Americans Addicted To War?

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499
I think appeasement is the bigger addiction. The attitude of much of the world seems to be "If I bury my head in the sand maybe the bad things might go away."


You have voted JIMC5499 for the Way Above Top Secret award.
You have two more votes this month.

Absolutely. Appeasement ... anti-americanism ... It's what is 'in'. Funny thing
is (or sad, depending on how you look at it) that the people who are spouting
anti-Americanism and appeasement wouldn't be able to if it wasn't for America.

No, Americans are NOT addicted to war. Best take another look around the
planet and at those who attacked US on 9/11.




posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Strangerous
'More backward'? on what evidence do you base that statement? We live in Europe 'you know, where the culture comes from' - Eddy Izzard - we don't see oursleves as backward (quite the opposite in fact).


Of course that's how you feel, and what else would anyone expect you to say in your defense? Of course it's also OK - in your mind - for you to feel that way and defend yourself, but somehow not OK for the U.S. to feel and do the same when attacked.


Kyoto was an agreement (no quotes!!) signed by many countries in the World but ignored by the US central govt.


You are sidestepping. The U.S. would have had to spend $billions (more?) modifying it's entire industrial base to comply while, as I said previously, gross polluters such as China were not required to make any changes. And the U.S did propose the alternative that all industrial nations be included. However, the underlying purpose of Kyoto seemed to be more about crippling the U.S. economy than reducing pollution, so quite naturally we refused to go along. Say, isn't the UK doing pretty much the same thing regarding the pound vs. the Euro?

Suggestion: Try making sure your your own country and/or the EU is that "shining city on the hill" before turning your attention over here. Failing to do so is a much better definition of hypocrisy than the one you provided.

Lastly, until the U.S. took your place, the UK was once the world's only super power ("the sun never sets on the British Empire"). Tell us all how badly you feel and how sorry you are for all the suffering that was caused for millions of people and all the resources pillaged worldwide by the British Empire.


[edit on 7/6/2006 by centurion1211]



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
BTW I pity anyone who thinks that War is always the only answer.

BTW I equally pity anyone who thinks that war is never the answer.

Unfortunately there are times when it has to happen. The war on terror is
one of those times. Appeasers and bought off politicians in the UN Security
Council (what a laughable title) stand in the way of our soverignty and security
then to heck with them. If they had done their jobs properly - like not
taking bribes from Saddam and not accepting illegal oil shipments (Syria and Russia and Galloway) there probably wouldn't be war on the scale you see it
now in the Middle East.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
Suggestion: Try making sure your your own country and/or the EU is that "shining city on the hill" before turning your attention over here.


You have voted centurion1211 for the Way Above Top Secret award.
You have one more vote left for this month.

Man, you nailed it. Excellent! Example - Tens of thousands of elderly died in
France last year in the heat wave while the middle aged crowd was too busy
on vacation to take care of them and yet France still points it's finger at America
every chance it gets. Amazing!



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Flyers Fan, many thanks for your vote. There must be a real shortage of mirrors around the world so these people can take a look at themselves - first.

History lesson for the rest of you: Find an old globe or world map from, say, before 1960. Now take a look at which country claims to own what section of the world. Start with the continent of Africa. What did France 'own' and suck the resources from? The UK? Netherlands? Germany (before they had to give up their claims as a result of losing WWI)? Now start moving across southern Asia where the UK also 'owned' all the land, resources and people of Egypt, India and Pakistan, while the French 'owned' Syria and "French Indochina" and the Dutch 'owned' current day Indonesia. Then there's all the islands of the Pacific Ocean.

Starting to get it yet?

Before you start throwing around the hypocrisy word, take a look at all the countries that were the real colonial powers. That's right, it's the same countries calling the U.S. to task right now.


[edit on 7/6/2006 by centurion1211]



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Absolutely. Appeasement ... anti-americanism ... It's what is 'in'. Funny thing
is (or sad, depending on how you look at it) that the people who are spouting
anti-Americanism and appeasement wouldn't be able to if it wasn't for America.

No, Americans are NOT addicted to war. Best take another look around the
planet and at those who attacked US on 9/11.


So, if we're against the war, we're anti-American? And how, I ask, can you dissent, and 'spout appeasement' at the same time? I don't think you have a firm grasp on who is appeasing who. The government is appeased by the complacence of the American society. This complacence is the 'sticking of the heads in the sand waiting for it to pass', and is the gateway to the errosion of our rights..."in the name of security".

Oh, and don't you have any questions about who really attacked us on 9/11? How can anyone with one eye half open not?

[edit on 7/6/2006 by Unit541]



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:04 PM
link   
I like my dew to the person that made reference to it.
And I said nothing about rights dude. Only point i was trying
to make was americans are not addicted to war. End of story.
Please stay on topic !



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mdv2
So, basically you generalize one accident as an excuse to start wars everywhere you think it is required? In my opinion there's no legal reason for the invasion of Iraq.


The funny thing about the "law" is that to be effective it has to be enforced, and it can only be enforced by somebody in power. What do you want America to do? Never engage in regional conflicts, even if they affect our citizens and interests? Should we do like we did in Rwanda, just step back and let millions of people be slaughtered and not do anything about it, even though we could?

You can't have it both ways. You can't expect us to be Team America, World Police, yet let the rest of the world hack at each other while we stand by and ignore it.

So what we try to do now is only get involved in conflicts where we can make money. Otherwise, what's in it for us? We just have to accept that people will always be trying to kill each other off. And it's not like places like Rwanda can afford to hire us as mercenaries. We're too expensive. So now we generally only go into places where we can get oil or some other kind of valuable resource. Otherwise, what's the point? We don't want to run some dusty little country where the Shaboos and Blahboos want to settle an old score between themselves. We're not really imperialistic like that. We'd prefer to keep everyone as potential markets, not conquered citizens we have to support.

But we don't get any cooperation! All we get is hate. So we say, "fine." If that's the way you want it, if you want us to fight for you, it'll be cash up front. And if you don't have cash, then tough toenails. Get slaughtered by your ancient enemies. What do we care? As long as we get your oil, or your cheap flat screen TVs, we're fine.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:06 PM
link   
neformore,

You have some good obersrvations, but would you concede that there are those of us who see a legitimate threat in Iraq, Iran, and North Korea due to their past actions? During the Korean war, NATO and the whole UN was at war with North Korea, and frankly the conditions there have not changed, except the NK peoples are being forced into cannibalism due to the psycho in charge there.

Iraq and Iran have govts that are responsible for thousands upon thousands of deaths, mostly against each other. One way or another they have (had for Iraq) been persuing means to extend their reaches.

Of these three, none had any love for the US. I'd go so far as saying they are/were quite militantly against the US.

I think I have some good reasons for seeing some countries as a threat to the US. Were the Balkans a threat? Hell no. Double hell no. Did anyone complain about illegal war when Clinton deployed troops there (where they still are after all these years). Not in the mainstream media they didn't. What was the consensus on this forum then? Not being a member then, I don't know what the air was like on that. Sure this isn't a good example of how the US isn't addicted to war, but my quetion is, is the US only addicted to war when the rest of the world doesn't approve of the war we are in?



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Enkidu

We'd prefer to keep everyone as potential markets, not conquered citizens we have to support.

But we don't get any cooperation! All we get is hate. So we say, "fine." If that's the way you want it, if you want us to fight for you, it'll be cash up front. And if you don't have cash, then tough toenails. Get slaughtered by your ancient enemies. What do we care? As long as we get your oil, or your cheap flat screen TVs, we're fine.


This seems to be what everyone misses, and its a great point. As a capitalist society we depend on the market. You don't make money off the market if you destroy the market place. So which is it: is are the US capitalist swine or warmongers? I don't think we can be both.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Why can't the US be capitalist swine and warmongers? If we're making so much money from arms deals and puppet governments, you bet your sweet patootie we can be both.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Why can't the US be capitalist swine and warmongers? If we're making so much money from arms deals and puppet governments, you bet your sweet patootie we can be both.


What money from arms deals and puppet govts? The AK47 is the most proliferated rifle in the world. Made in the USA? And what puppet govt is pouring money into our coffers?

[edit on 6-7-2006 by hogtie]



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Why can't the US be capitalist swine and warmongers? If we're making so much money from arms deals and puppet governments, you bet your sweet patootie we can be both.


Simple. Because there are many of us that prefer to do more than only find fault with the U.S. What about the fact that the U.S. has given more in foreign aid to the rest of the world than the rest of world's developed nations combined? And what country is there first (maybe even faster than we are in coming to the rescue of our own citizens!!!) when there is some disaster around the world? Can you be OK with either of those facts?



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Americans Addicted To War?

Well, they are always threatened by someone or they are in some sort of state of emergency. (War on this, War on that ...)
Or so they are being told.

So, yes! They have issues.
Reehab would be nice.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Simple. Because there are many of us that prefer to do more than only find fault with the U.S. What about the fact that the U.S. has given more in foreign aid to the rest of the world than the rest of world's developed nations combined? And what country is there first (maybe even faster than we are in coming to the rescue of our own citizens!!!) when there is some disaster around the world? Can you be OK with either of those facts?


You just got another wayabove vote. Not just for this thread either. Stay strong!



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by yanchek
Americans Addicted To War?

Well, they are always threatened by someone or they are in some sort of state of emergency. (War on this, War on that ...)
Or so they are being told.

So, yes! They have issues.
Reehab would be nice.


Is Eastern Europe the model of stability now?



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by hogtie
What money from arms deals and puppet govts? The AK47 is the most proliferated rifle in the world. Made in the USA? And what puppet govt is pouring money into our coffers?


Have you ever heard of a Banana Republic? Do you know where it got it's name from?

What about the current Afghani government? Pakistan?

Bagdhad?



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Beats me, man. I'm not from Eastern Europe.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by yanchek
Beats me, man. I'm not from Eastern Europe.


doh!

Then what did you mean in this post?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

"Althou my country (Slovenia) is in very high 9th place, I believe it's just a matter of time till we join the other "old" and "true" democracies. "

[edit on 6-7-2006 by hogtie]



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by yanchek
Americans Addicted To War?

Well, they are always threatened by someone or they are in some sort of state of emergency. (War on this, War on that ...)
Or so they are being told.


sure, War on Terror, War on Drugs,
but no War on Poverty, or War on Disease
No War on War

.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join