Lots of nations have an interest in stealing the oil. The US atrocities are not just the Iraq war. By "now" I mean modern history.
List of United States Atrocities
- Thread starter lixluke
- Start date
This is the Republican definition. Others use the dictionary's.
at the current price per barrel i hardly call it stealling.
you're right! its biggest atrocity is the peace corp
how modern are we talking, how far can we go back?
When you control the oil, you get the price, you don't pay it.
I say as far back as the Vietnam War (or as the Vietnamese more appropriately call it, the American War). 1965.
The argument is not about what terrorism is.
The fact is that you cannot change the fact that America is a terrorist by trying to change the definition of terrorism. Trying to change the definition of terrorism so that America is not a terrorist is an irrelevant argment.
We have already defined terrorism. This is not an argument. It is not up for debate.
We have already defined the USA to be a terrorist. This is not an argument. It is not up for debate.
The discussion is about where to find a list of terrorist acts commited by the USA.
there is no single definition.
see above
HOLY SHIT ! !
you mean we did something the UN has been trying to do since 1937?
it's very much up for debate my friend.
you struck out long ago but wrong yet again.
it was YOU not we.
you're repeating yourself.
first we need to define "terrorist act"
WRONG.
The argument is not about what terrorism is.
The fact is that you cannot change the fact that America is a terrorist by trying to change the definition of terrorism. Trying to change the definition of terrorism so that America is not a terrorist is an irrelevant argment.
We have already defined terrorism. This is not an argument. It is not up for debate.
We have already defined the USA to be a terrorist. This is not an argument. It is not up for debate.
The discussion is about where to find a list of terrorist acts commited by the USA.
Just shun people like that. The Republicans are even trying to redefine "civil war" for Iraq.
The book Rogue State is a comprehensive list.
Mickmeister
Registered Senior Member
The 1927 Buck vs. Bell case where the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Virginia to be able to sterilize humans that were considered "feeble-minded". Oliver Windel Holmes wrote the ruling saying that the pure gene pool outweighed the rights of procreation by individuals. Virginia continued this act of sterilization until it was repealed in 1974.
Funny you yourself aren't able to produce such a list?
Or perhaps you're under the impression we are your mommy?
I am liking the arguments in this thread. Some of the thoughts are interesting. Some are not as good as others and some should not even be considered. Such as how many web pages you can get on one term listed. Such as America perfection gets you over one million sites. 'Why is america perfect' almost 85 million. The amount of pages means nothing because I know for a fact america is not perfect. And there are a lot of people out there who are allowed to express their opinion, even if they barely know what that is, through the internet without getting dressed. All they need to do is spend an hour online and they can tell the whole world what they think and it will come up on google.
America is committing what some would call atrocities. We have to remember something though. There is a difference between definitions once the word war comes into play. During the second world war, or the first nuclear war, the US dropped 2 nukes. What was the reaction to that. The war ended. Well that part of the war anyway. America showed what it was capable of and their enemies could not withstand the attack. This was not an atrocity. This within the laws of war. Afterwards when it was reviewed and displayed to people who were not in fear of being slaughtered in a war it was found to be something that shouldn't be used unless needed. There is no talk in this forum about the use of chemical weapons used in the second world war that killed millions. Probly because the states hardly used those and it is hard to make them seem like that bad guys. Since the second world war a nuke has never been used on a group of people for the sole purpose of killing them. (As far as I know). But both Russian and the US built a lot of them so that the other wouldn't use theirs. Now Russian and the US have closed their cold war and Russia got rid of a lot of their nukes but the US still has theirs. They could uses them like so many americans say to nuke all those who are a threat to their way of life, such as iraq, but what would it get them. A bunch of land that is useless. There is a fear that other countries would use nukes against people. There are leaders of countries that kill their own people in mass numbers because they don't follow the way the governing body is leading them. Just saying that you don't agree with the Governemnt can get you shot. It is a fear that if some of these people get a nuke they may use it on their own people. The US doesn't fear getting hit by a nuke. Launching a nuke at the US would be an act of terrorism, not an act of war. If a nuke was launched at the states there would be no nuke retaliation. The US would invade and pound the country flat. Or attempt to. The defending country would still be able to fight. If many nukes were launched at the states that would be an act of war and the US would probly launch then. depending on the amount of nukes that fired off the US would probly walk away fairing somewhat well, due to the siye of the land. A lot of countries don't have the size to absorb so many hits and would be useless for years.
When Canada refused to enter afganistan with the US a lot of americans were upset and basically said, "If Canada was invaded where would you turn to for help." I can see where they were coming from but I am also aware of a few other things. If seen from a different light, If canada fell to a dictatorship that killed its own people I would be standing on the boarder screaming for the US to come in and imposed a government on us. As a canadian though I live almost the same lifestyle as an american and have close to the same every day beliefs. There is a big difference between me and a person from Iraq. I have no idea how the majority of people in Iraq are dealing with the new government and the us invation. I see conflicting news reports all the time. And living in Canada I get more then just the "Fox View". I am not in a position to say whether or not the US is doing a good or bad job at the moment.
I have no idea how many acts against humanity the US has done. I know that chances are Canada has done less. This makes me feel a little better. I also know that there are other countries out there that have done more. But this isn't the topic here. The topic is the US. And I know of one.
The first and only time the country of Canada was invaded it was by the US.
America is committing what some would call atrocities. We have to remember something though. There is a difference between definitions once the word war comes into play. During the second world war, or the first nuclear war, the US dropped 2 nukes. What was the reaction to that. The war ended. Well that part of the war anyway. America showed what it was capable of and their enemies could not withstand the attack. This was not an atrocity. This within the laws of war. Afterwards when it was reviewed and displayed to people who were not in fear of being slaughtered in a war it was found to be something that shouldn't be used unless needed. There is no talk in this forum about the use of chemical weapons used in the second world war that killed millions. Probly because the states hardly used those and it is hard to make them seem like that bad guys. Since the second world war a nuke has never been used on a group of people for the sole purpose of killing them. (As far as I know). But both Russian and the US built a lot of them so that the other wouldn't use theirs. Now Russian and the US have closed their cold war and Russia got rid of a lot of their nukes but the US still has theirs. They could uses them like so many americans say to nuke all those who are a threat to their way of life, such as iraq, but what would it get them. A bunch of land that is useless. There is a fear that other countries would use nukes against people. There are leaders of countries that kill their own people in mass numbers because they don't follow the way the governing body is leading them. Just saying that you don't agree with the Governemnt can get you shot. It is a fear that if some of these people get a nuke they may use it on their own people. The US doesn't fear getting hit by a nuke. Launching a nuke at the US would be an act of terrorism, not an act of war. If a nuke was launched at the states there would be no nuke retaliation. The US would invade and pound the country flat. Or attempt to. The defending country would still be able to fight. If many nukes were launched at the states that would be an act of war and the US would probly launch then. depending on the amount of nukes that fired off the US would probly walk away fairing somewhat well, due to the siye of the land. A lot of countries don't have the size to absorb so many hits and would be useless for years.
When Canada refused to enter afganistan with the US a lot of americans were upset and basically said, "If Canada was invaded where would you turn to for help." I can see where they were coming from but I am also aware of a few other things. If seen from a different light, If canada fell to a dictatorship that killed its own people I would be standing on the boarder screaming for the US to come in and imposed a government on us. As a canadian though I live almost the same lifestyle as an american and have close to the same every day beliefs. There is a big difference between me and a person from Iraq. I have no idea how the majority of people in Iraq are dealing with the new government and the us invation. I see conflicting news reports all the time. And living in Canada I get more then just the "Fox View". I am not in a position to say whether or not the US is doing a good or bad job at the moment.
I have no idea how many acts against humanity the US has done. I know that chances are Canada has done less. This makes me feel a little better. I also know that there are other countries out there that have done more. But this isn't the topic here. The topic is the US. And I know of one.
The first and only time the country of Canada was invaded it was by the US.