The US in big troubles [Archive]

mymemory

Sep 3, 2002, 09:24 AM

I think this is an important topic to discuss with you all, I would like tho know your point of view about the matter.

Last week I was in some conference (here in my country) and one of the topics or the beganing of the conference started explaning an overall situation with the US stuck market. Basictly and what I remember of it was that in a 100 years the stuck market increased 1000 pints (in the US) and from early 70's it incresed about 10.000 points or so, all that because of offer and demand. Now the difference was that the first 1000 points where based on "real" products, I mean things in existance while the actual market is based on a "virtual" price based on "offer and demand", that means that most of the value of a company is not there ( Enron, .coms, etc).

Now on the other hand there are 2 things going on at same time:
1. The socialist/comunist parties and societys of the world are taking advantage of that to destroy the occidental economy because even the banks have they money invested in the stock market in place of having it in real goods.
2. President Bush is trying to convence the world that is necessary to start a war, the reason of that is that a war move the economy and would work as a very nice cover-up to hide some real economic problems.

Now, if my memory works fine, the Big Depresion of the 40's or 20's ( I do not remember) was caused by a 25% decresed of the stuck market when the values where real, now, just imagine a depresion over 50% now days.

Comunism is taking over again, today in my country we are fighting agains it while international organizations are making us waisting or time whaiting for their help. In octuber there is gonna be a new (and powerfull) comunist leader in Brazil witch has connections with China, Irak, etc.

Lets see then because the global future doesn't seem bright at all starting from here.

Sorry from the spelling

Rajj

Sep 3, 2002, 10:52 AM

Wow, your spelling is pathetic!!!!;) :D I'm just messin' with yah;)
At any rate, President Bush, is trying to engage a war with Iraq without any physical proof of weapons of mass destruction (I love that word), which I think is crazy, because Russia and this country have the biggest stockpile of weapons of mass destruction, and you don’t see Germany or Great Britain coming after us!!!

The United States should mind their own business, and focus on annihilating Osama instead of Iraq!!! Iraq has done nothing to the U.S. (minus the Persian Gulf, which the U.S. had no business going over there anyway) only to their own people, so if Suddam wants to gas his own country, then let him!!! That’s not our problem.

That’s why Germany and Great Britain does not want to help the U.S. in this war, because the U.S. just wants the oil!!!

On final note, The United States should take care of its citizens first, before trying to be the world police

Rajj

Sep 3, 2002, 10:55 AM

President Bush is the pinnacle of ineptitude!!!

‘Nuff said ;) :p

big

Sep 3, 2002, 11:50 AM

The Great depression-1929, please be more informed. A simple sherlock search would have saved you some embarrassment.

>That’s why Germany and Great Britain does not want to help the U.S. in this war, because the U.S. just wants the oil!!!

The United States is dependant on foreign oil, with out it, everyone's economy will hit the *******. The US economy reaches wider than most people know it, maybe this will change when the euro finally surpasses the dollar. Then foreign investors will look to the United European countries for financial investment, and a great migration into the cities there will occur.

Meanwhile, the US will go into a depression, and we will finally have to back out of everyone's country to defend our own boarders. Leaving the new wealthy countries to take their place as UN troops, and peace makers (note: this will not happen, and many smaller regimes will see full war, the likes of which have not been seen since the dark ages w/serf vs serf)

Also, The major reasons we find our troops in every little country is that we just have a hard time sitting back and seeing "leaders" hurt, mame and kill innocent civilians in their country. ie, trade stipulations against China, due to their overwhelming gross neglect for human life.

big

Sep 3, 2002, 12:19 PM

>Now, if my memory works fine, the Big Depresion of the 40's or 20's ( I do not remember)

see, in 1940, we were gearing up to jump into WWI, you know, to save the day again for several countries you all say we have no business helping out.

Then again, it took the US to turn our back on the impending Japanese attacks at Pearl Harbor (WWII now) to get the backing of our military personal, and the country populous as a whole to jump into Europe's new war.

Say that we didn't get into either of those, what would have happened? Any speculation where France wqould be right now? I bet you'd be speaking German.

So what makes our intervention in Kuwait that much different? What about when Iraq attaked Isral, and the US advised for no strike backs? Israel listened and did not comlicate the war even greater then.

We are not a nation of fools and high-ho military idiots, we know what we are doing. This Iraq business is very tricky, Sept 11 was the first time we have been attacked on US soil, are we to forget? What then does Pearl Harbor mean? Those guys were more important?

Rajj

Sep 3, 2002, 12:41 PM

The French don't like Americans anyway, so who cares what language France would be speaking!!!

The point I am making is, that the United States spends billions of our hard earned tax dollars on inconsequential wars, to bring "peace", when all it does is cause hundreds of American families fatherless or motherless!!! And the only thing the families get is crisp, folded, refurbished flag!!! Where is the honor in that?

As for as September 11th, what happened to all the patriotism? What happened to the flags on the trucks and cars?? Americans have gone back to their old selfish ways again!!
‘Nuff said.
;)

big

Sep 3, 2002, 02:12 PM

>The French don't like Americans anyway
That's fine, they like it when we get 'em out of war, we're better then that.
oh- and what's on Ellis Island?

>that the United States spends billions
sorry, its more than that. it will only take 12.6 billion to bring all our schools up to par, out military budget is 2 trillion

>when all it does is cause hundreds of American families fatherless or motherless
Soldiers know what is at stake, that's why they enlist. They have a belief in a "greater good" helping fellow kind.

>As for as September 11th
it's still there, no one has forgotten. nor will. People do not feel the need to paint their bodies w/red, white & blue. Do you feel we have done enough since then? You seem to bitch about our money & lives being spent for foreign military aid, then you complain about Sept 11th?

krossfyter

Sep 3, 2002, 02:23 PM

someones *cough* (xrhajj) *cough*bitching about america....and it seems the way its being done is childish. you know ive heard a lot of griping and whining in my time about america and its foreign realations and to tell you the truth some of them were at least somewhat intelligent complaints. but this one on here... this one takes the cake for stupidity.

warning: im not attacking the person... im attacking whats being said and how its said... the message.

so lets be chill.

big

Sep 3, 2002, 02:52 PM

wow that was vague, which message are you complaining that other people are bitching about? no harsh feelings here, I just am not sure which direction you were pointing.

krossfyter

Sep 3, 2002, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by xrhajj
Wow, your spelling is pathetic!!!!;) :D I'm just messin' with yah;)
At any rate, President Bush, is trying to engage a war with Iraq without any physical proof of weapons of mass destruction (I love that word), which I think is crazy, because Russia and this country have the biggest stockpile of weapons of mass destruction, and you don’t see Germany or Great Britain coming after us!!!

not another one of these arguments.... look true we and russia have nukes etc. etc. but america is using them for defense. if and when sadam gets or has nukes he would not heisitate to use them offensivly to destroy our friends and or us. the term "weapons of mass destruction" i believe is not just limited to nukes... it also includes biological chemical weapons.... which have been found in iraq. i remember seeing on Fox News a former agent of Iraq being interviewed and saying that sadam hussien does have such weapons and he is close to obtaining nukes which he also said he would not hesitate to use it on Isreal and America. there has also been reports that members of Al Qaeda have had meetings with iraq officials which if true (its being heavily researched to find out if its true) means they are a co conspirator. regardless if they do or dont have anything to do with sept. 11, which in my opinion i believe they do, sadam still is trying to create a program of nukes and biological weapons to attack his neighbors (isreal primarily) and america. he has proven himself in the past to attack isreal (scuds) and even his own people (chemical weapons). so dont give me this load of bull that he is some type of freindly guy that is expempt from getting his ass kicked just because you have a problem seeing the evidence stacking or stacked against him or at least that side of the spectral argment.

Originally posted by xrhajj
The United States should mind their own business, and focus on annihilating Osama instead of Iraq!!! Iraq has done nothing to the U.S. (minus the Persian Gulf, which the U.S. had no business going over there anyway) only to their own people, so if Suddam wants to gas his own country, then let him!!! That’s not our problem.

That’s why Germany and Great Britain does not want to help the U.S. in this war, because the U.S. just wants the oil!!!

bush has said that america is fighting a war against anyone who conspires and aides with the terrorists. there are indications that Irag officials have met with some Al Qaeda memebers making them a part of that group who should be dealt with for what happened in sept 11. besides that there is other evidence developing that he has or is going to have nukes and does have chemical weapons. you tell me that he wont use such against isreal or others? you tell me he wont give out nukes to terrorists that will intern bring suitcase nuke bombs into america? you tell me he wont do such things and i will know you trust that sadam is humanity oriented type of guy. i seem to think you trust him. im sorry about that.

the point is.... america is trying to find evidence on Irag that puts them in the hot seat enough for us to attack them. if its overwhelming evidence (solid proof) we will attack. right now i dont think it is... but we havent attacked yet... so dont get your panities in a wad. i dont think we will attack untill its proven...enough for the majority of the country to back american troops. if germenny doesnt believe it fine... if britian doesnt believe it... fine. but america has a job to do if they go in alone or not. besided... i do believe hearing that tony blair is backing bush (just wants him to find more evidence and get others behind him)... and that a large part of his country believes that sadam should be taken out.

Originally posted by xrhajj
On final note, The United States should take care of its citizens first, before trying to be the world police

well okay then... i guess we should have not stoped the nazis because we have trouble in our own country and have citizens that need caring for. thats absurd. sorry man.

big

Sep 3, 2002, 03:19 PM

NICE Points! the here's one you missed, the whole world said they would back America in its defense on this war on terrorism. Now (only 1 year later) with the ideals that "Oh NO! We might actually have to help?!" those other nations are backing down (ie...Attacking Iraq).

>the point is.... america is trying to find evidence on Irag that puts them in the hot seat enough for us to attack them. if....

that's why we are sending inspectors back, if Iraq messes around again, we will have plenty of reason to go back in there!

though here's a little interesting X-Files reasoning, what if the European nations conspired in the sept 11th attacks, then they will reape the rewards when the Euro surpasses the Dollar, and economic items like the stock exchange & other Nations investment etc etc, all move their locations into Europe?

krossfyter

Sep 3, 2002, 03:30 PM

Originally posted by big
NICE Points! the here's one you missed, the whole world said they would back America in its defense on this war on terrorism. Now (only 1 year later) with the ideals that "Oh NO! We might actually have to help?!" those other nations are backing down (ie...Attacking Iraq).

true true. very odd aint it.

Originally posted by big

that's why we are sending inspectors back, if Iraq messes around again, we will have plenty of reason to go back in there!

but we know that sending inspectors back in is no way full proof. sadam will hide the evidence.

Originally posted by big
though here's a little interesting X-Files reasoning, what if the European nations conspired in the sept 11th attacks, then they will reape the rewards when the Euro surpasses the Dollar, and economic items like the stock exchange & other Nations investment etc etc, all move their locations into Europe?

intresting threory. i never thought of that. however if you want to go there... you must go toward the illuminati theory also... its in the same vein.. i would think.

but over all thanks for bringing out the points.

big

Sep 3, 2002, 03:30 PM

>intresting threory. i never thought of that. however if you want to go there... you must go toward the illuminati theory also... its in the same vein.. i would think.

well, problem is, the US is so massively dependant on oil, that if the wells just naturally ran dry, the world economy would go kaputs! So putting the world's interest into another location where the people are used to city living (far less car driving & more localized food production) actually makes sense on an economic scale.....

However,
I love this guy... very close to what we are discussing....

"_The new national totem of America presides over the chainstore that killed local economies from sea to shining sea. Under this icon of narcotized complacancy, a population of TV zombies plods like a herd of cows to the hamburger factory. Sometimes it's appropriate, even patriotic, to be ashamed of your country. "

James Howard Kuntsler (http://kunstler.com/)

Definitly read "Cluster**** Nation Chronicle -- ongoing commentary"

Rajj

Sep 3, 2002, 03:39 PM

Wow, your incorrect pronunciation and spelling is worse than our Venezuelan friend!!

It is pretty conspicuous that you don’t watch CNN or Fox news!!!

News flashes my friend….. this just in… The U.S. is already bombing Iraq’s spy bases and weapon housings…so don’t tell me that the U.S. is just standing there!!!

The bottom line is that U.S. wants the oil…That’s why ol’ chap Blair and Germany’s president won’t help the U.S. until they find valid proof!!

:p :p :D

big

Sep 3, 2002, 03:54 PM

>The bottom line is that U.S. wants the oil…That’s why ol’ chap Blair and Germany’s president won’t help the U.S. until they find valid proof!!

*sigh* and France & Great Britain just wanted their independance from a ruling Dictatorship....oh well, its just a means of life the US needs to keep the world afloat & feed their babies. All in all, in 1000 years we will have no more cars & trucks burning fossil fuels & Iraq will be a wasteland desert no one wants, perhaps so will europe & most of the US, as we have polluted our world.

Canada will however be a temperate climate, with New York being sub tropical! so that's great news!

Rower_CPU

Sep 3, 2002, 04:10 PM

Originally posted by xrhajj
The French don't like Americans anyway, so who cares what language France would be speaking!!!

Please avoid cultural stereotypes that only undermine your credibility.:rolleyes:

Rajj

Sep 3, 2002, 04:11 PM

Ahh the sarcasm!!!!
;) ;)

krossfyter

Sep 3, 2002, 04:12 PM

did you know that bush is being cautious about the possible attack on Iraq? did you know it was bush jr who told his father to be more cautious before going after iraq in what would be called "dessert storm"? i bet you didn’t because you love spitting out one-sided propaganda.

listen i don’t claim that what im saying is full proof or absolute... im merely indicating to you that you fail to see the other sides pros and the arguments that you try to push forth here are weak. people on your side have better arguments then the ones you are using ... you should learn from them and stop it with these arguments that seem are stemming from the elementary play ground.
;)

"This isn't just an issue for the U.S., it is an issue for Britain, it is an issue for the wider world. America shouldn't have to face this issue alone, we should face it together."
---- Tony Blair

http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/09/03/blair.iraq/index.html

jelloshotsrule

Sep 3, 2002, 04:22 PM

just as a note and question...

the us did use radioactive weapons in the gulf war... back-dawg knows the specifics better than i do. but basically it was some form of deteriorated uranium or something. while it was not as potent as what one would use in a full scale nuclear radioactive bomb, it has left the citizens of iraq with many cases of cancer and other illnesses from the residual radiation.... and i don't see that as totally "defense".

and now the question: how does anyone know for sure that as soon as saddam hussein gets nuclear weapons that he'd use them? after all, if they have chemical weapons as many say, and haven't used them against us yet, then why would they use nuclear weapons "without hesitation"?

while i agree that he's a psycho and doing harm to his people, i don't have all the facts, and i don't think most anyone on here does either.

as for france hating america.... that's cool. let em drink their wine, eat their cheese, and wave their white surrender flags....

ha ha!

krossfyter

Sep 3, 2002, 04:30 PM

yeah jello i dont know about that. if true thats not good.

all im saying to these other guy is to argue a bit better from his side. i am in no way claiming the way i think (my opinion) is correct and the only way. i do know that we are still at war and we need to bring these terrorists organizations to justice and all those who conspired with the terrorists organizations.

jelloshotsrule

Sep 3, 2002, 04:33 PM

Originally posted by krossfyter
yeah jello i dont know about that. if true thats not good.

yeah, it's true. saw it on a news story (not that that makes it true) and my dad (retired army colonel) and back-dawg (knows his military info) both confirmed it.... so yeah. it sucks. big time

didn't mean at all to sound like i was attacking you, just thought of those things while reading the thread.

it's alllll good.

big

Sep 3, 2002, 04:34 PM

>the us did use radioactive weapons in the gulf war...

it did? that was hush hush, glad I got this info from a rumors site....

>how does anyone know for sure that as soon as saddam hussein gets nuclear weapons that he'd use them?

ever hear of Gulf War Syndrome? Or is that made up too?

>while i agree that he's a psycho and doing harm to his people,

Give 'em Favorite Nation status like China! That'll teach 'em to emplore cheap labor in inhumain factories etc etc.... Oh, how about him killing his nephew, after the US interegating him....That's F* upped! He did say Saddam was working on getting weapons grade Uranium

alex_ant

Sep 3, 2002, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by krossfyter
not another one of these arguments.... look true we and russia have nukes etc. etc. but america is using them for defense. if and when sadam gets or has nukes he would not heisitate to use them offensivly to destroy our friends and or us.
If and when... please supply evidence for if and for when.
the term "weapons of mass destruction" i believe is not just limited to nukes... it also includes biological chemical weapons.... which have been found in iraq. i remember seeing on Fox News
Fox News, enough said.
there has also been reports that members of Al Qaeda have had meetings with iraq officials which if true (its being heavily researched to find out if its true) means they are a co conspirator. regardless if they do or dont have anything to do with sept. 11, which in my opinion i believe they do, sadam still is trying to create a program of nukes and biological weapons to attack his neighbors (isreal primarily) and america. he has proven himself in the past to attack isreal (scuds) and even his own people (chemical weapons). so dont give me this load of bull that he is some type of freindly guy that is expempt from getting his ass kicked just because you have a problem seeing the evidence stacking or stacked against him or at least that side of the spectral argment.
Nobody is saying he's Mother Theresa. The picture painted of him in the media, though, is largely sensationalized pap designed to get ratings and to satisfy the establishment, not to reveal the facts. Can you imagine what it would look like in the newspaper if Saddam saved a drowning child from a river and a major US news network reported it? "Saddam kidnaps child... holds him hostage in river... innocent Iraqi nearly killed by psychopathic dictator." Don't think you have an accurate picture of the situation by watching the Fox Republican News Channel.
bush has said that america is fighting a war against anyone who conspires and aides with the terrorists.
What is a terrorist? A terrorist to you is a martyr to the next person. You and I are terrorists who deserve to spend an eternity in Hell in the eyes of most of the Iraqi population. The fact is that the word "terrorist" means whatever WE make it mean. And we've made it into a word that we can apply to all our enemies, anyone we don't agree with, in order to silence them, take away their rights, and sidestep justice.
there are indications that Irag officials have met with some Al Qaeda memebers making them a part of that group who should be dealt with for what happened in sept 11.
"Dealt with" by breaking international law to invade and remove a regime we don't agree with? The problem is that the US is making up its own personally convenient laws as it goes. Prisoners of war? Nah, "enemy combatants." War on terrorism? Why hasn't Congress declared it? What is terrorism, anyway? Have you read the novel 1984? It's interesting to look at the parallels between Hussein, bin-Laden, all those evil terrorist guys, and Emmanuel Goldstein. VERrrry interesting.
besides that there is other evidence developing that he has or is going to have nukes and does have chemical weapons. you tell me that he wont use such against isreal or others? you tell me he wont give out nukes to terrorists that will intern bring suitcase nuke bombs into america? you tell me he wont do such things and i will know you trust that sadam is humanity oriented type of guy. i seem to think you trust him. im sorry about that.
I don't think he's a humanity oriented type of guy. I just think he's no worse than any other dictator. If we're going to bomb a third-world country that really treats its citizens like crap, let's go after China. Oh, wait. They're in bed with our big businesses. Nevermind then, let's take the easy route and go after the country whose oil we need, storming in under the guise of liberation and freedom and denying that the desire to rape and pillage their natural resources had anything to do with our decision.
the point is.... america is trying to find evidence on Irag that puts them in the hot seat enough for us to attack them.
While at the same time ignoring all evidence to the contrary.
if its overwhelming evidence (solid proof) we will attack. right now i dont think it is... but we havent attacked yet... so dont get your panities in a wad. i dont think we will attack untill its proven...enough for the majority of the country to back american troops. if germenny doesnt believe it fine... if britian doesnt believe it... fine. but america has a job to do if they go in alone or not. besided... i do believe hearing that tony blair is backing bush (just wants him to find more evidence and get others behind him)... and that a large part of his country believes that sadam should be taken out.
Virtually all of the Middle East and Europe are against it. Actually about 95% (rough estimate) of all countries in the world are against a US-Iraq war. Who knows why Britain is with us... maybe it's the lust for world domination that's in their DNA.
well okay then... i guess we should have not stoped the nazis because we have trouble in our own country and have citizens that need caring for. thats absurd. sorry man.
Nothing compares to the Nazis. Iraq is in no way similar to Nazi Germany. Not even the early days of Nazi Germany on a small scale. Hussein is in no way similar to Hitler. Please don't bring sensationalized Nazi comparisons into this - they're ridiculous and you know it.

Alex

krossfyter

Sep 3, 2002, 04:39 PM

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule

yeah, it's true. saw it on a news story (not that that makes it true) and my dad (retired army colonel) and back-dawg (knows his military info) both confirmed it.... so yeah. it sucks. big time

didn't mean at all to sound like i was attacking you, just thought of those things while reading the thread.

it's alllll good.

nah its cool man. thanks for offering that bit of info (even if there is no reference) to argue on the other side. thats a good argument if true and perhaps xrhajj
should look into it to help out his side more here.

Dr. Distortion

Sep 3, 2002, 04:40 PM

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
just as a note and question...

the us did use radioactive weapons in the gulf war... back-dawg knows the specifics better than i do. but basically it was some form of deteriorated uranium or something. while it was not as potent as what one would use in a full scale nuclear radioactive bomb, it has left the citizens of iraq with many cases of cancer and other illnesses from the residual radiation.... and i don't see that as totally "defense".

and now the question: how does anyone know for sure that as soon as saddam hussein gets nuclear weapons that he'd use them? after all, if they have chemical weapons as many say, and haven't used them against us yet, then why would they use nuclear weapons "without hesitation"?

while i agree that he's a psycho and doing harm to his people, i don't have all the facts, and i don't think most anyone on here does either.

as for france hating america.... that's cool. let em drink their wine, eat their cheese, and wave their white surrender flags....

ha ha!

Well, those "weapons" were just bullet points filled with decayed uranium/plutonium to make them able to penetrate much thicker tank shielding than conventional lead bulletpoints would have done.

krossfyter

Sep 3, 2002, 04:43 PM

alex ant.... thanks for joining in. :D

you are a good argumentive party for the other side. all im saying is that xrhajj
position is weak and he should take some lessons from what you are saying. evidence im not providing because i have no reference... thats why im saying my side is just an opinion right now ... not an absolute like i said before. when someone comes in here claiming thier side is the right way then they best support it with some sources or references etc. etc.
as im sure you can agree.

right now its all here say. but thanks for joining in. rock it.

Dr. Distortion

Sep 3, 2002, 04:48 PM

Originally posted by krossfyter

...

well okay then... i guess we should have not stoped the nazis because we have trouble in our own country and have citizens that need caring for. thats absurd. sorry man.

Well, if America hadn't joined the war Europe would have been freed shortly after by the Russians (who suffered far greater losses than the US troops). And don't forget the Brittain and Canadian troops.
Besides, one of the main reasons for America to join the war were german submarines attacking American supply ships and passenger ships close to the american territories. Another reason was that America couldn't sell consumption goods to the European market anymore.

This doesn't reduce the fact than I'm quite grateful the Americans freed the city I live in, Eindhoven.

-Dr. D.

krossfyter

Sep 3, 2002, 04:55 PM

Originally posted by Dr. Distortion

Well, if America hadn't joined the war Europe would have been freed shortly after by the Russians (who suffered far greater losses than the US troops). And don't forget the Brittain and Canadian troops.

okay. but i dont know about that. its all just guessing. all i know is the tide turned dramtically once america got involved. you could say and it would be true that russia really put a beating on them and weakend them before we got in and finished the job.

Originally posted by Dr. Distortion
Besides, one of the main reasons for America to join the war were german submarines attacking American supply ships and passenger ships close to the american territories. Another reason was that America couldn't sell consumption goods to the European market anymore.

This doesn't reduce the fact than I'm quite grateful the Americans freed the city I live in, Eindhoven.

-Dr. D.

yeah man. thanks for being cool about this.

big

Sep 3, 2002, 04:55 PM

>Well, those "weapons" were just bullet points filled with decayed uranium/plutonium to make them able to penetrate much thicker tank shielding than conventional lead bulletpoints would have done.

I now remember that being an issue....the news covered this during the Gulf War

>This doesn't reduce the fact than I'm quite grateful the Americans freed the city I live in, Eindhoven.

I have heard of Eindhoven! anyways, you need not admit you are grateful, no one on this board did anything to help back then....just remember those whom did, and be thankful to them, and we promise not to be all astute!

Dr. Distortion

Sep 3, 2002, 05:03 PM

Originally posted by big
>Well, those "weapons" were just bullet points filled with decayed uranium/plutonium to make them able to penetrate much thicker tank shielding than conventional lead bulletpoints would have done.

I now remember that being an issue....the news covered this during the Gulf War

>This doesn't reduce the fact than I'm quite grateful the Americans freed the city I live in, Eindhoven.

I have heard of Eindhoven! anyways, you need not admit you are grateful, no one on this board did anything to help back then....just remember those whom did, and be thankful to them, and we promise not to be all astute!

My grandfather is a living witness of the 2nd World War... in fact, he was in the Dutch army when he was captured by the Germans (after the Netherlands had surrendered!!!) and deported to a german hostage camp. Luckily he was released a few weeks after, but he still tells me those weeks were the most unsure weeks of his entire life. The Germans were actually quite lenient to the Dutch in the first few years because they saw us as their "arian brother race". After the war intensified in '44-'45 and germany was starting to lose they ofcourse oppressed the people here much more.

I think a lot of the arguments in this thread can be avoided by simply looking up stuff in good history books or on Discovery channel instead of blabbing pure patriottic thoughts here. I mean, you should have some solid material to back up your statements.

it's allowed to rumor here about Macs, not about the facts that happened in the past. (I guess)

-Dr. D.

e-coli

Sep 3, 2002, 05:11 PM

Originally posted by big
though here's a little interesting X-Files reasoning, what if the European nations conspired in the sept 11th attacks, then they will reape the rewards when the Euro surpasses the Dollar, and economic items like the stock exchange & other Nations investment etc etc, all move their locations into Europe?

the euro will continue to surpass the dollar. europes gdp is 13X what america's is. the dollar has been over-valued for years. but switching to the euro will actually harm europe's economy in many ways. the cost of labour in the EU is now prohibitively high for a number of sectors (namely manufacturing). china and taiwan are the countries that will benfit the most from the euro transition. countries like italy and will be the most adversely effected.

all the global stock markets are intricately tied together. american investors are as free to buy into european and asian markets as europeans and asians are to buy into american markets. relatively speaking, it's not really that big of a deal whose market is bigger, or more active. it's not like we're on a slippery slope to becoming a second-world country.

and war with iraq will not stimulate the economy enough to make a dent. it's not WWII. we're not going to be building tanks and ships and aircraft by the thousands to go there. the possible war has little to do with the economy, except in making people jittery. As far as oil? nah. we can buy it from russia. russian oil is cheap, and they have more oil in siberia than in the whole of the middle east.

and whoever mentioned America in rather ungrateful terms regarding WWII should watch their tongue. Like it our not, we lost countless thousands of men helping you out. Let's leave that subject alone and play nicely. ;)

jelloshotsrule

Sep 3, 2002, 06:18 PM

Originally posted by big
>the us did use radioactive weapons in the gulf war...

it did? that was hush hush, glad I got this info from a rumors site....

>how does anyone know for sure that as soon as saddam hussein gets nuclear weapons that he'd use them?

ever hear of Gulf War Syndrome? Or is that made up too?

of course it was hush hush. and maybe if you put the pieces together... perhaps gulf war syndrome is a result of said radiation?

edit: sorry bout this- peace

Gelfin

Sep 3, 2002, 06:38 PM

I'm still not taking sides on the Iraq issue, but as a technical issue, the technology many of you are referring to is the "Armor Piercing Depleted-Uranium Slug." Anyone who points to these to support an accusation that the U.S. is using radiological weapons is either heavily misinformed or relying upon the general ignorance and paranoia of nuclear issues among the general public.

Depleted uranium is called "depleted" because it consists almost entirely of the stable isotope U-238, which is so weakly radioactive that a sample can be held against exposed skin for weeks or longer without any reaction in the tissue. In fact, the most significant nonmilitary use of depleted uranium is in radiation shielding for hospital x-ray facilities.

For military applications, depleted uranium is used because uranium is an extremely dense metal (a sample of uranium is upwards of 60% heavier than an equal volume of lead), not for its radiological properties.

Think about it: if depleted uranium weapons have such serious radiological effects, why would we fire them in Iraq? "Darn you, Saddam, if you don't stop trying to aquire weapons-grade nuclear material, we're going to shoot this weapons-grade nuclear material at you!" If it would be impractical for the Iraqis to go out and collect slugs to extract the nuclear material (and it would be), how strongly radioactive do you think it could possibly be?

I wouldn't recommend you pop a depleted uranium slug in your mouth and suck on it, but I also wouldn't recommend doing so with a traditional lead slug. It's hard to say which would become fatally toxic first. But the DU slugs certainly don't live up to the anti-nuclear hype and paranoia people want to attach to them. People will tell you APDS were responsible for "Gulf War Syndrome," but radiation exposure produces specific effects which can be recognized by medical personnel, not the wide array of vague and mysterious maladies reported after the Gulf War.

jelloshotsrule

Sep 3, 2002, 06:49 PM

thanks for the info gelfin.

the news report i saw (forget which channel, not a major news channel though, rather a pbs type thing) got the linkage (from DU to sicknesses) in my head and it made sense

anyhoo, i was wrong, and i apologize to those who i may have implied were wrong with my incorrect thoughts

i'm still not convinced hussein would do anything and everything to attack the US right away if he got nuclear weapons.

just got finished reading alex's thoughts on the first page... and i agree with most of what you said... it's all relative. and therefore it's hard if not impossible for us to see the other person's side unbiased...

thanks again gelfin

krossfyter

Sep 3, 2002, 06:51 PM

thanks you gelfin for that. now im a bit more educated in that subject.

:D

big

Sep 3, 2002, 06:52 PM

>we can buy it from russia. russian oil is cheap, and they have more oil in siberia than in the whole of the middle east.

Sorry, russia will be pressed to up there production within 6 months, let alone substantially over 2 million more barrels a day

>I'm still not taking sides on the Iraq issue

Ditto

>Anyone who points to these to support an accusation that the U.S. is using radiological weapons is either heavily misinformed or relying upon the general ignorance and paranoia of nuclear issues among the general public.

Amen

>of course it was hush hush. and maybe if you put the obvious pieces together... perhaps gulf war syndrome is a result of said radiation? oh wait, that's too obvious.

ummmm read on my friend

>american investors are as free to buy into european and asian markets as europeans and asians are to buy into american markets. relatively speaking, it's not really that big of a deal whose market is bigger, or more active.

sorry, I put my money into the bank with the highest return, etc etc money talks man

>it's allowed to rumor here about Macs, not about the facts that happened in the past. (I guess)

did you understand the words coming out of my mouth? what the hell are you talking about? So my Grandfather was in WWII as well, so....what Patriotic Rhetoric was I blabbing on about, please show me the exact sentence you think I am making up

big

Sep 3, 2002, 06:54 PM

>i'm still not convinced hussein would do anything and everything to attack the US right away if he got nuclear weapons.

he would then have to come up with long range missles, or wait till we came over to hit us with those

jelloshotsrule

Sep 3, 2002, 07:05 PM

Originally posted by big
he would then have to come up with long range missles, or wait till we came over to hit us with those

true. which doesn't do much for those theories that suggest that he'd be bombing us within hours of getting nukes

that said, i'm still not sure his overall motivation would have him do it. not that he doesn't hate america, but not sure...

big

Sep 3, 2002, 07:14 PM

>that said, i'm still not sure his overall motivation would have him do it. not that he doesn't hate america, but not sure...

yeah, though how many people can nuke an advisary and become a living saint, all this as he is on his way out of this world (remember, he is truly showing his age, and must be considering how quickly this life will be over for him through natural means)

He could very easily be positioning himself to be the first leader of the Muslim world, pulling all the clans together, to fight against the great evil. There are so many possible reasons he could have.......

(note: just theorizing, these are the thoughts of a tired & rambling mind)

krossfyter

Sep 3, 2002, 08:13 PM

actually big and jelloshots..... if sadam gets nukes im sure he would sell them to terrorists (or give them out) or give out suitcase nukes to use against us. it doesnt have to be a long range thing.

just a possible theory.

big

Sep 3, 2002, 08:17 PM

Its all too scary though, you have to ultimatly be comfortable with who you and your god are

vniow

Sep 3, 2002, 08:23 PM

Originally posted by big
Its all too scary though, you have to ultimatly be comfortable with who you and your god are

Or gods. Don't forget us pagans!:p

krossfyter

Sep 3, 2002, 08:47 PM

Originally posted by big
Its all too scary though, you have to ultimatly be comfortable with who you and your god are

what was this in reference to and what do you mean? im sorry im a bit confused by that response. forgive me. heh

Gelfin

Sep 3, 2002, 10:16 PM

Originally posted by big
>i'm still not convinced hussein would do anything and everything to attack the US right away if he got nuclear weapons.

he would then have to come up with long range missles, or wait till we came over to hit us with those

This is not necessarily true. The most likely scenario, the one that scares your governmental representatives the most, is that Saddam will develop a crude nuclear device and sell or give it to terrorist organizations. The terrorists would then deliver it to a major U.S. port city on a cargo ship and detonate it there. This is currently our greatest vulnerability. We have absolutely no defense against it at present.

madamimadam

Sep 3, 2002, 11:03 PM

Originally posted by big
We are not a nation of fools and high-ho military idiots, we know what we are doing. This Iraq business is very tricky, Sept 11 was the first time we have been attacked on US soil, are we to forget? What then does Pearl Harbor mean? Those guys were more important?

You're not??? Could have fooled me!

madamimadam

Sep 3, 2002, 11:08 PM

Originally posted by xrhajj

As for as September 11th, what happened to all the patriotism? What happened to the flags on the trucks and cars?? Americans have gone back to their old selfish ways again!!
‘Nuff said.
;)

September 11 is a ****ing joke; the US has been bombing innocent citizens in countries they have had no right being in for years and it is a shock that someone got pissed off?!?!?!?!?!

****ing Americans can shove their patriotism up their asses... maybe you could come out of your shells of propoganda and take a listen to what the rest of the world thinks of your "loving nature".

In Australia, the US bug has been hitting the uneducated for a long time now due to the excessive amount of TV that comes from over that way but those of us who do not live to watch poor quality sitcoms see a different world.

madamimadam

Sep 3, 2002, 11:24 PM

Originally posted by big
>that the United States spends billions
sorry, its more than that. it will only take 12.6 billion to bring all our schools up to par, out military budget is 2 trillion

I certainly hope that worries you.... if not, think about the fact that the whole Australian budget is under $AU40 billion and the US has a terrible welfare system. Which is more important... keeping your people alive or fighting someone else's fight?

job

Sep 3, 2002, 11:30 PM

Originally posted by madamimadam

September 11 is a ****ing joke; the US has been bombing innocent citizens in countries they have had no right being in for years and it is a shock that someone got pissed off?!?!?!?!?!

people and/or regimes which support the groups which have attacked the united states are not "innocents."

yes, innocent people in afganistan have died, and many more probably will. it's war; a veritable hell on earth.

i don't hear anyone complaining or crying for the turks that were gassed by saddam hussein. were those not innocents as well?

would you rather that america not do anything, allowing to let terrorism to proliferate while we sit in fear of collateral damage and innocent civilian casualties?

all i seem to hear is everytime we happen to goof up, the world points the ever present guilt finger at us (usually accompanied with a string of euphamisms for otherwise obscene words.. ;) )

job

Sep 3, 2002, 11:37 PM

Originally posted by madamimadam

I certainly hope that worries you.... if not, think about the fact that the whole Australian budget is under $AU40 billion and the US has a terrible welfare system. Which is more important... keeping your people alive or fighting someone else's fight?

i'm sorry, i fail to see how it is "someone else's fight.."

welfare has always been a touchy subject.

why should people pay taxes to support the jobless? i'm not saying that i oppose welfare, however, if my tax money goes to support an able bodied person, who, although perfectly able to aquire a job, is content on sitting on his/her @ss and waiting for their welfare check every month, then yes, i do have a problem with welfare.

first hand example :

while i was living in germany, the turkish emmigrants were allowed to be supported by the german welfare system as they tried to find a steady job.

however, many of the emmigrants around and in my community were content with the big fat government handouts they recieved in the mail every month, some of which came from my tax dollars.

they saw no need to work as the government was already providing for them.

not only does this damage the local economy, this also results in the idea that the government knows what's best for you; slighly orwellian....

madamimadam

Sep 3, 2002, 11:40 PM

Originally posted by krossfyter
bush has said that america is fighting a war against anyone who conspires and aides with the terrorists. there are indications that Irag officials have met with some Al Qaeda memebers making them a part of that group who should be dealt with for what happened in sept 11.

Oh... well since US has the right to make a decision like "it is ok to bomb who ever we like as long as they have terrorists".

Next week I might start a war against school bullies and those who harbour them.

I will walk from school to school and bust some caps in their asses before going to their homes and burning them with their families inside.

madamimadam

Sep 3, 2002, 11:43 PM

Post Deleted by Moderator.

job

Sep 3, 2002, 11:44 PM

Originally posted by madamimadam

Oh... well since US has the right to make a decision like "it is ok to bomb who ever we like as long as they have terrorists".

well seeing as they "bombed" us first...

if any organisation or regime is helping those responsible, then it makes them just as guilty in my view.

Next week I might start a war against school bullies and those who harbour them.

I will walk from school to school and bust some caps in their asses before going to their homes and burning them with their families inside.

only a sovereign nation can declare war on another sovereign nation. ;) :D

it's all good..

job

Sep 3, 2002, 11:48 PM

Originally posted by madamimadam

Round up every U.S. citizen, all except the Jews
Take that lot to Israel and wipe that lot out too

not being racist or bigoted here at all...

no.....not at all......

madamimadam

Sep 3, 2002, 11:52 PM

Originally posted by hitman
people and/or regimes which support the groups which have attacked the united states are not "innocents."

And why not? While I point out I was not talking about these people, it is possible to support a body but not support 100% of it's decisions.

yes, innocent people in afganistan have died, and many more probably will. it's war; a veritable hell on earth.

Yes, I know, a war on all terorism because one group upset the US. To give an extreme example to make a point, a group of 5 German boys beat me up so I kill all Germans.

i don't hear anyone complaining or crying for the turks that were gassed by saddam hussein. were those not innocents as well?

Because the TV programs I like to watch are not cancelled for a day of remembering 1 year since bad thinks have happened to Saddam

would you rather that america not do anything, allowing to let terrorism to proliferate while we sit in fear of collateral damage and innocent civilian casualties?

I would rather America deal with those issues that belong to them, being the terrorism that they have been faced with not all terrorism, and that they do it more by the book and less as they think fit.

all i seem to hear is everytime we happen to goof up, the world points the ever present guilt finger at us (usually accompanied with a string of euphamisms for otherwise obscene words.. ;) )

I will be the first to point out the great that has come out of the US (hell, Apple is a US based company), but I just wish Americans would come down to earth for once and realise that they are no better than anyone else and that what they do has long term effects on others. If Bush, and the rest of the US for that matter, stopped for 2 seconds and tried to work out WHY his country is being terrorised instead of WHO is terrorising it then maybe a real solution could come instead of a mass of killings.

big

Sep 3, 2002, 11:57 PM

>You're not??? Could have fooled me!

ouch...no wonder the British sent you to live on an island all by yourself...
Damn! now they have Internet and can talk to the rest of us again!

>Next week I might start a war against school bullies and those who harbour them.

please do, here in the states, only a few prisoners get internet access, like less than 1/10000 of 1 percent

>Kill Americans - TISM

You are definatly not rational enough (nor mature) to be posting on this subject

>US has a terrible welfare system

Like that Beatles song...."It's Getting Better all the Time"

>In Australia, the US bug has been hitting the uneducated for a long time now due to the excessive amount of TV that comes from over that way but those of us who do not live to watch poor quality sitcoms see a different world.

That's what I hear from Canada too! (all the three people I know of from there) Yet I choose to spend my days either working, studying, reading books and going to school, OH and putting up with crap (Dung) from the Outback

>well seeing as they "bombed" us first...

We actually helped to over throw the horrid regime in power in Afhganistan first, teaching Laden his tricks, however, they loved us when we came over there then! Now they are like a red-headed step aussie.

>burning them with their families inside.

Thank God we have no gun controls here in the states, and I can & will freely harm you as you enter my house & domain (oh, that goes for my neighbors as well)

Last but not least, get off you high hoarse and go help clean some skyscraper rubble, I've never heard of Australia helping to make amends in the world

madamimadam

Sep 3, 2002, 11:58 PM

Originally posted by hitman
well seeing as they "bombed" us first...

Jesus, you sound like a bloody child. I don't know about the US but, in Australia, if someone attacks you and your life is not treatened after that attack them you are not, under law, allowed to retailiate. I would assume that law is similar in the US but when you get "bombed" you throw your law book out the window and become red-necks.

if any organisation or regime is helping those responsible, then it makes them just as guilty in my view.

Of course you do... that is what your country teaches.... watch, though, when you say "helping"... we were talking about "supporting" and I see a difference between the two. If a group is "helping" then they are guilty to an extent but if they are "supporting" they are not.

You can start a support group for Chales Manson and that is totally legal but you where around and helped him kill, you are guilty or a crime.

job

Sep 3, 2002, 11:59 PM

Originally posted by madamimadam

Yes, I know, a war on all terorism because one group upset the US. I would rather America deal with those issues that belong to them, being the terrorism that they have been faced with not all terrorism, and that they do it more by the book and less as they think fit.

Again, I fail to understand what exactly it is you think the United States should do. Are you saying that America should only attempt to stop one terrorist cell and not all? Would'nt logic dictate that if you have the opportunity to stop all terrorism that you should do so?

Because the TV programs I like to watch are not cancelled for a day of remembering 1 year since bad thinks have happened to Saddam

And that's a legitmate reason to post those henious lyrics?

If Bush, and the rest of the US for that matter, stopped for 2 seconds and tried to work out WHY his country is being terrorised instead of WHO is terrorising it then maybe a real solution could come instead of a mass of killings.

And why, pray tell, do you think that the United States is being terrorised?

job

Sep 4, 2002, 12:01 AM

Originally posted by big

>burning them with their families inside.

Thank God we have no gun controls here in the states, and I can & will freely harm you as you enter my house & domain (oh, that goes for my neighbors as well)

oh, don't say that, you'll offend everyone. ;)

just kidding man. beautiful point.

madamimadam

Sep 4, 2002, 12:05 AM

Originally posted by big
>Kill Americans - TISM

You are definatly not rational enough (nor mature) to be posting on this subject

>US has a terrible welfare system

Like that Beatles song...."It's Getting Better all the Time"

Last but not least, get off you high hoarse and go help clean some skyscraper rubble, I've never heard of Australia helping to make amends in the world

Well, I will not start a pathetic "ping pong" name calling session here so I will just say:

Kill Americans was a joke I added to lighten up a little and, if you read it all the way you would see how I came to that conclusion;

It is taking a LONG time to get better; and

You have not heard anything because we are a HIGHLY underrated country. Australia sent their best troops (special services) over to Afg. with you to fight this "war". Our Prime Minister was also one of the very first to claim full support. He was actually staying near the White House at the time of the incident and he got over to see Bush to pledge support as soon as he was given security clearance.

job

Sep 4, 2002, 12:06 AM

Originally posted by madamimadam

Jesus, you sound like a bloody child. I don't know about the US but, in Australia, if someone attacks you and your life is not treatened after that attack them you are not, under law, allowed to retailiate. I would assume that law is similar in the US but when you get "bombed" you throw your law book out the window and become red-necks.

Except almost 3,000 innocent civilians "had their lives threatened." :rolleyes:

First you expunge stuff on how the United States kills innocents, yet you overlook the fact that almost 3,000 civilians died because of the attacks. It seems a bit hypocritical. Yes, those who died at the Pentagon were not civilians, however, they make up a small percentage of those killed.

Next you'll be telling me that they were not "innocent...."

Of course you do... that is what your country teaches.... watch, though, when you say "helping"... we were talking about "supporting" and I see a difference between the two. If a group is "helping" then they are guilty to an extent but if they are "supporting" they are not.

There is a slight difference between the two, yes, however, allowing a group to operate freely within your borders seems to be "helping."