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.

 

Poll: Pakistanis Object To Bin Laden Killing!

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by babloyi
 




Another digression: Obama is the US president that probably comes closest to the correct pronunciation of the name of the country Pakistan


Pffftt....he can't even pronounce many English words correctly, such as 'corpsman'. He's just being pretentious, is all.




posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by confreak
reply to post by Paulioetc15
 


Well, if Chinese government was bombing your country in almost daily basis,


Then I would be prone to give their target to them, all wrapped upon in a pretty bow, so they wouldn't need to do that any more. I sure as hell wouldn't be hiding people that had attacked them first, then run and hid, bringing the wrath of China down on me...

Just out of curiosity, what makes you think China has the wherewithall to do that, any how? Vietnam kicked China's ass in a month in 1979. At least the US held out for 10 years before caving in to manufactured opinion...



conducting illegal operations


What "illegal" operations would that be? Please cite relevant law to prove the illegality.



and invading your neighbour,


Who had it coming... They were given the opportunity to make it right by not harboring terrorists, and chose not to. When you do that, you get what you get.



not to mention assassinating an innocent man (until proven guilty)


You seem to be mistaking WAR for a courtroom environment. Go to war, just one time, and you'll probably be able to figure out the difference after that. Furthermore, you aren't just attempting to apply the courtroom environment to the battlefield, you seem to be insisting on imposing AMERICAN jurisprudence on the rest of the world. That's just not cricket. Last time I checked, most countries have their own law to apply internally, and neither need nor want US law to be applied within their own borders.



then dumping his body in the sea like the mafia,


I actually sort of agree with this. I think the body should have been hanged from a lamp post, smothered with pig lard to assist the burning, and set on fire.



shooting his wife like an animal blablabla,


What can I say? You go to bed with dogs, you should expect to wake up with fleas.



you get where I'm going with this right?


Unfortunately, I do.



We all live in different realities, I wouldn't want to live in yours.


Likewise. I'm MIGHTY glad I don't have to live in yours.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
Why should Pakistanis approve of having a foreign country's military forces in their own country ? Let alone a foreign force launching air and ground attacks.

No wonder the majority object to the attack in Abbottabad.

The US military should get the heck out of Pakistan !



No problem... just as soon as the clean up their own yard, and stop harboring terrorists!

Until such time comes, then continue to let the Eagle crap all over them.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by SatoriTheory
reply to post by Paulioetc15
 


Well seeing as Al-Qaeda were allegedly set up by the CIA,


That old canard is getting exceedingly tiresome, but please, continue to try throwing it against the wall. You never know, all the folks who know better will one day be dead, and then it might stick...



How would the US feel if a Chinese hit squad went inside US borders and eliminated someone? Would the US sit back and take it?

st.


Depends on the situation. If the cat was heading up an organization that attacked China unprovoked, then ran to my back yard and hid, then I'd likely guide the Chinese right in on him, or alternatively just truss his ass up like a Christmas turkey and leave him in a basket on their doorstep to do with as they please.

Mow, I can imagine how the GOVERNMENT of the US might take a dim view of that, since I've not got much confidence in them any more, but I can't help how they'd feel about it. Right is right, and I try not to have much to do with the government any more, any ways.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by SatoriTheory
... If the US could forget about its pathetic nationalistic pride for 5 minutes and see the bigger world around them, respect the views, rights and wishes of other nations, then the world may not be in such a steaming pile of brown stuff as it currently is.

st.


Why should the US care about such things? It wasn't "the bigger world around them" that was attacked on 9/11.

I think YOUR country should just roll over and let the bad guys do whatever they want to it. Maybe they'd lose interest in the US after a while with a willing partner like that!



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by SatoriTheory

The Taliban come from the regions around northern pakistan, that's why they are there, always have been.


Wait, what! HOLD THE PRESSES! You're saying the Taliban are Pakistanis, and not Afghans? They ruled Afghanistan as a FOREIGN POWER? GASP!

Honestly, though, what you say here is absolutely true. Star for you!



Taliban are not terrorist, they are just pictured that way by the western media to serve a goal.


Actually, they ARE terrorists. If you don't believe me, ask some Afghan women who lived under their tender rule. They can tell you what "terror" is all about, and of course those who promote terror are... well, you know...



The Taliban are a tribe of people.


No, they are not a "tribe" of people, not in the same way that Pashtuns, Lakota, or Waranwani are tribes of people. The Taliban is a religious sect, birthed in Pakistani madrasas, not a "tribe".



I have no idea if Bin Laden was living in Pakistan at all. Do you? How? Maybe the ISI didn't find him because he wasn't actually there? No body, no pictures.


I have to presume he was, since the US is catching hell from all sides over killing him there...



When Russia was involved in Afghanistan, who was supporting and training the Taliban? CIA.


Again, WRONG. The CIA never supported the Taliban during the Soviet Afghan War, and indeed COULD NOT have, since the Taliban did not exist at all during that period. The Russians left Afghanistan in February or March of 1989, after having begun their withdrawal the previous November. The Taliban did not exist at all until 1994. You do the math.



Pakistan is not a massively rich nation, it does not have the resources available to fight terrorism that the US has. That doesn't mean they are not trying. Their resources could be stretched very thin. You cant judge another nations abilities based on your own nations.


Pakistan puts on a show every now and then of "fighting terrorists", like that dog-and-pony show they put on in Swat Valley a couple of years ago, but they don't do it like they really mean it, so one has to wonder. If they "don't have the resources", one has to wonder just what they're really doing with the money being given to them for that purpose... hmmmm...

Still, if they were really serious about fighting terrorism, and they for one reason or another had squandered the money given them on liquor and dancing girls instead, then they really ought not to have a problem with the US picking up their slack and doing it for them, on our own dime at that, eh? I mean, if they were really SERIOUS about fighting terrorists, that is...



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by SatoriTheory

Originally posted by Paulioetc15
... The Taliban doesn't even exist in the 1980s. In fact, look at the year what Taliban was created, it was the Pakistan ISI in 1994. Majority of them who formed the Taliban were mostly Pakistani. We trained the Mujadhideen so different group. Some fought with them and some joined the Taliban but most who joined the Taliban are mostly Pakistani. Fact is if world doesn't like the US as a leader, why don't other countries step up and show us how it's done?


Same groups, different names. Your nationalistic pride is clouding your better judgement.


Nope.

Entirely different groups, entirely different entities, entirely different thought patterns.

NOT "same group, different names".

Nope.



No other nation would get the chance to lead the world.


China is working hard on taking that driver's seat, and will eventually get it done if the US government doesn't get it's act together and start LEADING. You should take heart, the American Empire is on the decline. They bit off more than they could chew by trying to help their "neighbors" (which is about everyone on Earth with hat in hand, and hand stuck out), and are racking up a debt they'll never be able to repay trying to be "nice" to everyone. Hell with that! I think the rest of the world ought to get a grasp of what it is to fend for themselves for a while, and the US should keep their own stuff inside their own borders, only going forth to right wrongs perpetrated against THEM (well, like 9/11...). The rest can just handle their own messes.

Otherwise, they're bound to collapse, and have to listen to their inferiors cheer about it.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Openeye

The Taliban did not exist in the 80's like you said. However the people who formed the Taliban were all "freedom fighter" aka the Mujadhideen trained by the CIA to combat the soviets. They also were the first recruited by the radical Islamic factions which would later become Al-Qaeda.


"All"? Check again.

However, since you bring it up, so were the Northern Alliance, in like proportion - or perhaps just a bit more so. In view of that, it's sort of improper to assert that the Taliban or Al Qaida is a "CIA creation". They are a product of their own twisted, diseased minds, nothing more, although the Taliban had a boon of "guidance" and support from Pakistani ISI, the objective of which was to gain de facto Pak control of Afghanistan, through a puppet regime. It seems that neither the US nor Russia has a monopoly on creating puppet regimes.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by mishigas

Pockistan (to para Obama)


I noticed that, too. As well, the Taliban is now the "Tahl-ee-bahn", dahlink!



military and ISI is totally corrupt. They were hiding bin Laden.


Nothing new there. You should have seen the way the ISI and Pak military were wheeling and dealing during the Soviet Afghan War! They made a bundle playing both sides against the middle, most of it stolen. True, a lot of the cash was being laundered through Saudi intermediaries, so the Paks just figured "what the hell, there ain't no paper trail for the Accounting Department!" and stole more than they passed on.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi
I don't understand the purpose of this thread. Obviously Pakistan object to the operation. How would you feel if the UK secretly sent troops into the US without telling it, and assassinated the head of the Mara Salvatrucha without any trial or due process, took his body, and then dumped him in the sea on the way back, and then said they couldn't inform the US, because then he might have been moved.

Would you support this action? Or would you "object" to it?


I'd ask them what color they wanted the ribbon on their medal to be. God knows the US government isn't doing anything to tackle MS-13!



So the US lost a little money, and Afghanistan gained weapons, and Pakistan gained an influx of millions of Afghani refugees, along with the associated gun culture (the word "kalashnikov" was not something the common Pakistani was familiar with before that) and associated drug stuff, which was previously almost non-existent in that area.


Evidently still not too common a term. I saw a locally made Kalashnikov in Darra that was stamped "ROLEX"!


And drugs being "nonexistent" before that? Have you ever heard of "Karachi"? There was a LOT of dope getting moved through Karachi long before the Soviets even cast a jaundiced eye towards the area.



Of course, the US didn't really care about any of this, until, predictably, it all came back to bite them in the ass in 2001 (and yes, the CIA financed WITH KNOWLEDGE groups that were known to have ties with foreign -in many cases arab- groups, including Osama and Al Qaeda).


I'd like to see the paperwork on the CIA financing of AQ and OBL, if you don't mind. I'll wait while you fetch it.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
Why should the US care about such things? It wasn't "the bigger world around them" that was attacked on 9/11.

I think YOUR country should just roll over and let the bad guys do whatever they want to it. Maybe they'd lose interest in the US after a while with a willing partner like that!


Yeah you are right, you know everything, only the US matters, so the US shouldn't care. The US should do what it wants, because the US is the only nation on this planet. There are no other nations on this planet who get affected by the constant wars, fighting and pathetic bickering. As long as the US is ok as long as the US get its own way and what it wants, then nothing else matters.

There is a reason why the US is a 'target'. One day you might open your eyes and see.

st.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by SatoriTheory

Originally posted by nenothtu
Why should the US care about such things? It wasn't "the bigger world around them" that was attacked on 9/11.

I think YOUR country should just roll over and let the bad guys do whatever they want to it. Maybe they'd lose interest in the US after a while with a willing partner like that!


Yeah you are right, you know everything,


I'm sorry - I seem to have been misquoted... unless, of course, you can point out where I've claimed to "know everything" so that I can either be "right" or "wrong" about that statement.



only the US matters, so the US shouldn't care.


Gee, I looked over my posts, and can't seem to find where I made the statement that "only the US matters", either. Could you be so kind as to point that out to me? Otherwise, it seems THAT is a misquote as well.

What I WILL say - again, but perhaps more clearly so that even the unthinking can comprehend it - is that when it's the US that is attacked, then it's the US's problem to sort out. Don't like it? Then don't attack us, and don't provide a "safe harbor" for those who do. Pretty damned simple.

Yup, when it's the US's problem to sort out, then their opinion naturally DOES carry more weight than other folks who WEREN'T under that particular gun. Doesn't mean they "don't matter", it means their opinion carries less weight. Same goes for any other country - China, for example, since it's been the subject of so many Straw Men in this thread. If China comes under attack, it's no business of the US how they decide to protect their own. That's THEIR game to sort out.



The US should do what it wants,


Why?



because the US is the only nation on this planet.


Really? I didn't get that memo. Where did the rest of them go?



There are no other nations on this planet who get affected by the constant wars, fighting and pathetic bickering.


If you believe that, then it is YOU who are living in a rose-colored world. There are simple solutions to all of this, but human nature being what it is, no one will follow them.

And yeah, if your nation attacks my nation, or harbors those who do, then you'd better damn well EXPECT to get affected by it!

I note that we have not "processed" nations such as Iceland and Switzerland with bombs and boots. I bet there's a reason for that - they didn't involve themselves in the quarrel!



As long as the US is ok as long as the US get its own way and what it wants, then nothing else matters.


Says who?

Leave 'em alone, and THEN it doesn't matter - you won't be in the middle of a firefight you don't want!



There is a reason why the US is a 'target'. One day you might open your eyes and see.

st.


I've seen more than you'll ever know already, and am well aware that there is a reason the US is a target. It's just not the reason you're insinuating, is all.



edit on 2011/6/23 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


No misquotes at all, it's what is known as sarcasm. But I should have realised, you being American, you probably wouldn't understand it. My mistake, ho hum.


Nationalism is a relic of the past. You should try forging an identity for who YOU are, not what your government indoctrinates you to be. You would realise that attacking other nations and people is a pointless task that achieves little other than to demonstrate you are really no different or better than the so called terrorists.

Have a nice day now, y'hear!


st.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Openeye

The Taliban did not exist in the 80's like you said. However the people who formed the Taliban were all "freedom fighter" aka the Mujadhideen trained by the CIA to combat the soviets. They also were the first recruited by the radical Islamic factions which would later become Al-Qaeda.

In view of that, it's sort of improper to assert that the Taliban or Al Qaida is a "CIA creation".


I never said that the CIA created Al-Qaida. But they did "practically" create the Mujadhideen or at least made them a legitimate fighting force, who most were fundamentalist Islamic practitioners and many of the veterans of that conflict later became members of the Taliban and Al-Qaida.

There is nor "real" evidence linking the CIA to Al Qaida, however they did contact OBL multiple times throughout the early 90's what they wanted with him no one knows and probably no one ever will. Regardless if there were such evidence it would have been destroyed a long time ago. Why would they keep something like that around?

What I'm getting tired of is this "USA is the greatest country that will ever exist and is infallible" attitude. All governments are lier's and murderers. How can one put their trust in a country who cares not for anyone but themselves, who thinks profit in the long run is more efficient than compassion? The USA has been responsible for almost every major war in the world since Korea (even ones that we were not directly involved in), either because of policy, ideological differences, "supposed" humanitarian concerns, and economic development. This country is an Empire, It was founded on empirical principals and acted upon them until the civil war. After WW2 we created a "Plutocratic Empire" an empire that would conquer through corporate development rather through armed conquest.

I love the concept of the United States, and I want to be able to have faith that who I vote for will further the way for peace not just for this country but for the world. But we have been systematically lied to and betrayed by career politicians and our freedom subverted by a corrupt court system and insanely greedy megalithic corporations.


edit on 23-6-2011 by Openeye because: Spelling

edit on 23-6-2011 by Openeye because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-6-2011 by Openeye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Of course they oppose to the Bin Ladden killing..! How can anyone not understand this?!?
Now don't get me wrong, he was a very, very dangerous man, and I am glad he is out of
the picture. But Pakistan is bordering with Afganistan, and many Talibans have access to
the country. Ever since Bin Ladden was killed, it's like a can of whorms opened in Pakistan,
which unfortunately is a very poor and troubled country. Bombings, suicides, and many,
many bad things, Pakistan citizens do not feel safe at all, they are afraid to get out of their
houses, while the US, the country that proffited most of his death suffered
absolutely zero consequences (not that it should have, but Pakistan shouldn't have to suffer either).
It makes sense that they don't find it fair, don't you think?
After all, we are all only humans!
edit on 23-6-2011 by Imogene72 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by SatoriTheory
reply to post by nenothtu
 


No misquotes at all, it's what is known as sarcasm. But I should have realised, you being American, you probably wouldn't understand it. My mistake, ho hum.



Oh no, MY mistake! Sarcasm is ill-fitted to serious discussion, which is what I thought we were involved in here. Since we evidently are not, then it was of course MY mistake!



Nationalism is a relic of the past.


Well, it's true enough that there are those who wish that were so, but you know what they say about wishing... Have fun with your One World Unified Government, I won't be participating, since I've seen already what the rest of the world wants to do with that, and it just doesn't fit with a desire for freedom from oppression.



You should try forging an identity for who YOU are, not what your government indoctrinates you to be.


Ummm.... I DID. That's why I'm not a flaming Liberal - the government indoctrination didn't take. That's ALSO why I'll have nothing to do with your One World Unified Government, by the way. Borders are there for a reason, and until the Powers That Be can get enough folks indoctrinated, as you apparently are, into the notion that there are no differences among people, and we are all just cogs in their machine, no one any different from the other, Nationalism will NOT be a "thing of the past".



You would realise that attacking other nations and people is a pointless task that achieves little other than to demonstrate you are really no different or better than the so called terrorists.


A "response" is a little different from an "attack", but go on living in fairy-land. Those of us out in the real,world will continue to take care of business while you fantasize away. Now, our "response" to their "attack" seems to have kept them pretty busy, so I'd say it had a point. I'll have to agree that it's been mishandled, though. I believe complete erasure of the Taliban and AQ was in order, and it could have been done, had not the squeamishness and quest for yet more chest-candy on the part of some of our generals gotten in the way of victory. We'd be done and gone by now had it been handled correctly, with any sort of intent to win.



Have a nice day now, y'hear!


st.


Likewise!



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Openeye

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Openeye

The Taliban did not exist in the 80's like you said. However the people who formed the Taliban were all "freedom fighter" aka the Mujadhideen trained by the CIA to combat the soviets. They also were the first recruited by the radical Islamic factions which would later become Al-Qaeda.

In view of that, it's sort of improper to assert that the Taliban or Al Qaida is a "CIA creation".


I never said that the CIA created Al-Qaida.


It's possible that I misread this quote, then:



He was a radical Islamic fundamentalist, that is why the CIA and other organizations conditioned him and trained followers to initiate the attacks on the US (this my speculative opinion).


It would appear from that quote that you believe the CIA directed and trained AQ, which would be pretty close to "creating" it. Perhaps I misread it.



But they did "practically" create the Mujadhideen or at least made them a legitimate fighting force, who most were fundamentalist Islamic practitioners and many of the veterans of that conflict later became members of the Taliban and Al-Qaida.


Some of them did, but most went to the Northern Alliance. It's disingeuous to assert that because of CIA involvement with the muj, they somehow formulated the Taliban, while leaving their involvement with the opposition Northern Alliance out altogether. Just as I said earlier, it was their own twisted diseased minds that led them down that path, not CIA involvement.

While we're on the subject, the CIA sent in some ARMS to the muj, and a very few advisors, but it was found that the Afghan mujahideen were nigh on to untrainable. They already thought they knew everything about war, and indeed Afghanistan HAS been embroiled in war practically forever - and they ought to know their own terrain better than anyone else - so they DID have a point, but it was found that they were unadaptable and unresponsive to suggestions in some tactical areas that could well have made them far more formiddable. In other words, they only knew one way, the hard way, and simply refused to adapt to suggestions, resulting in a lot more people getting killed and maimed than was necessary.



There is nor "real" evidence linking the CIA to Al Qaida,


You're absolutely right, there isn't, and there can't be for good reason. It never happened as is being fantasized about.



however they did contact OBL multiple times throughout the early 90's what they wanted with him no one knows and probably no one ever will.


Uh huh. I'd like to see some evidence of THAT assertion, then...



Regardless if there were such evidence it would have been destroyed a long time ago.


Oh, I see. How... convenient...



Why would they keep something like that around?


Why? Are you at all familiar with the inner workings of bureauocracies? They ALL keep records, in triplicate, and that includes the bean counters and such at Langley. If evidence ever WAS there, it still IS.



What I'm getting tired of is this "USA is the greatest country that will ever exist and is infallible" attitude.


1. Nothing and no one is "infallible".
2. It's a hard statement to make that ANY country is the greatest that ever will exist, since we know not what may come down the pike.
3. The USA is emphatically NOT it's government, which is becoming increasingly estranged from the people of the USA - who are the real USA. WE are the country, not the government. Some fail to make that differentiation.



All governments are lier's and murderers.


Agreed, at least all that I've ever dealt with.



How can one put their trust in a country who cares not for anyone but themselves, who thinks profit in the long run is more efficient than compassion?


Because I don't confuse the government or the companies HQ'ed in the US with the country itself. Now as for myself, personally, I'm not very "compassionate" to begin with. I'll do anything I can FOR you, until you piss me off sufficiently, at which point I'll do anything I can TO you. Folks should learn that if you bute the hand that feeds often enough, meals are gonna get a lot thinner. In my case personally, biting the hand that feed just ONCE is enough for a loud noise to decide the issue, but that's just me. "Compassion" is a fine thing to have, until folks start abusing it.



The USA has been responsible for almost every major war in the world since Korea (even ones that we were not directly involved in), either because of policy, ideological differences, "supposed" humanitarian concerns, and economic development.


How big does a war have to get before it's a "major" war? Should I just look for the ones that the USA was "responsible" for, and will it help to bend the definition of "responsible" a bit? Now, before you get upset, I think the US really SHOULD stay out of other folks' business, "humanitarian" or otherwise. Take the current Libyan example. What they hell were they thinking to get involved in Libya's internal affairs? The "humanitarian" excuse just doesn't wash. Same for the Somalia debacle. Let 'em feed themselves, and we won't have to fiddle around with local "warlords" stealing the supplies. Matter of fact, I think we should stop exporting food PERIOD. Then we could feed our own.

No, I'm with ya on this, baby. The US ought to stay out of the rest of the worlds business, PERIOD.



This country is an Empire, It was founded on empirical principals and acted upon them until the civil war. After WW2 we created a "Plutocratic Empire" an empire that would conquer through corporate development rather through armed conquest.


Agreed, it has become an Empire, although I disagree that it was founded as one and was up until the Civil War. I think the Civil War marked the BEGINNING of the US Empire, not the end or transformation of it, when the USA invaded a sovereign country (the CSA) and forcibly annexed it.

Now, the "Plutocratic Empire" thing seems to have been a dismal failure, as I note we are still engaging in armed incursions (like Libya, for example). Corporate development, as conquest goes, pretty much sucks as a strategy, it appears.



I love the concept of the United States, and I want to be able to have faith that who I vote for will further the way for peace not just for this country but for the world. But we have been systematically lied to and betrayed by career politicians and our freedom subverted by a corrupt court system and insanely greedy megalithic corporations.


Agreed, but again only to a point. I think that whoever I vote for should look out for US first, since WE are the ones who vote for them. the rest of the world can look after it's own peace, with it''s own politicians. Not an American politician's job to force peace on the world.

Agreed, the career politicians have lied and betrayed us. The solution there is to never allow "politician" as a career path. Term limits is the key phrase. Limit congressional seats to no more than 12 years total, whether consecutive or not. Presidential limits seem to be OK, at 8 years total. Bureaucrats should all be VOTED in, with term limits, and NONE hired in or "appointed".

Keep 'em responsive to the people, or else don't let 'em entrench themselves in office.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:43 PM
link   


Oh no, MY mistake! Sarcasm is ill-fitted to serious discussion, which is what I thought we were involved in here. Since we evidently are not, then it was of course MY mistake!

Apology accepted. The sarcasm was appropriate due to the conversation drifting into the nationalist nonsense area. It is impossible to have a serious discussion with someone who is so clearly wrapped up in nationalism, your better judgement is clouded.



Well, it's true enough that there are those who wish that were so, but you know what they say about wishing... Have fun with your One World Unified Government, I won't be participating, since I've seen already what the rest of the world wants to do with that, and it just doesn't fit with a desire for freedom from oppression.

It's no wish. For those who look at the world around them, who visit and talk to people of other nations, it is a simple fact, nationalism is a thing of the past. It is one of the many ways used to control people. The world is changing, empires have fallen and are about to fall.
It's not my one world government, its just the right way to go. Sadly they want to base it on capitalistic ideals, not a very inviting prospect.



Ummm.... I DID. That's why I'm not a flaming Liberal - the government indoctrination didn't take. That's ALSO why I'll have nothing to do with your One World Unified Government, by the way. Borders are there for a reason, and until the Powers That Be can get enough folks indoctrinated, as you apparently are, into the notion that there are no differences among people, and we are all just cogs in their machine, no one any different from the other, Nationalism will NOT be a "thing of the past".

The indoctrination has worked on you, and it has worked incredibly well. Your nationalistic pride is your weakness. You are one who can be easily controlled and manipulated, that you have demonstrated for all to read. You are not thinking on a personal level, you are not thinking for yourself.

Borders are there for a reason, correct, they are there to keep you enslaved within that countries taxation system.

What differences do you think there are among people? What sets you apart from others?



A "response" is a little different from an "attack", but go on living in fairy-land. Those of us out in the real,world will continue to take care of business while you fantasize away. Now, our "response" to their "attack" seems to have kept them pretty busy, so I'd say it had a point. I'll have to agree that it's been mishandled, though. I believe complete erasure of the Taliban and AQ was in order, and it could have been done, had not the squeamishness and quest for yet more chest-candy on the part of some of our generals gotten in the way of victory. We'd be done and gone by now had it been handled correctly, with any sort of intent to win.

But you are not in the real world, you are in the controlled cocoon of nationalism. Big Brother has his grip firmly wrapped around you, its right in front of your face and you fail to see it. You also seem to be getting more extreme as this conversation goes on, but maybe you are joking me?


st.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by SatoriTheory
It's no wish. For those who look at the world around them, who visit and talk to people of other nations, it is a simple fact, nationalism is a thing of the past. It is one of the many ways used to control people. The world is changing, empires have fallen and are about to fall.


Of course it's a wish! If nationalism were "a thing of the past", then there would BE no more nationalism, and we can all see that there IS! I've seen all the world around me I care to. There's really nothing out there that I want. I have always visited and talked to the people of other nations, and still do - it's just that all of them I interact with these days are on my turf - I'm not going to theirs any more.

Indeed, empires ARE falling. The always have, ever since they have existed, and always will, for as long as they continue to exist. They have always been replaced by yet another empire, and always will be - at least into the forseeable future.

The world is ALWAYS changing. Always has, always will. Only someone very young, or someone who has completely ignored their history lessons, would thing "change" is somehow a new thing.

Sometimes, change is not even a good thing, but it comes all the same, like it or not. Change just for the sake of change is rarely, if EVER, a good thing.

On a related note, "empires" are another of those things which seek to erase nations, in favor of incorporating them into the Empire. Your One World Government is nothing more than the proposed replacement Empire, the successor to the empires in existence now, when they fall - as they most certainly will. It's not a new idea - the Romans had the same notion, and the Persians, Greeks, Babylonians, Egyptians, et al, before them. Unite the whole world under a single Empire - THEIRS, of course. This is just more of the same, and to be fought aqainst tooth and nail.



It's not my one world government, its just the right way to go. Sadly they want to base it on capitalistic ideals, not a very inviting prospect.


Now you've piqued my curiosity. WHY would anyone think it's "the right way to go" so subvert their own sovereignty and autonomy in favor of foreign masters? I'd really like to know, since that concept is so alien to me as to perhaps have originated off-world.




The indoctrination has worked on you, and it has worked incredibly well. Your nationalistic pride is your weakness. You are one who can be easily controlled and manipulated, that you have demonstrated for all to read. You are not thinking on a personal level, you are not thinking for yourself.


Perhaps, but I can guarantee that I'm not as eager to be just another cog in the machine of the New Masters as some here appear to be, not naming any names...

In light of that, WHO is REALLY "indoctrinated"? The would-be cog, or he who refuses that "honor"?



Borders are there for a reason, correct, they are there to keep you enslaved within that countries taxation system.


Actually, they're there to keep your own from being over-run by the alien - peoples who would subvert you, and force their way of living on YOU, in your own home, rather than the other way 'round, where they are expected to integrate into the local lifestyle if they plan to stay.

Taxation really has nothing to do with it at all, other than just which set of masters the taxes go to. Do you really fantasize that the One World Empire would be devoid of taxation? Dream on, little brother, dream on.



What differences do you think there are among people? What sets you apart from others?


I do not pray to Mecca. I do not bury my dead on cliff faces. I do not put cream in my tea. I do not drink coffee cold. I do not ceremonially drink blood from the cows in my herd. I do not expect my government to pay my doctor bills. The list goes on and on. It's a fact of life - people are different, and there simply IS no single government that fits all, nor can there be until all peoples are merely cogs in the same machine. It's not a matter of "superiority" or "inferiority", it's just a matter of differences, and how we see the world. What's good for one is abomination to another, and vice-versa. Believe it or not, I actually met a girl one time who refused to eat reptiles, like snakes and turtles! Can you think of anything less normal than that? Wouldn't want her running MY government, in MY nation - she might make my own culture illegal on my own turf!

Yup, there are reasons for nations, and those reasons haven't gone away...



But you are not in the real world, you are in the controlled cocoon of nationalism. Big Brother has his grip firmly wrapped around you, its right in front of your face and you fail to see it.


Actually, not. I AM in the real world, not some kumbaya fantasy land where cultural differences vanish magically in favor of an invitation to foreign masters. I have heard, through the grapevine, that Big Brother is trying to find me, but that's a story for another thread, I suppose.



You also seem to be getting more extreme as this conversation goes on, but maybe you are joking me?


st.


maybe.

Maybe not.

I'll let you decide, whatever you're most comfortable with.



edit on 2011/6/23 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 



He was a radical Islamic fundamentalist, that is why the CIA and other organizations conditioned him and trained followers to initiate the attacks on the US (this my speculative opinion).


Simply an opinion just based on actions committed by the CIA in the past no real evidence, I never presented this information as fact.


Oh, I see. How... convenient...Why? Are you at all familiar with the inner workings of bureaucracies? They ALL keep records, in triplicate, and that includes the bean counters and such at Langley. If evidence ever WAS there, it still IS.


It is not unlikely that a corrupt organization would destroy documentation that would implicate them in the mass murder of individuals and or training of terrorists. Not everything is documented especially if its highly illegal.


Because I don't confuse the government or the companies HQ'ed in the US with the country itself. Now as for myself, personally, I'm not very "compassionate" to begin with. I'll do anything I can FOR you, until you piss me off sufficiently, at which point I'll do anything I can TO you. Folks should learn that if you bute the hand that feeds often enough, meals are gonna get a lot thinner. In my case personally, biting the hand that feed just ONCE is enough for a loud noise to decide the issue, but that's just me. "Compassion" is a fine thing to have, until folks start abusing it.


And this is one of the problems with the world. Cynicism has destroyed all forms of transcendental philosophy. I'm no Christian, but I do believe in many of Christs words (not the ones perverted by relegion) such as "Love one another" and "But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,". Compassion given to enemies is the ultimate form of "good". One may say it is naive but I would rather live in a world where people attempt to conquer human nature rather than succumb to it because it is efficient.

To quote Immortal Technique "We can not change the past. But we can change the future and anyone who tells you different is a F#$%ing lethargic devil".


greed, it has become an Empire, although I disagree that it was founded as one and was up until the Civil War. I think the Civil War marked the BEGINNING of the US Empire, not the end or transformation of it, when the USA invaded a sovereign country (the CSA) and forcibly annexed it.

Now, the "Plutocratic Empire" thing seems to have been a dismal failure, as I note we are still engaging in armed incursions (like Libya, for example). Corporate development, as conquest goes, pretty much sucks as a strategy, it appears.


The entire western expansion of the United States was empirical. We butchered thousands of native Americans (innocent and violent). We instigated a war with Mexico and conquered their land and took it for ourselves.

You are right, after the civil war the empire grew even more the conquering of Hawaii, the Spanish-American war which most nations that fell to the US after that war was over never wanted them there to begin with (just like they didnt want the Spanish). No not empirical at all...

The "Plutocratic Empire" is running really strong US culture has spread to almost every nation. WalMart McDonalds, every American based oil company + many many more. Dont forget the profiters at home, Boeing, Raytheon, Aerospace, Northrup-Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Xe (aka Blackwater). Making tons of money for years off of blood.


Agreed, but again only to a point. I think that whoever I vote for should look out for US first, since WE are the ones who vote for them. the rest of the world can look after it's own peace, with it''s own politicians. Not an American politician's job to force peace on the world.

Agreed, the career politicians have lied and betrayed us. The solution there is to never allow "politician" as a career path. Term limits is the key phrase. Limit congressional seats to no more than 12 years total, whether consecutive or not. Presidential limits seem to be OK, at 8 years total. Bureaucrats should all be VOTED in, with term limits, and NONE hired in or "appointed".

Keep 'em responsive to the people, or else don't let 'em entrench themselves in office.


But does your vote matter? And even if it does how do you know that your elected officials do what is best for you and not to corporations with the veiled idea of "helping corporate America helps you". Lobbyists pay loads of money to press there agenda. It wasn't until recently that they banned handing out lobbyists checks to congressmen on the house floor, but as long as it is not in public...sure why not, what does that say about this country?

I can tell that your a decent person and you want whats best for this country and you do not want your rights trampled on. But all i can say is that the world evolves, ideas evolve and forms of government die and are reborn into something new. Democracy worked for a long time but we need something new that is better and m,ore free than the democracy we have now. Everyone on this earth is human and we can have peace, but no one other than the counter culture has promoted it. No one has ever tried because all revolutions are founded on blood and as long as that keeps happening the "cycle of pain" will continue until we all finally kill eachother with nukes.
edit on 23-6-2011 by Openeye because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join