LOL LOL HAHAHAHAHAHAQuote:
Originally posted by Wally Pipp
They are oppressed, sometimes tortured and generally mislead, that's true but you nor any other country is the judge of that.
but we are the bad guys for doing something about him...
Printable View
LOL LOL HAHAHAHAHAHAQuote:
Originally posted by Wally Pipp
They are oppressed, sometimes tortured and generally mislead, that's true but you nor any other country is the judge of that.
but we are the bad guys for doing something about him...
You are not the 'bad guys'. It's the justification you bring on for a possible war that's 'bad' in the world's eyes.
You tell me what stops Pakistan from launching an attack on Kashmir and India if you go in unilaterally ?
It is not yet clear if anything is found, if resolution 1441 is breached or not or that any evidence is provided that he's lying. All that is as of yet unclear and incomplete. Yet you are already on your warhorse.
Why doesn't your government play the game open and easy, comes forth and says "here UN, this is our evidence, let's see if they can counter it. Let the inspectors do their work" ? Then the whole world would be convinced of what you're trying to do.
And that's all we ask.
Is that so hard to understand ?
BTW I should just add that I got nothing against what your governement do, If I was on top I would do the same thing probably. It's just the part where you(I'm still talking about your government, not you personnally nor other americans) try to make everything seem as a selfless act that I don't like.
did you ever see 13 days?Quote:
Originally posted by Wally Pipp
You are not the 'bad guys'. It's the justification you bring on for a possible war that's 'bad' in the world's eyes.
You tell me what stops Pakistan from launching an attack on Kashmir and India if you go in unilaterally ?
It is not yet clear if anything is found, if resolution 1441 is breached or not or that any evidence is provided that he's lying. All that is as of yet unclear and incomplete. Yet you are already on your warhorse.
Why doesn't your government play the game open and easy, comes forth and says "here UN, this is our evidence, let's see if they can counter it. Let the inspectors do their work" ? Then the whole world would be convinced of what you're trying to do.
And that's all we ask.
Is that so hard to understand ?
No Why???
:confused: :confused:
Do you know the difference between real life and Hollywood ? :rolleyes:
well since most people from other countries don't read too much about US history that was not global.. some people don't know the vast majority of that situation.. smart a$$Quote:
Originally posted by Wally Pipp
Do you know the difference between real life and Hollywood ? :rolleyes:
we said that russia was putting missiles in cuba and no one believed us and then when the time was right we whipped out photos of them and they didn't know what to do... we don't WANT a war.. unfortunatly these days it gets harder for countries to work things out because volence seems to dominate
That I understand. Why doesn't the US do the same now ? They have the intelligence, right ?
It would make your case a lot stronger. I'm not against a war with Iraq in se but I need a little more than mere assertions that were made years ago and talk without evidence to back it up.
well i know the true facts as much as you do.. unfortunatly the media only knows what they are told and what leaks out.. but what leaks out is sometimes on purpose.. so it kinda sucks that we never really know what goes on until 50 years later when they declassify stuff... perhaps they are still waiting to reveal information.. perhaps they already have to the UN but it is still being held as classified by the UN..Quote:
Originally posted by Wally Pipp
That I understand. Why doesn't the US do the same now ? They have the intelligence, right ?
It would make your case a lot stronger. I'm not against a war with Iraq in se but I need a little more than mere assertions that were made years ago and talk without evidence to back it up.
BTW the whole thing with Korea is not all the US.. that has much more to do with the UN... the iraq situation is more US/Iraq.. but I think the Korea issue is something all should be concerned with...
Do you know where Iraq comes from? It is a manufactured kingdom created in the 1920's by...Quote:
Originally posted by kleinma
but we are the bad guys for doing something about him...
The British
Do you know how Iraq developed into an autocratic nation?
The British
(they suppressed an Arab uprising, and decided that a "jolly good monarchy" would settle things down. So they offered the King of Siam (Faisel) the job)
Do you know how the Iraqi's have such a potent Biological weapons arsenal?
The Yanks
(Rumsfeld was involved in the selling of 12 strains of deadly genetically modified bacteria to the Iraqis)
Do you know who was the Yankie's greatest ally during it's fisticuffs with Iran a few decades ago?
Iraq and Mr Saddam Hussein
Flame away, you're being misled by your media...
The British had the largest empire in the world, and had just finished fighting a war in Europe, forgive them for not being able to fully focus on areas which are not as important as matters closer to home.Quote:
Originally posted by Gaffer
Do you know where Iraq comes from? It is a manufactured kingdom created in the 1920's by...
The British
Do you know how Iraq developed into an autocratic nation?
The British
(they suppressed an Arab uprising, and decided that a "jolly good monarchy" would settle things down. So they offered the King of Siam (Faisel) the job)
The US was never at war with Iran.... only Iraq.Quote:
Do you know who was the Yankie's greatest ally during it's fisticuffs with Iran a few decades ago?
Quote:
Originally posted by Gaffer
Do you know how the Iraqi's have such a potent Biological weapons arsenal?
The Yanks
(Rumsfeld was involved in the selling of 12 strains of deadly genetically modified bacteria to the Iraqis)
That is the most ignorant thing i have ever read. Do you think the U.S. Is in the market of selling biological weapons?!?!?! You are out of your freeking mind. Do you think Rumsfeld would be where he is today if he had sold Biological weapons to IRAQ?!?!
Good lord what a moron.
Delete the post quick!! He revealed that they gave them chemicals a few days ago. (not the gov, but some US companies..)Quote:
Originally posted by Arc
That is the most ignorant thing i have ever read. Do you think the U.S. Is in the market of selling biological weapons?!?!?! You are out of your freeking mind. Do you think Rumsfeld would be where he is today if he had sold Biological weapons to IRAQ?!?!
Good lord what a moron.
How about educating us ignorant fellas here? Can you give us stats about how much share in your national economy do the weapons manufacturers have? And I don't mean those producing handguns, but those who produce the WMDs.Quote:
Originally posted by Arc
That is the most ignorant thing i have ever read. Do you think the U.S. Is in the market of selling biological weapons?!?!?! You are out of your freeking mind. Do you think Rumsfeld would be where he is today if he had sold Biological weapons to IRAQ?!?!
Good lord what a moron.
Before making such allegations as being out one's freaking mind, perhaps you would better check your history once again and understand how the US has always tried to control the other nations' economies to its advantage.
About Rumsfeld getting to where he is now, you did re-elect Bill Clinton, and you did elect George Bush Jr, didn't you? :rolleyes:
So, now PC_Madness has confirmed that the US companies indeed sold chemical weapons to Iraq to fight Iran, can we say your above post falls flat on its face? And I would find it hard to imagine the sales of chemical or even other weapons on the international market go without the US government knowing about it :rolleyes:
PC_, so if the US didn't get into a war with Iran directly, it definitely helped Iraq fight it, to which you seem to agree. Why, can I ask? If Iran and Iraq decided to fight it off for any reason, what was the reason the US played in this war? Definitely then both these countries didn't have any weapons of mass destruction which could have posed any threat to the world? But the US wanted to have a foothold in the region, and thought that by helping Iraq win the war it would gain that most important entry into the middle-east. Alas, Saddam seems to have seen through your "aid".
The recent N Korean fiasco also seems to be a fitting response to the US oppression. Although I hate to think of what will happen if the N Korea decides to use any of its nukes, I think it's time the US learnt a most valued lesson.
You can still learn from your neighbouring UK who at least admit to making mistakes and are not actively trying to worsen them. On the other hand, most Americans here seem to think of themselves as the saviours of the Earth :rolleyes:
.
Ok Ill be blunt your all getting as bad as America
Where The F*** Is Your Evidence For Any Of This!!!!!! All Press Is Made Up, Dont Jump To Conclusions Based On Unreliable Sources.
Western Countries Dabbled In Chemical Warfare In World War. They No Longer Use It Because It Is Indiscriminate And Attacks Innocent People. Whenever I See Attack By ANY Western Country It Is Directly Against Military Targets Not Civilians And Yet If We Look At Techniques Of Other Countries Eg Iraq, North Korea And Many More We See Them Attack Anyone Who Disagrees With Them Wether Armed Or Not!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad: This Is Why They Are Dangerous Look At 11th Sept It Was Aimed At Civilians Not The Military And Was A Direct Attack Against Individuals Who May Have Nothing Against Them.
They Did Look At Biological Weapons But Soon Realised That For Western Techniques They Are No Use Whatsover and No Longer Research Them. The Existence Of Biological Weapons In The West has ALWAYS Been Denied So They Are Not Likely Going To Blow That By Selling Them Are They????:eek: :eek:
I Have Heard In Recent Years Many Pieces Of Crap One Mate Turned To Me And Claimed The Churchill (British Prime Minister Of The UK During WWII) Was Going To Nuke India ***!!! They Didnt Even Have Nukes, How And WHY Would They Do This????
Ill Tell You Why,
They Were not Going To, Factions Againt Countries Make Up Crap To Turn Public Opinion Against These Countries, They Benefit Massively From This, Its When You Look At Inconsistancies In These Stories That You Realise They Are Just One Big Pile Of C***!!!!!!!!!!!!!:mad: :mad: :mad:
I Would Say That We Should Be Worried About Other Countries With Nukes Especially Dictators Who Are The Only Ones Needed To Launch A Nuke, Many Western Countries Cannot Fire Their Nuclear Arsenal Without Other Parties And representatives Agreeing That It Is Neccassary, The Balance Of Power Leans Too Far In The Direction Of Saddam And That Is What Scares The Americans, One Man Can Start A Nuclear War, America Is Wanting To Attack Saddam NOT Iraq!!!!!:eek: :eek:
And BTW GWBush is selling Crack as well, you can see it in his eyes...
Quote:
Originally posted by BodwadUK
At 11th Sept It Was Aimed At Civilians Not The Military And Was A Direct Attack Against Individuals Who May Have Nothing Against Them.
I think that attacking civilians is below the built, they don't go around starting the trouble. Attacks by soldiers should be against other soldiers. (if we define a terriost as a soldier...)
HoneyBee.
I never said that either. The actions of people inside a nation is hardly to be considered the will of the people, or the government. I'm yet to hear if the government had any knowledge of chemical trades.Quote:
it definitely helped Iraq fight it, to which you seem to agree.
Trading isn't a crime, Australia was trading scrap iron to Japan in WW2, and only stopped when they entered SE Asia. Later on in the war we were being bombed by our own metal.
Thats not a crime, stupidity, maybe, but not a crime, and is hardly worthly of attacking America, saying its out to steal Oil.
NK choose to live under oppression. The majority of the world seeks to create a democratic society, were people are able to speak freely. Why should these democratic societies congratulate other countries who do not allow people to have there rights?
The UK who admit its mistakes?? I believe it took them 20-30 years to admit that they did nuclear testings in the Australian outback on Australian soldiers, and they are still yet to clean up the mess that the left there.
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
Stupid Americans :D :D
One Mistake They Wont Forget Too Soon!!!!
The Problem Mainly Arisses from The Fact That Nobody Can Actually Prove What is Happening At The Time And Therfore Have No Justification For Stopping It. The Question of Course That We Must Ask Is Does Iraq Have These Types Ofd Weapons Still And do We Wait For Him To Use Them Before We Try To Justify Attacking Him????:confused: :confused:
1) that's for the inspectors to find out right now
2) if they're present, we do not wait but as stated in 1), that needs to be verified with all available proof on all sides.
as a side : do you think you can cut down on the capitals ? :)
Sorry i write like that in comments to make it more noticible, oh and my brain just dont work so i get carried away :D :D :D :D :D
The inspectors will find something soon but they take so dam long, at least they havent been thrown out!!!! YET :eek:
Still, their report is due on the 27th and then we'll know the new status.
Will We?????
Depends if they actually tell us all of it or just selected parts :( :(
It is also still a long time, i mean how long have they been there???:confused:
Well the interesting thing is that the UN haven't found anything... would they tell the world straight away that they found something to start the campaign, or wait to the 27th? Thats the odd thing...
They would tell all countries that need to know but then we the public will be the last to know :( :(
How do you expect your argument to be taken seriously if you not only jump to conclusions based on patriotism, but throw in defammatory remarks at the same time?Quote:
Originally posted by Arc
That is the most ignorant thing i have ever read. Do you think the U.S. Is in the market of selling biological weapons?!?!?! You are out of your freeking mind. Do you think Rumsfeld would be where he is today if he had sold Biological weapons to IRAQ?!?!
Good lord what a moron.
Please read the Washington Post article posted by Wally and get back to me on this "moron" tag you have unfortunatly labelled me with. I want an apology.
Oh, and your comment:
Well, your presidential entourage is riddled with people who you could say "do you think he/she would be where the are today if..."Quote:
"Do you think Rumsfeld would be where he is today if he had sold Biological weapons to IRAQ?!?!"
Let's just take a random company, like, erm, oh, Enron, and see who in the higher eschelons of US government has been employed, held shares, or received funds in Enron shall we?
* George W Bush, President of the USA.
* Dick Cheney, Vice President of the USA.
* Lawrence B Lindsey, economic adviser to US President.
* Donald H Rumsfeld, US Defence Secretary, former ambassador to NATO.
* James A Baker, former Secretary of State. Enron reportedly paid him more than US$2 million in "consulting expenses" last year.
* Frank Wisner Jr, a former Pentagon official. An Enron deal maker, played an important role in Enron gaining contracts in India and the Philippines.
* Attorney General John Ashcroft. The Department of Justice is carrying out a criminal investigation into Enron. Ashcroft and his chief of staff have had to remove themselves from any involvement in the official investigation because of their links with Enron.
* Michael T Shelby, US attorney for southern Texas. The entire US
Attorney's Office in Houston has also been removed from the case because of personal ties to current or former employees of Enron.
* Thomas E White, now Secretary of the Army, was an executive with Enron for 11 years. Held US$50 million in Enron shares, sold most of them before the collapse. White was hired to bring business and other expertise to the military. He is a retired brigadier general and decorated Vietnam veteran (23 years of
military service) and Cold War warrior.
* Karl Rove, Chief of Staff and Bush's top adviser. Rove owned a block of Enron stock once worth US$250,000.
* Robert Zoellick, Bush's Trade Representative, also on Enron's payroll in an "advisory capacity".
* Marc Racicot, Republic National Committee chairman, former Montana Governor and Enron lobbyist.
* Lee Rosenthal, Federal judge, has removed herself from all Enron lawsuits, apparently just three days after denying a motion to freeze assets held by Enron executives and board members.
* Senator Phil Gramm, one of the biggest recipients of Enron campaign donations. Wasn't sure whether he should drop out of congressional investigations into Enron.
* Dr Wendy Gramm, Senator Gramm's wife, chair of the federal Commodity Futures Trading Commission from 1988-1993. Played a major role in exempting the trading of energy products from government oversight greatly benefiting Enron. Then left the Commission and joined the board of Enron and its audit
committee.
* Billy Tauzin, Republican Representative, chair of House Energy and Commerce Committee inquiry focusing on Enron and Arthur Andersen. Received campaign money from Enron and Arthur Andersen.
and the list goes on....
Arc, you really shouldn't be so naive...
Oh man, could you just get hold of your senses? We are talking chemical and biological weapons here, not baby diapers, for whatever's sake! If the mere suspicion of a nation holding WMDs (remember, only suspicion and no proof) is enough for that country to be wiped off the earth (not exactly, but there's no other word to describe it), the US companies indulging into the trade of such weapons WITHOUT the US government knowing about it can only mean one of the two things: One the US government really is so stupid, the rest of the world needs to take over the US and change the regime so a more intelligent leader can be elected there. Two the US wants to earn money from the weapons trade, but also wants the purchasing nations to scrap the weapons as soon as they acquire them. Nice going there :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally posted by Pc_Madness
The actions of people inside a nation is hardly to be considered the will of the people, or the government. I'm yet to hear if the government had any knowledge of chemical trades.
Trading isn't a crime, Australia was trading scrap iron to Japan in WW2, and only stopped when they entered SE Asia. Later on in the war we were being bombed by our own metal.
Thats not a crime, stupidity, maybe, but not a crime, and is hardly worthly of attacking America, saying its out to steal Oil.
If you think your government was stupid enough not to know about the weapons dealings, I think your government should be hanged to death because their stupidity is going to cause a nation very dear.
NK chose to live under oppression. The exact words from you. So if it's their choice, why do you want to mess with them? If they didn't make the right choice, they will suffer for it. You don't need to be the messiah of the world. Your government is full of enough sh it that you will take years to clean up, so I think you should undertake the cleaning of your own house before looking at others'.Quote:
Originally posted by Pc_Madness
NK choose to live under oppression. The majority of the world seeks to create a democratic society, were people are able to speak freely. Why should these democratic societies congratulate other countries who do not allow people to have there rights?
The important thing, you manage to forget, is they talk sense, they talk reality. You only talk imaginary things. You imagine Iraq holding secret WMDs. Your satellites or the UN inspectors have yet to come up with a piece of evidence as much as bird's crap.Quote:
Originally posted by Pc_Madness
The UK who admit its mistakes?? I believe it took them 20-30 years to admit that they did nuclear testings in the Australian outback on Australian soldiers, and they are still yet to clean up the mess that the left there.
Somebody mentioned Cuba up above, I think. So if you presented the world with the evidence, where's the evidence now? Or just because you were right then, you are right now too?
.
That report makes me sick. Bloody US government! :mad:Quote:
.
Let's start attacking Iraq while the UN inspectors finish their work. Then if they don't find anything, we can always fund the rehabilitation programme for the Iraqis, like we did in Afghanistan, can't we? :D This way, we won't lose time if they really have hidden some WMDs somewhere.Quote:
Originally posted by BodwadUK
Sorry i write like that in comments to make it more noticible, oh and my brain just dont work so i get carried away :D :D :D :D :D
The inspectors will find something soon but they take so dam long, at least they havent been thrown out!!!! YET :eek:
.
honeybee, id just like to point out that it is very well possible that a US company could have exported sensitive marterials to Iraq, without the knowledge of the government. I'd cite an example from India itself. I recently read that an Indian company was caught exporting something (dont know what) to Iraq (via a gulf nation). That stuff they were exporting could well have aided Saddam's WMD. So back in 1980, the US probably didn't have very strong export checking and regulation (i dont know for sure).Quote:
Originally posted by honeybee
If you think your government was stupid enough not to know about the weapons dealings, I think your government should be hanged to death because their stupidity is going to cause a nation very dear.
Now, to the debate. I don't get it? Look at Saddam's track record. He has constantly shown hostility to neighboring countries. I mean this guy had scud missiles fired upon Israel. He clearly knew that he would be retaliated against and heavily injured. That would be my foremost point in saying that Iraq could attack anyone (even the brits) if they had the means. And they could have these means very soon. So ok, lets go into the future. Suppose the US minds it own business and doesn't poke its "long" nose into international affairs. What would happen in two years time? North Korea would have a full Nuclear arsenal and they are exporting it to developing countries. Soon, every country on this globe has a missile pointed at someone. And by this time, even Iraq has its own set of bio, chemical and nuclear weapons. They'd be threatening Iran and Kuwait again (coz there would be no US to bully them if they did). Now all we would need is a minor conflict in some part of the world and one rogue leader to light up a nuke. Thats it. World War III has started and guess what? We won't be talking anti US then... honeybee and Wally pip would be hiding in their bunkers sweating it out.. hoping that the worst would steer clear of them...
what a beautiful future.
I know where you're coming from, but just because war is inevidable doesn't mean that everyone has to get on-side with the US/Brit governments. It's not just pacifists/unpatriots who are goingto be sweating it out in their bunkers....Quote:
Originally posted by OrdinaryGuy
World War III has started and guess what? We won't be talking anti US then... honeybee and Wally pip would be hiding in their bunkers sweating it out.. hoping that the worst would steer clear of them...
I personally don't mind the US and little brother Blair acting at global policement and sticking their nose in. I do object, however, to a number of things:
1. The hippocracy. Who has broken more UN resolutions, Iraq or Israel? (Clue: It doesn't end in the letter "q")
2. The hippocracy. Oil, Western armoury, Western involvment in supporting Saddam during Iran, Western objection to Terrorism after 500 years of heinous acts of attrocity...
3. The hippocracy (did I mention this before?).
4. The tenuous link between Saddam and Bin Laden. As far as I know, many of Bin Laden's allies were used in teh war against Saddam in teh Gulf war - have a guess where bin Laden was trained? Go one, one guess.... errrrrrrrr, the Land of the Free?
The West has the power to appease everyone peacefully. Let's use the brains, not the brawn....
you all go on hating america all you want... bottom line is you wouldn't be posting on this board right now if it wasn't for us... the worlds economy as you know it would not exist without america.
when your the top nation it is common for other nations to want to knock you down... but we won't let it happen
i'd agree with the last point of kliemna. No country in the world has faced more criticism than the US for its policies. I mean look at China (with no reference to its people). They have followed a policy of aggression and ruthless surpression. Rarely does the world look at this. It is the US that faces the most criticism because of its military and economic power. We have been detaining people in military camps because not only the US, but the world view them as dangerous men. But just because of anti US sentiments harbored by many people, the issue of human rights has surfaced in these camps. Human rights?? Has any country in the middle east received so much criticism? A person speaks against the government, and he is sentenced to death. Yet voices remain silent... but when it comes to the US, without even any significant evidence of human rights abuses, the world is pounding on us. They want them released. The fact is that these people are getting better food and living conditions then they would have ever got from the place they have come from. They even have a mosque in these camps.
Coming to Iraq and Israel. Which one of them has threatened their neighbors? (hint, it does end with a "q")
Now, the US has done some wrong things. But how many good things has it done? When was the last time the US bailed out a fellow country by giving it money? and when was the last time the US was praised for that. The fact is the US has done more good to other nations then any country in the world. trust me, we are crying about hippocracy... but imagine a world without the US... without a bully to keep dangerous countries from attaining WMD... without a bully that went to great depths to stop weapon proliferation.. without a bully that wanted a more safter middle east and south asia.. without a bully that has contributed more to the world than all the other countries combined.
Where would we be then? Spiralling into world of never ending power conquests, weapon proliferation and global arms races.
As long as we're talking bottom lines : without Europeans there wouldn't be a US to begin with. But anyway ...
I realise that we EU are the "lame" part in this discussion, that we don't possess the political and financial weight to swing it in our favour. I also acknowledge that this has resulted in anti-american sentiments and questioning.
I realise that many American decisions have proven to be a benefit. I realise that many countries in the past have done equally good and bad. I realise that sometimes a bully is needed to get things going.
I don't deny history, its merits and its faults. I only look at the whole picture because that is the only "good" way to look at it.
But where is it written that we can't criticise ? That we can't have doubts by every decision the UN, the US and every other nation on earth starting with ourselves makes ?
Do we have to lie down and take it as it comes even if we don't agree with it ? Do we have to take other's comments as undeniable truth and decisions without so much as a peep ? Can we have a different point of view without being branded as "anti-us" or worse "us haters" ? I believe we still can. But it seems that that is less and less likely.
All we ask is that we do it by the numbers, that we won't find ourselves in a situation that is worse than it is now, that we find ourselves in a siuation where f.i. Iraqis can point at us and say "look what you, the free and just, have done to us ! Look ! And without a just reason". It's easy to be wronged and it's not easy to be right, especially not when someone says "prove it".
I'm only saying that we have to begin and end with a strong position. It is now vitally important to do these things by the numbers or we may (and probably will) end up with more problems than we anticipated.
Give full reports and proof to the inspectors, give them all the room and space to work, let them discover and if they find nothing, then they find nothing. If at the same time Iraq complies then it complies and then Res. 1441 has been respected.
Leave the Iraqis to deal with their govt.
If they breach res. 1441 on both accounts (inspectors find something and Iraq fails to comply) then you have a reason for war. If Saddam decides to release his "arsenal" on another country then you have a reason for war.
If you're talking wmd and human rights as a reason then we should deal with at least 20 other countries such as (and not limited to) pakistan, N. Korea, several African nations, China, Russia, Turkey, Israel ... the list goes on and on.
That is my position. All the rest is meaningless propaganda from either side.
And for the last time : I don't hate America, I don't hate americans, I don't hate the US of A.
I only place a big
?
behind some of your country's foreign policy.
Is that clear now ?
Many nations have contributed to the state of the world today. You could argue that if it wasn't for Charles Babbage inventing the first "computer" in the 1800s that we wouldn't be posting on this board right now.Quote:
Originally posted by kleinma
you all go on hating america all you want... bottom line is you wouldn't be posting on this board right now if it wasn't for us... the worlds economy as you know it would not exist without america.
You could argue that if it wasn't for the industrial revolution in the late 1800s that our ecomnmy would not exist as we know it now.
You could even argue that if it wasn't for Italian entrepreneurs settling in London in the 1600s that the Banking system, thus free and fair trade, wouldn't exist now (Banco is Italian for "Bench". They used to loan money from benches on Lombard Street in the city of London (Lombard is a region of Italy). When they went out of business, they used to break up the benches, banco rupto [sic] )
So you are indeed a small cog in the the evolution of today's society.
As for "it is common for other nations to want to knock you down... but we won't let it happen", of course you wont let it happen, just like the Romans, the British, the Germans didn't...
Quote:
As for "it is common for other nations to want to knock you down... but we won't let it happen", of course you wont let it happen, just like the Romans, the British, the Germans didn't...
:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:
And Israel haven't threatened their neighbours?!?!? Errrrm...Quote:
Coming to Iraq and Israel. Which one of them has threatened their neighbors? (hint, it does end with a "q")
As for the poor souls above who feel hard done by with thsi anti-American feeling - I believe this discussion started off as a discussion on how to resove the Iraq situation peacefully. I have given facts that are undeniable in their truth, and completely unbiased in their targets - I've quoted the Britsih government in much of it, and if Mother Theresa was a suddenly proven to sell bugs to the Iraqis, I'd have a pop at her as well.
This is not anti-American, this is anti-agressor. Don't take it personally. Some of you must see the hippocracy present here. Reaping what you sow is the old proverb, right?
The Romans, the Brits, the Germans all strutted and pouted about how superior they were and how the world wouldn't be as it is now without them etc etc, and now they are all either extinct or neutered as world powers...Quote:
Originally posted by BodwadUK
:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:
we defeated 2 of the 3 you just mentioned... lolQuote:
Originally posted by Gaffer
As for "it is common for other nations to want to knock you down... but we won't let it happen", of course you wont let it happen, just like the Romans, the British, the Germans didn't...
too bad the US wasn't around in Roman times
They also tried to take over the world.. we don't want to do that... we just need to police it a little.. because obviously someone has to...Quote:
Originally posted by Gaffer
The Romans, the Brits, the Germans all strutted and pouted about how superior they were and how the world wouldn't be as it is now without them etc etc, and now they are all either extinct or neutered as world powers...