Jump to content

During the last 50 years Americans invaded 200


Recommended Posts

During the last 50 years Americans invaded 200 countries and killed 8 million people. Looking scaring indeed! So the death of 4 Ukrainian soldiers shot down in Iraq by patrolling American squad is just a ‘minor error’ for them. But not for the Ukrainian officer with Afghan background. West Point dropouts with vague knowledge of the map and missing North South give him orders so full of themselves. The officer’s my old buddy Misha serving in our unit sent into Iraq to help mighty GIs. He seldom writes home. ‘For the guys (americans) it’s a stroll. They don’t know a sh-t about local ways and habits calling it their mindset. This ignorance and stupidity result in occasional deaths. I am really happy our new president decided on our pullout from Iraq. We are aliens here. We’d rather send humanitarian aid here like Russians. That would make more sense…’ These are words from Misha’s latest letter. Most Italians and Poles staying in Iraq are thinking in a similar way. I know that national parliaments in Poland, Netherlands, Italy, Mongolia and some other countries are now doubting whether to quit Iraq or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

so quick to point out what we have done, but yet so quick to squash anything done by the other side of the world. "those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it" i love how communism gets off with a slap on the wrist we run a police action in a foreign country and all the sudden were the next hitlers. damned if you do damned if you dont. for those of you too lazy to read the article 87 percent of democide has been cause by communist/socialist countries

Link to comment
Share on other sites

During the last 50 years Americans invaded 200 countries and killed 8 million people.

Cite. Name them.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we cant even come close to are communist brethren.

Right. So as long as a nation isn't the worst offender, all is well?

:rolleyes:

This exact line of reasoning pops up in virtually every thread from right wingers..err..moderates... on this forum. Too bad it is a fallacy.

It's called pointing out your hypocrisy. You hate "X" allegedly because they do "Y", but you have no problem at all, and in fact are quite friendly with "A, B, C, D, and E" even though they do far, far worse.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so quick to point out what we have done, but yet so quick to squash anything done by the other side of the world.

Erm. Has anyone actually "squashed" what the "other side of the world" has done in this thread, or are you simply trying to defend your fallacy by lashing out at straw men?

i love how communism gets off with a slap on the wrist we run a police action in a foreign country and all the sudden were the next hitlers.

Hint: The US can still be bad, even if other nations have been worse. I know this is hard to understand, but I assure you it is true.

damned if you do damned if you dont.

You know, there is an entire range of possibility between "do" and "don't."

for those of you too lazy to read the article 87 percent of democide has been cause by communist/socialist countries

Hint: No matter how many times you repeat a fallacy, it remains a fallacy.

Feminism.. the new face of female oppression!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's called pointing out your hypocrisy. You hate "X" allegedly because they do "Y", but you have no problem at all, and in fact are quite friendly with "A, B, C, D, and E" even though they do far, far worse.

What on earth are you talking about? I don't recall every posting anything approximating that. Nor have I ever seen a serious poster on this forum say anything of the sort.

You're lashing out at straw men trying to establish some sort of defense for a simple fallacy that you appear unable to avoid.

Feminism.. the new face of female oppression!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's called pointing out your hypocrisy. You hate "X" allegedly because they do "Y", but you have no problem at all, and in fact are quite friendly with "A, B, C, D, and E" even though they do far, far worse.

What on earth are you talking about? I don't recall every posting anything approximating that. Nor have I ever seen a serious poster on this forum say anything of the sort.

By any imaginable stretch of interpretation the Soviet Union was far, far more brutal, corrupt and murderous than the US. Yet Soviet leaders were free to travel the world as honored guests and did not need to fear enormous demonstrations. Same went for China - and still goes for China. If the Chinese leader lands in Toronto the only people who will be out protesting will be Asians, with a scattering of whites in the Free Tibet movement. If the US president lands tens of thousands will come out shriek their disapproval. It's always been like that. Putin can line up artillery wheel to wheel and blast away at rows of Chechen apartment buildings full of civilians, but if he stops over in Paris or London or Toronto hardly anyone will care. But let the US president land and all you squealing leftists will be out howling at how evil and cruel he and his government are.

So some intellectual smurf bleats about "200" countries the US has invaded. A list which, assuming it exists, will be replete with farcical interpretations of law and reality determined to draw condemnation down on the evil Americans. Russia? Who cares? China? Who cares? North Korea? Who cares? It's the Americans he hates. And I doubt he's even bright enough to figure out why.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So some intellectual smurf bleats about "200" countries the US has invaded. A list which, assuming it exists, will be replete with farcical interpretations of law and reality determined to draw condemnation down on the evil Americans. Russia? Who cares? China? Who cares? North Korea? Who cares? It's the Americans he hates. And I doubt he's even bright enough to figure out why.

You just don't get it, do you? The excesses of the nations you list are well known, well documented, and even taught in school. There has been a virtual free ride given to the US on the issue of war crimes and murder. Perhaps thats why people make up such lists; to point out that, even though there may be worse offenders, the US is still a pretty bad offender.

Just to let you know, saying "X is bad" is not the same as saying "X is the worst." I hope that clears things up for you.

Kim Jong could make the exact same "argument" that you are making here... "Why do you focus on my country?! There are way worse offenders out there. Look at china and russia! Any criticism on North Korea is hypocrisy!"

:rolleyes:

But then, I guess if you can't defend the actions of the US military in the last 50 years, your best chance is to bleat on about how others are worse, and hope people don't notice the irrelevance of your ranting.

Feminism.. the new face of female oppression!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So some intellectual smurf bleats about "200" countries the US has invaded. A list which, assuming it exists, will be replete with farcical interpretations of law and reality determined to draw condemnation down on the evil Americans. Russia? Who cares? China? Who cares? North Korea? Who cares? It's the Americans he hates. And I doubt he's even bright enough to figure out why.

You just don't get it, do you? The excesses of the nations you list are well known, well documented, and even taught in school.

Your excuses don't cut it. Explain to me why tens of thousands will come out to scream in rage at the American president but almost no one will come to protest against the others even though their brutality is "taught in school".

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest eureka

Well why don't you get out and protest if you feel so strongly about it. After all, in your mind, everyone who does not share yourhatred of any who are different in their humanity than you is a sympathiser with murderous regimes.

Tell me, do you think it was "Rightists" who overthrew the Soviet regime or who are gathering the strength in China? Can you name a "Right Wing" movement that overtrew any of the "murdderous dictators?"

Isn't it almost always "Leftists" that remove tyrannous regimes? From Nazi Germany where the resistance in occupied Europe was almost wholly of the Left to the Soviet Union to Latin America.

On the subject of American atrocities, what about Cambodia, Korea, Vietnam? Millions were massacred by the Americans in these countries without looking into the lesser absolute numbers in many others.

Oh, 500,000 young children killed by the sanctions on Iraq that the Americans insisted on keeping in force. Up to the latest invasion, of course. More are dying now as the conditions have worsened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well why don't you get out and protest if you feel so strongly about it. After all, in your mind, everyone who does not share yourhatred of any who are different in their humanity than you is a sympathiser with murderous regimes.

You are blathering.

Answer the question.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Invaded 200 countries? That's hard to believe, even in all of U.S. history. Let's count (generously):

Nicaragua (coupla times)

Vietnam

Laos

Cambodia

Somalia

Lebanon

Iraq

Cuba

Libya

Panama

Grenada

Iran

Germany

N. Korea?

Phillipines

Hawaii

Various Native American nations

Japan

Mexico

Italy

British North America

Afghanistan

Hmmm. Who am I missing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how can you say that 87 percent of the murders commited since the turn of the century are a fallacy? he posted an article without source that indicated that the us invaded 200 countries and killed millions. i desputed that fact by saying that over 87 percent of murders in the last 100 years have been by commited by communist countries alone, NOT INCLUDING HITLER(facsist), or the middle east. I think if you took the total democide over the last 100 years the United States would be very low on that list. I wont venture a number because it would be unfounded. So whats the fallacy here, attacking the US with unfounded data, or me defending it by showing the true fallacy, that the us isnt even on the same level as the butchers in other countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how can you say that 87 percent of the murders commited since the turn of the century are a fallacy?

I didn't. You may want to reread what I wrote.

he posted an article without source that indicated that the us invaded 200 countries and killed millions.  i desputed that fact by saying that over 87 percent of murders in the last 100 years have been by commited by communist countries alone,

That you think you "disputed" the original post is the fallacy.

Unless, of course, you want to try and defend your claim by demonstrating the logical impossibility of a nation killing millions when another nation killed more.

:rolleyes:

I think if you took the total democide over the last 100 years the United States would be very low on that list.

Iraq under Saddam Hussein would be far far lower on that list than the US. So he can't be that bad, after all.

:D

So whats the fallacy here, attacking the US with unfounded data, or me defending it by showing the true fallacy, that the us isnt  even on the same level as the butchers in other countries.

What on earth are you talking about? No post in this thread suggested that the US was on par with the "great" butchers of the 20th century.

Feminism.. the new face of female oppression!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your excuses don't cut it. Explain to me why tens of thousands will come out to scream in rage at the American president but almost no one will come to protest against the others even though their brutality is "taught in school".

Likely because it is fashionable to be anti-american, or more precisely, anti-bush, in most civilized nations at this point in time.

Note, though, that the fact that it is fashionable doesn't make it incorrect.

Now perhaps you can explain to me why you seem to have no problem with the US doing, on a smaller scale, the very thing you denounce other nations for.

Are you an apologist or a releativist?

Feminism.. the new face of female oppression!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sweal:

I'm not sure, but looking at your list makes me think you missed the 'last 50 years' part.

Likely because it is fashionable to be anti-american, or more precisely, anti-bush, in most civilized nations at this point in time.

Quite right.

I was marching against US policy in the 1980s, when things were really bad. I think that they've softened up a lot since then, yet it seems that people are more outraged than ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your excuses don't cut it. Explain to me why tens of thousands will come out to scream in rage at the American president but almost no one will come to protest against the others even though their brutality is "taught in school".

Likely because it is fashionable to be anti-american, or more precisely, anti-bush, in most civilized nations at this point in time.

Thank you.
Note, though, that the fact that it is fashionable doesn't make it incorrect.

Now perhaps you can explain to me why you seem to have no problem with the US doing, on a smaller scale, the very thing you denounce other nations for.

Specificially what is the US doing that I don't have a problem with but should?

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sweal:

I'm not sure, but looking at your list makes me think you missed the 'last 50 years' part.

Likely because it is fashionable to be anti-american, or more precisely, anti-bush, in most civilized nations at this point in time.

Quite right.

I was marching against US policy in the 1980s, when things were really bad. I think that they've softened up a lot since then, yet it seems that people are more outraged than ever.

Were you marching against the Soviet Union in the eighties?

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you.

Uhm... you're welcome for nothing.

Specificially what is the US doing that I don't have a problem with but should?

Well see this is what I am having trouble with. Either your early posts were a purely fallicious "defense" against the claim of the original post, or you honestly don't think that the US has taken many actions worthy of criticism in the past 50 years. Or perhaps you do think that the US has done things worthy of criticism, but decided to post an off topic response on how some other nation is worse. I honestly don't know what you intended (though my guess is on "fallacious off topic response"). Anyways, all of the possibilities are absurd and/or invalid.

Feminism.. the new face of female oppression!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here is what you are missing trudeau, its not that we are saying that the US is clean hands, what we are saying is that HOLD UP, you cant say unfounded things that are incorrect to begin with backed up by no data. (burden of proof) i showed an example of democide in the last 100 years, (most of major US history) you jumped to conclusion and said that i was trying to show the US is better because weve killed LESS people. which is not the case, my point is, how can you be so arrogantly hyporcritcal and post incorrect data backed up by no proof, which was obviously just a malicious attack on the us, judged by the amount of effort to put actually data into it that he did. The fallacy is with the original poster not with those who dispute it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here is what you are missing trudeau, its not that we are saying that the US is clean hands, what we are saying is that HOLD UP, you cant say unfounded things that are incorrect to begin with backed up by no data.

Thats all well and good. Except for the fact that you never said anything resembling that:

http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/rummel/postwwii.htm

we cant even come close to are communist brethren.

so quick to point out what we have done, but yet so quick to squash anything done by the other side of the world. "those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it" i love how communism gets off with a slap on the wrist we run a police action in a foreign country and all the sudden were the next hitlers. damned if you do damned if you dont. for those of you too lazy to read the article 87 percent of democide has been cause by communist/socialist countries
how can you say that 87 percent of the murders commited since the turn of the century are a fallacy? he posted an article without source that indicated that the us invaded 200 countries and killed millions. i desputed that fact by saying that over 87 percent of murders in the last 100 years have been by commited by communist countries alone, NOT INCLUDING HITLER(facsist), or the middle east. I think if you took the total democide over the last 100 years the United States would be very low on that list. I wont venture a number because it would be unfounded. So whats the fallacy here, attacking the US with unfounded data, or me defending it by showing the true fallacy, that the us isnt even on the same level as the butchers in other countries.

I realize that it would be convenient for you to have said that. But, well, you never really did. Sorry.

Feminism.. the new face of female oppression!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,816
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nibu
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...