Judge Hades Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 (edited) We are not the police of the world. The US government needs to learn that. We shouldn't let our boys and daughters go to the front lines for these people and mind our own borders. Oh, I say we should still trade and have good relations in the economic sense. However next time someone decides to wage war in some region of the world I say let them all die. Imagine how the world would react if we remove ourselves from NATO and the UN completely or eliminate all foreign aid to other countries and demand all loans to other countries paid back in full. I think the results would be interesting. Countries that cannot pay their debt to the US we will sieze all assets within the country, including property belonging to foreigners of those countries and that is not covered we will impose a trade sanctions aginast that country til the debt is paid. Edited December 19, 2005 by Judge Hades Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musopticon? Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 Result= a lot of dead people kirottu said: I was raised by polar bears. I had to fight against blood thirsty wolves and rabid penguins to get my food. Those who were too weak to survive were sent to Sweden. It has made me the man I am today. A man who craves furry hentai. So let us go and embrace the rustling smells of unseen worlds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Hades Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 Indeed, but it seems that there are a lot of countries critical of the US and our doings. I think that would be the best way of handling this situation. If the Euros, the Asians, Middle Easterners, and Hispanics don't want the US to police the world then we should just not to and reclaim resources that we have given in loan. If people die, well that is what the other nations of the world wanted, right? A United States that is completely hands off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 The big thing about when US presidents suspend civil liberties in a time of war is that they return them come peace time. Now Bush clearly used the war on terror to get himself re-elected. Reagan did the same with the Cold War, as did JFK. But the US has huge political shifts every 4-8 years, and it's very hard to predict what will happen in three more years. The wheels are already in motion for Homeland Security to be lessened. That is the beauty of the US's government, it's constantly evolving and very resistant to any one person manipulating power. Lincoln clearly seized power during the Civil War, but before his assassination, he was facing tough political opposition because of this. George Washington could have been king. He could have stayed in power until he was dead, but he set a precedent that has helped the US adapt very well over the years. If you don't like the current government, just wait, it's constantly shifting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Hades Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 It does shift, but very slowly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musopticon? Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 How slow is slow? I consider the present rule to be quite a bit different from, say, Clinton's. kirottu said: I was raised by polar bears. I had to fight against blood thirsty wolves and rabid penguins to get my food. Those who were too weak to survive were sent to Sweden. It has made me the man I am today. A man who craves furry hentai. So let us go and embrace the rustling smells of unseen worlds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Hades Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 It still takes years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 Years are nothing in the grand scale of things. I count in decades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
random evil guy Posted December 19, 2005 Author Share Posted December 19, 2005 how clever. *shut up*. you learned that from bill o'reily...? in addition, your reasoning is flawed and infested with ad hominems and strawman arguments...like you said, grow up. You think I'm anywhere near right of center? You made a ridiculous remark about US servicemen. It's to be expected that US servicemen, no matter their political orientation, will resent it. Speaking of ad hominems, casting aspersions on the mental capacity of well over two million people might just qualify, don't you think? first of all, i even spent time with us forces during a joint nato excercise. so i do know what i'm talking about. secondly, the norwegian army is on the same level, in terms of training, tactics and equipment as most other nato armed forces. including the us. thirdly, all of the officers and enlisted men are volunteers here as well and they are the ones who defines the very culture and structure of the organization. the conscripts are just cheap labor ants. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, you've convinced me. You definitely know what you're talking about. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> why do i need to convince you? all i claim is that my opinions aren't completely unfounded like you'd like to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BattleCookiee Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 (edited) The biggest problem with the US is that they clearly think they are in charge of the whole world nowadays. They believe their politcal system is best, and everybody should follow their wise rule. If not done so "out of free will" the US would gladly help them out... Now is it that not everywhere in the world the US-system is best. To begin to make such a system usefull you need a lot of wealth and power to start with. The US got this during the Second World-War because they didn't have the financial and infa-structual damage done here in Europe, because they were savely away... far away. But they did loan and sold weaponry and supplies to the Allied in Europe. They profited ALOT from our troubles, and the US flourished financially. Now, due to the fact they didn't loose their international connections and armies because they were busy fighting the Nazi's they could also become the big "Force of the World" they currently are. They quickly exploited this key position to make sure that we (Europe) were behind them during the Cold War. We had damage, alot, and we needed cash to build it up. So the US loaned us the money they MADE from our war, leaving huge debts. +Power for the US. Now, because we were still dependant on the US for safety and financial during the Cold War we largely surpassed what happened war-like between the USSR and US. That did not mean we supported them though. Not all of that was a really issue untill Bush suddenly started seeing himself as a God-like person who was tasked to bring the "succesfull" American Way into every other country in the world, probably unaware that the only way they actually became such a power was due to loss of power and wealth here. But if that wasn't enough to ignore every other country in the world to do the "good deeds of Liberation" nobody asked for, he also started to severly break off the freedom in the US and World alike. Sanctians are placed on people, foltering/torturing being used as a good way to get information and privacy-decreasing laws are daily created. Innocent people could be taken away by US-Soldiers never to be seen again without any fair trial... And that is not just on their own soil. US- Intelligence agencies can check calls and mail WORLDWIDE without needing permission from anyone than their own government. And recently leaked out that sometimes even they were being kept out of the loop. Another scary factor of the US-Powerbase is that currently the US-Army is being praised and worshipped. Joining the army is the rage, advised for "protection and liberation of your country". Totally ignoring the fact that these soldiers do not preserve peace in their own country, but used for peace-keeping and conquering in distant land. Even if the Army is for "protecting the country" did the army really was equiped or trained for "National Emergencies" like the Hurricane in New Orleans? No, they are being exclussively trained for the combat. And they do so as to giving the soldiers a sense of NATIONALISM. There country is the best and they should prove that to the world. Their actions everywhere make sure that the country keeps "pure" from threatning elements. Now, where do we heard Nationalism and Warmongering together? Usually when talking about Nazi-Germany, or the Japanese, Italian during World War II. Right, the Facist countries. Lots of military force we should use to preserve "our" country. And instead of the Axis doing it on a scale of Europe, and the Japanese on a Asian scale, the US currently tries such a tactic on the World Scale. Another mark for facism besides nationalism and alot of military force is that they try to "bend the people to their will". And how do you do that, by influencing how people think. And due to the "Tapping" of Telephones/Mail by the Intelligence Agencies they have alot more information about the minds of the people than the Nazi's can ever dreamed off. Now the US-Government didn't force people to think like they do like the Nazi's did, but the huge amount of restricting rules put on people currently seems to get that exact effect; anyone who does not agree with the US-Policies of the "World Freedom" is brainwashed by what you guys love to call "left-wing politicians" or "naivelings"... EDIT: I just have to add that if you are being an agent/citizen for the US and then speak against the government, it can suddenly happen a "spontane leak" tells that your wife is CIA-agent..., now don't tell me that is something to be scared off... Edited December 19, 2005 by Battlewookiee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Hades Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 Okay Battlewookie, think on this. Over the last century or so what country has been called up to bail other countries out of a jam? Was it Germany? Nope, they caused 2 world wars. Was it Sweden or Switzerland? Nope, they were neutral. Was it Japan? Nope, they were causing problems of their own by conquering their neighbors. Hmm... WHAT BLOODY COUNTRY DID EUROPE AND MANY OTHERS CALL FOR HELP?!?!?! The United Freakin' States. Every single freaking time. As I said, I propose that we remove all troops from all counties anbd bring them back here to the US. I propose that we end all foreign aid to all countires as well. I propose that we remove ourselves from NATO and the UN and boot the UN out of the United States. I also propose that we demand all foriegn loans be paid within 3 months. If these loans are not paid then we sieze all assets of that foriegn nation within our borders and place trade sanctions on that country till the debt is paid. Of course we will still trade with other countries but we will give no aid, financially or militarily no matter how much that country begs. What do you say Battlewookie, does that sound like a good idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Lawson Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 There are several current and ex-military people employed here at Obsidian. To find this discussion and some of the things that have been said in this discussion here on our forums...is quite entertaining at best. However, there appear to at least be a few people who know what's going on. Commissar seems to have things under control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BattleCookiee Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 Also interesting that you criticize others for looking only through "US-coloured" glasses, then continue to post "references" from a single source. When you can start corroborating evidence, it tends to strengthen your argument. When you use a single reference, that has an agenda which supports your claims, your arguments tend to lose weight. If people want to know what Arabice think of the Iraq war, would you really pick stories written by European or American journalists to show them? I've noticed that Battlewookie does better at writing in English than many of those born to it. That's probably what caused the confusion. He writes it too well to be a foreigner. Gee, Thanks... Two: All countries will have detractors and proponents. America right now seems to have a very Sith outlook on the world (if your not with me your against me). And thus the detractors of america are instantly labeled terrorists. I find it funny we label entire Nations as terrorists because they don't agree with what we are doing or becasue they don't want to become democratic. also America has recently allowed the NSA to start wiretaps on all international calls WITHOUT a warrent of any kind from a court. They went soley on executive order. Right now they are debating the legality of this (I would think that it would breach the right to privacy under any and all circumstances. but that's just me.). The only good thing I can see coming out of that is Impeachment of our "beloved" republican yahoo. well, they can tap my phone lines 24/7, i don't give a crap. i am not dealing nuclear arms in the blackmarket, nor do i think they will take a simple personal conversation of mine and disclose it to everyone in the nation simply because they heard it. Could be you, but I don't think that I would really like the Intelligence Services to read my mail or listen to my calls without me knowing. Worse still if they can just bust in with cops, drag me off, torture me, and then I appear to be innocent, and get kicked out without a sorry because I was just fooling around with a friend doesn't sound like fun to me, but the possibility seems high... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Hades Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 I will be the first to say that the military is not the best place for some people, especially me. When I was in the Navy all the rules and restrictions were maddening, let alone being cooped up in a tiny ship with absolutely no privacy nearly drove me bonkers officially. I had a choice of a standard military medical discharge or a freaking section 8. I decided not to have a Section 8 and a day later was given my papers. I will say that overall my time in the Navy was interesting and I do not overly regret the decision of joining though next time I have a major decision like that come up I will not depend on a coin toss for the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 Man, Battlewookie just keeps spewing his anti-American propaganda. Do you even bother to read the rebuttals? You are totally looking at one side and refusing to see the many angles that politics have. The world is not nearly as cut and dry as you portray it to be. It's a huge onion with layers and layers of crap. Bush is also just one president, and the executive branch doesn't not have absolute power over the direction of the US. You seem to have a very elementary view of our political structure. I also don't see why the US needs to back out of its role as a protector of struggling nations. We have the largest and most advanced military. In many parts of the world they do a ton of good. The Middle East is a difficult situation, but there is no grand American strategy to conquer it. Even if the president had such ambition, he'd never be able to pull it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Hades Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 I think we should stop aiding other countries. I think the burdon of doing so should be in the hands of someone else. After all we wouldn't want to be looked as an evil empire now would we. I think that separating ourselves militarily and aid from the rest of the world would really do us some good. It would free up resources we could be using at home instead abroad. Of course we will still export and import with other countries. We shouldn't be isolationistic in this global economy but we should stop being the nursemaid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BattleCookiee Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 Man, Battlewookie just keeps spewing his anti-American propaganda. Do you even bother to read the rebuttals? You are totally looking at one side and refusing to see the many angles that politics have. The world is not nearly as cut and dry as you portray it to be. It's a huge onion with layers and layers of crap. Yes. I read what is written back... Bush is also just one president, and the executive branch doesn't not have absolute power over the direction of the US. You seem to have a very elementary view of our political structure. "Tapping with only permission of Bush" "Presidents advisor "leaks" CIA-agents identity" Yup. It seems Bush really follows the things like Senate your country has to protect themselves from power-hungry presidents... I also don't see why the US needs to back out of its role as a protector of struggling nations. We have the largest and most advanced military. In many parts of the world they do a ton of good. The Middle East is a difficult situation, but there is no grand American strategy to conquer it. Even if the president had such ambition, he'd never be able to pull it off. Where do you really use your "advanced military" to keep the peace at the moment (besides Afghanistan/Iraq)? I think we should stop aiding other countries. I think the burdon of doing so should be in the hands of someone else. After all we wouldn't want to be looked as an evil empire now would we. I think that separating ourselves militarily and aid from the rest of the world would really do us some good. It would free up resources we could be using at home instead abroad. Of course we will still export and import with other countries. We shouldn't be isolationistic in this global economy but we should stop being the nursemaid. Economically we are dependant on the US, yes. Thanks to the Second Worldwar that is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Hades Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 (edited) So you admit your country is dependent on the US. Now, tell me what would happen if the US decides to eliminate all funding to your country and seeks repayment of all loans given. How long do you think your country would survive. Personally I think that it would be for the best. Strong countries would definitely survive while weaker ones will be either absorbed by the larger countries or consumed by internal strife. If you hate the US then don't take our resources and don't expect us to send troops over to aid you. That is my view of it. Edited December 19, 2005 by Judge Hades Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BattleCookiee Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 So you admit your country is dependent on the US. Now, tell me what would happen if the US decides to eliminate all funding to your country and seeks repayment of all loans given. How long do you think your country would survive. Personally I think that it would be for the best. Strong countries would definitely survive while weaker ones will be either absorbed by the larger countries or consumed by internal strife. If you hate the US then don't take our resources and don't expect us to send troops over to aid you. That is my view of it. Yes, we got that financial "LOAN" after WO II to help ourselves build up again... Currently we don't receive (support) cash from your country, except for the companies that also deal with the US ofcourse... And if they wanted a refund right away of everything that would probably be a big proof that your current government goes for keeping their "strongest power" position" and would cause an international riot against your US that probably could cause yet another World War. I don't suggest starting World Wars and international crisesses, you do... and they call me hypocryte and naieve with no world-knowledge? Do we "take" your resources? NO Do you guys send troops over to my country? NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Hades Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 +You would just pay back the loan, if you haven't already, and that would be that. Like I said we would keep trade relations but no loans or troops in case a country gets into trouble. Also as for asking for the money back "right away" WW2 happened 50 years ago plus. You had all that time to pay it back. I have no problem with your view Battlewookie and in fact I share it in many ways. The US should not send its sons and daughters to foreign countries to clean up the messes that they made for themselves. We shouldn't give money to other countries when we have homeless and people without proper medical care right here at home. Loans are not gifts and they need to be settled. If a coutnry can't pay its debts, like a person, that country's assets should be siezed. In terms of national boundries that would be all property, civillian or governmental, own by citizens of said nation taken over then assessed in value, after of which needs to be applied to pay back the loan. If the countries we are giving these loans to didn't want to pay them back or take responsibility for them then they should have never asked for or accepted the loan in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WILL THE ALMIGHTY Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 I understand having amilitary to protect but to invade with no REAL reason is not only uselsess, its stupid. Sorry, its just what I think. "Alright, I've been thinking. When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade - make life take the lemons back! Get mad! I don't want your damn lemons, what am I supposed to do with these? Demand to see life's manager. Make life rue the day it thought it could give Cave Johnson lemons. Do you know who I am? I'm the man who's gonna burn your house down! With the lemons. I'm going to to get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that burns your house down!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirottu Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 They thought they had real reason. Ermm, I This post is not to be enjoyed, discussed, or referenced on company time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaftan Barlast Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 I would just like to remind you that the US's 1500billion dollar deficit is being kept in check with loans from Europe and Asia " so.. whos really dependant on whom here? DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 Commissar seems to have things under control. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> From the halls of Montezuma, to the forums of Obsidian... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 There are several current and ex-military people employed here at Obsidian. To find this discussion and some of the things that have been said in this discussion here on our forums...is quite entertaining at best. However, there appear to at least be a few people who know what's going on. Commissar seems to have things under control. You read the whole thread? You're braver than me. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now