OT: This one is for rogue

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Kung Fu Forum
1

After getting nailed by a “daisy-cutter”, Osama made his way to the pearly gates.

There, he is greeted by George Washington. “How dare you attack the nation I helped found!” yells Mr. Washington slapping Osama in the face.

Patrick Henry comes up from behind. “You wanted to end the Americans’ liberty, so they gave you death!” Henry punches Osama in the nose.

James Madison comes up next, and says “This is why I allowed the Federal government to provide for the common defense!” He stomps the side of Osama’s knee.

Osama is subject to similar beatings from John Randolph of Roanoke, James Monroe, and 65 other people who have the same love for liberty and America. As Osama writhes on the ground, Thomas Jefferson picks him up to hurl him back toward the gate where he is to be judged.

As Osama awaits his journey to his final very hot destination, he screams “This is not what I was promised!”

An angel replies “I told you there would be 72 Virginians waiting for you. What the **** did you think I said?”

2

oh wait, Im not Rogue. anyway I think you’ll like this http://www.apelsin.nu/classics/

good nite

3

:smiley:

4

Hmmm, these things disgust me as much as the other ‘sides’ ignorance

5

Thanks Stranger, score one for the Old Dominion! :wink:

Respectmankind, we’re not dealing with differing opinions over how to represent a free people or a war between haves and have nots. This whole thing is currently about the West versus a rather large group that would like to see us go away so they can run the show in their own distorted vision. This whole thing is about goverments (Iran, Iraq & Pakistan to name a few) fighting for power and using these intelligent but demented bast@ards to do their dirty work against anyone in their way. This war has been going on for years before 9/11 and will continue for years into the future.

One thing you should realize is that unlike dealing with Gov’ts like China or Saudi Arabia, co-existence with Islamic terrorists like bin Laden is not an option.

6

This whole thing is currently about the West versus a rather large group that would like to see us go away so they can run the show in their own distorted vision.

May I respectfully point out that the West does NOT consist of the “US of A” alone, and that the “US of A” does NOT speak for the west. Nor was invited to speak on the behalf of the west regardless of what they think or imagine themselves to be.

On the other hand if the US keep this position up some now friendly nations might fall in with the Terrorists.

7

I was not commenting on anything like that rogue. Do not put words in my mouth.

8

respectmankind,

Are you mad about the content of my original post?:confused:

9

May I respectfully point out that for all intents and purposes, the West, as it has so quaintly been termed, does indeed consist of the USA and western Europe, and that many of the policies that Europeans like to point, hoot and holler about are simply continuations of old French, British and German policies?

Examples…

The Gulf War:

A direct result of British creation of the Nation of Kuwait, formerly the 39th province of Iraq. The goal was to remove Iraq’s access to both a deep sea port, and to the oil reserves, in the fear that Iraq would grow too powerful.

This support of British-French border creation can also be tagged as partly responsible for the attack on the US.

The Iran-Iraq War: A direct result of the creation of a border between these two nations by dividing a river in half, rather than the navigable channels of said river in half. The goal, to prevent either nation from effectively using said river to move goods to the gulf and international markets.

Kashmir: Created to cause conflict between the Muslims and Hindu. God save the Queen.

Libya and Chad: Created a disputed oil rich region. Thank France.

Namibia: Thank Germany and South Africa.

Israel: This is a personal pet peeve, because I hate US support for Israel. The creation of Israel was officially a UN action, and could not have taken place without UN support, but it hardly could have done so without the other European players as well. Even so, in 1922 it was the British who created the Predecessor to Israel, Palestine-Eretz-Israel.

I can go on and on. The roots of today’s conflicts are hardly “American” at all.

Hell, just about the only conflict that European policies c. WWI didn’t cause is the civil unrest in Rwanda and Burundi, and also Sri Lanka.

Personally, I think it’s high time the US stopped acting the World Cop, and let other people deal with their own problems.

Oh, but wait, then we’d get blamed for not doing anything. Too bad. When China and India are the superpowers, we’ll see how different things are.

10

ooops, I was about to mention Israël but you edited the post

On a side note, if the roots of modern conflict are hardly American at all, it is just due to the fact that before WWI the USA had no political power compared to the “old world”.
Therefore, indeed, mosst of the bad roots that were seeded and are now being reaped cannot be attributed to them.
But you seem to forget quite fast that England has long been and is still a major pro-USA pole in Europe, and that many European actions or interests were therefore influenced by the USA through that gate.

11

Oh, one last thing. The official decision to create Israel as an independent homeland was voted on by the UN general assembly, not just the security council.

And Crimson, I would turn your last comment around. It is more that the US has always been pro-british, rather than the British being Pro-US.

Particularly in regards to the Middle East, when the Arab lands were being chopped up, the US was thought to be oil self sufficient. So decisions made in this regard were hardly serving perceived US interests.

12

The US being pro-british…huuhh…yeah, if you say so…and the oil thingie…why not, after all, when you’re self-sufficient for money, you won’t try to earn any more will you?
I wonder how it got so geopolitic somehow…

13

I’m sorry, are you trying to tell me that after WWI and II that the US is not pro-British? Or better yet, after the Falklands/Malvinas War?

That’s the one where the US supported the Brits against Argentina despite having a mutual defense treaty with Argentina?

No, you are right, we aren’t pro-British at all.

14

Ahhhh…my mommy DID warn me though.
“You cannot possibly have a balanced geopolitical discussion with someone who probably has underwears with star-spangled banners on them”.
OK, let’s drop it, I don’t want to argue,we have different opinions and none of us will change them anyway. Historical facts have long been known not to be that objective, even in his young days Napoleon claimed that “History is a lie agreed upon”.
You are right, you won.
Case closed

15

Crimson, you make a statement that the US is not pro-british, and do not support it at all. When confronted with contrary evidence you back down, but still provide no support to your position other than a childish comment.

Up until that point I thought we had a dialogue of sorts going, and I was enjoying it.

Now, I’m just disappointed.

16

I’m sorry I disapointed you, but that is what can happen when you expect too much of people.
I do not agree that US are pro-british in the sense that the relationship does not exist, I am just uncomfortable with the direction of the relationship.
To me the british are pro-US, not the contrary.
US has a far more important weight in other countries’ politics than the reciprocal event. You cannot deny the US could influence a french or british decision in an overwhelming fashion compared to the eventuality of the contrary, ie the british or the french dictating their own interests on the US.

As for the childish comment I will take it as a compliment, as a follower of K. Lorentz’.
To me, childish comments often bear more truth than most obscure and seemingly educated ones.
That said, I might as well have underwears with blue white and red…I know no one who can be 100% objective when it comes to such sensitive topics especially

17

Currently, I will agree with the statement that the US wields an undue amount of influence.

I will further agree that currently, the US and the British have a very tight relationship, and that Britain is undoubtedly the closest ally of the US. That relationship works both ways though, and the US have supported the UK in circumstances where it would not have stood by another nation.

I sometimes wonder, particularly if I happen to be in London–though never aloud–, if the British would rather join the US and Canada, rather than the EU.

As for the US dictating responses to France or the UK, that may be true, but we can only wonder how the situation will change as the EU continues to evolve.

It is also clear that US power is on the wane, and India and China are on the rise. The next few years should be truly interesting, because for the first time since the 1600’s, the axis of power will shift away from the West.

18

The US government may openly support the British government as it deems politically fit, but a little reality check about “America” and “Americans” as a whole, and how “pro-British” we are:

we don’t really care.

It’s sad but true. Citizens of the USA are arrogant and centric to the extreme. We ARE the world. We think the Brits are a bunch of silly twits, and we’ll use them when we can, but care about them in the sense that their problems affect us? Hardly.

Evidence: Take a poll of Americans on the street anywhere in the USA and ask them to:

  • Name a British television show: 48% say “Monty Python”, 42% say “I don’t know”
  • Tell you who is currently Prime Minister - 94% clueless
  • Ask them the first name of the Queen - an astounding 67% guess wrong
  • Name 3 large cities in the UK - the vast majority can’t get past London
  • Name the countries that comprise the UK - 2% get it right.

By contrast, ask any Brit those questions, only of course make them apply to the USA, and you will see that Brits are much more deeply affected by America than America is by Britian.

One of the funniest lines on teevee lately was a sitcom character who wailed “I am NOT gay! I’M BRITISH!!!” :smiley:

Britian is barely a blip on our collective consciousness radar. And that pretty much goes for most of the rest of the world, too. There is US, and there is the yokels out there, who all buy cokes and levis and chow down on Mickey D’s, so who cares, we got their money and we all know money talks bullsh*t walks :wink:

Personally, I think it is precisely this attitude, especially as reflected in our foreign policy, that gets folks torqued off enough at us to send in suicide bombers. If we showed more real respect we might not p!ss so many people off.

19

Now, why don’t you go to britain and ask them to name an India TV show, who the Prime Minister of India is, three major cities in India, and two major political parties in India.

I’ve had this exact same argument in London you see. I’m sorry to say that not too many Brits can do the above. Not many americans can either, but the point is that you can find “ignorance” anywhere you choose to look.

20

Nope sorry doesn’t wash. India might be big in the Middle East, but it doesn’t register on western radar. I see no one trading balckmarket curry in the west, but take a load of Levi’s over to New Delhi and count the money.

Face it - we’re the big gorilla, and we’re really oblivious to anyone else’s perceptions. Sad, huh.

Just curious, are you Indian?