THe United States: Best Country On Planet

[OCA]

Yeah I did screw that up, thanks for the correction.

Hitler was a fool who somehow believed his was the most powerful nation on earth which he quickly found out not to be the case. If America had acted quicker he would not have blitzkrieged through half those countries. Victories yes he did get but as for a lasting and extended influence over other countries I would hardly say 6 years to be extended. I forget how long the Romans for example were the most pwerful going and how long their influence was but i'd guess a century or two, can't remember now. That is what i'm talking about, history shows that powerful nations or empires have always used that power to extend their views whether right or wrong although I consider ours to be right. I mean people can bitch and moan about it but really what is going to happen because others are powerless to do anything as exampled by the tussle in the U.N. before we went into Iraq, and that was like 3 or 4 major players on the world scene who could do nothing.

 

[Scourge]

That policy and idea is a reason we have terrorists attacking us. Good of you to put some of the blame on us. Instead of that BS I always hear "They hate us because we're free" or whatever.

And just because the Romans did it does NOT mean we should! Acting with impunity and invading a country because we don't like what they are doing (or not doing) with THEIR OWN resources is ridiculous. If we run out of fresh water we can just bomb Canada and take their water, I mean they have soooo much, and not many people, it would be better in our hands.
Just because there have been evil empires in the past doesn't justify our acting like one.

 

[DKSuddeth]

he actually makes a good point about it though, humanity seems to refuse to learn from history. The only lasting empire was the chinese dynasty which, I believe, lasted over 1,000 years I think, but all the others have lasted little time compared to that and always ended by being beaten to death because they extended themselves too thin.

By OCA's thinking, the US is doing the same as far as spreading influence but not colonizing though will have little change from history as far as being successful. at least in my opinion anyway.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
he actually makes a good point about it though, humanity seems to refuse to learn from history. The only lasting empire was the chinese dynasty which, I believe, lasted over 1,000 years I think, but all the others have lasted little time compared to that and always ended by being beaten to death because they extended themselves too thin.

By OCA's thinking, the US is doing the same as far as spreading influence but not colonizing though will have little change from history as far as being successful. at least in my opinion anyway.

Actually we have learned. You cannot dominate a land without seeing to the welfare of it's local economy for very long. That' why the neocons aim to bring personal freedom, capitalism and free markets to the entire world. Some of us have learned, but you obviously haven't.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Actually we have learned. You cannot dominate a land without seeing to the welfare of it's local economy for very long. That' why the neocons aim to bring personal freedom, capitalism and free markets to the entire world. Some of us have learned, but you obviously haven't.

omnipotence must be such a burden for you.

personally, I think you're full of shit. I also believe you don't have a real clue as to what ever it is you think you're talking about. You're incapable of learning a damn thing in this world because you think you know it all already. I look forward to your continuing dissapointment in this lifetime.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
omnipotence must be such a burden for you.

personally, I think you're full of shit. I also believe you don't have a real clue as to what ever it is you think you're talking about. You're incapable of learning a damn thing in this world because you think you know it all already. I look forward to your continuing dissapointment in this lifetime.

You have nothing left but ad hominem attacks. How sad. I know that equal access to the first world corporate environment for third world workers is a threat to your standard of living. Try to think of someone else for a change. You're nothing but William-lite.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by Scourge
That policy and idea is a reason we have terrorists attacking us. Good of you to put some of the blame on us. Instead of that BS I always hear "They hate us because we're free" or whatever.

And just because the Romans did it does NOT mean we should! Acting with impunity and invading a country because we don't like what they are doing (or not doing) with THEIR OWN resources is ridiculous. If we run out of fresh water we can just bomb Canada and take their water, I mean they have soooo much, and not many people, it would be better in our hands.
Just because there have been evil empires in the past doesn't justify our acting like one.

The reason terrorists attack us are as varied as the number of attacks. But the first and foremost reason is that they can. Plain and simple.

Until such time as their actions have consequences which make others think before they act and then decide against attacking us, terrorism will continue.

Surely you are not suggesting that the world would be better off for prior societies to have failed to secure exploration, domination and ultimate settlement of new lands? Please. Labeling a civilization as evil just becasue they used their resources for the betterment of their society is not evil on its face. The Roman and Grecian empires, the byzantines, great britain, the US, etc. They were all beneficiaries of empire building...it's what humans do. Yes, there's a winner and a loser and to the victor go the spoils. That doesn't make the victor evil nor the loser good. Nor does it mean the opposite.

Every society will eventually have to stake their claim. I believe that the US is going to be the winner in the war against the middle east - rightly so for me. However, I'm not going to worry about how history looks back on us. I know in my heart and mind that what we are doing is right and just and it is necessary for the continuation of the country that I love.

Because stopping terrorists will save our lives, greater freedom for religous differences will better society as a whole and stopping a regime which treats 50% of its population as inferior and regularly allows violence, rape and murder to happen to them will better the world and, because I'm not stupid, I do believe that there are more than enough other countries out there with similar ideas, to send a message that we will die rather than abdicate our responsibility and privledge of defending what's right in this world.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
You have nothing left but ad hominem attacks. How sad. I know that equal access to the first world corporate environment for third world workers is a threat to your standard of living. Try to think of someone else for a change. You're nothing but William-lite.

You've done nothing BUT ad hominem attacks. Most of your arguments have zero substance. The only thing you're capable of is spewing the neocon mantras. You've no real clue about reality. You're so worried about invasion that you are comfortable wallowing in your unemployed situation so long as you feel safer and its sad that you are trying to convince most of america that its better to be safe from the boogieman than it is to be working.

You are the sad individual, not me. You're nothing but a PNAC stooge with no original thought. You flip flop worse than john kerry when it comes down to it.

get some intelligence in your life and maybe you might have something positive to contribute to your country.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by Moi
The reason terrorists attack us are as varied as the number of attacks. But the first and foremost reason is that they can. Plain and simple.

Until such time as their actions have consequences which make others think before they act and then decide against attacking us, terrorism will continue.

Surely you are not suggesting that the world would be better off for prior societies to have failed to secure exploration, domination and ultimate settlement of new lands? Please. Labeling a civilization as evil just becasue they used their resources for the betterment of their society is not evil on its face. The Roman and Grecian empires, the byzantines, great britain, the US, etc. They were all beneficiaries of empire building...it's what humans do. Yes, there's a winner and a loser and to the victor go the spoils. That doesn't make the victor evil nor the loser good. Nor does it mean the opposite.

Every society will eventually have to stake their claim. I believe that the US is going to be the winner in the war against the middle east - rightly so for me. However, I'm not going to worry about how history looks back on us. I know in my heart and mind that what we are doing is right and just and it is necessary for the continuation of the country that I love.

Because stopping terrorists will save our lives, greater freedom for religous differences will better society as a whole and stopping a regime which treats 50% of its population as inferior and regularly allows violence, rape and murder to happen to them will better the world and, because I'm not stupid, I do believe that there are more than enough other countries out there with similar ideas, to send a message that we will die rather than abdicate our responsibility and privledge of defending what's right in this world.

the only issue I have with your argument moi, is that in the war on terror, we are truly not putting ourselves in a position to put an end to it. What I mean by that is most terrorist attacks come as a result of religious influence. A fanaticism that promotes honor and nobility in commiting murder. That is what we have to stop and I don't feel that we can completely do that by bringing the fight to them. Its the 'violence begets more violence' madness. Sure, alot of bombs and bullets are going to stop some of it, but terrorism is going to continue until the religious differences can be settled.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
You've done nothing BUT ad hominem attacks. Most of your arguments have zero substance. The only thing you're capable of is spewing the neocon mantras. You've no real clue about reality. You're so worried about invasion that you are comfortable wallowing in your unemployed situation so long as you feel safer and its sad that you are trying to convince most of america that its better to be safe from the boogieman than it is to be working.

You are the sad individual, not me. You're nothing but a PNAC stooge with no original thought. You flip flop worse than john kerry when it comes down to it.

get some intelligence in your life and maybe you might have something positive to contribute to your country.

bah bah black sheep, have you any wool?

More personal attacks. What have i flip flopped on?

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
the only issue I have with your argument moi, is that in the war on terror, we are truly not putting ourselves in a position to put an end to it. What I mean by that is most terrorist attacks come as a result of religious influence. A fanaticism that promotes honor and nobility in commiting murder. That is what we have to stop and I don't feel that we can completely do that by bringing the fight to them. Its the 'violence begets more violence' madness. Sure, alot of bombs and bullets are going to stop some of it, but terrorism is going to continue until the religious differences can be settled.

As long as their terror networks are interrupted and disrupted, as long as it costs more (and thus they have fewer tools at their disposal), as long as they die in greater numbers and as long as those ready to take their place must pause, I am satisfied.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
bah bah black sheep, have you any wool?

More personal attacks. What have i flip flopped on?

you flip flop on your patriotism. One minute You're all about america and americans and then next minute you're all about giving people of other countries the fair break. Your true objective is corporatism, not americanism. you're busted, get out. :crutch:

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
you flip flop on your patriotism. One minute You're all about america and americans and then next minute you're all about giving people of other countries the fair break. Your true objective is corporatism, not americanism. you're busted, get out. :crutch:

Not utilizing cheaper resouces in the third world will make out corporations weaker in the long run. This will not benefit Americans one iota. Will it? I'd like to hear how? Can you think in the long term?

You haven't busted anyone, McGruff the Crime Dog.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

DK, the era of nation states is coming to an end. Even a GOOD commy would understand the importance of this.

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
I don't feel that we can completely do that by bringing the fight to them.

Well, I believe in a male-dominated society like the Middle East they appreciate strength. I think thru a demonstration of our power in that area of the world the people there may come to many conclusions, and among these conclusion the one disprovable fact will be that we are strong. They will appreciate and desire this strength for themselves and wonder by what means they can achieve it. When they realize that democracy and a free market bring strength they will want it. I think it's that simple, and I think that's why it is essential that we always project strength in that area of the world. We can't run away anymore, and we can't be silent anymore. That sort of action or inaction, more than religious beliefs, is what allowed 9/11 to happen. They saw weakness and just as they appreciate strength they despise weakness. I think it's begining to work already, and I think that area of the world will change for the better if we stand firm and stick with our current policy.

"when people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature, they will like the strong horse" -UBL

I think UBL understands that part of the world better than I, and in this instance I believe he's right.

 

[DKSuddeth]

while I agree with you and moi mostly, what is it we really want to accomplish? Do we want to stop terrorism or just minimize it?

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
while I agree with you and moi mostly, what is it we really want to accomplish? Do we want to stop terrorism or just minimize it?

either is fine with me. I am not egotistical enough to think that terrorism will be stopped. I don't think you can 100% change the hearts and minds of the world's population. But I am willing to kill and die to defend my way of life.

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
while I agree with you and moi mostly, what is it we really want to accomplish? Do we want to stop terrorism or just minimize it?

I'd like us to create a world where we don't have to drop bombs on anyone anymore.

I don't care wether or not these people like us, so long as they can behave in a civilized manner towards us and one another.

 

[Bry]

the only issue I have with your argument moi, is that in the war on terror, we are truly not putting ourselves in a position to put an end to it. What I mean by that is most terrorist attacks come as a result of religious influence. A fanaticism that promotes honor and nobility in commiting murder. That is what we have to stop and I don't feel that we can completely do that by bringing the fight to them. Its the 'violence begets more violence' madness. Sure, alot of bombs and bullets are going to stop some of it, but terrorism is going to continue until the religious differences can be settled.

excellent take, DK. I wish I'd said it.

 

[tim_duncan2000]

terrorism is going to continue until the religious differences can be settled.

And how might we do that?