Forums / Miscellaneous Discussions / No offence

"Invade Iraq---------) ? -------- )Happiness"

lol that made me laugh.

They actually did have terrible planning on Iraq, it's been brought up all over the place, TV, documentaries, blogs, news papers, websites, everything.

Hmmm, other countries don't put as much into the war because they realise the effect it's having on their own countries and it's *beep*ing everything else up. Why do you think your currency and economy sucks?

Wtf are you talking about "most" people go to American colleges for higher education???

You say that as if the vast majority of the worlds population aspire to going to America for their higher education......!!

Judging by the abysmal use of the English language by the American posters in here, I would say that your education system is atrocious.

Another thing to add is that overall, the American education system is comparable to a lot of third world countries when you look at the bigger picture. It's appalling if you think about it, so please stop going on about your lacklustre education in America because it is not even close to being the best in the world ;)

Also, Cambridge and Oxford > Harvard and Yale ;)

I'm an American that's VERY critical about America, and yet some of the things said here are so stupidly insulting that's it's actually funny o.O

I mean, I agree. Bush is an *beep*. He got elected because there are so many fcking *beep*s in the country. Those same *beep*s are probably gonna destroy the chance of this country's recovering by electing the republican guy (who wants more war?? wtf???). I hate the war. It's stupid. And yet, I still find most of the Anti-American posts insulting....

"Dropping the atomic bombs was a bad idea. America sucks."
As that guy said, it saved millions of lives. As for the long-term effects, it was a brand new weapon that had been tested once. How the hell were they gonna know that it would cause problems 50 years later due to radiation?

"America invaded Iraq for cheap oil! Now they're benefiting!!"
"Everyone else left because attacking Iraq would have been bad for their country. Staying in Iraq has screwed up America's economy!"
Those 2 statements are contradictory. The first one is wrong. We invaded Iraq because Bush sucks. Cheap oil?? Oh yea! Our oil prices are only sky-rocketing!! Cheap oil must have been the actual reason!

"America screwed up the Middle East. They should leave now and it'll fix itself."
Yea...America did mess things up. But it would be kinda hard to predict the actual result. They knocked down the cruel dictator, and since they were no longer being oppressed, the majority (I forget whether Shiites or Sunnis) attacked the previously oppressing minority. Boom! Civil war. Ah yes...I can see how America leaving would help. That way there would be no safe areas! No one to try and stop the war. No one to try and save those caught in the crossfire, and capture/kill those doing the shooting.

Holy *beep*! That was one damn long post! I'd like to add in, that there may be some inaccuracies in the above post due to faulty knowledge on my part. I am not flaming anyone/country, and I have an anti-flame shield!! Don't even try it on me!

Also, the video was amazing. I was lmao when I saw it before. Funny to run into it again.

In some ways I agree with Atriedes and in some ways I don't ,but he has a very good point. European countries need to take a good look at their countries before flaming other countries.

England> Needs guns.

France> Do I even need to say anything?

Spain> What have they done in the past few years?

Poland> Only country in Europe without debt if I remember correctly.

USA> Clinton f'ed us up by selling us to China and destroying our workforce and therefore causing most of the debt we now have.

Canada> Dunno :P

Mexico> Corrupt government

South America> Way to many dictators and rebels

Africa in general> Governments holding the food back from the people to hold power. We are giving plenty. We just need to fix their corrupt governments

Middle-East> Never at peace and always trying to kill someone or kill eachother.

Russia> Communist....

China> Communist and becoming a super-power because of their huge population.

India> Only chance for the US to actually stand up to China when China trys to F' us over. Not to mention sending a continual train of Soc clones.

har Har

"Judging by the abysmal use of the English language by the American posters in here, I would say that your education system is atrocious."

And you base this off of, what, some kids who write with bad grammer and spelling mistakes?  This is a prime example of generalization, which I could point out just shows the lack of your own intellect.  I am an American and I went to public schools.  I just provided a counterexample.

As for exactly how America's education compares to a third world country, I'd like to see what your reasoning behind that is also.  Yes--there are many regions in the country that suffer from poor education--and many that don't.  Many people don't seem to realize education is primarily handled by the individual states and individual counties, not the American nation as a whole, and that education also corresponds to socioeconomic factors which is far more apparent in capitalistic countries than more socialistic European ones.

You make good points, Clamps.  I think arrogance is a condition of any country "in power."  Do you think the ancient Greeks and Romans or the British Empire were any different in their prime?&nb*beep*erica's not the first--and certainly won't be the last, as what propelled the US to being a world power after WWII has been increasingly fading.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned anything about money in their arguments for or against American actions. After all, America is the most capitalist country in the world and has the highest total wealth in the world. Would it surprise anyone if the U.S used money as a major factor in a lot of their decisions and policies?

In WWII, the Americans needed to raise a lot of money through bonds to fund their fighting. They were going into heavy debt from the war and dropping the A-bombs, saved the U.S millions of dollars.

With regards to Iraq, I'm sure America planned on placing a new government that would supply them with cheaper oil. The European countries that were the most adamant against invading Iraq, also lost the most money from deals they made with the Iraq dictatorship. One reason, Americans soldiers are still fighting in Iraq, is because of the money certain American companies make from government contracts, that are funded by the American government to rebuild Iraq. The politicians that have a stake in these companies, are getting rich off of the war.

Finally, the reason that America doesn't invade other countries with dictatorships is because there's not enough money to make that would justify invading these other places.

1 + 1 = 9999999999999999999999999999999999999999

Septim, you are right.  A triangle has 5 sides :-)

name one war that hasn't been fought for land or money

Dang, North Korea is a lot larger than Sotuh Korea...

which civil war?  because there have been many all over.

the American Civil War.

Well, the southerners didn't want to have to free/pay their slaves which was basically what their whole economy was thriving on.  So, the American civil war was fought for money.

Ok. For the atomic bomb discussion. How the hell would it not save millions of lives? The war was no where near over. Not the America vs. Japan party anyways. Taking a few (fine, a lot of) islands from Japan was nowhere near defeating Japan. That's like saying Mexico beat the US in a war by attacking and taking over Texas (with the US still fighting and retaliating....).

Blasting through Japanese countryside and cities would have taken a lot of lives. Soldiers alone would probably number at least 1 million dead. (The armies of both nations had millions of soldiers in this war...). Then the civilian deaths....

And how is it so horrible for the US to drop 2 atomic bombs, while it is ok for Europe to foolishly start 2 World Wars, and in WW2, looking only at bombing of say Germany, inflict far, far more civilian casualties?

This anti-American crap is kinda annoying. Every country has problems.

"while it is ok for Europe to foolishly start 2 World W*beep*M>

Hey!! You can't blame a whole continent for one country's aggression and obsession.

I'm the last person to be called a History expert but World War 2 was started when Germany invaded Poland and Britain and France went to Poland's aid. Therefore you can't blame the entire continent...

Wtf?! No. World War 2 started because Britain and France told Germany that if it invaded Poland, they would go to Poland's aid and Germany did it anyway.

And I can't comment about World War I since I never paid any attention to it. I just know that some really important leader was assassinated (Austrian Prince?) and this sparked a chain of events.

how many World Wars have there been?

3

lol

actually, I bet when we all get jobs, there will be a WWIII

:-(

erm, I meant, when I do...

they paid those people to be m0r0ns...

"That just doens't make sense. You just said it was Europe who started the war and then you said it wasn't Europe, all in two sentences."

 First of all, that was 3 sentences that you quoted...
Second, I said it was Europe's fault, but there were a few countries who have no blame....how is that contradictory? That's like saying birds can fly, except for a few (penguins, ostriches, etc. for those who thought all birds fly ;)). Makes perfect sense. Europe started the war...but not all of Europe was involved in it.

"Well, the southerners didn't want to have to free/pay their slaves which was basically what their whole economy was thriving on.  So, the American civil war was fought for money."

Psh, no, the civil war wasn't caused by slavery.  It was caused by equal representation.  The south felt as though the expanding nation was too beneficial to the northern states and demanded a questioned right to leave the Union.  The north said no, the south said "oh yeah?" and the civil war began.

Now who would have benefited most from the south being independent?  Well, probably their plantation and big business owners and politicians, so yes, money is indirectly the cause of the war.

My fault, time was late and the last thing I was thinking about was how many sentences it was, but I'll give you that, it was three.

And I believe Wraith put it pretty good just now.

Birds and Europe just isn't the same thing.. ;)

I heard that in one state(or several?), dildos are forbidden unless it's for you're own health and you got a doctor recipe for it, but you're not allowed to have more then five since then you can sell them on, five is ok, six no. Anyway, I wouldn't say all of U.S don't allow them, would you?

europe started the war..................europe isnt all the same country ya know? it started because germany invaded the british ally nd wouldnt quit it saying "europe started the war" indicates that europe is a country nd therfore a civil war.

well 1 dumb country did

oh yeh i was thinkin of when britain went in my bad