Limelight Forums

Limelight Forums > Entertainment > News > US Launches Missiles At Syria
Full Version: US Launches Missiles At Syria
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Preditor

Apr 9, 2017, 06:58 PM
(Apr 9, 2017, 10:44 AM)Dig Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 9, 2017, 05:55 AM)Nevy Wrote: [ -> ]If Assad has used chemical weapon(s) in the past, which is the case, why would this time be any different? Why would you negate the fact that he HAS violated international law in the past and come to the conclusion that he wouldn't likely make use of chemical weapons again simply because it doesn't make sense. To say he wouldn't kill his own civilians is very uninformed since he has been doing just that for the past years. 

You're also foolish to think that the United States would launch a strategic military attack on a sovereign nation, which is currently backed by Iran and Russia, without absolute certainty in the evidence provided by US intelligence. Trump didn't coordinate this attack, this was simply something that he gave the go-ahead on based on the evidence they had. If you didn't know, nearly all of our allies including Australia, United Kingdom, France, and Israel had issued their strong support of this action. The Tomahawk missiles were a clear and concise message to the Syrian government that any further violation of international law would provoke action by the United States. This is also a message that can be seen from North Korea that any intimidation or violation will lead to a military response. 

Obama made it clear that he wouldn't take action to intimidation, however the time has changed for the United States to put some power behind it's punches.

Foolish to not follow with the flock? I think it's more foolish not to ask questions. We have a former congressman saying that it was most likely a false flag, a former UN ambassador claiming that Hillary Clinton and a few other politicians actually supplied the rebels with sarin gas awhile before the last attack happened in 2013, and well respected pulitzer prize winner Seymour Hersh also stating that during the last attack then President Obama left out many details to the public.

Quote:“If any of this was true, I don’t know why they couldn’t wait and take a look at it. In 2013, there were similar stories that didn’t go anywhere, because with a little bit of a pause, there was a resistance to it built in our Congress and in the American people. They thought that it was a fraud and nothing like that was happening, and right now, I just can’t think of how it could conceivably be what they claim, because it’s helping ISIS, because it’s helping Al-Qaeda.” -U.S Congressman Ron Paul 
You wanna know who else is currently in a war with Syria? ISIS. So either this means a total US occupation of the entire Middle East to also push through remaining ISIS territory all the way to the border of Iran, which I'm sure the Iranians and Russians will not be happy about. I'm not saying I'm against getting rid of ISIS, I'm just saying this war is not just going to encompass Syria.

Tons of anomalies and questionable factors are not being weighed into the main stream approach and it's not because they aren't aware of it, it's because they might not want people to fully grasp what has been going on in the Middle East in recent years. Maybe US Intelligence doesn't want you in on it? 

If you watch this following video, the situation is very similar to the one we're going through now.

https://youtu.be/4gXwhsVA6ZI

Quote:"Barack Obama did not tell the whole story this autumn when he tried to make the case that Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons attack near Damascus on 21 August. In some instances, he omitted important intelligence, and in others he presented assumptions as facts. Most significant, he failed to acknowledge something known to the US intelligence community: that the Syrian army is not the only party in the country’s civil war with access to sarin, the nerve agent that a UN study concluded – without assessing responsibility – had been used in the rocket attack. In the months before the attack, the American intelligence agencies produced a series of highly classified reports, culminating in a formal Operations Order – a planning document that precedes a ground invasion – citing evidence that the al-Nusra Front, a jihadi group affiliated with al-Qaida, had mastered the mechanics of creating sarin and was capable of manufacturing it in quantity. When the attack occurred al-Nusra should have been a suspect, but the administration cherry-picked intelligence to justify a strike against Assad." -Seymour M. Hersh
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-...hose-sarin

This is the same guy who reported on the coverup of military massacres during the Vietnam War, is it really that outlandish to speculate on this sort of issue? Fast forward to the modern day, we see the same exact event occur yet again and immediately the drums of war start pounding as if it were the fucking Balkans in 1914. Jesus how the fuck do we speculate at all if every time someone does they get called an idiot for not following the crowd that supports the story presented by the media. And funny how if you don't follow the headlines plastered on the American news networks and actually look at both sides of a conflict you get labeled as siding with the enemy because the red scare or some shit like that. That sort of cold war argumentative strategy is not only outdated but defeats the purpose of open discussion. 

https://www.newser.com/story/240999/russ...trike.html

And now the media is unanimously covering this one story to get the same american war machine that invaded Iraq rolling again. The kremlin is warning that we could be one step away from an all out war all so that we got to show the size of our dick to Xi Jinping and Kim Jung Un. And that isn't to say we haven't been on the brink of war in the recent past, but hey one of these times it might not be a false alarm and might actually break out. And yeah let's never question US intelligence agencies because it's not like they've ever been wrong about anything before.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_Pigs_Invasion

And you better get your tin foil hat on because the CIA and many other federal level agencies have been using lies and deception as one of their primary tools for ages now. They even planned a false flag on US soil just to justify a full scale war with Cuba in the 60s. It wasn't stopped till JFK put the plug on it and you see what happened to him, didn't ya?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

Quote:The proposals called for the (CIA) or other US government operatives to commit acts of terrorism against American civilians and military targets, blaming it on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba.

But yeah no, the CIA/feds nor any other government funded agency that has a history of meddling in world events would never lie to you to push hidden rhetoric. And it's absolutely foolish to question the narrative that everyone else is unanimously following because their TV told them so. /s

If this escalates to war, this will not be as simple as the Iraq War or Afghan War.
It's also very possible that Trump might be playing the world.

I understand your point and it's always valid to raise a question about it, however is it always right to assume that the government is up to no good? 

The 60s is also extremely understandable given the political tension and the cold war. Though this isn't the cold war anymore.

Why can't we give the government the benefit of doubt for just once? What if they're actually planning something that could be good? What if they don't want to release the whole story because it can compromise US special forces in the region or something like that? Why do we always have to believe that our own country is in the wrong?

It's not always bad to be a patriot for once to your country.

Nudelsalat im Panzer

Apr 9, 2017, 07:51 PM
(Apr 9, 2017, 05:02 PM)General Rickets Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 8, 2017, 06:32 PM)Nudelsalat im Panzer Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 8, 2017, 02:18 PM)General Rickets Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 8, 2017, 11:17 AM)Nudelsalat im Panzer Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 8, 2017, 01:04 AM)SourLemon Wrote: [ -> ]Why dont you fucking move to Syria and fucking join the rest of them since you seem to be on their side.

You pretty like the word "fucking"huh? I dont think your dad would like to see you beeing so evil  Rolleyes

Keep it on topic or take your flaming elsewhere. 

As for your statement you must be high or something, you just said you want World War Three.

lol

This is a serious thread, if you find it funny that there is a possibility of World War Three on the horizon then you need to re-evaluate your life.

Calm down for fuck sake. This is a discussion.

George

Apr 9, 2017, 08:11 PM
(Apr 9, 2017, 06:58 PM)Preditor Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 9, 2017, 10:44 AM)Dig Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 9, 2017, 05:55 AM)Nevy Wrote: [ -> ]If Assad has used chemical weapon(s) in the past, which is the case, why would this time be any different? Why would you negate the fact that he HAS violated international law in the past and come to the conclusion that he wouldn't likely make use of chemical weapons again simply because it doesn't make sense. To say he wouldn't kill his own civilians is very uninformed since he has been doing just that for the past years. 

You're also foolish to think that the United States would launch a strategic military attack on a sovereign nation, which is currently backed by Iran and Russia, without absolute certainty in the evidence provided by US intelligence. Trump didn't coordinate this attack, this was simply something that he gave the go-ahead on based on the evidence they had. If you didn't know, nearly all of our allies including Australia, United Kingdom, France, and Israel had issued their strong support of this action. The Tomahawk missiles were a clear and concise message to the Syrian government that any further violation of international law would provoke action by the United States. This is also a message that can be seen from North Korea that any intimidation or violation will lead to a military response. 

Obama made it clear that he wouldn't take action to intimidation, however the time has changed for the United States to put some power behind it's punches.

Foolish to not follow with the flock? I think it's more foolish not to ask questions. We have a former congressman saying that it was most likely a false flag, a former UN ambassador claiming that Hillary Clinton and a few other politicians actually supplied the rebels with sarin gas awhile before the last attack happened in 2013, and well respected pulitzer prize winner Seymour Hersh also stating that during the last attack then President Obama left out many details to the public.

Quote:“If any of this was true, I don’t know why they couldn’t wait and take a look at it. In 2013, there were similar stories that didn’t go anywhere, because with a little bit of a pause, there was a resistance to it built in our Congress and in the American people. They thought that it was a fraud and nothing like that was happening, and right now, I just can’t think of how it could conceivably be what they claim, because it’s helping ISIS, because it’s helping Al-Qaeda.” -U.S Congressman Ron Paul 
You wanna know who else is currently in a war with Syria? ISIS. So either this means a total US occupation of the entire Middle East to also push through remaining ISIS territory all the way to the border of Iran, which I'm sure the Iranians and Russians will not be happy about. I'm not saying I'm against getting rid of ISIS, I'm just saying this war is not just going to encompass Syria.

Tons of anomalies and questionable factors are not being weighed into the main stream approach and it's not because they aren't aware of it, it's because they might not want people to fully grasp what has been going on in the Middle East in recent years. Maybe US Intelligence doesn't want you in on it? 

If you watch this following video, the situation is very similar to the one we're going through now.

https://youtu.be/4gXwhsVA6ZI

Quote:"Barack Obama did not tell the whole story this autumn when he tried to make the case that Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons attack near Damascus on 21 August. In some instances, he omitted important intelligence, and in others he presented assumptions as facts. Most significant, he failed to acknowledge something known to the US intelligence community: that the Syrian army is not the only party in the country’s civil war with access to sarin, the nerve agent that a UN study concluded – without assessing responsibility – had been used in the rocket attack. In the months before the attack, the American intelligence agencies produced a series of highly classified reports, culminating in a formal Operations Order – a planning document that precedes a ground invasion – citing evidence that the al-Nusra Front, a jihadi group affiliated with al-Qaida, had mastered the mechanics of creating sarin and was capable of manufacturing it in quantity. When the attack occurred al-Nusra should have been a suspect, but the administration cherry-picked intelligence to justify a strike against Assad." -Seymour M. Hersh
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-...hose-sarin

This is the same guy who reported on the coverup of military massacres during the Vietnam War, is it really that outlandish to speculate on this sort of issue? Fast forward to the modern day, we see the same exact event occur yet again and immediately the drums of war start pounding as if it were the fucking Balkans in 1914. Jesus how the fuck do we speculate at all if every time someone does they get called an idiot for not following the crowd that supports the story presented by the media. And funny how if you don't follow the headlines plastered on the American news networks and actually look at both sides of a conflict you get labeled as siding with the enemy because the red scare or some shit like that. That sort of cold war argumentative strategy is not only outdated but defeats the purpose of open discussion. 

https://www.newser.com/story/240999/russ...trike.html

And now the media is unanimously covering this one story to get the same american war machine that invaded Iraq rolling again. The kremlin is warning that we could be one step away from an all out war all so that we got to show the size of our dick to Xi Jinping and Kim Jung Un. And that isn't to say we haven't been on the brink of war in the recent past, but hey one of these times it might not be a false alarm and might actually break out. And yeah let's never question US intelligence agencies because it's not like they've ever been wrong about anything before.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_Pigs_Invasion

And you better get your tin foil hat on because the CIA and many other federal level agencies have been using lies and deception as one of their primary tools for ages now. They even planned a false flag on US soil just to justify a full scale war with Cuba in the 60s. It wasn't stopped till JFK put the plug on it and you see what happened to him, didn't ya?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

Quote:The proposals called for the (CIA) or other US government operatives to commit acts of terrorism against American civilians and military targets, blaming it on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba.

But yeah no, the CIA/feds nor any other government funded agency that has a history of meddling in world events would never lie to you to push hidden rhetoric. And it's absolutely foolish to question the narrative that everyone else is unanimously following because their TV told them so. /s

If this escalates to war, this will not be as simple as the Iraq War or Afghan War.
It's also very possible that Trump might be playing the world.

I understand your point and it's always valid to raise a question about it, however is it always right to assume that the government is up to no good? 

The 60s is also extremely understandable given the political tension and the cold war. Though this isn't the cold war anymore.

Why can't we give the government the benefit of doubt for just once? What if they're actually planning something that could be good? What if they don't want to release the whole story because it can compromise US special forces in the region or something like that? Why do we always have to believe that our own country is in the wrong?

It's not always bad to be a patriot for once to your country.

Yet Americans believe in the right to bear arms in case they need to overthrow a tyrannical government? Surely if they deserve to be trusted, what's the need?

Preditor

Apr 9, 2017, 08:53 PM
(Apr 9, 2017, 08:11 PM)George Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 9, 2017, 06:58 PM)Preditor Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 9, 2017, 10:44 AM)Dig Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 9, 2017, 05:55 AM)Nevy Wrote: [ -> ]If Assad has used chemical weapon(s) in the past, which is the case, why would this time be any different? Why would you negate the fact that he HAS violated international law in the past and come to the conclusion that he wouldn't likely make use of chemical weapons again simply because it doesn't make sense. To say he wouldn't kill his own civilians is very uninformed since he has been doing just that for the past years. 

You're also foolish to think that the United States would launch a strategic military attack on a sovereign nation, which is currently backed by Iran and Russia, without absolute certainty in the evidence provided by US intelligence. Trump didn't coordinate this attack, this was simply something that he gave the go-ahead on based on the evidence they had. If you didn't know, nearly all of our allies including Australia, United Kingdom, France, and Israel had issued their strong support of this action. The Tomahawk missiles were a clear and concise message to the Syrian government that any further violation of international law would provoke action by the United States. This is also a message that can be seen from North Korea that any intimidation or violation will lead to a military response. 

Obama made it clear that he wouldn't take action to intimidation, however the time has changed for the United States to put some power behind it's punches.

Foolish to not follow with the flock? I think it's more foolish not to ask questions. We have a former congressman saying that it was most likely a false flag, a former UN ambassador claiming that Hillary Clinton and a few other politicians actually supplied the rebels with sarin gas awhile before the last attack happened in 2013, and well respected pulitzer prize winner Seymour Hersh also stating that during the last attack then President Obama left out many details to the public.

Quote:“If any of this was true, I don’t know why they couldn’t wait and take a look at it. In 2013, there were similar stories that didn’t go anywhere, because with a little bit of a pause, there was a resistance to it built in our Congress and in the American people. They thought that it was a fraud and nothing like that was happening, and right now, I just can’t think of how it could conceivably be what they claim, because it’s helping ISIS, because it’s helping Al-Qaeda.” -U.S Congressman Ron Paul 
You wanna know who else is currently in a war with Syria? ISIS. So either this means a total US occupation of the entire Middle East to also push through remaining ISIS territory all the way to the border of Iran, which I'm sure the Iranians and Russians will not be happy about. I'm not saying I'm against getting rid of ISIS, I'm just saying this war is not just going to encompass Syria.

Tons of anomalies and questionable factors are not being weighed into the main stream approach and it's not because they aren't aware of it, it's because they might not want people to fully grasp what has been going on in the Middle East in recent years. Maybe US Intelligence doesn't want you in on it? 

If you watch this following video, the situation is very similar to the one we're going through now.

https://youtu.be/4gXwhsVA6ZI

Quote:"Barack Obama did not tell the whole story this autumn when he tried to make the case that Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons attack near Damascus on 21 August. In some instances, he omitted important intelligence, and in others he presented assumptions as facts. Most significant, he failed to acknowledge something known to the US intelligence community: that the Syrian army is not the only party in the country’s civil war with access to sarin, the nerve agent that a UN study concluded – without assessing responsibility – had been used in the rocket attack. In the months before the attack, the American intelligence agencies produced a series of highly classified reports, culminating in a formal Operations Order – a planning document that precedes a ground invasion – citing evidence that the al-Nusra Front, a jihadi group affiliated with al-Qaida, had mastered the mechanics of creating sarin and was capable of manufacturing it in quantity. When the attack occurred al-Nusra should have been a suspect, but the administration cherry-picked intelligence to justify a strike against Assad." -Seymour M. Hersh
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-...hose-sarin

This is the same guy who reported on the coverup of military massacres during the Vietnam War, is it really that outlandish to speculate on this sort of issue? Fast forward to the modern day, we see the same exact event occur yet again and immediately the drums of war start pounding as if it were the fucking Balkans in 1914. Jesus how the fuck do we speculate at all if every time someone does they get called an idiot for not following the crowd that supports the story presented by the media. And funny how if you don't follow the headlines plastered on the American news networks and actually look at both sides of a conflict you get labeled as siding with the enemy because the red scare or some shit like that. That sort of cold war argumentative strategy is not only outdated but defeats the purpose of open discussion. 

https://www.newser.com/story/240999/russ...trike.html

And now the media is unanimously covering this one story to get the same american war machine that invaded Iraq rolling again. The kremlin is warning that we could be one step away from an all out war all so that we got to show the size of our dick to Xi Jinping and Kim Jung Un. And that isn't to say we haven't been on the brink of war in the recent past, but hey one of these times it might not be a false alarm and might actually break out. And yeah let's never question US intelligence agencies because it's not like they've ever been wrong about anything before.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_Pigs_Invasion

And you better get your tin foil hat on because the CIA and many other federal level agencies have been using lies and deception as one of their primary tools for ages now. They even planned a false flag on US soil just to justify a full scale war with Cuba in the 60s. It wasn't stopped till JFK put the plug on it and you see what happened to him, didn't ya?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

Quote:The proposals called for the (CIA) or other US government operatives to commit acts of terrorism against American civilians and military targets, blaming it on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba.

But yeah no, the CIA/feds nor any other government funded agency that has a history of meddling in world events would never lie to you to push hidden rhetoric. And it's absolutely foolish to question the narrative that everyone else is unanimously following because their TV told them so. /s

If this escalates to war, this will not be as simple as the Iraq War or Afghan War.
It's also very possible that Trump might be playing the world.

I understand your point and it's always valid to raise a question about it, however is it always right to assume that the government is up to no good? 

The 60s is also extremely understandable given the political tension and the cold war. Though this isn't the cold war anymore.

Why can't we give the government the benefit of doubt for just once? What if they're actually planning something that could be good? What if they don't want to release the whole story because it can compromise US special forces in the region or something like that? Why do we always have to believe that our own country is in the wrong?

It's not always bad to be a patriot for once to your country.

Yet Americans believe in the right to bear arms in case they need to overthrow a tyrannical government? Surely if they deserve to be trusted, what's the need?

Because there's a difference between being a Patriot and supporting a tyrannical government.

Dig

Apr 10, 2017, 01:43 AM
Quote: I understand your point and it's always valid to raise a question about it, however is it always right to assume that the government is up to no good?

The 60s is also extremely understandable given the political tension and the cold war. Though this isn't the cold war anymore.

Why can't we give the government the benefit of doubt for just once? What if they're actually planning something that could be good? What if they don't want to release the whole story because it can compromise US special forces in the region or something like that? Why do we always have to believe that our own country is in the wrong?

It's not always bad to be a patriot for once to your country.

Not at all, being a patriot is part of the reason I am so adamant in my belief that regardless of the story or who is supporting it we should analyze it and think critically without allowing CNN/FOX headlines to control our world view.

I am not suggesting we automatically assume the government has bad intentions, I'm saying we should allow no corporation nor federal level entity to control the way we think and unfortunately there's plenty of evidence to show that the modern coalition of corporations that essentially own the media have a very specific agenda when it comes to giving us our news.

I believe that there is no idea or value that is more reminiscent of America's founding fathers than the questioning of authority.
It's what brought this country into existence and if you look it up, you will find that many founding fathers left behind books and texts that pretty much tell us that if we want to maintain our great democracy we have to remain as diligent as the revolutionaries were in 1776.

That being said it is my full hope that President Trump does not have the wrong people whispering in his ear. I hope he remains the strong independent candidate I saw in 2016 and rejects neo-conservatism and continues with his plan to restore true American democracy. If not, we have much more work to do as Americans. 

I love America, it's the place I was born and when I learned the history of the nation I was so enthralled by it that I truly believed the place that I lived in today was the exact same place I had learned about. But the sad truth is that America has changed and the masses don't seem to realize it or they don't want to realize it. It's the reason I began to take a liking to Trump and his ideas.

"Every nation gets the government it deserves" -Joseph de Maistre

Lord Octagon

Apr 10, 2017, 02:36 AM
(Apr 9, 2017, 05:26 PM)George Wrote: [ -> ]Proxy wars are what will become the norm, especially in the Middle East where a lot of dictatorships are starting to collapse.
 

Dictatorship: Ruled by absolute authority.

Which dictatorships? Let's take a look at the governments of each Middle East country.

1. Bahrain - Constitutional monarchy and parliament, not a dictatorship as there is no absolute authority invested in a dictator, there is a constitution which restricts the King and there are split powers with a parliament.

2. Egypt - Semi-presidential (president, prime minister and cabinet). President el-Sisi was elected with more than 93% of the vote. A constiution restricts powers. There are split powers with the president and the parliament. Not a dictatorship

3. Iran - Parliament, president, supreme leader. The supreme leader, whilst not elected, does not wield all power, he is merely religious council as part of the Islamic Republic. President Hassan Rouhani was elected in 2013. No discrimination in running for parliament. There is a constitution which restricts powers, split powers between the president, supreme leader, and parliament. Not a dictatorship.

4. Iraq - Federal parliamentary republic. President Faud Masum was elected in 2014. Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi was approved by parliament in 2014. Constitution restricting powers and split powers between president and parliament. Not a dictatorship.

5. Israel - Parliamentary constitutional republic. President Reuven Rivlin was elected in 2014. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was elected again in 2015. Constitution restricts power, split power between president, prime minister and parliament. Not a dictatorship.

6. Jordan - Parliamentary, constitutional monarchy. Whilst there is a King, Abdullah II does not exercise all the power. Prime Minister Hani Al-Mulki was elected in 2016. Constitution restricts power, split power between king, prime minister and parliament. Not a dictatorship.

7. Kuwait - Constitutional monarchy, there is a National Assembly. The monarch does not exercise all power. The last general election was in 2016 which saw Jaber Al-Mubarak be appointed Prime Minister. All members of the National Assembly are independent from political parties. Constitution restricts powers, split powers between Emir, prime minister and National Assembly. Not a dictatorship. 

8. Lebanon - I covered the recent Lebanese presidential election, President Michel Aoun was elected by the democratically elected parliament in 2016. The parliamentary elections happened in 2009 (2014 election was postponed until 2017 due to 29 months of no president). Constitution restricts powers, split powers between president and parliament. Not a dictatorship

9. Oman - Now, Oman can be considered a dictatorship as it is an absolute monarchy, the Sultan has unrestricted power and the parliament cannot override his authority. That is one country so far.

10. Qatar - Constitutional monarchy. Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani has restricted power as per the constitution. Also, the elections for the Qatari Consultative Assembly are to be held in 2019, which will further dilute his power. Not a dictatorship

11. Saudi Arabia - Dictatorship. Full stop. That's two so far.

12. Syria - Semi-presidential. Regardless of what the media says, Syria is a democratic country. President Bashar Al-Assad was elected again in 2014, winning 88.7% of the votes. The People's Council of Syria had its last democratic election in 2016. Constitution restricts powers, split of powers between president and People's Council. Not a dictorship.

13. Turkey - Parliamentary constitutional republic. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan was elected in 2014, the next presidential election is in 2019. There is an elected parliament which then approves the appointment of the Prime Minister. Constitution restricts powers, split of powers between president and parliament. Not a dictorship

14. United Arab Emirates - Absolute monarchy to an extend. Although power is spread amongst several Emirs, the President is the defacto head. Dictatorship. That's three so far.

15. Yemen - Conflicts in Yemen, split powers. However, the people do elect a House of Representatives which is the  legislature of Yemen. Constitution restricts powers. Not a dictatorship.

So, out of 15 countries, 3 are defined as dictatorships. Saudi Arabia, Oman and the UAE. Are you seeing any serious opposition against the monarchy in those countries?

Preditor

Apr 10, 2017, 03:34 AM
(Apr 10, 2017, 01:43 AM)Dig Wrote: [ -> ]
Quote: I understand your point and it's always valid to raise a question about it, however is it always right to assume that the government is up to no good?

The 60s is also extremely understandable given the political tension and the cold war. Though this isn't the cold war anymore.

Why can't we give the government the benefit of doubt for just once? What if they're actually planning something that could be good? What if they don't want to release the whole story because it can compromise US special forces in the region or something like that? Why do we always have to believe that our own country is in the wrong?

It's not always bad to be a patriot for once to your country.

Not at all, being a patriot is part of the reason I am so adamant in my belief that regardless of the story or who is supporting it we should analyze it and think critically without allowing CNN/FOX headlines to control our world view.

I am not suggesting we automatically assume the government has bad intentions, I'm saying we should allow no corporation nor federal level entity to control the way we think and unfortunately there's plenty of evidence to show that the modern coalition of corporations that essentially own the media have a very specific agenda when it comes to giving us our news.

I believe that there is no idea or value that is more reminiscent of America's founding fathers than the questioning of authority.
It's what brought this country into existence and if you look it up, you will find that many founding fathers left behind books and texts that pretty much tell us that if we want to maintain our great democracy we have to remain as diligent as the revolutionaries were in 1776.

That being said it is my full hope that President Trump does not have the wrong people whispering in his ear. I hope he remains the strong independent candidate I saw in 2016 and rejects neo-conservatism and continues with his plan to restore true American democracy. If not, we have much more work to do as Americans. 

I love America, it's the place I was born and when I learned the history of the nation I was so enthralled by it that I truly believed the place that I lived in today was the exact same place I had learned about. But the sad truth is that America has changed and the masses don't seem to realize it or they don't want to realize it. It's the reason I began to take a liking to Trump and his ideas.

"Every nation gets the government it deserves" -Joseph de Maistre

I certainly agree even more with your statement in regards to media, I myself do not rely only on major media outlets like you spoke of. However I do disagree with your reasoning about neoconservatism. I do think that Trump is a very independent President, especially during the election. However my point is all because he does something that may seem to imply he's going against what he said does not mean he's switching sides against the American people.

America has changed greatly over the years from what its original intention was to be, for example isolationism. If now, anything its the opposite of what it was, which in my opinion is a good thing. 

Trump is not an idiot, he's certainly not and anyone that says he is are probably more mentally handicapped than they think. He is obviously a smart individual and I doubt he lets the influence of one or two people drive his thoughts. He's a BILLIONAIRE. If someone was as stuck up and snobby as he appears through the media than how would he ever become one in the first place?

The way I see it, the election is over and now, more than ever we need to support our country and stand united.

Daley

Apr 10, 2017, 02:47 PM
(Apr 9, 2017, 06:58 PM)Preditor Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 9, 2017, 10:44 AM)Dig Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 9, 2017, 05:55 AM)Nevy Wrote: [ -> ]If Assad has used chemical weapon(s) in the past, which is the case, why would this time be any different? Why would you negate the fact that he HAS violated international law in the past and come to the conclusion that he wouldn't likely make use of chemical weapons again simply because it doesn't make sense. To say he wouldn't kill his own civilians is very uninformed since he has been doing just that for the past years. 

You're also foolish to think that the United States would launch a strategic military attack on a sovereign nation, which is currently backed by Iran and Russia, without absolute certainty in the evidence provided by US intelligence. Trump didn't coordinate this attack, this was simply something that he gave the go-ahead on based on the evidence they had. If you didn't know, nearly all of our allies including Australia, United Kingdom, France, and Israel had issued their strong support of this action. The Tomahawk missiles were a clear and concise message to the Syrian government that any further violation of international law would provoke action by the United States. This is also a message that can be seen from North Korea that any intimidation or violation will lead to a military response. 

Obama made it clear that he wouldn't take action to intimidation, however the time has changed for the United States to put some power behind it's punches.

Foolish to not follow with the flock? I think it's more foolish not to ask questions. We have a former congressman saying that it was most likely a false flag, a former UN ambassador claiming that Hillary Clinton and a few other politicians actually supplied the rebels with sarin gas awhile before the last attack happened in 2013, and well respected pulitzer prize winner Seymour Hersh also stating that during the last attack then President Obama left out many details to the public.

Quote:“If any of this was true, I don’t know why they couldn’t wait and take a look at it. In 2013, there were similar stories that didn’t go anywhere, because with a little bit of a pause, there was a resistance to it built in our Congress and in the American people. They thought that it was a fraud and nothing like that was happening, and right now, I just can’t think of how it could conceivably be what they claim, because it’s helping ISIS, because it’s helping Al-Qaeda.” -U.S Congressman Ron Paul 
You wanna know who else is currently in a war with Syria? ISIS. So either this means a total US occupation of the entire Middle East to also push through remaining ISIS territory all the way to the border of Iran, which I'm sure the Iranians and Russians will not be happy about. I'm not saying I'm against getting rid of ISIS, I'm just saying this war is not just going to encompass Syria.

Tons of anomalies and questionable factors are not being weighed into the main stream approach and it's not because they aren't aware of it, it's because they might not want people to fully grasp what has been going on in the Middle East in recent years. Maybe US Intelligence doesn't want you in on it? 

If you watch this following video, the situation is very similar to the one we're going through now.

https://youtu.be/4gXwhsVA6ZI

Quote:"Barack Obama did not tell the whole story this autumn when he tried to make the case that Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons attack near Damascus on 21 August. In some instances, he omitted important intelligence, and in others he presented assumptions as facts. Most significant, he failed to acknowledge something known to the US intelligence community: that the Syrian army is not the only party in the country’s civil war with access to sarin, the nerve agent that a UN study concluded – without assessing responsibility – had been used in the rocket attack. In the months before the attack, the American intelligence agencies produced a series of highly classified reports, culminating in a formal Operations Order – a planning document that precedes a ground invasion – citing evidence that the al-Nusra Front, a jihadi group affiliated with al-Qaida, had mastered the mechanics of creating sarin and was capable of manufacturing it in quantity. When the attack occurred al-Nusra should have been a suspect, but the administration cherry-picked intelligence to justify a strike against Assad." -Seymour M. Hersh
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-...hose-sarin

This is the same guy who reported on the coverup of military massacres during the Vietnam War, is it really that outlandish to speculate on this sort of issue? Fast forward to the modern day, we see the same exact event occur yet again and immediately the drums of war start pounding as if it were the fucking Balkans in 1914. Jesus how the fuck do we speculate at all if every time someone does they get called an idiot for not following the crowd that supports the story presented by the media. And funny how if you don't follow the headlines plastered on the American news networks and actually look at both sides of a conflict you get labeled as siding with the enemy because the red scare or some shit like that. That sort of cold war argumentative strategy is not only outdated but defeats the purpose of open discussion. 

https://www.newser.com/story/240999/russ...trike.html

And now the media is unanimously covering this one story to get the same american war machine that invaded Iraq rolling again. The kremlin is warning that we could be one step away from an all out war all so that we got to show the size of our dick to Xi Jinping and Kim Jung Un. And that isn't to say we haven't been on the brink of war in the recent past, but hey one of these times it might not be a false alarm and might actually break out. And yeah let's never question US intelligence agencies because it's not like they've ever been wrong about anything before.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_Pigs_Invasion

And you better get your tin foil hat on because the CIA and many other federal level agencies have been using lies and deception as one of their primary tools for ages now. They even planned a false flag on US soil just to justify a full scale war with Cuba in the 60s. It wasn't stopped till JFK put the plug on it and you see what happened to him, didn't ya?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

Quote:The proposals called for the (CIA) or other US government operatives to commit acts of terrorism against American civilians and military targets, blaming it on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba.

But yeah no, the CIA/feds nor any other government funded agency that has a history of meddling in world events would never lie to you to push hidden rhetoric. And it's absolutely foolish to question the narrative that everyone else is unanimously following because their TV told them so. /s

If this escalates to war, this will not be as simple as the Iraq War or Afghan War.
It's also very possible that Trump might be playing the world.

I understand your point and it's always valid to raise a question about it, however is it always right to assume that the government is up to no good? 

The 60s is also extremely understandable given the political tension and the cold war. Though this isn't the cold war anymore.

Why can't we give the government the benefit of doubt for just once? What if they're actually planning something that could be good? What if they don't want to release the whole story because it can compromise US special forces in the region or something like that? Why do we always have to believe that our own country is in the wrong?

It's not always bad to be a patriot for once to your country.

Patriotism is being proud of things you did not do. American patriotism I do not understand. America has a dark history, with only a small amount of good, and a lot of bad. It's this attitude that sends 17 year olds into war and death. Invading countries for shady reasons. People die because they cannot afford medicine, cripleling study debts, and national debts. 
Oh, and lets just forget the mass scale privacy invasion by the NSA. Seems like everyone else has.

-phone

The Rock

Apr 10, 2017, 03:49 PM
America and their thing , they like to promote war , they create wars where they dont exist , they should promote peace instead , no wonder why most of world hates/dislike america , big country like this and have horrible image

Preditor

Apr 10, 2017, 06:45 PM
(Apr 10, 2017, 02:47 PM)Daley Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 9, 2017, 06:58 PM)Preditor Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 9, 2017, 10:44 AM)Dig Wrote: [ -> ]
(Apr 9, 2017, 05:55 AM)Nevy Wrote: [ -> ]If Assad has used chemical weapon(s) in the past, which is the case, why would this time be any different? Why would you negate the fact that he HAS violated international law in the past and come to the conclusion that he wouldn't likely make use of chemical weapons again simply because it doesn't make sense. To say he wouldn't kill his own civilians is very uninformed since he has been doing just that for the past years. 

You're also foolish to think that the United States would launch a strategic military attack on a sovereign nation, which is currently backed by Iran and Russia, without absolute certainty in the evidence provided by US intelligence. Trump didn't coordinate this attack, this was simply something that he gave the go-ahead on based on the evidence they had. If you didn't know, nearly all of our allies including Australia, United Kingdom, France, and Israel had issued their strong support of this action. The Tomahawk missiles were a clear and concise message to the Syrian government that any further violation of international law would provoke action by the United States. This is also a message that can be seen from North Korea that any intimidation or violation will lead to a military response. 

Obama made it clear that he wouldn't take action to intimidation, however the time has changed for the United States to put some power behind it's punches.

Foolish to not follow with the flock? I think it's more foolish not to ask questions. We have a former congressman saying that it was most likely a false flag, a former UN ambassador claiming that Hillary Clinton and a few other politicians actually supplied the rebels with sarin gas awhile before the last attack happened in 2013, and well respected pulitzer prize winner Seymour Hersh also stating that during the last attack then President Obama left out many details to the public.

Quote:“If any of this was true, I don’t know why they couldn’t wait and take a look at it. In 2013, there were similar stories that didn’t go anywhere, because with a little bit of a pause, there was a resistance to it built in our Congress and in the American people. They thought that it was a fraud and nothing like that was happening, and right now, I just can’t think of how it could conceivably be what they claim, because it’s helping ISIS, because it’s helping Al-Qaeda.” -U.S Congressman Ron Paul 
You wanna know who else is currently in a war with Syria? ISIS. So either this means a total US occupation of the entire Middle East to also push through remaining ISIS territory all the way to the border of Iran, which I'm sure the Iranians and Russians will not be happy about. I'm not saying I'm against getting rid of ISIS, I'm just saying this war is not just going to encompass Syria.

Tons of anomalies and questionable factors are not being weighed into the main stream approach and it's not because they aren't aware of it, it's because they might not want people to fully grasp what has been going on in the Middle East in recent years. Maybe US Intelligence doesn't want you in on it? 

If you watch this following video, the situation is very similar to the one we're going through now.

https://youtu.be/4gXwhsVA6ZI

Quote:"Barack Obama did not tell the whole story this autumn when he tried to make the case that Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons attack near Damascus on 21 August. In some instances, he omitted important intelligence, and in others he presented assumptions as facts. Most significant, he failed to acknowledge something known to the US intelligence community: that the Syrian army is not the only party in the country’s civil war with access to sarin, the nerve agent that a UN study concluded – without assessing responsibility – had been used in the rocket attack. In the months before the attack, the American intelligence agencies produced a series of highly classified reports, culminating in a formal Operations Order – a planning document that precedes a ground invasion – citing evidence that the al-Nusra Front, a jihadi group affiliated with al-Qaida, had mastered the mechanics of creating sarin and was capable of manufacturing it in quantity. When the attack occurred al-Nusra should have been a suspect, but the administration cherry-picked intelligence to justify a strike against Assad." -Seymour M. Hersh
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-...hose-sarin

This is the same guy who reported on the coverup of military massacres during the Vietnam War, is it really that outlandish to speculate on this sort of issue? Fast forward to the modern day, we see the same exact event occur yet again and immediately the drums of war start pounding as if it were the fucking Balkans in 1914. Jesus how the fuck do we speculate at all if every time someone does they get called an idiot for not following the crowd that supports the story presented by the media. And funny how if you don't follow the headlines plastered on the American news networks and actually look at both sides of a conflict you get labeled as siding with the enemy because the red scare or some shit like that. That sort of cold war argumentative strategy is not only outdated but defeats the purpose of open discussion. 

https://www.newser.com/story/240999/russ...trike.html

And now the media is unanimously covering this one story to get the same american war machine that invaded Iraq rolling again. The kremlin is warning that we could be one step away from an all out war all so that we got to show the size of our dick to Xi Jinping and Kim Jung Un. And that isn't to say we haven't been on the brink of war in the recent past, but hey one of these times it might not be a false alarm and might actually break out. And yeah let's never question US intelligence agencies because it's not like they've ever been wrong about anything before.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_Pigs_Invasion

And you better get your tin foil hat on because the CIA and many other federal level agencies have been using lies and deception as one of their primary tools for ages now. They even planned a false flag on US soil just to justify a full scale war with Cuba in the 60s. It wasn't stopped till JFK put the plug on it and you see what happened to him, didn't ya?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

Quote:The proposals called for the (CIA) or other US government operatives to commit acts of terrorism against American civilians and military targets, blaming it on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba.

But yeah no, the CIA/feds nor any other government funded agency that has a history of meddling in world events would never lie to you to push hidden rhetoric. And it's absolutely foolish to question the narrative that everyone else is unanimously following because their TV told them so. /s

If this escalates to war, this will not be as simple as the Iraq War or Afghan War.
It's also very possible that Trump might be playing the world.

I understand your point and it's always valid to raise a question about it, however is it always right to assume that the government is up to no good? 

The 60s is also extremely understandable given the political tension and the cold war. Though this isn't the cold war anymore.

Why can't we give the government the benefit of doubt for just once? What if they're actually planning something that could be good? What if they don't want to release the whole story because it can compromise US special forces in the region or something like that? Why do we always have to believe that our own country is in the wrong?

It's not always bad to be a patriot for once to your country.

Patriotism is being proud of things you did not do. American patriotism I do not understand. America has a dark history, with only a small amount of good, and a lot of bad. It's this attitude that sends 17 year olds into war and death. Invading countries for shady reasons. People die because they cannot afford medicine, cripleling study debts, and national debts. 
Oh, and lets just forget the mass scale privacy invasion by the NSA. Seems like everyone else has.

-phone


For starters no an outsider won't get it. So I don't expect you to. And to add to that this may seem a bit rough and blunt but it's the best way to describe it.

"Patriotism is being proud of things you did not do." That sounds pretty edgy. Secondly no that is not what patriotism is. I don't know where you were told that's what it is but you should certainly go take a drawback. How about we start with google?

[Image: e699c157f766a7b0777b76215e77798d.png]
"Vigorous support for one's country." Have I not ever been proud for my country? Have you assumed that as an American I have not done my own work for the good of my country? No, you don't know me so you should rethink that before you decide to say such words.

I think your entire paragraph is nothing but mainstream media driven more than this entire thread, so lets take it apart:

"Dark amount of history with not a lot of good." Okay, I can agree that not everything my country has done was good. But who are you to argue? Do you think that your country is also oh so innocent? There is a lot of good that has came from America, good in which I dare you to look into. For example:

1. The fucking internet was invented in america.

2. Airplanes.

3. Ipod, Ipad, Windows, pretty much all of the things you see in everyday life came originally from America. Including Wikipedia.

Those were just some examples of things you see TODAY as opposed to contributions from the country as a whole, which I'm willing to elaborate.

I can continue on forever but for the sake of this thread I will not go off topic.

"It's this attitude that sends 17 year olds to war and death" No, no and no. It is not that attitude. Only a small percent of US service personnel actually join due to patriotic desires. Most of our service personnel do it to escape the life they're currently in, or for economic gain and college tuition. 

(Here is a good example article if you do not believe me https://archive.defense.gov/news/newsart...x?id=65272 )

As for invading countries for shady reasons I would like you, if you can to inform me of what countries were invaded for shady reasons. I'll be surprised if you come up with more than just Iraq or the middle east.

"People die because they cannot afford medicine, cripleling study debts, and national debts. " No, they don't die because of that. Everyone is allowed healthcare to the bare minimum as doctors here take oaths to preserve life to the best they can. But like food, healthcare and education here are a service. You cannot walk into a store and demand the best loaf of bread they have, then expect to get it for free can you? No, you can't. The same applies to healthcare. Doctors and other medical personnel require ways to have economic productivity, so they sell their services to support their own lives.

*GASP* Yes I don't believe in free healthcare. I'm willing to debate it more if you have an issue. The same applies with college tuition. It is not mandatory to attend college and you can get a perfectly suitable job that can keep you alive without it. They don't "die" from student loans, I would know this personally and more importantly I would know that you can navigate around owing student debt.

National Debt I'll give you that one.

"Oh, and lets just forget the mass scale privacy invasion by the NSA. Seems like everyone else has." Sorry bud, I would rather the government look at my porn history knowing that I'd be safer from a terrorist blowing me up outside than risk it not happening.

The program itself has ruined many potential terrorist attacks over the years, saving lives. You certainly over exaggerate the issue, and I want to know why you think it's such a bad thing. Of course my privacy is important but from what I've gathered with my training in law enforcement is that honest living people do not mind as much about privacy as do those with not so clear intentions.

Though all in all I can understand how the Patriot Act can seem like a bad thing, but our country is still more free, and in my opinion more free than any other country in the world. Thus why I am proud to be american, also leading to why I am a Patriot.

You see places in the world, such as the middle east where a lot of everyday freedoms you enjoy are stripped and taken away. Look at North Korea for example, not all of us are fortunate enough to be born in a first world country. Don't take that for granted.

Throughout history America has always represented the image of creating your own fortune and your own dream, hence the American Dream. It is the land of production and a place where dreams come true. It's a place where as a country, even despite our political differences we still band together throughout times of war and terror. For example Hurricane Katrina, or 9/11. Regardless of who caused it everyone came together as a country and did our best to fix it. You don't see that everywhere. In many other places you watch as people fend for themselves without aid, or without friendship. 

Our country is more divided than ever at the current moment in time, but if it comes to an outside threat I am willing to bet that just like in the second world war, we can all come together. That's what patriotism is. It's not just celebrating the fourth of july or being proud of things that happened in the past. It's being loyal to your country no matter what others across the world say.

Archer

Apr 10, 2017, 07:13 PM
No offense but...
US lied about Iraq,it lied about Afghanstan,it lied about Libya and you expect them to tell the truth in Syria?

Daley

Apr 10, 2017, 08:06 PM
For starters no an outsider won't get it. So I don't expect you to. And to add to that this may seem a bit rough and blunt but it's the best way to describe it.

Outsiders, figures.  I've been to America, and I have several American friends, I have heard a lot of good and bad, but what I do know is that people in the military are often idealized. I am an "Outsider" in your words, I am not born there, I am not a citizen of your country, but that attitude is very dangerous.

"Vigorous support for one's country." Have I not ever been proud for my country? Have you assumed that as an American I have not done my own work for the good of my country? No, you don't know me so you should rethink that before you decide to say such words.

You cannot change the country by yourself, it's the general attitude of a country, or the people controlling it. You cannot blame an entire country for that, unless they allow it, and do not take measures, if they can.

I think your entire paragraph is nothing but mainstream media driven more than this entire thread, so lets take it apart:
Ugh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index
Besides, we have a lot of media, free, independent, and some funded by the government, directly or otherwise. Plenty of sources to get information for, and to verify.

"Dark amount of history with not a lot of good." Okay, I can agree that not everything my country has done was good. But who are you to argue? Do you think that your country is also oh so innocent? There is a lot of good that has came from America, good in which I dare you to look into. For example:

I never claimed nor said that your country has not done anything good, but this could be something brought up about almost any country. 

1. The fucking internet was invented in america.

2. Airplanes.

3. Ipod, Ipad, Windows, pretty much all of the things you see in everyday life came originally from America. Including Wikipedia.

Those were just some examples of things you see TODAY as opposed to contributions from the country as a whole, which I'm willing to elaborate.

I can continue on forever but for the sake of this thread I will not go off topic.

"It's this attitude that sends 17 year olds to war and death" No, no and no. It is not that attitude. Only a small percent of US service personnel actually join due to patriotic desires. Most of our service personnel do it to escape the life they're currently in, or for economic gain and college tuition.

So, you are telling me that they either do not like the life they have in your country, don't have money, or education, which makes them join the military. Right. I don't see your point here?

(Here is a good example article if you do not believe me https://archive.defense.gov/news/newsarti...x?id=65272 )

As for invading countries for shady reasons I would like you, if you can to inform me of what countries were invaded for shady reasons. I'll be surprised if you come up with more than just Iraq or the middle east.

You can't just dismiss that matter, a lot of lives where lost on both sides, for no good reason. It accomplished nothing. But I expected you to brush over it. I wouldn't, no matter if it was my country or not.

My country focused on trading in the past, including slaves, we did a lot of horrible things, and we are not proud of it, but at school, they tell us about it, so we do not repeat our self. I've talked to several Americans, and non of them have been told about what happened in your country, not the genocide they committed against the native population of "America".

"People die because they cannot afford medicine, cripleling study debts, and national debts. " No, they don't die because of that. Everyone is allowed healthcare to the bare minimum as doctors here take oaths to preserve life to the best they can. But like food, healthcare and education here are a service. You cannot walk into a store and demand the best loaf of bread they have, then expect to get it for free can you? No, you can't. The same applies to healthcare. Doctors and other medical personnel require ways to have economic productivity, so they sell their services to support their own lives.

There are plenty of people with disabilities, or other issues that prevent them from making money in such a way, there are plenty of stories like this, if people fall on their faces, or lose their job, sure, they get the basic treatment, but they get left with a debt, or they simply cannot afford to pay for their prescribed drugs.

https://www.rxrights.org/americans-cant-...-medicine/

*GASP* Yes I don't believe in free healthcare. I'm willing to debate it more if you have an issue. The same applies with college tuition. It is not mandatory to attend college and you can get a perfectly suitable job that can keep you alive without it. They don't "die" from student loans, I would know this personally and more importantly I would know that you can navigate around owing student debt.

You are free to pick what systems you have in place, and as a country to decided if you want this or not. And you are entitled to your opinions. However, personally I don't think it's the right move.

"Oh, and lets just forget the mass scale privacy invasion by the NSA. Seems like everyone else has." Sorry bud, I would rather the government look at my porn history knowing that I'd be safer from a terrorist blowing me up outside than risk it not happening.

It could have been put to a vote, as it should have been, or been brought up in senate, rather then just done, it's against the law to do what they did, yet you all seem alright with it.

The program itself has ruined many potential terrorist attacks over the years, saving lives. You certainly over exaggerate the issue, and I want to know why you think it's such a bad thing. Of course my privacy is important but from what I've gathered with my training in law enforcement is that honest living people do not mind as much about privacy as do those with not so clear intentions.

Though all in all I can understand how the Patriot Act can seem like a bad thing, but our country is still more free, and in my opinion more free than any other country in the world. Thus why I am proud to be american, also leading to why I am a Patriot.

You see places in the world, such as the middle east where a lot of everyday freedoms you enjoy are stripped and taken away. Look at North Korea for example, not all of us are fortunate enough to be born in a first world country. Don't take that for granted.

Never said I did, I appreciate where I live, and I am fortunate, but this does not mean that I will blindly follow my country, and agree with their decisions, government like anyone else need to be told off when they go to far.

Throughout history America has always represented the image of creating your own fortune and your own dream, hence the American Dream. It is the land of production and a place where dreams come true. It's a place where as a country, even despite our political differences we still band together throughout times of war and terror. For example Hurricane Katrina, or 9/11. Regardless of who caused it everyone came together as a country and did our best to fix it. You don't see that everywhere. In many other places you watch as people fend for themselves without aid, or without friendship.

Our country is more divided than ever at the current moment in time, but if it comes to an outside threat I am willing to bet that just like in the second world war, we can all come together. That's what patriotism is. It's not just celebrating the fourth of july or being proud of things that happened in the past. It's being loyal to your country no matter what others across the world say.

It took you a while to join in on that war, and only because your hand got forced, sure you provided support, but there was no full scale involvement until provoked. America has their own mindset, and directive to the world, they are in the UN yet they operate outside of it as they please. The issue I have is your attitude, it's all about you, we are just all "Outsiders". Loyalty is earned, not given, given because you believe they will act in your best interest, and depending on what kind of person you are, those around you.

But I also do not want to generalize, I know that some comments I made does not include everyone, but I do know there is an issue, and that if your America did not have such a big military presence, they would not be allowed to conduct the way they do now.

Anyways, Feel free to write a reply, make counter arguments, but that's it for me. If we go any further it will end in either me, or you repeating yourself, you are entitled to your opinions, but I am entitled to disagree. What I stated is about the concept of patriotism, and not individuals, you cannot generalize, yet you can recognize a group of people with a similar mindset, which I disagree with.

SourLemon

Apr 10, 2017, 08:15 PM
You would actually be surprised at the large amount of people who are in the military for patriotic reasons. Of course you have those who do it for college, but that definitely isn't the majority

SourLemon

Apr 10, 2017, 08:43 PM
Also really the only reason the US operates outside the UN is because the security council has Russia and China on it who both usually go against American goals and basically tie their hands, so you can't really blame them, Russia does as well with Ukraine as well as their involvement in Syria, you wouldn't expect Russia to vote for UN operations against Assad while supporting him, that'd make no sense, so the US acting on its own is the only way for something to happen.

Preditor

Apr 10, 2017, 08:50 PM
(Apr 10, 2017, 08:06 PM)Daley Wrote: [ -> ]For starters no an outsider won't get it. So I don't expect you to. And to add to that this may seem a bit rough and blunt but it's the best way to describe it.

Outsiders, figures.  I've been to America, and I have several American friends, I have heard a lot of good and bad, but what I do know is that people in the military are often idealized. I am an "Outsider" in your words, I am not born there, I am not a citizen of your country, but that attitude is very dangerous.

"Vigorous support for one's country." Have I not ever been proud for my country? Have you assumed that as an American I have not done my own work for the good of my country? No, you don't know me so you should rethink that before you decide to say such words.

You cannot change the country by yourself, it's the general attitude of a country, or the people controlling it. You cannot blame an entire country for that, unless they allow it, and do not take measures, if they can.

I think your entire paragraph is nothing but mainstream media driven more than this entire thread, so lets take it apart:
Ugh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index
Besides, we have a lot of media, free, independent, and some funded by the government, directly or otherwise. Plenty of sources to get information for, and to verify.

"Dark amount of history with not a lot of good." Okay, I can agree that not everything my country has done was good. But who are you to argue? Do you think that your country is also oh so innocent? There is a lot of good that has came from America, good in which I dare you to look into. For example:

I never claimed nor said that your country has not done anything good, but this could be something brought up about almost any country. 

1. The fucking internet was invented in america.

2. Airplanes.

3. Ipod, Ipad, Windows, pretty much all of the things you see in everyday life came originally from America. Including Wikipedia.

Those were just some examples of things you see TODAY as opposed to contributions from the country as a whole, which I'm willing to elaborate.

I can continue on forever but for the sake of this thread I will not go off topic.

"It's this attitude that sends 17 year olds to war and death" No, no and no. It is not that attitude. Only a small percent of US service personnel actually join due to patriotic desires. Most of our service personnel do it to escape the life they're currently in, or for economic gain and college tuition.

So, you are telling me that they either do not like the life they have in your country, don't have money, or education, which makes them join the military. Right. I don't see your point here?

(Here is a good example article if you do not believe me https://archive.defense.gov/news/newsarti...x?id=65272 )

As for invading countries for shady reasons I would like you, if you can to inform me of what countries were invaded for shady reasons. I'll be surprised if you come up with more than just Iraq or the middle east.

You can't just dismiss that matter, a lot of lives where lost on both sides, for no good reason. It accomplished nothing. But I expected you to brush over it. I wouldn't, no matter if it was my country or not.

My country focused on trading in the past, including slaves, we did a lot of horrible things, and we are not proud of it, but at school, they tell us about it, so we do not repeat our self. I've talked to several Americans, and non of them have been told about what happened in your country, not the genocide they committed against the native population of "America".

"People die because they cannot afford medicine, cripleling study debts, and national debts. " No, they don't die because of that. Everyone is allowed healthcare to the bare minimum as doctors here take oaths to preserve life to the best they can. But like food, healthcare and education here are a service. You cannot walk into a store and demand the best loaf of bread they have, then expect to get it for free can you? No, you can't. The same applies to healthcare. Doctors and other medical personnel require ways to have economic productivity, so they sell their services to support their own lives.

There are plenty of people with disabilities, or other issues that prevent them from making money in such a way, there are plenty of stories like this, if people fall on their faces, or lose their job, sure, they get the basic treatment, but they get left with a debt, or they simply cannot afford to pay for their prescribed drugs.

https://www.rxrights.org/americans-cant-...-medicine/

*GASP* Yes I don't believe in free healthcare. I'm willing to debate it more if you have an issue. The same applies with college tuition. It is not mandatory to attend college and you can get a perfectly suitable job that can keep you alive without it. They don't "die" from student loans, I would know this personally and more importantly I would know that you can navigate around owing student debt.

You are free to pick what systems you have in place, and as a country to decided if you want this or not. And you are entitled to your opinions. However, personally I don't think it's the right move.

"Oh, and lets just forget the mass scale privacy invasion by the NSA. Seems like everyone else has." Sorry bud, I would rather the government look at my porn history knowing that I'd be safer from a terrorist blowing me up outside than risk it not happening.

It could have been put to a vote, as it should have been, or been brought up in senate, rather then just done, it's against the law to do what they did, yet you all seem alright with it.

The program itself has ruined many potential terrorist attacks over the years, saving lives. You certainly over exaggerate the issue, and I want to know why you think it's such a bad thing. Of course my privacy is important but from what I've gathered with my training in law enforcement is that honest living people do not mind as much about privacy as do those with not so clear intentions.

Though all in all I can understand how the Patriot Act can seem like a bad thing, but our country is still more free, and in my opinion more free than any other country in the world. Thus why I am proud to be american, also leading to why I am a Patriot.

You see places in the world, such as the middle east where a lot of everyday freedoms you enjoy are stripped and taken away. Look at North Korea for example, not all of us are fortunate enough to be born in a first world country. Don't take that for granted.

Never said I did, I appreciate where I live, and I am fortunate, but this does not mean that I will blindly follow my country, and agree with their decisions, government like anyone else need to be told off when they go to far.

Throughout history America has always represented the image of creating your own fortune and your own dream, hence the American Dream. It is the land of production and a place where dreams come true. It's a place where as a country, even despite our political differences we still band together throughout times of war and terror. For example Hurricane Katrina, or 9/11. Regardless of who caused it everyone came together as a country and did our best to fix it. You don't see that everywhere. In many other places you watch as people fend for themselves without aid, or without friendship.

Our country is more divided than ever at the current moment in time, but if it comes to an outside threat I am willing to bet that just like in the second world war, we can all come together. That's what patriotism is. It's not just celebrating the fourth of july or being proud of things that happened in the past. It's being loyal to your country no matter what others across the world say.

It took you a while to join in on that war, and only because your hand got forced, sure you provided support, but there was no full scale involvement until provoked. America has their own mindset, and directive to the world, they are in the UN yet they operate outside of it as they please. The issue I have is your attitude, it's all about you, we are just all "Outsiders". Loyalty is earned, not given, given because you believe they will act in your best interest, and depending on what kind of person you are, those around you.

But I also do not want to generalize, I know that some comments I made does not include everyone, but I do know there is an issue, and that if your America did not have such a big military presence, they would not be allowed to conduct the way they do now.

Anyways, Feel free to write a reply, make counter arguments, but that's it for me. If we go any further it will end in either me, or you repeating yourself, you are entitled to your opinions, but I am entitled to disagree. What I stated is about the concept of patriotism, and not individuals, you cannot generalize, yet you can recognize a group of people with a similar mindset, which I disagree with.

I find your replies interesting, however most of what you're saying is based off what your friends told you or wikipedia.

But I will try my best to explain everything you've highlighted.

For the first part about enlisting, no I am not telling you. I am simply saying that patriotism is a smaller reason compared to what you believe it is. In reality there are many different and unique reasons and your phrase that patriotism is sending 17 year olds to their death is foolish.

I would really like to see this argument of the US school system not teaching US history, because me personally, I have taken advanced US history courses myself and I have been taught about our country's history. Including with the native Americans and all you have highlighted. Please direct me to these friends of yours that say otherwise because in my opinion with everyone that I know that is american they will have to disagree with you. I only see this argument from Non-Americans, and mainly people in the UK may I add.

And as for your disability issue, there are already other government programs that aid people with disabilities, this was not your statement you said originally. Instead you were targeting how our healthcare isn't free, and I simply told you why. Healthcare is a service and no one is entitled to it. Just like food or other services that are a necessity.

As for the NSA, heads up bud, it was put to a vote. Google the Patriot Act. Hence my originally comment, you should do more research before poking me with that rod. So yes I am alright with it because it was brought in LEGALLY.

I'm not blindly following my government, if you refer to what I said to dig in regards to his post I also do as much research on a topic as I can before making a decision. I am CHOOSING to trust my government and follow it. Whether you agree or not.

What war are we talking about? I'm going to assume you mean the second world war, so let me correct your statement. For starters we were much more involved than just giving the UK materials to fight Germany. We sent our own soldiers, airmen, and sailors to aid you and more importantly our own ships were attacked by German submarines. We were virtually already at war with Germany, we were only lacking an official declaration. (here is a good example if you want to elaborate more on the subject https://nationalinterest.org/feature/wha...r-ii-17573 )

Now I'm really going to sound like an ass, but it's just the way the world spins. You can complain all you want about how America does this and America does that, but of course it will act in its best interest. It acts for its people, hell even Trump lays it flat out - America first. And as an American citizen I would rather it be my country first than some small African country across the world. Hate me all you want but to generalize your rant about that - too bad. You have your opinion and I have mine but that won't change the world.

And surely, if our military wasn't as effective as it is now of course we wouldn't be able to do anything. But it is. And without it good luck dealing with Russia, you can claim all the bad things you want but end of the day it's still us that's keeping NATO strong and protecting Europe.

If you don't believe me go look at NATO's statistics, better yet I can summarize it for you.

Annually members of NATO are required to donate 2% of their GDP, but unfortunately:

[Image: Pg9TUBG.jpg]

This was from 2016.

Bottom line, you can hate and loathe America as much as you want, but end of the day you should be more grateful than rude about it.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Limelight Forums > Entertainment > News > US Launches Missiles At Syria