Fear of America.
- Thread starter Nerf Ninja
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Oh haha, I didn't notice that. But you're right.Aby_Z said:
It kinda cheapens my standpoint though...
Well, I certainly am less serious about it than I make it sound, but after katrina, houston and my town were FLOODED with nawlens jackasses. Not to say everyone from New Orleans is disgusting filth that ought be wiped away from the face of the earth, in fact one of my close friends was an evacuee.blindthrall said:
It made me laugh that you got a lousiana dude talking about shit texas and then you got me giving you all honest report of the shitty nature of a city in lousiana
seewhatididthere? heehee
I have to say that I'm an American and that is pretty close, I'm sad to say, I'd say more like a schizophrenic baby switching between angry and scared. Half the time it is paranoid about any and all threads, the other half it gets mad at the people they blame to have made them paranoid (terrorists), yet in both parts they are still irrational, and likely to poop unless its get what it wants, but the paranoid one like to have unnecessary security measures everywhere. I just lost a whole lot of respect for America.Lord George said:
As for security measures, as long as you don't purposefully tick off anyone who can arrest you, you are fine. Also media blows up everything as usual.
My uncle was detained overnight in Miami without explanation when he was going through it to get back to Toronto. They did some extreme scanning and stuff on him, and they didn't physically harm him, but he obviously doesn't want to go through Miami again. I guess he was just the 1 out of 4 middle aged white males they pull aside for extra overnight questioning. So if you fear being in a prison for a night, I guess you have something to fear. For something with my finances, I view it as free room and board (I'm not sure if they gave him any food, so maybe not board) but if you fear being randomly pulled aside in front of everyone and having everyone suspect you have a bomb, you have something to fear. Or perhaps more accurately, if you go through Miami, prepare for the worst and be prepared to relinquish you're dignity.
Well excuse me. I thought we were rating countries based on how someone spells and uses grammar in their sentences. At least, that is the precedence you had set. Insult someone over a spelling mistake. Say their country is stupid because of it. Etc.The_Graff said:
If you don't want to get into such activities might I suggest not starting them?
Halaxis said:Just so we are clear, your points for America are irrelevant, because I am not saying that America is better than Great Britain, only that we are no worse than anyone else.danpascooch said:The British had little resistance taking over. One, they destroyed the cultural backbone of India. Two, they set the religions against each other. Three, they manipulated the prices into fighting each other. By the time the official "take over" began, the sub-continent was already so weak, that it took no effort from the Brits.Halaxis said:You're right, you know, how about this, when we think that a country isn't advanced enough, we will just roll the troops in, take the fucking thing over, and then ask them to thank us.danpascooch said:Know that story well. Half my family in India won't stop bitching about the English taking over the country. Yeah, well, if it wasn't for those "goras" then India might have taken another 5 centuries to catch up to the West considering many of India's modern commodities are a direct result of British interference. Of course, logic and proof never works.Halaxis said:Centuries upon centuries upon centuries of brutal British imperialism *cough cough*danpascooch said:You know, until you attack our citizens. *cough* Japan *cough* Pearl Harbor *cough*Nerf Ninja said:Don't worry too much about "security procedures" friend, nobody really cares that much about security, remember, Americans are lazy
Maybe we should all just kill ourselves now, because its not just America, the whole world is fucking crazy
Nice logic there.
Also, remember, India wasn't a country back then, it was a REGION, ruled by warring princes. India would still be that today if the Britishers hadn't come in.
Third. Thinking was different back then. The Britishers wanted to spread technology, wealth, and culture to the places they called colonies. They wanted to rise people out of backward ways. They screwed up. But the intention was a good one.
Fourth. What you described " You're right, you know, how about this, when we think that a country isn't advanced enough, we will just roll the troops in, take the fucking thing over, and then ask them to thank us." No one has done this in decades. There haven't been countries with true imperialistic goals since WW2.
Fifth. If you were talking about Iraq or Afghanistan, then you have the wrong information. Britain was looking for colonies to increase its wealth and empire.
The U.S. went into Iraq
1.) Saddam was a major supporter of many Anti-American militants before the war
2.) Iraq was a base of operations for Al-Qaeda. Not much as Afghanistan, but still there
3.) Saddam still harbored anti-America feelings after the Gulf Wars. We would have left our backs open if he was still in power. A part of Hitlers down fall was because he fought a war on 2 fronts. Cut his army's power.
4.) It was rumored that he had WMD'. We proved this wrong, yes. But remember, If we were in Afghanistan, and he launched a Chemical or Nuclear weapon, our soldiers were screwed. it was a case of "Better Safe Than Sorry."
The U.S. went into Afghanistan because
1.)Al-Quida HQ was stationed there.
2.)Bin Ladin was there.
3.)The poppie fields were the main source of Al-Qaeda's income
4.)Large number of militants were stationed there
In neither case, did the US plan to establish an colony or mine for precious material. Never have we asked them to thank us.
You argument is now worthless.
Give examples next time
Also, quick reminder, the statement "Your arguement is now useless" does not make it useless
Here are my counterpoints, ordered to match your points
1.) (quoted from you
2.) (quoted from you
3.) (quoted from you
How the fucking hell are these points arguing AGAINST my argument that Great Britain is just as bad as the US? Sure it seems fine to you because it didn't happen to you, but what if another country came into yours and "destroyed the cultural backbone, set the religions against each other, and manipulated the prices?", you would call that a GOOD THING!? If anything, these points are not only useless, but actually HELP my argument. You said I should try using examples, how about you try using examples that DON'T SUPPORT THE OPPOSING SIDES POINT! Maybe I shouldn't argue with you anymore, and you will just argue your own point away for me!
You said that "By the time the official "take over" began, the sub-continent was already so weak, that it took no effort from the Brits." Oh ok, so since it wasn't official none of those first three points are bad? How about this, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't part of the "official" acts against Japan. There we go, now all of those people are alive again. OH WAIT I FORGOT, THEY ARE NOT BECAUSE CALLING BRUTAL ACTS "UNOFFICIAL" AND THEREFORE ALRIGHT IS A RIDICULOUSLY RETARDED EXCUSE TO MAKE.
4.) "No one has done this in decades. There haven't been countries with true imperialistic goals since WW2."
Well, if you want to pull everything that didn't happen after WWII out of the picture, than your original argument saying that America should be feared due to bombing those Japanese cities is null and void also. I would advise you against making points that are designed to nullify your initial argument. If you DO think things that happened before this time matter (which was your ORIGINAL EXAMPLE) than Britian's takeover of India also matters, you can't just arbitrarily slash away time periods before and after the example you use to make your point and say "these time periods don't matter, but this little island of time left does matter, because it is where my example is"
5.) "If you were talking about Iraq or Afghanistan, then you have the wrong information. Britain was looking for colonies to increase its wealth and empire."
What the HELL are you talking about? Do you even know? I did not once mention Iraq OR Afghanistan.
Lastly
6.) "In neither case, did the US plan to establish an colony or mine for precious material. Never have we asked them to thank us."
That's not what I was talking about AT ALL. Did you even read my damn post before trying to attack yourself with examples supporting my position that you thought would prove your point?
I was talking about your first response post in which you said:
"Know that story well. Half my family in India won't stop bitching about the English taking over the country. Yeah, well, if it wasn't for those "goras" then India might have taken another 5 centuries to catch up to the West considering many of India's modern commodities are a direct result of British interference"
In this quote you are basically saying that India should stop bitching and be thankful that the English brought them up to speed on technology and commodities, so this point is completely off base, did you write this last post while drunk or something?
Ok, I know I said lastly, but one more thing:
7.) "Also, remember, India wasn't a country back then, it was a REGION, ruled by warring princes. India would still be that today if the Britishers hadn't come in."
This is also COMPLETELY irrelevant, are you just practicing typing or something? Let me remind you one last time, the point of this thread is "should America be feared", my argument is "Not any more than other nations" and yours is "yes, look what they did to Japan". Do you think people should not take any offense at Britain's acts toward India because India was a REGION and not an "official country" yet? That makes no sense, brutal acts of colonization and violence (remember some of the massacres in India? Look it up) are not nullified because India didn't yet have a fucking name on Britain's maps, idiot. The acts still happened. It looks like you are stumbling over yourself trying to find one easy point you can make that voids everything Britain did in India "Uh, it wasn't the "official"/b] takeover yet when they did that" "uh, they weren't yet a COUNTRY, but a REGION, so it was totally fine"
So far you are doing a better job taking your original argument apart than I am, keep it up, and I won't have to post at all, and you'll ruin your original argument all by yourself.
I would use this last spot to say: "Your argument is worthless now, give some RELEVENT examples that DON'T SUPPORT THE OPPOSITION next time" to be ironic, but then again, the argument in your last post was worthless long before I made this one.
You have a bunch of nice facts up there, now just try to arrange them in a way that is both relevant, and supports your argument and not mine, lol. I have never seen a fail post like that as long as yours is.
Fear of America is fundamentally illogical. Yes, there's a lot of us, and yes, we can wield a lot of influence, but we can barely agree on anything, whether that's the abortion debate, politics, religion, whether cats or dogs are better, and up to and including what color the sky is. ("It's blue! No, it's turquoise! Fascist! COMMUNIST!")
Innocence proves nothing.thiosk said:
Unfortunately, I've sterotyped Americans. I wouldn't mind visiting, but it's just too...different. To me it's like the country most like my own (Britain), ie it speaks English etc, but there are just some things that are too different when unconsciously it seems the same, if you get what I mean. Like they think it's strange to eat pizza with a knife and fork! Weird.
The people who are making my country look the worst are typically the talking gas bags on FoxNews:
"If they're Muslim, have them strip searched." (Paraphrasing).
To the great relief of the entire world, these are not the people running the country. I don't feel that persecuting any ethnic or religious group will do anything to better secure our citizens, in fact, I'm convinced it would do just the opposite. I understand that this is actually a rather obvious deduction, but thankfully, it is one that the current administration (Obama) shares. While both American and international media outlets will focus on the opinions of xenophobic idiots, they are neither the majority nor are they in charge.
Mainly, new security measures are meant to detect explosive devices before people can get them onto a plane. I've flown a few times in recent years, and never did I feel the I was anything more than temporarily inconvenienced by security including airports in England (where I saw a rather heavily armed soldier walking around the concourse with a German shepherd on some kind of patrol).
"If they're Muslim, have them strip searched." (Paraphrasing).
To the great relief of the entire world, these are not the people running the country. I don't feel that persecuting any ethnic or religious group will do anything to better secure our citizens, in fact, I'm convinced it would do just the opposite. I understand that this is actually a rather obvious deduction, but thankfully, it is one that the current administration (Obama) shares. While both American and international media outlets will focus on the opinions of xenophobic idiots, they are neither the majority nor are they in charge.
Mainly, new security measures are meant to detect explosive devices before people can get them onto a plane. I've flown a few times in recent years, and never did I feel the I was anything more than temporarily inconvenienced by security including airports in England (where I saw a rather heavily armed soldier walking around the concourse with a German shepherd on some kind of patrol).
I don't see a single spelling error in my post. Also If you're going to give me shit about that, I suggest you learn a little grammar lesson yourself. And you're second comment is just stupid.The_Graff said:
