It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

State of nation - european point of view

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 06:20 AM
link   
....sorry to mention, but it seems to me that you are on a way to
totalitarian policestate under martial law with president with limitless
power. And everybody who dare to critisize that is unscrupulous traitors.
Sounds nice?
And your governments attidude of democracy in other countries seems to
be that if you critisize actions of your USG, you are undemocratic terrorist
lovers and your goverment have to change or...
Mr Bush asked "Why they hate us?", wrong qustion, right is:
Why they hate USG?
Do you remember some nasty big bullies in your school?
Mostly their victims were defendless, friendless, different children.
I think the answer to question is...
USG is the bully of the world.
USG thinks to be always right because you are so strong and God is
american and capitalist.

Most of rest of the world don't agree I'm afraid, thats why.

I'm developing multiple personalities so I can answer to myself.

!
Shut up you
traitor, we don't like your opinios, we'll send you
to Syria to learn some respect
!



"Amnesty International has today written to the US Attorney General urging a full investigation into the treatment of Maher Arar. The Canadian citizen was deported last year from the USA to Syria where he was allegedly tortured and held for months in cruel, inhuman and degrading conditions."

web.amnesty.org...



[edit on 2-3-2006 by HoHoFoo]

Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 3-3-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]




posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 12:53 PM
link   
As long as we're going to extremes here, let me give it a shot.

All Europeans hate America and want to drag us down because they are still angry about the revolutionary war. You're always wanting to drag down the U.S., and anything we do is automatically wrong to you. Bush is the best president and world leader there every was/will be, but anything he does makes you people think that he is the great Satan. You all want to terrorists to win, and are extremely gleeful when you hear that Bush screwed up. You seem to think that be spreading freedom, we suck and are doing the wrong thing.

How'd that sound? Too extreme...not extreme enough? I don't know that I could quite get into a mind-set that would rival your level of political "brawashed-ness."



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 05:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Herman
As long as we're going to extremes here, let me give it a shot.

...."brawashed-ness."


What "brawashed-ness." means? I'm not natural born english writer and I could't find any translation.

Yes I agree that my "opening" was littlebit extreme, but we are talking about USA politics which is only superpower in world this moment and also acting like one. Speaks of goood intensions of freedom, democrazy and capitalism are not enought to calm people of other world when you stomp on nations to pieces.
Actions, not talks, are the measure of man.
USG is messing with world, so world has right to mess with USA politics

Irak had once perhaps best infrastructure and standart of living in middle-east.
Now it's in ruins and at the edge of civilwar after two wars USG has attacked against them.
And why? Because USG old friend and puppy, Saddam was not obedient anymore, so he had to go.
This is my opinion.



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 10:46 AM
link   
HoHoFoo,

Maybe You Should Look From Your European Prospective(And Mine Too) First At Europe,and than at USA...
If there will be an govenment change it will be in Europe,and not for good - muslim lovers or anti-emigration hard-liners...
With aging and dying population,we already 15 years need immigrants to simply not loose population...but last year that too didn't help...
With the absence of any millitary capability outside Europe( execpt GB) Iran is having fun with us now,I can only image what it will be when thay have the Bomb...
Yeah we can nuke them...it will really help us when we loose millions...

[edit on 3-3-2006 by ZMax]



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by HoHoFoo
What "brawashed-ness." means? I'm not natural born english writer and I could't find any translation.


I made it up. Trust me, you don't want me to go into all of the spelling and grammar errors in your post. I think I'd be here all day. I figured as long as you clearly don't care about that kind of stuff, I could make up a word or two and get away with it.



Yes I agree that my "opening" was littlebit extreme, but we are talking about USA politics which is only superpower in world this moment and also acting like one. Speaks of goood intensions of freedom, democrazy and capitalism are not enought to calm people of other world when you stomp on nations to pieces.


Oh, I see what you did there. Very whitty! I'm sure Michael Moore would love you! But seriously, there's a fine line between "stomping a country to the ground" and attempting to liberate it. Before peace, sometimes, there needs to be a little chaos. Think about every war we've ever fought. Was it instantaneous peace? No - there was a period of war and destruction before we could rebuild.



Irak had once perhaps best infrastructure and standart of living in middle-east.


Wow... Just wow... I don't know if what you've said is true (You didn't provide a link or anything), but saying that Iraq was the best in the middle east is like saying this murdering rapist is the nicest of the murdering rapists. It was still in shambles, being ruled be a murderous dictator, and I for one am glad that we're in there trying to improve it.


Now it's in ruins and at the edge of civilwar after two wars USG has attacked against them.
And why? Because USG old friend and puppy, Saddam was not obedient anymore, so he had to go.
This is my opinion.


I'll try to respect your opinion, but are you suggesting that removing Saddam was the wrong thing to do?



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Herman
Wow... Just wow... I don't know if what you've said is true (You didn't provide a link or anything), but saying that Iraq was the best in the middle east is like saying this murdering rapist is the nicest of the murdering rapists. It was still in shambles, being ruled be a murderous dictator, and I for one am glad that we're in there trying to improve it.


Please don't mix things. Saddam=Iraq is not true. When you put Iraq in box and Saddam's face as label it's easy to stomp on it, but too easily you forget those millions of civilians.
Links:
www.ugcs.caltech.edu...
thenexthurrah.typepad.com...
www.ilaam.net...


Now it's in ruins and at the edge of civilwar after two wars USG has attacked against them.
And why? Because USG old friend and puppy, Saddam was not obedient anymore, so he had to go.
This is my opinion.



I'll try to respect your opinion, but are you suggesting that removing Saddam was the wrong thing to do?


Of course not, we agree that Saddam was inhuman dictator.
But if you want scrambled eggs, is it really nessessary to nuke down the hole chicken farm?

I also consider inhuman acts as destroing hole infrastructure of country, launching 12 years embargo making about 1 million extra deaths.

"The United Nations estimates 1 million Iraqis, mostly children, have died under the sanctions."
www.hanaduschak.com...

Mod Edit: Quoting Etiquette – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 3-3-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by HoHoFoo
Yes I agree that my "opening" was littlebit extreme, but we are talking about USA politics which is only superpower in world this moment and also acting like one.


Well what should we act like?


Originally posted by HoHoFoo
USG is messing with world, so world has right to mess with USA politics


Yeah alot of good it will do you.



Originally posted by HoHoFoo
Irak had once perhaps best infrastructure and standart of living in middle-east. Now it's in ruins and at the edge of civilwar after two wars USG has attacked against them.


Perhaps they did have the highest standards in the middle-east but I would have to disagree that its our fault for the change. After all it was Saddam's idea to attack Iran [sarcasm] oh and after that incredibly glorious and successful war [/sarcasm] he then decides to pick on Kuwait. Again that was hardly our idea either. And then instead of cutting his losses and tucking his tail in between his legs and going home he has to try to kill the Former President Bush.

Saddam had more than his fair share of chances to be let back into the world community my friend. He blew them all. But like a good european its not the blood thirsty dictators fault its the evil capitalist americans fault. You gloss over the fact of all the people he killed and treat the guy like some innocent victim. That is obsolute garbage.


Originally posted by HoHoFoo
And why? Because USG old friend and puppy, Saddam was not obedient anymore, so he had to go.


He should have taken a que from good old Hosni Mubarak over there in Egypt. Good Hosni, good Hosni now fetch.



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 10:04 PM
link   
HoHoFoo,

First off, I'd like to apologize for being short with you earlier about "brainwashed-ness." In all honesty, I read what you typed wrong and though you were poking fun at me for using a made up word. Sorry about that. And no - it's not a real word
.


Originally posted by HoHoFoo
Please don't mix things. Saddam=Iraq is not true. When you put Iraq in box and Saddam's face as label it's easy to stomp on it, but too easily you forget those millions of civilians.
Links:
www.ugcs.caltech.edu...
thenexthurrah.typepad.com...
www.ilaam.net...


From the beginning of this whole ordeal, Saddam has been the dictator of Iraq. Had Saddam never taken power in the first place, we most likely would never have invaded Iraq. Saddam has been a huge part of the problem for the entire ride. So to re-phrase your analogy, Saddam = huge part of the reason for invading Iraq.


Now it's in ruins and at the edge of civilwar after two wars USG has attacked against them.
And why? Because USG old friend and puppy, Saddam was not obedient anymore, so he had to go.
This is my opinion.


Saddam was mass murdering civilians. This is hardly our little puppy mis-behaving. It's more like a gigantic pitbull going on a murderous rampage.



Of course not, we agree that Saddam was inhuman dictator.
But if you want scrambled eggs, is it really nessessary to nuke down the hole chicken farm?

I also consider inhuman acts as destroing hole infrastructure of country, launching 12 years embargo making about 1 million extra deaths.


Saddam wasn't the entire problem, but he was a major part of it. We didn't nuke the country. We've been using precision strikes and soldiers. If we were nuking the place, there would be nothing left to rebuild.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Herman
HoHoFoo,

First off, I'd like to apologize for being short with you earlier about "brainwashed-ness." In all honesty, I read what you typed wrong and though you were poking fun at me for using a made up word. Sorry about that. And no - it's not a real word
.



It's okay, I could use more time to be accurate or to use some text editor with spell checking.
I can read and understand english quite well but presenting your ideas with foreign language is harder, needs more mistakes

Anyway people can have some fun with my grammar and spelling after my depressing and heavy subjects



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 12:16 PM
link   


Saddam had more than his fair share of chances to be let back into the world community my friend. He blew them all. But like a good european its not the blood thirsty dictators fault its the evil capitalist americans fault. You gloss over the fact of all the people he killed and treat the guy like some innocent victim. That is obsolute garbage.


My english have to be terrible, you not getting my point.
Or do misunderstand me by purpose?
I put it simple:
I don't defend Saddam, he had to go.
I'm criticizing USR attitude.
When USG wanted Saddam to down, they didn't give a s... about "collateral damage".
Over 1 million civilians died during your embargo to lack of medicins, malnutrition or/and lack of clean water.
Hey, halloo....? Human rights?



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 04:08 PM
link   
The sanctions were created to limit Saddam's ability to rearm after the first gulf war. And yes they were poorly planed and implemented. However the vast majority of suffering that resulted from the sanctions is directly attributible to Saddam. Under the oil for food program Saddam could sell as much oil as he wanted for food and medicine but did he no.

Saddam with the help of many governments from all over the world including from europe was able to undermine the sanctions to increase his power. And prolong the suffering of his people for political purposes. The suffering of the Iraqi people under the sanctions was not the USG fault. It was Saddam's and it was his alone.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join