IS AMERICA A BULLY?

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter, I am always listening. Please don't toss acronyms at me. This will sound stupid, but what is KZ? Maybe I missed where you explained before.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Nor did it chose to humiliate and enslave its enemies.
izzythepush wrote:
Just your allies. Still troops stationed over here to threaten and intimidate the locals. Harold Wilson was forced to resign thus undermining the democratic process. God only knows what they would have done had we not gone along with the invasion of Iraq.

All those British servicemen's lives lost for a country that treats them with utter contempt.
Izzy, does your post contemplate
an American military attack on England???

Do u assert that English citizens are frightened
of American troops stationed there ?

Does your post imply an American danger of overthrow
of the English government ?

That we 'd take over England, as we did Mexico ?

David

I'm not sure even izzy is implying a military conquest of the UK although clearly he is implying that America, somehow, forced Harold Wilson to resign.

Interestingly enough, if you Google "Harold Wilson forced resignaton" you will find the fllowing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Wilson_conspiracy_theories

Scour as I might, I couldn't find a mention of the US being a player in these zany conspiracy theories. Apparently izzy isn't content with finding his native right-wingers evil, he has to cast them as American puppets.

Speaking of zany, how else to describe the notion that American troops are stationed in the UK to intimidate the locals? Clearly I'm an American right-winger, and I would be quite pleased to see all American troops withdrawn from the UK. Surely the Black Watch can defend England's green and pleasant land on their own. (But wait, considering how things stand vis a vis the UK and Scotland, maybe they wouldn't be such a reliable defense force).

Izzy is the classic leftist. He so wants to be a revolutionary; a foe of imperialistic oppression that he is willing to manufacture threats (of American origin) to his country. It's a damn shame he has no real fascists scaling the Dover Cliffs so he's decided to invent them.

If he could join Mr. Peabody and Sherman in a journey via the Way-Back Machine, he would chose to visit Chile in 1973. Once there he might man the barricades, alongside Salvador Allende, against the CIA launched coup.

In true armchair revolutionary fashion, izzy rails against evil right-wing, racist oppressors everywhere...in internet discussion forums. He once started a thread applauding the boorish disruption of a performance of the Israeli Philharmonic Orchestra in London. Chances are he wasn't even at those barricades, but that's OK, izzy proves his leftist bonafides, again and again, by finding fault with all things Israeli.

Ironically, izzy tends to be something of a British chauvinist. He gets all bent out of shape if he perceives that someone has insulted his Special Forces, and was quite delighted that the crooked bones of Richard III were unearthed and given their proper attention.

Of course I find nothing wrong, at all, with izzy's patriotism, but I suspect that he would rather be labelled a leper than a patriot.

1 Reply

I like Izzy, too. I like everybody! Drunk

2 Replies

@wmwcjr,

If you find him (somehow) likeable, like away.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

When he gets personal and nasty with you, I obviously don't agree with that. Seriously, I don't condone the meanness by anyone.

I don't even know why I'm here. I'm just an outsider with nothing to contribute. At least nothing that many people would care about. I'm neither a "progressive" nor a conservative. Politically I'm just a lousy moderate with nowhere to go and no one to support. I've made silly, dumb statements in this topic tonight because, frankly, I'm extremely [expletive deleted] depressed for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with any of the forums of this website.

I've said enough. Take care.

2 Replies

@wmwcjr,

Buck up my friend, you have plenty to contribute.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

The basis for disbelieving him was his refusal to allow Hans Blix more time, because that would have meant that Blix could report that Hussein had no WMDs.

There were no WMDs, that was clear from the off.

After Hussein had had twelve years to live up to a treaty and only played games, why give him more time? Twelve years seems like a long time to keep one's word.

Apparently the elimination of his former WMD programs wasn't obvious to a lot of people. This was based on the fact that he had at one time had these development programs and then promised to eliminate them, but oddly refused to allow it to be verified. Many people believed that it was a deception, so why couldn't the President have been one?

The stakes were enormous. If he had actually merely moved the WMD programs underground, then his best move would have been to stall for more time to allow him to complete development. One day he could have simply announced that he had them and then would have been untouchable. The world would have paid a heavy burden, even if he only used the threat of WMD to coerce his neighbors into giving ground. Or, he could have smuggled a WMD in pieces into American and killed hundreds of thousands of us simultaneously just to give us something else to worry about.

And, as I said, the situation will certainly repeat over and over in the future as world technology advances and the difficulty and expense of creating nukes or bioweapons goes down. Just wait until some horrid, unstable dictator gets nuclear weapons and see what the cost is.

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Hans Blix wanted more time not Saddam Hussein. Try to keep up.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

Apparently the elimination of his former WMD programs wasn't obvious to a lot of people.

Yeah, morons and lickspittles.

0 Replies

@wmwcjr,

Finn is a sick piece of crap who insulted my dead wife and said my disabled son should be killed.

He tries to joke along, but he's not very good at it so he turns nasty. There are no depths to which he will not sink.

The idea that America forced the resignation of Harold Wilson is long established, and is a lot more credible than the notion that Saddam Hussein had WMDs prior to invasion.

I am a local I feel intimidated by foreign troops on our soil.

All Finn cares about is money, he hates the fact that the children of poor people are treated by the NHS because that means people like him can't get their snouts fully in the trough.

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Of course David. Their original purpose was to ensure that any conflict between USA and the Soviet Union took place on Europe. They're currently used to project American power across the Europe and the Middle East.

Any government that tried to remove them would be met with extreme violence. Chris Mullins' A Very British Coup summed it up very well.

2 Replies

@ossobuco,

KZ, concentration camp.

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

KZ, concentration camp.

There were more than 300 (pus hundreds of subcamps) under the Concentration Camps Inspectorate ... in Germany.
[And then the extermination camps (or death camps), which were (additionally to concentration camps) in the occupied countries.]

0 Replies

@wmwcjr,

wmwcjr wrote:

When he gets personal and nasty with you, I obviously don't agree with that. Seriously, I don't condone the meanness by anyone.

I don't even know why I'm here. I'm just an outsider with nothing to contribute. At least nothing that many people would care about. I'm neither a "progressive" nor a conservative. Politically I'm just a lousy moderate with nowhere to go and no one to support. I've made silly, dumb statements in this topic tonight because, frankly, I'm extremely [expletive deleted] depressed for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with
any of the forums of this website.

I've said enough. Take care.

Shud that be: fora ??

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

wmwcjr wrote:

When he gets personal and nasty with you, I obviously don't agree with that. Seriously, I don't condone the meanness by anyone.

I don't even know why I'm here. I'm just an outsider with nothing to contribute. At least nothing that many people would care about. I'm neither a "progressive" nor a conservative. Politically I'm just a lousy moderate with nowhere to go and no one to support. I've made silly, dumb statements in this topic tonight because, frankly, I'm extremely [expletive deleted] depressed for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with
any of the forums of this website.

I've said enough. Take care.

Shud that be: fora ??

David

I used to use "fora", David...but it always sounded pretentious when I did. And then when I actually looked it up..."forums" is not only acceptable, it is the preferred form.

(Can you see the connection of this with the preferred pronunciation of the word "temperature?" )

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

Of course David. Their original purpose was to ensure that any conflict between USA and the Soviet Union took place on Europe. They're currently used to project American power across the Europe and the Middle East.

Any government that tried to remove them would be met with extreme violence.
Chris Mullins' A Very British Coup summed it up very well.

I must say, Izzy, that I was VERY surprized at the notion
of an American invasion of England, as distinct from a re-inforcement
of English defenses from the threat from communist slavery issuing from the USSR
and its minions. Since the death of the USSR, I don t see much need to keep American troops there.

For the duration of my life, the first introduction of the notion
of an American overthrow of the English government was in your post.
I deem that extremely un-likely, but then again, I can 't speak for obama.
I assure u that I voted against him both times.

David

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

wmwcjr wrote:

When he gets personal and nasty with you, I obviously don't agree with that. Seriously, I don't condone the meanness by anyone.

I don't even know why I'm here. I'm just an outsider with nothing to contribute. At least nothing that many people would care about. I'm neither a "progressive" nor a conservative. Politically I'm just a lousy moderate with nowhere to go and no one to support. I've made silly, dumb statements in this topic tonight because, frankly, I'm extremely [expletive deleted] depressed for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with
any of the forums of this website.

I've said enough. Take care.

Shud that be: fora ??

David

Frank Apisa wrote:

I used to use "fora", David...but it always sounded pretentious when I did.

I don t propose that we PRETEND
to change Latin grammar. It just sounds ignorant,
which certainly IS the source of that mis-use.

Frank Apisa wrote:

And then when I actually looked it up..."forums" is not only acceptable, it is the preferred form.

Preferred by someone who has authority from the Romans
to change Latin grammar??

Frank Apisa wrote:

(Can you see the connection of this with
the preferred pronunciation of the word "temperature?" )

No.

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
(Can you see the connection of this with
the preferred pronunciation of the word "temperature?" )
No.

I'm waiting to see the connection, too. (In Latin it's temperatura, plural temperaturae.)

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

wmwcjr wrote:

When he gets personal and nasty with you, I obviously don't agree with that. Seriously, I don't condone the meanness by anyone.

I don't even know why I'm here. I'm just an outsider with nothing to contribute. At least nothing that many people would care about. I'm neither a "progressive" nor a conservative. Politically I'm just a lousy moderate with nowhere to go and no one to support. I've made silly, dumb statements in this topic tonight because, frankly, I'm extremely [expletive deleted] depressed for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with
any of the forums of this website.

I've said enough. Take care.

Shud that be: fora ??

David

Frank Apisa wrote:

I used to use "fora", David...but it always sounded pretentious when I did.
I don t propose that we PRETEND
to change Latin grammar. It just sounds ignorant,
which certainly IS the source of that mis-use.

I am sure you also use, "The opera Carmen are by Bizet" also, right David?

Forum is an English word...taken from the Latin "forum." Speakers of Latin pluralize it by using "fora"...but speakers of English use "forums"...or at least some do.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Buck up my friend, you have plenty to contribute.

AGREED.

David

0 Replies

IS AMERICA A BULLY?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know