• Want to take part in this year's BoS Trials event for Maths and/or Business Studies?
    Click here for details and register now!
  • YOU can help the next generation of students in the community!
    Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page

American Imperialism - A list of American Imperialism (2 Viewers)

euripidies

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2004
Messages
155
"Yes, America did support Saddam when fighting Iran - this doesn't made America responsible for Saddam gassing the Kurds. Do I have to use my dog analogy again? It's like you buying a dog to protect you, letting it go out on the streets and then a year later, it attacks a homeless guy. No causal link."

Yes they did they founded him, gave him a better credit rating so he could borrow of other financial institutions. Now they gave him the money in which to build these weapons who knows if they acutely gave him the weapons themselves. But anyways a year after the gas was used Saddam was up there shaking the hand of Donald Rumsfeld. So did they really care no but now there taking the moral high ground oh look what he did to the Kurds, his a bad man we have to take him out and steal all the oil bit hypocritical seeing Americas track record.

You thought wrong, again. You should correct that before it becomes a habit.

What about the Taliban and al-Qaeda did you guys fund them make bin laden into a leader.

He was saying George Bush got through Yale because his father was paying school fees. I said plenty of people pay school fees. If that is proper or not is another issue, but you can't say Bush got special treatment because his Dad paid university fees

I was talking about how in Australia all the hexs have been put up heaps and the UAIs you have to attain have shoot up. Like I said my friend did communications she said she had to get 70 UAI and now 3 years latter its 90 UAI.

It might be funny if Mrs. Bush was really giving blowjobs to the school chairman. Unfortunately, I think you'll find that's incorrect, to the best of everyone's knowledge.

I think he was its a big cover up!!!! (joking)

America has used WMDs offensively twice, to end one of the greatest conflicts in human history, and even then they didn't understand the damage the bomb would cause. America has never used them again since. What are you basing your statement on? Do you deny the above facts?

I dont deny that they used WMDs offensively twice. But to say that didnt understand the damage, well they knew it was going to be big and even then what are they doing testing weapons on citys?

Oh and America has never used them again since

Yer they havent but they have planed to I gave the examples that I know of but it seems when a war is getting to costly they plan to drop WMD.

America is a terrorist organisation? Just when I begin to give some credit to the things you say, you start saying something like "Bush is Hitler" or "America is a terrorist organisation".

If terrorism means intimidation by violence or the threat of violence, and if we allow the definition to include violence by states and agents of states, then it is these, not isolated individuals or small groups, that are the important terrorists in the world.
If terrorist violence is measured by the extent of politically motivated torture and murder, ...it is in the U.S.-sponsored and protected authoritarian states the real terror network that these forms of violence have reached a high crescendo in recent decades.

Edward S. Herman
The Real Terror Network

FACT: It's never happened since 1945.
Yes but they have planed it when war was growing to costly but thank god war ended in Korea. I dont know much about the Cambodian example umm.. and dad told me about that one.
 

um..

hip hop antagoniser
Joined
Dec 23, 2002
Messages
1,303
Location
10:15 Saturday Night
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Originally posted by George W. Bush
Pwned by own ineptitude.



You thought wrong, again. You should correct that before it becomes a habit.



Yes, America did support Saddam when fighting Iran - this doesn't made America responsible for Saddam gassing the Kurds. Do I have to use my dog analogy again? It's like you buying a dog to protect you, letting it go out on the streets and then a year later, it attacks a homeless guy. No causal link.
that is the most pitiful analogy i've heard in a long time. If perhaps, you included the fact that you strapped a razor to the dogs chest, slapped him around the head and generally stirred him up to make him aggressive before setting him loose in a pen full of chickens, then you might be getting close


He was saying George Bush got through Yale because his father was paying school fees. I said plenty of people pay school fees. If that is proper or not is another issue, but you can't say Bush got special treatment because his Dad paid university fees :rolleyes:



It might be funny if Mrs. Bush was really giving blowjobs to the school chairman. Unfortunately, I think you'll find that's incorrect, to the best of everyone's knowledge.
lol i like the bit about the best of everyones knowledge, just like to the best of everybody's knowledge he didnt go AWOL from the texas air guard becuase the relevant papers have been destroyed. and i find it amusing that the PUSA got through college with a C grade average (http://www.extremelysmart.com/humor/dubyaresume.php - interesting read)



America has used WMDs offensively twice, to end one of the greatest conflicts in human history, and even then they didn't understand the damage the bomb would cause. America has never used them again since. What are you basing your statement on? Do you deny the above facts?
hmmm, lets get a good definition of WMD then, shall we? http://www.nti.org/f_wmd411/f1a1.html defines weapons of mass destructions as any nuclear, chemical or biological weapon. i think it would be erroneous on your part, George, to deny that the US have not used weapons such as napalm and agent orange in Vietnam, or warheads with depleted uranium tips in the first Gulf War.



America is a terrorist organisation? Just when I begin to give some credit to the things you say, you start saying something like "Bush is Hitler" or "America is a terrorist organisation".
well, as euripides pointed out, if you want to read up about war crimes comitted by the US just look up some Noam Chomsky and Edward S Herman, in particular Chomsky's "Septermber 11". And it's good to see America stick by international law when fighting terrorist threats
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/mar2003/icc-m17.shtml (i know its from a socialist website but it's still true)



FACT: It's never happened since 1945.
see my earlier points

Oh, and you REALLY don't want to know who SKA is. I mean, seriously - curiousity killed the cat and all. I'd tell you, but I mean, that's like answering someone when they say "What's bukkake?".
seconded
 

euripidies

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2004
Messages
155
Good point um.. And I was gong Concede to the point that America has only used WMD two times. Only on a limited sense I was taking a narrow minded view thinking of nuclear weapons. GB on a wider definition youre wrong and given Americas track record they cant be trusted which most people seem to know. But other such as GB and Alexander think they can be trusted which is quite nave.

Jamaica should be the worlds lone supper power!!!!! (jk)
 

reno2004

Retired Member - 1/12/04
Joined
Mar 10, 2004
Messages
364
Location
Wollongong, NSW
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Man, George u r such a fool. Obviously u either havent graduated school properly or u were caught cheating of the real George W Bush's test paper and thrown out of school, which i believe is the most likely of the two.

wat euripidies said about Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden is true. IF U cared to read up on history u may find that both these "Tyrants" were actually hired by the US to take out other tyrants of the time, ( the iranians and russians). Why now ( just cause they decided to stop licking America's balls and do things on their own) does America decide to go after them, when they were probably commiting worse atrocities during their time of American sponsorship.

George u really must be American to come up with all this crap, go back to ur country of crime and injustice and leave us Australians alone.
 
Joined
Feb 21, 2004
Messages
629
Location
America
I'll get back to you other guys but I'm in a bit of a hurry and it's easier to make fun of this fool:

Originally posted by reno2004
wat euripidies said about Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden is true. IF U cared to read up on history u may find that both these "Tyrants" were actually hired by the US to take out other tyrants of the time, ( the iranians and russians).
Look, you are out of your intellectual depth in this forum. Your reading comprehension level could only be described as basic, as you seem to have invented some passage where I denied that at a time America supported Saddam/Osama.

Why now ( just cause they decided to stop licking America's balls and do things on their own) does America decide to go after them, when they were probably commiting worse atrocities during their time of American sponsorship.
The way you say "probably" indicates you actually have no fucking idea.

George u really must be American to come up with all this crap, go back to ur country of crime and injustice and leave us Australians alone.
This is racism.
 

neo o

it's coming to me...
Joined
Aug 16, 2002
Messages
3,294
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Originally posted by euripidies

I cant really think of any but thats because they only ones they report on are Islamic groups maybe they are racist.
Your not trying very hard if you cant think of the Basque separatists (whom were intially thought to have been responsible for the recent train bombings in Spain) or the IRA. Both i believe have seen quite a bit of media coverage ;-)
 
Last edited:

euripidies

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2004
Messages
155
"
Your not trying very hard if you cant think of the Basque separatists (whom were intially thought to have been responsible for the recenent train bombings in Spain) or the IRA. Both i believe have seen quite a bit of media coverage ;-)"

I know what those groups are, but the point of the question was to find a non-Islamic terrorist organisation that want to destroy the united states.
 

Alexander

Gold Member
Joined
May 18, 2003
Messages
383
Location
Whitehall
Originally posted by euripidies
Good point um.. And I was gong Concede to the point that America has only used WMD two times. Only on a limited sense I was taking a narrow minded view thinking of nuclear weapons. GB on a wider definition youre wrong and given Americas track record they cant be trusted which most people seem to know. But other such as GB and Alexander think they can be trusted which is quite nave.

Jamaica should be the worlds lone supper power!!!!! (jk)
You're right. Just give whoever/whatever it is you cant stand about the US a few nukes, and they'll blow up the f*@%ing planet.
I wish I weren't so naive as to think that if anything, nuclear weapons are a deterent against any military action...even though this has been proven ever since another country apart from the US has aquired them.
 

euripidies

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2004
Messages
155
"You're right. Just give whoever/whatever it is you cant stand about the US a few nukes, and they'll blow up the f*@%ing planet. "

Your just making stuff up now when did I say that? Oh sorry you always were making stuff up.

"I wish I weren't so naive as to think that if anything, nuclear weapons are a deterent against any military action...even though this has been proven ever since another country apart from the US has aquired them."

But now the USA is changing all that again by bring in the star wars programme. So when that comes into play America can attack people without them getting back at them.

WMD have been used by the USA in the past many times not just at the end of WW2.
 

Generator

Active Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2002
Messages
5,244
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
What is a weapon of mass destruction? Today it seems as though one could argue that the the news media industry is a weapon of mass destruction given how vague the term truly is.
 

Aerials

your member for ulladulla
Joined
Dec 27, 2003
Messages
142
Location
Newcastle
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Right.. Im racist because I think GWB is a fuckwit... that makes a whole lot of fucking sense. But I guess youre extreme political analysis makes up for the fact that you can't tell the difference between racism and just plain hatred for a man who has killed innocent men and women and children (no pun intended) just as his dad did. No but wait my hatred isnt justified right? Because those Iraqis with the rocks sure look like a big fucking threat... why not try to reach the root of the problem and where it lies... IRAN! No no wait you'd call me a racist again. But Im not... Im Persian (Iranian) and I know exactly where these fuckwits who are killing people are coming from. You want to kill real criminals... go there.
 

reno2004

Retired Member - 1/12/04
Joined
Mar 10, 2004
Messages
364
Location
Wollongong, NSW
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
i would respond to ur accusations of racism and stupidity, but i fear u may get G W Bush to bomb my house and therefore my arguement would just have been in vain.

I also see that it is impossible to change or even influence the views of extremists like ur self George, so i will not try that either.
 

Aerials

your member for ulladulla
Joined
Dec 27, 2003
Messages
142
Location
Newcastle
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
wtf? reno was that for me? :S if it was please read my post again... I was replying to one of George's comments. Sorry if I misinterpreted your post :)
 
Joined
Feb 21, 2004
Messages
629
Location
America
Originally posted by euripidies
Yes they did they founded him, gave him a better credit rating so he could borrow of other financial institutions. Now they gave him the money in which to build these weapons who knows if they acutely gave him the weapons themselves. But anyways a year after the gas was used Saddam was up there shaking the hand of Donald Rumsfeld. So did they really care no but now there taking the moral high ground oh look what he did to the Kurds, his a bad man we have to take him out and steal all the oil bit hypocritical seeing Americas track record.
Let's assume you're correct. Why do you oppose America's efforts to "clean up their mess", so to speak?

I was talking about how in Australia all the hexs have been put up heaps and the UAIs you have to attain have shoot up. Like I said my friend did communications she said she had to get 70 UAI and now 3 years latter its 90 UAI.
Like I said, I was pointing out how stupid it was to say Bush got preferential treatment because he was paying fees, when everyone is paying fees (well, many people are paying fees). Yes, UAIs have gone up, but this is quite unrelated to Bush's progress through Yale;). About the paragraph above this, I forgot what we were talking about, so if it's important enough just bring it up again.

I dont deny that they used WMDs offensively twice. But to say that didnt understand the damage, well they knew it was going to be big and even then what are they doing testing weapons on citys?
Invading Japan to end the war would undoubtably cause more death and damage than any bomb. If you disagree, I will elaborate. A nuclear device had never been 'field-tested' (I mean actually used offensively), so of course they could not really predict the impact the bomb would have. Hell, they didn't even know if it would work or not.

Yer they havent but they have planed to I gave the examples that I know of but it seems when a war is getting to costly they plan to drop WMD.
yeah, but the fact is they never have. It's all well and good to say that they were planning to, or something like that, but until it's actually happened, you can't criticise their handling of WMDs. Any plan can be aborted at any time.

If terrorism means intimidation by violence or the threat of violence, and if we allow the definition to include violence by states and agents of states, then it is these, not isolated individuals or small groups, that are the important terrorists in the world.
But by this definition, I could call a primary school bully a terrorist. FIGHT OSAMA IN CLASS 4L - DON'T LET HIM TAKE YOUR LUNCH MONEY. The rebuking of this definiton also rebuts the following points.
 
Joined
Feb 21, 2004
Messages
629
Location
America
that is the most pitiful analogy i've heard in a long time. If perhaps, you included the fact that you strapped a razor to the dogs chest, slapped him around the head and generally stirred him up to make him aggressive before setting him loose in a pen full of chickens, then you might be getting close
Like I said above, if this is true, why won't you let America clean up its own mess?

hmmm, lets get a good definition of WMD then, shall we? http://www.nti.org/f_wmd411/f1a1.html defines weapons of mass destructions as any nuclear, chemical or biological weapon. i think it would be erroneous on your part, George, to deny that the US have not used weapons such as napalm and agent orange in Vietnam, or warheads with depleted uranium tips in the first Gulf War.
Any nuclear, chemical or biological weapon? So if I put bicarbonate in someone's drink, causing them to burp, I'm suddenly using WMDs? It's obviously a question of scale, and I don't think what you're mentioning crosses the line. In the same way, a suicide bomber with a chemical bomb would not fall under my definition of WMDs. If you do use the above definition, then sure, the US (as well as numerous other states, I'm sure) have used weapons of "mass destruction" since WW2.

And it's good to see America stick by international law when fighting terrorist threats
The concept of "international law" is really a bit of a joke, though. Let's be honest.
 
Joined
Feb 21, 2004
Messages
629
Location
America
Originally posted by Aerials
Right.. Im racist because I think GWB is a fuckwit... that makes a whole lot of fucking sense. But I guess youre extreme political analysis makes up for the fact that you can't tell the difference between racism and just plain hatred for a man who has killed innocent men and women and children (no pun intended) just as his dad did. No but wait my hatred isnt justified right? Because those Iraqis with the rocks sure look like a big fucking threat... why not try to reach the root of the problem and where it lies... IRAN! No no wait you'd call me a racist again. But Im not... Im Persian (Iranian) and I know exactly where these fuckwits who are killing people are coming from. You want to kill real criminals... go there.
I apologise, I did extrapolate, as generally those who possess such an intense hatred of George Bush extend their hatred to all Americans. If you don't hate Americans, then you're not racist. Of couse, American isn't a race and all, but you know what I mean.

BTW: If you want to throw rocks at armed troops, you shouldn't expect them to just stand there and take it. And don't try and pretend like anyone throwing a rock at a Coalition soldier gets shot - hell, burning a Humvee doesn't even seem to get you arrested.
 
Joined
Feb 21, 2004
Messages
629
Location
America
Originally posted by reno2004
i would respond to ur accusations of racism and stupidity, but i fear u may get G W Bush to bomb my house and therefore my arguement would just have been in vain.
You can try and pretend like you're above the argument all you like, but it's pretty obvious to all the observers that you lost. Especially since you reentered the argument after you'd already lost once.

I also see that it is impossible to change or even influence the views of extremists like ur self George, so i will not try that either.
Maybe you'd make a few more inroads if you could provide any single true fact in your post, rather than resorting to racist comments like "George u really must be American to come up with all this crap, go back to ur country of crime and injustice and leave us Australians alone." BTW Aerials, that's the sort of thing I'm referring too.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 2)

Top