Look at the OECD countries, now pick the odd man out.
Are they trying to start a war
- Thread starter ukjason
- Start date
Wow, way to turn what I said. Are those bomber you listed? They are early warning/cargo planes. Props have their place, and yes the Russian bomber comes close to the speed of the B-52....so maybe they are on more equal ground. My point was that Russia doesn't have sh** on us and it's a show of what little bit of strength they have. They are resuming flights in response to the fact that we have invaded two countries in five years and gone by a "you're with us or against us" policy since Bush has been in office. This tends to make other countries nervous.
We saw that with the Soviet Union where they went for cheap stuff in big numbers compared to the US who went with expensive high tech in far lesser mumbers, and what did we learn from conflicts where these weapon systems have met? Maybe the Soviets got paid to well, which made their weapons too expensive..the you should look into the fixed exchange ratio and the concept of "purchasing power"
you can buy a lot more stuff in china with 90 billion than 410 billion in the western world. it's just a simple fact.
the standard to measure how much the country is spending on military is the military spending to GDP ratio, not just the amount in terms of dollar alone.
Never the less, what the US is accusing Venezuela for doing; starting an arms race, it is rather the US that should look its self in the mirror. You can't hold anything against China as it is only a reaction of your action; raising the defence budget to a world conquest proportion.
I'm sure that this russian games are only a response to US
Anti-rocket shield games going on in Polland and they could be also
used for focus attention of russian people from real problems, just like
the war in Irak is used to distract american people.
Can you imagine Russians deploying radar system in Canada and
controling US air space?
I'm also sure that all normal people know, that there could be no
winner in nuclear war and that there wouldnt be any conventional
forces left after launching thousands of nukes that both sides have.
And there is no defence system against that.
People talking about positive aspects of war should sign in army
so less soldiers who don't want to go there would be send to Irak.
And before worshiping great new or old weapons one should read
some books from Kurt Vonnegut, or some other guys
who saw real war rather than watching Rambo or listening to words
from pilots of "Champagne Unit" who used F-102 to shuttle tropical
plants from Florida while other were forced to fight in remote
countries just because someone have to test new weapons.
Anti-rocket shield games going on in Polland and they could be also
used for focus attention of russian people from real problems, just like
the war in Irak is used to distract american people.
Can you imagine Russians deploying radar system in Canada and
controling US air space?
I'm also sure that all normal people know, that there could be no
winner in nuclear war and that there wouldnt be any conventional
forces left after launching thousands of nukes that both sides have.
And there is no defence system against that.
People talking about positive aspects of war should sign in army
so less soldiers who don't want to go there would be send to Irak.
And before worshiping great new or old weapons one should read
some books from Kurt Vonnegut, or some other guys
who saw real war rather than watching Rambo or listening to words
from pilots of "Champagne Unit" who used F-102 to shuttle tropical
plants from Florida while other were forced to fight in remote
countries just because someone have to test new weapons.
You're correct, glad you didn't call me anti American, freedom hater or what not. But I have trouble reading your stance in this post, don't you have a problem with US foreign policy? Shouldn't people around the world have a problem with it when you're everywhere effin up peoples lives and their countries for over 60 years now (outside the Americas)?
Have you seen the BBC documentary Why We Fight? The teachings of Eisenhower have a major part in it. It's a must watch otherwiese, it's that good really.
Here's a link to it (cut to 4 short parts):
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-354061731360218518&q=why+we+fight&total=26621&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
Another documentary that I just have to recomend, while I'm at it
, is Zeitgeist the Movie. Absolutely fantastic too. Can only find it in small parts on google vids though. Here's Part I (the intro is missing):Zeitgeist - Religion: The Greatest Story Ever Told
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-354061731360218518&q=why+we+fight&total=26621&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
Part II is called: All the World's a Stage
Part III: Don't Mind the Men Behind the Curtain.
The whole film:
http://thepiratebay.org/search/zeitgeist/0/3/200
Good points!
Quotes from Why We Fight:
Here are different datas, but I'm not sure if they are correct:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2034rank.html
I'm not sure but I think this might not be included:
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/mil_cos_of_the_mil_pergdp-military-cost-per-gdp
Then we might add costs for the last line of defence:
http://www.amazon.com/Stopping-Power-Million-Americans-Guns/dp/1584450576/ref=sid_dp_dp/104-9364493-4590366
And collateral damage:
http://209.85.135.104/search?q=cache:21XBAOLBh18J:www.michiganstudentcaucus.org/entries/292/+spend+approximately+$675+million+per+year+on+health&hl=sl&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=si&client=firefox-a
It seems to me that security is big issue in some parts of the world.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2034rank.html
I'm not sure but I think this might not be included:
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/mil_cos_of_the_mil_pergdp-military-cost-per-gdp
Then we might add costs for the last line of defence:
http://www.amazon.com/Stopping-Power-Million-Americans-Guns/dp/1584450576/ref=sid_dp_dp/104-9364493-4590366
And collateral damage:
http://209.85.135.104/search?q=cache:21XBAOLBh18J:www.michiganstudentcaucus.org/entries/292/+spend+approximately+$675+million+per+year+on+health&hl=sl&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=si&client=firefox-a
It seems to me that security is big issue in some parts of the world.
Rockwool, look at my location. Do you really think I am going to come on here and start expressing my views? You bet your ass not. I'm on a government server which means I play by the rules.
While your anti-American stance is hurtful (since I have lost 8 of my West Point classmates, in addition to 3 other friends, because of our foreign policy), I will not get into a political debate. Besides, its nothing I haven’t heard before.
I can tell you that what is wrong with Europe. The EU is content to sit back, cut back on military spending (A very good way to influence external national interests) and become isolationist. This has had some serious drawbacks, such as conceding much pull in the developing world to Russia and China (who both have military personnel all over the place [specifically Africa], looking to gain control of natural resources). Slowly, the EU has woken up to this fact, such as when it became apparent that Europe can’t protect its newest members against Russia, or itself for that matter (Europe is at Russia’s mercy because they are dependent on its energy). However, with the newly assertive Russia, even France is stepping up, recently saying that they are strongly considering rejoining the military-arm of NATO after a 60-year absence.
History has repeatedly shown that countries who have chosen isolationist policies, and had oversees interests (this includes America) have come back to be bitten by it.
So be it, time to go back to my job.
While your anti-American stance is hurtful (since I have lost 8 of my West Point classmates, in addition to 3 other friends, because of our foreign policy), I will not get into a political debate. Besides, its nothing I haven’t heard before.
I can tell you that what is wrong with Europe. The EU is content to sit back, cut back on military spending (A very good way to influence external national interests) and become isolationist. This has had some serious drawbacks, such as conceding much pull in the developing world to Russia and China (who both have military personnel all over the place [specifically Africa], looking to gain control of natural resources). Slowly, the EU has woken up to this fact, such as when it became apparent that Europe can’t protect its newest members against Russia, or itself for that matter (Europe is at Russia’s mercy because they are dependent on its energy). However, with the newly assertive Russia, even France is stepping up, recently saying that they are strongly considering rejoining the military-arm of NATO after a 60-year absence.
History has repeatedly shown that countries who have chosen isolationist policies, and had oversees interests (this includes America) have come back to be bitten by it.
So be it, time to go back to my job.
We understand.
Limp-wristed diplomacy with neither a carrot nor a stick to offer equals isolationist despite whatever intentions they may have to be more than that. Call it isolationism-by-default if you want to.
Ohio *sigh*..... not using military violence/threats as the be all end all to further internal political/economic goals does NOT constitute isolationism.
I live in EU (Slovenia) and I can tell you that nobody here thinks that Russia is threat to us.
But we all see Poland acting in strange manner last few years, their
twin leaders threatening Russia, Germany and rest of EU claiming
rights they don't deserve. The disagreement between Poland and
other EU members is the latest difficulty in the EU's efforts to
approve a cut-down version of the stalled European constitution.
However Russia was always a part of the Europe and I do not know
why should we fear them.
It's true-parts of EU are dependend on Russia natural gas, but natural
gas is not the most important source of energy here and rather than
developing new weapons (since we do not want to attack them and
steal their gas) EU decided to develop other, cleaner energy sources.
It's their gas so they have right to determine the price for it.
Here the Russia-Ukraine gas dispute is described and you can see that
Ukraine did not want to pay regular prices for gas as all other countries did.
Besides high prices of gas are good for the environment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia-Ukraine_gas_dispute
China investing in Africa is also no threat to EU, since the risk factor is
very high.
Bunch of EU countries have learned that there is not much you can do
in Africa with millitary forces.
Besides their investment could stop the flow of african refugees to EU,
increase the market, stability,...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6079838.stm
And finally who has military personnel all over the place?
10 years ago:
http://allcountries.org/uscensus/580_u_s_military_personnel_on_active.html
now:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0883073.html
Enough with the links! I can’t access them!
Interesting about Poland.
Like I said again, most people agree with you. And it is indisputable that the US has forces deployed all over the place and it has really overextended us (TRUST ME). The good news for you Europeans, is that history has shown that when countries do that (Roman Empire and Britain come to mind), it is followed by a period of withdrawal.
I currently live in Europe and there will never be agreement on the topic of foreign policy. So I respectfully bow out of this one.
(The one good thing is, no one has come on here with the America Kicks Ass At Everything mentality or as I call it, being dumb)
Interesting about Poland.
Like I said again, most people agree with you. And it is indisputable that the US has forces deployed all over the place and it has really overextended us (TRUST ME). The good news for you Europeans, is that history has shown that when countries do that (Roman Empire and Britain come to mind), it is followed by a period of withdrawal.
I currently live in Europe and there will never be agreement on the topic of foreign policy. So I respectfully bow out of this one.
(The one good thing is, no one has come on here with the America Kicks Ass At Everything mentality or as I call it, being dumb)
What's this new country called Europe?
I think its where whore babies come from.
Or apostrophes perhaps?
I bet you right now most of the major European powers could get much more out of nearly any ocountry on the planet just by asking nicely than the US could.
It's state of mind, not country. It has nice future If people will be able to deal with stupidty. Of course we shall never underestimate the power of stupidity.
Here are some ideas:
http://www.vision.org/visionmedia/article.aspx?id=799
I would like to comment that but I will leave it as we have enough already.
I'm anti-American? I just wrote that I was glad that you didn't call me anti-American as I don't see my self as one.. Then I have to ask you to define what things you consider American and what not, this we have to discuss.
About your classmates/friends, I can't feel sorry for their lives as my sympathies are with the Iraqi people who, unlike your classmates/friends, didn't volonter to go fight a war on a safe distance from their loved ones and their infrastructure, much less live in the middle of it as an opressed civilian.
Shots also go out to those in the Iraqi resistance who defend their country against a foreign power that wants to force their ways upon them, while steal the wealth of their country from them. Guns High!
Dunno about what France is upto or why, but you've got it all wrong about the EU. The EU has no wishes at all to become isolationistic, how could it when all major economic countries of the world, primarily the US (do we count in Canada here?), China and Russia are out in the world securing energy reserves for the future.
Don't you think that the EU has ambitions of future economic growth? Well, growth needs energy, lots of it. Don't be surprised if you see the EU every five years or so look more and more like your own country.
There are powers that trying to turn the EU into a single nation, with each member country taking the role of your 50 states. This is of course not something "official" but the're sneaking changes upon us leading more and more to that every year or so.
For instance, lately the EU found problems with their proposed constitution when a few member countries did the democratic thing and let their people deside in a referendum whether they wanted it or not.
On a side note, the late government of Sweden did not alow us to vote on the matter as they feared that we would vote against it as we did with the Euro, despite a silly unequal funding for ads to the advantage of the pro Euro side.
Is Europe at large cutting back on military spending? Good, our kids need better education, our elders need better care, we still don't have any dental health plan (Sweden at least) and sick people are forced to sleep on the streets in a country where polar bears walk them at night time.
If the military has good funding then they are going to want to fight. If they have poor crappy wheapons they gonna chicken out and stay within their borders, where they should be..
No one in Sweden fears the Russians as a military force with offensive ambitions, or that they do as they please with their own natural resources. Haven't seen anything about this in Greece eather.
I don't know which countries you're thinking about except the US which never was isolationistic. The US called it self isolationist because its colonial ambitions were limited to the two American continents. That is not isolationist, more like self limiting your exploiting greed.
In Latin America and the Carribean you were just as much a colonizing force as the Belgians were in Congo, French in Mozambique but foremost the Brittish in all corners of the world.
The US was never bitten by it, as Pearl Harbour was purposedly sacrifised to get the majority of the US public to want to go to war (there's a lot of evidence to this among Aussie inteligence warnings of a huge Japanese fleet closing in).
Basicly what they did with Pearl was repeated on 11/9; They sacrifised their subjects to fool the masses to a war so that some stock holders can get stinkin rich from weapon sales and rebuilding contracts of foreign infrastructure.
Bomb The Russians!!!
*sigh* so hard to find a good troll these days.
Rockwool, your logic is impeccable, and you have won me over.
I am sure the evidence that you have amassed to support your theories that both Pearl Harbor and 9/11 were perpetrated by the U.S. Government is irrefutable. If the evidence you have is as bulletproof as you have led me to believe, I implore you to share it with the world, so that everyone can know the truth.
The fact that historians have missed the entire reason for American’s formal entry into WW II for the past 66 years is despicable, because as you know, nothing good came out of WW II. I look forward to seeing your evidence presented to the masses.
In addition, the historical revision to foreign policy that you have given (that countries do not need militaries or armies based on the European model you have presented) is again irrefutable. I will immediately go out into the city (Baghdad) and tell the Sunnis and Shias that weapons and fighting are not the answer. You have solved the Middle East Peace Process riddle.
Because I am not allowed to leave here for another year, please go to Brussels (NATO), Washington D.C., Moscow, Beijing , and then the Balkans and Africa as well. Spread the word. Also, please let the EU know they should disband the European Reaction Force and stop all peace keeping operations immediately, please also let the U.N. know. All funds that were directed to militaries should now be used for education and social improvement.
Having little or no military capability is the way to world peace, because as you have said “they will be chicken and stay in their borders.” I can guarantee you that no other country would take advantage of that to invade or attack that country’s interests, because they of course would have no military either!
Peace Breaks Out. If we extrapolate this theory, the same can go for police forces! Why if countries can learn to get along, why can’t individual people! Those same funds that were once dedicated to law enforcement, can now be redirected to education of this revisionist history!
Al Qaeda will be happy to know they don’t have to blow themselves up anymore.
In the face of such irrefutable evidence, logic and good grammar, I humbly concede the debate to you. And as started before, will have no more part of it.
I am sure the evidence that you have amassed to support your theories that both Pearl Harbor and 9/11 were perpetrated by the U.S. Government is irrefutable. If the evidence you have is as bulletproof as you have led me to believe, I implore you to share it with the world, so that everyone can know the truth.
The fact that historians have missed the entire reason for American’s formal entry into WW II for the past 66 years is despicable, because as you know, nothing good came out of WW II. I look forward to seeing your evidence presented to the masses.
In addition, the historical revision to foreign policy that you have given (that countries do not need militaries or armies based on the European model you have presented) is again irrefutable. I will immediately go out into the city (Baghdad) and tell the Sunnis and Shias that weapons and fighting are not the answer. You have solved the Middle East Peace Process riddle.
Because I am not allowed to leave here for another year, please go to Brussels (NATO), Washington D.C., Moscow, Beijing , and then the Balkans and Africa as well. Spread the word. Also, please let the EU know they should disband the European Reaction Force and stop all peace keeping operations immediately, please also let the U.N. know. All funds that were directed to militaries should now be used for education and social improvement.
Having little or no military capability is the way to world peace, because as you have said “they will be chicken and stay in their borders.” I can guarantee you that no other country would take advantage of that to invade or attack that country’s interests, because they of course would have no military either!
Peace Breaks Out. If we extrapolate this theory, the same can go for police forces! Why if countries can learn to get along, why can’t individual people! Those same funds that were once dedicated to law enforcement, can now be redirected to education of this revisionist history!
Al Qaeda will be happy to know they don’t have to blow themselves up anymore.
In the face of such irrefutable evidence, logic and good grammar, I humbly concede the debate to you. And as started before, will have no more part of it.
Aint that a cunt picking on my grammar. But obviously your not humble enough to offer to discuss this in my first language instead of yours. Twat. Your whole post was low, must have triggered you by saying that I don't feel for your buddies. Don't expect to be looked upon as a righteous liberator by everyone just cus your president says you are one.
Of all the things you wrote in your previous post, which I then adressed, you chose not to answer the one specific thing I asked you to. Instead you picked and raved on the matter that I expressed about that money could be better spent than on weapons that are enriching a powerfull loby.
Silly me, should have known better than to pick on something that puts food on some peoples table and expect them to agree with that.
Evidence about Pearl Harbour? In post nr47 I recomended all of you to watch the documentaries Why We Fight and Zeitgeist. In the latter they talk about the Aussie intelligence warnings. This is nothing new, evidence of how Pearl Harbour was possible has been in at least a few documentaries I've seen. How come you missed that? See no evil, hear no evil, say no evil?
Amazed that you've been lied to about Pearl and 9/11 too? How about the Gulf of Tonkin incident? You know that that was a lie to get you in a war in Vietnam, don't you? Never happened! If the military industrial complex wants a war, they get a war. Don't believe me? Take a look at Why We Fight.
Want proof of 9/11? That is another current thread, and many more if you search, but as you will watch Why We Fight and in particular Zeitgeist you will get some from there as well. See those first and then get back to me for more.
There is non such European model dumbass, that was a picture I painted. The EU is almost as gready as the US, and as I pointed out in my previous post (in answer to your previuos post where you said the EU was isolationist and a lot of other dumb ****) it has ambitions to become the worlds 2nd superpower and probably with wishes to surpass your greed.
Now, can you answer my original questions? Among those was that you called me an anti-American, because of what? Which things considered American am I against? I'll make it easy for you, just list all things considered "American" and those considered "non-American" and I'll check the y/n boxes. Start a new thread, this topic needs to be discussed propperly.
I didn't mean to trigger you with what I said in my previous post, but don't excpect every one to tap you on the shoulder or be indifferent about what you with your actions are supporting/allowing to happen in Iraq and where else the US is effing it up for people.
Hey man you can't blame US for all wars. Pearl Harbor was attacked by Japan and yes US gave them cause for that attack, but it was war between two rising superpowers and history is written by the victors. Beside what goes around comes around...
Some reasons for Japan attack:
http://www.theamericancause.org/patwhydidjapan.htm
Few thoughts about surprise and Pearl Harbor
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Was_the_Japanese_attack_on_Pearl_Harbor_truly_a_surprise_attack
Swedish joke:
Some reasons for Japan attack:
http://www.theamericancause.org/patwhydidjapan.htm
Few thoughts about surprise and Pearl Harbor
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Was_the_Japanese_attack_on_Pearl_Harbor_truly_a_surprise_attack
Swedish joke:
Things American
Big boobs [ ] (lots of plastic surgery here, in abundance)
Beer [ ]
Hotdogs [ ]
Hamburgers [ ]
Big Cars [ ]
Baseball [ ]
Football [ ]
Soccer ------- Just kidding
You're right, WWII wasn't started by the US. Struck me that I found the thought quite amazing that they weren't to blame that time.
The Swedish joke was excellent!
Didn't think that the ambiguouity (spelling?) of our weapons exporting politics were that known in other countries.. We actually have a law that porhibits us to export weapons to countries that are in a war, but when asked about the exports to the UK/US the former prime minister Göran Persson said that Swedens relationship to those two countries were of greater interest to Sweden that following the law. 
I like the fact that in the picture the article offers the fighter is not the same type of fighter they describe. The fighters described in the articles are F3's and the fighter in the picture is a Eurofighter....
Fixed....... but when asked about the exports to the UK/US the former prime minister Göran Persson said that Swedens profits from those two countries were of greater interest to Sweden that following the law.
And don't forget all the other things we export and what would happen to all that income if we put those two heavy buyers of Swedish products on a "black list"..