Biles is leaving south-west Canada for a while

[deleted by biles]

[deleted by biles]

 

farewell biles

 

hate to see you go... but it's your own choice...

the hell with it, have fun and take care!

greetze, Zembla

 

take a laptop with you

have a nice time. we`ll still be here when you return. (you WILL return)

 

Just remember biles....us yanks don't start World Wars.....but we sure as hell do finish them...

 

Farewell.

BTW, how can US external relations be so hipocrity ? How can world opinion let this happen ? What they are clamming to attack Iraq ? Disrespect t Security Concil statement ? How many others have done the same ? Israel for example (for retreat from palestinian territorys a few months ago),have them been attacked ?
DAMN, I hate this world

PS: No, I'm not saying that all that disrespect Security Concil statements should suffer military action, actually I think the oposite.

 

...at what cost? Few million dead mb?

Kambozea about 500.000people killed all civilians. Bombed more than japan in WW2. No real armed conflict with US.
Disorder made space for Red Khmers who killed million or two.

God knows how many in Nam. Maybe 500.000-1.000.000. Again what for?

Murdering Chile general to get way to kill democrately voted president of Chile. Getting Augusto pinochet in power....and how many dead by him? And just because Pepsi co. was worried by their income...huh.

Assault on panama to get hold of incomes passing channel.

Failed landing on cuba. (whatever that was)

Supporting financically and with weapons civil holocaust (timorians) in Indonesia. Indonesian troops were supplied by US weapons, US battlegear and uniforms. Kissinger gave his (and USAs) blessing for attack. Million dead maybe?

Ready to murder millions of civilians for money.

These are some war ending acts?

 

Big boys game dont like "public opinion" if it come accross their opinion.
"public opinion" is bullshit that alive only and only at peace time and dies imediatly if someone want to start "little" war.

 

US policy and restraint and strength has been the stabilizing factor in the global politic for decades now. Would any other country have fared so... if given the power to choose the world politic?
Yes, we are the big dog, and we are not perfect. But we have not taken over the world to our way of thinking/ bussiness/religion as has been attempted in the past by less powerfull /influential Superpowers.

 

The problem is that nobody "gave" the power to th USA to direct the world's politics. They just got it by their own hand, and all other stupid nations have laid to their feet, licking their boots. That's the problem, imo.

Anyway, i don't want a new flame about politics, so, pls, guys, don't start it, ok?

 

Man, am I sick of nowadays anti-American slurs by revisionists, nazi-whitewashers and people of nations who failed to build a successfull, stable constitutional democratic state like the US. As a matter of fact most of this anti-American shit-talking is based on simple agony. And as ByTor already said, name another country in history which was in a similar powerfull position like nowadays US that did not try to take over the whole damn globe, as far as they knew it. Yeah, of course the US do exactly the same thing, because you can find a McDonald's in Bugaltakiti. Man, shut up. I still feel free here in Germany and I know this is true. Countries who mix up "freedom" with isolation against progress and against the last leading world power haven't recognized the signs of this time and shall not blame any other than themselfes for their doom. You got to move on, or you die out. And it's not the US which is guilty for that, it's a natural geo-political evolution. That's no boot-licking, and those nations ain't stupid. You don't like it? OK, just don't wonder if you wake up with no future the other day if you continue to live in the past. Move on.
The US surely is no Nazi Regime, or god knows what, one couldn't live with. You don't agree with that point? Ok, too late then I guess.

heartc

@biles: Farewell and good luck!

 

Originally posted by By-Tor
US policy and restraint and strength has been the stabilizing factor in the global politic for decades now. Would any other country have fared so... if given the power to choose the world politic?
Yes, we are the big dog, and we are not perfect. But we have not taken over the world to our way of thinking/ bussiness/religion as has been attempted in the past by less powerfull /influential Superpowers.


1º usa is living in century XIX yet, with the agressive policy, and usa have been the balance of countries in world is a shit, later of Vietnam ( people knows what happen before and during vietnam) usa gave guns to countries like Iraq, Afghanistan,etc... is that to do balance?

2ºusa only is worry when one subject hit him, it hasn t solidarity, his pilicy hit many poor countries and they think that it ins t important, then, why is bin laden attacking all world now???

3ºusa will attack Iraq by his economy and price of petrol, not by other thing

4ºim with usa now because now we can leave the problem by the half, we may destroy international terrorims, but usa may learn a new policy after destroy al qaeda, although i dont think that will be possible, because all people after WWII thought it would be peace......
all presidents of usa were and is stupid and ignorant, it s their guilt, not of people of usa..... i think

 

Heartc, I just can't trust any country whose leaders and soldiers are once and again saying "god bless america" "with god help we will win"... etc, it just reminds me "Gott mit uns" too much.

Broz, my brother, as myself, aren't against "progress" nor isolated, but the "american way" is just not our way. As it isn't most of the world's way. You don't accept it? ok, your problem. I don't like U.S. soldiers in my country, because they supported Franco, I don't like U.S. soldiers in Europe, because they turned Europe in chess pieces against URSS, I don't like U.S. soldiers in Africa, because they are there for their own economic interests, not to help those nations (AIDS is a huge problem there, I don't see U.S. government helping them), I don't like U.S. soldiers in South-America, because they have caused too much suffering there, killed, raped, tortured....

Heartc, how many South-american democratic states have "failed" to build a stable democratic nation "thanks" to U.S. politics?

"evolution"..... killing is evolution...... helping dictators is evolution..... (they helped Saddam when it was in their own economical interests to do so)

Broz didn't said so

Heartc, Europe is trying to build a "union", progress is seen here, as well as a respect for other cultures, traditions... etc, Germany had the Nazis, they learnt, France had Napoleon, they learnt, Spain killed a lot of people in South America, we learnt.... when will U.S. learn? when will they stop supporting people like Saddam, or Bin Laden? those are just two examples of U.S way of "helping" the world...... and quite recent btw.....

Finnally, I think U.S. has the right to fight for their own interest, economical or whatever, what I can't stand is that they say is for the world interest, that has a name "hipocracy". If they are going to fuck around as they've been doing since WWII, they can do it, but please, while ass-raping some poor african country, accept it's for the dollar-god, not for your love for mankind.....

 

Thx for your kind words. I see you keep on line, Mr Everybody's-friend. I said i didn't want a flame, and...here it is. Ok

Ok, they're in position of strength. So? you justify they try to take over the world? Hitler had that power....that's all i'll say (this, my friend, is a comparison about power, not ideology, i'm not saying USA=nazism, ok? great)

You consider domination=progress? I don't. And... about what doom are you talking about? i don't feel doomed, maybe you feel like that? I guess you do

That's what i'm defending. In the past, the strongest dominated all the other countries, tribes, and humans. Do you want it to happen with our current society? I don't, that's why NO single country should have the power the USA have now. Move on? well, i remember a post of yours where you said you would move to german server....I see it hasn't yet happened

 

Erm, well then skip the thread...? What makes you think we should adapt to your wish? Just don't read it... I saw it, you pointed it out to me, don't you think it's a little hypocrite to make EXACTLY the same mistake?

ON TOPIC:
-------------

AFAIK the Americans of present day shouldn't be hated because of what their ancestors did, somehow the negative stuff has been stuffed into the heritage they got too... fine...

It happened so that after WWII the world was pretty impressed at helping hand America, well they owed them alot, at least that's what they thought, it's hard to tell if the assumption that in case the US of A wouldn't have participated in the European scenario the "healthy" regimes would've perished... and either way, it's a matter of a helping hand, it's pretty dumb to say "we helped you out, you wouldn't be there without us" because it could've been the other way around, and as a matter of fact it is the other way around too, if it weren't for us, or for the Spanish Portuguese there wouldn't have been discovered a continent called America (well not before 1492)... it were the Europeans that migrated and now populate the US of A... so we're virtually hating our own brothers, who've got a somewhat different lifestyle and some sort of distinct attitude... So now to go back to the main sentence I was typing: the US of A was one of the VERY few nations that didn't suffer from the World War directly... of course they suffered, but they also caused the industry to increase in potential, they did the economy good, not much people without a job... so they had the trade advantage, and it's not uncommon to want to be in grace of the world economic superpower... the US didn't have to rebuild every factory that was bombed in the second WW... although! they did provide a significant aid to the territories struck by the WWII...

So: the power and advantageous situation of their ancestors was inherited too... and now the world, not being used to anything else is looking at the US of A, it's the only real superpower that came out of the cold war better than it had gotten into it... And still they have a pretty dominant market position, but times change, and so does the economy and all sorts of thing, it is not unlikely that within the next 50 or 100 years the balance shifts to either another place (say Asia) or to one of the ancient places (such as Europe)...

One note: They also did provide very good bombers, with precision bombing equipment, which enabled them to be able to hit their targets with so called pin point accuracy, well then, ok they bombed the **** out of Germany, but not only Germany, they bombed a school in a neighboring town, the bombers missed their targets, annihilation of more than half of a school... innocent children that were killed by their allies... ok accidents happen, but if there's a school near the target area and you take off with a cloud overcast, you better abort the mission...

greetze, Zembla

 

So do you accept all murdering done in name of and aid of USA in 3rd world countries?

Do you think puppet goverments of military dictators they put in place in latin america are some form of freedom?

Two similar parties whose ideals mainly differ in abortion laws and storing guns at your home....yeah sure you are free to choose. FROM SAME! Is that democracy?

Call me semi-nazi or what you want. But I only want to live peacefully with other people without exploiting or killing them.

And I don't still find out how USA is "balancing factor". Against what exactly?

Ps. Zembla, i dont think racial heritage has anything to do with nations actions. Its culture that has. In different cultures you will have generally different sense of morale.
Is it our surroundings what REALLY matter? Is it money that REALLY matters (even if that cant be said aloud in these cultures.)? Is is sayings of moses (insert another profet/god) that REALLY matters? Is it etc. etc.

NO problem with any of these. But western..yes europeans as well values material profits and money over anything generally.

How many people really care about some starving children in angola? (inspite of saying so) While they are happy to have money to buy products that cause such agony. Wouldnt loss of their money be bigger hit for them than few thousand dead people in some adjacent place?

Nothing wrong with that either. Atleast I care more about people I actually know than some poor bastards in 3rd world countries.

But I really am discusted about hypocricy... i guess should get used to it. Its everywhere.

I wish I would once hear politican say. "Fuck them, as long as I have my Mercedes"

I know thats what many of them think... yet they dont say it. Why? Because saying so is immoral. But doing so isnt. In our society at least.

Ill shut up for now.

 

Well, i thought the thread was about some sort of thing different to politics. That's why i started to read it.

I don't want people to addapt to my wishes, don't misunderstand me (again). Is only, that i know myself, and when a discussion starts, i never can stop (YOU should know it ). That's why i didn't want a flame. My mistake, but i'm like that.
Of course, i can stop a discussion if exec close the thread and i don't want it to happen to this thread
All ok? I hope yes

 

@Perdomo:

About US supporting Saddam in the past (you are talking especially about the Iran/Iraq conflict in the 80s I guess).

That was after the pro-US Regime (note: no comment here on the quality and rightous of that regime by me) in Iran was removed from power and an anti-western fundamental islamistic regime was set into power. Back then, Saddam saw his chance to become the leading power in the Gulf area by putting himself into the light of a progressiv, modern and pro-western Arabic leader who would fight for stability and against fundamentalistic "God-States" in the area, which would be a threat for world's economy and peace (as you see, back then he presented himself as exactly the opposite kind of man than he is doing now). So not the US did change their politics towards Iraq, but Saddam did as he invaded Kuwait in 1990.

About US supporting Bin Laden:
I don't know what you mean by that, but I guess you are referring to the Afghan war in the 80s. Well, Osama wasn't any key player at that time, given the case that he was on the scene at all. It was a - for the cold war typical - indirect fight between the Russians and the US. As you know, the Cold War was just a fight for dominance between two super powers. Just note that the big bang never came, for God's sake, and I think we have to thank "a few good men" in the US as well as in Russia for that (e.g. during the Cuban Crises).

And about US acting only if they are touched by a situation in any way: Name me a country which is sending its people into battle to die even if the interests of this country aren't involved at all. You really want to make an accusation out of this? Somalia was perhaps one scenario where the US had no real interests, except for prestige perhaps. After Mogadishu they decided not to do so again.

That "God bless..." stuff I also don't like, especially not in context with battle action, but this is old and not only an US way of seeing the things. Why don't you bother about Iraq talking the same way? Only that Iraq does have some more differences to the US based on religion...

@ Illo: Consider to commit suicide, that way you might enter paradise sooner. I didn't say the US are running a campaign to construct heaven on earth. And I also can't remember them saying to do so.

heartc

 

@Heartc, about Bin Laden, yes he was an "actor" in the Afgan war, Talibans were trained and payed by C.I.A. to fight against Russia, and Bin Laden was trained by C.I.A. too.

About the "God Bless..." stuff, as you said, when in my post I said I don't bother about Irak? please, read it carefully, I clearly said "I just can't trust any country whose leaders and soldiers are once and again saying..." I always thought that "any country" includes Irak too.... maybe I was wrong . But anyway, I don't see Irak's soldiers in Europe, in South America, in Asia.... and Irak lives under a dictator (one that U.S. has supported... there aren't good and bad dictators, they are all bad, so please, don't excuse them for supporting Irak, of course he presented himself as a "good man", while using genocide and mass-killings angainst Kurdistan, U.S. closed the eyes?).... as I was saying, Irak lives under a dictator, and U.S.A. don't. So for me, responsability for foreign politics in U.S.A. goes to the people voting their leaders (as we've seen recently, they support Bush and his terrorist-histeria), while responsability for Irak's actions goes to his leader and all those helping to stay there ruling that country (something U.S.A. did back in the 80s)

Finnally, about the "Cuba crisis", there we can see tipical American way of thinking, they had missiles all over the world, even in europe, targeting russia, when russia did the same (AFAIK with quite old missiles) then the U.S. leaders are about to start WWIII, and russians take away their missiles (russians, U.S. didn't take away theirs from Europe, they kept the threat....) And of course there's the fact that they were trying to kill Castro (another dictator) and invade Cuba, and when cuba wants to protect herself.... they want to start WWIII.... today is happening the same, they say they want to protect themselves, and they do it by attacking other countries, when if they stopped attacking countries, and having soldiers all around the world, they would be much less hated, and would live in peace, but with actual politics....

[Edit mode]: I just read what you say to Illo, I hadn't read it before because I wanted to discuss waht you were saying to me, I thought we where having a civilized discussion about politics, I see that's not the case, reading what you said to Illo.... makes me wonder what kind of person you are, I won't go on with this discussion. [Edit mode off]