Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
General Discussion Forum
General Discussion
The World
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ralan" data-source="post: 11895" data-attributes="member: 35"><p><strong>The World</strong></p><p></p><p>To Pyro and Mom;</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Pyro, I'm sure most Americans would agree that a threat to your government's plans at present is not neccessarily a bad thing.</p><p></p><p>The UN protects the US, along with the rest of the West, by showing the 'terrorist' countries in the East that their enemies are united. Would we be so keen to invade Iraq if we knew that Afghanistan, Iran and Jordan would step right in to defend their ally? You get one big terrorist attack and think your allies in the UN are not protecting you. The truth is, without the united strength of the UN threatening anyone singling out a contingent UN country, the US, along with the rest of us, would be plagued by these attacks; protection comes in many forms.</p><p></p><p>Iraq did not attack the US. Afghanistan did not attack the US. Terrorists based in these countries attacked the US. Terrorists who probably had the intention all along of intimidating your government into attacking those countries. The terrorists do not care if you 'liberate' the people of Iraq or Afghanistan. You cannot stay there forever while your own country struggles under the accusing finger of the rest of the world. Soon you will be forced to pull back out of the East. Then the terrorist leaders will settle again, and nothing will have changed. The world does not work in the simple ways that George Bush likes to think it does. 'Liberation' is not taken an army into the country and killing military and civilians alike until the problems go away. True liberation is what, even as it goes out into the East, the United States needs to do to <em>itself</em>. The people of America are suffering while the government plays its power games, and as the world's dislike of the US festers before its pompousity, it grows more and more likely that you will find the UN on your doorstep to liberate <em>you</em>.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In the eighties and nineties American corporacy drove the third world back into the dirt; I study this at school, its not a personal opinion. These countries are now struggling to recover from the debt 'democratic business' has inflicted on them, amidst a backdrop of war and poverty; the US returning to 'liberate' them.</p><p></p><p>Capitalism means survival of the fittest; social Darwinism. It means 5% of the population hoarding 95% of the wealth. It means a country out of control, because when the people are given that kind of freedom, the quick thinkers snatch it up, and everyone else loses it before they have it. Sure, it is nice to know that capitalism is treating the US just fine, but US capitalism is destroying the third world. Giving to the Church helps the Church. Giving to the poor themselves is what really helps the poor. Just to draw on previous points to support what I said in the last post, 'trading' with the third world is what drove them down in the first place, I still don't see how the comparitively small UN tax can be worse than paying out a large chunk in the name of this 'liberation' power game, and the Bush family has been dodgy dealing with oil for decades. I strongly doubt that becoming president has encouraged young Dubya to end that tradition. I could give you a link, but what real truth can the internet give you? Research yourself if you feel the need.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ralan, post: 11895, member: 35"] [b]The World[/b] To Pyro and Mom; Pyro, I'm sure most Americans would agree that a threat to your government's plans at present is not neccessarily a bad thing. The UN protects the US, along with the rest of the West, by showing the 'terrorist' countries in the East that their enemies are united. Would we be so keen to invade Iraq if we knew that Afghanistan, Iran and Jordan would step right in to defend their ally? You get one big terrorist attack and think your allies in the UN are not protecting you. The truth is, without the united strength of the UN threatening anyone singling out a contingent UN country, the US, along with the rest of us, would be plagued by these attacks; protection comes in many forms. Iraq did not attack the US. Afghanistan did not attack the US. Terrorists based in these countries attacked the US. Terrorists who probably had the intention all along of intimidating your government into attacking those countries. The terrorists do not care if you 'liberate' the people of Iraq or Afghanistan. You cannot stay there forever while your own country struggles under the accusing finger of the rest of the world. Soon you will be forced to pull back out of the East. Then the terrorist leaders will settle again, and nothing will have changed. The world does not work in the simple ways that George Bush likes to think it does. 'Liberation' is not taken an army into the country and killing military and civilians alike until the problems go away. True liberation is what, even as it goes out into the East, the United States needs to do to [i]itself[/i]. The people of America are suffering while the government plays its power games, and as the world's dislike of the US festers before its pompousity, it grows more and more likely that you will find the UN on your doorstep to liberate [i]you[/i]. In the eighties and nineties American corporacy drove the third world back into the dirt; I study this at school, its not a personal opinion. These countries are now struggling to recover from the debt 'democratic business' has inflicted on them, amidst a backdrop of war and poverty; the US returning to 'liberate' them. Capitalism means survival of the fittest; social Darwinism. It means 5% of the population hoarding 95% of the wealth. It means a country out of control, because when the people are given that kind of freedom, the quick thinkers snatch it up, and everyone else loses it before they have it. Sure, it is nice to know that capitalism is treating the US just fine, but US capitalism is destroying the third world. Giving to the Church helps the Church. Giving to the poor themselves is what really helps the poor. Just to draw on previous points to support what I said in the last post, 'trading' with the third world is what drove them down in the first place, I still don't see how the comparitively small UN tax can be worse than paying out a large chunk in the name of this 'liberation' power game, and the Bush family has been dodgy dealing with oil for decades. I strongly doubt that becoming president has encouraged young Dubya to end that tradition. I could give you a link, but what real truth can the internet give you? Research yourself if you feel the need. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Discussion Forum
General Discussion
The World
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top