You Must Be Kidding Me? What's Up The The Butt Of The U.s.?

[TheSumOfGod]

America used to believe in truth, justice, freedom and all that jazz. But that was WWII. That was over 60 years ago. Now all that matters is thinly-veiled imperialism and greed, massive corporate greed. PNAC, the military-industrial complex, the perpetual "War on Terror", it's all good baby.

 

[Matt]

So China raised their military budget? This is no suprise, after all...they have Jack Bauer to deal with now.

 

[The Question]

The good thing, by your priority on order, is that Saddaam was able to systematically kill at least 500,000 of his people in the gulags.

Of course that wasn't a good thing. We've just made it worse.

The Iraqi people are safer now than they ever have been, despite the car bombings and terrorist attacks.

How have we made them safer if the percentage of deaths has risen dramatically as a result of our being there?

 

[War Lord]

real nice source ya got there champ!

OMG! You're counting the deaths of soldiers in the Iraq-Iran war??? So I guess America should be put on trail for war crimes for the millions of deaths during the Vietnam War.

We went into Iraq because Saddam had WMD's. If Bush was really a humanitarian he would've intervened in the Congo war inwhich millions died. But he didn't did he. Why? Not that much oil down there. Sad but true.

The Congo was the responsibility of France and the UN.

You'd have to get the UN to admit it's genocide befor the US could do anything.

 

[blind_fury]

You're welcome to explain how a free market for everybody contributes to imperialism.

well lets see. if half the oil in the world was on the black market the price of oil would be much higher. do a little regime change and suddenly that oil is available for US consumption. How do you think this effects the US economy? hmmmm.

 

[War Lord]

Of course that wasn't a good thing. We've just made it worse.

How is it worse?

Saddam was killing, about as many people every year that have been killed in 3 years under the new Iraqi government. In other words, by having only a third of the number dying, the Iraqi people are safer.

Though I hope the numbers continue to go down.

How have we made them safer if the percentage of deaths has risen dramatically as a result of our being there?

Last time I checked, about 13,000 people died in car bombs yearly after the war, but that was in a super chaotic situation. The Iraqi government has a stronger hand on the situation now than they did 3 years ago, so less are dying though the media has ramped the story up because it still gets more attention then rebuilding schools or pipelines.

 

[The Question]

Puerto Rico is not part of the US, they could ask the US to leave anytime.

Alaska or the Southern states were not forced to be part of the US originally.

The U.S. preformed an act of casual genocide by forcing thousands of Native Americans out of their homes. It's called the "trail of tears." Thousands died because of it. The country is built on bloodshed and conquest.

I'm amazed how consistent Leftists are in ignoring the plight of those under dictatorship and how they keep blaming the free for those dicatorships.

Hey, I'm not ignoring anything. I'm just saying that going in and destroying their government is not the right way to go about it. It only makes things worse.

 

[War Lord]

well lets see. if half the oil in the world was on the black market the price of oil would be much higher. do a little regime change and suddenly that oil is available for US consumption. How do you think this effects the US economy? hmmmm.

The oil was always available for US consumption, Saddaam or not. Do you honestly think that Saddaam wouldn't have signed an exclusive deal with the US if that saved his hide?

Of course he would have.

Now, the US continues to buy the oil on the world market at the world market prices, the main beneficiaries are the Iraqi people, not a single government head and a few cronies.

 

[Lackey]

So China raised their military budget? This is no suprise, after all...they have Jack Bauer to deal with now.

Hahaha, was just going to say that

 

[blind_fury]

They are building up until they are able to attack.

oh! an attack that will destroy their own economy? brilliant!

China's wants to protect themselves so the US can't b-tch slap them like they did Iraq. It's common sense.

 

[Slipknot]

Jonty (War Lord)... doesn't it get old being stuck up Bush's ass all the time and never being critical of anything the U.S. does?

 

[The Question]

How is it worse?

Saddam was killing, about as many people every year that have been killed in 3 years under the new Iraqi government. In other words, by having only a third of the number dying, the Iraqi people are safer.

Though I hope the numbers continue to go down.

Excuse me. I thought you said Saddaam killed one million people. How can you only kill one million people and yet also kill 40,000 people a year?

Last time I checked, about 13,000 people died in car bombs yearly after the war, but that was in a super chaotic situation. The Iraqi government has a stronger hand on the situation now than they did 3 years ago, so less are dying though the media has ramped the story up because it still gets more attention then rebuilding schools or pipelines.

But people are still dying. Far more than the numbers that we would have had if we just left them alone. We created the chaotic situation. It's out fault. You can't say that the people are safer when we've upped the death rate.

 

[War Lord]

The U.S. preformed an act of casual genocide by forcing thousands of Native Americans out of their homes. It's called the "trail of tears." Thousands died because of it. The country is built on bloodshed and conquest.

Can you pick a more recent event than one that happened 150 years ago?

I'm not minimizing that, but if you're going to complain about the current US government, using events from generations ago is not the way to do it.

Even the US military doesn't have a time machine to go back and fix things.

Hey, I'm not ignoring anything. I'm just saying that going in and destroying their government is not the right way to go about it. It only makes things worse.

I'm sure with hindsight, the US could have done a better job. However, had the US basically left the situation as is, minus Saddaam, you would have simply ended up with the same situation of terror except it would have been somebody else doing the terrorizing.

 

[blind_fury]

That hasn't been disproven. Thanks to the UN, Saddaam had a good year to hide or transport the stuff.

I also have some ufo photos if you're interested. One of the ufos is actually transporting Saddam's WMDs but I'm not sure where to!

 

[War Lord]

Jonty (War Lord)... doesn't it get old being stuck up Bush's ass all the time and never being critical of anything the U.S. does?

When I see something that should be criticized because I think it really could have been done better realistically, I'll criticize.

However, I don't expect perfection from my governments, because that doesn't exist.

 

[TheSumOfGod]

I also have some ufo photos if you're interested. One of the ufos is actually transporting Saddam's WMDs but I'm not sure where to!

You don't want to know what I know about UFOs in Iraq.

 

[The Question]

Can you pick a more recent event than one that happened 150 years ago?

I'm not minimizing that, but if you're going to complain about the current US government, using events from generations ago is not the way to do it.

Even the US military doesn't have a time machine to go back and fix things.

Of course not. But the U.S. isn't perfect and never has been.

I'm sure with hindsight, the US could have done a better job. However, had the US basically left the situation as is, minus Saddaam, you would have simply ended up with the same situation of terror except it would have been somebody else doing the terrorizing.

Which is why we shouldn't have gone in at all. Saddaam wasn't randomly killing people because he was bored. He was a dictator. He did horrible things, but he also isntilled order. If we hadn't gone in at all, the body counts would have been nowhere near the numbers they are now.

 

[Matt]

Hahaha, was just going to say that

I find it much easier to just make Jack Bauer jokes than actually try to argue with Jonty

 

[War Lord]

I also have some ufo photos if you're interested. One of the ufos is actually transporting Saddam's WMDs but I'm not sure where to!

We know he wanted WMD's, he was a threat to the entire ME region and that he had tons of fertilizer and components which could be converted to WMD's. These aren't debatable.

I'd love to hear how you guys would have complained had the US did nothing and something terrible happened.

I know you guys would because in your eyes, the US is incapable of doing anything decent and right.

 

[Slipknot]

When I see something that should be criticized because I think it really could have been done better realistically, I'll criticize.

So you have nothing bad to say about the Bush administration whatsoever?

 

[blind_fury]

The Congo was the responsibility of France and the UN.

You'd have to get the UN to admit it's genocide befor the US could do anything.

Why is the Congo the responsibilty of the UN and Iraq the responsibilty of Bush?

I'll give you a hint. It has three letters and rhymes with fOIL.

 

[War Lord]

Of course not. But the U.S. isn't perfect and never has been.

I've never said it was, but I have yet to hear anything that can qualify as praise towards the US government, ever.

At least I criticized GB's tax package a few years ago.

Which is why we shouldn't have gone in at all. Saddaam wasn't randomly killing people because he was bored. He was a dictator. He did horrible things, but he also isntilled order. If we hadn't gone in at all, the body counts would have been nowhere near the numbers they are now.

He wasn't randomly killing his people, because he was systematically killing them. Since the Iraqi people didn't know where they were on his list, it was as good as randomly killing them.

 

[War Lord]

Why is the Congo the responsibilty of the UN and Iraq the responsibilty of Bush?

I'll give you a hint. It has three letters and rhymes with fOIL.

1. The US cannot just go willy-nilly into any part of the world it wants to restore order. Iraqi was already promised retribution if it didn't comply with the UN, the US just enforced the orders that were approved by the UN. You'll have to ask the UN why it has no interest in calling it genocide in the Congo and Sudan.

2. I'll give you a seven letter word that rhymes with mullphit.

 

[blind_fury]

The oil was always available for US consumption, Saddaam or not. Do you honestly think that Saddaam wouldn't have signed an exclusive deal with the US if that saved his hide?

Of course he would have.

Now, the US continues to buy the oil on the world market at the world market prices, the main beneficiaries are the Iraqi people, not a single government head and a few cronies.

Iraq has the second largest oil reserve in the world. That's why soldiers are dying in Iraq. For that insane amount of oil, NOT "democracy". Hell we're ready to fight Iran, another oil rich country, and last time I checked they already have a democracy.

 

[The Question]

He wasn't randomly killing his people, because he was systematically killing them. Since the Iraqi people didn't know where they were on his list, it was as good as randomly killing them.

Why was he systimatically killing 40,000 a year? For ****s and giggles?