that's highly debatable. And we didn't help until WE were attacked. So again, we don't get involved until we've been hurt. And don't forget, it seems like we saved their ass becuase they'd been fighting for a LONG time before we got involved, they asked for help and we didn't give it to them until WE got hit. Then we raced in at the end, fully loaded because we hadn't been fighting for two years, and wooped ass because we weren't tired from tons fo battle.
Where are all the Euros on here tonight? I know you know what I'm talking about.
And this is exactly the point of the opening comment of this thread. We don't look at other view points from outside the country, we accept things we're told, aplaud what LOOKS right, without stoping to check if it is.
I dont know about you guys, Im from Canada and i seem to be viewing that America seems to have their hands everywhere in the world. Soon there will be a one world country runned by americans, its already happening with Bush
America is the most dangerous place in the world. Its one thing to have people go along willingly with despotic political leaders or even to have the people enslaved....
In the US, the population is practically wholly ignorant or doesn't care about world events and naively assumes the US are the Good Guys allowing sh!t like the CIA training Osama bin Laden to go on unchecked. We're a bunch of freakin' sheep.
Gender: Male Location: Massachusettes, United States
We didn't go in until we got hit because it was Democratic FDR in the White House.... Bush would have been in there long ago. Actually, so would have Clinton, who had FAR more of a world-police type of policy than Bush does.
And furthermore, I go back to the media issue. Forget about whether the war is right or wrong for a moment, and just look at it from the two points of view. I really think it is all those AGAINST the war that just accept what they are told. They are just listening to the networks anti-war pieces. Those supporting it are actually going against what they are being told, for the most part.
Huh? Those against the war are more likely to get their news from alternative sources like the BBC, etc. Those supporting the war are just following the status quo.
oh no, of course not. and certainly not the low low low violent crime rates of england since they aren't so friggin' gun crazy. oh wait, they don't have any guns CUZ THEY"RE ILLEGAL!!
And no, its not about being around people that agree with me. debate is good, its healthy, and its the POINT OF ALL MY FREAKIN POSTS IF YOU WERE PAYING ATTENTION. its about not living in a nation controled by fear. its bout the president not lying to me about why he's gonna go take over a country and get record numbers of our people killed and waste record numbers of money. its about not being round people who accept everything the government tells them. That's why I'm willing to move.
At least in Canada FREEDOM OF SPEECH actually exits. In America they prevent the news from giving the nation whats really going on, CNN ABC NBC CBS, they all have to do what Bush says otherwise they will get it. Remember Phil Lamarr when he made the comment about america being cowards by bombing a country while terrorists go and blow themselves up for their country and religion.
Gender: Male Location: Massachusettes, United States
Hardly! NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, PBS (lol), New York Times, LA Times, they are all HIGHLY anti-war. I don't have any stats but I'd guess that far more than 60% of Americans get their news from these sources.
You don't suppose people are against the war automatically BECAUE THEY THINK ITS WRONG TO KILL INNOCENTS FOR BULLS**T REASONS DO YOU? Do you think they just think mass amounts of DEAD humans on both sides is wrong? Oh no, it must be those little pussy democrats, always supporting not killing people for no reasons. Wow are they biased....
Gender: Male Location: Massachusettes, United States
El Nino, due to your nations media you may not even know about this, but there was a pretty big story a few months back. Somewhere in Ontario I believe there was a serial killer who buried all his victims behind a barn or something to that effect.
In any case, the Canadian government, because they "did not want to incite a riot," WOULD NOT ALLOW ANY REPORTS on this to be in any newspapers or in televison news broadcasts, even though there was vital information on how to keep oneself safe from the killer. In fact, (and I could be wrong about this) I believe the government surpressed reporting after the killer was found because it gave them bad PR on the way they handled the case....
lol i dont know what "Canadians" you talk too but there so wrong, the health care system is used for regular check ups by a family doctor, they cover most opertations. HAHAH i laugh at americans for paying $80 everytime they go to a doctor
Thank you, all mass media in the US is biased. I've been looking for alternative press, that's why I watch BBC world news on BBC america, which shows a WHOLE new view point most Americans simply never see because they're too busy accepting stereotypes. CBS, NBC, ABC, you name it, all owned by big corporations, many of which contribute to the Republican party. Gee, they wouldn't want to be biased would they?
KMC Community Forums
May 9th, 2005 05:46 AM
-- Laughing is good 
--
