jillian
Princess
We are Not Muslim.
closer
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We are Not Muslim.
Check the dates again.Ummm, and wasn't it the U.N. (the one you Leftists worship), not the U.S., that imposed those sanctions? Why yes it was, as a matter of fact. But please, explain to me how "Rich American parasites who profit from war" are responsible for Saddam Hussein diverting oil-fpr-food money from Iraqi civilians to his military (there's incontrovertible evidence he did that, as you know). I swear, you're a one trick pony; all you know how to do, is bash America, because it isn't the communist workers' paradise your little Trotskyite heart desires.Are we responsible for these dead Iraqis?
What threat did they pose to your children?
Why should anyone be allowed to profit from their murders?
"These results provide strong evidence that the Gulf war and trade sanctions caused a threefold increase in mortality among Iraqi children under five years of age. We estimate that an excess of more than 46,900 children died between January and August 1991. (N Engl J Med 1992;327:931–6.)"
MMS: Error
Between January and August 1991 over 46, 000 Iraqi children died from direct and indirect effects of US bombs dropped on water treatment plants.Gulf War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Do you think anyone earned a profit from those bombs?
Link?Since our invasion in March of 2003, one in four Iraqis has become
1. dead
2. displaced
3. maimed
4. incarcerated
and you and george the brain dead antisemite terrorist supporter should get an education on the subject area you're discussing before you make ridiculous statements.
Awesome answer! It's dismissive and vaguely insulting yet can't be countered in any way. Because you haven't said anything. Nice!
By the way, how you YOU respond if China persuaded the UN to invade the US (let's say it was to put an end to our contentious culture wars). Would you be tickled pink about them building permanent military bases in your back yard?
In that case, I would pick up my weapon, and start killing every Baby-blue-helmeted amateur soldier I could find! I do not consider that third-world debating society our friends, anyway. There's your answer, plain and simple. Now I have a couple of questions for you: (1) ever been in combat?
(2) in the event of said U.N. invasion, where might we expect to find YOU? Would that be helping repel it, or would you be cowering in your hole, moralizing about it?
... the army didn't pay me to sympathize with the enemy, or question the policy decisions of my superiors, and I did not and do not give a rat's rear end what the enemy may have felt about that, or what some dope-smoking hippies back home felt about it. Is that clear enough for you?
In that case, I would pick up my weapon, and start killing every Baby-blue-helmeted amateur soldier I could find! I do not consider that third-world debating society our friends, anyway. There's your answer, plain and simple. Now I have a couple of questions for you: (1) ever been in combat?
No.
(2) in the event of said U.N. invasion, where might we expect to find YOU? Would that be helping repel it, or would you be cowering in your hole, moralizing about it?
I'd hope I'd have the courage to be out there fighting for all I was worth. But I don't suppose I'll really know until I'm tested, eh?
... the army didn't pay me to sympathize with the enemy, or question the policy decisions of my superiors, and I did not and do not give a rat's rear end what the enemy may have felt about that, or what some dope-smoking hippies back home felt about it. Is that clear enough for you?
Yeah. It sounds like you're missing the point of my comments entirely. The question of the thread is "Why do they hate us?". It's my suggestion that it's very likely that they hate us because our military is in their face day in and day out. Some people want to say it's a religious issue, or that they're jealous of this or that, and those issues may have some merit. But it seems to me that the overwhelming factor would be our presence there. I'm saying we would be just as angry and violent as they are if we were in their shoes. That's not 'sympathy' as much as just having an intelligent understanding of your enemy's perspective. Delusion doesn't get us anywhere.
In any case, it doesn't matter; you generally expect your enemy in combat to have the same gentle concern for you, that you have for him (which is none). It is of no great help to know whether the enemy's motivation for fighting is political, religious, or territorial, unless you can use it to help break his will to fight, which is the ultimate objective of the exercise. Until then, it is a matter of killing him, before he kills you. Since the beginning of warfare, combat has been, and still is ultimately about one soldier imposing his (and his nation's) will on his opponent.
In any case, it doesn't matter; you generally expect your enemy in combat to have the same gentle concern for you, that you have for him (which is none). It is of no great help to know whether the enemy's motivation for fighting is political, religious, or territorial, unless you can use it to help break his will to fight, which is the ultimate objective of the exercise. Until then, it is a matter of killing him, before he kills you. Since the beginning of warfare, combat has been, and still is ultimately about one soldier imposing his (and his nation's) will on his opponent.
I suppose all that's true, but I'm assuming a broader context than just combat. Politically, it's very important to understand the motivations of others. Especially when formulating foreign policy. It can make the difference between fomenting hatred or inspiring cooperation - which seems to be the context of the topic. Since 9/11, many of Americans have been trying to make sense of it all - asking "Why do they hate us?" It's an important question to understand, because if we've done things to help create that hatred, we need to learn to avoid it in the future.
You mean survival of the richest, fool."WAR is a racket.Misleading title. Should read:
Why I Hate the US
"It always has been.
It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives."
Why I hate War.
Survival of the fittest, baby!!!
Move to Switzerland, Yella'.
But, meanwhile, appreciate those that have fought and died in the bloodiest wars in history to give you the right to be a Pinko.
In my opinion, Obama is at least as corruptible as his predecessors and much smarter than any of them.One And Done.Yet another Obama Hate thread... Can't you just leave the poor little boy alone???
Has a ring to it, I think.
Except for those unable to judge the "poor little boy" by the content of his character.
Obama's "character." Now there's an interesting topic.
They hate us because they're told to hate us. They're told by their rulers that the US is responsible for their oppression -- not their rulers.They hate us because we're free. That's the main thing. I mean, seeing their homeland occupied by our military might annoy them, but the main thing is, they're jealous of our wealth and our freedom.
Oh, it's quite true, but let's take your "broader context" for a moment. First of all, since my first explanation of why Bin Laden and Co. hated us apparently didn't register with you, let's expand on it a bit. Islam is a religion founded by a warrior, which from its beginnings has had a pronounced penchant fro spreading itself by conquest. That was true in its early days on the Arabian peninsula, and it remained so when it swept west out of Arabia and across North Africa and eventually Spain a couple of centuries later. It has always had a militant component, sometimes more dominant than at others, and every time that militant side has become dominant, it has had another eruption of violent expansionism. What we are now witnessing, is another such militant Islamic eruption, led by Al Quaeda, but not confined to it. This current version of militant Islam has its origin (like Bin Laden) in the radical Waha'abi Islamic sect of Saudi Arabia. The Saudi oligarchy, in an effort to remain in power, has for many years bought the most fanatical components of this sect off, by funding schools they run in various Islamic countries, and by exporting its radicals to those same countries. This has, naturally expanded the influence of Waha'abism, which in its radical form is violent, rabidly anti-Western, anti-Israeli, and by extension anti-American.In any case, it doesn't matter; you generally expect your enemy in combat to have the same gentle concern for you, that you have for him (which is none). It is of no great help to know whether the enemy's motivation for fighting is political, religious, or territorial, unless you can use it to help break his will to fight, which is the ultimate objective of the exercise. Until then, it is a matter of killing him, before he kills you. Since the beginning of warfare, combat has been, and still is ultimately about one soldier imposing his (and his nation's) will on his opponent.
I suppose all that's true, but I'm assuming a broader context than just combat. Politically, it's very important to understand the motivations of others. Especially when formulating foreign policy. It can make the difference between fomenting hatred or inspiring cooperation - which seems to be the context of the topic. Since 9/11, many of Americans have been trying to make sense of it all - asking "Why do they hate us?" It's an important question to understand, because if we've done things to help create that hatred, we need to learn to avoid it in the future.
That's a small part of this story.Because America's for-profit Killing Machine generates nearly half the world's refugees.
Afghanistan with 3.05 million displaced persons followed by Iraq's 1.68 million refugees currently lead the pack but don't underestimate the misery US elites have in mind for Yemen and Libya.
While the US accepts more refugees for permanent settlement than any other country (71,400 in 2010) most of the current burden falls on neighboring states like Pakistan, Iran, and Syria.
Maybe US defense contractors and the richest 1% of Americans should have their income that comes from killing children taxed at a little higher rate than their winnings in Wall Street's casino?
Half of World's Refugees are Running From US Wars | Truthout
Why They Hate US
How about we help you out with a hint George.
We are Not Muslim.
Or Kosher.We are Not Muslim.
closer
The bombing of Baghdad in '91 was a war crime.Check the dates again.Ummm, and wasn't it the U.N. (the one you Leftists worship), not the U.S., that imposed those sanctions? Why yes it was, as a matter of fact. But please, explain to me how "Rich American parasites who profit from war" are responsible for Saddam Hussein diverting oil-fpr-food money from Iraqi civilians to his military (there's incontrovertible evidence he did that, as you know). I swear, you're a one trick pony; all you know how to do, is bash America, because it isn't the communist workers' paradise your little Trotskyite heart desires.
Between January and August 1991 over 46, 000 Iraqi children died from direct and indirect effects of US bombs dropped on water treatment plants.Gulf War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Do you think anyone earned a profit from those bombs?
That bombing, George, was a direct response to the fact that Iraq had invaded and occupied one U.S. ally (Kuwait), and threatened to invade another (Saudi Arabia)Aside from the naked and unprovoked aggression involved, as a practical matter, we could not let Saddam control that big a chunk of the world's oil supply, so we acted. partly out of treaty commitments, partly out of self-interest.. That's hardly a first, for us, or most other major powers. Apparently, Saddam did not believe we could and would push him out of Kuwait, so he would not pull his forces out voluntarily, and ultimately we had to kick them out. Infrastructure, including roads, bridges, water and power plants, is a legitimate target of war, and we bombed it. That was a necessary part of the strategy, and I make no apologies for it. I thought we were rather restrained; we could have, after all, carpet bombed Baghdad, but didn't; we confined our strikes to targets of military value. There is no reason this nation's forces should fight with one hand tied behind their backs just to "make it fair" or soothe your tender, squeamish, effeminate, little permanent civilian "conscience" (which is rather selective at that-you don't seem perturbed over Iraqi atrocities in Kuwait). I believe in fighting to win. Don't like that? Cry me a river!
Antiwar.comLink?Since our invasion in March of 2003, one in four Iraqis has become
1. dead
2. displaced
3. maimed
4. incarcerated
The bombing of Baghdad in '91 was a war crime.Check the dates again.
Between January and August 1991 over 46, 000 Iraqi children died from direct and indirect effects of US bombs dropped on water treatment plants.Gulf War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Do you think anyone earned a profit from those bombs?
That bombing, George, was a direct response to the fact that Iraq had invaded and occupied one U.S. ally (Kuwait), and threatened to invade another (Saudi Arabia)Aside from the naked and unprovoked aggression involved, as a practical matter, we could not let Saddam control that big a chunk of the world's oil supply, so we acted. partly out of treaty commitments, partly out of self-interest.. That's hardly a first, for us, or most other major powers. Apparently, Saddam did not believe we could and would push him out of Kuwait, so he would not pull his forces out voluntarily, and ultimately we had to kick them out. Infrastructure, including roads, bridges, water and power plants, is a legitimate target of war, and we bombed it. That was a necessary part of the strategy, and I make no apologies for it. I thought we were rather restrained; we could have, after all, carpet bombed Baghdad, but didn't; we confined our strikes to targets of military value. There is no reason this nation's forces should fight with one hand tied behind their backs just to "make it fair" or soothe your tender, squeamish, effeminate, little permanent civilian "conscience" (which is rather selective at that-you don't seem perturbed over Iraqi atrocities in Kuwait). I believe in fighting to win. Don't like that? Cry me a river!
How many have you committed?
How many women have you killed?
How many did you rape?
How many children?
Were you "squeamish" about the first?
You're just another flag-flapping punk who's getting close to his own death and looking for justification for his crimes. There are none. If there's any justice in this world, shit like you will die the same slow miserable death you've helped inflict on others.
Don't like that?
Swill some Agent Orange and die.
Bitch.
You're the longest-winded baby killer I've come across.
Were you drafted, or did you "volunteer" to travel thousands of miles from your stye and kill human beings ("gooks" to you) who posed no threat to your family?
'Still confusing yourself with a good guy?
Good guys don't kill because their government tells them to.
Hitler had an abundance of those.
Shit like you would have fit in well with the fuhrer.
Your crime, again, was being too stupid/lazy/indifferent and ignorant to question those who gave you orders that turned you into war criminal.
You were already a slave.
"Thanks for you service."
Slave.
PS Your "maker" is another lie the rich tell to convince their slaves to serve.