America - You are the biggest threat to world peace

a reply to: DBCowboy

Who was starting all the wars before America was around?

The big chief who wanted the most resources - then he taxed the people so he could wage bigger wars;

then the arms makers saw that it was good - and on the 7th day they never rested - but waged war on the whole world.

I just represent me.

well your post suggested otherwise.

On behalf of America, I would like to apologize for America starting all the wars in the world since the beginning of time.

originally posted by: TheLead
a reply to: chr0naut

I'm not sure I know what you're referring to?

My point entirely.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

On behalf of America, I would like to apologize for America starting all the wars in the world since the beginning of time.

It was actually Kevin's fault. No one really likes Kevin. You can punch him if you'd like.

It's okay.

He's a jerk. Ask anyone.

Always allocating blame on someone else. It started young;

Kevin's mom: "Don't play with sharp knives, Kevin, you might cut yourself".

Kevin (brandishing knife and with those wild and crazy eyes),

"Mom, knives don't kill people. It's, it's, the body snatching giant brain creatures from Spinduloma who kill people. They're everywhere... You, you, could be one of them now. Even I could.... Oh, oh no....

Oh no, I'm thinking in my mind, making me do stuff.

Yet I can observe my thought processes, so who is me? Am I the observer or the observed?

I have to drink more grain alcohol and sniff mimeograph fluid to clear my head and help me gain control..." (runs from house, into the rainy street, trailing the toilet paper, still stuck to his bare backside).

Kevin... WHY are you doing this??? Why??? We gave you everything...

Your mom and I, we just want you to come home...

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: DBCowboy

My opinion doesn't matter.

It's not like I can pick up a phone and change things.

True.

But it doesn't mean you have to defend it either.

I think there have been some times that we have helped the civilized world, even with some of our actions recently.

But I don't think the needle is leaning that way(helping) in recent history.

Stating the obvious isn't defending.

a reply to: chr0naut

So are there some "special" phone devices they are putting out? What's special about them and who would dare want to come up with a new technology, within a device that controls and spys on individuals that they will gladly keep on their person, to sell to them?

a reply to: Krakatoa

Ok I get that in any modern economy "just in time" manufacturing only has so much produce in stock. Last I checked America wasn't running out of water or food, and has now become a net exporter of Oil.

Which country is proving to be an existential threat to 330 million US citizens?

So stomp through the world before the world comes to your door stealing your peanut butter, yeah right.

a reply to: TheLead

Religion has always been a pretext for war when the real reasons are economic.

The main premise of my thread is not about world peace. Did you miss the OP in its entirety?

As you continue to be a tool of the MIC and installing central banks controlled by the Rothschilds?

How much longer will the world put up with your lawlessness?

How many millions more need to die?

How much more burdens will be placed on your taxpayers for these wars ?

Will you ever be dragged kicking and screaming before any world courts to be held accountable for the wanton destruction and countless deaths?

Did you even read the link - where a certain narrative is being played out?

"Oh look Iran is a threat to commercial air travel."

originally posted by: TheLead
a reply to: chr0naut

So are there some "special" phone devices they are putting out? What's special about them and who would dare want to come up with a new technology, within a device that controls and spys on individuals that they will gladly keep on their person, to sell to them?

I dunno, there are lots of people on Facebork or whose every preference is stored in the metadata of the iCloud or Google search and sold to the highest bidder.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Yeah Yeah Yeah,

Let's see how "peaceful" the world would be if we picked up our toys and went home.

They aren't toys. They are weapons.

If you ceased using those weapons, then the world would be just that much more peaceful.

If you removed all American influence from the sovereign countries where you intervene, you wouldn't be there for the reactionaries to react against.

It's really simple then ...stop cashing the check. If every country that's INFLUENCED too much by America would just refuse the check.

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Yeah Yeah Yeah,

Let's see how "peaceful" the world would be if we picked up our toys and went home.

They aren't toys. They are weapons.

If you ceased using those weapons, then the world would be just that much more peaceful.

If you removed all American influence from the sovereign countries where you intervene, you wouldn't be there for the reactionaries to react against.

It's really simple then ...stop cashing the check. If every country that's INFLUENCED too much by America would just refuse the check.

There are countries who have what America wants and refuse to give it, or refuse payment.

Apparently that makes them in need of 'military assistance' (Why invade places like Iraq, which has oil, and totally ignore Rwanda, Uganda, Chad or Kampuchea?).

a reply to: putnam6

The check?

Last I looked the CIA playbook has been to use cash and weapons for their crony politicians to rise to power and bring in friendly co-operation for US industry.

Are you really trying to spin that the US stands in the corner square of other countries giving cash aid to its ordinary citizens?

Give me a break.

So show me who has refused a check. Regardless of what the politicians do the will of people here is moving towards getting out of the middle east and elsewhere. You just can't expect a country to spend billions on other countries, not just Iraq and Afghanistan but countries all over the middle east, Europe, Asia, and South America and not have influence. Have been reading America's War for the Greater Middle East a decidedly frank look at U.S involvement and the process behind it. It's way more complicated than the US being war dogs and wanting to pound freedom into everybody's head around the world.
Dont see the US starting anything with Iran anytime soon, but they will be there for their allies in the region.

So show me who has refused a check. Regardless of what the politicians do the will of people here is moving towards getting out of the middle east and elsewhere. You just can't expect a country to spend billions on other countries, not just Iraq and Afghanistan but countries all over the middle east, Europe, Asia, and South America and not have influence. Have been reading America's War for the Greater Middle East a decidedly frank look at U.S involvement and the process behind it. It's way more complicated than the US being war dogs and wanting to pound freedom into everybody's head around the world.
Dont see the US starting anything with Iran anytime soon, but they will be there for their allies in the region.

originally posted by: TheLead
a reply to: chr0naut

So are there some "special" phone devices they are putting out? What's special about them and who would dare want to come up with a new technology, within a device that controls and spys on individuals that they will gladly keep on their person, to sell to them?

Also, you should look into the Exynos chipset.

Samsung Is Looking to Sell Exynos Mobile Processors to ZTE and Others - ExtremeTech

originally posted by: xuenchen
It will be the resurrection of the MongoRian Empire !!!!!

😧

Fixed ya spelling of Mongorian.

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: putnam6

The check?

Last I looked the CIA playbook has been to use cash and weapons for their crony politicians to rise to power and bring in friendly co-operation for US industry.

Are you really trying to spin that the US stands in the corner square of other countries giving cash aid to its ordinary citizens?

Give me a break.

LOL give me a break got any idea how foreign aid works, the damn CIA doesn't have its nose in every country either LOL paranoid much. Besides if the CIA is there likely other foreign entities are already there too. Sorta like you guys are going to be so worried about America that China is going to buy your ass out from under you, and then what happens, your peace-loving leaders will come crying to Washington DC.

They do spend billions that go to the duly and legally recognized governments of those countries. Once it gets on the ground what are they supposed to do? they count on all those peace-loving leaders to distribute it as needed. Like in Somalia, that was one of the basic points. Aid wasn't getting to the people that needed it, yet when the US tries to get it where it needs to go they get attacked locally. How do propose they get those funds directly to the people, bypassing their governments? LOL mail them individual supplies and monies. That's the point the rest of the world is mostly crooked in its own right, especially when it can tap into billions in supplies and monies. So again how do the insure monies get to those in need?

We don't live in a perfect world....

originally posted by: Justoneman
Kuwait would be under Saddam's rule.

The US was part of an alliance against Saddam.

Hitler would have won.

At the battle of Stalingrad, Russia finally turned the German advance back and had been pushing back towards Germany without aid from any other powers.

The Russians overran Berlin, probably the last battle of the European war, not the Americans. Battle of Berlin From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Similarly, the Russian defeat and annexation of Manchuria would probably have been the death blow to Japan had not the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs fallen within days of the defeat. Definitely, there were signs that the Japanese were preparing to surrender prior to either the defeat in Manchuria at the hands of the Russians, or the A-bombs.

The Soviets and the Iron Wall of Communist Country's would have stayed in power.

Do you think that anything that America did caused the USSR to reform?

Also, what of all those countries who voted communist governments in and out at times (Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, North Korea, Nepal, Afganistan, Albania, Angola, Benin, Bulgaria, Congo, Czechoslovakia, Ethiopia, Germany (GDR), Grenada, Hungary, Kampuchea, Mongolia, Mozambique, Poland, Romania, Somalia, Tuva, Yemen (PDRY) and Yugoslavia).

Perhaps political change has nothing to do with 'Americanism'?

Africa would be Germany's colonies. Japan would still be in China and the Chicoms too.

Probably not.

I think the world would be worse off too, if we were isolationists.

I agree, but that is because were are all human, stuck on the same planet, and were are continuing to expand into the maximum resource that the planet can provide. Our ultimate problems are in common and it is fairly obvious that the solutions are too.

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Yeah Yeah Yeah,

Let's see how "peaceful" the world would be if we picked up our toys and went home.

They aren't toys. They are weapons.

If you ceased using those weapons, then the world would be just that much more peaceful.

If you removed all American influence from the sovereign countries where you intervene, you wouldn't be there for the reactionaries to react against.

It's really simple then ...stop cashing the check. If every country that's INFLUENCED too much by America would just refuse the check.

Mmhmm. Refuse the "check".

That didn't get Qaddafi very far, now did it?

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: putnam6

The check?

Last I looked the CIA playbook has been to use cash and weapons for their crony politicians to rise to power and bring in friendly co-operation for US industry.

Are you really trying to spin that the US stands in the corner square of other countries giving cash aid to its ordinary citizens?

Give me a break.

LOL give me a break got any idea how foreign aid works, the damn CIA doesn't have its nose in every country either LOL paranoid much. Besides if the CIA is there likely other foreign entities are already there too. Sorta like you guys are going to be so worried about America that China is going to buy your ass out from under you, and then what happens, your peace-loving leaders will come crying to Washington DC.

They do spend billions that go to the duly and legally recognized governments of those countries. Once it gets on the ground what are they supposed to do? they count on all those peace-loving leaders to distribute it as needed. Like in Somalia, that was one of the basic points. Aid wasn't getting to the people that needed it, yet when the US tries to get it where it needs to go they get attacked locally. How do propose they get those funds directly to the people, bypassing their governments? LOL mail them individual supplies and monies. That's the point the rest of the world is mostly crooked in its own right, especially when it can tap into billions in supplies and monies. So again how do the insure monies get to those in need?

We don't live in a perfect world....

OK, take Somalia for instance, you give the country some token foreign aid (hey, you can afford it) then you charge that the aid isn't getting to the poor people who need it.

Lets break it down:
- Environmental aid (they just had a drought) $4.13 million.
- Education & social services $8 million.
- Democracy, human rights and governance (euphemism for police) $18.94 million.
- Economic development $20.57 million.
- Peace and security (euphemism for military aid) $110.28 million.

Now ask yourself, which heading is the food aid for helping the people who are drought and famine stricken? Yup, you guessed it, the $4.13 million one. Where is the actual clear and present need for aid? The one that gets the least and the one that they will claim (probably rightly) isn't getting to the people in need.

So the US gets to send in the troops and control a sovereign country by proxy. A country with a GDP of $7.369 billion. All for the sweet price of just under $52 million (with the military aid bit removed).

See, I know how aid works!

Foreign Assistance in Somalia by Category - foreignassistance.gov

Why The U.S. Ranks At The Bottom In A Foreign Aid Index - NPR

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Raggedyman

And like clockwork you wade in over your head with name calling as a rebuttal.

The playground is outside your basement - you're sorely missed.

Tic Toc, how about you justify your opinion piece, then it wouldn’t just be a pointless rant from some upset Labor supporter who lost an election

Or do you sincerely think that if the US hadn’t stepped in so many time over the last 100 odd years we would have achieved world peace now


Ike clockwork I will ask for evidence, ask you list your issues

Are the US a pawn in the NWO, of course, who isn’t, even you play your part