Free Tibet? Hell, free America!

reply to post by Conspiriology


Sir you post is one that has pleased and intrigued me so far, for I can see in your words you understand exactly what's going on in and around our nation.

We may collide on religious issues but is so much I agree with you in that post.

Great post.

There is virtually nothing accurate in the opinions of this author so it's almost not worth commenting. We actually treat the enemy combatants better than they treat themselves. They are getting 3 square meals a day and some didn't want to leave even when proven innocent and released.

Christianity is what gave the liberals the idea of helping the downtrodden and civil rights. Prior to that you had a brutal survival of the fittest scheme, that in fact was a key part of Hitlers ideology. The lib.s simply abused the notion of all men are created equal to create special rights based on what you do with your genitals and for anyone who has a gripe or violent aspirations against the republic.

reply to post by emeessa


You are welcome to "burst in any time" quote me, correct me, any thing for a good debate. Is nothing more refreshing that the views of people all around the world here in ATS.

reply to post by budski


Something like that. Taxing corporations that make their fortunes from the populace in order to reward the populace would be one way of looking after our children. Tearing down the war machine keeps our children and the worlds children safer. Military might should always be one of prevention. The U.S is a global community, just in my neighborhood there are folks that represent China, Pakistan India, Greece, Japan, the list goes on all over this country. Americans live with cultural diversity, none putting themselves above the other, although there are some wounds that heal slowly but we are getting there. Our problems are the tip in the distribution of wealth we have greedy men in control right now. The religious stuff is working itself out.

Why isn't there more debate on the reasons for attacking Iraq? Sure, it gets mentioned quite a lot but seems to be shrugged off by republicans. Some democrats are criticizing it but not enough imo.

If you start a war that has resulted in maybe as much as a million dead and a country in chaos then imho the people that started it should be put on trial.

Everyone knows by now (except the Fox news viewers) that Iraq in 2003 had no weapons of mass destructions and no links to Al Qaida.

Why isn't anyone in a high ranking position demanding that Bush is put on trial for starting a disastrous war based on lies? Clinton was put on trial for receiving a blow job. It makes no sense!

[edit on 18-4-2008 by Shades1035]

reply to post by marg6043


Oh, I'm learning LOTS from this thread all ready there's nothing like a lil education during nighttime.. (Too dang bad my englishteacher arn't on here.. )

As I said earlier in this thread, the view "over here" on "you guys/gals over there" is Way different from how you feel that it is, and how it realy are.. So both sides learn from this (..i hope.. )

reply to post by emeessa


Yes you are right, many of the things we learn from outside the US is through bias news and the internet.

So thanks for bringing your point of view from the other side.

reply to post by emeessa


I am impressed with your english. I only know a little spanish, I need to brush up on it. How many languages do you know?

reply to post by Conspiriology


Haha...Agree or disagree...You are one of my favorite posters here at ATS...Always bring great counterpoints to every debate, and are ferocious at times in doing so. I wouldn't want to be on your bad side! Star for you!

reply to post by DimensionalDetective


you are already on his bad side by being a news ho.

Although he does have a point

About me as well

reply to post by Witness2008


Oh.. Swedish and english more or less fluent.. I still lack some words in english but I'm working on it I used to speak Danish pretty good, but I think i've forgotten most of it.

Some polish, some german (i understand a lot more than i can say), some ancient latin (don't ask why) very little french.. And some norweigan I did speak a little everyday greek when I was younger (around 10) but the only thing i can say now is; Hi handsome

reply to post by emeessa





Funny

Originally posted by Shades1035
Why isn't there more debate on the reasons for attacking Iraq? Sure, it gets mentioned quite a lot but seems to be shrugged off by republicans. Some democrats are criticizing it but not enough imo.

If you start a war that has resulted in maybe as much as a million dead and a country in chaos then imho the people that started it should be put on trial.

Everyone knows by now (except the Fox news viewers) that Iraq in 2003 had no weapons of mass destructions and no links to Al Qaida.

Why isn't anyone in a high ranking position demanding that Bush is put on trial for starting a disastrous war based on lies? Clinton was put on trial for receiving a blow job. It makes no sense!

[edit on 18-4-2008 by Shades1035]

Grab a pillow my friend...it will be a long night! This topic is avoided by everyone...even by the liberals. I think its a case of 'winner takes all'.

If you lose the war you get tried and executed...much like saddam which deserved it. But doesn't bush and blair deserve the same fate for acts of aggression? The nazis got hanged after WW2 because they lost. If they had won the allied generals would be guilty........see my point?

And the Clinton trial was beyond ironic. He got caught lying about having an affair while the neo-cons that managed to fabricate a ton of "evidence" to justify an immoral/unethical war get away with it.

An old saying comes to mind: "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." Aesop - (c. 550 B.C.)


[edit on 18-4-2008 by EarthCitizen07]

reply to post by budski


Yeah, he gave me an arse kicking once a ways back for one of my threads, and I was like "ouch"...haha. He is one spirited dude, whatever side of the issue he may be on. Very entertaining writing style.

reply to post by DimensionalDetective


Yeah, but he's a likkle kitty cat really

(looks around and runs)

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Grab a pillow my friend...it will be a long night! This topic is avoided by everyone...even by the liberals. I think its a case of 'winner takes all'.

If you lose the war you get tried and executed...much like saddam which deserved it. But doesn't bush and blair deserve the same fate for acts of aggression? The nazis got hanged after WW2 but they lost...if they had won the allied generals would be guilty........See my point?

And the Clinton trial was beyond ironic. He got caught lying about having an affair while the neo-cons that managed to fabricate a ton of "evidence" to justify an immoral/unethical war get away with it.

An old saying comes to mind: "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." Aesop - (c. 550 B.C.)

I have to ask.. Is there realy any way of winning that war at all? When can that war be over?

As for the Bush vs Clinton.. I have to agree.. It's ridicolous that one president gets hung out over an affair.. while the other one can start a war thats Way beyond all critic. But what are the reasons?

Shouldn't be money.. since that war is one expencive hobby..
Religion? well.. it's from any religions point of view wrong to have affairs.. but still at the same time it's wrong to kill. (Oheah, i know, some religions Push the other way on that point)

Why the big fuzz about someone "having a lil fun" with another grownup.. and the very lil fuzz (earlier) over a crazy war?

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by emeessa

 

Funny

I'm blond, I can't remember everything.. and Never ever ask me to spell anything unless it's swedish

Originally posted by emeessa
I have to ask.. Is there realy any way of winning that war at all? When can that war be over?

They won from a tactical perspective in that they defeated the iraqi military but what they did not account for was the insurgents willing to kill themselves and others to defend their ideology and national interests.

No country likes to be occupied by foreign troops but in Iraq and Afghanistan the situation is much more complicated due to the various religious sub-groups. For example, we have a kurds in the north and shiites and sunni muslims in the rest of the country. This country was always plagued with division but Saddam being a ruthless baath dictator from the sunni minority group always managed to quell opposition by force and that is why he deserved what he got...hanging!

Now there is a power vacuum that will likely bring the shiites into power and create a new 'Iran' as soon as occupying forces retreat. So not only did we not solve any problems we in fact worsened the situation. Didn't any middle east experts know that and try to stop the madness before it became too late?

I think the best thing to do now is keep the troops there, or at least a respectable amount, to keep the shiites from easily grasping power. Yeah it will probably be a long...long time and the future is bleak but the alernatives look worse if they decide to do a complete withdrawal.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Very wisely wrote.

As the situation looks at the moment, taking in the fact that no matter wether it's shia or sunni.. it's still an under educated country where religions plays a very big role.. and The religions pushes on the fact that If you die and take "the white devil" or whatever other enemy they might have with you - You'll end up in paradise. And as the people probebly don't see a light in the tunnel of war I bet paradise sounds pretty good.

So, keeping the troops there might be one way of handling it.. but unless the educational system and the healthcare system down there changes it will be for ever.

I doubt there's any chanse of diplomacy that'll work anywhere in the near future, the whole foundation of the culture down there will prolly have to be "redone" for this war to be over.

Withdraw all forces and there'll be war anyway.. don't withdraw, keep the position of the White christian devil they don't understand... and somehow try to show them "how to live"... And suddenly we're back to forcing "our" culture on a people that prolly wont like it any better than they like "us" breathing their air.

reply to post by emeessa


Our leaders throw religious phrases around like fishing lines then reel in the votes they need. There is nothing spiritual or religious about George Bush, he simply played the religious card and won... well that card and the tax cut card, like I said earlier a lot of people vote for their own bank accounts.

More that 60% of the american population thinks Iraq is a big mistake and want out. In the minds of our illustrious leaders our oil is under middle east sand and they want it and the political leverage it brings. I think there are a few other reasons we are there but they would be for another thread. Power and Greed is what has led our country into the ditches. We voters make the mistake of putting elitist into power because we like the sound bites. We should judge our political applicants for content and the body of work they intend on taking to office. If those standards had been applied to Bush he would not be in office.

If you distabilize an area and you have a presense in that area you maintain a certain control. The U.S had zero control before that invasion.