Should Poland continue to support Bush's war on terror?

Yeah I didn't read the entire thread and was curious if your support of a candidate mattered at all. Nothing personal.

I have noticed in my years of being abroad that the most vocal and opinionated people when it comes to politics have never been to the place they are talking about let alone have the right to vote there. It makes sense to discuss issues with fellow citizens who have the power to change things but I won't waste my time with people who aren't a part of the process.

I have a German colleague who has never been stateside and he argues with everyone like he owns land there or something.

Yes I can vote.....

Very good point by the way..... you may find many people on this forum like this...

However Im guessing your not a fan of Obama?

Honestly I don't like any of the options. I think of the people who actually have a chance he is the best choice. But as apathetic as it sounds I don't think it is gonna matter either way.

Your are right in terms that none of the options are ideal... Each one has a weakness that can cost America big and have strengths that can benefit us. Its a question of costs vs benfits.
But some choices are much better than others...

Jones101 wrote:

But as apathetic as it sounds I don't think it is gonna matter either way.

How so?

It is simply my opinion...but the US government it a huge machine with so much mass that it is impossible to stop or change it's direction in any meaningful way. It will eventually collapse under it's own weight or die out like any leviathan. Sure you can nudge it a bit one way or the other but the things people want changed are the same things people have wanted changed for generations.

The president is a figurehead. There is a whole apparatus underneath that moves things. That apparatus is not chosen by the people...hell the PRESIDENT is not really chosen by the people (rather the electoral college).

Therefore despite the millions/billions spent on campaigning and nonsensical politics nothing really changes in the big picture. Take all that money and use it for something worthwhile.

Like I said...my opinion.

All good points, and all true....

As you said you cannot change things much because these things have been so entrenched in government politics for decades even centuries(and as you said by the sheer size of it all).. That is why we must keep nudging it in the right direction... Its going to take generations, But im not willing to give up on this country...

Side note: you can't change these things overnight because this country would collapse... however a little bit at a time can get the job done... I believe Obama is this nudge.... He's idealistic but I feel this is what the country needs, we need to reach this idealism and make it a reality... IMO

I don't know maybe Im being idealistic, but the only other option is to give up...

so what your saying is Osama isnt responsible for anything at all?

its all propaganda??

the talibans are just bunch of nice , sweet innocent dudes running around with
turbons beggin for candy and no bad boys in that crowd... nahhhhh impossible.

I agree, neither Osama or Taliban are innocent... they are responsible with backing from many middle east governments..
there are many Al Queda sympathizers in almost if not all of the governments in the middle east.. Not wanting to sound like a broken record but we can't afford war with all of them...

no we cant.. Im sure thats probably the reasons why we didnt get so much backing
from all the other world leaders when it began.

but yet they can afford to repair damages caused by terrorists.. loss of life. WTF?

I agree,

Patty I don't know where you stand on this, but IMO, I think many of our so called allies secretly wanted us to fail... They just wanted to do it in a discrete way...

Good news is, some countries realized there plan didn't work and now are working hard to repair there relations with the US...

ps... they blame Bush for their betrayel, easy scapegoat I guess.... However the truth is clear..

heck yeah they wanted us to fail.. its obvious..



they should be.. because we do alot for the world..

What chaps my hied, is how these countries don't even realize how transparent they really were....


P.S We were definitely seperated ; )

just wait till the day comes when those in question will need or want assistance
from us and will be told.. well.. we can send volunteers, but thats it.. we will not
be sending in military assistance..

but then again,, we always get that silly little finger pointed at us either way.

heh heh.. thats what i thought.. ;)

There is actually a whistleblowers association now. Ellsberg and Edmonds being the main two. More info will get leaked out into the public domain. The terrorists resent the PNAC vision. Reliable sources say an attack on Iran isn't too far away. Iran being one of the 5 countries which doesn't have a Rothschild bank and apparently hasn't been in compliance with its treaty obligations on uranium enrichment. Things could get very volatile if America attacks Iran, sth Scott Ritter has strongly advised against. Russia would likely step in and stop it

Funded/suported and put in power by the CIA!!!

http://www.noendinsightmovie.com
Try this one

Funded by saudi arabia..

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9800EEDC173CF936A35753C 1A9679C8B63

So maybe that's where your bloody war should be.....

Firstly, i never said i was intelligent, that is a conclusion you've made. thank you for the compliment.

Secondly, you've done a nice bait and switch from claiming Iran was a threat to the U.s. and replaced that with U.s. interests. It's an all too transparent move. You=fail.


So now your argument is that it was fine to suppport Sadaam because of a strategic position?
Well they live there not you, it's almost like they have a right to say whether or not they wanted foreign interference.
Well call it making a bad business decision and having to pay for it. Americans chose to invest and play politics there and gambled that the people there would just do as their puppet leader told them to. So supporting and propping up Sadaam is excusable as is the entirely negative, desperate and devastating effect of that support (war) because America needed oil? That's your explanation? Is it because those people are brown or just far enough away where Americans don't have to look them in the eye to often? And yet you wonder from where or why some are suspicious of American foreign policy.


What you mean they didn't want to simply do as they were told, you mean they wanted and still want to act as an autonomous state? Why shouldn't they want that?


Again you justify the killing and completely destabilising and barabaric effects of American support for Sadaam by valuing human life and prosperity to strategic influence. Well thanks for clearing up where you stand- it's ok to kill as long as it improves American geopolitical position.

And look here punk, that was THE biggest dick tuck move i've ever seen. You challenged the guy, he took you up on it and you direct him to your brother. Good lord son, grow a set. I knew you were a punk but even then, that was pretty bad.
you've failed to contribute anything even remotely bordering on intelligent to any conversation? Good heavens no, the tally is much higher.

First hairball, lol you said CIA (your anti american propagenda) and Patrycja19 proved you wrong and you say so what....

lol, quit spreading lies on subjects you know nothing about....

Foreignor wrote:

bait and switch?? lol A threat to America, it is threat to American intrests... please learn English....

Your so naive, we could not let Russia gain power in middle east through Iran or even Iran itself...

You've been owned and now deal with it.... Iran was a threat to US.... don't take the moral high ground... the question was if Iran was a threat to America and I more than proved that to you....

She proved sh!t. CIA funded Afghanistans Islamic extremists. Anybody with even just one brain cell knows this.... So that must just show that you don't even have one you idiot!

It's funny you would write that as one would expect that if you make such smug remarks you'd have at least been able to succesfully differentiate (means explain the difference) between "a threat to america" and "a threat to american interests" from the beginning.

thank you for not only acquiescing (fitting you'd do it that way) you are in fact a dick-tucker (coward) but also acquiescing you're somewhat of a sycophant when it comes to others' suffering and destitution for the sake of maintaining your own notion of your country's power.

I readily admit it's more complicated than that in your case as these "investments" and "strategic gains" in no way really translate to your being. It comes off as pure self-indulgent fantasy on your part, moreover this power only transfers to a few very elite parties, it seems it's more about gas prices with you people. Whatever the case, you are obviously not playing with a full deck.

But i wish not to digress.

So your leaders sponsored a meglomaniacal tyrant and encouraged a war in the area, the result of which devastated iraqi and iranian men, women and children but again you're ok with that cause it gives you a feeling of satisfaction- gotcha fcuk pal face, loud and clear.


That in effect was the ground I took from the very beginning. You see this is the culmination of your being owned fully and completely by Foreigner4.

From the outset, you failed (i assume you're used to this reoccuring event in your existence) to state the difference between a threat to america and a threat to america's interests. Now that i've got you on this, it is plain to see that you and ANYONE who suppports your perspective on this was and is perectly fine with other people dying and other civilizations being directed towards complete chaos as long as it satisfies american interests.

Your administrations supported Sadaam and all that went with him to take two countries to the brink of collapse and then years later walk in a claim he's a bad guy and somebody had to take care of him. It's like a sick joke that your leaders and media pushed this message and even sicker that so many people bought that story (including myself when it happened) without any forethought as to how it all started.

If you cannot see how or why someone would not only be opposed to that way of thinking but disgusted then you are truly of a sort that deserves no better than you'd wish on the victims of such interests.

Now, if you want to take up ANY other point in our discussion please do and when I have the time to spare on your pathetic cause, i'll donate as i see fit.
Foreigner4 the Win!!!

Hairball,

Yes we funded the taliban in the 1980's to fight the Russians, dumba*ss..... Also at that time the islamists that didn't use such horriffic tactics they use today.... America hasn't supported the taliban for decades numb nuts... So please use arguments that are actually relevant..... At the time of 911 it was the Saudis funding taliban not CIA.. So your governemnt conspiracy that US was behind attack on 911 flies out the window... Why don't you use facts from 100 years ago (which are no longer relevant) while your at it....

Foreignor your lack of grasp for the English language is making it hard for us to communicate.... If you don't realize a threat to American intrests is a threat to America... than we have nothing to discuss... Sit on this statement for days or even weeks and get back to me when you realize your stupidity.

Yes numb nuts we supported Saddam.... Obviously you don't know your history very well..... Russia was much more dangerous than any other country.... If Russia became powerful hundreds of millions of lives would have been lost... Your an idiot, you've been owned and you can't admit it....

I proved you wrong on Iran..... figure out a way to deal with it.....

Also Hairball you complain now but if wasn't for US actions during cold war you would be speaking Russian......

You dunce matthias! Your entire explanation is simply an ad hominem. It appeals to the lowest level of thought (i'm being generous) which is clearly all you're capable of. and you still continue to use my catch phrases thereby completing the circle of stupid that is your pathetic defense.

well sonny boy that's why we have something called an adjective- you failed to use it from the get go (hence my continued ownage of you) and you've also failed to realize the difference- this is the trap you set for yourself and you still haven't realized you're in it! It's sad in a way that you keep proving your lack of comprehension at this fundamental difference that it prevents you from getting to the bigger picture so repeatedly. then imo

See? Perfect timing too! You can always be counted on to fcuk up, just as i said, you make smug remarks and then play right in to them- the irony is they've only applied to you the whole time.
Anyhow think about this question if you're able:

Would it really have been a threat to you if Iran and Iraq had managed to live together in peace without your governments intervention (which led to war)?

Hey, if you're so confident of that not being the case then you should have no problem explaining this one, now should you? But, for the sake of clarity, let's explore your attempt at logic and try to extend it. See, I think of it this way, we can take your argument and simply reverse the names, if the argument is sound then it should hold regardless of who one is talking about.

E.G., America was a threat to Iranian interests, now according to your logic that should justify just about anything Iranians had or have ever wanted to do or did do in the name of self-interest. Try to apply that line of reasoning to any aggeressive action by any state whether they be recognized or not. Heck, we could even try that at a personal level- do you really think that's solid reasoning?


and all that went with him in the name of self interest as you've established. And you've the nerve to continue to defend this as though there were some higher morals involved. It was pure greed then and it's pure greed now- nothing has changed.

again you say this but it was U.s. policy that pushed the area towards a war that lasted over a decade.
If Russia had become...imo
Nice one champ, you scored on yourself again. This is epidemic of your attempt at discourse, you lash out when someone disagrees with you, yet you fail time and time again to give even the slightest objective thought to your stance. Your argument amounts to telling others they are wrong simply because they disagree with you but offer absolutely no sound reasoning to even hint at substantiating your position. In fact your input only supports the case against the one you try to make!

If Russia had become powerful you simply don't know what the outcome would have been. It doesn't matter because the leaders you defend took the course of history in a direction that resulted in untold horrors. But somehow you defend this with a "hey it could have been worse if Russia the boogey man" ad hominem b.s.

that's just it though, that statement also represents a summary to another aspect of your utter stupidity- a complete to grasp the relevence of history and how the effects of it are felt today.

Foreignor,

How stupid can you be???... Your lack of comprehension of the English language is creating a barrier for you to understand what is being said.... Its not me lashing out at you, it's just obvious when you cannot see that a threat to American intrests is a threat to America.... not to mention a threat to American bases in the middle east... is a direct threat... or the embassy bombings I mentioned... However you still fail to grasp how bombing American embassies is a threat to America.... What world are you living in????

I lost count already, 20th I think.....

Matthias you, numbskull! You might be the cyber embodiment of Elmer Fudd!Your response was a big fat 0.
Not so confident then are you?
No. You provided the rational and I applied it to your argument.
Now you've acquiesced/ dick-tucked on my other conclusions which leads to the logical conclusion you are a coward and curr of the lowest order. Anyone can spot the trend of your avoidance here. But your down to precious little now.
Now we come to the point of why the devil were those Iranians so ticked off in the first place. Well come on champ, let's see what you can come up with, why do you think the Iranians had the revolution they did.

Quick! Make another post so fewer people read how completely I've owned you on this. Again!


Zero actually, but it's funny you admit to having trouble counting to 20. matthias=Fail.



Foreigner4 the win!!!

Who gives a f*ck why they were pissed.... Question was how Iran was a threat and I answered it for you... You've been owned..

Also read the link I provided previously.... It's from an Iranian (not your dumb as* whose not even from Iran)... who says that many people in Iran feel that the revolution was a big mistake and it destroyed the country..

I'll take an opinion of an Iranian over yours...

21st time... Dam I feel good... Very confident hehehehe

But America and Scotland gave the world great music and scenery which is a positive digression from terrorism.

youtube.com/watch?v=2NYHD-XD44s, God Bless America for this

I completely agree, but the world is full of beautiful places and music.....too bad we all can't appreciate it! (Let us not forget the rest of the UK....some of my favorite artists are from there)