Look to the Past or Future (election, terrorism etc)

[THE ENFORCER]

Lincoln did not commit xenocide, he conducted a war that the senate approved and the northern populace was mostly for, well at least in the beginning.

Saddam ruled by hiring street thugs to office who routinely practiced torture just for the thrill of it. Killed anyone who opposed him. Gased 2,000 Kurds in a northern village to put down the rebellion that occurred right after the Gulf War. Extracted monuments and pictures of himself everywhere to press the idea 'he was always watching' like in that 1984 book. Mass graves to incite fear and therefore orderlyness. Tried to invade another country, ie Kuwait. Lied to UN and obstructed weapon search, it will be a long time til we figure out why he did that knowing he had no weapons to hide. rejected numerous proposals for safe passage out of iraq to prevent war.

You want to hate the US? Do it because we sent propaganda in Iraq during Gulf War saying to Iraqi people 'rise up and we will help you'. When what we did was listen to people say, continued war will be too costly, let's stop and not invade Iraq after we kicked them out of Kuwait. We even allowed Saddam the use of his helicoptors to put down the rebellion, we only limited his air force in north and south. Iraqi's hated us for this but are happy that we at least finished the job, although late.

European pessimism, caution, and dishonor led to WW2. You guys allowed Hitler to invade Czechslovakia believing that he would stop there because Hitler promised. You sat by as Poland was conquered. You did not pay attention to the air force Germany practically showcased for you during the Spainish Civil War and therefore did not prepare for it. You created the hatred that German's had against the rest of Europe with the unfair and unmerciful treaty of Versailles which in turn allowed someone like Hitler to come to power. Europe punished Germany after WW1 even though they agreed to stop fighting for concessions, which probably saved about a million lives, by indebting them for all the damage war brought, cutting their country up, and occupying them. It was instead not a treaty but an unconditional surrender smuggled out after the German soldiers went home thinking they saved their country some trouble in a cleaner and quicker defeat. Europe did not take time and effort to rebuild the society, as you did after WW2, although America helped you a great deal then and ALSO reconstructed Japan by ourselves. We fought your war for you so you could survive, and now America is all about preventing the same thing from happening.

The UN is not helping reconstruction after the fact and instead is complaing about not getting job contracts, going back to arguement that war should not have happened. The US is doing a lot and spending a lot of money with reconstruction while Europe sits by smugly. Your governments are even punishing our country with gay resolutions like banning genetic food. Stop hurting and bickering and do something useful.

The US has tons of money, to go on weird but rational tangent, which is because we are also a hard working society, on average an american works 1900 hours a year, average in Europe is 1600 hours about. So if you guys want more say in world events get off your lazy ass and compete economically. The US is almost the biggest donor to world problems, behind Japan and maybe a few others, like recently donating 5 billion dollars to Africa for AIDS, while all of Europe combined gave less than 1 billion dollars. I concede I might be ignorant about last few sentences, so cite me some examples about what Europe does to better world to enhance mine and others knowledge.

You cannot deny Saddam could possibly have been another Hitler with his history.

Yea, the 9/11 comission is all about doing pre-emptive strike to Al-queda but now America is doing a pre-emptive strike to Iraq and everyone bitches about that and stilll people wonder why we couldnt have done a pre-emptive stike on Al-Queda its crazy!

On the Israel topic, we were wrong to take away some land after WW2 and set it up for Jews, even though that much of the land is very holy to Muslims in general. We did a very disgraceful and humilitating thing by just taking some of their most holy lands. In not Catholic, but think what the western world would think if some minority Muslim group took and occupied Rome, the site of the birth of our type of civilizations, and we had no power to stop them.............................................. ........ie we lived in stoneage and they ruled in the industrial world even though just a thousand years ago we were the most advanced civilization in the world.

So your saying that the Jews shouldnt be given any land because simply all land has been taken? Even though the holocaust wouldnt have happened if the state of Israel existed back then, im sorry but the state of Israel is essential to this world after the world just sat back and did nothing while 6 million jews died! We deserve a homeland we and USA fought for Israel and won! Its our land now we fought for it we developed it into a first world country its unfair to say we should give it back because then a holocaust would happen agian (and it will happen since every generation hates the Jew)!, but we are willing to share with the palastiens! If the neighboring arab countries just gave up alittle bit of thier land to the palastiens then the palastien state would be way bigger than Israel! So why dont the neighbouring countries give up a small percentage (like 10%) for peace if the palastiens dont want to live with israelis? Its not Israel's fault we want peace!

[THE PUSHER]

The Enforcer

THE ENFORCER,

Your continued spamming of these forums will not be tolerated! All of your posts could have been combined into one post. If you continue to violate this Forum's policies you will be banned from here.

THE PUSHER

[THE ENFORCER]

THE ENFORCER,

Your continued spamming of these forums will not be tolerated! All of your posts could have been combined into one post. If you continue to violate this Forum's policies you will be banned from here.

THE PUSHER

Then you show me how all of post could of been combined to one extremely large post? thats just rediculous! i was replying to different people on different issues! I would understand if you have a problem with me quoting as it takes up alot of space but thats not spamming! Im sorry but that was a ridculous threat to make, they comprises the whole integrity of the forum! Frankly since you have opposed me on every issues maybe there is a personal axe to grind are you the next clarke? Before you ban me i would like to state my argument to Zeus if you plan to! And also if you have a problem with me spamming you dont mention it on this forum!

[Exceed]

Well, you could have replied to multiple people on one post. And you don't really need to quote entire entries to respond to them...

[sTuPiD-gErBiL]

MODERATOR WARNING: These girls are not showing enough cleavage. Please consider this when posting images. -wadi

[Gemfire]

If he put them all into one post, theyd be to freaking long, and noone would read them, and the thread would die. Thats why im guessing he is doing this. I'm not defending him, or pusher. Just stating my opinion =p

[THE ENFORCER]

If he put them all into one post, theyd be to freaking long, and noone would read them, and the thread would die. Thats why im guessing he is doing this. I'm not defending him, or pusher. Just stating my opinion =p

True! Someone who i was responding to individually may overread my large post! I dont want that to happen!

If i get warned for making such long posts then why dont people like stupid-gerbil get warned for posting large pictures that have no relevance! InSanE!

[sTuPiD-gErBiL]

i think my post carries a greater deal of relevance than anything that's been posted in this entire thread.

[THE ENFORCER]

i think my post carries a greater deal of relevance than anything that's been posted in this entire thread.

Yea..............it'll be better if they didnt have underwear though.


but if i get banned then you must too or its unfair.

[Mantra-Slider]

hey gerbs

and enforcer you need to study some if you dont know what democrazy is and if you think all their is needed is "free elections"

creager is right

[THE ENFORCER]

hey gerbs

and enforcer you need to study some if you dont know what democrazy is and if you think all their is needed is "free elections"

creager is right

CITIZENSHIP Democracy:

"A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression. from:
http://www.worldnewsstand.net/freedom/democracy.htm (first link found)

Thats the main crux of democracy!
But instead of just saying "your wrong" how about provide reasoning! and tell me your definition!

[bloodzombie]

But telcat is arguing against me and directly insulting me?

umm.. no she wasn't.

I'm sticking with the theory.

[THE ENFORCER]

Why question mark? Be self confident - look at THE ENFORCER, even though all the people who replied to this thread disagreed with him, he still goes on as if he is the chosen one. I mean sometimes you do look more experienced in certain field when you just sound self-assured, even though what you say is completely wrong, kz *oink* *oink*

How is that not an argument and direct insult to me bloodzombie?

[Mantra-Slider]

CITIZENSHIP Democracy:

"A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression. from:
http://www.worldnewsstand.net/freedom/democracy.htm (first link found)

Thats the main crux of democracy!
But instead of just saying "your wrong" how about provide reasoning! and tell me your definition!

ok, I will try to explain to you what real democrazy is. since I dont really feel good at the moment (puked 13 times yesterday) I wont do it now, but really Im really sad that people can be so narrow minded and actually believe that your definition of democrazy is even close to the truth. I say this after have studdied political science (still do) I will give you a chance to look up and do some research for yourself cos I beleive if you realise it by yourself and not from some stupid swede on a forum to an online game, you will feel alot better afterwards. Check out the political development in the ex communist countries, the latin american countries and african nations and so on. There are at least 70 nations that during the 2000 century simply broke down after first being either ruled by dictator/communism/military then tried to change to democrazy but the failure was so great that they had no other choice (yes even the people wanted to change from democrazy) but to abandon it cos the living conditions were horrible. I tell you once again, IT IS NOT EASY TO CHANGE TO DEMOCRAZY AND IT TAKES TIME AND NEED TO BE DONE CORRECTLY. and "free elections within a year" will certainly not do it.

If you have time check out the books "On Democrazy" by R. Dahl, "the strong democrazy" by R. Premfors, "Making democrazy work" by R.D. Putnam and "comperative Government and politics" by R. Hague and M. Harrop

edit: and "models of democrazy" by David Held.

[THE ENFORCER]

ok, I will try to explain to you what real democrazy is. since I dont really feel good at the moment (puked 13 times yesterday) I wont do it now, but really Im really sad that people can be so narrow minded and actually believe that your definition of democrazy is even close to the truth. I say this after have studdied political science (still do) I will give you a chance to look up and do some research for yourself cos I beleive if you realise it by yourself and not from some stupid swede on a forum to an online game, you will feel alot better afterwards. Check out the political development in the ex communist countries, the latin american countries and african nations and so on. There are at least 70 nations that during the 2000 century simply broke down after first being either ruled by dictator/communism/military then tried to change to democrazy but the failure was so great that they had no other choice (yes even the people wanted to change from democrazy) but to abandon it cos the living conditions were horrible. I tell you once again, IT IS NOT EASY TO CHANGE TO DEMOCRAZY AND IT TAKES TIME AND NEED TO BE DONE CORRECTLY. and "free elections within a year" will certainly not do it.

If you have time check out the books "On Democrazy" by R. Dahl, "the strong democrazy" by R. Premfors, "Making democrazy work" by R.D. Putnam and "comperative Government and politics" by R. Hague and M. Harrop

edit: and "models of democrazy" by David Held.

What? i never said it was easy to change to democracy (not democrazy! i realise you purposefully mispelled it but its still stupid) i just said the fundemental part of Democracy is that the people have the freedom to choose on matters and freely elect members of parliment! Where do you pull this shit that i thought it was easy to change to a democracy! Theres alot of bloodshed in general when a country changes styles of government! Once agian you people read into my statements more than what they are! All i said is hopefully Iraq will be a democratic state within a year (doesnt have to be fully democratic but just have the fundamentals in place like free elections which i think will happen!)

Obviously your just trying to show off your knowledge by saying i know more than all you people because i did this... but really this is a case of misinterpreting what i said therefore there is no need to bring in your special expertise on how country's change. Like a typical Arts student you try to spin the facts to suit your argument and not state facts that suit the argument in discussion, do you ever watch the orielly factor because if you do you will know what i mean when i say your a "spinner"!

P.S i hope you feel better though.