Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 5/4/03 09:29 PM, Ninja_Scientist wrote:

Seems like gay ninja will rape a dog.

to everyone that read the quote earlier bout the US savin the world from hitler...

that is why america is hated, cuz we say that, and we believe it to be true...

im well aware that canada and britain along with australia were also part of the normandy invasion... as i am that yes the US just chinchilled while europe/asia was kickin the shit out of each other...

but lets not forget, in any DEMOCRACY the people need a reason to go to war... the people were all isloationist, thinking if we let them fight it would solve the problem itself, not until the US was attacked did we suit up...

imagine if you were in America at the time of WW2... 2 huge oceans seperating you from 2 big wars... why get involved???

it actually rings true to today... americans still wanna be isolationalist, just realize they cant since it would cause more harm than good... (nk VS sk, china VS taiwan, no troops in germany, means the german army must once again be risen up, and im sure france, poland and russia would just LOVE that...)

At 5/5/03 05:52 PM, BlackPaladin87 wrote:

some stupid gay joke cause ninja proved them wrong

you do know ninja is a chick, right?

America WAS involved in WWII- they traded with the allies, and the germans literally considered that an act of war, which is why the civilian supply ships were attacked.
Also, you cannot say America saved Europe- after all, the germans were being fought off with the blood of Canadians, Austrillians, Bristish, Russians, and hundreds of other countries.....weither or not America joined the war would have stopped the Allies from winning is debatable, since the Americans were simply re-enforcements. Hell, American didn't even story Berlin- Russia did. And Americans didn't story Rome, either- Canadians did(with the help of a revoltution, but still). America had its own personal vendenna with Japan, so they took over with that, but the European front was fought by many more people than americans for many more years- hell, wasn't America the nation that has spent the least amount of time in the war in both World Wars? they joined later in the game in both.....

Please at least scan this as it is very long. I tried to be brief, but I legitemately want to bounce my ideas off of all of you as I'll need your opinions in the future.

What would happen if America immediately withdrew it's forces from EVERYWHERE? The more we are boo'd and protested the more Americans say that. I for one believe that everywhere we are protested, we should immediately withdraw from. No more protection, no more peace, no more BIG America making everyone place nice. Lets go back to the way we were before the World Wars, removing ourselves from only those countries who don't like us. You protest? We leave. Simple. No more problems. No money, no aid, no armies, no rescue, no technology, no trade. You deal.

Think about it, when's the last time you spit in the bartender's face and then bought a drink from him or asked him for advice?

America is not perfect, we are dix, really(see list).
But we also try to be genuinely good and everywhere we turn people spit in our faces for it, France continues to spit in our face for helping the people of Iraq. When I go into politics our foreign policies will change....(read on for America's faults)

The world hates America because: 1. We are more powerful than anyone else, 2. We are too damned arrogant about it, 3. We have a lot of evil people here as well as a lot of good people here, 4. We are too damned arrogant, 5. We are too damned powerful, 6. Our cultural influence is like a really sweet smelling fragrance, at first it's nice and you enjoy it, but the stronger the smell gets the more you either like it or really start getting sick of it.

Final Thought: When there is a culture that becomes as successful as the American culture, then let that culture tell the American culture how bad it is. I mean seriously.

This is "sort of" related to this topic. Just thought it would interest some people here.

Here's an issue that was published a while back in Texas (while Bush was the Governor there):

Apparently, a group of people were on a tour of the Governor's office. While on a tour, they passed by the room that Bush was in. Bush, unfortunately, was busy signing papers and didn't notice the small group of people outside his room. The papers he just happened to be signing were documents that needed his approval for the death penalty to be enforced on certain individuals.

After the papers were handed to him, Bush looked up at the secretary that gave him the papers and said, "So, there are no White people or women on these, right?" The man responded that there wasn't. Bush said, "Good, the last time I put a woman to death, I got hell from the public." Then Bush signed the wavers without reading any of them, and gave them to his secretary.

And now this man is our president.

NEW Bush quote!

"Weapons will untimately be found in Iraq!"

.....but haven't yet.

So, we fought this whole war "just to find out if they have weapons?"

That's not really a war then, is it? So now big bad America is fighting a weapon-less people. Isn't a war when two groups with weapons fight one another, and not when one group bombs another that has no way to defend itself?

What if they don't have weapons in the long run? Then what will this war have been for?

At 5/5/03 10:55 PM, Ninja_Scientist wrote: So big bad America is fought a weapon-less people...

"Isn't a war when two groups with (equal) weapons fight one another, and not when one group bombs another that has no (possible) way to defend itself?"

AYE! Well said!!. Goodonya N-Sci.

** untwists own tangled heart-strings **

..it's important for (us) foreigners to hear young Americans who know fully well what a scam has been perpetrated in the name of.. "a safer planet"

<fake red-neck voice> "..NO jackasses, it was all about that EVIL TYRANT - Saddam Insane !!!"

Saddam of-course has played his part; (early) curtailing of research, allowing inspectors (late) full access, dismantling missiles, not pre-ordering the distruction of bridges, not using gas on advancing US troops, and err, NOT leaving Iraq for a casual family holiday to avert war in the 1st place :]

Meanwhile, more and more Iraqis will get gunned down by US bullets for chanting in Arabic while throwing shoes and stones in continued protest, and (before US troops are finally pulled out) ppl will be heard to say, "Ya-know? That Saddam wasn't so bad after all"

So, despite what US Commanders suggest (hollow words of victory as the deck of cards witch-hunt continues) history will actually record G.W.2 as yet-another heavily mis-matched Illegal War of American Aggression.

True Judge Volt, I'm from NZ and from where I stand it looks like madness

Witness the way George Bush mocks his enemies and revels in his $1-billion-a-day victory over one of the weakest nations on earth. Witness how fanatically determined he is to whip Saddam’s ass, no matter what the cost.

After World War II, America’s talk of freedom and dignity inspired the world. Since then its moral fiber has gradually eroded – it has grown decadent and devolved into a brand. America(tm) is a corporate-run, hollow nation in a constant crisis of depression, crime, obesity and excess. It no longer has the guts to take on an enemy in face to face combat – it likes to “win” its wars from 40,000 feet, and only if the people back home can keep shopping and sipping soda while the bombs fall in their name. Rather than adjusting and accommodating and being fleet of foot, declining superpowers try to cement their slipping preeminence into an exploitative system; they try to turn their Autumn into a new Spring. Rome did it, the Brits did it, and now America is following suit.

I'm just fucking dreading the day when the nations who lived complacently in America’s shadow, will have to come up with system-level solutions to the geo-eco-politico-military mess left behind by American superiority.

Arrrgh.. I'm going to sleep.

I hate when people call him Saddam Insane.

MyAssiZB; u from NZ, but living in Aus ..or other way round?

$1-billion-a-day war from 40,000 feet (..or 1000km!!)

sure, but it's not just the ridiculous cost that bothers me.

9-11 was a low-tech approach to terrorism, but compare that to the American response, where the worlds latest, best and supposedly greatest technologies are still only used to kill more efficiently foreign people in foreign lands with differing views.

"a threat to America" - my ass!

At 5/6/03 12:01 PM, Judge_VOLT wrote: 9-11 was a low-tech approach to terrorism, but compare that to the American response, where the worlds latest, best and supposedly greatest technologies are still only used to kill more efficiently foreign people in foreign lands with differing views.

"a threat to America" - my ass!

9/11 was done ewith kitchen knives. 16 people were killed in a nightclub when someone sprayed deoderant in the air. Everyone panicked and 16 people got trampled.

At 5/5/03 10:45 PM, Creation27 wrote: What would happen if America immediately withdrew it's forces from EVERYWHERE?

germany would rebuild its army russia would get scared cuz they remember 50 years ago...

china would invade taiwan, there goes the place that makes all the cool shit...

nk VS sk would stay the same cuz sk wants a unified peaceful korea, and nk wouldnt gain anything against the better trained sk

japan would have to rebuild its army, china korea and many other pacific islands will remember what happened 50 years ago...

iraq would be invaded by iran, causing iran to be a world power with its new found oil

israel would be building its army up for the inevitable

The more we are boo'd and protested the more Americans say that. I for one believe that everywhere we are protested, we should immediately withdraw from. No more protection, no more peace, no more BIG America making everyone place nice.

well the above will happen if we leave, if u dont care about russia, china, germany, japan, korea and iran playing the arms race game super, and since china and russia are streghtening then so does the US... which im sure would be great for our hurtin' economy

Lets go back to the way we were before the World Wars, removing ourselves from only those countries who don't like us. You protest? We leave. Simple. No more problems. No money, no aid, no armies, no rescue, no technology, no trade. You deal.

actually it would cause many more problems

Think about it, when's the last time you spit in the bartender's face and then bought a drink from him or asked him for advice?

this is way over -simplfying the problem...

America is not perfect, we are dix, really(see list).
But we also try to be genuinely good and everywhere we turn people spit in our faces for it, France continues to spit in our face for helping the people of Iraq. When I go into politics our foreign policies will change....(read on for America's faults)

um... this foreign policy u have called for already will meet with a ton of criticism, domestically and internationally, but hey if ur ready to let the world fall into a world war scenario with nukes go ahead...

if ur going to collge: make sure you take some international relations classes, then u should learn about traditional theory, also toss on the mid-east classes if possible,

The world hates America because: 1. We are more powerful than anyone else, 2. We are too damned arrogant about it, 3. We have a lot of evil people here as well as a lot of good people here, 4. We are too damned arrogant, 5. We are too damned powerful, 6. Our cultural influence is like a really sweet smelling fragrance, at first it's nice and you enjoy it, but the stronger the smell gets the more you either like it or really start getting sick of it.

all of these are true, but just remember, germany and russia would not have anyone else in germany to keep the countries seperate...

Final Thought: When there is a culture that becomes as successful as the American culture, then let that culture tell the American culture how bad it is. I mean seriously.

define a successful culture, lets not forget the american culture is 225+ years old, iraq, china have a 4000 year old culture... france, britain, russia have at least 700 years of culture, not to mention african cultures are way older than the US...

the stuff makes sense but it inherently flawed in your lack of knowing what would happen afterwards... HENCE why there is a difference between knowing POLITICS, and knowing current events... the most logical answer is usually politically impossible to achieve...

germany would rebuild its army russia would get scared cuz they remember 50 years ago...

.....I think you're a little confused with years. Germany has already rebuilt most of it's army, if not all of it. And sense when do we have American's "on guard" in Germany? Also, Germany invaded it's surrounding territory, Belgium, and then France in WWII. Russia didn' t get invaded towards the end, and the Germans didn' t even make it all the way due to the weather. So, I don't think Russia would care even if that was the case.
-------------------
china would invade taiwan, there goes the place that makes all the cool shit...

....Like Cupey Dolls. lol. We don't have military men "guarding China." In fact, the only time we had planes there, they found out and there was a big international problem. We're not allowed to have military there in the first place. That was part of the agreement to keep peace between the two countries.

Also, China is a super power, too. They're not exactly threatened by the US. In fact, they have a population of people that makes our country look like a city. Americans only make up 3% of the world's population, while Asians surprisingly make up over 50%. China could very possibly beat us in a war (they have nukes, too). Sorry to hurt your nationalistic pride.

So, what makes you think the US has so much control over everyone anyway?
-------------------
nk VS sk would stay the same cuz sk wants a unified peaceful korea, and nk wouldnt gain anything against the better trained sk

.....Actually, the US did pull out of Korea already (right when Bush became president). Ironically, Korea is the only threat we truly have right now. So now they're beefing up their military and they are even suspected of having plans to attack us. Bush has done nothing about it, however. Why? Well, they don' t have oil for one thing. If fact, other countries are starting to get alarmed that Bush isn't doing anything.

"U.S. shrugs off North Korean threat": http://www.johnworldpeace.com/e030207c.htm

"US plays down N Korean threat," BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2776841.stm

"Preserving the North Korean Threat": http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2001_04/focus.asp
-----------------------
japan would have to rebuild its army, china korea and many other pacific islands will remember what happened 50 years ago...

Once again, Japan's army is already rebuilt. This I know. Again, we're not "guarding Japan."

Sheesh, what makes you think all these countries are under our control? Even if we have a few men there, once they leave, the whole world won't be "Few! The couple of American's are gone, let's go destroy stuff for no reason!" The presence of a couple of American's isn't that strong, especially in the midst of a population of millions of people.

And what makes you think Japan would go invade China all of a sudden? The only reason Japan did that in WWII was because of the "population problem." And their leader decided to solve it by taking over more land. Well, I doubt that their leader now would suddenly decide to continue that failed plan for no reason. Especially considering that China is much stronger now. (You know, the US isn't the only power or threat to these countries in the world). Unless Japan had a beef with the pacific islands, which they don't. In fact, they're their best custumers (Ever see Hawaii? The Japanese practically have taken it over. lol.).
----------------------
iraq would be invaded by iran, causing iran to be a world power with its new found oil

Um, actually, ever heard of the Iranian Conflict not too long ago? The US pushed both Iraq and Iran to go to war with one another and supplied weapons of mass destruction to both (including Anthrax)---which neither of the countries had before (in fact, the only signs of weapons of mass destruction they had found, were the same weapons we gave them 20 years ago, including the Anthrax). Well, our plan was to weaken both the countries which would continue to make them dependent on the US as an oil customer still. Well, it worked, both Iran and Iraq became weak. So, now neither Iran or Iraq are a threat to us or one another anymore.

The problem with this is that, while Iran can trade freely, Iraq has trade restrictions imposed on them by the UN (called the "food-for-oil" plan). Even though they have the world's second largest oil supply, they can only trade about 100,000 barrels of their oil a month for food (the US gets hundreds of millions of barrells of oil a month from other sources, no joke).

So, the second phase of the plan is this war. Once Iraq is weak, we blame them for having the same weapons we gave them, and then attack them to take them over. This way, we are sure to get the highest amount of oil we can from each country. Understand now?

http://www.progressive.org/0901/anth0498.html

In addition, we didn' t have enough troop in Iraq before the war to "wart off Iran" anyway. And Iran still didn't attack Iraq. Why would they suddenly do it now if we left again?
-------------------
israel would be building its army up for the inevitable

How does that relate the the US anyway?

At 5/5/03 05:17 PM, bumcheekcity wrote:

At 5/5/03 04:22 PM, jimsween wrote: Doesnt that make you think that maybe they have a plan then? As far as I can see the US has done a pretty good job of not letting there be a WW3.

Possibly, yes. I give you that. The Americans have made a bloody good job of stopping WW3 by making loads of little wars and spreading them out.

In person?

Yup. That was a hard question.

All through history there have been little wars, at no point in the existance of civilization was there complete peace for more than a year.

At 5/5/03 05:42 PM, Ninja_Scientist wrote: you have proof that this or any other war was for that?

Read a history book, and check out all the other information I have about the war under the topic, "War on Iraq, Review" under the politics section.

First, no history book says the war was for oil. Second, that whole long thing was just a jumble of ranting and raving, I wont bother to read the whole thing.

Also, this war is related to the Iranian Conflict in the earlier 80's which was also for oil (and there are documents which prove this). And the US threatened to go to war with Afghanistan after 9/11 "unless they agreed to an oil pipeline to run through Afghanistan into the Central Asian oil supplies." If they had conceeded, we may not have gone to war with them at all. There is also documents that prove this.

Where are these documents? And where is your proof of this about afghanistan? And I'm sure none of these link will have Difinitive proof because that would require them to be omniprescent, which they are not. It took us years to figure out how and why the 8 (or seven) day war was started.

To all those out there that actually do hate America:

You'll be happy to know in 2010 USA is slashing it's nuclear arsenal by 2/3 bringing it down to 4,000 warheads. By then china will have reached 5,000 warheads. Unfortunately for you Russia is also cutting back because they can no longer afford to keep up thier arsenal and they will be down to just above britan and frances arsenal (around 500). China will have more warheads than all of you put together and will have complete controll over you. Lucky for America China does not have a sufficient supply of ICBM's (right now they ahve 20) to assault America so we will not have to worry about China. And you thought we were imperialistic, good luck.

At 5/6/03 08:59 PM, jimsween wrote: To all those out there that actually do hate America:

You'll be happy to know in 2010 USA is slashing it's nuclear arsenal by 2/3 bringing it down to 4,000 warheads.

Wow. 4000 warheads only! Notice my sarcasm. Im aware about the other part of this text that talks about how many nukes other countrys own, but why would america have to be on top anyways? And another thing. it takes less than 4000 warheads to blow up the world so why keep that much? If you ask me, its just a way to piss all of your tax dolars away.

How do you know it's a "bunch of raving" if you "won't read it?"

Here ya go:

http://www.progressive.org/0901/nagy0901.html

(it tells you how to get to that document on this site, and it also has some snippets from those document as well).

http://www.progressive.org/0901/anth0498.html
--------------
Here's also some information on the Bush-Bin Laden relationship.

"Bush thwarted FBI probe against bin Ladens," Hindustan Times
AFP
http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/bush_twarted.htm

"BUSHLADEN"
by Jared Israel [8 October 2001]
Includes report from the 'Wall Street Journal'
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/bushladen.htm

CNN, AMERICAN MORNING WITH PAULA ZAHN, "Explosive New Book Published in France Alleges that U.S. Was in Negotiations to Do a Deal with Taliban." http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0201/08/ltm.05.html

"Osama Bin Ladin joined a Secret Energy Commisson meeting of Senators and Oil execs."
http://www.gwbush.com/archive/index2-5-02.shtml

Judicial Watch: Bush/bin Laden Connection "has now turned into a scandal!"
Comment by Jared Israel
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/jw.htm

"We Decide, You Shut Up," an interview made on The O'Reilly Factor, Fox News, printed out in the latest edition of Harpers. The man is named Jeremy Glick (his father died in 9/11).
-------------
Korea is more of a threat than Iraq ever was, and yet Bush does nothing about this (Korea has no oil).

"U.S. shrugs off North Korean threat": http://www.johnworldpeace.com/e030207c.htm

"US plays down N Korean threat," BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2776841.stm

"Preserving the North Korean Threat": http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2001_04/focus.asp
Spurgeon M. Keeny, Jr.
-------------------
Iraqi oil consumption by the US.

NOTE: I even bothered to write the person in charge of Marketing information at Middle East Economic Survey (MEES), MIDDLE EAST PETROLEUM AND ECONOMIC PUBLICATIONS (CYPRUS) and asked her about US and Iraqi oil trades up until the war. Here is what she wrote me back:

"THE US CONTINUED TO PURCHASE IRAQI OIL UNDER THE TERMS OF THE UN
OIL-FOR-FOOD PROGRAM UP TO THE START OF THE WAR. IRAQ NEVER HALTED
EXPORTS SPECIFICALLY TO THE US -- ALTHOUGH IT DID HALT EXPORTS IN
GENERAL FROM TIME TO TIME"

Note that MEES is the company that also did the report on the US's Iraqi oil consumption in 2001 (which wound up being 90% of Iraq's oil at the time).

October 4, 2002
Bush Donors: Saddam's Best Customers
A BuzzFlash Reader Commentary
by Margie Burns
http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/2002/10/04_Oil.html
----------------
"Oil Puppet" we're putting in Baghdad.

"Our Man In Baghdad," by Jon Spade, Harpers Magazine, March 2003.

If anyone wants any more sources or documents, just let me know. ^_^

At 5/6/03 09:11 PM, mrpopenfresh wrote:

At 5/6/03 08:59 PM, jimsween wrote: To all those out there that actually do hate America:

You'll be happy to know in 2010 USA is slashing it's nuclear arsenal by 2/3 bringing it down to 4,000 warheads.

Wow. 4000 warheads only! Notice my sarcasm. Im aware about the other part of this text that talks about how many nukes other countrys own, but why would america have to be on top anyways? And another thing. it takes less than 4000 warheads to blow up the world so why keep that much? If you ask me, its just a way to piss all of your tax dolars away.

It takes more than 4000, the point is none of you could blow up china and china will be able to blow all you up. China will control you completely and they wont be as nice as US.

At 5/6/03 09:13 PM, Ninja_Scientist wrote: How do you know it's a "bunch of raving" if you "won't read it?"

I started reading and it and then quit cause it was stupid.

Here ya go:

http://www.progressive.org/0901/nagy0901.html

(it tells you how to get to that document on this site, and it also has some snippets from those document as well).

The water doesnt need to be as pure as they limit to drink. With weapons it is much higher than that and most countries dont use distillation.

http://www.progressive.org/0901/anth0498.html
--------------
Here's also some information on the Bush-Bin Laden relationship.

We have a free market economy, our companies can sell that stuff to Iraq if they want to.

"Bush thwarted FBI probe against bin Ladens," Hindustan Times
AFP
http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/bush_twarted.htm

Did you ever think this might be because it is against the constitution to spy on citizens and maybe because this would provoke them

"BUSHLADEN"
by Jared Israel [8 October 2001]
Includes report from the 'Wall Street Journal'
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/bushladen.htm

FDR had links to the mafia but that didnt make him lieniet to them.

CNN, AMERICAN MORNING WITH PAULA ZAHN, "Explosive New Book Published in France Alleges that U.S. Was in Negotiations to Do a Deal with Taliban." http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0201/08/ltm.05.html

Ok, this is just a transcript from a show on CNN, I cant possibly reply to it because everything said on it was already debated. All I can say is that this was written by a french man while french hatred for Americans is high, I.E. more money.

"Osama Bin Ladin joined a Secret Energy Commisson meeting of Senators and Oil execs."
http://www.gwbush.com/archive/index2-5-02.shtml

Thats a website making fun of bush, Why is Osammas head bigger than everyone else and he is in camouflauge, Derrr it's doctored. I cant belive you fell for that.

Judicial Watch: Bush/bin Laden Connection "has now turned into a scandal!"
Comment by Jared Israel
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/jw.htm

The ossamma family is a highly prestigious business family in the middle east, seeing as how bush has connections in the oil industry and alot of oil comes from the middles east. You dont hink there would be the slightest connection? The kennedy family stretches farther than you could know but when someone is friends with a kennedy people dont think, oooh he must be in with the government.

"We Decide, You Shut Up," an interview made on The O'Reilly Factor, Fox News, printed out in the latest edition of Harpers. The man is named Jeremy Glick (his father died in 9/11).
-------------
Korea is more of a threat than Iraq ever was, and yet Bush does nothing about this (Korea has no oil).

"U.S. shrugs off North Korean threat": http://www.johnworldpeace.com/e030207c.htm

It's not for oil, it's because they HAVE a nuke. You dont mess with somebody who has a nuke, bush knows that and that's why he is ignoring them which IS the best option because Kim Jong IL just wants any reason to attack.

"US plays down N Korean threat," BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2776841.stm

see above

"Preserving the North Korean Threat": http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2001_04/focus.asp
Spurgeon M. Keeny, Jr.
-------------------
Iraqi oil consumption by the US.

NOTE: I even bothered to write the person in charge of Marketing information at Middle East Economic Survey (MEES), MIDDLE EAST PETROLEUM AND ECONOMIC PUBLICATIONS (CYPRUS) and asked her about US and Iraqi oil trades up until the war. Here is what she wrote me back:

"THE US CONTINUED TO PURCHASE IRAQI OIL UNDER THE TERMS OF THE UN
OIL-FOR-FOOD PROGRAM UP TO THE START OF THE WAR. IRAQ NEVER HALTED
EXPORTS SPECIFICALLY TO THE US -- ALTHOUGH IT DID HALT EXPORTS IN
GENERAL FROM TIME TO TIME"

What does this have to do with the war being for oil? Why wouldnt we trade, its for a good cause.

Note that MEES is the company that also did the report on the US's Iraqi oil consumption in 2001 (which wound up being 90% of Iraq's oil at the time).

October 4, 2002
Bush Donors: Saddam's Best Customers
A BuzzFlash Reader Commentary
by Margie Burns
http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/2002/10/04_Oil.html
----------------
"Oil Puppet" we're putting in Baghdad.

"Our Man In Baghdad," by Jon Spade, Harpers Magazine, March 2003.

This is pathetic, saddam would have traded oil with us for decades if only instead of fighting we just befriended them and lifeted the sanctions. Saddam would even make it cheaper knowing that we could impose the sanctions again at any time. Why would we fight it for oil when it will take us 16 years of cheap oil imports to pay back how much the war costed.

Daaaaamn. This thread is as long as my wang. About half way through I stopped reading, because I only want to say one thing...

They do if that war is for simply financial purposes (such as oil trade). A murder is still a murder, regardless whether or not you take the guy's wallet afterwards or not.

Hey, you are the US. If someone steals from you, are you gonna fight him(you are, after all, the most powerful person in the world), or are you going to ask him nicely to return it? Or, give a warning or two...or eight, or even more(like you usually do), but they still don't do anything. I think that if someone so what as insults the US should have their ass handed to them. They are asking for it.

At 5/6/03 04:01 PM, Ninja_Scientist wrote: germany would rebuild its army russia would get scared cuz they remember 50 years ago...

.....I think you're a little confused with years. Germany has already rebuilt most of it's army, if not all of it. And sense when do we have American's "on guard" in Germany? Also, Germany invaded it's surrounding territory, Belgium, and then France in WWII. Russia didn' t get invaded towards the end, and the Germans didn' t even make it all the way due to the weather. So, I don't think Russia would care even if that was the case.

im sorry but your wrong, ive already discussed this with my international relations professor, who has quite the background in this stuff...

------------------
china would invade taiwan, there goes the place that makes all the cool shit...

....Like Cupey Dolls. lol. We don't have military men "guarding China." In fact, the only time we had planes there, they found out and there was a big international problem. We're not allowed to have military there in the first place. That was part of the agreement to keep peace between the two countries.

Also, China is a super power, too. They're not exactly threatened by the US. In fact, they have a population of people that makes our country look like a city. Americans only make up 3% of the world's population, while Asians surprisingly make up over 50%. China could very possibly beat us in a war (they have nukes, too). Sorry to hurt your nationalistic pride.

So, what makes you think the US has so much control over everyone anyway?

this has nothing to do with national pride, taiwan would be much more likely to be invaded if the US wasnt going to back up taiwan against china, as of now, we would, if we do what the person wants and leave from the world, then we wouldnt back up taiwan and they would get invaded.

-------------------
nk VS sk would stay the same cuz sk wants a unified peaceful korea, and nk wouldnt gain anything against the better trained sk

.....Actually, the US did pull out of Korea already (right when Bush became president). Ironically, Korea is the only threat we truly have right now. So now they're beefing up their military and they are even suspected of having plans to attack us. Bush has done nothing about it, however. Why? Well, they don' t have oil for one thing. If fact, other countries are starting to get alarmed that Bush isn't doing anything.

ive heard that there are still 30+ thousand americans on the border of the koreas... ill check ur sites though... and bush isnt talking about korea not because of oil... but because if nk still has nukes, less people can bitch and moan about missile defense... makes sense doesnt it...

-----------------------
japan would have to rebuild its army, china korea and many other pacific islands will remember what happened 50 years ago...

Once again, Japan's army is already rebuilt. This I know. Again, we're not "guarding Japan."

japan only has a defensive army not an offensive army, and we would still rush to the aid of japan or sk if need be...

Sheesh, what makes you think all these countries are under our control? Even if we have a few men there, once they leave, the whole world won't be "Few! The couple of American's are gone, let's go destroy stuff for no reason!" The presence of a couple of American's isn't that strong, especially in the midst of a population of millions of people.

i never said they were under US control, i said it would scare their neighbors, regardless of what you think, this is the belief in much of the world...

And what makes you think Japan would go invade China all of a sudden? The only reason Japan did that in WWII was because of the "population problem." And their leader decided to solve it by taking over more land. Well, I doubt that their leader now would suddenly decide to continue that failed plan for no reason. Especially considering that China is much stronger now. (You know, the US isn't the only power or threat to these countries in the world). Unless Japan had a beef with the pacific islands, which they don't. In fact, they're their best custumers (Ever see Hawaii? The Japanese practically have taken it over. lol.).

im not saying that japan would invade china or germany would invade russia, im saying it would scare other countries that were invaded by them in ww2...

this has nothing to do with the US being as strong as it is, they are the only country everyone can agree with having somewhere, and by everyone i mean the leaders...

----------------------
iraq would be invaded by iran, causing iran to be a world power with its new found oil

Um, actually, ever heard of the Iranian Conflict not too long ago?

that was Saddam VS iran... not iraq vs iran... saddam decided to attack iran... also, the shia muslims in southern iraq, are the same muslims that 1) were oppressed under saddam's rule, 2) the same muslims crying for the US to leave, 3) the same muslims that are in iran... SO it seems logical for iran wanting to invade iraq and take over... or at the very least have in iraq the same type of govt that is in iran, thus giving iran the worlds 2nd largest oil reserve in the world...

The US pushed both Iraq and Iran to go to war with one another and supplied weapons of mass destruction to both (including Anthrax)---which neither of the countries had before (in fact, the only signs of weapons of mass destruction they had found, were the same weapons we gave them 20 years ago, including the Anthrax).

um... ive only heard that the US gave iraq chemical weapons, the US sold parts to iran to give the money to contras in nicaragua... the iran-contra affair...

The problem with this is that, while Iran can trade freely, Iraq has trade restrictions imposed on them by the UN (called the "food-for-oil" plan). Even though they have the world's second largest oil supply, they can only trade about 100,000 barrels of their oil a month for food (the US gets hundreds of millions of barrells of oil a month from other sources, no joke).

actually iran is on the US terrorist watch list, which means they cant freely trade with companies, or the US imposes economic penalities on the companies that do business in iran and US...

In addition, we didn' t have enough troop in Iraq before the war to "wart off Iran" anyway. And Iran still didn't attack Iraq. Why would they suddenly do it now if we left again?

because if we left there would be no US forces there so the population wouldnt really give a fuck... even if they dont invade iran could still set up a puppet government over in iraq...

-------------------
israel would be building its army up for the inevitable

How does that relate the the US anyway?

cuz the US gives israel a whole shit load of money every year, and its pretty much common knowledge that if israel is invaded, the US would back it up, if needed... and israel having to build its army even more to thrawt an arabian attack would scare the arab world... also with the US holding the money over israel's head, israel is less likely to use nukes...

At 5/6/03 10:06 PM, 0gn34jmhag wrote: Daaaaamn. This thread is as long as my wang.

You must have a small wang to be comparing it to a thread.

For starters... we have hotter women.
Or... we, as humans, are bound to hate that which we fear, and vise-versa. The US has accumulated an unequivocal status in the world, and being the true winner in the Cold War, has broken established Democracy as the only method of true freedom and good-governing. In the midst of that victory it has been relentless at times, and lacking humility, and for that reason, beckons to those who are ideological dissidents and opponents to its way of life to show it something other than victory the US and its citizens have become so familiar with.
They hate us because they fear us... and sadly, might I add, rightfully so.

I doubt that they rightfully hate us.

I don't hate people just because I disagree with them, or even because I think they're assholes. It should take more than a little here, a little there to justify hate.

Thee must only look at ones leaders, Bush is a complete dumbass and those of his supporters, He started a war for oil, If you doubt be on this you only have to look at his background with oil politics and what oil contractors have been accepted for iraq's oil. He some how thinks terrorism and Iraq is some how related, and that Iraq is a chemical treat, and Zero proof has been found nor will be.

Now the leader is not the only reason, but iv been up since 7:30 am yesterday and ill let other people fill in the other reasons

Jesus...the war's over, and it wasn't a goddamned war for oil. There are much better targets if we wanted some Texas Tea.