Terrorists are only Helping the world

Slavery is completely irrelevent in this argument. You did not answer my first point.

Bush is not power hungry, if he were, he would have thoughlessly invaded more countries, or at least purposed such resolutions.

Who are you to determine if they have a right or not to be in Iraq? The expansionism was justified; I personaly do not agree with the justification, yet it was justified, it was not for the sake of expansion.

Communist states do not have dictators, they are ruled by a single party with no opposition. You are proving to be more ignorant.

If they are messages that are indeeed subliminal, how do you know that they exist? And what propoganda? The army commercials? They existed since TV was invented. The campiagn adds? That is a right for any candidate, and the networks must air them.

The president is the represantation of the majority of the people in a country. If the country, arrived to a conclusion through a democratic process, which states that it does not oppose Bush for one reason or another... then they do not, it is that simple. Comprehend it!

Yes, there are hundreds of thousands of people who disagree with Bush, but it does not mean that they or thier leaders will oppose him. Learn this, young one, politics are about compromise, just like most other things in life.

 

Thanks, first fashion show I've ever been to. I'm good friends with some of the models, so I got a free way in...the actuall cost of entrance (500$) is way past my economical reach. The show wasn't impressive at all ,and was rather poorly directed, but the after party was good.

Anyhow, I leave digitalldj to you to rip apart by yourself, good night.

 

i didnt respond to it right away because i dont like it when people bash my english this is the internet not a term paper.

in response to the rest of your post, i dont know what else to say, Money makes the athlete, poor countries may have much better overall athletes but without proper funding they will never go anywhere, the US seems to be the only country which does not struggle to get all of their athletes to the olympics and once they are there, they produce (excluding the us basketball team lol) in my mind when a country has that much influence and that many medal wins during the olympics, it's much more than a show of pride.



k, i'm damn tired and it's nearly 2am so i gotta hit the sack, dont post stupid shit and let this thread go to hell. if your going to post, at least have a decent opinion.

good discussion so far BraveSirRubin and Lodui

 

Yeah, its 4 here, and I told my friend I'd help him move at like 9, so I should get to bed too, see you later digitaldj.

 

Bear with this post length.

I would like to begin by making a disclaimer: I do NOT in any way hate Americans. I don't really hate anything, but I feel an extreme dislike, bordering on hatred, for the policies, actions and words of your current government - and those which have gone before. This is not anti-Americanism; in fact, if anything, it's pro-Americanism, because despite the best efforts of the govt. & media to argue otherwise, the process of dissent, debate & protest is about as central to the American national ideology as you can get.

I have studied america, from its inception to vietnam via its foreign policy doctrine in the 19thC, the construction of its constitution, and the civil rights movement. I don't hate America. also, you must remember that my vitriol - for example over arms sales, or Iraq - is not directed solely at the US; I will & do criticise the government of the country I'm in (Australia) along with many others, from Russia to Uzbekistan to Zimbabwe via South Africa.

So, if we can put aside for a second the senseless finger-pointing and bland hyper-paranoid ranting about 'anti-Americans' and 'pro-saddamites', it's time for a detailed look at why the rest of the world feels so strongly about the actions of the US government.

Here goes:

1) The US govt. (which will from now on in this post be abbreviated to US for reasons of brevity - this does NOT mean all Americans!) has consistently worked to intervene in the affairs of a huge number of foreign countries, with blatant disregard for international law, democracy, human rights and the wishes of the local populace. it does so mainly for reasons of economic and political self-interest. this selfish interventionism is conducted within a framework of 'free trade' and 'humanitarian intervention', which attempts to legitimise otherwise inexcusable behaviour.

For example: in Chile, in 1973, the US intervened to overthrow a democratically elected Allende government & installed one of latin america's worst dictators, General Pinochet, whose war crimes are well known. In the 1980s, the US fought a long war against the Sandinistas in Nicaragua, using profits from drug trafficking to pay for guns that murdered children. This is all freely available information & fact. Thousands of people in Chile were assasinated - including women and children - with the assistance of the US. in Nicaragua, the US supported thugs which murdered thousands; here's one lovely example: a female body was discovered in a pile of garbage. She was pregnant, but the foetus had been ripped out & the severed head of her partner was placed inside her womb.

The US has intervened in some 134 cases since the turn of the 20th C - from bolivia, brazil, colombia, cuba, dominica, ecuador, nicaragua, el salvador, guatemala, haiti, honduras, jamaica, mexico, panama, peru, uruguay, cambodia, laos etc. etc. and very rarely have these interventions produced anything beneficial for the 'host' country - launched on the pretence of securing freedom, democracy or human rights improvements, they have more often than not resulted in violations, dictatorships, and destruction - at best, the result has been crippling US-centric trade agreements and economic vested interest impositions that suit the US, but no-one else.

2) The US has a habit of launching wars based on ideological, reductionist propaganda, and then fighting them in the dirtiest & most abhorent way possible. everyone knows about vietnam; knows that it was a bullshit, unnecessary conflict that was dragged out into america's longest war. The US used chemical weapons on its own troops in vietnam; they covered up mass murder and rape of civilians; they authorised the use of chemical weapons in far greater concentrations than was legal, let alone recommended; they carpet-bombed cambodia with such ferocity that death counts for the period AFTER the war had officially ended are still impossible; they refuse to pay any compensation to victims of US chemical warfare who still grow up, to this day, without limbs or eyes or with terrible deformations; and yet the US was spending over $15,000 per day in the 80s looking for dead US soldiers in vietnam.

The iraq war is a case in point; where are those WMD? how much of a threat was saddam? the only real basis for war now is saddam's terrible human rights record. and although it was undoubtedly an evil regime, let's just pause to remember who sold iraq the chemical weapons, who supported him during the iran/iraq war, and who gave him tactical advice when he gassed the kurds at hallabja; that's right, the US. why is nothing being done about zimbabwe? or uzbekistan? is it because there's no valuable commodities to be found there? how hypocritical does it seem that the reason for invading iraq without international consent was that it had refused to comply with the wishes of the UN, when in fact the US is by far the worst offender as far as UN co-operation is concerned?

3) The US has a consistent policy of sticking two fingers up at the rest of the world & insisting on unilaterally acting wherever it deems it necessary. let's take the UN as a starting point:

Thus sayeth william blum, in 'rogue state': 'washington has found itself - often alone, sometimes joined by one or two other countries - standing in opposition to the General Assembly resolutions aimed at furthering human rights, peace, nuclear disarmament, economic justice, the struggle against south african apartheid & israeli lawlessness'.

There have been 150 - that's one hundred and fifty - incidents between 1984 - 1987 when the US alone voted against UN resolutions. the US refused to pay its UN membership dues for years, then when it did agree to pay, backed out of the promise. the UN's ECOSOC judged that the US was to be excluded from the 53 member Human Rights Commission in may 2001.

The US is one of only two countries which has not ratified the 1989 UN convention on the rights of the child. guess what the other country is? Iraq.

The US has consistently acted in violation of the World Convention against Torture, in vietnam, western europe, trained the iranian SAVAK secret service, and trained and equipped intelligence outfits in methodology of torture in Bolivia, Brazil, Uzbekistan and Israel, amongst others. in 1982 - 83, the US alone voted against the declaration that education, work, healthcare, nourishment and national development are basic human rights. in 1996 the US disagreed that it is 'the right of everyone to have access to safe and nutritious food'. in 1998, the US maintained sanctions against 75 countries, which constituted some 52% of the world population.

In 1986 the US was judged by the World Court to have used 'unlawful force', and then vetoed a resolution demanding all states adhere to international law.
The US has refused to sign up to the Kyoto protocol, alone apart from its pet toy australia. 'this is the US position because it's right for America' declared George Bush Jr.

The US has refused to sign up to the International Criminal Court, because it is afraid that US citizens might be tried for war crimes.

The US has created a special non-existent legal status for the detention and trial of the terror suspects in Guantanamo Bay. This violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the European Convention, and the Geneva Convention. The suspects are being held without trial, without access to outsiders, and indefinitely; and their propose trials will take place in front of a specially created military tribunal.

The US, whilst insisting that democracy is the overriding concern of the world, and more specifically that its brand of democracy is the only acceptable one, has intervened in the democratic process in the following countries: Italy, Lebanon, INdonesia, Vietnam, Guiana, Japan, Nepal, Laos, Bosnia, Mongolia, Russia, Bulgaria, Haiti, Nicaragua etc. etc.

The US has refused to comply with biological and chemical weapons agreements. it hold the largest stockpile of anthrax, smallpox & other pathogens. it has 30,000 tons of chemical weapons, and refuses to allow UN inspectors to visit its biowarfare facilities.

The US tries to force other countries to sign the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, yet has refused to sign up itself, and again refuses to allow inspections of its nuclear weapons programs and stockpiles.

The US has so far refused to drop its steel sanctions that enrich american steelworkers at the expense of the rest of the world, despite the fact that they have been deemed illegal by the WTO, and despite the fact that it constantly pressurises for 'free trade' for america.

 

4) The US maintains that its aid spending is the greatest, and many americans are living under the illlusion that their country is the most generous. Unfortunately, this is bullshit. The proportion of foreign aid as GDP ranks the US as bottom of the 22 most developed countries; over 50% of its aid budget goes to middle-income mid-eastern countries, israel being first amongst equals; and further, the USAID website makes clear that 'The principle beneficiary of America's foreign assistance program has always been the United States'. 80% of USAID contracts and grants are given directly to US firms.

US aid is often tied to provisions, such as those being enacted in africa at the moment. Thanks to Bush, sub-saharan and continental african aid recipients must ensure that abortion clinics are closed down. Because of the precious sensibilities of the american moral majority, africans are denied the right to try and control their population, especially in areas where up to 30% of the population is born with HIV. Think about that for a moment; whilst simultaneously denying the distribution of generic AIDS drugs, the US is ensuring that many thousands of children are brought into the already impoverished african life, born with a viral death sentence, while US citizens ('bug chasers') deliberately contract HIV, safe in the knowledge that their subsidised drugs will keep them alive for decades. When paired with the despicable Africa Growth & Opportunity Act of 2001, it makes for unsettling reading.

5) The US continues to sponsor repressive regimes. Take for example Uzbekistan, where the ruling party have been condemned by Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the UN. Political prisoners in Uzbekistan have been boiled to death – this is in 2003 – yet the US gave over $50 million to the regime in the past 12 months alone. The US openly admits that $40million of this was specifically given to the state security apparatus, which is responsible for the torture & murder of political and civilian opponents. The Colombian security forces, although part of that huge coalition in the war on terror (nb: sarcasm!) are responsible for the disappearance and deaths of thousands of innocent civilians.

The fallout from the sponsorship of individuals or parties at the expense of morals is clear and apparent. Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden are two prominent examples of how US policy has ensure the rise of bad people; the US trained and sponsored Bin Laden in the era of Soviet war in Afghanistan, knowing that he was a fundamentalist authoritarian with terrible intentions. Without US support, who can say that OBL or Hussein would have risen to such prominence?

6) The US has officially endorsed the doctrine of pre-emption, i.e. attacking countries without necessary provocation on the basis that they constitute a threat. This is a particularly dangerous and destabilising policy; the very reason NATO was formed in the aftermath of WWII was to prevent pre-emptive attacks from ever being acceptable policy. If we disregard for a moment the immediate implications of pursuing such a policy, then the danger to the world at large becomes apparent. What is to stop the Chinese govt. from claiming the same pre-emptive right and invading Taiwan? What about Chechnya? What if Robert Mugabe decided that neighbouring Zambia was a ‘rogue state’ and invaded it pre-emptively? Pre-emption is a dangerous, revisionist policy, and one which has no place in the modern world.

7) The US is particularly ineffective at inspiring democracy or even stability in the countries it has invaded. Iraq remains in a terrible state, but it’s still too early to judge; Afghanistan is slipping slowly back under taliban control. Given that colin powell authorised $43 million in aid to the taliban in 2001, and the structures through which US aid is passed, it seems incredible that the situation is still ongoing. The taliban are resurgent, the Afghan authority under Karzai has virtually no power outside Kabul, and many of the provinces remain under the control of local warlords, many of whom are noted for war crimes – yet in the fight against the taliban, the US is happy to co-operate with warlords responsible for burning people to death. This ‘whomever is my enemy’s enemy is my friend’ policy has been responsible for so many terrible outcomes for the people of latin America, the middle east, central & south east asia, that you’d think the US had learnt from its mistakes. Yet it blunders on.

Almost all US interventions have resulted in substantial profitmaking for American companies, be they arms manufacturers or civilian infrastructure companies. The US is currently in the process of illegally tampering with the economy in iraq; the US gave out many contracts to companies such as Bechtel and Halliburton without competition. It stinks, and the world knows it does.

The US has a long tradition of launching prolonged and unwinnable wars in order to maintain its massive military industrial complex. First there was the war on communism, which could count amongst its victims the left-wing government in latin America, the innocent Vietnamese who were prevented from democratically choosing a government by the US, and many more. Then there was the war on drugs, whereby Bolivian and Peruvian and Colombian people suffered unnecessarily, all whilst the US itself was running drugs to pay for more anti-communist activities in latin America. Now we have the war on terror, which is equally disingenuous. The problem with fighting a war against a non-specific entity, like ‘drugs’ or ‘terror’ or ‘communism’, is that it can never truly be won; there is no one country that can be invaded to stop it, there is no solution, just continual expenditure and hostility, which American tax dollars subsidise.

Tied to all these specific complaints is the overall picture and image of the US which is being exported by its government. The US is despised by lots of people, from the impoverished steel workers of Bangladesh to the chemically deformed children of northern Vietnam; and yet the government continues to act in self-interest only, holding the rest of the world and its international organisations in thinly-veiled contempt. President Bush has been responsible for the awful and absolutist ‘You’re either with Us or against Us’ division, which stifles debate and discussion. Reducing real, serious issues to ‘you’re either on our team or not’ playground bullshit is threatening for democracy and America. This is a real problem, and one which can only be solved by Americans.

I think this explains a lot of people’s anger – they feel, as I do, that the good, honest and hardworking compassionate citizens of America are being railroaded by the post-9/11 hyperpatriotic, nationalist fever that has allowed the Bush government to pass the Patriot Act & stifle opposition to its policies under the cloak of McCarthyist anti-american actions. Americans, it looks to us like you are being betrayed; that your outpouring of national grief following a terrorist attack has been wilfully manipulated by a controlling cabal of government spokespeople and officials in order to further subjugate ordinary Americans, and to irreparably divide the country. Outside the egotistical and US-centric media (perhaps the most insular media in the world) America is not seen as a great democracy anymore. Your president – the son of a president - was elected based on the decision of a panel of judges chosen by the Governor of the State of Florida, who is a member of his immediate family. People outside America are saddened by the trampling of individual rights – of assembly, of protest, and even (though not through direct intervention) free speech. We see Americans locked up for 20 years for possession of two ounces of cannabis; we see the firebombing of abortion clinics and the persecution of doctors willing to help people terminate unwanted pregnancies; we see the repulsive flag-waving patriotism that inspired people to randomly attack arabs in 2001; we see massive tax cuts that affect only the top 1%, the richest of the rich, and we are saddened.

I am saddened because the majority of Americans didn’t vote for this, didn’t approve this, or weren't told about it. Americans, just as much as Iraqis, Uzbeks, Zimbabweans, Poles or Russians, are people first and foremost. People like me & you and everyone around us, people who deserve to be safe and happy and secure. So why, America, are you allowing this cohort of pure evil, the wolfowitz/ashcroft/cheney/rumsfeld/rove/perle coalition (which incidentally has over 10 times the wealth of the Clinton administrative team – just look at how many of the Bush administration are deeply involved with oil companies), to dominate your international and domestic policies? Why allow such cruelly manipulative and inhuman fuckwits to be your representatives? Why allow sinister pressure groups such as the Project for a New American Century (which detailed how & why the iraq war 2 would be fought way back in 1999???) to actually have a real influence on your lives? Why allow your government to further alienate the world population? Why allow these oil-soaked backroom-dealing buddies cause greater poverty, injustice, hostility, war and cruelty in your name?

 

Most Americans truly believe--take this to be self-evident--that the United States is not only the world's greatest country, but it has always been the last great hope of earth, that Americans have always been willing, more than any other Western power, to take on the White Man's burden, to bring life, liberty and happiness to the rest of mankind. This is a testament to the power of American media: that it can claim to be the world's freest media and yet control--like no other 'free' media--what an overwhelming majority of Americans know and believe about their country. And what they know and believe is America the free, pure and virtuous.

Day after day, the mandarins and media in the country work tirelessly, cleverly, to project an image of an America that protects freedoms at home and abroad; an America that has time and again shed its blood to rid foreign lands of murderous tyrannies; an America that cares, that responds with alacrity to famines and calamities abroad; an American that contributes men, money and ideas to bring prosperity to the backward races; an America that has patiently served as an honest broker in the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians.

As a result, year after year, most Americans are kept in the dark, unaware of the actual, the real America--the only kind seen by much of the rest of the world. This is the America that daily employs its might to mangle the lives of hundreds of millions, that pushes a globalization that devastates the economies of the Third World, that instructs and arms foreign tyrannies to terrorize their own people, that aids and abets an Israeli machine that is determined to extirpate the Palestinians. This America acts in the name of freedom, in any way that it sees fit and necessary, to keep the world safe for American capital. However, this dark side of America is nearly completely, nearly always, whitewashed by the myth-making powers of America's elites.
Occasionally, this myth-making machine will let slip a few snapshots of the real, the actual America. In fact, such slippages are functional; they serve to validate the trust of the duped and faithful in our 'free' media. Generally, these revelations appear long after the fact. They are also quickly explained away. Americans are told that this is for their own good: they serve higher American values. When they cannot be explained away, they are described as unavoidable lapses, human failings of a few. These lapses remind the faithful to be thankful that the system works well nearly all the time. No apology is tendered. None is demanded.

 

If you are too lazy to read through that...

Well you might as well go drown yourself in the toilet right now....you are facing a huge issue ....your attention is warranted!

 

awsome post Mr Soul! very informative and although it wasnt directed clearly to either side of the opinion, many peices in it only reinforced my views

 

Mr. Soul, Your points serve well to help claify this discussion. Thanks. What sources did you use? Alot of this looks like Amnesty International material, which I consider to be trustworthy and unbiased, working as they do to document human rights violations in ALL countries. I think it is important to note sources largely because of the incredible division of public opinion over the news media in the U.S. (as I'm sure you are aware). Good documetation of your sources will most likely strengthen your points.

 

Mr. Soul, I have read all that, but you might have gotten more responses if you abriged it into a few talking points, and elaborated as needed, rather then obscuring your points in pages of trivial foreign policy complaints, therefore I'm not going to try to address them all, as I dont have two hours to do it right now, but the reason the rest of the world feels so strongly about US actions is because we are the most prominent, wealthy, powerful, and recognisable country on earth, of course everyone feel strongly about what we do, but that doesn't mean we should take global opinion polls to determine our foreign policy, our foreign policy should be based on the intrests of americans before considering international law, or how the rest of the world feels about our policies. I've traveled to England, Germany, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, and even France, and everyone seemed to have a good impression of the US, even though a lot of them disagreed with some policies.

Of course we've suported some pupet dictators in the 20th century... for most of it we were trying to prevent the spread of Soviet influence, and sometimes it worked out, and sometimes it didn't. non-intervention really wasn't an option after WW2, in fact we did intervene during WW2, we were atacked by the Japanese, not the Germans, and if we hadn't interviened, Europe might have fallen to the Nazis. Afterwords some of our military interventions had been anti-communist, some to secure trade intereests, and some to serve human rights.

All our intervention has been kinda a grey area, but our human rights contributions haven't. The US has done more for human rights this century than any on else in history, for example the US's globally introduced agricultural revolution that has reduced the amount of forests that need to be cut down for farming, and feeding billions.

You're humanitarian argument is fallacious, our budget seperates military aid from humanitarian aid, and we dont give humanitrain aid to Isreal, only military aid, humanitarian aid goes elsewhere. We also lead the world in reasearch and development in agriculture and medicine, which although it isn't included in our foreign aid, will do much more in the long term for destitute nations then a few dozen crates of frozen food ever could. Some US humanitarian organizations and firms do benifit from the aid, but that doesn't demean our aid any... much of the aid given by other countries is also handled by US firms, simply because they are best equiped to handle it.

I'm voting Kerry, and I didn't agree with Iraq, and although Vietnam shouldn't still be an issue, I wouldn't have agreed with it either, but Iraq is another gray area... of course it was about resources (oil) and I knew that before it happened, but disposing a murderous despot mostly for resources is still getting rid of a murderous despot, and although the Iraqis dont want the US there, they're glad Hussein is gone too, and in 20 years Iraq may be a glorious shining torch of Democracy in the middle east. I
d like to see all this moral grandstaning from you when Australia gets a piece of the cheap oil cookie in a few years.

And I don't like Bush at all, but he did win in 2000. The supreme court ruled agnist a formal recount, but it was recounted by many organizations to find out who would have own in a recount in Florida, and Bush still won. Get over 2000, theres a new election comming up, and I dont want to see bush around for another 4 years.

Thats all I feel like saying for now, I can't respond to every tiff you have with my governments policies. You're obscuring whatever point you were trying to make by bringing up dozens of points without relating them, and it all sounds like an inane anti-american sentiment. Please make your response more concise.

 

My sources: http://hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23836


The end of cheap oil: http://hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24438


I suggest scrolling to halfway down this thread:

http://hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24728

Another thread excerpt titled: "if you could live anywhere"

My response:

Anywhere but the US.

She is the worst case example of the West, and her prospects are very bleak. That nation will erupt into violence. She has far too many deep seated social problems, ranging from racism to socio-economic disparity. She lacks the camaraderie found in the Australian spirit, where wholesale looting in the US is a social norm in times of American natural disasters. The recent Florida hurricane a case in point. Many of the people were armed at their wreckage, fearful of looters stealing what little was left behind. I have also seen on the news where they've had highways packed with people fleeing and then there's roads leading in teaming with looters, this was the case with the Californian fires. What sort of nation is that! She is ripe to implode.

*re the end of cheap oil and the peak

The Americans and their obcessive demands to retain their consumerist society simply don't get the facts. They believe (too many of them do) that they can retain all their cars, their large houses, their rampacious material consumerism that effects their 4% of the world population consuming 25% of the global resources. Not to mention their erroneous belief paradigm that this can go on forever into some sort of "Buck Rogers future", by nothing less than silver bullet techo-fixes. Evidenced in their wanton desire to believe in hybrids, electric cars and the touted "hydrogen economy". All pure lies, plain and simple.

There will be no way that party can go on and what a party it is for them. As an Australian with a culturally cynical take on almost everything, I do not buy into the American charm and their Amway sales pitches. I call a spade a spade. Their American way of life is simply unsustainable. The suburbia, the city and all that goes with it can not run without the input of cheap oil.

It should also be obvious, certainly so to non-Americans, that the American people, a people spoiled on outrageous materialism, will not only reject the ominous warnings of oil peak, but they will throw themselves into a rage at any denial of their American way of life. Thus perish the thought that they'll entertain a "power down" to reduce the effects of their squandering of global resource usage. This is why they will sieze on the absurdity of a "hydrogen economy", because it means in essence that nothing, at a social and spiritual level, needs to change.

Put simply, they are culturally incapable of change to the vast level that is required. Yes, a cynical view of the American psyche perhaps, but I believe my appraisal is brutally honest. Thus her path is clear, a war for resources and given there's the building of a now evident petrochemical geopolitical power block, then war is the obvious conclusion. Such is evidenced with the war on Iraq as a means to keep OPEC under the petrodollar as the US feared they would break with US dominance and refinance to the Euro Dollar. This makes the whole globe in effect a very dangerous place to be, certainly so as we slide into the years 2010 to 2020. The US I firmly believe will do whatever it takes to retain her American way of life. It's simply insanity.

Now given one can not control such events and their fallout, then one must make shrewd decisions insofar as to the geographical hotspots of the world and in accordance be as far as possible from them.

I see Tasmania as the furthest one can get away as an Australian citizen, from the madness of the Northern Hemisphere.

I'm very fortunate to live in Australia, even in scope to the very serious continental drought problem, that will worsen as the decades advance. That pales to the American near 2900 million people that will swell by 45% or so by 2050. A land bordered to the Mexico third world, rolled up into a sociopathic consumerist culture, coupled with millions of guns and an angry people. Good luck to them, that's a horror house! I wouldn't hold much hope out in the US attempting to buy a rural block to see out the transition, she will suffer a prolific bandit culture. Rape, robbery and murder will be their transition. Too many people and very hard to find a place to be safe in that.

*There's some reading material Lodui to keep you up to date on things global.

I had to laugh at your cheap oil assertion. Cheap oil aint gonna happen!!!

 

crackhead.......terrorism is onyl killing innocent people. even though no one wants the states to take over, that doesnt make terrorism right. did you agree with hitler to kill the jews? you must have been dropped on your head as a baby.

 

You want the money, technology, and aid of the USA, but not the USA. I think your political ideas, and the fact that you cannot form a coherent point go hand in hand. All you succeeded in doing is bringing attention to how people who support terrorists have no real knowledge only a perverse rage.

Lets look at the previous topics brought to our attention by digitalldj

http://hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25075
Eating mushrooms
http://hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24820
Anal Masturbation

Once again, I don't think your politics are an accident, too many mushrooms and anal masturbation have caused them.

 

get out of this thread u idiot, i'm not even going to respond to anything you've said cause u obviously havent read through the entire thread, please dont post here again as i really doubt a 14 year old has enough knowledge of history and politics to be in any sort of discussion cocerning those topics.

 

what i post in other forums is irrevalent and your making yourself look like an ass by brining up posts i've made that try to lessen my credability in this thread. And where did i ever say i support terrorists? read through the whole thread before post somthing else, this is a mature discussion on a hot topic, and i appreciate people like Mr_soul who actually have some good input rather than taking time to search through my posts.


i dont see how my posts on eating mushrooms or anal have much difference than somone who's addicted to comics, tv shows and smokes weed

 

Well in a sense they are helping somebody. Construction companies profit off having to rebuild on a site that was demolished. Then there are the jobs of those who died in a terror attack that get to go to newer people looking for an open door to oppurtunity. Whenever the world's population becomes reduced in any attack it surely helps others out indeed.

 

So Mr. Soul, basically the only point your trying to get across there is that americans dont care about each other, and you provide the Florida hurricane as evedince, although that proves nothing, and our government has appropriated billions in aid, and we were certainly concerned about the state of Florida after the hurricane.

So your only point is that America is evil and consumeristic, and you feel the best medium to express that point of view is on a computer which had its components assmebled in silicon valley.

The 25% of the worlds resources argument is misleading, we import 25% of harvested natural resources... which resources do you think those are? We export lumber, we export produce... that refers specifically to oil. There is more oil in the world then all the industrialized nations could ever use, in fact underneath the dense mountain ranges in China, there lies the largest supply of oil in the world, the push to get off of of fosil fuels is not due to a lack of supply, but an increased demand, fosil fuels ineffeciency, the negative effects fosil fuels have on the enviorment, and most importantly, the people we import oil from.

If you don't think alternative energy is viable then you truly have no understanding of how energy is even produced, hydrogen and proton fuel exchenge have already proven viable for large scale operations and complexes, and the shift is already taking place in military and large corparate complexes, and with the the technology will obviously become more viable for smaller operations in time.

Your message is anti-corporate, which is fine, but your obscuring it behind blatently anti-american sentiment, as if your country isn't enjoying the fruits of industrialization, and your using those very benfits to post your message.

Your vehement detest of the US became very apperant with your last post, and you've proven nothing other then your own simplistic fears and your blatent media induced despisment of Americans... I'd be jealous too if I lived in Australia.

If by worst case example of the west you mean the most affluent, advanced, powerful, and amongst the most liberated nations to ever exist, then the US and the west is doing pretty. We may get a dud in the white house every couple years, but our prospects aren't bad... we could stagnate at where we are right now and still be judged pretty well by history.

You've shown your bias, and I hope the irony of using the benifits of consumerism to complain about consumerism isn't lost on you.

 

War = Profit

american economy was in a slum prior 9/11

 

good post!


haha no one else seems to want to put up a point now because there's too much to read in this thread