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.

 

Ahmadinejad says Israel will soon disappear

page: 16
14
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 04:33 PM
link   
It is not the fault of the U.S. that there are people in other countries who are easily bribed and fall under the power of rich and powerful IC's. You continue to blame the U.S. government for the actions of the IC's. You want to blame the U.S. for the actions of all greedy dictators around the world because U.S. based corporations can easily bribe them, and that is nonsense. Your view is the same of so many others that want to blame the U.S. for all the problems in the world. Wake up and join the real world, and start taking responsibility for your own actions and the actions of the culture you belong to.

If you take a look at GDP, and worker output, it is easy to see that the U.S. leads the world. Your claim that this is subjective clearly illustrates your complete bias against the U.S..

If you can't recognize the leadership of the U.S. in developing technology, then you know nothing about the development of technology. You blame the U.S. for the pathetic actions of the criminals who have too much say in the U.N., you blame the U.S. for world starvation, I'll bet you even blame the U.S. for your own hemmeroids.

If you knew anything about the history of the Spanish empire, you would have displayed it by now, but your biased view of history prevents you from any understanding. Yeah, U.S. industrialist did fund Hitler, they wanted to break German unions, and then the people of the U.S. defeated Hitler against the wishes of those same industrialists. If you understood history, you would see how there is a constant battle between the rich and the poor, in all nations. What makes the U.S. and Europe more success than other nations is that the people win out over the rich and the powerful enough of the time to hold on to their freedoms.

Do you have any clue as to what the goals of Empirical Japan were? I have heard all of this nonsense before from those who hate the west. Here is a clue, you need to look up how the Japaneese viewed their Emporer up until the defeat of Japan in WW II. Looked at your twisted comments about the U.S. rebuilding Germany and Japan, you even want to pretend that this was a bad thing. Yeah, the people of the U.S. really sufferred in the fifties and the sixties because of the money spent to help rebuild Japan and Germany. Then take a look at what the USSR did in Eastern Europe. If you want to pretend that the USSR and China are not or were not expansionist, then you have lost all credibility. Ever hear of Tibet? Do you think the people of Taiwan want to be part of communist China?

Of course on top of this you want to ignore thousands of years of Muslim expansion in all directions, Irans numerous invasions of India, the current ongoing Muslim conquest of Africa, the numerous attempts of the Muslim world to conquer the west. And still you can not see how your bias blinds you to the realities of this world. Yeah, I know what Europeans did in Africa almost a century ago, and I know what Muslims are doing in Africa even now. The differences are that I don't pretend that the Europeans are complete innocents like you pretend that the Muslim world is so innocent. I recognize the good and the bad in my culture, while you continue to practice hypocrisy.

Yeah we are a bunch of bigots with no culture and you are a peace loving Muslim, sure, yeah, you're a real sweetheart.

You must learn to find your own freedom, and how to defend it before you will ever understand how the people of the west hang on to their freedoms, and one of the first steps is to admit responsibility for your own life, and stop blaming the Americans.

The whole, Islam is a nation of peace, death to Israel thing isn't fooling anyone.




posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by StellarX

Originally posted by poet1b
You claim "And yet US foreign policy have been expansionist for more than a century", when the reality is that maybe U.S. has been expansionist for the last fifty years, but not much longer.


And by more than a century i actually mean two centuries but since i am doing my best not overwhelm you with the truth i stuck to one presuming that you could at least discover expansionist American wars such as the Spanish-American war and all the territories the US gained by attacking a nearly prostrate Spain. Please open a history book and just see what even convention suggests before you claim that i am the one who 'makes stuff up'.


[edit on 4-7-2008 by StellarX]


Expansionist? BS. The U.S. has withdrawn from every country it has ever "conquered" (not my description).


Not so, stellar, with your favorite empire - the soviet onion/russia. "Somehow" they became the largest country in the world. Was it because the smaller countries that border russia just couldn't wait to voluntarily give up their sovereignty? Again,




Anyway, the thread is supposed to be about another one of iran's threats, not U.S. so-called "imperialism".



posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
Expansionist? BS. The U.S. has withdrawn from every country it has ever "conquered" (not my description).


It has not withdrawn from North AMerican which was taken from the natives.
I wont even start with all the territories still under US control as you are clearly not intelligent enough to google it or read it when it's presented on a platter.


Not so, stellar, with your favorite empire - the soviet onion/russia.


There is no such thing as good empire hence my problem with them. What i pointed out is that the USSR did not have the power to do much to the rest of the world for most of the time and didn't use the power to do much good when it got some power.


"Somehow" they became the largest country in the world.


They conquered dictatorships that aided the Nazi regime. If the US were so concerned about such abuses ( in fact the US destroyed democratic and liberation movements in Greece and Italy just after the war) they could have invaded the SU and liberated said nations.


Was it because the smaller countries that border russia just couldn't wait to voluntarily give up their sovereignty? Again,


I am not trying to excuse the actions of the SU when i point out that these countries were occupied by German troops when the SU conquered them. The fact that it chose to withdraw leaving mostly puppet ( if puppet rulers with more support than US puppets mostly had) regimes in place is not a practice widely different from the one the US employed in other places.




Anyway, the thread is supposed to be about another one of iran's threats, not U.S. so-called "imperialism".


Since Iran is making empty threats in response to the very real and often acted upon threats of a imperial power i don't see how it's not related.

Stellar



posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 05:10 PM
link   


Expansionist? BS. The U.S. has withdrawn from every country it has ever "conquered" (not my description).




mmmmm, not really.

They withdrew their offensive military from those countries, yes, but also installed a number of puppet governments.

They have also most notably installed military bases around the world.

Same thing with all other empires. They didn't remain in the country per-se, they installed puppet governments so they could continue their focus on other countries. Leaving behind outposts. (Only in this case they are far more than mere outposts.)

[edit on 15-7-2008 by johnsky]



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by StellarX
 


Tell ya what, when all the people of Arabian descent move back to Saudi Arabia, then I guess everyone else in the world will then move back to the country of their origins, what ever that means. Oh, and you can surrender all of the intellectual property you have obtained from Westerners and go back to goat herding. Maybe we should all move back to Africa?

That would still leave Israelis in Israel, so when will the Muslims relinquish control to land that is not theirs.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by johnsky
 


Um, really, Empires take over and hold onto the territory that they conquer. They don't set up puppet governments, they establish local governors who are from the central state of the Empire, and they control the new territory. When asked to withdraw, the U.S. military does in fact withdraw, as they withdrew from the Phillipines.

U.S. bases around the world are there to support the governments at the request of those governments, ussaully against hostile and aggressive neighbors.



new topics

top topics
 
14
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join