Games out of Europe

[EnderAndrew]

Yep. I was so blind.

 

If the United States never stepped in WWI or WWII, the world would be a MUCH better place. If Stalin didn't have the US as an ally, he might have fallen into the idea of having certain spheres of power with Italy, Japan, Russia and Germany chopping up the globe.

 

And Iraq would be a much better place right now with Saddam continuing to kill off his population. You harp on the embargo. Do you recall how it came to be?

 

Saddam invaded Kuwait, stole money, killed people and threatened to go into Saudi Arabia next. We should have not been involved then either. Saudi is the home to Mecca. Can you imagine the holy wars that would have ensued if he controlled Mecca and Saudi's oil supply?

 

I do read. I consider myself well informed and fairly intelligent. And I've demonstrated that I keep better tabs on this war than you do. That's not meant to be a direct knock on you, however you seem to insist that the only reason someone would support the US was a lack of knowledge. I've found that most of the people knocking the war have used propoganda and lies. Weren't people screaming from the beginning that this was all about oil?

 

Bush was going in there on personal reasons, and to steal oil. Yep, that's right. Never mind that we're not stealing money or oil from Iraq. The United States if forking over billions to rebuild and help Iraq while our economy is already struggling. And we set up a welfare system where oil sales profit the country of Iraq and it's populace.

 

You live in this simple notion that everyone should stay uninvolved. History has shown that theory doesn't work. Look at WWI and WWII. The United States tried to be isolationist in WWII and we got attacked. The United Nations should do a better job of policing the world, but they have failed to do so.

 

If the UN did their job, I don't think the US would get involved so much.

[mkreku]

Yep. I was so blind.

 

If the United States never stepped in WWI or WWII, the world would be a MUCH better place. If Stalin didn't have the US as an ally, he might have fallen into the idea of having certain spheres of power with Italy, Japan, Russia and Germany chopping up the globe.

 

And Iraq would be a much better place right now with Saddam continuing to kill off his population. You harp on the embargo. Do you recall how it came to be?

 

Saddam invaded Kuwait, stole money, killed people and threatened to go into Saudi Arabia next. We should have not been involved then either. Saudi is the home to Mecca. Can you imagine the holy wars that would have ensued if he controlled Mecca and Saudi's oil supply?

 

I do read. I consider myself well informed and fairly intelligent. And I've demonstrated that I keep better tabs on this war than you do. That's not meant to be a direct knock on you, however you seem to insist that the only reason someone would support the US was a lack of knowledge. I've found that most of the people knocking the war have used propoganda and lies. Weren't people screaming from the beginning that this was all about oil?

 

Bush was going in there on personal reasons, and to steal oil. Yep, that's right. Never mind that we're not stealing money or oil from Iraq. The United States if forking over billions to rebuild and help Iraq while our economy is already struggling. And we set up a welfare system where oil sales profit the country of Iraq and it's populace.

 

You live in this simple notion that everyone should stay uninvolved. History has shown that theory doesn't work. Look at WWI and WWII. The United States tried to be isolationist in WWII and we got attacked. The United Nations should do a better job of policing the world, but they have failed to do so.

 

If the UN did their job, I don't think the US would get involved so much.

Ok, enough of this crap. Could you PLEASE back up your ridiculous claims? For ONCE?!

 

How WWI or WWII would have ended without the US? I DON'T KNOW AND NEITHER DO YOU. Pure ridiculously nationalistic speculation. Crappy point, move on.

 

How was Iraq before you bombed the place to bits? It wasn't a ruin, that's for sure! Yes, I recall why the embargo was put in place. I've even provided links with lots of information about the situation (which hasn't helped). What have you provided? Opinions. Or should I perhaps call them outright lies?

 

You have demonstrated that you "keep better tabs" on this war than me? Dumb thing to ask, but how do you come to this conclusion? Because you write lots and lots of posts without any references? Sorry, it doesn't work that way for me. Go back in the thread and read some of the links I've provided FOR YOU (which *I* have already read) and see who knows more. If you still think you keep better tabs then I, then I have nothing more to add.

 

I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but YES they are pumping the land dry of oil. I provided links of that too, ones you obviously never bothered to read since you already "keep better tabs" than me.

 

"History has shown that theory doesn't work"? Yeah, all the links you provide to back up your claims sure convinced me this time. Bull. Sh!t.

 

The UN does their job. It's called diplomacy. As long as you think the only action is war, the UN rarely solve anything, no.

 

I'm done discussing with you. There's no point discussing something with people who make up facts as they go along, which I now assume you do since you refuse to give me any references to back up your pro-american claims even though I've asked you politely several times.

[EnderAndrew]

You say:

I honestly think this would be a better world to live in if the US wouldn't interfere in other countries businesses.

I respond with my opinion. Then you say:

Ok, enough of this crap. Could you PLEASE back up your ridiculous claims? For ONCE?!

 

How WWI or WWII would have ended without the US? I DON'T KNOW AND NEITHER DO YOU. Pure ridiculously nationalistic speculation. Crappy point, move on.

Talk about crappy point. How is it that you're entitled to express an opinion, and I'm not? You just claimed that you knew the world would be better if the US didn't get involved. I pointed out examples of how the world was made a better place by US involvement and you shout like a baby. I discussed the Quran and you retort with a link to bible quotes and admit that you haven't read the Quran. Then you make a blanket statment that all religions are the same. Do you really want me to do ten pages spelling out the major differences between the most popular religions? I write religion papers all the time. My exgirlfriend has me write the papers for her religion class. I'll make you look like a fool if you really want me to. I thought a few paragraphs would suffice, and I left it at that.

How was Iraq before you bombed the place to bits? It wasn't a ruin, that's for sure! Yes, I recall why the embargo was put in place. I've even provided links with lots of information about the situation (which hasn't helped). What have you provided? Opinions. Or should I perhaps call them outright lies?

When the US came into Baghad, much of the place was in ruins and poverty. We're spending tens of billions rebuilding. And if we bombed the place into ruins, could you please show me some pictures of that? I've got tons of CNN footage of smart bombs taking out one building leaving the surrounding buildings untouched. Once again, you throw around opinions and scream like a baby when someone responds with opinions. Let's do a quick review. You said:

If the US hadn't come to France then the french people would probably be speaking russian today, not german..

That's a ridiculous opinion. Go back and read some history books. Russia had econmic concerns, and got their butts kicked. 26 million Russians died. No way in hell would they march all the way to France. Nor would the world stand for it.

Oh, and do you know which nation has started the most wars during the 20'th century? US of A.

I considered the possiblity of this when you posted it. After reviewing all major military conflicts that the US was in during the 20th century, the US didn't start a single one of these. You flat out lied.

The actual second world war was fought on the east front, but numerous movies, documentaries, pure propaganda films have depicted the entire war as being dependant on the US.

Yep, that's US propganda right there. You ignore the fact that Hitler marched into Africa, that there was a Western front to begin with, and that there was a Pacific theatre. To say that the war solely existed on any one front is ridiculous. The US was involved in three of the four fronts however. And the eastern push came after a lengthy western campaign. Hitler's initial targets were Poland and France. You've demonstated that you know very little about WWII and world history. Germany was able to make a huge push into Russia because of their economy. The war helped them greatly, and while Britain had nothing left to fight with, Germany was cranking out tanks left and right. They were 50 miles outside of Paris, and the West had crumbled. So Hitler looked East and marched his new tanks. The US repelled Germany for several reasons. One, we outproduced Germany on tanks and weapons. When we mobilized, it was scary. Germany also was stupid to invade Russia in the winter. Both of these contributed to Germany's failure.

Do you believe in weapons of mass destruction? I bet you do, but the swedish UN Secretary (and weapons inspector) spent several months in cooperation with the Iraqi government and he filed a report (prior to the war) that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

The UN said for 12 years the weapons were there. We found some, and training labs for more. And Saddam used them on his own troops. Sweden was dead on in denying they exist. You accuse me of nationalism, but I have to wonder if your nationalism and anti-US sentiments are clouding your ability to see a logical arguement. Once again, you made a claim and were wrong. Yet you accuse me of lies.

President Bush called Hans Blix a liar (not in those words) and decided to attack Iraq anyhow.

Hans is an idiot. Iraq refused to allow inspections for the better part of twelve years, and Hans called that cooperation. Hans says one thing, and the UN security council unanimously said another for twelve years. Who do we believe? Considering that Hans has been proved wrong, it's not a hard call. You make brilliant arguements.

Did you know that Iraq has been under a trade blockade since 1991?

You blamed the US repeatedly for this blockade for the murdering a million people. The US didn't place this blockade. The UN did in response to Iraq's invasion of another country. You forget that. You also are ignorant of the fact that Saddam placed localized blockades in his cities to keep food and water out. Yet you blame the US for starvation. That's outright lies on your part. You're batting 1.000 so far.

I saw Fox News declaring american soldiers as heroes and supermen as they used their high tech weapons to murder Iraqi soldiers.

Wait one minute. You question the validity of me getting facts from CNN and BBC while you're watching Fox News? Did you miss when the UK blocked Fox News from broadcasting in their country because of their lack of responsible journalism? Anytime a reported uses terms like "hero" they are editorializing. Furthermore, your argument seems based upon this notion that anyone with a higher budget is the villian, and that lesser equipped troops are thereby victims. The logic doesn't hold. Furthermore, you use the term murder. The planes crashing into the two towers was murder. Soldiers shooting soldiers is war.

 

Your links point to sites that claim the US invaded Iraq with no concern for human rights, terrorism, or democracy. They claim the US has economic motives. Considering that the war is hurting us economically, that sure makes sense. Considering we're spending a 80 billion dollar package on rebuilding Iraq, that makes perfect sense.

 

When Clinton bombed Sudan, evidence was brought forth to the UN many years ago linking Saddam to Al Quaeda, and WMD. The UN acknowledged the link to Al Queda, WMD, and terrorism. The UN also made note of Saddams refusal to feed his people and passed the Oil for Food program.

 

You take a leadership who praises terrorism, invades it's neighbors, starves it's citizens, has rape and torture rooms in it's "police" stations, uses human shields,

uses WMD on it's own people, etc as the victim. It's such a victim that the UN threatened action for twelve years.

 

Consider that argument for two seconds.

 

Your links and sources make an argument that Clinton killed a million innocent kids in Iraq. Well, the US wasn't behind the embargo as I've established. The UN put it in place. In case you forgot, the US didn't run Iraq between 1991 and 2004. The sources all make claims of mass conspiracy.

 

You want facts? Bush has spent billions on developing alternate energy sources. He gives tax breaks on hybrid cars and has said since day one that he wants to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil. I get my electricity in my house from fuel cells. My local power company runs off them. They also have a nuclear plant. Does Sweden still use fossil fuels? And you call me a liar talking about oil being pumped in Iraq. I never said Iraq wasn't pumping oil. I claimed that we set up a welfare system to sell oil and give the money to the Iraqi people. You didn't read my post. People are screaming that this conspiracy is about stealing oil, except the UN is involved in the new oil-for-food program. No oil is being stolen, nor do we want it. Why would Bush invest billions in fuel-cell technology only to create a global conspiracy to steal oil? Are you also aware that we have tons of oil in our own country? We choose not to drive most of it due to ecological concerns, but if we need it, we got it.

 

Okay, recap done. Let's get to your current post.

You have demonstrated that you "keep better tabs" on this war than me? Dumb thing to ask, but how do you come to this conclusion?

Well, anytime I've asked a question or made a point, you largely ignore them. You've provided lies and unfactual information.

"History has shown that theory doesn't work"? Yeah, all the links you provide to back up your claims sure convinced me this time. Bull. Sh!t.

 

The UN does their job. It's called diplomacy. As long as you think the only action is war, the UN rarely solve anything, no.

Do I need a link to talk about WWII? I thought outside of Neo-Nazi's the world agrees that WWII happened.

 

Diplomacy failed in WWI, WII, Korea, Afhganistan, etc. We pursued diplomacy for twelve-thirteen years in Iraq. Diplomacy did a fine job there.

 

The UN does their job. It's called diplomacy. As long as you think the only action is war, the UN rarely solve anything, no.

 

The UN flat out ignored issues in Zaire, Liberia, South Africa, East Timoor, Tibet, Taiwan, China, etc. etc. etc.

 

The UN has become a mockery. They pass resolutions, and do nothing to enforce them. You keep mentioning diplomacy or non-involvement. You don't back these claims up, because you can't. I have no qualms providing research material. If you weren't acting like a child, and calling names perhaps I'd do the research. Frankly, I've had little time for anything, and little sleep this past week. If I'm going to do hours of research for a debate, it better be worth my time.

 

You haven't been.

[mkreku]

blah blah blah

Not a single source to back up your lies. Again.

 

http://www.apk2000.dk/netavisen/artikler/g...basic_stats.htm

http://www.fpif.org/

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/nsaebb8i.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/september11/oney...,793153,00.html

http://www.krysstal.com/democracy.html

http://www.truthbeknown.com/biblequotes.htm

 

Here are some of my sources, straight up. Now show me yours and let's compare what we find, shall we?

 

It's bad when you start behaving like Volourn, saying stuff like "I don't show facts because you're not worth my time" and then you have the stomach to call me childish? Uhm.. Check out the thread above.. And you claim you didn't think it was worth it? That's half an essay up there.

[EnderAndrew]

Quoting your lies suffices for now.

 

I've also checked your links. The Bible Quotes proves everything.

 

I've responded to the content in your links. But then again, you don't read posts. You lie and then refuse to acknowledge said lies.

 

But you want links. Links prove everything.

 

First discovery of Sarin Gas before the 500 shells

 

Frontpage article on WMD

 

Article Suggesting Other Traces of WMD

 

[url="http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7

[Weiser_Cain]

I honestly think this would be a better world to live in if the US wouldn't interfere in other countries businesses. If by some bizarre quirk you still think the US are the good-doers of the world, please read more books. (Or at least read some of the links I've provided above.)

I disagree. Every time we talk about just focusing on us there are cries of isolationism, fortress America, and turning a blind eye to the problem of the world.

 

People want us involved but they want to tell us how to do everything without risking their own necks, and then they complain about having to contribute anything to the cost of the effort.

 

You know what if you don't like the way we do things do it yourself.

 

....

 

Anyway just when in history would you have liked America to keep to itself?

After we saved you from the fascist or the communist?

[mkreku]

The Ultimate Proof

Hahaha, I love this last link!

 

You're amazingly accurate in your "ignorant, uneducated american" impersonation. We actually have a kind of "contest" of who can find the "dumbest american" on one of the swedish boards I'm a member on, and so far we mostly have really funny quotes from NRA members and the likes ("we could bomb you back to the stone age!"), but I imagine I have a new contestant here! I hope you won't mind if I use your page as an entry

[Weiser_Cain]

The thing is we really could...

[EnderAndrew]

Once again, after having a million opportunities to reply to the actual content of my messages you choose to make a snide remark.

 

I've pointed out three flat-out lies on your part.

 

Do you have a come-back or have you been owned?

[mkreku]

The thing is we really could...

Yes, I'm sure your dad is stronger than mine..

 

If your comment was written by anyone else than an american I would have thought it was a joke. Sadly though..

[mkreku]

Do you have a come-back or have you been owned?

No no, your immense intelligence (especially the homeage-link for me) has me on my knees, totally owned. No comebacks here. As a matter of fact, now that I've been so 0wn3d by you, I think it might be best if we stayed far away from each other in other threads as well, that's how shaken I am. Deal?

[EnderAndrew]

You say the webpage serves a perfect example of a dumb American. Except the argument and logic contained in that page is yours.

 

You argue that links to websites equals validity, even though the websites aren't saying the same things you are.

 

I used quotes from you, and paraphrased them to make that page. Someone the joke eluded you.

 

So who's the stupid American?

 

And why should I stay away from you in threads? I've called you a liar. I laid it on the line in three quotes. You said you would respond when I provided links. I provided links.

 

Make that another lie. I'll call you on them all day long. When are you going to respond?

[mkreku]

Someone the joke eluded you.

 

So who's the stupid American?

Yes, someone the joke eluded me. I must be the stupid american.

 

Anyhow, I have no interest in continuing this pointless argument with you. We've been taught by different school systems and we're obviously not on the same level of education. One of us would have to actually educate the other and I bet noone of us would have the time it would take to do that.

 

I apologize for letting the discussion sink to this level and I will try not to voice my opinions to you in particular in the future. No hard feelings on my part.

[Weiser_Cain]

The thing is we really could...

Yes, I'm sure your dad is stronger than mine..

 

If your comment was written by anyone else than an american I would have thought it was a joke. Sadly though..

HA HA HA, actually I'm pretty sure I can take your old man.

Listen there is no one in the world that can take on even a fraction of the US of A's military might. It would take the five top military powers under us just to match our current conventional arsenal.

[EnderAndrew]

Ok, enough of this crap. Could you PLEASE back up your ridiculous claims? For ONCE?!

 

How WWI or WWII would have ended without the US? I DON'T KNOW AND NEITHER DO YOU. Pure ridiculously nationalistic speculation. Crappy point, move on.

 

You say this and then try to take the high road?

 

I gave you a civil debate. I used facts, and then backed them up. You lied, and I pointed it out. You still don't have answers. You demonstrated a lack of knowledge of history, made ridiculous claims and then question my education.

 

I'm glad there are no hard feelings. I'd hate to think that after all your bull-sh!t posturing that you might be angry for being exposed.

[mkreku]

I'm glad there are no hard feelings. I'd hate to think that after all your bull-sh!t posturing that you might be angry for being exposed.

No, actually I'm very satisfied. Thank you!

[Child of Flame]

I'm going to back out of this while I still have my honour, and the Wiggster and mkreku as forum buddies; as this seems to have degenerated into an international pissing match.

 

 

I would like to shove off with a couple points though. Even if the US is the strongest military power in the world as of now, does it make it right to attack countries that we have outgunned and 'bomb them into the stoneage'? Also....how much longer do you think we're going to continue to be top dog with our economy slipping, and China's growing....I certainly don't want other countries to take on our current attitudes towards others towards us when they gain the upper hand....do you?

 

The last thing I'd like the point out, is there are always at least two sides to any story; more often than not multiple sides to one. Only the winners of any given war write the history books.....though a more factual picture of the war may linger on in the loser's camp....

 

JT

[Weiser_Cain]

We can destroy the planet several times over, all out war againts us is unwinable. The most anyone can hope for is to become a threat to our security, and no rational person wants that.

 

War isn't about a fair fight, it's about defense, imposing your will on others, and killing the enemy. We have the right to go to war against anyone we choose(which is usually because we deem them a threat to us or our intrests), just like any other sovereign nation.

 

The chinese have said something to the effect that war with us is inevitable, the thing is how do you attack you best customer? We pump billions into china. I sure there's an equvilent chinese proverb about not biting the hand that feeds you. And unless you plan on killing us all there's no way you'd pacify us.

 

I belive that we are possibly the most tollerant nation on earth. But then I have a low opinion of the rest of the world so maybe we aren't angels but we are better than most and certanly better than any nation in history with anywhere near as much power(relatively, since no one's ever been this powerful) as we have.

[Child of Flame]

We can destroy the planet several times over, all out war againts us is unwinable. The most anyone can hope for is to become a threat to our security, and no rational person wants that.

 

War isn't about a fair fight, it's about defense, imposing your will on others, and killing the enemy. We have the right to go to war against anyone we choose(which is usually because we deem them a threat to us or our intrests), just like any other sovereign nation.

 

The chinese have said something to the effect that war with us is inevitable, the thing is how do you attack you best customer? We pump billions into china. I sure there's an equvilent chinese proverb about not biting the hand that feeds you. And unless you plan on killing us all there's no way you'd pacify us.

 

I belive that we are possibly the most tollerant nation on earth. But then I have a low opinion of the rest of the world so maybe we aren't angels but we are better than most and certanly better than any nation in history with anywhere near as much power(relatively, since no one's ever been this powerful) as we have.

But are you honestly naive enough to think that we'll ALWAYS be the top dog on the pile? There's always someone who comes along after awhile who's bigger and badder than you...

[EnderAndrew]

I served in the United States Marine Corps. I did NATO training with troops from other countries.

 

I have great respect for the ROK (Republic of Korea) Marines, the Isreali Air Force, and I suppose, the British Royal Marines.

 

I would contend that the US military has the best technology in the world, and some of the best training. All that aside, I think it's silly to think that no one can touch the US. When you discount your opponent, you get a rude awakening.

 

The Isreali Air Force is the finest in the world. They fly more missions and get more air time, while flying many of the same planes we do. (We build them for 'em).

 

China's tanks can't really stand up to our M1-Abram. However, China has a huge economy, and a very large military. China and the US did go head-to-head once in a stalemate (Korea). China had supply lines and the advantage of locale. The US had no supply lines, and lost more troops to hypothermia than gun-shots, but I wouldn't discount China's army.

 

If I ran things in the military, standards would be increased even more. Everyone would go through a minimum of 13 weeks basic training, with another month after that in pure field combat training like the Marine Corps.

[EnderAndrew]

edit

[Phosphor]

The chinese have said something to the effect that war with us is inevitable, the thing is how do you attack you best customer? We pump billions into china.

 

I belive that we are possibly the most tollerant nation on earth. But then I have a low opinion of the rest of the world so maybe we aren't angels but we are better than most and certanly better than any nation in history with anywhere near as much power(relatively, since no one's ever been this powerful) as we have.

Problem with that is that you've now got a record high trade deficit that severely weakens your dollar. Retail sales are up, but you're buying imported goods rather than US-made goods, and you're not exporting very much.

 

Tolerant or egotistical? I do not believe the US to be so tolerant...

[EnderAndrew]

Don't get my started on the US policy on imports/exports.

 

Bill Clinton made China our favored trading partner so they don't pay tariffs selling products in the US while they pirate billions and billions in our intellectual property and have a limited trade embargo on other US products.

 

It's insanely stupid. See, I'm not blinded by nationalism. I'll point out our mistakes easily.

[~Di]

Holy smokes. Here I thought this was a thread about the upswing in wonderful European games lately, and since several of my new favorite developers are European, I happily clicked into the conversation. Imagine my surprise to see it turn into yet another "America sucks" thread.

 

Looks like Europe has not only a large contingent of talented game developers, it also has its own fair share of hateful, mean-spirited bigots... and a few of them are posting here. For shame.

[Weiser_Cain]

...I think it's silly to think that no one can touch the US. When you discount your opponent, you get a rude awakening.

I don't discount our opponents I just don't think we will ever be so lax as to let ourselves fall very far behind and even if we do, we still can do so much damage to our enemy that attacking us at home would be an act of suicide. Can you imagine the spike in recruitment and retention?

 

Tolerant or egotistical? I do not believe the US to be so tolerant...

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

 

 

Holy smokes. Here I thought this was a thread about the upswing in wonderful European games lately, and since several of my new favorite developers are European, I happily clicked into the conversation. Imagine my surprise to see it turn into yet another "America sucks" thread.

 

Looks like Europe has not only a large contingent of talented game developers, it also has its own fair share of hateful, mean-spirited bigots... and a few of them are posting here. For shame.

Crazy eh?