|
|
#31
06-22-2005, 09:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The world should be kissing our feet!
[ QUOTE ]
LOL - Since Russia wasn't involed in WW2 until September of 40 and lend/lease was a program between Britan and America ....well. [/ QUOTE ] LOL+LOL x 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 . Utterly mistaken. Try google with Lend+lease+russia. Also have you conceded that the Brits fleet wasnt in a distant third place. 
|
|
#32
06-22-2005, 11:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The world should be kissing our feet!
[ QUOTE ]
Democracy was not invented or first implemented in the US. I think US should thank Oooooold Europe . ************************************************** Shouldn't the USA by thanking the ancient Greeks rather than Oooooold Europe. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Ooooooold Europe should be thanking Greece [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
|
|
#33
06-22-2005, 12:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Public Enemy No. 1
[ QUOTE ]
what do you think we should we be doing about our relationships with these countries? [/ QUOTE ] I will chime in here. You hear a lot from the right about how bad the UN is. The fact is that the UN does not limit our sovereignty like the WTO does. So what should we do? Economic embargo! No products from any countries that commits widespread abuse of human rights go in or out of the country. This includes China, Pakistan, Egypt, and other countries like Russia and Israel are put on notice. Of course we need oil, so this means we can't stop trading with the Saudis. However, I think the Saudi's treat thier people so bad invading might be the best solution. That way we secure our oil, but more importantly women don't have to live in fear of gang rape, stoning, and being burned alive if they allow too much hair to show from under thier viel.
|
|
#34
06-22-2005, 12:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The world should be kissing our feet!
This would make an interesting seperate thread. I've contacted a friend of mine in the Navy acrhives and he's going to pull the TOE (or as much as he can find for a steak diinner) of all three Navys in 39. I await his results.
You're right - not a distant third [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#35
06-22-2005, 12:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Public Enemy No. 1
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] what do you think we should we be doing about our relationships with these countries? [/ QUOTE ] I will chime in here. You hear a lot from the right about how bad the UN is. The fact is that the UN does not limit our sovereignty like the WTO does. So what should we do? Economic embargo! No products from any countries that commits widespread abuse of human rights go in or out of the country. This includes China, Pakistan, Egypt, and other countries like Russia and Israel are put on notice. Of course we need oil, so this means we can't stop trading with the Saudis. However, I think the Saudi's treat thier people so bad invading might be the best solution. That way we secure our oil, but more importantly women don't have to live in fear of gang rape, stoning, and being burned alive if they allow too much hair to show from under thier viel. [/ QUOTE ] There is logic in what you propose. Of course you realize, you are going to get flamed for the remarks regarding Saudi Arabia. If liberating Iraqis was such a bad idea (in the minds of many), you're not going to get much support for liberating Saudis. After all, if we were to go down this path, we might create more Saudis/Arabs which will hate Americans, prompting them to become terrorists and attack innocent American citizens at home, and join the 'insurgency' in Iraq, etc... The US is running a massive trade deficit with most (probably all) of the countries on your list and stringent economic sanctions would undoubtedly get their attention. Unfortunately, however, the US will then be accused of killing millions of citizens in these countries who will suffer from economic depression, lack of food, medicine, etc... Thanks for addressing the issue with a plan. (As opposed to merely blaming the US for all of the world's problems - past, present and future...)
|
|
#36
06-22-2005, 12:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Public Enemy No. 1
[ QUOTE ]
If liberating Iraqis was such a bad idea (in the minds of many).... [/ QUOTE ] Exactly whose minds believe liberating Iraqing was such a bad idea? ********unfair partisan attack alert********** -ptmusic
|
|
#37
06-22-2005, 12:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Public Enemy No. 1
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] If liberating Iraqis was such a bad idea (in the minds of many).... [/ QUOTE ] Exactly whose minds believe liberating Iraqing was such a bad idea? ********unfair partisan attack alert********** -ptmusic [/ QUOTE ] *********sarcasm alert***********
|
|
#38
06-22-2005, 01:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Public Enemy No. 1
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] If liberating Iraqis was such a bad idea (in the minds of many).... [/ QUOTE ] Exactly whose minds believe liberating Iraqing was such a bad idea? ********unfair partisan attack alert********** -ptmusic [/ QUOTE ] *********sarcasm alert*********** [/ QUOTE ] Who was sarcastic? You, when you said that many believe liberating Iraqis was a bad idea? I doubt it. Nice try, though. -ptmusic
|
|
#39
06-22-2005, 08:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ignorance as point of view
[ QUOTE ]
Sigh... I guess I have to spell it out. I was speaking in broader hypothetical terms. [/ QUOTE ] There's nothing "broadly hypothetical" in what you claimed. Which was this little piece of stupidity: [ QUOTE ] It’s very possible that without [the US constitution] FDR or Truman could have cut a deal with the Soviets ... to slice the world up. [/ QUOTE ] Spelling it out, once more for ya: That's a false claim! What you claimed would not happen, actually did happen. And the "US constitution" had nothing at all to do with it.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
