Zeta

[QUOTE]Plain and simple, the majority of americans DON'T hate muslims, or have any dislike for them whatsoever. Most of the dislike is directed towards the middle east, but that doesn't mean we hate the middle east nor does it imply that we hate muslims.[/QUOTE] Yes my apologies, I should have said Middle East. >_> Yes there is a lot of dislike aimed towards the Middle East as you said, and as you said it doesn't mean we hate the Middle East. Why should se say that North Korea hates America if it is basically the same thing as our views on the M.E.? [QUOTE]Bad is such a weak word. They are taught that it is an evi, vile system as we were taught so about Communism during the cold war. It's not simply asked of the children. It is enforced.l[/QUOTE] How can they enforce it really? If one doesn't make their true views known then how can one know if they truly believe that it is a vile, evil system? There are some who do believe that, and some who will not believe it. With this we are using the majority rules based on what is seen on the surface. Basically juding a book by its cover if you will. So you can't say the [i]entire[/i] country hates America/capitalism.

Why on earth would you want to use majority rules on such a large number of people. I mean really, that is taking the rule way beyong its limits. I'm not buying the majority rules coming into play with an population of millions. You can't speak for everyone. That is like saying America hates Muslims, because a vast amount of people do hate them, or have strong dislike of them, but we don't say America hates Muslims. [QUOTE]ow, the general feeling of lots of people is set against America...but, luckily, in a passive manner. Now, are you going to disagree with that?[/QUOTE] Now that I agree with. You still can't speak for a majority of people in a country. You just don't know how many people dislike America, or like us. Judging by what I read on the CIA factbook, North Korea isn't doing to tell with its economy I believe it was. Now when they are taugh that Capitalism is bad and they see that their form of government is crap compared to the United States, I don't believe they will follow it, nor believe it.

[QUOTE]North Koreans are smart.[/QUOTE] Ok? Who cares, lol. The point I was making, which you obviously didn't get (I hope I am wrong here and you are being sarcastic) or you chose to ignore, is that just because you are taught something, doesn't mean you understand, follow, nor believe it. Majority rules it taking it a bit too far when talking about an entire country's populartion. I never said [i]none[/i] of them hated or disliked America. I just said I highly doubt an entire population dislikes us. The entire population of Iraq doesn't hate us, and if anything, they have justified reason to. I don't think you can speak for an entire population of 22,697,553, sorry.

[quote name='Morpheus']In North Korea, it is TAUGHT to hate capitalism.[/quote] Yeah? Well I am taught how to find the degree of angle theta in a right triangle and I don't know how to do it. Just because it is taught there, doesn't mean the entire country follows it. Sure some follow it, but I am not buying that every single person in the whole country follows that, lol.

I don't many places dislike America. I think they disagree with some of our choices, but there isn't dislike. But yes, there are places that do not like American, even then it is groups of people, not the country as a whole (at least I', not aware of a [i]whole[/i] country disliking us). I personally think we are doing the best we can at the moment. Some things we could have done different in the past, but otherwise I think we are doing all right. We've helped set up a democracy going in Afghanistan. And even though overall things look bad in Iraq, we have done quite a few good things nontheless.

Band of Brothers. Quite possibly the best thing to ever be shown on HBO. I still remember where I was and what I was doing when I watched the show when it first aired. Bought the book right after the first episode and read it in a day. HOpefully I can scrounge what money I have left to go and buy it, seeing as how I ddin't get it for Christmas. -_-

I loved the movie, probably because I am big on all things Roman, heh. I really loved the battle scenes. But yes, I do agree with you about Lancelot. And yes I also agree with you about Keira. Good in some movies, but didn't really fit her part in this movie, in my opinion at least.

[QUOTE]Honestly, if a serial rapist was on the loose, the government isn't going to allow people to start killing their daughters.[/QUOTE] I don't believe we said they would. Someone just said that it does occur, when you said it doesn't. [QUOTE]First of all, I have lived in the middle east before. I also have many arab friends who live there, or who visit it often. At least they know what is going on, so I do have sources of information. [/QUOTE] Things can change you know. I expect you will find a much different place than what you lived in. I see more people going against what is taught in your religion than do.*shrug* I am probably just not looking hard enough. But it again comes back to the few extremists painting a bad picture for the whole. Common sense. It happens in school, jobs, why can't it happen with religion? Look at the Crusades and the Inquisition(sp) in Spain. Christianity doesn't teach us that our religion is better, and that you should get rid of the Muslims(can't remember exactly who they were fought against >_>) Yet they said they were doing it in the name of God. Same thing with the Middle East. They believe they are doing it in the name of God. Obviously not following what is taught.

I live in Ball Ground. North of Alpharetta I think. I just moved here last April, so I don't know too much about cities and what not, lol. First I lived in...Cumming. :wigout: Then I moved to Ball Ground a few months later, but still attend the same school even though I am way out of district, heh.

You know the religion as it is supposed to be yes. But seeing as how you don't live in the Middle East, there is no way for you to know how it exactly is over there. Just because you are of the religion doesn't mean you know it. I say mosey on over there and you will see how different it is than what you have been preaching here. It comes down to one basic thing: Do the people over there follow what is taught verbatum(sp)? I highly doubt that. With all you say that the religion teaches, I do not see it happening over there.

I live in Georgia. One of the most boring places I have ever lived. I would much rather be back in Wisconsin, lol. And I live in the middle of nowhere. Nearest store (like a Target or something) is 45 minutes away. >_> People also hang out in the parking lot of a grocery store. -_-

You still haven't answered my question as to how they go about taking the weapons of the enemy. [QUOTE]The first day the U.S bombed Iraq, a civilian was killed. There really must have been a better way to carry out your first attack rather than just sending a missile to Iraq.[/QUOTE] You and others are asking way too much from our military. Sure they have equipment that helps minimize as much casualties, but it won't happen. If you can point me to a war without civilian casualties, please do. I will honor that military as having the perfect military without civilian casualties. Going about war in the way you advocate would take on helluva time to complete(pardon my language). We would have to go door to door, weed out the innocents from the "enemy". Impossible. You have much too much faith in technology. Sword, I am sure that they weren't entrenched [i]at[/i] the period, but probably in the general area. If I am wrong, my apologies. [QUOTE]We all know that no nation could stand up to the sheer numbers of the US troops, so why waste countless lives, not to mention dollers, by wasting Iraqi buildings and killing innocents? I don't see the use in it.[/QUOTE] If we ALL know that then why are they fighting against us? More enemy is killed than innocents. Give our military, hell any military, credit enough for that. No military is perfect, there will be civilian casualties no matter how hard they try to avoid them. We could just bomb every single building in every single town and achieve the same effect: putting a stop to the insurgents. Naturally we don't. Why? Because we are trying to avoid as many civilian casualties as possible.

I am curious about these peace keepers. How do they go about taking the weapons of the enemies away? If they found a way to take away enemy army weapons, I would be content with the US doing just that. And what if they fire upon you? Just forget about it and leave the weapons. I am sure the US would do just that if it were possible in these areas. But if the enemy is firing upon you, you aren't going to go in there without firing your weapon back. We tried to get UN inspectors to check for weapons in Iraq. Based on the evidence we had at the time we believe they did have them we attacked. I admit the evidence was greatly flawed, but there was no way for the President to know [i]at the time[/i] that it was flawed information. Yes I am saddened by the loss of ancient artifacts. I am a huge ancient history nerd. But aren't the insurgents fighting from ancient sites and among ancient buildings? If they are firing on US soldiers from there the soldiers are going to fight back. If anything blame should be put onto the insurgents for choosing such a place to attack from. We try to avoid such places as those. Innocent casualties are a part of war. Yes I am saddened by them, but it is something that should be expected.

In regards to the section of my previous post that was revised: To Boba I believe. You said something along the lines of "we shouldn't be the patrolman." Now if it isn't us, who should it be? There has to be someone who tries to bring a sense of order and stability to the world. If not, it will get other countries stuck in the state of mind that they can do whatever they want. And if countries are in that state of mind nuclear missles could be flying around. Doesn't it make sense that the one country who can bring countries out of that mindset be the one who can actually stand up to what they believe, or try to get countries out of that mindset. We sent aid to Western Europe after WWII. Without this aid they would have taken much longer to have gotten their war-torn economies off the ground. Communist nations could have sprung up all across Europe. We sent aid to Japan as well. Now look at western Euopre and Japan. Thriving countries. We sent aid there, and it was met without oppostion, and look what resulted. And again onto your point of protecting our interests and nothing more. That is a very greedy statement, in my mind at least. That is saying "you provide us with nothing, so we will leave you to your own devices." That will only tarnish the image of the US. There would only be a select few who get our aid, we would be picking favorites. The rest of the topic. [QUOTE]Same thing applies to suicide bombers. So it's their fault only that other palestinians get killed by the israeli soldiers? I think soldiers who fire into crowds of unarmed palestinians while they are merely protesting are at fault too? They are responsible for their own actions, the bombers didn't make them shoot at the crowds. Many of you simply shift all the blame to the bombers when it clearly isn't completely their fault. What they are completely at fault for are the bombings, not the killings of palestinians.[/QUOTE] If the suicide bombers hadn't of done what they did in the first place, they soldiers would have no need to attack them. I share the same views on this as James does (one side doing something, then the other side retaliating in a never ending circle). Well to make this post short, I will just say that my views are the same as James. *shrug* Saves me typing time and everyone reading time, lol.

Perhaps my using patrolman was a bit strong, my apologies. Watching out for our interests sounds a little bit greedy to me. That is exactly what Chabichou will have then said. We only look out for those that we have interests with? That in my mind is just plain greed. You see someone laying down in the street after having breaking their leg. You have no interest in them, but you are going to help them. It is the same thing with the country as a whole. If there is a country that is in the midst of a civil war, that peace-talks have not been able to settle and things are only getting worse, why shouldn't we help them? Boba, you know what I meant if someone attacked us. [i]We should try and work with other countries to mediate such disputes in other countries, or provide aid to those being oppressed if it comes to that. Stepping in militarily and telling another country how to run it's affairs is not only risky to our troops, but makes us look like a bully. [/i] We try to work with other countries. We tried to work with Iraq with the UN inspectors. We tried to work with the Taliban to hand over Bin Laden, we had a peace settlement going between Israel and Palestine. Obviously they didn't work out. We are trying to set up democracies in these countries. A government system that provides for the people and by the people to the best of it's ability. With us being the example for a working democracy of course bits and pieces of ways will get transfered over. I don't know about anyone else, but I would prefer deomcracy over some tyrant/dictator. [i]It's not our place. Pure and simple.[/i] Only helping countries with our interests is basically saying to countries that we don't try to help that they don't matter. EDIT: Removed a section to make it legible and easy to understand, will repost it a bit. [i]"rich idiots who want control of everything." Be careful what you say and think about that statement. Do you know any rich idiots who want control of everything? *cough*America*cough*[/i] If we wanted control of everything we wouldn't help other countries onto their feet. We would install our own leader and it will basically be a puppet government. And please, it is obvious what I meant by some rich idiot, someone who wants complete control of their country.

Correct me if I am wrong here, but don't all religions basically worshio God? But with just different names like, God, Allah, etc. So aren't they all the same in the way that they all end with one who has created everything, but with different names? My apologies if I am incorrect, not up to date with all religions here. I myself am a Christian. I believe in God but I do not go to church. I follow the words of a good friend of mine who said that as long as you believe in him, you are basically good to go, heh. When I am an adult I will of course go to church, but right now I do not have the money that it takes to drive there, nor do I have the time with all my school work and job.

No it doesn't give them the right to empty their weapons into children. But does that give the Palestinians the right to suicide innocents? Neither is right. You can chose to believe all that you said in your second post if you so desire. I never said such a thing, nor will I ever. Not all Palestinians are terrorists. Not all Israeli's are innocent (which I said in your other topic). Why should the Israeli's treat the Palestinians any different than the Palestinian treat them? *shrug* I don't see the logic. It is a never ending circle on placing the blame on someone else, so I won't go there. But what I am saying is that the Palestinians are wrong in their claim of Israeli land. The land of Canaan was LATER named after the Philistines, that came from Aisa Minor. The Israeli's had to band together and form the Kingdom of Israel to fend off the Philistines. The banded together to protect their land from the Philistines (later became known as Palestinians) so in all technicality, the Palestinians took land from the Israeli's long before moder times. With that in mind it is exactly what you said the Palestinians are claiming to do, the Israeli's are fighting to protect their land.

[QUOTE=Chabichou][COLOR=#004a6f]Notice that you left the first part of my sentence out. I said [B]"none of these soldiers are innocent,[/B] and quite frankly I'm happy when they die". You also ignore the fact that they kill civilians on purpose. Why do all you keep denying that? THEY KILL CIVILIANS ON PUROPOSE AND [B]THAT'S NO LIE[/B]! Okay? Why are you all so blind to that fact? I don't care what they say to defend themseleves. They're lying. Here's a link:[url]http://www.ifamericansknew.com/cur_sit/child-killed.html[/url] and another:[url]http://www.ifamericansknew.com/cur_sit/child-shield.html[/url] And you choose to support them. When there are people already there and are kicked out of there homes, I think that qualifies as stealing the land. As for history, ancient Arab tribes lived there thousands of years before. This land has been conquored many times by many different people and the last people to live in it were Arabs before Israel was created. The British had a mandate on the land because they planned to give it to the Jews. You don't have a good enough argument saying that it was right for them to destroy the home of my grandfather. He was there first, not them. .[/COLOR][/QUOTE] Palestinians kill Israeli civilians on purpose too. [i]VI.iv.2. From Heroöpolis [modern Abu-Keyschid, near modern Suez City], situated in that recess of the Arabian Gulf which is on the side of the Nile, to Babylon, towards Petra of the Nabataei, are 5600 stadia. The whole tract lies in the direction of the summer solstice (i.e., east and west), and passes through the adjacent Arabian tribes, namely Nabataei, Chaulotaei, and Agraei [in the modern An-Nafud desert, along on the borders of present Jordan, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia]. Above these people is Arabia Felix, stretching out 12,000 stadia towards the south to the Atlantic Sea. [/i] [url]http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/arabia1.html[/url] Look at a map and see where the areas around Jordan, Syria and Saudi Arabia is. Doesn't look like the land of Israel to me. As I said, the land didn't belong to the Palestinians. The Palestinians are fighting for their so called land, not the Arabs. Sure the Palestinians may be Arabs, but it is not the Arabs fighting for their land, only the Palestinians. Once the whole of the Arab popularion (the Arabs who resided in modern day Israel, not the Philistines (The Volume Library 1) or know today as the Palestinians will their actions be just. The land never belonged to Palestinians themselves. I never said it was right to destroy your grandfathers home. Please point me to my saying that. What I said is that the land never belong to the Palestinians. Even if they were the last to "own" the land, it was taken from the Jews who unified the area into a country. And when you unify the land into a country, it becomes recognized as your land. The Arabs didn't have a problem with this then? Why do they now. Greed is the answer in my mind. Of course we ally ourselves with a country that is stable and can cause us economic growth. Why would we ally ourselves with a country that would hurt us? We don't ignore other countries plights, please point me to one of these instances. We try to get peace between the Palestinians and Israeli's, we tried to bring an end to a Civil War in Somalia that was devasting the population, we helped bring Germany and Japan back from a devastating war and succeeded(sp?). And right now we are trying to get things right in Iraq, and I will admit it is not going too well at the moment. But hey, nothing in this life comes easy. edit: As Kane would say, Intersting, most interesting. (always wanted to say that ^_^; ) The Volume Library 1, page 989 "About 1800 B.C., during a time of faime, their (the Hebrews also called Jews and Israelites) partriach Abraham led them away from the city of Ur in Sumer northwestard to the land of Canaan...But then a new and more powerful enemy appeared, the Philistines, a non-Semitic people who had been driven out of Asia Minor and settled in southwest Palestine. (in fact the name Palestine derives from them)" Very interesting. I can make a copy of the page if anyone so desires.

[QUOTE=Break][color=darkorchid]After you completely ****** them up, yes. I just think America should stop being the ******* patrolman of the world, it is annoying a lot of people. Why does it feel the need to do this? Because it has the world's resources, the world's finances, and the world's population under its control.[/color][/QUOTE] [i]We[/i] didn't **** them up. They did it themselves. They brought a war to the Pacific and brought trouble to their economy. They are the ones who had their economy pump out tanks and rifles to attack China, the US, and British in the Pacific. That is what happens in war time. Economies crumble, which is exactly what happened. Again, imagine if we hadn't of used the bomb. That would be a country left wtihout millions of people because they were going to fight to the death. We destroyed TWO cities people, two cities. That minimized the casualties on both sides overall. We didn't screw them up. Palease. If we aren't the patrolman who will be? The Romans were the patrolman in their times. THe British were the patrolman during their reign. Why should we be any different? We feel the need to help better civilization across the world. And when people decide to attack us for it is their own fault that something may happen to them. We don't like to see children starving on the street due to a civil war between the people and some rich idiots who want control of everything. We try to help others people. We try to bring order to the world so a small conflict doesn't explode and turn into World War III.

[QUOTE=Sword Breaker]Zeta, the only reason that Muslims tend to be the suicide bombers more often is probably caused because people like Osama Bin Laden have no law to stop them from recruiting an army of easily impressionable young kids, who just happen to be Muslims, and breeds anti-Americanisim into their lives. He probably uses the Islamic religion as another tool in brainwashing, but it doesn't mean that your Muslim nieghbor could show up one day at your doorstep, bomb in hand, and blow yuo up simply because Allah told them to! No, it's all the work of megelomaniacs who go unopposed in MIddle Eastern nations, and take advantage of young people. Oh, and yes, I wouldn't consider Isreal an illegal nation, more of a soveriegn (SP?) nation, granted to the Jewish people by the UN, and, thus, was in fact stolen from the Arabian people, because they did not agree with it being created. I can very much imagin why the Arabian nations are pissed, hell, if somone came into myt yard, put a fence around my forest, and said "This is mine, cause the owls need it!" I'd say,"Hey, know what? I don't give a **** bout' the owls, you stole from me, and I'm gonna take it back!" Now, don't get me wrong, I belive that the Jews deserved to recive a referation from their grief during WWII, but they should have worked somthing out with Arabian people first.[/QUOTE] Exactly. It isn't the entire religion, it is the select few. And I repeat it is the select few that lead us to believe they are all bad. I know the next door neighbor won't, but there is the possibility it could happen. It is the select few that bring our views about. I know it isn't the religion as a whole, just the extremists, which I have all ready said. Yes it will be quite different because the extremists have a LARGE impact on what we see and believe. As Boba said, bad news is good news. And the fact that the extremists do many bad things only brings those things to light. I bring up suicide bombers Chanichou because you see the need to bring up your beliefs that Israel has taken land from Palestinians when they haven't. They came from Aisa Minor, much farther to the north. They are fighting over the wrong land if they should be fighting at all. They have no right to the land based upon history so don't say they do. Their land is in Aisa Minor, more around modern day Turkey. The land belongs to the Israeli's, deal with it, there is nothing that you can do.

The idea that Muslims hate America is the fact that they attack us any chance they get, more than any other religious group as far as I am aware. How many Cathloics run into a crowded market strapped with a bomb? Muslims are painted in a bad light because they are the ones who do that. Blame the "select few", not our media. If they didn't do that, we would have no reason to report anything of the sort. How is Israel an illegal nation? The land never belonged to Palestinians, it was just name Palestine. It belonged to the Hebrews who founded the Kingdom of Israel long before Palestinians came. Palestinians aren't even from Palestine, they are from Asia Minor. (The Volume Library 1, page 986)

[QUOTE=Chabichou][COLOR=#004A6F] How about when America poses sanctions on other countries? How about when America tries to prevent other countries like Korea from developing nuclear weopons when they themselves have nuclear weapons? How about when America thinks it's above the U.N rules and wants to use landmines in Korea even though they are banned by international law? How about when America uses depleted Uranium, when it's also banned, and has led many Iraqi babies to be born deformed? And what good has America done in Japan? How can wiping out two cities each in a matter of seconds be regarded as good? Japanese people are still suffering today form radiation posioning. None of that is "helping" these countries. Although America has done many good things, like aiding third world countries or even saving the people of a country form cruel leaders, as they do sometimes in Arab countries, why do they always end up killing innocent muslims in the process? Why should the general Arab and Muslim population suffer because of what their corrupt governments do? Haha, but they don't belong to America, they aren't on American land, so it doesn't have the right to start wars to take them. I'm pretty sure that America, having the best economy and being the richest nation on earth, doesn't need these resources as much as these countries do.[/COLOR][/QUOTE] Oh palease! Look at Japan now. There was a time when we let them into our factories and took pictures so that they could do the same back home. We eventually stopped allowing them in because they were just as good as us, if not better. The atomic bomb attacks were bad yes. But look at the good in the country now. Look how thriving it is. Think before you say something. Sure they don't belong to America, but we need them just as much if not more. Look at the size of America, you cut off our oil, we are basically a fish out of water. We need oil just as much as any other country. More than other countries because of our size. I thought for sure that was common sense. Again, the bad Muslims paint a bad picture for the whole. Many people only hear about the bad things so they make judgements based on that. Wrong I know. Same thing with Goths, a few psychos considered Goth shoot up a school and everyone else thinks others are the same. Again blame the extremists for engraving the picture into our minds. I believe we went into Somalia did we not? And as far as I am aware there is not a lot of oil at all, if any. Mogadishu. See Black Hawk Down or read the book. See Vietnam. Korea. The Balkans (can't remember exactly the name of that whole time, something in Yugoslavia or something). We do go into other places where there is civil unrest, with or without oil. You see and hear what you want to. If you don't know about other actions it is your own ignorance.

Look at Iraq. Sure there are trouble now, but when things get straightened out it will be much better. They will have a ruler that the people want, not someone who declared himself President for life and gases his own people. The reason why there are such views about Muslims because they do bring it on themselves. How are they going to accomplish anything with their actions? It is the action of a few that ruin it for the rest. If you want to blame anyone, blame the suicide bombers and extremists, not Americans. We "stick our noses" in other peoples business to help them. Hell, things could get so out of hand that another World War could break out, we don't know. Look at all the good we did in Germany and Japan. If people could just see that they could be just as well off and have a good country in which to live in. Our "grubby" hands are on their resources because we need them just as much as you do. Throughout history there has been a group of countries that are big enough to lend aid to those countries in need, without those who is there to help anyone? We don't police the world with our army, we lend aid when it is needed. Without that many, many things would be much more out of hand. We would get out of other countries if they can actually take care of themselves. Unfortunately (in my mind at least) many of them are not to that point. The fact that they bomb innocent people is just one occurance that hinders my ability to think they can.

But seriously people, who honestly [i]wants[/i] to die? No one wants to die. Being put to death is not an easy release for him or anyone for that matter. People do not want to die, and the fact that they will be losing their life is punishment enough until it actually happens. It isn't easy living with the fact that you are going to be getting put to death.

Which is exactly why many people don't get released from prison Boba, least the ones that do horrible crimes. And anyways, as was all ready stated, many don't even get to the electric chair, injection, etc. They just die in their anyways.