan to make.

The first part I do agree with you, and I have been to cuba many times and it is absolutly one of the most beautiful countries in the world. But Castro was just mearly a simple example of the US using terrorist tactics and acting as if they are Innocent of such things. My argument here was that America can not try to apear so Innocent in the eyes of the world when there past is littered with terror.
My point is Terror is not something that just happens out of the blue, terror and terrorist are created by terror and is a result of similar actions against them or having no other choice to defend what you believe in. You have to understand that in the eye of mid east and many other countries the US are Terrorist that are threatning there beliefs and way of life and defending that with war which is more terror for them does nothing to help that. You do not have to agree, this is mearly my Opinion so do not take this as a way to bash the US because I am not trying to.

[Mage]

QUOTE (Achtung @ Mar 9 2003, 02:26 PM)

I'm only making a reply to Lizzard king because he seems to understand what I said above, and actually wants to carry a normal debate.

Hahaha how funny.  Do what you wish, the people who shall read this thread shall see all your posts and judge based on such.  My job is already done.
By the way, my answers were valid, regardless if you choose not to accept them.

[Dark Schneider]

QUOTE (Achtung @ Mar 9 2003, 03:26 PM)

And I refuse to acknowledge that sickening rant by Dark Schneider.

Can't handle a bit of the truth that you cannot refute with insane accusations and 2 year old tantrums? Shame...

QUOTE

I'm only making a reply to Lizzard king because he seems to understand what I said above, and actually wants to carry a normal debate.

Do you know the actual meaning of a debate? For you have shown little knowledge in the area for that which is required to be considered so. The past 3 pages are filled with "fanatical" and unsubstantiated "facts" by yourself.

Are you French by the way? Oh I'm sorry...

[jasonmvt]

Achtung,

This is much more of what I was hoping for; at least you are presenting a more thought out opinion.   Much of what Lizard has said I agree with, and I really don't want to reiterate more of the same (the downfall of catching your reply a little late).  I especially agree with him in regards to your 1st point about the past support of Saddam and others like him.  It was a move made to deal with the situation at hand at the time.  If they could forsee the future of that decision, I cannot say.  It was, however, the lesser evil at the time, and certainly it is better to be dealing with Saddam now, rather than a strong, coherent Soviet Union.  It was a business type move, and we put the major competitor out of business only to have the 'employees' we trained try to take their place.  I know that is an over simplification, but is reinforced by the ideal that business and warfare are not all that diffrent.

as for your second point about what gives the US the right...  The resolutions enacted and agreed upon by Iraq were backed by many, many countries, including Canada, I believe.  The simple fact that we wish to enforce them should not ostracize us from the global community.  Like I have said before, we have given them ample opportunities, and still are, to comply.  The have continually blocked our efforts, lied, and attempted to make fools of us for trying. (example being the mockery of a report submitted by iraq on the status of its weapon development)  Saddam understands very well that his defiance causes tension between the US and its allies and will continue to milk it right down to, and maybe even past, zero hour (March 17th).

Nicaragua is without a doubt another case of the lesser of two evils.   I would think if you know the history of the country you too would choose to back the Contras over the alternative.  When you ad in the cold war hysteria of the time, the choice to oppose communism, in any form, becomes more palatable.  As far as Castro is concerned, Lizard is absolutely correct-   the country languishes in squalor and fear, while Castro rules on unflinchingly.  The Cuban missle situation also rears itself into this equation, albeit long ago, the powers at be then, are the powers at be now.

The last part, about the moon landing fellow, well.... that is just laughable, and anyone who can present such arguments straight faced loses all other credibility in the debate.  You had backed him in his previous statements as being a person of intelligence, and my point was to show the error in that judgement.

I realize that you have already responded to similar points that I have made here, but I did still wanted to recognize your previous post as an honest attempt at debate.  While I don't agree with the things that you are saying, it is alot easier to respect them.

[Achtung]

QUOTE

It was a business type move, and we put the major competitor out of business only to have the 'employees' we trained try to take their place. I know that is an over simplification, but is reinforced by the ideal that business and warfare are not all that diffrent.

Im sorry but I refuse to see the loss of countless innocent lives as any form of business. Go tell the tons of Mothers, Fathers sons and daughters that there innocent loved ones that were killed from war that its just business. Someone mentioned there family curently going over to fight, if they dont return tell there family it was just business. I guess thinking that way Ford made a great business decision with the pinto aswell. I hope to never live to see a day when we look at life that way.

Again this is only my opinion, Im not trying to Insualt you.

I also dont agree with the comment of it being better to deal with the "employees" or smaller rebel factions as apose to someone like the Soviets. Dealing with many small rebel cells armed with low tech devastating tactics  is much worse then a Huge country having to act according to deplomatic rules. And the United States is finding that out right now. The Soviets had to worry about there place on the Internatinal stage and could not use any type of chemical or nuclear weapon without huge consequences. Not so with unknown rebels whos whole goal is to get noticed with Terror.

QUOTE

I realize that you have already responded to similar points that I have made here, but I did still wanted to recognize your previous post as an honest attempt at debate. While I don't agree with the things that you are saying, it is alot easier to respect them.

I do appreciate that.