To U.S. Empire Apologists: America Is A Terrorist State

[ch33zw1z]

The entire point of war is to subdue your opponent thru some means. violence, chemical warfare, economic attacks....its not necessarily for the outright slaughter of people.

 

[WelshBloke]

I understand the need to examine our failures as a country - we are not perfect. Over centuries, everyone makes what might be looked upon by history as mistakes. The OP and his supporters just needed a little reminder however of reality, that deep down in inside most humans want to be American despite those mistakes. So do let the criticism continue, but do so with that in mind.

Eh?

Most people dont want to live in war zones or areas of extreme poverty or violence.

The ironic thing is that really, deep down, you dont want to be American. You want to live in some fucked up theocracy where your religion is on top and you can oppress anyone with a lifestyle you dont agree with.

 

[pmv]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_War

Would you mind adding some commentary to your comment? I don't see the point of posting totally unrelated wikipedia links that don't address the point you are replying to.

Though, that said, I did find the relevant Wiki entry that does address my point. And it seems I was not entirely correct - there have been a few formally declared wars since 1945, but, ironically, none of those you mention are on the list (the only war the US has declared since WW2 was against Panama). Vietnam, for example, I believe was always a 'police action', and never a declared war. My understanding is that formally declaring war involves a lot of legal obligations, so nations tend not to bother.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war#Declared_wars_since_1945


For the US in particular

The last time Congress passed joint resolutions saying that a "state of war" existed was on June 5, 1942, when the U.S. declared war on Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania.[44] Since then, the US has used the term "authorization to use military force", as in the case against Iraq in 2003.

 

[bradly1101]

How can what we're doing not be called carpet-bombing?

 

[FelixDeCat]

Eh?

Most people dont want to live in war zones or areas of extreme poverty or violence.

The ironic thing is that really, deep down, you dont want to be American. You want to live in some fucked up theocracy where your religion is on top and you can oppress anyone with a lifestyle you dont agree with.

Now now welshy, I know you live in some crazy mixed up country filled with atheists and Islamic no go zones due to silly liberal idealism that has failed miserably. Just stay in the UK and I wont complain. 🙂

 

[sdifox]

Would you mind adding some commentary to your comment? I don't see the point of posting totally unrelated wikipedia links that don't address the point you are replying to.

Though, that said, I did find the relevant Wiki entry that does address my point. And it seems I was not entirely correct - there have been a few formally declared wars since 1945, but, ironically, none of those you mention are on the list (the only war the US has declared since WW2 was against Panama). Vietnam, for example, I believe was always a 'police action', and never a declared war. My understanding is that formally declaring war involves a lot of legal obligations, so nations tend not to bother.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war#Declared_wars_since_1945


For the US in particular

The last time Congress passed joint resolutions saying that a "state of war" existed was on June 5, 1942, when the U.S. declared war on Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania.[44] Since then, the US has used the term "authorization to use military force", as in the case against Iraq in 2003.

All of them involved UN resolution. Thus justified action.

 

[WelshBloke]

Now now welshy, I know you live in some crazy mixed up country filled with atheists and Islamic no go zones due to silly liberal idealism that has failed miserably. Just stay in the UK and I wont complain. 🙂

Is that a promise? Because I was going to stay here anyway (apart from the odd holiday) and you seem to spend most of your time complaining so that looks like a win for me!

 

[unseenmorbidity]

Too bad about the 150 thousand civilians. Any city with a sizable population would have worked. America wanted to show the world how many people it could kill with a single plane on a single sortie. It worked and it was an act of terror. In the moral calculus, it probably saved lives.

Actually Japan was about to surrender anyways, and the generals knew it.

 

[MajinCry]

Now now welshy, I know you live in some crazy mixed up country filled with atheists and Islamic no go zones due to silly liberal idealism that has failed miserably. Just stay in the UK and I wont complain. 🙂

Lookie here, someone actually believes in "no go zones". You still fall for that right wing propaganda?

What next, Breitbart and Infowars are legit news sources?

 

[FelixDeCat]

Lookie here, someone actually believes in "no go zones". You still fall for that right wing propaganda?

What next, Breitbart and Infowars are legit news sources?

So you deny there are parts of Europe where the native population is no longer welcomed by majority immigrant neighborhoods - so called "no-go" zones? Do you really want me to post the first hand account videos put together by local media?

 

[MajinCry]

So you deny there are parts of Europe where the native population is no longer welcomed by majority immigrant neighborhoods - so called "no-go" zones? Do you really want me to post the first hand account videos put together by local media?

That's not what a no go zone is. A no go zone is an area in these countries where the law doesn't apply, and instead the communities use their own in lieu.

And those don't exist. If you're going to talk propaganda, at least know the meaning of the terms you use.

 

[bshole]

The entire point of war is to subdue your opponent thru some means. violence, chemical warfare, economic attacks....its not necessarily for the outright slaughter of people.

Learn your damn Bible. According to the creator of the universe, it is necessary to kill every man, woman and child. Sometimes it is even necessary to kill every goat as well.

 

[pmv]

So you deny there are parts of Europe where the native population is no longer welcomed by majority immigrant neighborhoods - so called "no-go" zones? Do you really want me to post the first hand account videos put together by local media?

How come you are silently switching your claim from Welshbloke's country (Wales, presumably?) to "Europe"?

As for 'full of atheists' - you say that like it's a bad thing!

(Besides, the UK isn't really full of 'atheists' in the tiresome Dawkins sense, its just full of people who aren't that fussed about religion either way, which seems far preferable to having the nutters you have over there).

 

[bradly1101]

I understand the need to examine our failures as a country - we are not perfect. Over centuries, everyone makes what might be looked upon by history as mistakes. The OP and his supporters just needed a little reminder however of reality, that deep down in inside most humans want to be American despite those mistakes. So do let the criticism continue, but do so with that in mind.

I doubt this. From our point of view lots of people want to live here, and envy our openness and successes in both financial and freedom-loving ways, but unless you can backup "most humans" with a comprehensive, global survey, I sincerely doubt it. It feels good to think that, and bolsters national pride.

 

[FelixDeCat]

How come you are silently switching your claim from Welshbloke's country (Wales, presumably?) to "Europe"?

As for 'full of atheists' - you say that like it's a bad thing!

(Besides, the UK isn't really full of 'atheists' in the tiresome Dawkins sense, its just full of people who aren't that fussed about religion either way, which seems far preferable to having the nutters you have over there).

Perhaps "full of atheists" was a bit of an exaggeration as there are plenty of God loving Christians as well. And while I agree the Dawkins style atheist is probably just as annoying as the Westborough Baptist style Christian, I try not to judge. 😉

 

[FelixDeCat]

I doubt this. From our point of view lots of people want to live here, and envy our openness and successes in both financial and freedom-loving ways, but unless you can backup "most humans" with a comprehensive, global survey, I sincerely doubt it. It feels good to think that, and bolsters national pride.

There really is no doubt about it. American idealism makes this country great and it is the preferable way to live worldwide. And you are certainly correct in that I feel good about being American! Long live the USA!!

But I am sure that there are plenty of people that are happy just where they are. And hopefully they stay there. The roads are way too congested in DFW and housing / other costs has more than doubled over the last five years.

 

[FelixDeCat]

That's not what a no go zone is. A no go zone is an area in these countries where the law doesn't apply, and instead the communities use their own in lieu.

And those don't exist. If you're going to talk propaganda, at least know the meaning of the terms you use.

Okay, I stand corrected. It would be nice however if the areas in which locals are greeted by hostile immigrant populations that use violence to keep natives out, including emergency services, would revert to their previous state of peace and tranquility. That or you can just deport them back to their homelands - which is unlikely in liberal Europe.

 

[realibrad]

That's not what a no go zone is. A no go zone is an area in these countries where the law doesn't apply, and instead the communities use their own in lieu.

And those don't exist. If you're going to talk propaganda, at least know the meaning of the terms you use.

To be fair, this was a thing.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-like-those-in-brazilian-favelas-7462654.html

Weird claim, but not an unimportant person making the claim either.

 

[MajinCry]

To be fair, this was a thing.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-like-those-in-brazilian-favelas-7462654.html

Weird claim, but not an unimportant person making the claim either.

https://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/nogozones.asp

 

[realibrad]

https://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/nogozones.asp

Did you read my link at all?

head of a UN drugs agency said parts of Manchester, Birmingham and Liverpool were "no-go areas" similar to Latin America's notoriously violent favelas.

That was a claim from the President of the UN International Narcotics Control Board Hamid Ghodse. So if you wonder where people got the idea from...

 

[MajinCry]

Did you read my link at all?


That was a claim from the President of the UN International Narcotics Control Board Hamid Ghodse. So if you wonder where people got the idea from...

And that's not what Felix was talking about.

And if you read the Snopes article, you'll find a debunking of the idea that the cities are in chaos, Birmingham in particular.

 

[realibrad]

And that's not what Felix was talking about.

And if you read the Snopes article, you'll find a debunking of the idea that the cities are in chaos, Birmingham in particular.

Your snopes has nothing to do with it. If you are wondering how this idea got out there, then look no further than the UN. I know that its wrong, but that is a pretty big authority giving out misinformation. It was not started by the right, unless you believe the UN is a right wing institution. The guy at the UN started this idea and people morphed it into what they wanted to believe. The context of Hamid Ghodse's comment was about drugs and gangs which are typically minority and immigrant groups. That was then twisted into "Muslims" as they are a major immigrant group in the UK. That said, your original comment about believing right wing propaganda is misinformed as it was originated by the UN.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Did you read my link at all?



That was a claim from the President of the UN International Narcotics Control Board Hamid Ghodse. So if you wonder where people got the idea from...

And yet the folks who actually police the areas mentioned say:

"Police reacted angrily to the suggestion there were areas of major cities beyond their reach. Chief Constable Tim Hollis, the Association of Chief Police Officers lead on drugs, said: "I simply do not recognise the reference to 'no go' areas in the UK. It appears to be set in the broader context of social cohesion."

Merseyside Police said they "absolutely disagree that there are any 'no- go areas' in Liverpool," and West Midlands Police also denied their existence."

 

[realibrad]

And yet the folks who actually police the areas mentioned say:

"Police reacted angrily to the suggestion there were areas of major cities beyond their reach. Chief Constable Tim Hollis, the Association of Chief Police Officers lead on drugs, said: "I simply do not recognise the reference to 'no go' areas in the UK. It appears to be set in the broader context of social cohesion."

Merseyside Police said they "absolutely disagree that there are any 'no- go areas' in Liverpool," and West Midlands Police also denied their existence."

Hey dummy. The issue was that Majin thought the idea was a right wing issue, yet it was clearly something spread by the UN. I have said twice before this that it was clearly not a correct for factual statement. It was, however, a statement made by the President of the UN International Narcotics Control Board. I have never once said that it was true. What I have done is correct Majin's statement about it being right wing propaganda.

Its pretty clearly something that is not true. In no way could any reasonable person believe that the UK has places as dangerous as the poor parts of Brazil. Amazing that someone at that level in the UN could be so misinformed. Less amazing that the public would believe his statements though.

 

[MajinCry]

Hey dummy. The issue was that Majin thought the idea was a right wing issue, yet it was clearly something spread by the UN. I have said twice before this that it was clearly not a correct for factual statement. It was, however, a statement made by the President of the UN International Narcotics Control Board. I have never once said that it was true. What I have done is correct Majin's statement about it being right wing propaganda.

Its pretty clearly something that is not true. In no way could any reasonable person believe that the UK has places as dangerous as the poor parts of Brazil. Amazing that someone at that level in the UN could be so misinformed. Less amazing that the public would believe his statements though.

Of course it's a right wing issue; did you not read the Snopes article? It's the right wing tabloids and media that are obsessed with the mythical no go zone, where western laws are suspended in favour of Sharia Law.

What you're calling no go zones, is not what everyone else uses the term to refer to. Take a look at Felix; he even admitted he was wrong about them existing. You're interjecting with a definition for the term that nobody uses, except for one guy in the UN.

Come talk to me when that guy replaces Murdoch in the media.