| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Malax |
Posted - 03/01/2004 : 18:33:30
I don't really. Never been. Just wanted to do a spin-off for those who have missed my award winning post over in the pixies section. Where a bunch of people shouted at me for saying the pixies were English.
To have some relevance:
I watched bowling for columbine recently and as someone pointed out you can't believe everything one seemingly biased filmmaker says,but facts speak for themselves. I assume alot of that shows america in the worst light, but the gun thing astounded me. 150,000 deaths compared to our 40 or whatever it was, is amazing and the fact that there is a ridiculous amount of poverty and corruptness there makes me glad I live here. On the other hand if someone made bowling for ...manchester I'd probably find out alot about this country that I don't really know. The locked doors thing and guns and pollution is just crazy though.
I May've Joined The Cult Of Frank If I Knew What The Balls Was Going On.
*Adapted By Carolynanna* |
| 35 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Stuart |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 18:11:02
quote:
Originally posted by Erebus
quote:
Originally posted by PixieSteve
BTW, I'm not acting like the country I live in, or I myself are defenders of the peace, given the chance we're just as bad. Except America has been a super power for decades now, it is far more powerful than britain or whatever, and has been commiting far worse crimes, acts of terrorism and aggression, etc. in the past few decades. One might argue that for a super power, they're not as bad as they could be. That doesn't mean it should be acceptable... they're still wankers :P
American actions occurring prior to the fall of the Soviet Union need to be understood in the context of the Cold War, which is not to say that all such actions would thereby stand excused. If the European cultures of the world spent a rational amount on defense, the USA would not need to be a super power. Without the USA as super power, the power would be Chinese and then the whiners would actually have something to complain about.
I really think that people over-estimate the Chinese... The Chinese are not as aggressive as the western nations, certainly nowhere near as bad as the US or the UK. Human rights wise it might be different, but on the world stage I don't think that China would be worse than the US if the US weren't a superpower. Other than say Tibet, and the Taiwan issue the Chinese are generally not war mongers. When was the last time the Chinese won a war?? I guess you can say WW2 against the Japanese, but then most of the work had been done by the Allies in the Pacific (and in any case they were defending their country from the Japanese occuptation). I suppose you could argue that the Chinese fought in the Korean War, as a million or so called Chinese 'volunteers' flooded across the border to join forces with the Korean communist forces against the US army (and even then that turned out to a stalemate).
If the US weren't around I really don't think it would be the Chinese who dominated and terrorized. But then again who knows?
Who's the man that won't cop out when there's danger all about? |
| Malax |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 16:54:29
But hey, look on the brightside, I changed the title. Isn't it snappy and sooooo witty.
I hate america (or how I stopped worrying and learned to love america)
You have to love me.
I shall take no further part in this topic, because I don't know whats going on. Seems a case of non of you really know what your talking about, only people who do make lots and lots of money.
I May've Joined The Cult Of Frank If I Knew What The Balls Was Going On.
*Adapted By Carolynanna* |
| PixieSteve |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 13:01:51
quote:
Originally posted by Erebus
quote:
Originally posted by PixieSteve
Here goes... You suck, Dallas. It actually makes me physically sick that a fellow fan of Frank Black can be this ignorant. I'm not sure how Frank would feel about me involving him though.
Remarks like these are really uncalled for, and pretty sad.
What, stating that I feel physically sick that someone, especially someone who I thought had a decent taste in music, could express opinions like his. I was not trying to say that only people who are anti-war like Frank Black. But I did think that most Frank Black fans would be able to argue about the actual points I've made rather than minor side comments like that. If you're so upset, I'm sorry, but in reality you are the sad person.
 I joined the Cult of Pi / Because it's cool |
| PixieSteve |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 12:58:25
Why did you quote a part of my post that hadn't yet made a point, cimply because I hadn't gotten to it yet, and then claim I hadn't made a point? LOL. Also, why did you completely ignore the content of my argument and only target my use of the word "probably" (did you not take any notice of the style of my argument?). You then, it appears, tell me to take some notes on Blix's accurate and certain use of language, but then call him a liar and a son of a bitch. I don't know what to do now! |
| Erebus |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 12:55:37
quote:
Originally posted by PixieSteve
Here goes... You suck, Dallas. It actually makes me physically sick that a fellow fan of Frank Black can be this ignorant. I'm not sure how Frank would feel about me involving him though.
Remarks like these are really uncalled for, and pretty sad. |
| Dallas |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 12:48:01
"Saddam was filling the sand with hundreds of thousands of murdered eh? OK, lets look at some of these famous mass-murders. It appears he often used chemical weapons, according to an american government website"
What is your point? Make one please. Are you saying Saddam didnt murder those people? The US did? Are you drunk? You dont even have certainty of your own half-baked assertions. "probably" got it from the US? You go read Blix, really read it. He didnt couch his terms in anything less than certain language. Remember him in the UN "we are close to discovering WMD's, we need more time". What a LIAR! That SOB misled the entire world! Now look what has happened! Saddam lost his despot! What a sicko!
Also, how childish to invoke FB in this discussion. Get some perspective on life man. Charles Thompson is a performer, he makes transcendant music. It doesnt reach people who have a singular view of the world, only a simpleton would think it did. |
| PixieSteve |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 12:15:47
Here goes... You suck, Dallas. It actually makes me physically sick that a fellow fan of Frank Black can be this ignorant. I'm not sure how Frank would feel about me involving him though.
Saddam was filling the sand with hundreds of thousands of murdered eh? OK, lets look at some of these famous mass-murders. It appears he often used chemical weapons, according to an american government website. The thing is, they don't state where he got these chemical weapons. Oh yeah, that was probably because it was the very people who are now suddenly anti-Saddam who provided him with the weapons. I guess it would look kinda stupid if they put it on their own website. They didn't even condemn these attacks either, I guess they didn't want to put that on there then. I don't understand though, why did America supply this evil dictatorship with weapons when they knew very well it could use them on its own people? It was because America installed him there in the first place. This can be explored more if you want to.
"It is correct that we had strong suspicions that anthrax could remain [in Iraq]. There is some difference between strong suspicions and assertions. ... Compare it with the language from the other sides [U.S./U.K.]." - Blix
I think it says that all, regarding your comment on Blix confirming these claims. Also, in the UK, a document was produced with "evidence" of WMDs etc. in Iraq. It has now been discovered that most of it was complete bullshit. Not a bogus claim by mun chien.
Oh blah blah. I'm not nearly finished. I jsut don't have the time, I went through this kind of stuff several times before and during the war.
|
| Dallas |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 11:45:30
If a US leader was filling the sand with hundreds of thousands of murdered citizens, I would pray daily that some great nation would establish a no-fly zone to keep the murderer at bay. Wouldn't you? What kind of a person defends Saddams right to murder ethnic tribes without resistance? That keeping him from genocide was an infringement of his rights? If you cant fight your way out of that moral-wet-paper-bag there is no amount of facts that can help you.
You said Bush claimed WMD's. All those I listed did...before Bush was President. Plus the falsified documents claim is bogus. What documents? Who altered it?
The car bombs you mention are not coming from the citizenry. They are coming from Saddams former henchman who know they have no place in a free Iraq as well as imported Al Queda and Islamist terrorists. Iraqi people are jubilant at their freedom. No calls for Saddams safe return to the throne, just calls for Saddams return for revenge.
I'll keep asking, how do avoid these very basic facts when forming your half-baked opinions? You are in the cult of Saddam, lamenting that he was harrassed while trying to kill hundreds of thousands of people by the US and Brits. Lamenting that HE led the world to believe that he had WMD's and would use them if provoked. Lamenting that millions upon millions of Iraqi's can live without fear of Government sanctioned rape and torture and genocide. Horror, what has the coalition of the willing DONE!?!?! |
| EdBudd |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 11:32:57
"You do not bomb buildings and kill thousands of innocent fish in the US and get away with it"
lol.
[/quote]
 |
| mun chien andalusia |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 11:29:26
quote:
Originally posted by Dallas
Saddam had shot at US and British planes over a thousand times in the 12-18 months leading up to the Liberation. How in the world can you miss a fact like that?
you mean shooting at planes violating Iraqi airspace?what would YOU do if iraqis (backuped by others)decided some no-fly zones over the us?
Kofi Annann and Hans Blix purported that Saddam had WMD. Less than 10 days before the LIBERATION Blix reiterated that Saddam had hundreds of gallons of anthrax. I think the actual quote is over a thousand, but, I'll err on the conservative side. So did Blair. Chirac was on record as stating that Iraq had WMD and that given time the inspectors would find it.
if they were so sure about it 1)why did they falsificate inteligence documents 2)didn't find anything(after searching for 12!months)
The answer is that someone must put their brain into solitary confinement to believe half the shit that gets posted in this forum about the US/Bush. Letting the facts in will erode the childish illusion that there is a big, bad meanie in the US who is going around the world liberating muslims by the millions.
the fact is that you won't admit that others may see something you can't.if it's liberation why angry mobs lynch your soldiers(or blow them up or shoot at them or whatever)?why is it that you are still administrating Iraq instead of letting them do what the hell they want to?usually liberators are welcomed with flowers and not with car bombs.think instead of absorbing patriotic crap.
 join the cult of errol\and you can have a beer\without having to quit smoking
|
| PixieSteve |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 11:15:32
lol this stuff is really hard to read and not feel like crying. |
| Dallas |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 10:50:15
"please explain how the war on iraq can possibly be considered a defensive war since saddam a)didn't have the weapons that the bush admin claimed he had b)didn't have any connections with osama bin laden c)didn't provoke or attack any of the countries that moved war on him"
Not even half the story.
Saddam had shot at US and British planes over a thousand times in the 12-18 months leading up to the Liberation. How in the world can you miss a fact like that?
Kofi Annann and Hans Blix purported that Saddam had WMD. Less than 10 days before the LIBERATION Blix reiterated that Saddam had hundreds of gallons of anthrax. I think the actual quote is over a thousand, but, I'll err on the conservative side. So did Blair. Chirac was on record as stating that Iraq had WMD and that given time the inspectors would find it. It was the stated belief of the entire world for a decade before Bush came into office. How do you avoid facts like this??
The answer is that someone must put their brain into solitary confinement to believe half the shit that gets posted in this forum about the US/Bush. Letting the facts in will erode the childish illusion that there is a big, bad meanie in the US who is going around the world liberating muslims by the millions.
|
| Erebus |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 10:30:12
Am I the only one who thinks these last two posts are in very poor taste? |
| BLT |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 09:51:56
quote:
Originally posted by PixieSteve
"You do not bomb buildings and kill thousands of innocent people in the US and get away with it"
lol.
"You do not bomb buildings and kill thousands of innocent
people in the US and get away with it!"
|
| PixieSteve |
Posted - 03/04/2004 : 09:14:11
"You do not bomb buildings and kill thousands of innocent people in the US and get away with it"
lol. |
| mun chien andalusia |
Posted - 03/03/2004 : 17:36:29
quote:
Originally posted by EdBudd
like Erebus said, "If the European cultures of the world spent a rational amount on defense, the USA would not need to be a super power. Without the USA as super power, the power would be Chinese and then the whiners would actually have something to complain about."
We spend time and money on world defence (or "wars") and have citizens to back up their country. The numbers above show that, you cant argue that. If we had a puny military you better believe that we would get pummled for our territory and/or resources. If anybody attacked Canada or the UK the US would be there defending YOUR country. This brings us to the question of why your countries are allies. Whether it is for the good of mankind, money, greed, resources it doesnt matter, Canada and the UK have never had a problem with the US when they really needed help. You scratch my back and Ill scratch yours type of thing. Do you know how much support the UK and France recieved from the US in WWII when the Nazis were trying to take over Eroupe? And to hear the negativity comming from you when we get attacked and want to do something about it chaps our asses. It sucks that innocent people have to die in the US, Afganistan, and Iraq but someone had to put their foot down after 911 with or without UN approval. You do not bomb buildings and kill thousands of innocent people in the US and get away with it. If this is the attitute that has made people from other countries less open to the US then fuck em.
please explain how the war on iraq can possibly be considered a defensive war since saddam a)didn't have the weapons that the bush admin claimed he had b)didn't have any connections with osama bin laden c)didn't provoke or attack any of the countries that moved war on him.moreover the us(and the uk and spain)knew in advance that he was not a menace(for western countries at least)and yet deliberately lied and falsified documents in order to have the un approval.now that looks like an invasion to me.the fact that americans like to think of it as democratization and liberation of Iraq means only that they are blind to reality.and the paragon with europe in ww2 is totally out of contest.remember that during ww2 the allies and occupied countries 1)ASKED for the us to help 2)they already had active internal resistance armies 3)the occupation was from a foreign army (not a native dictator) and it lasted less than 5 years(not almost 30 like saddam).that's why the us troops were considered allies and liberators and in iraq are seen as an occupation army(which is exactly what they are)
join the cult of errol\and you can have a beer\without having to quit smoking
|
| Malax |
Posted - 03/03/2004 : 17:00:42
Ha, god damn. I like reading all the posts in a topic I start, but this has gotten a little political on me. I'll leave that stuff to Dave Noisy.
I May've Joined The Cult Of Frank If I Knew What The Balls Was Going On.
*Adapted By Carolynanna* |
| bedrock_barney |
Posted - 03/03/2004 : 12:01:55
This thread is going nowhere.
 "The Pixies are reforming?? / I say bring back Abba, ahaaa!!!" |
| EdBudd |
Posted - 03/03/2004 : 11:53:52
It looks like we dont have a hunger problem then doesnt it? So we can use the extra tax money to go terrorize the world? Fuck off. |
| EdBudd |
Posted - 03/03/2004 : 11:47:23
like Erebus said, "If the European cultures of the world spent a rational amount on defense, the USA would not need to be a super power. Without the USA as super power, the power would be Chinese and then the whiners would actually have something to complain about."
We spend time and money on world defence (or "wars") and have citizens to back up their country. The numbers above show that, you cant argue that. If we had a puny military you better believe that we would get pummled for our territory and/or resources. If anybody attacked Canada or the UK the US would be there defending YOUR country. This brings us to the question of why your countries are allies. Whether it is for the good of mankind, money, greed, resources it doesnt matter, Canada and the UK have never had a problem with the US when they really needed help. You scratch my back and Ill scratch yours type of thing. Do you know how much support the UK and France recieved from the US in WWII when the Nazis were trying to take over Eroupe? And to hear the negativity comming from you when we get attacked and want to do something about it chaps our asses. It sucks that innocent people have to die in the US, Afganistan, and Iraq but someone had to put their foot down after 911 with or without UN approval. You do not bomb buildings and kill thousands of innocent people in the US and get away with it. If this is the attitute that has made people from other countries less open to the US then fuck em.
|
| MMD |
Posted - 03/03/2004 : 08:25:37
EdBudd either you are joking or you are delirious if you seriously think this is in any way about anyone here being jelous about the US's lifestyle, you fatass (hehe). Yours is the attitute that has made people from other countries less open to the US and you aren't doing a damn thing to change that. Also I hope you enjoy your government spending all your tax dollars on wars, I sure can't think of a better use for all that money like FEEDING THE HUNGRY.
“Not since Orson Welles had one man so many fingers in so many pies, and been the chef as well. And then looked like he went and ate them all. The guy was out of control.” |
| EdBudd |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 14:01:29
What is rational in terms of manpower?
Canadian armed forces=53,000
UK armed forces=207,000
US armed forces=1,400,000
Us armed forces from California alone=149,000
Call it pride. |
| Erebus |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 13:36:16
quote:
Originally posted by PixieSteve
BTW, I'm not acting like the country I live in, or I myself are defenders of the peace, given the chance we're just as bad. Except America has been a super power for decades now, it is far more powerful than britain or whatever, and has been commiting far worse crimes, acts of terrorism and aggression, etc. in the past few decades. One might argue that for a super power, they're not as bad as they could be. That doesn't mean it should be acceptable... they're still wankers :P
American actions occurring prior to the fall of the Soviet Union need to be understood in the context of the Cold War, which is not to say that all such actions would thereby stand excused. If the European cultures of the world spent a rational amount on defense, the USA would not need to be a super power. Without the USA as super power, the power would be Chinese and then the whiners would actually have something to complain about. |
| PixieSteve |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 13:10:04
BTW, I'm not acting like the country I live in, or I myself are defenders of the peace, given the chance we're just as bad. Except America has been a super power for decades now, it is far more powerful than britain or whatever, and has been commiting far worse crimes, acts of terrorism and aggression, etc. in the past few decades. One might argue that for a super power, they're not as bad as they could be. That doesn't mean it should be acceptable... they're still wankers :P |
| EdBudd |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 12:47:04
Murders are different than gun related deaths because there are many accidental gun deaths. Again look at the population of the US vs. the UK. Considering the frequency with which threads devolve into gratuitous America/Bush bashing we should change the threads to "lets all bitch because we have no clue what we are talking about or are jealous of the lifestyle of other cultures". |
| Erebus |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 12:08:47
quote:
Originally posted by bedrock_barney
...and Malax, can you change the name of the thread? A bit inflammatory at the moment don't you think? (whether one's tongue is in one's cheek or not)
Actually, please leave the name unchanged. Or, better yet, change the names of about half the active threads in this category to "I hate America" or "America sucks". Considering the frequency with which threads devolve into gratuitous America/Bush bashing, let's have a little truth in labelling. |
| bedrock_barney |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 11:24:10
...and Malax, can you change the name of the thread? A bit inflammatory at the moment don't you think? (whether one's tongue is in one's cheek or not)
"The Pixies are reforming?? / I say bring back Abba, ahaaa!!!" |
| bedrock_barney |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 11:22:40
quote:
Originally posted by BLT
I hate rehashing another gun rights argument, but I'd like to raise a couple points.
What about homicide rates in general, not counting the method? One gets the impression there would have been no US homicides if not for guns. Who is to say the killing would not have been committed with another weapon? Dead is dead, whether you were shot, stabbed, or had your head crushed. Obviously, using a gun would sometimes be "convenient", but I doubt convenience is a factor in most murders.
Also, no one ever mentions those who successfully defend themselves and/or their property with firearms. These stories are seldom told, yet they do happen. You probably have to read the NRA's American Rifleman magazine to learn about these.
Ok, I'm sticking to the gun crime stats - I'm not sure where Edbudd and Pixiesteve are heading.
BLT, to answer your question I've dug out some more stats:
Total murders in the US during 2002 - 16,110
Total murders in the UK during 2002 - 900
In the States you're much more likely to be murdered with the use of a gun (approx 60% of all murders). Uk stats appear to show that only 7% of murders are gun related.
"The Pixies are reforming?? / I say bring back Abba, ahaaa!!!" |
| Malax |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 11:11:17
I'll watch it again and find the exact facts. I must have added an extra 0.Once again Im not saying I hate America. Just starting a topic really.
I May've Joined The Cult Of Frank If I Knew What The Balls Was Going On.
*Adapted By Carolynanna* |
| mun chien andalusia |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 10:58:48
europe has definetely lower crime\homicide rates than the us.lower handgun diffusion is only one of the factors. i think it's a society based thing mostly.americans are way too different.things that look absurd in europe are normal in the us.
join the cult of errol\and you can have a beer\without having to quit smoking
|
| Homers_pet_monkey |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 10:34:49
quote:
Originally posted by Malax
On the other hand if someone made bowling for ...manchester I'd probably find out alot about this country that I don't really know. .
I May've Joined The Cult Of Frank If I Knew What The Balls Was Going On.
*Adapted By Carolynanna*
Right seeing as I live there, I'm on the case!!!
To quote Michael 'Jackass' Jackson from 'Bo Selecta', I'm a doc-u-ment-ay making mother fucker!!! Eeh hee!!!
Hansel and Gretel have formed a band, .....And You Will Know Us By The Trail Of Breadcrumbs!!! |
| BLT |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 10:32:30
I hate rehashing another gun rights argument, but I'd like to raise a couple points.
What about homicide rates in general, not counting the method? One gets the impression there would have been no US homicides if not for guns. Who is to say the killing would not have been committed with another weapon? Dead is dead, whether you were shot, stabbed, or had your head crushed. Obviously, using a gun would sometimes be "convenient", but I doubt convenience is a factor in most murders.
Also, no one ever mentions those who successfully defend themselves and/or their property with firearms. These stories are seldom told, yet they do happen. You probably have to read the NRA's American Rifleman magazine to learn about these. |
| EdBudd |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 10:09:54
First off, gun control network is obviously a biased organization pushing for new gun laws. Thier objective is surely not to document statistics. We could argue the validity of sources till were blue in the face. And why is it that both Brittish and French forces either have in the past or continue to attack Afghan and Iraqi targets? Is it about peace or money? Bottom line is that every country is guilty of greed. Unfourtunately, it is neceesary to survival on this planet. So dont act like you or your country is some high and mighty defender of the peace and be thankful that you dont get terrorized to the extent of places like Nicaragua, Honduras, Zambia, Guatelmala, Panama, Vietnam, Isreal, Iraq, etc. |
| bedrock_barney |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 09:43:46
An afterthought. Are North Americans aware of the tight controls on guns here in the UK? From the same website in the above post:
Handguns
The two 1997 Firearms (Amendment) Acts resulted in the prohibition of the vast majority of handguns in Great Britain. As a result of the prohibition and the surrender exercise, more than 162,000 handguns were handed in to local police forces.
Handgun Surrender and Compensation. Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General NAO, 1999.
"The Pixies are reforming?? / I say bring back Abba, ahaaa!!!" |
| bedrock_barney |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 09:38:58
quote:
Originally posted by EdBudd
Malax,
According to the center for disease control the number of gun related deaths in the US was about 30,000 in 1998 and is dropping by five percent a year for the last twenty years. I dont know how may deaths were quoted in bowling for columbine, but 30,000 is way less than 150,000! If you add the fact that the US population is five times that of the UK there is little difference. I noticed that people from the UK are quite concerned with this issue. Bottom line for anyone bashing the US is get your facts in tact, and be thankful. Without the US, this world might be alot different.
Edbudd - don't think you've quite got your facts right here. Check out this website:
http://www.gun-control-network.org/facts.htm
In 1999 there were 4.08 homicide deaths per 100,000 population in the USA. Only 0.12 in the UK. I work this out to be approx. 10,200 deaths in the States, 66 in the UK. Quite a difference!!
Also 5 people killed themselves or others unintentionally in the UK. The figure for the US was 1,050 people. More guns = more deaths, whether intentional or otherwise.
I think Malax was just throwing a few figures around.
The USA statistics are harrowing.
"The Pixies are reforming?? / I say bring back Abba, ahaaa!!!" |
|
|
