America

[aleister]

america is said to be the leader of the free world while im still skeptic of how free we really are i must say it could always be worse in afghanistan during a speech by president Karzai a missile hits not to far away karzai never flinches and keeps talking without pause so in turn as everyone must have already realized afghanistan is without a doubt one of the top five worst places to live. ive heard bin laden was in pakistan but have only heard rumors. i cant find the vid yet but will post it as soon as i find it.

[BlackZodiac]

The United States is a rich country (also in alot of debt) but is not the "best,free" country to live in.

[aleister]

Yes i agree but by many Americans its viewed as the best and strongest yet is far from either.

[faggypunk]

true true, america is losing its freedom little by little by giving up rights for security
im guessing that some time in the future america is just going to fit into the crowd of other countries

[puppetmaster]

I agree and disagree. In the future America will probably be the only communist government in the world.
While we advocate freedom we are simply distributing our own for cheap securities and a war no one believes in anymore.

[BlackZodiac]

The "good old" America is what I like from what I had seen on television and documentaries, looks great. But not really anymore.

[puppetmaster]

The new America is somewhat like the old Iran (Persia) conquering through force and giving liberties as to be diplomatic, it just so happens that our good old bush
doesn't have the intelligence level of Darius or Xerxes and its not 400 b.c.e. anymore.
look at it like this, Bush has installed three different governments in Iraq.
each time a new one was put in he said the other didn't meet the needs of that country well wonder what would happen if Russia stepped in and said that the bush regime didnt meet the needs of this country.

[AbstractHorizon]

WOW! You saw 300 like everyone else.

PS-Very VERY bad comparison. Persians weren't free by any means.

[puppetmaster]

No not my point and i haven't seen 300 (though i'd like to) but i have seen a special on the events surrounding 300 on the history channel. My point was that Persia conquered lands and allowed them the right to their own religion and to govern themselves.
Not that were exactly like the Persians but the comparison in part with the specifics of the conversation are relatively accurate.

[AbstractHorizon]

OK, but we are in no way and imperalistic nation. Even if it was all lies, we invaded the places we did for our own national security, not to conquer and control them.

There are specific policies that say the land we have, is the land we have, and we shall aquire no more by force.

Puerto Rico could one day become the 51st, but even that is a long shot.


PS- If Russia stepped in and tried to tell us ANYTHING, they would be promptly engaged, and destroyed...no questions asked.

[puppetmaster]

Yes and i see your point and maybe i worded mine wrong, were not going to seize Iraq's land but we are there to protect our own oil investments, I could think of a couple of places our military would be of better use. Al Qaeda is a great motivating factor, but their not only in Iraq, their all over the middle east. so my point was that were in Iraq to protect our investments, and by killing operatives we kill two birds with one stone, national security, and protection of foreign investments.

[AbstractHorizon]

You are straying too far from your originial point.

Most of the U.S. oil consumption doesn't even come from Iraq. Also, oil that does come to the U.S. is controlled, and wholesale priced by O.P.E.C. It is a common misconception that we are in Iraq for oil by any means. Sure, several internal oil companies are doing business in Iraq, but we have far less beneficial assests than we do liabilities associated with Iraq.

Nice try though.

Please, for the sake of history, don't compare the United States to olden empires of the early ages.

[puppetmaster]

Well not to far from the point but ill just give you my source rather than spell it out myself. This site gives you a focused look on some things you may or may not know yet.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5857

[AbstractHorizon]

Oh come on lad.

Yes we are...Of COURSE we are. No country in the world that isn't a member of O.P.E.C could supply us with the 10,000,000(Less the 2 million that Canada gives us, who is also the largest barrels of oil we need a day to keep the country running.

Think before you speak, my friend.

And no, Iraq is the world's 15th largest oil producing country.

Sources:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/quickfacts/quickoil.html
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/topworldtables1_2.html

[puppetmaster]

Did you check the site. maybe you read my post before i edited it, i realized i was wrong and changed it. check out that site and youll see why we're in Iraq.

[AbstractHorizon]

Dude, that is a fucking opinionated article written by an obvious opponent of Bush, and the Republican party.
'
Look at the first line of the article: "This could be the real reason behind the invasion of Iraq by the Anglo-American forces and their allies."

If anything, that article only gives backing to the fact that Bush could be a corrupted oil tycoon who made a reciprocated agreement with Saudi Arabia, and other members of his administration for their own beneft, not protect America's oil needs there.

Don't use journalistic bullshit to back your arguement, use cold, hard numbers.

[puppetmaster]

I know it's an opinionated article but it is supported by facts and i see i forgot to put that this is what i believe as the reason we're in Iraq. I'm a bit drained and not holding full concentration. so you'll have to excuse my lack of poinense (fuck it i forgot how to spell that fucking word)

[AbstractHorizon]

excused, but you could just save yourself the trouble and admit that your comparison was offensive and/or wrong

Our country is nothing like the naves that existed in those times.

[puppetmaster]

Yes i agree but in the context of the topic it was relatively inclusive to the conversation.

[BlackZodiac]

PS- If Russia stepped in and tried to tell us ANYTHING, they would be promptly engaged, and destroyed...no questions asked.

It all depends on the invader (which mostly would be the United States) did you know that all American Tanks, weapons, etc do not work nothing more then -15, Russia is very cold, you could expect -45 easy... Their major bases are in the Artic tundra's and in Siberia... Russia would have a very good chance of winning (Hence they just rebuilt their army) spending almost what the United States dose (Russian equipment is cheaper and more reliable) so I know for a fact the United States could not take on Russia, there is a difference when you're facing old T-55 tanks, try a fully modded T-90 with ERA systems. You think IED's are bad? Try a RPG-7V,RPG-27,RPG-26 will have no problems taking out any American vehicles... A T-90 will blow the American Abram off it's tracks with it's 125mm smooth bore cannon or the modded 250mm smooth bore cannon, all autoloaded. Small that packs a punch. And if their army was defeated, imagine the Russian mafia's? Blackmarkets? They would be Russia's insurgents. You should really check out Russian military equipment and compare it.

[BlackZodiac]

You are straying too far from your originial point.

Most of the U.S. oil consumption doesn't even come from Iraq. Also, oil that does come to the U.S. is controlled, and wholesale priced by O.P.E.C. It is a common misconception that we are in Iraq for oil by any means. Sure, several internal oil companies are doing business in Iraq, but we have far less beneficial assests than we do liabilities associated with Iraq.

Nice try though.

Please, for the sake of history, don't compare the United States to olden empires of the early ages.

You're right a about that, the United States gets the Oil from the Saudi's... But the thing is, the United States dose want their hands on some Iraqi oil, when everything settles.

edit: it's Iraqi, not Iraqui!

[AbstractHorizon]

It all depends on the invader (which mostly would be the United States) did you know that all American Tanks, weapons, etc do not work nothing more then -15, Russia is very cold, you could expect -45 easy... Their major bases are in the Artic tundra's and in Siberia... Russia would have a very good chance of winning (Hence they just rebuilt their army) spending almost what the United States dose (Russian equipment is cheaper and more reliable) so I know for a fact the United States could not take on Russia, there is a difference when you're facing old T-55 tanks, try a fully modded T-90 with ERA systems. You think IED's are bad? Try a RPG-7V,RPG-27,RPG-26 will have no problems taking out any American vehicles... A T-90 will blow the American Abram off it's tracks with it's 125mm smooth bore cannon or the modded 250mm smooth bore cannon, all autoloaded. Small that packs a punch. And if their army was defeated, imagine the Russian mafia's? Blackmarkets? They would be Russia's insurgents. You should really check out Russian military equipment and compare it.

All that is good and well, but who ever said we had to invade Russia to defeat it? Why don't you look up the United States' current submarine arsenal, especially the relatively new Virginia class (HEY! GO VA!)....Yeah, we could several cruise missles, and even a nuclear strike without ever being detected.

[BlackZodiac]

All that is good and well, but who ever said we had to invade Russia to defeat it? Why don't you look up the United States' current submarine arsenal, especially the relatively new Virginia class (HEY! GO VA!)....Yeah, we could several cruise missles, and even a nuclear strike without ever being detected.

The Russians have the best functional anti-missile systems in the world, capable of taking out nuclear missiles. And I would love to see the United States take over the Russian Tundra... Also there is not much you can strike in the Pacific, so there is not much you can do with them subs, especially when the Russians have a very good anti-nuclear sub hunters, along with their nuclear class subs. So therefore making it a ground warfare scenario. And they are not undetectable when moving. All the Russians would have to do is sit and wait.

[AbstractHorizon]

You got me, nuff said.

[Dracus124]

Just legalize the weed america! some freedom eh?