Nyarlathotep Posted February 21, 2003 Author Share Posted February 21, 2003 well lets take them 1 at a time shall we?"Palestine1948-Present"The United Nations ruled Israel an independent nation. THis was a UN backed effort. And where is the US tyrrany here? This is an anti-semitic example, illustrating the website webmasters own antisemitism.It's a piece about the Israeli forces killing civiliants and even US military. Yet the US government supports Isreali government with money. So as long as the US government pays money to a government that kills innocent people (not talking about their effort to eliminate extreme terrorists) it's okay and yet if France has sold stuff in the past to Iraq it's all of a sudden moraly wrong ? Iraq1991-Present Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. US tyrrany? He was going to push into Saudi ARabia, who begged for help. Us tyrrany? The United Nations imposed resolutions on Iraq. US Tyrrany? The webmaster is siding with Saddam Hussein and feeling sorry for him because the big bad USA helped to put resolutions on a conquering dictator. Awwwww....Of course Saddams invasion of Kuwait wasn't US tyranny. But what about the following statement (not as tyranny, but more as a reaction to your polution story):Laka Foundation estimates that this particular U.S. campaign left behind 300-800 tons of radioactive waste from the depleted uranium ammunition all over Kuwait and Iraq — poisoning the air, the land, the water and the people everywhere.Afghanistan2001-2002 One word: ROFL. Taliban Says: US Empire20 Million Afghan people say: US liberators.so i guess if the webmaster is a Taliban sympathizer, he would see Afghanistan 2001-2002 as tyrrany. Yea, I understand his point. A taliban supporter would naturally see Afghanistan 2001-2002 as tyrrany. Forutnately, the Afhgan people see it differently.This part is about innocent victems that lost their lives.To give you 2 other stories from a different site:1st site2nd siteLastly, I noticed something very curious. He doesn't (that I could find) critisize the US for Germany 1945. Why not? I was just wondering. Perhaps its in there somewhere and I missed it.He does actually Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyarlathotep Posted February 21, 2003 Author Share Posted February 21, 2003 what facts? I already covered the first three of them. Need we cover anymore? True, hence why I said sorry in my second reply. I hadn't seen it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 what facts? I already covered the first three of them. Need we cover anymore? True, hence why I said sorry in my second reply. I hadn't seen it. "Palestine1948-Present"It's a piece about the Israeli forces killing civiliants and even US military. Yet the US government supports Isreali government with money. So as long as the US government pays money to a government that kills innocent people (not talking about their effort to eliminate extreme terrorists) it's okay and yet if France has sold stuff in the past to Iraq it's all of a sudden moraly wrong ? does it mention all the Israeli citizens killed by Palestinians? Does it mention all the Saudi and other moneies that goes to Palestine to help continue to kill innocent Israelis? This is hardly US tyrrany. The UNITED NATIONS decided Israel owned that land. SO which is it Nyar? Was the UN right or wrong? You cant have it both ways. Tell me: UN RIGHT....or....UN WRONG.Iraq1991-Present Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. US tyrrany? He was going to push into Saudi ARabia, who begged for help. Us tyrrany? The United Nations imposed resolutions on Iraq. US Tyrrany? The webmaster is siding with Saddam Hussein and feeling sorry for him because the big bad USA helped to put resolutions on a conquering dictator. Awwwww....Of course Saddams invasion of Kuwait wasn't US tyranny. But what about the following statement (not as tyranny, but more as a reaction to your polution story):Laka Foundation estimates that this particular U.S. campaign left behind 300-800 tons of radioactive waste from the depleted uranium ammunition all over Kuwait and Iraq — poisoning the air, the land, the water and the people everywhere.this is exxageration. The "radioactive waste" it is referring to are Depleted Uranium shells. They are classified as low-level radioactive by the IAEA and there is no clear indication as of yet as to how much of an environmental hazard they produce. All the UN findings on DU can be found here: http://www.un.org/partners/civil_society/m-atomic.htm scroll to the section about "depleted uranium"having said that, if the IAEA findings demonstrate they pose a seriuos health risk, I think the US should be required to clean them up. Perhaps they should clean them up regardless- I would not have a problem with that point of view.One word: ROFL. Taliban Says: US Empire20 Million Afghan people say: US liberators.so i guess if the webmaster is a Taliban sympathizer, he would see Afghanistan 2001-2002 as tyrrany. Yea, I understand his point. A taliban supporter would naturally see Afghanistan 2001-2002 as tyrrany. Forutnately, the Afhgan people see it differently.This part is about innocent victems that lost their lives.innocent victims losing their lives. Oh you mean like her?[sarcasm]Those US tyrants! How dare they kill innocent Taliban or accidentally kill civillians trying to free these people! Interferring with the sovereign, independent Taliban and their enslaved population is HORRIBLE. Those #$#$#$'ing US imperialists. How DARE they try to save that woman!!! Just leave those Taliban alone!!![/end sarcasm]a few innocent civillians lost their lives while RUssia, UK, and US took down Germany and liberated France. I guess they were tyrranical maniacs then eh?To give you 2 other stories from a different site:Lastly, I noticed something very curious. He doesn't (that I could find) critisize the US for Germany 1945. Why not? I was just wondering. Perhaps its in there somewhere and I missed it.He does actuallyLOL! That about sums it up. THose tyrranical US butchers going in and trying to stop HItler. How dare they!! That would include the UK and Russia, too, in his list of tyrants. LOL. This guy has some serious problems. He doesn't even know what terrorism is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quoudam72 Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 If you really want to prove something don't take the obvious ones Emprworm why not talk about the harder ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 If you really want to prove something don't take the obvious ones Emprworm why not talk about the harder ones. what do you mean? what is it about the taliban's utter barbaric enslavement and ravenous despicable torture of human beings is not obvious? How this person can list "Afghanistan 2000-2001" as an example of US tyrrany is beyond belief. Tyrrany is the Taliban. Liberation was taking them down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gobalopper Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 I think he means some of the cases where it isn't easy to defend their actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 I think he means some of the cases where it isn't easy to defend their actions.well from my perspective, all i need to do is show a few examples of his moral confusion and his whole site is discredited. he uses Afghanistan 2000-2001 and, surprisingly, Germany 1945 as examples of US tyrrany. He is discredited by those alone. However, I by no means support everything the US has done. we are not moral angels on the planet and have made some pretty big screw ups. But we have done some pretty great things as well (helping South Korea, for example). which one of those, then QUandom, would you like to discuss? However, it is already clear that the webmaster of this website has no idea what terrorism actually is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 lol, his site is full of lies:The United States Government Committed the September 11 Attacks 1991 – PresentAmerican/British State Terrorism of the Iraqi People Estimated total civilian deaths: at least 200,000 people directly from the 1991 terror campaign; lol. A total, complete, unfettered bold-faced LIE! he he. I, Emprworm will be your enlightened guide. I will uncover the lies from that site, and give you the truth.Now for the truth:"According to Baghdad, civilian casualties numbered more than 35,000. However, since the war, some scholars have concluded that the number of Iraqi soldiers who were killed was significantly less than initially reported. "http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/gulf.war/facts/gulfwar/Even BAGDAD said only 35,000 civillians died, lol! And we know that figure will be inflated. Thats still far less than the confused person running that website. another source in case you dont like CNN (i dont blame you)http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/desert_storm-timeline.htmlets get the FACTS clear: his claim of at least 200,000 civillian deaths from the "terror" campain is obviously not US related deaths. What he really means is that the 200,000 deaths were due to the terror campaign of Saddam Hussein on his own people. NOW we are more in line with the real truth!! ;D :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyarlathotep Posted February 22, 2003 Author Share Posted February 22, 2003 However, I by no means support everything the US has done. we are not moral angels on the planet and have made some pretty big screw ups. But we have done some pretty great things as well (helping South Korea, for example). This is basicly all I wanted to hear from you. Listen Emp, no one in here never stated the US government did everything wrong (as far as I have checked). With this post I was showing that the US government makes mistakes as well (as you state, next to the good things they have done). All you have done so far (in my opinion) was puttig the US government on a pedastal and not allowing anything with the slightest negativity being said about them.And you're right, not only the US government has done things wrong in the past. Almost every government has done something wrong in the past. However, I know you'd agree to that. I just needed to get my point across, which as it seems has worked.Try to take this in account when you proceed to debate with others :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acriku Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 If any world power stumbled into this kind of world just over 2 centures ago, I'm sure bad things would have happened over there as well :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 However, I by no means support everything the US has done. we are not moral angels on the planet and have made some pretty big screw ups. But we have done some pretty great things as well (helping South Korea, for example). This is basicly all I wanted to hear from you. Listen Emp, no one in here never stated the US government did everything wrong (as far as I have checked). With this post I was showing that the US government makes mistakes as well (as you state, next to the good things they have done). All you have done so far (in my opinion) was puttig the US government on a pedastal and not allowing anything with the slightest negativity being said about them.And you're right, not only the US government has done things wrong in the past. Almost every government has done something wrong in the past. However, I know you'd agree to that. I just needed to get my point across, which as it seems has worked.Try to take this in account when you proceed to debate with others :) wow, I'm shocked. i had to read the posters name...then re-read it again. yup, this is from Nyar. Oh I agree so much with this. I fully condemn, for example, the entire Vietnam campaign. It was an utter disgrace of our nation what we did. Now, the south Vietnameise needed help, but the way we offered it was really pathetic and as a result so many people died needlessly. Oh no no, I do not support everything the US has done in the world. But I see nothing that President George W. Bush Jr. has done that falls under the word "tyrant". Absolutely nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyarlathotep Posted February 22, 2003 Author Share Posted February 22, 2003 Oh no no, I do not support everything the US has done in the world. But I see nothing that President George W. Bush Jr. has done that falls under the word "tyrant". Absolutely nothing.This thread wasn't intended to prove that Bush is/was a "tyrant". It intention was to show that the US government made mistakes in the past as well and not towards just one leader in particular. That's all, nothing more nothing less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 Oh no no, I do not support everything the US has done in the world. But I see nothing that President George W. Bush Jr. has done that falls under the word "tyrant". Absolutely nothing.This thread wasn't intended to prove that Bush is/was a "tyrant". It intention was to show that the US government made mistakes in the past as well and not towards just one leader in particular. That's all, nothing more nothing less.fair enough. i agreed to that even w/o the thread :)the site you quoted, however, is an abysmal representation of honesty, Full of mistruths, distortions, and bizzarre conclusions. It is nothing more than a hate site. very similar looking to a KKK site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordos45 Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 the site you quoted, however, is an abysmal representation of honesty, Full of mistruths, distortions, and bizzarre conclusions. It is nothing more than a hate site. very similar looking to a KKK site.Actually the KKK main site wasn't overtly bad last time I was forced to consult it during a debate about the KKK (couldn't remember which 2 US Presidents had been members). I think they do quite a bit to make sure they come off as a friendly, family type organization at first glance. (Not that I buy into that...watch a KKK rally turn into a small riot and you can understand that.)As for the US being behind the 9/11 attacks, sounds like some book I heard about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 the site you quoted, however, is an abysmal representation of honesty, Full of mistruths, distortions, and bizzarre conclusions. It is nothing more than a hate site. very similar looking to a KKK site. (couldn't remember which 2 US Presidents had been members). I you do know there is currently a serving congressman in the United States that was former clan. You know this right? He is serving now....as we speak. Elected into congress. Once high ranking member of the Ku Klux Klan.If you are wondering who it is, I'll tell you only this: he aint no republican. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordos45 Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 Would it happen to be Robert C Byrd, one of our Democratic West Virginian Senators, who is the man my high school is named after? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMA_1 Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 hehe thats the beauty of america. People vote these guys in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zamboe Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 the site you quoted, however, is an abysmal representation of honesty, Full of mistruths, distortions, and bizzarre conclusions. It is nothing more than a hate site. Millions of people think different and support that site. Wheater you like it or not, even in your own country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 OMFG THAT SITE IS COMPLETE BULLSHIT! I MEAN SERIOUSLY YOU GUYS ACTUALLY BELEIVE THAT CRAP? US KILLING THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT CHILDREN IN SOMALIS?YEAH INNOCENT CHILDREN WITH AK-47s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowzeewee Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 i think USA should be restrained to where they are now and their bases removed from non-US places,and let another country take control of UN instead of controlling it[get what i mean?] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 Would it happen to be Robert C Byrd, one of our Democratic West Virginian Senators, who is the man my high school is named after?yea, Democrat Robert Byrd, ex-KKK nice resume for public office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Sadukar Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 [sarcasm]lol! The big bad USA. Yea, we are the enemy!!!! ENEMY!!!i am wondering why we just didn't conquer Europe when we had the chance after WWII? ANyone have any ideas why?[/sarcasm]because you are stupid, mayby? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edric O Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 1945 – 1974American Genocide of the Vietnamese PeopleEstimated total civilian deaths: 2,500,000 – 3,500,000 peopleFrom Rogue Stateby William Blum:The slippery slope began with the US siding with the French, the former colonizers, and with collaborators with the Japanese, against Ho Chi Minh and his followers, who had worked closely with the Allied war effort and admired all things American.Ho Chi Minh was, after all, some kind of “communist” (one of those bad-for-you label warnings).He had written numerous letters to President Truman and the State Department asking for America’s help in winning Vietnamese independence from the French and finding a peaceful solution for his country. All his entreaties were ignored. For he was some kind of communist.Ho Chi Minh modeled the new Vietnamese declaration of independence on the American, beginning it with “All men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with...” But this would count for nothing in Washington. Ho Chi Minh was some kind of communist.More than twenty years and more than a million dead later, the United States withdrew its military forces from Vietnam. Most people believe that the US lost the war. But by destroying Vietnam to its core, by poisoning the earth, the water and the gene pool for generations, Washington had in fact achieved its primary purpose: preventing what might have been the rise of a good development option for Asia. Ho Chi Minh was, after all, some kind of communist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
die4honr Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 well most of the people here arent american...u should have known what people were gonna say before u made the topic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zamboe Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 Think about this.In WWII, for each 100 killed people, 90 were soldiers and 10 were civilians.In Gulf War (1991), for each 100 killed people, 90 were civilians and 10 were Irak soldiers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.