Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I think it's a good idea to continue the censored thread, but in a proper manner, as it's an important issue.

    My view is as follows.

    (Original post by UniOfLife)
    Can we have some examples of American bullying please?

    Invasions on a regular basis. I can only think of three invasions in the last decade. One was in Serbia where they intervened to stop genocide. One was in Afghanistan to remove the horrendous dictatorship that was the Taliban and bring freedom to the people of Afghanistan. This had the backing of most of the world IIRC. The third was Iraq.

    I liked this line though:
    "They join clubs like Nato and the Security Council and G8 but expect to have the overriding say on everything."

    They don't "join" those clubs so much as make them. Without the USA Nato wouldn't exist. Without the USA the UN wouldn't exist and without the USA well, it'd be G2-8 and would be even more useless than it is now.

    Oh and this is good too:
    "They just dont play fair!"

    I'm inclined to say "go cry to the teacher" but of course you can't because as we all know the only country in this entire world prepared to take action against others when such action is required is the USA as proved so tragically in the Balkans and in Sudan.

    I'm inclined to think that this is going to be a pathetic excuse for US bashing as happens from time to time on TSR.
    Oh pur-leese.

    RE Serbia, there was no genocide. There were only 2000 killings in Serbia in the two years preceding the attack by NATO. 1500 of those killings were carried out not by Serbian authorities but by the KLA. This has been verified by America's Watch, Amnesty International and even the court that tried Milosovic! To call that genocide is an insult to the Jews.

    IN FACT, you can take a look at this link which defines US foreign policy towards Yugoslavia and its motivations therefor; as you'll see it's got nothing to do with genocide. http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nsdd/nsdd-133.htm

    The genocide story is another farce by the US, trying to paint their enemies as monsters to justify their tyranny.

    You're insane if you try to justify the invasion of Afghanistan, which began with the systematic terrorization of the civilian population to try and "smoke out" Al Qaeda, violates international law gravely with regard to the conditions fot military force, has killed untold thousands of people and driven many more to starvation, poverty and opium production.

    If the US were so interested in democracy and freedom, why did they have to bomb the place to shreds? Why not just support the democratic processes, and appeal to the UN for a peacekeeping force if one was required?

    Your projection of the US as some kind of altruistic hero-nation could not be more misplaced. I've already referred to the "tragedy" in the Balkans. It's also clear that Sudan has to do with nothing but oil. There is no justification for what the US have done in the past.

    They've invaded South Vietnam and killed millions of innocent people, razed the place to the ground and sent it into probably a century of regression; they've supported a series of despotic regimes in South America and destroyed the democratic process there; they've presided over the poverty of billions of people towards the end of the century for a few men to line their pockets; they've given arms to the biggest human rights abusers in history including iconic mass murderes such as Ariel Sharon and General Suharto; they've come close to ending the human race at Cuba; and now they're creating rivers of blood in Iraq and Afghanistan. It must end.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    IBTL :teeth:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Agent Smith)
    IBTL :teeth:
    The discussion hasn't been ended. The Mod censored it for a pretty lame reason, I think, and prematurely so; there is much to "debate".
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shamrock92)
    You're insane if you try to justify the invasion of Afghanistan, which began with the systematic terrorization of the civilian population to try and "smoke out" Al Qaeda, violates international law gravely with regard to the conditions fot military force, has killed untold thousands of people and driven many more to starvation, poverty and opium production.
    Where to begin. The invasion of Afghanistan was justified on account of several factors, the central one being that the Taliban was not seen as being the legitimate government of Afghanistan by the vast majority of nations worldwide. If I recall correctly, only a handful of nations conferred this legitimacy upon Taliban; the rest considering the Northern Alliance to be the legitimate government of Afghanistan.

    If the US were so interested in democracy and freedom, why did they have to bomb the place to shreds? Why not just support the democratic processes, and appeal to the UN for a peacekeeping force if one was required?
    What "democratic processes" are these then? The ones within the country? Forgive me, but even the world's greatest sleuth would have a task in finding any democratic processes taking place within Afghanistan under the Taliban's rule. The "democratic processes" of the UN? I think these two words serve as a euphemism for "inaction"; think about the poverty within Afghanistan. People complain about US bombing of infrastructure within Iraq, but this isn't a charge you can level with them within Afghanistan: to all extents and purposes it didn't exist.

    Your projection of the US as some kind of altruistic hero-nation could not be more misplaced. I've already referred to the "tragedy" in the Balkans. It's also clear that Sudan has to do with nothing but oil. There is no justification for what the US have done in the past.
    I wouldn't portray the US government as being altruistic. However, I wouldn't give any government worldwide this accolade, as most countries, by and large, choose to act in their self interests and I wouldn't have it any other way. Some actions may appear to be outwardly reprehensible, but in many cases the alternative would have been more distasteful. This point may not fit into the one-sided mirage in which the US is the doyen of evil, but it's worth trying to see if it will permeate your world views.

    They've presided over the poverty of billions of people towards the end of the century for a few men to line their pockets
    Ridiculously naive twaddle which I'm sure could be dissected within a minute or two by someone with an ounce of economic knowledge. I'd do it myself but to be frank I'm losing the will to do so merely by responding to the rest of this post.

    They've given arms to the biggest human rights abusers in history including iconic mass murderes such as Ariel Sharon
    LOL!

    They've come close to ending the human race at Cuba
    Even if this ridiculously hyperbolic charge had any semblance of validity - which it doesn't - surely a greater proportion of blame for such actions can be attributed to the erstwhile leader of Cuba for almost 40 years, a certain Fidel Castro? A man that has wreaked enormous damage to his country over this period and is a bastion of the failures of Marxism? But no! Amerikka ranks as a greater demon in the Chomskyan viewpoints which you espouse.

    It must end.
    Thankfully, your post has.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UniOfLife)
    Can we have some examples of American bullying please?
    Well, didn't they ironically threaten to bomb Pakistan in 2001 "back to the stone age" if they didn't cooperate fighting terrorism?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Invocation)
    Well, didn't they ironically threaten to bomb Pakistan in 2001 "back to the stone age" if they didn't cooperate fighting terrorism?
    Pft!

    At least feign intelligence and objectivity, even if it's just to humor the rest of us.

    This was a claim made by President Musharraff in September 2006. Given that the accusation was made five years after the threat was supposedly made, by a man that has since been forced to step down as President facing impeachment charges for violation of the constitution and gross misconduct, I'll let you draw your own conclusion as to its reliability.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Pft!

    At least feign intelligence and objectivity, even if it's just to humor the rest of us.

    This was a claim made by President Musharraff in September 2006. Given that the accusation was made five years after the threat was supposedly made, by a man that has since been forced to step down as President facing impeachment charges for violation of the constitution and gross misconduct, I'll let you draw your own conclusion as to its reliability.
    Well, it didn't do him any favours at the time. Since terrorism sky-rocketed when Musharraf sided with the Americans, the claim showed weakness on his part. Past leaders such as Nawaz Sharif probably wouldn't have put up with such bullying.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Invocation)
    Well, it didn't do him any favours at the time. Since terrorism sky-rocketed when Musharraf sided with the Americans, the claim showed weakness on his part. Past leaders such as Nawaz Sharif probably wouldn't have put up with such bullying.
    What bullying?

    Again, this was a claim made by Musgarraf five years after it supposedly took place. Are you seriously going to use this as an example of American bullying?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm from the USA and I think the government takes action in wayy too many countries. Afghanistan is partially justified because their government was in pieces. We had NO right to go into Iraq, it was mainly a personal war for G. Bush. Most Americans think that he tried to finish what his father started, and that he wants the oil in Iraq, because he was an oil company owner before he was a politician.

    On the other hand, I think NATO and the UN don't take enough action in countries where it is needed. Darfur, for example is a crazy situation and everyone seems to be sitting around acting like their hands are tied. I don't get it!!
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shamrock92)
    I think it's a good idea to continue the censored thread, but in a proper manner, as it's an important issue.

    My view is as follows.



    Oh pur-leese.

    RE Serbia, there was no genocide. There were only 2000 killings in Serbia in the two years preceding the attack by NATO. 1500 of those killings were carried out not by Serbian authorities but by the KLA. This has been verified by America's Watch, Amnesty International and even the court that tried Milosovic! To call that genocide is an insult to the Jews.

    IN FACT, you can take a look at this link which defines US foreign policy towards Yugoslavia and its motivations therefor; as you'll see it's got nothing to do with genocide. http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nsdd/nsdd-133.htm

    The genocide story is another farce by the US, trying to paint their enemies as monsters to justify their tyranny.
    So you're a typical anti-American conspiracy-theorist-lover then. The USA made up the crimes being committed in Bosnia and Kosovo in order to compel NATO belatedly to intervene to put an end to these imaginary events. I have little interest in "debating" with people who refuse to believe evidence and facts when it suits them - there's simply no point.

    (Original post by shamrock92)
    You're insane if you try to justify the invasion of Afghanistan, which began with the systematic terrorization of the civilian population to try and "smoke out" Al Qaeda, violates international law gravely with regard to the conditions fot military force, has killed untold thousands of people and driven many more to starvation, poverty and opium production.
    You're right. It'd be like trying to justify WWII which killed millions and drove many more to starvation and poverty. :rolleyes:

    (Original post by shamrock92)
    If the US were so interested in democracy and freedom, why did they have to bomb the place to shreds? Why not just support the democratic processes, and appeal to the UN for a peacekeeping force if one was required?
    Oh FFS. The capacity of anti-Americans to be so stupid never ceases to amaze me. Next time a brutal dictatorship represses its population in the horrendous manner of the Taliban all we need to do is sit back and support the all those people who are getting killed for suggesting that maybe some sort of voting might be nice.

    (Original post by shamrock92)
    Your projection of the US as some kind of altruistic hero-nation could not be more misplaced. I've already referred to the "tragedy" in the Balkans. It's also clear that Sudan has to do with nothing but oil. There is no justification for what the US have done in the past.

    They've invaded South Vietnam and killed millions of innocent people, razed the place to the ground and sent it into probably a century of regression; they've supported a series of despotic regimes in South America and destroyed the democratic process there; they've presided over the poverty of billions of people towards the end of the century for a few men to line their pockets; they've given arms to the biggest human rights abusers in history including iconic mass murderes such as Ariel Sharon and General Suharto; they've come close to ending the human race at Cuba; and now they're creating rivers of blood in Iraq and Afghanistan. It must end.
    It's perfectly clear that you don't know what you're talking about but I would like to point out one thing which just highlights the necessary hypocrisy of being as anti-American as yourself.

    At the beginning of your post you bent over backwards to exempt Serbia from charges of genocide and war crimes claiming that they didn't do it but someone else in their country etc. Yet here when it suits you Ariel Sharon becomes an "iconic mass murderer".
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Invocation)
    Well, it didn't do him any favours at the time. Since terrorism sky-rocketed when Musharraf sided with the Americans, the claim showed weakness on his part. Past leaders such as Nawaz Sharif probably wouldn't have put up with such bullying.
    You have this totally backwards I'm afraid. All we have is the claim of Musharraf and he would make this claim 5 years later precisely because of the trouble his decision caused in his country. If he says he was forced into it by the "evil Americans" then all those people causing trouble in Pakistan because the government was helping the "evil Americans" might not be so hard on him. They'd all be victims of the same people.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    "Come close to ending the human race?"

    Newsflash: It was the SOVIETS who put missile bases on Cuba.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    In all fairness the American policy towards Cuba pushed it very much into the arms of the soviets. Missle bases in Turkey didn't help either.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Crash)
    In all fairness the American policy towards Cuba pushed it very much into the arms of the soviets. Missle bases in Turkey didn't help either.
    I'm not an expert in this field but I'm going to guess that the Communist Cuba was bound to be very close to the Communist USSR with or without US involvement.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UniOfLife)
    I'm not an expert in this field but I'm going to guess that the Communist Cuba was bound to be very close to the Communist USSR with or without US involvement.
    Well the revolution wasn't specifically communist from the off. The marxist elements only achieved dominance because of US's response to Cuba immediately post-revolution. The economic blockade caused the revolution to adopt a more soviet-friendly ideology in return for aid.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Crash)
    Well the revolution wasn't specifically communist from the off. The marxist elements only achieved dominance because of US's response to Cuba immediately post-revolution. The economic blockade caused the revolution to adopt a more soviet-friendly ideology in return for aid.
    So what you're saying is... America caused Communism
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UniOfLife)
    I'm not an expert in this field but I'm going to guess that the Communist Cuba was bound to be very close to the Communist USSR with or without US involvement.
    Didn't Castro push Kruschev to give him the missiles? I seem to remember reading that somewhere. No idea whether the source is reliable though...

    Whilst you might imagine that the USSR wouldn't cede to his will unless they quite fancied the idea anyway, you only have to look at what happened with South Vietnam to see what a bit of pressure from the smaller guys allied with the bigger guys could cause the US and USSR to do.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Agent Smith)
    So what you're saying is... America caused Communism
    :rolleyes:

    They certainly made the revolutionary government in Cuba more extreme by it's response. Remember, the revolution wasn't a communisit one - rather it was to displace the corrupt government, whom the US happened to be buddies with.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    YES, We regain out right to express our freedoms. No more RUSSIAN BASHING please! Sorry, shamrock, I see you have been neg repped. I'm afraid to say it happens to anyone who talks sense in the politics area

    I dont agree with Condoleeza Rice's recent visits abroad.
    Also, America's recent statement dismissing as "patently false" accusations by Russia that it helped provoke the conflict in Georgia for domestic political reasons seems rather riciculous to me. They cant hide the fact they were supplying weapons and military training to the Georgians, not only before but during Georgia's initiation of military force on SO.

    To suggest that the United States orchestrated this on behalf of a political candidate - it sounds not rational," she said. - Well, I have to say, it sounds more than rational to me. Has it never happened beofre in history that a party has created events purposefully to gain support? remember the burning of the Reichstag, orchestrated by the National Socialist Party in Germany back in the day. They blamed it on the communist party so that Hitler and his cronies could get into power. It is very easy to manipulate public thought through the press, and it has the most influential effect come election time, agreed?
    Even if America has not orchestrated this by pushing Georgia into it, and we find out that actually Sakashvili did it of his own accord, no one can deny that the US has involved itself in this whole situation so heavily that no blame can be put upon it!

    In addition to finding the US governments treatment of this whole conflict as completely hypocritical, I also think America is aggravating more than just Russia by bossing Eastern Europe around and threatening China and other countries. Its almost as if America thinks it has the right to tell everyone what to do. They talk as if they are police officers, not to be disobeyed, but they are on the same level as everyone else, and I think we can safely say that no one likes being bossed around.
    Put it this way, Amercia is the goody two shoes in a YR 6 class (I say goody two shoes, but that doesnt mean its actions are always good). A Georgia is a puny little schoolboy who is desprately seeking more friends. He see's how America is able to put others down and always get its way. He sees America is also very rich. he wants some part of this. He gives America his lunchmoney everyday. America offers him protection. America gives Georgia martial arts lessons on one condition 'you do what I tell you to do'. America builds up Georgia's confidence so much that, after having initiated into the 'American gang' of America and his other cronies, Georgia is feeling rather powerful and decided to aggravate Russia (up tll now a quiet member of the class) by throwing mashed up chewing gum at Russia's little brother in the playgorund one day. Russia, upset and aggravated, retaliates by getting some of his friends to verbally warn off Georgia. Georgia screams to the dinnerlady 'i've been attacked by Russia for no reason, miss'. Russia gets more aggravated and beats up Georgia, who despite his martial arts traning is no match for Russia and is defeated within a few minutes. Georgia gets the American gang to beat up two of Russia's little sisters. Russia gets his friends to spy on Georgia everyday and tag along behind him over his shoulder to make sure his stays in line. Russia does this stop Georgia attacking his sisters or anymore of his friends for a sceond time. Russia says to America, who feels its influence is waining and attempts to go on a power tyrade, that it will call of its friends spying on Georgia as soon as Georgia signs a contract not to hurt more of Russias friends. Georgia, its ego inflated by its friendship with America, refuses to sign the contract. Russia continues to order its friends to spy on Georgia. America throws insults at Russia everyday in class and makes speeches in Show and Tell along the lines of 'Russia must stop spying on Georgia' its so unfair, I will not tolerate it, neither will my friends, will you friends?'. 'Friends, if you dont agree with me, I wont give you protection either, you msut join the American gang, or else Russia will hit you'. Scared into submission by America, Ukraine, Poland and other schoolkids decide to apply for membership to the 'American gang'. America tells Poland, let me put a slingshot on your desk and have it aimed at russia, as you sit next to Russia. Poland says yes. And SO it ends!
    The best analogy ever, If I say so myself.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by studentin007)
    YES, We regain out right to express our freedoms. No more RUSSIAN BASHING please! Sorry, shamrock, I see you have been neg repped. I'm afraid to say it happens to anyone who talks sense in the politics area

    I dont agree with Condoleeza Rice's recent visits abroad.
    Also, America's recent statement dismissing as "patently false" accusations by Russia that it helped provoke the conflict in Georgia for domestic political reasons seems rather riciculous to me. They cant hide the fact they were supplying weapons and military training to the Georgians, not only before but during Georgia's initiation of military force on SO.

    To suggest that the United States orchestrated this on behalf of a political candidate - it sounds not rational," she said. - Well, I have to say, it sounds more than rational to me. Has it never happened beofre in history that a party has created events purposefully to gain support? remember the burning of the Reichstag, orchestrated by the National Socialist Party in Germany back in the day. They blamed it on the communist party so that Hitler and his cronies could get into power. It is very easy to manipulate public thought through the press, and it has the most influential effect come election time, agreed?
    Even if America has not orchestrated this by pushing Georgia into it, and we find out that actually Sakashvili did it of his own accord, no one can deny that the US has involved itself in this whole situation so heavily that no blame can be put upon it!

    In addition to finding the US governments treatment of this whole conflict as completely hypocritical, I also think America is aggravating more than just Russia by bossing Eastern Europe around and threatening China and other countries. Its almost as if America thinks it has the right to tell everyone what to do. They talk as if they are police officers, not to be disobeyed, but they are on the same level as everyone else, and I think we can safely say that no one likes being bossed around.
    Put it this way, Amercia is the goody two shoes in a YR 6 class (I say goody two shoes, but that doesnt mean its actions are always good). A Georgia is a puny little schoolboy who is desprately seeking more friends. He see's how America is able to put others down and always get its way. He sees America is also very rich. he wants some part of this. He gives America his lunchmoney everyday. America offers him protection. America gives Georgia martial arts lessons on one condition 'you do what I tell you to do'. America builds up Georgia's confidence so much that, after having initiated into the 'American gang' of America and his other cronies, Georgia is feeling rather powerful and decided to aggravate Russia (up tll now a quiet member of the class) by throwing mashed up chewing gum at Russia's little brother in the playgorund one day. Russia, upset and aggravated, retaliates by getting some of his friends to verbally warn off Georgia. Georgia screams to the dinnerlady 'i've been attacked by Russia for no reason, miss'. Russia gets more aggravated and beats up Georgia, who despite his martial arts traning is no match for Russia and is defeated within a few minutes. Georgia gets the American gang to beat up two of Russia's little sisters. Russia gets his friends to spy on Georgia everyday and tag along behind him over his shoulder to make sure his stays in line. Russia does this stop Georgia attacking his sisters or anymore of his friends for a sceond time. Russia says to America, who feels its influence is waining and attempts to go on a power tyrade, that it will call of its friends spying on Georgia as soon as Georgia signs a contract not to hurt more of Russias friends. Georgia, its ego inflated by its friendship with America, refuses to sign the contract. Russia continues to order its friends to spy on Georgia. America throws insults at Russia everyday in class and makes speeches in Show and Tell along the lines of 'Russia must stop spying on Georgia' its so unfair, I will not tolerate it, neither will my friends, will you friends?'. 'Friends, if you dont agree with me, I wont give you protection either, you msut join the American gang, or else Russia will hit you'. Scared into submission by America, Ukraine, Poland and other schoolkids decide to apply for membership to the 'American gang'. America tells Poland, let me put a slingshot on your desk and have it aimed at russia, as you sit next to Russia. Poland says yes. And SO it ends!
    The best analogy ever, If I say so myself.
    Please use paragraphs.

    Also, who are these two sisters that the Americans beat up?
 
 
 
Poll
Are you chained to your phone?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.