|
Please guys, stay on topic.
This thread is about the situation in Iraq and Syria. |
On September 03 2013 04:59 Big-t wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 04:56 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:49 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:43 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:38 bosnia wrote:
I never said it gets the U.S. land read my posts, I said it get's them military positions. The U.S. spendS 60% on military you think they don't want to be in control ?You think they don't want to set up bases in every corner of the world just because they feel it's the right thing to do, how would you feel if you were poor and I was rich and I told you I'm going to put cameras in your house because I want to see what you're doing even though I'm much more powerful than you. If I asked you what the capital of Canada was you wouldn't even know without having to google it, where in Canada a lot of people know almost all states and you couldn't even tell me 5 provices, that's just you being an American, blind to what's going on outside of your bubble. Anyways I have to go, feel like I wasted the last half hour for nothing =/ It's probably better that you not post then, seeing as how you can't refrain from using petty, childish insults alongside some of the most ridiculous and grammatically incorrect illogic I've seen since this morning. There is a very good chance that the US will limit it's involvement to strategic air strikes only, and that means no bases and no soldiers on the ground. This would be in pursuit of forcing Assad to come to the table, which, admittedly, may or may not happen, but the fact remains that Iraq/Afghanistan style involvement isn't even being discussed yet by the President, relegating your continued insistence that the US only acts in pursuit of "military positions" to the waste bin. If you think those are petty insults then I feel bad for you. Your talking about limiting airstrikes when in fact the States have no business being there in the first place, makes no sense, why are you trying to make it sound like the Americans have to be in every country to "help out" which is not the case at all. Doesn't matter what president is next it's always the same focus, step in, take over. The Bush family has been friends with the Bin Ladens for almost 2 decades and after 9.11 they all went in claiming terrorism trying to control land, oil. Now you're so blind still to accept that it's really all again about the same resources. Did you just claim 9-11 was a ploy for USA to get land and oil? This rumor will always live. Deal with it^^
Yes that's what I said and so have many more powerful and muuuuch smarter people than yourself and I have said, What now? Were you there during the talks? Have you watched any documentaries? Have you read any papers? What's the problem. When you need resources you WILL come up with a lie that's so ridiculous that most won't believe that's how it becomes successful. I actually have a business degree from the University Of Alberta, what do you have?Opinions like everyone else, I stay in the media, I read a lot and I love strategy that's why I love StarCraft and not call of duty.
|
On September 03 2013 05:15 bosnia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 04:59 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 04:56 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:49 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:43 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:38 bosnia wrote:
I never said it gets the U.S. land read my posts, I said it get's them military positions. The U.S. spendS 60% on military you think they don't want to be in control ?You think they don't want to set up bases in every corner of the world just because they feel it's the right thing to do, how would you feel if you were poor and I was rich and I told you I'm going to put cameras in your house because I want to see what you're doing even though I'm much more powerful than you. If I asked you what the capital of Canada was you wouldn't even know without having to google it, where in Canada a lot of people know almost all states and you couldn't even tell me 5 provices, that's just you being an American, blind to what's going on outside of your bubble. Anyways I have to go, feel like I wasted the last half hour for nothing =/ It's probably better that you not post then, seeing as how you can't refrain from using petty, childish insults alongside some of the most ridiculous and grammatically incorrect illogic I've seen since this morning. There is a very good chance that the US will limit it's involvement to strategic air strikes only, and that means no bases and no soldiers on the ground. This would be in pursuit of forcing Assad to come to the table, which, admittedly, may or may not happen, but the fact remains that Iraq/Afghanistan style involvement isn't even being discussed yet by the President, relegating your continued insistence that the US only acts in pursuit of "military positions" to the waste bin. If you think those are petty insults then I feel bad for you. Your talking about limiting airstrikes when in fact the States have no business being there in the first place, makes no sense, why are you trying to make it sound like the Americans have to be in every country to "help out" which is not the case at all. Doesn't matter what president is next it's always the same focus, step in, take over. The Bush family has been friends with the Bin Ladens for almost 2 decades and after 9.11 they all went in claiming terrorism trying to control land, oil. Now you're so blind still to accept that it's really all again about the same resources. Did you just claim 9-11 was a ploy for USA to get land and oil? This rumor will always live. Deal with it^^ Yes that's what I said and so have many more powerful and muuuuch smarter people than yourself and I have said, What now? Were you there during the talks? Have you watched any documentaries? Have you read any papers? What's the problem. When you need resources you WILL come up with a lie that's so ridiculous that most won't believe that's how it becomes successful. I actually have a business degree from the University Of Alberta, what do you have?Opinions like everyone else, I stay in the media, I read a lot and I love strategy that's why I love StarCraft and not call of duty.
You do know it's hard to take anyone seriously when most of their post is ad hominem, right?
|
On September 03 2013 05:15 bosnia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 04:59 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 04:56 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:49 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:43 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:38 bosnia wrote:
I never said it gets the U.S. land read my posts, I said it get's them military positions. The U.S. spendS 60% on military you think they don't want to be in control ?You think they don't want to set up bases in every corner of the world just because they feel it's the right thing to do, how would you feel if you were poor and I was rich and I told you I'm going to put cameras in your house because I want to see what you're doing even though I'm much more powerful than you. If I asked you what the capital of Canada was you wouldn't even know without having to google it, where in Canada a lot of people know almost all states and you couldn't even tell me 5 provices, that's just you being an American, blind to what's going on outside of your bubble. Anyways I have to go, feel like I wasted the last half hour for nothing =/ It's probably better that you not post then, seeing as how you can't refrain from using petty, childish insults alongside some of the most ridiculous and grammatically incorrect illogic I've seen since this morning. There is a very good chance that the US will limit it's involvement to strategic air strikes only, and that means no bases and no soldiers on the ground. This would be in pursuit of forcing Assad to come to the table, which, admittedly, may or may not happen, but the fact remains that Iraq/Afghanistan style involvement isn't even being discussed yet by the President, relegating your continued insistence that the US only acts in pursuit of "military positions" to the waste bin. If you think those are petty insults then I feel bad for you. Your talking about limiting airstrikes when in fact the States have no business being there in the first place, makes no sense, why are you trying to make it sound like the Americans have to be in every country to "help out" which is not the case at all. Doesn't matter what president is next it's always the same focus, step in, take over. The Bush family has been friends with the Bin Ladens for almost 2 decades and after 9.11 they all went in claiming terrorism trying to control land, oil. Now you're so blind still to accept that it's really all again about the same resources. Did you just claim 9-11 was a ploy for USA to get land and oil? This rumor will always live. Deal with it^^ Yes that's what I said and so have many more powerful and muuuuch smarter people than yourself and I have said, What now? Were you there during the talks? Have you watched any documentaries? Have you read any papers? What's the problem. When you need resources you WILL come up with a lie that's so ridiculous that most won't believe that's how it becomes successful. I actually have a business degree from the University Of Alberta, what do you have?Opinions like everyone else, I stay in the media, I read a lot and I love strategy that's why I love StarCraft and not call of duty.
Watch out guys, he's got a business degree from Univeristy of Alberta, therefore 9-11 is an inside job.
|
Those are not personal attacks, I actually know what hominem meant years ago, those are some of my opinion and some facts and some life experiences. Don't be offended DannyJ, I'm educated and talking to non-educated people is like talking to a brick wall, need I say more or are you smart enough to agree with that ?
|
On September 03 2013 05:22 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 05:15 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:59 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 04:56 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:49 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:43 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:38 bosnia wrote:
I never said it gets the U.S. land read my posts, I said it get's them military positions. The U.S. spendS 60% on military you think they don't want to be in control ?You think they don't want to set up bases in every corner of the world just because they feel it's the right thing to do, how would you feel if you were poor and I was rich and I told you I'm going to put cameras in your house because I want to see what you're doing even though I'm much more powerful than you. If I asked you what the capital of Canada was you wouldn't even know without having to google it, where in Canada a lot of people know almost all states and you couldn't even tell me 5 provices, that's just you being an American, blind to what's going on outside of your bubble. Anyways I have to go, feel like I wasted the last half hour for nothing =/ It's probably better that you not post then, seeing as how you can't refrain from using petty, childish insults alongside some of the most ridiculous and grammatically incorrect illogic I've seen since this morning. There is a very good chance that the US will limit it's involvement to strategic air strikes only, and that means no bases and no soldiers on the ground. This would be in pursuit of forcing Assad to come to the table, which, admittedly, may or may not happen, but the fact remains that Iraq/Afghanistan style involvement isn't even being discussed yet by the President, relegating your continued insistence that the US only acts in pursuit of "military positions" to the waste bin. If you think those are petty insults then I feel bad for you. Your talking about limiting airstrikes when in fact the States have no business being there in the first place, makes no sense, why are you trying to make it sound like the Americans have to be in every country to "help out" which is not the case at all. Doesn't matter what president is next it's always the same focus, step in, take over. The Bush family has been friends with the Bin Ladens for almost 2 decades and after 9.11 they all went in claiming terrorism trying to control land, oil. Now you're so blind still to accept that it's really all again about the same resources. Did you just claim 9-11 was a ploy for USA to get land and oil? This rumor will always live. Deal with it^^ Yes that's what I said and so have many more powerful and muuuuch smarter people than yourself and I have said, What now? Were you there during the talks? Have you watched any documentaries? Have you read any papers? What's the problem. When you need resources you WILL come up with a lie that's so ridiculous that most won't believe that's how it becomes successful. I actually have a business degree from the University Of Alberta, what do you have?Opinions like everyone else, I stay in the media, I read a lot and I love strategy that's why I love StarCraft and not call of duty. Watch out guys, he's got a business degree from Univeristy of Alberta, therefore 9-11 is an inside job.
So I assume my Political Science degree isnt useful here? D:
|
On September 03 2013 05:22 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 05:15 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:59 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 04:56 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:49 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:43 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:38 bosnia wrote:
I never said it gets the U.S. land read my posts, I said it get's them military positions. The U.S. spendS 60% on military you think they don't want to be in control ?You think they don't want to set up bases in every corner of the world just because they feel it's the right thing to do, how would you feel if you were poor and I was rich and I told you I'm going to put cameras in your house because I want to see what you're doing even though I'm much more powerful than you. If I asked you what the capital of Canada was you wouldn't even know without having to google it, where in Canada a lot of people know almost all states and you couldn't even tell me 5 provices, that's just you being an American, blind to what's going on outside of your bubble. Anyways I have to go, feel like I wasted the last half hour for nothing =/ It's probably better that you not post then, seeing as how you can't refrain from using petty, childish insults alongside some of the most ridiculous and grammatically incorrect illogic I've seen since this morning. There is a very good chance that the US will limit it's involvement to strategic air strikes only, and that means no bases and no soldiers on the ground. This would be in pursuit of forcing Assad to come to the table, which, admittedly, may or may not happen, but the fact remains that Iraq/Afghanistan style involvement isn't even being discussed yet by the President, relegating your continued insistence that the US only acts in pursuit of "military positions" to the waste bin. If you think those are petty insults then I feel bad for you. Your talking about limiting airstrikes when in fact the States have no business being there in the first place, makes no sense, why are you trying to make it sound like the Americans have to be in every country to "help out" which is not the case at all. Doesn't matter what president is next it's always the same focus, step in, take over. The Bush family has been friends with the Bin Ladens for almost 2 decades and after 9.11 they all went in claiming terrorism trying to control land, oil. Now you're so blind still to accept that it's really all again about the same resources. Did you just claim 9-11 was a ploy for USA to get land and oil? This rumor will always live. Deal with it^^ Yes that's what I said and so have many more powerful and muuuuch smarter people than yourself and I have said, What now? Were you there during the talks? Have you watched any documentaries? Have you read any papers? What's the problem. When you need resources you WILL come up with a lie that's so ridiculous that most won't believe that's how it becomes successful. I actually have a business degree from the University Of Alberta, what do you have?Opinions like everyone else, I stay in the media, I read a lot and I love strategy that's why I love StarCraft and not call of duty. Watch out guys, he's got a business degree from Univeristy of Alberta, therefore 9-11 is an inside job.
That was just weak, because people who have a business degree know NOTHING else about what's going on in the world ? Please come back with some relevant and useful.
|
On September 03 2013 05:23 bosnia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 05:22 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 05:15 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:59 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 04:56 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:49 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:43 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:38 bosnia wrote:
I never said it gets the U.S. land read my posts, I said it get's them military positions. The U.S. spendS 60% on military you think they don't want to be in control ?You think they don't want to set up bases in every corner of the world just because they feel it's the right thing to do, how would you feel if you were poor and I was rich and I told you I'm going to put cameras in your house because I want to see what you're doing even though I'm much more powerful than you. If I asked you what the capital of Canada was you wouldn't even know without having to google it, where in Canada a lot of people know almost all states and you couldn't even tell me 5 provices, that's just you being an American, blind to what's going on outside of your bubble. Anyways I have to go, feel like I wasted the last half hour for nothing =/ It's probably better that you not post then, seeing as how you can't refrain from using petty, childish insults alongside some of the most ridiculous and grammatically incorrect illogic I've seen since this morning. There is a very good chance that the US will limit it's involvement to strategic air strikes only, and that means no bases and no soldiers on the ground. This would be in pursuit of forcing Assad to come to the table, which, admittedly, may or may not happen, but the fact remains that Iraq/Afghanistan style involvement isn't even being discussed yet by the President, relegating your continued insistence that the US only acts in pursuit of "military positions" to the waste bin. If you think those are petty insults then I feel bad for you. Your talking about limiting airstrikes when in fact the States have no business being there in the first place, makes no sense, why are you trying to make it sound like the Americans have to be in every country to "help out" which is not the case at all. Doesn't matter what president is next it's always the same focus, step in, take over. The Bush family has been friends with the Bin Ladens for almost 2 decades and after 9.11 they all went in claiming terrorism trying to control land, oil. Now you're so blind still to accept that it's really all again about the same resources. Did you just claim 9-11 was a ploy for USA to get land and oil? This rumor will always live. Deal with it^^ Yes that's what I said and so have many more powerful and muuuuch smarter people than yourself and I have said, What now? Were you there during the talks? Have you watched any documentaries? Have you read any papers? What's the problem. When you need resources you WILL come up with a lie that's so ridiculous that most won't believe that's how it becomes successful. I actually have a business degree from the University Of Alberta, what do you have?Opinions like everyone else, I stay in the media, I read a lot and I love strategy that's why I love StarCraft and not call of duty. Watch out guys, he's got a business degree from Univeristy of Alberta, therefore 9-11 is an inside job. That was just weak, because people who have a business degree know NOTHING else about what's going on in the world ? Please come back with some relevant and useful.
No, but that's not a justification as to why you think 9-11 is an inside job.
|
On September 03 2013 05:23 Maasked wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 05:22 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 05:15 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:59 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 04:56 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:49 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:43 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:38 bosnia wrote:
I never said it gets the U.S. land read my posts, I said it get's them military positions. The U.S. spendS 60% on military you think they don't want to be in control ?You think they don't want to set up bases in every corner of the world just because they feel it's the right thing to do, how would you feel if you were poor and I was rich and I told you I'm going to put cameras in your house because I want to see what you're doing even though I'm much more powerful than you. If I asked you what the capital of Canada was you wouldn't even know without having to google it, where in Canada a lot of people know almost all states and you couldn't even tell me 5 provices, that's just you being an American, blind to what's going on outside of your bubble. Anyways I have to go, feel like I wasted the last half hour for nothing =/ It's probably better that you not post then, seeing as how you can't refrain from using petty, childish insults alongside some of the most ridiculous and grammatically incorrect illogic I've seen since this morning. There is a very good chance that the US will limit it's involvement to strategic air strikes only, and that means no bases and no soldiers on the ground. This would be in pursuit of forcing Assad to come to the table, which, admittedly, may or may not happen, but the fact remains that Iraq/Afghanistan style involvement isn't even being discussed yet by the President, relegating your continued insistence that the US only acts in pursuit of "military positions" to the waste bin. If you think those are petty insults then I feel bad for you. Your talking about limiting airstrikes when in fact the States have no business being there in the first place, makes no sense, why are you trying to make it sound like the Americans have to be in every country to "help out" which is not the case at all. Doesn't matter what president is next it's always the same focus, step in, take over. The Bush family has been friends with the Bin Ladens for almost 2 decades and after 9.11 they all went in claiming terrorism trying to control land, oil. Now you're so blind still to accept that it's really all again about the same resources. Did you just claim 9-11 was a ploy for USA to get land and oil? This rumor will always live. Deal with it^^ Yes that's what I said and so have many more powerful and muuuuch smarter people than yourself and I have said, What now? Were you there during the talks? Have you watched any documentaries? Have you read any papers? What's the problem. When you need resources you WILL come up with a lie that's so ridiculous that most won't believe that's how it becomes successful. I actually have a business degree from the University Of Alberta, what do you have?Opinions like everyone else, I stay in the media, I read a lot and I love strategy that's why I love StarCraft and not call of duty. Watch out guys, he's got a business degree from Univeristy of Alberta, therefore 9-11 is an inside job. So I assume my Political Science degree isnt useful here? D:
Good for you, I can appreciate someone who has their head right, I have a couple of friends who studied Political Science and I respect them.
|
Take it to the PM's if you guys are going to constantly attack each other. Please.
|
Netherlands19141 Posts
wei2coolman and Bosnia, consider yourselves warned and stop this ad hominem streak you both have going against eachother.
|
On September 03 2013 05:23 bosnia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 05:22 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 05:15 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:59 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 04:56 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:49 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:43 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:38 bosnia wrote:
I never said it gets the U.S. land read my posts, I said it get's them military positions. The U.S. spendS 60% on military you think they don't want to be in control ?You think they don't want to set up bases in every corner of the world just because they feel it's the right thing to do, how would you feel if you were poor and I was rich and I told you I'm going to put cameras in your house because I want to see what you're doing even though I'm much more powerful than you. If I asked you what the capital of Canada was you wouldn't even know without having to google it, where in Canada a lot of people know almost all states and you couldn't even tell me 5 provices, that's just you being an American, blind to what's going on outside of your bubble. Anyways I have to go, feel like I wasted the last half hour for nothing =/ It's probably better that you not post then, seeing as how you can't refrain from using petty, childish insults alongside some of the most ridiculous and grammatically incorrect illogic I've seen since this morning. There is a very good chance that the US will limit it's involvement to strategic air strikes only, and that means no bases and no soldiers on the ground. This would be in pursuit of forcing Assad to come to the table, which, admittedly, may or may not happen, but the fact remains that Iraq/Afghanistan style involvement isn't even being discussed yet by the President, relegating your continued insistence that the US only acts in pursuit of "military positions" to the waste bin. If you think those are petty insults then I feel bad for you. Your talking about limiting airstrikes when in fact the States have no business being there in the first place, makes no sense, why are you trying to make it sound like the Americans have to be in every country to "help out" which is not the case at all. Doesn't matter what president is next it's always the same focus, step in, take over. The Bush family has been friends with the Bin Ladens for almost 2 decades and after 9.11 they all went in claiming terrorism trying to control land, oil. Now you're so blind still to accept that it's really all again about the same resources. Did you just claim 9-11 was a ploy for USA to get land and oil? This rumor will always live. Deal with it^^ Yes that's what I said and so have many more powerful and muuuuch smarter people than yourself and I have said, What now? Were you there during the talks? Have you watched any documentaries? Have you read any papers? What's the problem. When you need resources you WILL come up with a lie that's so ridiculous that most won't believe that's how it becomes successful. I actually have a business degree from the University Of Alberta, what do you have?Opinions like everyone else, I stay in the media, I read a lot and I love strategy that's why I love StarCraft and not call of duty. Watch out guys, he's got a business degree from Univeristy of Alberta, therefore 9-11 is an inside job. That was just weak, because people who have a business degree know NOTHING else about what's going on in the world ? Please come back with some relevant and useful.
edit: Nyovne beat me to it
|
On September 03 2013 05:25 bosnia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 05:23 Maasked wrote:On September 03 2013 05:22 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 05:15 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:59 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 04:56 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:49 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:43 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:38 bosnia wrote:
I never said it gets the U.S. land read my posts, I said it get's them military positions. The U.S. spendS 60% on military you think they don't want to be in control ?You think they don't want to set up bases in every corner of the world just because they feel it's the right thing to do, how would you feel if you were poor and I was rich and I told you I'm going to put cameras in your house because I want to see what you're doing even though I'm much more powerful than you. If I asked you what the capital of Canada was you wouldn't even know without having to google it, where in Canada a lot of people know almost all states and you couldn't even tell me 5 provices, that's just you being an American, blind to what's going on outside of your bubble. Anyways I have to go, feel like I wasted the last half hour for nothing =/ It's probably better that you not post then, seeing as how you can't refrain from using petty, childish insults alongside some of the most ridiculous and grammatically incorrect illogic I've seen since this morning. There is a very good chance that the US will limit it's involvement to strategic air strikes only, and that means no bases and no soldiers on the ground. This would be in pursuit of forcing Assad to come to the table, which, admittedly, may or may not happen, but the fact remains that Iraq/Afghanistan style involvement isn't even being discussed yet by the President, relegating your continued insistence that the US only acts in pursuit of "military positions" to the waste bin. If you think those are petty insults then I feel bad for you. Your talking about limiting airstrikes when in fact the States have no business being there in the first place, makes no sense, why are you trying to make it sound like the Americans have to be in every country to "help out" which is not the case at all. Doesn't matter what president is next it's always the same focus, step in, take over. The Bush family has been friends with the Bin Ladens for almost 2 decades and after 9.11 they all went in claiming terrorism trying to control land, oil. Now you're so blind still to accept that it's really all again about the same resources. Did you just claim 9-11 was a ploy for USA to get land and oil? This rumor will always live. Deal with it^^ Yes that's what I said and so have many more powerful and muuuuch smarter people than yourself and I have said, What now? Were you there during the talks? Have you watched any documentaries? Have you read any papers? What's the problem. When you need resources you WILL come up with a lie that's so ridiculous that most won't believe that's how it becomes successful. I actually have a business degree from the University Of Alberta, what do you have?Opinions like everyone else, I stay in the media, I read a lot and I love strategy that's why I love StarCraft and not call of duty. Watch out guys, he's got a business degree from Univeristy of Alberta, therefore 9-11 is an inside job. So I assume my Political Science degree isnt useful here? D: Good for you, I can appreciate someone who has their head right, I have a couple of friends who studied Political Science and I respect them.
Nevermind I am dropping it EDIT
|
On September 03 2013 05:15 bosnia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 04:59 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 04:56 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:49 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:43 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:38 bosnia wrote:
I never said it gets the U.S. land read my posts, I said it get's them military positions. The U.S. spendS 60% on military you think they don't want to be in control ?You think they don't want to set up bases in every corner of the world just because they feel it's the right thing to do, how would you feel if you were poor and I was rich and I told you I'm going to put cameras in your house because I want to see what you're doing even though I'm much more powerful than you. If I asked you what the capital of Canada was you wouldn't even know without having to google it, where in Canada a lot of people know almost all states and you couldn't even tell me 5 provices, that's just you being an American, blind to what's going on outside of your bubble. Anyways I have to go, feel like I wasted the last half hour for nothing =/ It's probably better that you not post then, seeing as how you can't refrain from using petty, childish insults alongside some of the most ridiculous and grammatically incorrect illogic I've seen since this morning. There is a very good chance that the US will limit it's involvement to strategic air strikes only, and that means no bases and no soldiers on the ground. This would be in pursuit of forcing Assad to come to the table, which, admittedly, may or may not happen, but the fact remains that Iraq/Afghanistan style involvement isn't even being discussed yet by the President, relegating your continued insistence that the US only acts in pursuit of "military positions" to the waste bin. If you think those are petty insults then I feel bad for you. Your talking about limiting airstrikes when in fact the States have no business being there in the first place, makes no sense, why are you trying to make it sound like the Americans have to be in every country to "help out" which is not the case at all. Doesn't matter what president is next it's always the same focus, step in, take over. The Bush family has been friends with the Bin Ladens for almost 2 decades and after 9.11 they all went in claiming terrorism trying to control land, oil. Now you're so blind still to accept that it's really all again about the same resources. Did you just claim 9-11 was a ploy for USA to get land and oil? This rumor will always live. Deal with it^^ Yes that's what I said and so have many more powerful and muuuuch smarter people than yourself and I have said, What now? Were you there during the talks? Have you watched any documentaries? Have you read any papers? What's the problem. When you need resources you WILL come up with a lie that's so ridiculous that most won't believe that's how it becomes successful. I actually have a business degree from the University Of Alberta, what do you have?Opinions like everyone else, I stay in the media, I read a lot and I love strategy that's why I love StarCraft and not call of duty.
Yeah, I started reading quality news paper on a daily base a few months ago. There are so many different stories about the same thing, like 3 people with 4 opinions, that I started to be very skeptical about the "western civilization". I can´t even trust my own country, now that the national council elections are soon, suddenly things come up left and right simply to sympathize or antisympathize certain parties. Things that should be public long time ago, or wrong facts.
I have actually no idea what to think about the current war state, because the more I read the news the more different versions I get about it. I´m beginning to think that this really all just a game, not a funny game tbh.
|
On September 03 2013 05:24 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 05:23 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 05:22 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 05:15 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:59 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 04:56 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:49 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:43 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:38 bosnia wrote:
I never said it gets the U.S. land read my posts, I said it get's them military positions. The U.S. spendS 60% on military you think they don't want to be in control ?You think they don't want to set up bases in every corner of the world just because they feel it's the right thing to do, how would you feel if you were poor and I was rich and I told you I'm going to put cameras in your house because I want to see what you're doing even though I'm much more powerful than you. If I asked you what the capital of Canada was you wouldn't even know without having to google it, where in Canada a lot of people know almost all states and you couldn't even tell me 5 provices, that's just you being an American, blind to what's going on outside of your bubble. Anyways I have to go, feel like I wasted the last half hour for nothing =/ It's probably better that you not post then, seeing as how you can't refrain from using petty, childish insults alongside some of the most ridiculous and grammatically incorrect illogic I've seen since this morning. There is a very good chance that the US will limit it's involvement to strategic air strikes only, and that means no bases and no soldiers on the ground. This would be in pursuit of forcing Assad to come to the table, which, admittedly, may or may not happen, but the fact remains that Iraq/Afghanistan style involvement isn't even being discussed yet by the President, relegating your continued insistence that the US only acts in pursuit of "military positions" to the waste bin. If you think those are petty insults then I feel bad for you. Your talking about limiting airstrikes when in fact the States have no business being there in the first place, makes no sense, why are you trying to make it sound like the Americans have to be in every country to "help out" which is not the case at all. Doesn't matter what president is next it's always the same focus, step in, take over. The Bush family has been friends with the Bin Ladens for almost 2 decades and after 9.11 they all went in claiming terrorism trying to control land, oil. Now you're so blind still to accept that it's really all again about the same resources. Did you just claim 9-11 was a ploy for USA to get land and oil? This rumor will always live. Deal with it^^ Yes that's what I said and so have many more powerful and muuuuch smarter people than yourself and I have said, What now? Were you there during the talks? Have you watched any documentaries? Have you read any papers? What's the problem. When you need resources you WILL come up with a lie that's so ridiculous that most won't believe that's how it becomes successful. I actually have a business degree from the University Of Alberta, what do you have?Opinions like everyone else, I stay in the media, I read a lot and I love strategy that's why I love StarCraft and not call of duty. Watch out guys, he's got a business degree from Univeristy of Alberta, therefore 9-11 is an inside job. That was just weak, because people who have a business degree know NOTHING else about what's going on in the world ? Please come back with some relevant and useful. No, but that's not a justification as to why you think 9-11 is an inside job.
I'm not the only person that thinks 9/11 was a inside job, I'm one of those people though that agrees with some shady shit that has happened during 9/11 that is very strange. There's more people than you think, people than are a lot more educated than you and actually don't just get mad when their opinions get shattered by facts 
User was warned for this post
|
On September 03 2013 05:28 Big-t wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 05:15 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:59 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 04:56 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:49 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:43 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:38 bosnia wrote:
I never said it gets the U.S. land read my posts, I said it get's them military positions. The U.S. spendS 60% on military you think they don't want to be in control ?You think they don't want to set up bases in every corner of the world just because they feel it's the right thing to do, how would you feel if you were poor and I was rich and I told you I'm going to put cameras in your house because I want to see what you're doing even though I'm much more powerful than you. If I asked you what the capital of Canada was you wouldn't even know without having to google it, where in Canada a lot of people know almost all states and you couldn't even tell me 5 provices, that's just you being an American, blind to what's going on outside of your bubble. Anyways I have to go, feel like I wasted the last half hour for nothing =/ It's probably better that you not post then, seeing as how you can't refrain from using petty, childish insults alongside some of the most ridiculous and grammatically incorrect illogic I've seen since this morning. There is a very good chance that the US will limit it's involvement to strategic air strikes only, and that means no bases and no soldiers on the ground. This would be in pursuit of forcing Assad to come to the table, which, admittedly, may or may not happen, but the fact remains that Iraq/Afghanistan style involvement isn't even being discussed yet by the President, relegating your continued insistence that the US only acts in pursuit of "military positions" to the waste bin. If you think those are petty insults then I feel bad for you. Your talking about limiting airstrikes when in fact the States have no business being there in the first place, makes no sense, why are you trying to make it sound like the Americans have to be in every country to "help out" which is not the case at all. Doesn't matter what president is next it's always the same focus, step in, take over. The Bush family has been friends with the Bin Ladens for almost 2 decades and after 9.11 they all went in claiming terrorism trying to control land, oil. Now you're so blind still to accept that it's really all again about the same resources. Did you just claim 9-11 was a ploy for USA to get land and oil? This rumor will always live. Deal with it^^ Yes that's what I said and so have many more powerful and muuuuch smarter people than yourself and I have said, What now? Were you there during the talks? Have you watched any documentaries? Have you read any papers? What's the problem. When you need resources you WILL come up with a lie that's so ridiculous that most won't believe that's how it becomes successful. I actually have a business degree from the University Of Alberta, what do you have?Opinions like everyone else, I stay in the media, I read a lot and I love strategy that's why I love StarCraft and not call of duty. Yeah, I started reading quality news paper on a daily base a few months ago. There are so many different stories about the same thing, like 3 people with 4 opinions, that I started to be very skeptical about the "western civilization". I can´t even trust my own country, now that the national council elections are soon, suddenly things come up left and right simply to sympathize or antisympathize certain parties. Things that should be public long time ago, or wrong facts. I have actually no idea what to think about the current war state, because the more I read the news the more different versions I get about it. I´m beginning to think that this really all just a game, not a funny game tbh.
I'm still in debt because of my education and some of my friends smoke weed every day and work dead end jobs living paycheck to paycheck, it's hard for me sometimes to have a real conversation because their brain is so clouded by so many other things, feels like most people just live for the moment and don't think about tomorrow. My country has also been shattered by civil war and to go back to Syria, so many lives have been destroyed and the outcome is yet to be calculated within years to come.
Warned for what ?Sorry but can you explain what it is that I've said that offended you ?
|
On September 03 2013 05:32 bosnia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 05:28 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 05:15 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:59 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 04:56 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:49 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:43 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:38 bosnia wrote:
I never said it gets the U.S. land read my posts, I said it get's them military positions. The U.S. spendS 60% on military you think they don't want to be in control ?You think they don't want to set up bases in every corner of the world just because they feel it's the right thing to do, how would you feel if you were poor and I was rich and I told you I'm going to put cameras in your house because I want to see what you're doing even though I'm much more powerful than you. If I asked you what the capital of Canada was you wouldn't even know without having to google it, where in Canada a lot of people know almost all states and you couldn't even tell me 5 provices, that's just you being an American, blind to what's going on outside of your bubble. Anyways I have to go, feel like I wasted the last half hour for nothing =/ It's probably better that you not post then, seeing as how you can't refrain from using petty, childish insults alongside some of the most ridiculous and grammatically incorrect illogic I've seen since this morning. There is a very good chance that the US will limit it's involvement to strategic air strikes only, and that means no bases and no soldiers on the ground. This would be in pursuit of forcing Assad to come to the table, which, admittedly, may or may not happen, but the fact remains that Iraq/Afghanistan style involvement isn't even being discussed yet by the President, relegating your continued insistence that the US only acts in pursuit of "military positions" to the waste bin. If you think those are petty insults then I feel bad for you. Your talking about limiting airstrikes when in fact the States have no business being there in the first place, makes no sense, why are you trying to make it sound like the Americans have to be in every country to "help out" which is not the case at all. Doesn't matter what president is next it's always the same focus, step in, take over. The Bush family has been friends with the Bin Ladens for almost 2 decades and after 9.11 they all went in claiming terrorism trying to control land, oil. Now you're so blind still to accept that it's really all again about the same resources. Did you just claim 9-11 was a ploy for USA to get land and oil? This rumor will always live. Deal with it^^ Yes that's what I said and so have many more powerful and muuuuch smarter people than yourself and I have said, What now? Were you there during the talks? Have you watched any documentaries? Have you read any papers? What's the problem. When you need resources you WILL come up with a lie that's so ridiculous that most won't believe that's how it becomes successful. I actually have a business degree from the University Of Alberta, what do you have?Opinions like everyone else, I stay in the media, I read a lot and I love strategy that's why I love StarCraft and not call of duty. Yeah, I started reading quality news paper on a daily base a few months ago. There are so many different stories about the same thing, like 3 people with 4 opinions, that I started to be very skeptical about the "western civilization". I can´t even trust my own country, now that the national council elections are soon, suddenly things come up left and right simply to sympathize or antisympathize certain parties. Things that should be public long time ago, or wrong facts. I have actually no idea what to think about the current war state, because the more I read the news the more different versions I get about it. I´m beginning to think that this really all just a game, not a funny game tbh. I'm still in debt because of my education and some of my friends smoke weed every day and work dead end jobs living paycheck to paycheck, it's hard for me sometimes to have a real conversation because their brain is so clouded by so many other things, feels like most people just live for the moment and don't think about tomorrow. My country has also been shattered by civil war and to go back to Syria, so many lives have been destroyed and the outcome is yet to be calculated within years to come. Warned for what ?Sorry but can you explain what it is that I've said that offended you ?
Please read Nyovne's post before continuing.
|
On September 03 2013 05:41 Maasked wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 05:32 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 05:28 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 05:15 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:59 Big-t wrote:On September 03 2013 04:56 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:49 bosnia wrote:On September 03 2013 04:43 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:38 bosnia wrote:
I never said it gets the U.S. land read my posts, I said it get's them military positions. The U.S. spendS 60% on military you think they don't want to be in control ?You think they don't want to set up bases in every corner of the world just because they feel it's the right thing to do, how would you feel if you were poor and I was rich and I told you I'm going to put cameras in your house because I want to see what you're doing even though I'm much more powerful than you. If I asked you what the capital of Canada was you wouldn't even know without having to google it, where in Canada a lot of people know almost all states and you couldn't even tell me 5 provices, that's just you being an American, blind to what's going on outside of your bubble. Anyways I have to go, feel like I wasted the last half hour for nothing =/ It's probably better that you not post then, seeing as how you can't refrain from using petty, childish insults alongside some of the most ridiculous and grammatically incorrect illogic I've seen since this morning. There is a very good chance that the US will limit it's involvement to strategic air strikes only, and that means no bases and no soldiers on the ground. This would be in pursuit of forcing Assad to come to the table, which, admittedly, may or may not happen, but the fact remains that Iraq/Afghanistan style involvement isn't even being discussed yet by the President, relegating your continued insistence that the US only acts in pursuit of "military positions" to the waste bin. If you think those are petty insults then I feel bad for you. Your talking about limiting airstrikes when in fact the States have no business being there in the first place, makes no sense, why are you trying to make it sound like the Americans have to be in every country to "help out" which is not the case at all. Doesn't matter what president is next it's always the same focus, step in, take over. The Bush family has been friends with the Bin Ladens for almost 2 decades and after 9.11 they all went in claiming terrorism trying to control land, oil. Now you're so blind still to accept that it's really all again about the same resources. Did you just claim 9-11 was a ploy for USA to get land and oil? This rumor will always live. Deal with it^^ Yes that's what I said and so have many more powerful and muuuuch smarter people than yourself and I have said, What now? Were you there during the talks? Have you watched any documentaries? Have you read any papers? What's the problem. When you need resources you WILL come up with a lie that's so ridiculous that most won't believe that's how it becomes successful. I actually have a business degree from the University Of Alberta, what do you have?Opinions like everyone else, I stay in the media, I read a lot and I love strategy that's why I love StarCraft and not call of duty. Yeah, I started reading quality news paper on a daily base a few months ago. There are so many different stories about the same thing, like 3 people with 4 opinions, that I started to be very skeptical about the "western civilization". I can´t even trust my own country, now that the national council elections are soon, suddenly things come up left and right simply to sympathize or antisympathize certain parties. Things that should be public long time ago, or wrong facts. I have actually no idea what to think about the current war state, because the more I read the news the more different versions I get about it. I´m beginning to think that this really all just a game, not a funny game tbh. I'm still in debt because of my education and some of my friends smoke weed every day and work dead end jobs living paycheck to paycheck, it's hard for me sometimes to have a real conversation because their brain is so clouded by so many other things, feels like most people just live for the moment and don't think about tomorrow. My country has also been shattered by civil war and to go back to Syria, so many lives have been destroyed and the outcome is yet to be calculated within years to come. Warned for what ?Sorry but can you explain what it is that I've said that offended you ? Please read Nyovne's post before continuing.
I have and I understand if it got off topic a little but I've also seen a lot of other threads where people are totally off topic too and don't get warned for it. I love TL, I've been supporting it for almost 11 years now =/
|
It's the off-topic and the overall condescending tone of both your posts I believe.
|
Zurich15366 Posts
Doesn't matter what anyone of you believes.
Please everyone, stop derailing this thread. If you have questions about moderation, please ask them in Website Feedback, not here.
|
On September 03 2013 04:57 Catch]22 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2013 04:38 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On September 03 2013 04:33 wei2coolman wrote:On September 03 2013 04:31 farvacola wrote:On September 03 2013 04:30 bosnia wrote:
Ok so what do those countries have to do with Syria, why do so many countries hate on the states?If you're so smart please explain yourself, the world is not stupid we all see it on tv except not always the truth just what they want us to believe. It's doesn't matter to me at all if you agree with me or not, fact is I actually know what I'm sayin while your just re-posting trying to prove your opinions and not facts. All those countries you just stated are all allies with the states LOL...so why wouldn't they be for intervention? Answer my second question. If international intervention ends up being air strikes and no boots on the ground, which is the most popular idea at the moment, how does that get the US land? To be honest the best solution would be to do Cold War puppet gov't after throwing out Assad, but for some reason that seems out of the question, especially considering how Egypt went down. Oh no, that would be one of the worst possible solutions. We've tried that often in the Mideast. It only got us chaos and worse situations in those countries where it happened. A few examples of the end political product of our interventions is the Islamic Republic in Iran (we overthrew a democracy in Iran to reinstate the very brutal Shah who was logically overthrown, just by the worst possible person), an Islamic government in Libya, and a semi-Islamist Shiite dictatorship in Iraq that's in bed with Iran. Jordan, Kuwait, Dubai, Saudi Arabia, Oman, there are more countries in the middle east you know, and a lot of them friendly dictatorships with pretty happy people. And come to think about it, its also a list of countries that listened to their people and changed their countries faced with the protests of the arab spring. Wonder if the connection to the US influenced that.
Friendly dictatorships. Lol. It's almost an oxymoron. But it does paint the sad fact that we could care less how terrible a govt. is (and we've instated some terrible ones in the world ourselves) as long as they are friendly to us. Sad, but it's how things work. Jordan relies on us so much for their very livelihood, they have literally no other choice  .
I chuckled a bit at the pretty happy people statement . You are joking, right?
Most people in these countries live like shit in terribly oppressive societies. In UAE, most of the citizens are foreigners who have it pretty bad, especially Indians, Pakistanis, Filipinos, etc., and that place is considered a lot better than the other Gulf countries. Oman though is actually rare. Extremely small population and things are stable since there's really nothing going on. IDK too much about Kuwait, but I haven't heard good things. Jordan is very poor and has lots of issues, especially with the infinite war refugees and Christians from Iraq and Syria.
I don't think it was so much the US influenced that so much as it was that they wanted to keep their seats of power haha. Speaking of which, if the US was involved/influential or put it some real effort, we probably wouldn't have lost Mubarak and Egypt, which was by far one of our most important assets in the Mideast/N. Africa. It was a big loss for us. The only good thing is that at least the Muslim Brotherhood isn't in power, so we may be able to keep some good ties with Egypt, which would have been impossible with Morsi, and in addition, at least we can be assured that the Coptic population won't be exterminated any time soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
