Recommended Posts
Quote
How about you try to see your own faults before trying to belittle others!
Why? I don't claim the same high moral ground that you try to. You're lauding a country that is built on luring foreign work, repossessing their passports, and then changing the terms of the deal.
This is 2009 - even in the 19th Century, only the South was sustained by slave labor.
wmw999 2,461
Comparing your country's present to another country's past is kind of chickenshit.
Wendy P.
Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)
rushmc 23
QuoteComparing your country's present to another country's past is kind of chickenshit.
Wendy P.
Now that's telling it like it is!!!!
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
rhys 0
o.k. we'll talk present;
you (USA) are slaughterng the civilians of a foreign countries in the name of a lie, the threat that is posed on you country was much less before the war on terror started.
now you are broke, and will have to try to sustain the idiocy and crime you have created in the middle east. democracy will not be installed, instead a haven for 'extremists' will be grown to an unprecedented level along with an unprecedentd level of hate towards your country from people that have all the right to hate you. They have lost control of their country, thier families (how would you feel?) and I do not blame them for hating you the way they do. you all talk about liberty and freedom yet you applaude the slaughter of innocent human beings and suggest it is O.K. because they 'may' pose a threat to you.
Remember 9/11 was not mastreminded by some cave dwelling family member of you ally. It was masterminded by members of your own country!
New Zealand on the other hand refused to assist the USA on the war on terror for 2 reasons;
1, it was an illegal war
2, It set a precedent for anyone to attack anyone they disliked and felt a threat.
If these reasons are considered unimportant by the USA then what is so wrong if someone comes and begins the slaughter of US citizens on US soil?
You idiots/assholes have created more trouble for this planet than you are willing to realise and it is the USA that is creating more hardship (for its own citizens and foreiners) than any other nation.
It is also making you all broke, while your 'leaders' get extremely rich!
better start learning mandarin!
Have you ever played 'risk' before?
you (USA) are slaughterng the civilians of a foreign countries in the name of a lie, the threat that is posed on you country was much less before the war on terror started.
now you are broke, and will have to try to sustain the idiocy and crime you have created in the middle east. democracy will not be installed, instead a haven for 'extremists' will be grown to an unprecedented level along with an unprecedentd level of hate towards your country from people that have all the right to hate you. They have lost control of their country, thier families (how would you feel?) and I do not blame them for hating you the way they do. you all talk about liberty and freedom yet you applaude the slaughter of innocent human beings and suggest it is O.K. because they 'may' pose a threat to you.
Remember 9/11 was not mastreminded by some cave dwelling family member of you ally. It was masterminded by members of your own country!
New Zealand on the other hand refused to assist the USA on the war on terror for 2 reasons;
1, it was an illegal war
2, It set a precedent for anyone to attack anyone they disliked and felt a threat.
If these reasons are considered unimportant by the USA then what is so wrong if someone comes and begins the slaughter of US citizens on US soil?
You idiots/assholes have created more trouble for this planet than you are willing to realise and it is the USA that is creating more hardship (for its own citizens and foreiners) than any other nation.
It is also making you all broke, while your 'leaders' get extremely rich!
better start learning mandarin!
Have you ever played 'risk' before?
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix
kallend 2,033
www.marketwatch.com/story/january-barometer-predicts-us-stock-gains-in-2010-2010-01-11?dist=beforebell
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Quote
New Zealand on the other hand refused to assist the USA on the war on terror for 2 reasons;
with 4M people, it's completely irrelevant.
No, the comparison was with Dubai, not NZ. And if we have to pick one, it's clear which one is better in any regard.
Lucky... 0
Quotewith 4M people, it's completely irrelevant.
Illustrative of the arrogance that makes the world hate us. If even symbolic, it's important to have the support of others.
At its peak in July 1942, New Zealand had 154,549 men and women under arms (excluding the Home Guard) and by the war's end a total of 194,000 men and 10,000 women had served in the armed forces at home and overseas. A total of 11,928 New Zealanders, or 0.73% of the 1939 population, lost their lives.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_New_Zealand_during_World_War_II
Yea, they were insignificant in WWII, a war they got behind; and what was their population then? See, American arrogance to minimize the sacrafice of others via ethnocentric views.
____________________________
MORE RESEARCH______
- 1940 population 1,637,300 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand
- 11,928 died in WWII
- .728% of Kiwi's died
- 1940 US population = 132,122,446 http://www.census.gov/popest/archives/1990s/popclockest.txt
- 416,000 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
Hell, that last graph did all the math for us:
USA rate of WWII casualty = .32%
New Zealand rate of WWII casualty = .73%
NEW ZEALAND HAD > TWICE THE RATE OF CASUALTY AND YOU HAVE THE FUCKING GALL TO UNDERMINE THEIR VOICE, THEIR PRESENCE IN WARS? DO YOU GET IT, EVEN A LITTLE?
So what you're saying is that even 60 years ago, in a war that has absolutely no bearing on today, they were still irrelevant.
"Ethnocentric views." Could I buy you a dictionary so you could get a clue? New Zealand consists primarily of European immigrants, biased towards England, just like the United States.
"Ethnocentric views." Could I buy you a dictionary so you could get a clue? New Zealand consists primarily of European immigrants, biased towards England, just like the United States.
hcsvader 1
2009 and was the best year I've ever had... so 2010 to 2011 I wont be working... or giving a shit about whats going on in the world... let me know how it works out for y'all
Have you seen my pants?
it"s a rough life, Livin' the dream
>:)
it"s a rough life, Livin' the dream
>:)
Lucky... 0
QuoteSo what you're saying is that even 60 years ago, in a war that has absolutely no bearing on today, they were still irrelevant.
You don't get it, the US lost fewer and a lower % of people per capita than many, mnay other countries, yet the US histopry books and guys like you still think we beat both Germany and Japan when in reality we beat Japan with help and we helped the USSR beat Germany. Italy was mutual and quick. What's next; the American Indians loved us? Love guys who write the history books based upon their egos rather than truth.
As for bearing on today, I was drawing a reference that you called them irrelevant today and established their relevance today as well as then; I'm sorry for you that you're unable to discern a parallel. If you want to try to understand what others mean by, "ugly American" just look at the words you're writing about an ally in one of the most relevant wars in world history, ours died next to theirs and you mock their importance. As far as I know, we've never had a disagreement with the Kiwi's and you call them irrelevant; see why Republicans make poor ambassadors?
Quote"Ethnocentric views." Could I buy you a dictionary so you could get a clue? New Zealand consists primarily of European immigrants, biased towards England, just like the United States.
1) New Zealand still has a significant Maori population, which is like Polynesian peoples. They celebrate Chinese New Year.
2) Your ideas about ethnocentricity are antiquated at best, actually just wrong
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethnocentric
- characterized by or based on the attitude that one's own group is superior
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethnocentric
- 1. Sociology. the belief in the inherent superiority of one's own ethnic group or culture.
- 2. a tendency to view alien groups or cultures from the perspective of one's own.
I understand your thinking is limited to white/black and that skin color determines ethnicity or that origin 100's of years ago means there will be no diversion from cultural ethnicity, I do understand Republican thinking as primordial. However, it is you who thinks ethnicity is determined by origin 100's of years ago as unchanging and that of skin color.
Since ethnicity is heavily tied to culture, are you going to say American ethnicity/culture is anything like New Zealand ethnicity/culture? Did the Kiwis oppress a race/races of people like the US did? NO. Do the Kiwis have such a depraved HC / social system that they selectively dole out who gets medical care? NO. You can't have it both ways; defame New Zealand for being so far out there and CULTURALLY DIFFERENT FOR HAVING CRADLE-TO-GRAVE, yet culturally the same, as part of their population derrived from the same place some of the US did 100's of years ago. Furthermore, blacks = 13% of the US as well as Mexican/Hispanics are the fastest growing demographic at 15+%, Asians at 4% and then others. So to say we are even racially European as a rule is yet another Republican falacy. But I won't stop you, as you think America runs the world. Your party's corporate love has assured that China rules the world.
rhys 0
Wow, your knowledge and acknowledgement of new zealand history astounds me.
One just has to look at the battle of Gallipoli (ww1) to see how a small population can make a big difference. if it wasn't for the drunken english officers i'm sure they would have had even more success.
You are also right about the corporate greed propping up chinas strength.
If US manufacturers had kept employing americans, and dare i say it, the government made sure they did so, then maybe america wouldn't be in the shit right now.
The neo con right wingers in here are strong advocates for corporatons doing as they please and anti government regulation, but can't seem to put 2 and 2 together about the unemployment problems the USA is facing.
Just because the US government is corrupt, does not mean that government regulation is a bad Idea, it just means USA needs to grow a spine and make thier leaders accountable for thier actions.
If my prime minister is in a car that is speeding, it is just as likely to get a speeding ticket than any other, just as much as if they buy a new home they will be askedwhere they got the money from.
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix
kallend 2,033
To get the thread back on topic, I'm waiting to see if an NFC or AFC team wins the Super Bowl before making any financial predictions for the year.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
QuoteQuoteSo what you're saying is that even 60 years ago, in a war that has absolutely no bearing on today, they were still irrelevant.
You don't get it, the US lost fewer and a lower % of people per capita than many, mnay other countries, yet the US histopry books and guys like you still think we beat both Germany and Japan when in reality we beat Japan with help and we helped the USSR beat Germany. Italy was mutual and quick. What's next; the American Indians loved us? Love guys who write the history books based upon their egos rather than truth.
No, you won't accept it. If FDR had accepted America's desire to avoid the war, we could have continued to supply oil to Japan and it would have taken the entire South Pacific. Then there would have been no attack on Pearl, no entrance into the European conflict.
If loss rate is your metric (you always pick lame ones), then the Polish Jews are probably #1. The vast majority died. But did they have any bearing on the conclusion of the war? Unfortunately, not a bit. Quantity matters much more.
Do you think Dubya stayed up at night, worried that the Kiwis weren't going to help in Iraq? He barely cared what the UN thought. NZ wasn't even an afterthought.
Quote
1) New Zealand still has a significant Maori population, which is like Polynesian peoples. They celebrate Chinese New Year.
So does San Francisco, which has more Chinese people than that entire country does. NZ is whiter than America.
Oh, and also, Kansas Representative Dennis Moore, who retired in November, will become a highwayman and steal everyone's lupines.
--------------------------------------------------
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites