How much or little do you think the US should intervene in foreign affairs?

from a completely objective standpoint, i can only cringe when wondering about his seduction technique.
Ghb, ruffies and the trunk of a car? I imagine that would be followed by some 'fuck it' pouring out of the bloodstream (or some such stream) behind a dumpster in an abandoned industrial hellhole. Scary picture indeed. Maybe we should pass the hat for charm school?

I declare victory.
 
that wasnt foreign intervention, that was a response to piracy, kidnapping and murder of americans at sea

the mexican american war was a response to attack on us citizens by a foreign power

the spanish american war was a response to brinksmanship and attack on us forces by a foreign power

ww1, ww2 and iraq1 & 2 were wars fought in defense of allies first and foremost.

afghanistan was a response to murder of americans by pirates (they just used planes instead of boats)

all those were well within the ideal of "the discourse of kings"

vietnam, korea, etc were all bullshit though

you must have gotten an "A" in False History. in Mexico, we were the foreign power, and they weren't our citizens any longer. the Spanish War was our first Imperial War, and led to the Philippine War, our first "Vietnam." WWI was the Fiat Currency War; WWII, the War to Readjust the Fiat Currency. Vietnam and Korea, just policing the hood, and everything else is Blood for Oil.
 
We have self rule and you do not because our Exec and Court are independent from the Legislature by LAW and yours are not, by law. You system is small weak and cozy.

We cannot use that stuff here and we rejected it and fought for this.

And you sound like a priest. Somehow you know better because you just believe it.

Foolish.
 
Ghb, ruffies and the trunk of a car? I imagine that would be followed by some 'fuck it' pouring out of the bloodstream (or some such stream) behind a dumpster in an abandoned industrial hellhole. Scary picture indeed. Maybe we should pass the hat for charm school?

I declare victory.

I declare you are shriveled prune with bad manners.
 
I have no problems with special forces sneaking in and taking out a Hussein type dictator. We don't need to be investing full scale boots on the ground invasions all over. I'd want it to be covert and we play ignorant instead of thumping our chests.

As far as hunger, we need to figure out why our own war on poverty has been such a dismal failure before we can "help" others. Individually, you can help quite a lot. Our government? not so much.

Based on your post, is it therefore fine for special forces or such sneaking around killing off American diplomats? I'm sure there is a huge number of people in the world who could rationalize that just as you can rationalize taking out Hussein type dictators. This seems to be a big issue with America and many other western countries; they are more than happy to do whatever they please to others, but the moment one of these others retaliates in any way, we cry like little brats and claim not to understand how they could possibly commit such monstrosities.
 
Based on your post, is it therefore fine for special forces or such sneaking around killing off American diplomats? I'm sure there is a huge number of people in the world who could rationalize that just as you can rationalize taking out Hussein type dictators. This seems to be a big issue with America and many other western countries; they are more than happy to do whatever they please to others, but the moment one of these others retaliates in any way, we cry like little brats and claim not to understand how they could possibly commit such monstrosities.

I'd prefer we minded our own business but when dictators are killing people by the hundreds of thousands, my solution would be to take out the dictator, not wage war on the country.

Yes, I want to stay out of conflicts, but people like Hussein need to be stopped. We don't need to be involved with placing the "right" leadership and nation building afterward either. It doesn't have to be the US that takes em out either.
 
Based on your post, is it therefore fine for special forces or such sneaking around killing off American diplomats? I'm sure there is a huge number of people in the world who could rationalize that just as you can rationalize taking out Hussein type dictators. This seems to be a big issue with America and many other western countries; they are more than happy to do whatever they please to others, but the moment one of these others retaliates in any way, we cry like little brats and claim not to understand how they could possibly commit such monstrosities.


What do you mean, "is it fine?' We just had an Al Q cadre sneak up and kill an Ambassador on Hate America Day.

This is global conflict that never ends. You wake up in your teens thinking you understand it all.
You think it is so UN-nessary and you have the formula for Peace.

And hopefully by the time for the grave, you know you didn't understand it a bit.
 
that wasnt foreign intervention, that was a response to piracy, kidnapping and murder of americans at sea

the mexican american war was a response to attack on us citizens by a foreign power

the spanish american war was a response to brinksmanship and attack on us forces by a foreign power

ww1, ww2 and iraq1 & 2 were wars fought in defense of allies first and foremost.

afghanistan was a response to murder of americans by pirates (they just used planes instead of boats)

all those were well within the ideal of "the discourse of kings"

vietnam, korea, etc were all bullshit though

Come on, we had to kill commies in Vietnam and Korea.
 
It's pretty clear from this that you need professional help. This is by far the most delusion stuff I think I've seen you write to date. Where to start?
The most obvious would be: 'Iraq2' in defense of allies. Really. What ally was being defended? Korean war: 'bullshit'? The U.S. and NATO allies had just watched eastern europe consumed by the Soviet war machine and KGB. Now they were supposed to sit idly by whilst China did it in Asia? If you'd been the age you are now back then, I imagine you would have been screaming for blood.
Your revisionism is shameful.

You should see how hard he shifted on what he considers essential gov't spending.
 
you must have gotten an "A" in False History. in Mexico, we were the foreign power, and they weren't our citizens any longer. the Spanish War was our first Imperial War, and led to the Philippine War, our first "Vietnam." WWI was the Fiat Currency War; WWII, the War to Readjust the Fiat Currency. Vietnam and Korea, just policing the hood, and everything else is Blood for Oil.
I agree with this post until you got to WW1. Not too bad. You started strong too when you told the neocon he probably got an A in false history.

If I had a like button I would click.
 
Guys that run out of ideas and find their cockroach hole plugged face the light as grammar coaches. I've run year long cons on my intentional and not so much mistakes. HA Ha.

Beenthere.
 
Back
Top