5 ms·

> Military intervention should only be used when our nation's interests are at risk. Or when you caused threat to others and now need to take care of it. Or wh

by wnight 15y ago

> Military intervention should only be used when our nation's interests are at risk. Or when you caused threat to others and now need to take care of it. Or where you'd want others to help you, and thus should help them. But yeah, it's pretty obvious you're only in this for yourselves. > We are not the world's police force. Strange, you say otherwise when it comes to wiretapping the world, enforcing your drug laws around the world, forcing your patent system on others, etc. > We're already spending $4million/day in Libya and the Iraq/Afghanistan wars will cost $4trillion. What of it? You've not only blow more on crooked bank bailouts, but you easily gain more value than that in ensuring American control of Iraq and Afghanistan's resources and in permanent military bases in more countries. Financially your wars are a huge win, as soon as the world forgets you started them and lets you profit. > Not to mention 6,026 US soldiers who have died. No, not to mention them. They've killed and participated in the deaths of over a million people. At a thousand-to-one kill ratio, when you're the aggressor nation, you need to quit whining. That the war was predicated on false pretenses was known long before troops got overseas. The virtuous among them had plenty of time to refuse to fight. > The biggest portion of U.S. aid goes to Iraq ($4.27 billion), Afghanistan ($1.46 billion), Sudan ($725 million), Colombia ($562 million), Egypt ($541 million), Nigeria ($514 million), Democratic Republic of Congo ($486 million) and Pakistan ($465 million). So you spend less fixing up Iraq, Afghanistan, etc, than you did on ammunition, let alone bombs, to destroy them and you want thanks? You give (to cronies) about as much aid money as you spend air-conditioning your soldiers. > We cannot afford anymore wars. You don't even begin to suffer from your wars. When you say things like that remember the countless dead who cannot afford your war anymore, either.

diogenescynic 15y ago
|...it's pretty obvious you're only in this for yourselves. Yeah because not intervening in one marginal conflict invalidates all the good America has done in WWI/II, Israel, Korea, Thailand, Philippines, Kosovo, Africa and the fact we already do more than the rest of the world... you're still claiming we're the worst. You would never be happy and we don't have to please psychotics like yourself. |you easily gain more value than that in ensuring American control of Iraq and Afghanistan's resources and in permanent military bases in more countries. More conspiracy theories, devoid of logic, reality or facts. |Or where you'd want others to help you, and thus should help them. Syria would never help the US under any circumstances, but the US is a better country than Syria and yes like I've pointed out Obama has already spoken out against it. You wouldn't be happy no matter what. So why did I even bother? You're clearly mentally imbalanced/unstable and have some issues with conspiracy theories. And like I've asked repeatedly: If the USA is so bad who is better? I'm taking you repeated avoidance as tacit admission that the USA has done the most good to the world and received the least back from it. And please explain to me our world 24-7-365 everyone/everywhere wiretapping program you referenced? Also in case you haven't noticed, PG/Y-Combinator are from the USA? You're commenting here on their site. Ironic. You've made many ridiculous accusations without backing them up with facts. It's 4th of July. Have a nice life.
- wnight 15y ago
  > Yeah because not intervening in one marginal conflict invalidates all the good America has done in WWI/II, Israel, Korea, Thailand, Philippines, Kosovo, Africa and the fact we already do more than the rest of the world... The Philippines, where US soldiers slaughtered almost everyone over ten on an entire island, as retribution for attacks from fighters upset at being invaded by the USA. In total hundreds of thousands of people, likely over a million were killed - as usual, mostly civilians. Or is this not what you were thinking of? Africa like how you stood by and watched Rwanda butcher itself, quibbling over using the word 'genocide' to avoid hurting your allies, and own, historical images. Or how WW2 the USA waited out much of the war while its allies were getting pummeled. Joining the war only when the USA was attacked. As spoils the USA has military bases in Germany, Italy, Japan, etc, and joint political control of much oil-rich and strategically important territory. As I said, intent is key. The hugely egregious wrongs 'you' have committed show yours as being to help yourselves at all costs. > you're still claiming we're the worst. No, but for the standards you purport to uphold, you're still doing a horrible job. Torture? Really? > You would never be happy and we don't have to please psychotics like yourself. Ahh yes. My dissenting view clearly labels me psychotic. Never mind that it's the view (That the USA manufactured the Iraqi war on totally false pretenses) held by your allies' leaders, many foreigners, and anyone else who knows the facts. >> you easily gain more value than that in ensuring American control of Iraq and Afghanistan's resources and in permanent military bases in more countries. > More conspiracy theories, devoid of logic, reality or facts. The facts are the military bases you've got in nearly every country you've gone to war for or against, and that this gives you tremendous military and intelligence assets, as well as political clout - dictating beneficial treaties and policies. >> Or where you'd want others to help you, and thus should help them. > Syria would never help the US under any circumstances, Syria the country/regime, or Syria the people? The regime already helps you constantly, such as by torturing your detainees. The people might help you if you hadn't been a key ingredient in their plight. > You wouldn't be happy no matter what. Sure I would. But not as long as you feel you have a right to go to war such as against Iraq or Afghanistan. > So why did I even bother? To justify or evade your country's crimes, and thus minimize your perceived role in them. > You're clearly mentally imbalanced/unstable and have some issues with conspiracy theories. Yes, clearly I'm psychotic. Remember? > And like I've asked repeatedly: If the USA is so bad who is better? As others have asked repeatedly: What kind of person, when taken to task for their actions, points at another to avoid the question? > I'm taking you repeated avoidance as tacit admission that the USA has done the most good to the world and received the least back from it. The USA has done much good - liberating areas held by the Nazis for instance. But this is self-serving - literally. To serve/save yourselves. If you could have safely driven the Germans into continental Europe and left them bottled there - harmless to you, you would have. And as for receiving the least back from it, not only does the USA occupy incredibly rich land it won through deceit and conquest, but it has control of many valuable resources around the world that it has gained in 'rescuing' others, or has itself taken directly by force. > And please explain to me our world 24-7-365 everyone/everywhere wiretapping program you referenced? Which countries do you think you don't wiretap and otherwise spy on? > Also in case you haven't noticed, PG/Y-Combinator are from the USA? So? WW2 didn't make Germans racially evil, being American doesn't mean PG supports unjust wars. > You're commenting here on their site. Ironic. Alanis?

by wnight 15y ago

diogenescynic 15y ago

|...it's pretty obvious you're only in this for yourselves. Yeah because not intervening in one marginal conflict invalidates all the good America has done in WWI/II, Israel, Korea, Thailand, Philippines, Kosovo, Africa and the fact we already do more than the rest of the world... you're still claiming we're the worst. You would never be happy and we don't have to please psychotics like yourself. |you easily gain more value than that in ensuring American control of Iraq and Afghanistan's resources and in permanent military bases in more countries. More conspiracy theories, devoid of logic, reality or facts. |Or where you'd want others to help you, and thus should help them. Syria would never help the US under any circumstances, but the US is a better country than Syria and yes like I've pointed out Obama has already spoken out against it. You wouldn't be happy no matter what. So why did I even bother? You're clearly mentally imbalanced/unstable and have some issues with conspiracy theories. And like I've asked repeatedly: If the USA is so bad who is better? I'm taking you repeated avoidance as tacit admission that the USA has done the most good to the world and received the least back from it. And please explain to me our world 24-7-365 everyone/everywhere wiretapping program you referenced? Also in case you haven't noticed, PG/Y-Combinator are from the USA? You're commenting here on their site. Ironic. You've made many ridiculous accusations without backing them up with facts. It's 4th of July. Have a nice life.

wnight 15y ago
> Yeah because not intervening in one marginal conflict invalidates all the good America has done in WWI/II, Israel, Korea, Thailand, Philippines, Kosovo, Africa and the fact we already do more than the rest of the world... The Philippines, where US soldiers slaughtered almost everyone over ten on an entire island, as retribution for attacks from fighters upset at being invaded by the USA. In total hundreds of thousands of people, likely over a million were killed - as usual, mostly civilians. Or is this not what you were thinking of? Africa like how you stood by and watched Rwanda butcher itself, quibbling over using the word 'genocide' to avoid hurting your allies, and own, historical images. Or how WW2 the USA waited out much of the war while its allies were getting pummeled. Joining the war only when the USA was attacked. As spoils the USA has military bases in Germany, Italy, Japan, etc, and joint political control of much oil-rich and strategically important territory. As I said, intent is key. The hugely egregious wrongs 'you' have committed show yours as being to help yourselves at all costs. > you're still claiming we're the worst. No, but for the standards you purport to uphold, you're still doing a horrible job. Torture? Really? > You would never be happy and we don't have to please psychotics like yourself. Ahh yes. My dissenting view clearly labels me psychotic. Never mind that it's the view (That the USA manufactured the Iraqi war on totally false pretenses) held by your allies' leaders, many foreigners, and anyone else who knows the facts. >> you easily gain more value than that in ensuring American control of Iraq and Afghanistan's resources and in permanent military bases in more countries. > More conspiracy theories, devoid of logic, reality or facts. The facts are the military bases you've got in nearly every country you've gone to war for or against, and that this gives you tremendous military and intelligence assets, as well as political clout - dictating beneficial treaties and policies. >> Or where you'd want others to help you, and thus should help them. > Syria would never help the US under any circumstances, Syria the country/regime, or Syria the people? The regime already helps you constantly, such as by torturing your detainees. The people might help you if you hadn't been a key ingredient in their plight. > You wouldn't be happy no matter what. Sure I would. But not as long as you feel you have a right to go to war such as against Iraq or Afghanistan. > So why did I even bother? To justify or evade your country's crimes, and thus minimize your perceived role in them. > You're clearly mentally imbalanced/unstable and have some issues with conspiracy theories. Yes, clearly I'm psychotic. Remember? > And like I've asked repeatedly: If the USA is so bad who is better? As others have asked repeatedly: What kind of person, when taken to task for their actions, points at another to avoid the question? > I'm taking you repeated avoidance as tacit admission that the USA has done the most good to the world and received the least back from it. The USA has done much good - liberating areas held by the Nazis for instance. But this is self-serving - literally. To serve/save yourselves. If you could have safely driven the Germans into continental Europe and left them bottled there - harmless to you, you would have. And as for receiving the least back from it, not only does the USA occupy incredibly rich land it won through deceit and conquest, but it has control of many valuable resources around the world that it has gained in 'rescuing' others, or has itself taken directly by force. > And please explain to me our world 24-7-365 everyone/everywhere wiretapping program you referenced? Which countries do you think you don't wiretap and otherwise spy on? > Also in case you haven't noticed, PG/Y-Combinator are from the USA? So? WW2 didn't make Germans racially evil, being American doesn't mean PG supports unjust wars. > You're commenting here on their site. Ironic. Alanis?