Verified:

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 23rd 2014, 19:28:43

Originally posted by mrford:


this wont go anywhere, have fun with your bigotry and hatred, something you displayed in your last post with terms like "redneck" thanks for proving my point. this thread is about ISIS's problems, not yours. maybe one day you will learn to attack an argument instead of a person.


Lol - rich. I called you redneck because you really trully are one. But i called you a redneck just after you said 10 insults at my person.

"slander", "biggotry", " hateful little fluff" ... ++.

And you yet build your case about an inoffensive "redneck" insult. You know that for me you will always remain a redneck addicted to guns. But i didn't call you a rather average idiot with doubtful morals, mean, heartless, sometimes with nazy tendencies that thinks that he`s the "center" of the universe, yet.


Edited By: Alin on Sep 23rd 2014, 19:35:51

blid

Member
EE Patron
9319

Sep 23rd 2014, 19:38:52

Originally posted by mrford:
Originally posted by blid:
Originally posted by mrford:
Originally posted by blid:
i assume the end-goal is to place western-friendly govts in these states, you know like our good friends the genocidal israelis and the corrupt and backwards saudis, and we'll just keep arming rebels and bombing people until we succeed, in order to grab strategic geographic influence and to maintain western hegemony against china/russia etc


i can already see you are completely objective in your methods. carry on communist!
say what you want about my ideology, you have to agree that that's a perfectly realistic motivation for these military campaigns


plausible? maybe. likely? hardly. although ill admit i would be more inclined to agree with you if you didnt use descriptive words like genocidal and backwards. those are hyperbolic phrases that kill rational credibility.

you, as many others, have a hyper capable viewpoint of the government. they make mistakes, they act irrationally, just like any other organisation from your local police force to a fortune 500 company.

maybe you are right, and the illuminati are all around us!
also, invoking the "illuminati" because i said the west does things in its strategic interest is just asinine. that's the LEAST conspiracy-addled view possible.
Originally posted by Mr. Titanium:
Watch your mouth boy, I have never been accused of cheating on any server nor deleted before you just did right there.

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 23rd 2014, 19:43:11

Originally posted by blid:
Originally posted by mrford:
Originally posted by blid:
Originally posted by mrford:
Originally posted by blid:
i assume the end-goal is to place western-friendly govts in these states, you know like our good friends the genocidal israelis and the corrupt and backwards saudis, and we'll just keep arming rebels and bombing people until we succeed, in order to grab strategic geographic influence and to maintain western hegemony against china/russia etc


i can already see you are completely objective in your methods. carry on communist!
say what you want about my ideology, you have to agree that that's a perfectly realistic motivation for these military campaigns


plausible? maybe. likely? hardly. although ill admit i would be more inclined to agree with you if you didnt use descriptive words like genocidal and backwards. those are hyperbolic phrases that kill rational credibility.

you, as many others, have a hyper capable viewpoint of the government. they make mistakes, they act irrationally, just like any other organisation from your local police force to a fortune 500 company.

maybe you are right, and the illuminati are all around us!

bwah? how, when i say they are targeting regimes they dont like and most of the time they fluff up and end up destabilizing the region for the worse but that they either are incompetent or just dontcare, am i attrubting "hyper capable" powers to the govt?


you did not state the last part of this most recent post in your previous post, it changes the tone a bit. regardless, the US is clearly pursuing its own interests, i doubt anyone will argue with that. but some have implied in this thread that it is all about oil, and in the case of ISIS, it really isnt. there is a pervaying view among a lot of people that the US government is some sort of puppet master playing other countries behind the scenes in some movie like evil plot. that is what i was referring to. if you are not in that demographic, then i apologize.

maybe im guilty of grouping you in with others in this thread, but you used verbiage that caused me to do so.

Edited By: mrford on Sep 23rd 2014, 19:45:42
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

blid

Member
EE Patron
9319

Sep 23rd 2014, 19:44:47

i said it in the post before that one, which you apparently didnt read
Originally posted by blid:

it doesnt matter if it's bush or obama in power, america is imperialist fluffers who decide they dont like a govt and destablize/overthrow it and then consistently end up facing something worse. i dont know if US policymakers are complete idiots or if the resulting chaos is also perfectly acceptable to their agenda.
so you skimmed/skipped that post and then accused me of seeing the US gov't as hyper capable... hehe...
Originally posted by Mr. Titanium:
Watch your mouth boy, I have never been accused of cheating on any server nor deleted before you just did right there.

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 23rd 2014, 19:46:57

i believe that post was made as i was wasting my time responding to one of Alin's and is probably why i missed it.

probably a simple misunderstanding.
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Trife Game profile

Member
5817

Sep 23rd 2014, 19:48:37

in alin's defense

if i am labeled a libtard, then mrford, a redneck label is quite fitting for you, imho

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 23rd 2014, 19:50:24

oh, im proudly a redneck. but i wont have someone who is hateful and ignorant using it as a derogatory word because they lack the capacity or desire to understand.
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 23rd 2014, 19:51:48

I still have a hard time figuring if blid is a communist or not. Might be the barrier of my language or mrford`s brain one.

Man and seeing him using words like hateful and ignorant is just rich... I can make a 5 rows resume of his person using his own words in this thread, only.

Edited By: Alin on Sep 23rd 2014, 19:55:42

Pang Game profile

Administrator
Game Development
5731

Sep 23rd 2014, 20:12:47

can we get more discussion on topic rather than on people's validity to discuss the subject? heh

For instance, it's been my opinion that there is a vested interest for the rest of the world to keep the middle east ablaze/divided. it's been that way since the collapse of the Ottoman empire. that makes it easier for foreign powers (or companies, now-a-days) to exert their influence over the region without a ton of local oversight.

I always try to look at people's actions or inactions through that prism
-=Pang=-
Earth Empires Staff
pangaea [at] earthempires [dot] com

Boxcar - Earth Empires Clan & Alliance Hosting
http://www.boxcarhosting.com

Heston Game profile

Member
4766

Sep 23rd 2014, 20:22:10

Originally posted by Alin:
@Heston.

When people run out of arguments with me it all resumes to "my english". Sure is not perfect - specially written from a stupid tablet, but i suppose is readable enough. Don`t use that as an excuse - others have tried and failed miserably often. English is actually my 3rd.

Furthermore, what is your purpose in this thread than ? When i told you are a retard, i based my statement on some facts. All you are doing here is to give more strength to my point of view.


How does one argue with someone that admittingly know nothing about whats being discussed in a thread. Your english is good enough to understand, but it sucks. Just like your knowledge on current events and how you come to you opinions. I guess through osmosis you obtain the wealth of information you store in your pea brain.
You expect to debate on these terms? Its not about your opinion, its about you not knowing fluff. Im not alone in this line of thought.
Nice touch throwing a reference to sof here. fluffing retard. Lol
Christ you are predictable.

Edited By: Heston on Sep 23rd 2014, 20:24:37
See Original Post
❤️️Nothing but❤️️💯❤️️❤️️🌺🌸🌹❤️❤️💯

blid

Member
EE Patron
9319

Sep 23rd 2014, 20:25:50

well it's clear, it's overtly clear, that we're trying to put our hand picked ppl in charge in these states... we're trying to install friendly regimes in the region, regimes that will be 'open for business' (oil etc) and military partners and so on. that's why, despite saudi arabia being a deeply repressive undemocratic kingdom - where most of the 9/11 hijackers came from btw -, we don't intervene, because they are cooperative with us and are our friends over there. and israel is our greatest friend, despite the violence and aparatheid they reign over in israel and the occupied territories.

it's no secret whatsoever that saddam hussein was not a friend of the US or the west. same for qaddafi (although he had been compromising somewhat at the time before his overthrow). same for assad, who is more in russia's sphere of influence. therefore, we overthrow these regimes or sponsor their overthrow, either ignorant of the consequences or without care of the consequences. obviously funding and arming "moderate rebels" (whoever heard of moderate rebels) often ended up assisting isis and they ended up with US-made weapons. the fighting of those we sponsored against the assad regime is a major reason why syria's government wasn't able to stop isis from grabbing power in some regions of the country.

whether that was purely our own incompetence and short-sightedness or not is really the only thing that's hard to figure. did we sincerely believe it would work? despite what happened in iraq and libya? and we're just that incompetent? maybe. did we sincerely HOPE it would work out, but not really care either way? that's possible too... i mean thanks to isis emerging and beheading a couple of westerners we now are politically able to get more directly involved in syria; we are now bombing syria when previously we couldn't get political support for that despite wanting to.
Originally posted by Mr. Titanium:
Watch your mouth boy, I have never been accused of cheating on any server nor deleted before you just did right there.

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 23rd 2014, 20:27:33

Im not alone in this line of thought.


You and mrford are really like Beavis and Butthead. Otherwise, altought is in plain pure english, your text is lame at best.

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 23rd 2014, 20:33:14

Originally posted by blid:
well it's clear, it's overtly clear, that we're trying to put our hand picked ppl in charge in these states... we're trying to install friendly regimes in the region, regimes that will be 'open for business' (oil etc) and military partners and so on. that's why, despite saudi arabia being a deeply repressive undemocratic kingdom - where most of the 9/11 hijackers came from btw -, we don't intervene, because they are cooperative with us and are our friends over there. and israel is our greatest friend, despite the violence and aparatheid they reign over in israel and the occupied territories.

it's no secret whatsoever that saddam hussein was not a friend of the US or the west. same for qaddafi (although he had been compromising somewhat at the time before his overthrow). same for assad, who is more in russia's sphere of influence. therefore, we overthrow these regimes or sponsor their overthrow, either ignorant of the consequences or without care of the consequences. obviously funding and arming "moderate rebels" (whoever heard of moderate rebels) often ended up assisting isis and they ended up with US-made weapons. the fighting of those we sponsored against the assad regime is a major reason why syria's government wasn't able to stop isis from grabbing power in some regions of the country.

whether that was purely our own incompetence and short-sightedness or not is really the only thing that's hard to figure. did we sincerely believe it would work? despite what happened in iraq and libya? and we're just that incompetent? maybe. did we sincerely HOPE it would work out, but not really care either way? that's possible too... i mean thanks to isis emerging and beheading a couple of westerners we now are politically able to get more directly involved in syria; we are now bombing syria when previously we couldn't get political support for that despite wanting to.


maybe you are thinking too short term, or maybe im thinking too long term. it definitely isnt an overnight solution to factions that have been fighting for thousands of years. history will ultimately be the only judge of these last 2 decades, but i affirm that we need to keep at it. It is more of a damned if you do damned if you dont situation. Let a dictator that is against you remain in power, with the resources and support to actually carry out attacks in the region, or destroy the government and deal with a decade of localized fighting and religious extremists blaming the west for all their problems until another regime surfaces?

neither situation is favorable, but if you intervene atleast you have a chance at coming out ontop, more of a chance than negotiating with a dictator more concerned with keeping his own people inline than foreign policy. i dont really see many other options. letting things just play out for the next 20 years would even be worse imo.
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 23rd 2014, 20:33:40

Originally posted by blid:
well it's clear, it's overtly clear, that we're trying to put our hand picked ppl in charge in these states... we're trying to install friendly regimes in the region, regimes that will be 'open for business' (oil etc) and military partners and so on. that's why, despite saudi arabia being a deeply repressive undemocratic kingdom - where most of the 9/11 hijackers came from btw -, we don't intervene, because they are cooperative with us and are our friends over there. and israel is our greatest friend, despite the violence and aparatheid they reign over in israel and the occupied territories.

it's no secret whatsoever that saddam hussein was not a friend of the US or the west. same for qaddafi (although he had been compromising somewhat at the time before his overthrow). same for assad, who is more in russia's sphere of influence. therefore, we overthrow these regimes or sponsor their overthrow, either ignorant of the consequences or without care of the consequences. obviously funding and arming "moderate rebels" (whoever heard of moderate rebels) often ended up assisting isis and they ended up with US-made weapons. the fighting of those we sponsored against the assad regime is a major reason why syria's government wasn't able to stop isis from grabbing power in some regions of the country.

whether that was purely our own incompetence and short-sightedness or not is really the only thing that's hard to figure. did we sincerely believe it would work? despite what happened in iraq and libya? and we're just that incompetent? maybe. did we sincerely HOPE it would work out, but not really care either way? that's possible too... i mean thanks to isis emerging and beheading a couple of westerners we now are politically able to get more directly involved in syria; we are now bombing syria when previously we couldn't get political support for that despite wanting to.


This is the type of open mind american that will always understand what is going on and you(as a rather neutral outsider) will always have a line of discussion with him about anything that is going on in this world. Because he sees further than the walls of fluffy propaganda he is served every day. His view over the events is correct and accurate.

blid

Member
EE Patron
9319

Sep 23rd 2014, 20:35:57

you notice that despite isis being so evil and dangerous and so on and so on, we're still refusing to ally with the assad gov't in putting them down. what does that tell you about our priorities
Originally posted by Mr. Titanium:
Watch your mouth boy, I have never been accused of cheating on any server nor deleted before you just did right there.

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 23rd 2014, 20:40:47

im not sure what you are getting at here, but i agree with you that the US dictated that assad had to go. now weather it was because he didnt like us, aligned with russia, or the human rights violations, you can pick your reasoning.

in addition, Assad regime supports ISIS no? i remember reading that most of current ISIS leadership was released from jail by the regime. maybe i read incorrectly.

Edited By: mrford on Sep 23rd 2014, 20:42:47
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Trife Game profile

Member
5817

Sep 23rd 2014, 20:47:37

Originally posted by mrford:
Assad regime supports ISIS no?


No.

It's more like a free for all. SAA vs. FSA/AN vs. ISIS

Beavis

Member
53

Sep 23rd 2014, 20:49:34

Originally posted by Alin:
Im not alone in this line of thought.


You and mrford are really like Beavis and Butthead. Otherwise, altought is in plain pure english, your text is lame at best.


No. Ford and i are not alike. Ford resents that.

blid

Member
EE Patron
9319

Sep 23rd 2014, 20:49:45

if it's "human rights violations" why are we fine with saudi arabia? qatar? etc. "human rights violations" is almost always an excuse, a veneer to put on an internvetion to earn domestic or international acceptance.

isis is trying to take over parts of syria, so of course assad doesn't support isis. he is battling them and the smaller faction of "moderate rebels" to attempt to restore order to syria.
Originally posted by Mr. Titanium:
Watch your mouth boy, I have never been accused of cheating on any server nor deleted before you just did right there.

lolz

New Member
2

Sep 23rd 2014, 20:50:06

lolz

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 23rd 2014, 20:54:00

Originally posted by blid:
if it's "human rights violations" why are we fine with saudi arabia? qatar? etc. "human rights violations" is almost always an excuse, a veneer to put on an internvetion to earn domestic or international acceptance.

isis is trying to take over parts of syria, so of course assad doesn't support isis. he is battling them and the smaller faction of "moderate rebels" to attempt to restore order to syria.


you cant fix all the human rights violations at once? fluff if i know.

from a pure tactical point of view, you try to fix the countries that dont like you before you fix the ones that do. Also, from a purely uninformed guess, i would assume the violations in syria were worse than the saudis. saudis are more freedom and equality violations, not right to life like in syria and some other african nations the UN is intervening in. even if not, at least they are letting in western culture. maybe mcdonalds and justin beiber can pascify them.
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

blid

Member
EE Patron
9319

Sep 23rd 2014, 21:06:07

Originally posted by mrford:
Originally posted by blid:
if it's "human rights violations" why are we fine with saudi arabia? qatar? etc. "human rights violations" is almost always an excuse, a veneer to put on an internvetion to earn domestic or international acceptance.

isis is trying to take over parts of syria, so of course assad doesn't support isis. he is battling them and the smaller faction of "moderate rebels" to attempt to restore order to syria.


you cant fix all the human rights violations at once? fluff if i know.

from a pure tactical point of view, you try to fix the countries that dont like you before you fix the ones that do. Also, from a purely uninformed guess, i would assume the violations in syria were worse than the saudis. saudis are more freedom and equality violations, not right to life like in syria and some other african nations the UN is intervening in. even if not, at least they are letting in western culture. maybe mcdonalds and justin beiber can pascify them.
you dont even hear the phrase "human rights violations" thrown around if the organs of power don't want you to.

for example, after the 'arab spring,' the egyptian people democratically elected the muslim brotherhood, yes? then there were some protests against them and the egyptian military overthrew the elected government, executing a coup d'etat and taking power. they rounded up MB officials and jailed them and tried them with crimes, they fired on and brutalized MB supporters when *they* were protesting in the streets. we don't hear about "human rights" then though... instead we hear the term used in reference to libya and qaddafi, when he's fighting against an armed rebellion in his country, or assad, etc. it's funny when people frame what qaddafi or assad does as "slaughtering their own people." have you heard that phrase? ive heard it a ton. would be funny to read about the US civil war in that light. abraham lincoln slaughtering hundreds of thousands of his own people! and so on...
Originally posted by Mr. Titanium:
Watch your mouth boy, I have never been accused of cheating on any server nor deleted before you just did right there.

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 23rd 2014, 21:14:57

in regards to the US civil war, you arnt acknowledging the paradigm shift in the value of human life in the western world over the last 60 years or so, especially in regards to civilians. A lot of this shift can probably be attributed to widely avaliable coverace of world events and graphic images of war avaliable to everyone almost immediately. look at japan and WWII re: US firebombings and the Japanese occupation of China. and now the Iraq war where 4,500 US casualties and 100,000-200,000 Iraqi is an absurd number over 10 years, especially since saddam wasnt exactly great in the human rights arena either. Im not going to argue the merit of those numbers in regards to what should or should not have happened, it isnt my point. still, it was close enough of an analogy for your point to be made i suppose lol. it is a different argument entirely, the value of human life vs conflict.

you are bordering on conspiracy theories though. i agree that government uses key terms to rally public support, but the human rights violations in egypt were well documented. It is a tactic used by anyone rallying support to their cause, even companies like Apple and BP practice it. I suppose the game changes when you are talking about human life and war though huh? fair enough.

Egypt wasnt an immediate threat is the only real excuse i can come up with. you wont see me here praising the government for consistency, honor, and philanthropy, but im not going to throw them under the bus for things they did in good faith in addition to serving their own agenda. they will always be accused of having an alternate adgenda by their opponents. It isnt all about the oil, but i will agree with you that it is usually about power and aligning leaders with our goals.

Edited By: mrford on Sep 23rd 2014, 21:24:44
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 23rd 2014, 21:24:17

Originally posted by blid:
Originally posted by mrford:
Originally posted by blid:
if it's "human rights violations" why are we fine with saudi arabia? qatar? etc. "human rights violations" is almost always an excuse, a veneer to put on an internvetion to earn domestic or international acceptance.

isis is trying to take over parts of syria, so of course assad doesn't support isis. he is battling them and the smaller faction of "moderate rebels" to attempt to restore order to syria.


you cant fix all the human rights violations at once? fluff if i know.

from a pure tactical point of view, you try to fix the countries that dont like you before you fix the ones that do. Also, from a purely uninformed guess, i would assume the violations in syria were worse than the saudis. saudis are more freedom and equality violations, not right to life like in syria and some other african nations the UN is intervening in. even if not, at least they are letting in western culture. maybe mcdonalds and justin beiber can pascify them.
you dont even hear the phrase "human rights violations" thrown around if the organs of power don't want you to.

for example, after the 'arab spring,' the egyptian people democratically elected the muslim brotherhood, yes? then there were some protests against them and the egyptian military overthrew the elected government, executing a coup d'etat and taking power. they rounded up MB officials and jailed them and tried them with crimes, they fired on and brutalized MB supporters when *they* were protesting in the streets. we don't hear about "human rights" then though... instead we hear the term used in reference to libya and qaddafi, when he's fighting against an armed rebellion in his country, or assad, etc. it's funny when people frame what qaddafi or assad does as "slaughtering their own people." have you heard that phrase? ive heard it a ton. would be funny to read about the US civil war in that light. abraham lincoln slaughtering hundreds of thousands of his own people! and so on...


Wow - i rarely am silent on this forum, but that just put a complete gag on my keyboard.

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 23rd 2014, 21:27:42

It isnt all about the oil, but i will agree with you that it is usually about power and aligning leaders with our goals.


Read your comments on the first page regarding oil and other interests and the fact that (and i quote you) this time is not about the oil or other interests. You surely change your opinion often when you get pawned big style ...

blid

Member
EE Patron
9319

Sep 23rd 2014, 21:28:58

Originally posted by mrford:
in regards to the US civil war, you arnt acknowledging the paradigm shift in the value of human life in the western world over the last 60 years or so, especially in regards to civilians. look at japan and WWII re: US firebombings and the Japanese occupation of China. and now the Iraq war where 4,500 US casualties and 100,000-200,000 Iraqi is an absurd number over 10 years. Im not going to argue the merit of those numbers in regards to what should or should not have happened, it isnt my point. still, it was close enough of an analogy for your point to be made i suppose lol.

you are bordering on conspiracy theories though. i agree that government uses key terms to rally public support, but the human rights violations in egypt were well documented. It is a tactic used by anyone rallying support to their cause, even companies like Apple and BP practice it. I suppose the game changes when you are talking about human life and war though huh? fair enough.

Egypt wasnt an immediate threat is the only real excuse i can come up with. you wont see me here praising the government for consistency, honor, and philanthropy, but im not going to throw them under the bus for things they did in good faith in addition to serving their own agenda. they will always be accused of having an alternate adgenda by their opponents. It isnt all about the oil, but i will agree with you that it is usually about power and aligning leaders with our goals.
the other thing is i guess you can say when the US overthrows saddam hussein or what have you, "well, they're acting in their own interest, why wouldnt they, who can blame them." but then you look at the immense human cost, the 3-5m people displaced in the iraq war, the million killed, the loss of infrastructure and living conditions, and you start questioning, well, just because it's in our interest (or attempting to be in our interest... whether it actually succeeds at that is up for debate)... can that really make it right
http://web.mit.edu/humancostiraq/
Originally posted by Mr. Titanium:
Watch your mouth boy, I have never been accused of cheating on any server nor deleted before you just did right there.

Beavis

Member
53

Sep 23rd 2014, 21:29:29

The gawddamn muslim religion is a huge problem right now for the world. I dont give two fluff how they live or what they do, so long as i dont have to be effected in any way. Political correctness is tyranny with manners.
For fluffs sake, there is a wealth of oil in that region that would be the cherry on top of wiping out the threat. Why say thats a bad thing? Reap what you sow?

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 23rd 2014, 21:39:14

Originally posted by blid:
Originally posted by mrford:
in regards to the US civil war, you arnt acknowledging the paradigm shift in the value of human life in the western world over the last 60 years or so, especially in regards to civilians. look at japan and WWII re: US firebombings and the Japanese occupation of China. and now the Iraq war where 4,500 US casualties and 100,000-200,000 Iraqi is an absurd number over 10 years. Im not going to argue the merit of those numbers in regards to what should or should not have happened, it isnt my point. still, it was close enough of an analogy for your point to be made i suppose lol.

you are bordering on conspiracy theories though. i agree that government uses key terms to rally public support, but the human rights violations in egypt were well documented. It is a tactic used by anyone rallying support to their cause, even companies like Apple and BP practice it. I suppose the game changes when you are talking about human life and war though huh? fair enough.

Egypt wasnt an immediate threat is the only real excuse i can come up with. you wont see me here praising the government for consistency, honor, and philanthropy, but im not going to throw them under the bus for things they did in good faith in addition to serving their own agenda. they will always be accused of having an alternate adgenda by their opponents. It isnt all about the oil, but i will agree with you that it is usually about power and aligning leaders with our goals.
the other thing is i guess you can say when the US overthrows saddam hussein or what have you, "well, they're acting in their own interest, why wouldnt they, who can blame them." but then you look at the immense human cost, the 3-5m people displaced in the iraq war, the million killed, the loss of infrastructure and living conditions, and you start questioning, well, just because it's in our interest (or attempting to be in our interest... whether it actually succeeds at that is up for debate)... can that really make it right
http://web.mit.edu/humancostiraq/
Originally posted by blid:
Originally posted by mrford:
in regards to the US civil war, you arnt acknowledging the paradigm shift in the value of human life in the western world over the last 60 years or so, especially in regards to civilians. look at japan and WWII re: US firebombings and the Japanese occupation of China. and now the Iraq war where 4,500 US casualties and 100,000-200,000 Iraqi is an absurd number over 10 years. Im not going to argue the merit of those numbers in regards to what should or should not have happened, it isnt my point. still, it was close enough of an analogy for your point to be made i suppose lol.

you are bordering on conspiracy theories though. i agree that government uses key terms to rally public support, but the human rights violations in egypt were well documented. It is a tactic used by anyone rallying support to their cause, even companies like Apple and BP practice it. I suppose the game changes when you are talking about human life and war though huh? fair enough.

Egypt wasnt an immediate threat is the only real excuse i can come up with. you wont see me here praising the government for consistency, honor, and philanthropy, but im not going to throw them under the bus for things they did in good faith in addition to serving their own agenda. they will always be accused of having an alternate adgenda by their opponents. It isnt all about the oil, but i will agree with you that it is usually about power and aligning leaders with our goals.
the other thing is i guess you can say when the US overthrows saddam hussein or what have you, "well, they're acting in their own interest, why wouldnt they, who can blame them." but then you look at the immense human cost, the 3-5m people displaced in the iraq war, the million killed, the loss of infrastructure and living conditions, and you start questioning, well, just because it's in our interest (or attempting to be in our interest... whether it actually succeeds at that is up for debate)... can that really make it right
http://web.mit.edu/humancostiraq/


million dead? most figures i see are less than 250,000, but i supose that is semantics, your point stands.

my counter would be that even though it was poorly planned, there was no way of knowing that the conflict would take so long. The factions and religious incompatibilities in the region are pretty much too different to exist peacefully in a democratic nation right now. But because of that, should you of allowed the dictatorship to remain in place? That country was ruled by death squads and gas attacks on his own citizens. He attacked 2 of his neighbors in 10 years. To say the Iraq conflict wasnt worth it i cant really agree with. Poorly planned and executed, sure. But this was a different kind of war, one we had to adapt to, and it took us a while.

And in all fairness, Saddam had WMDs at one point in time. what he did with them is what worries me.
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 23rd 2014, 21:45:47

Originally posted by Alin:
It isnt all about the oil, but i will agree with you that it is usually about power and aligning leaders with our goals.


Read your comments on the first page regarding oil and other interests and the fact that (and i quote you) this time is not about the oil or other interests. You surely change your opinion often when you get pawned big style ...


maybe it is you who needs to go back in read. i have not reversed my position at all.
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 24th 2014, 6:47:53

You didn't?!?!?

you started your case with:
" this is not about oil and interests this is about eradicating a dangerous group of terror".

You momentum status is :
" it isnt all about the oil, but i will agree with you that it is usually about power and aligning leaders with our goals "

you are unable to see in all the direction. you see things like a horse - just in front.
blid (as a counter example) sees like a Chameleon (180 grades view angle).

Sometimes i wish all this world powers to build a 1 kilometer high wall at their borders and leave anyone else alone. I would like to see that to happen to Russia China USA Germany UK and a couple more.
Everyone else in the world will just live a better life. But that is impossible.

This world does not need what you want to believe to be "a world police that fights evil" and what i believe to be a mirage of a "world police" that actually seeks for resources, influence, markets and ultimately power.

The "world police" actually needs the world to maintain their "bosses" status.

So there are 2 scenarios here :

1. One is just easy to manipulate and does not understand what this is all about. He will always believe propaganda, and think they are searching for WMDs, terrorists and "human rights" in middle west.
2. One realizes that most of the "war" reasoning are just a wave of fog thrown in his eyes. He also realize that while he pays an average of 3 USD / gallon of gasoline, the rest of the world pays 6-10 USD / gallon.

You are a mixture of both 1 and 2. You pay 3 usd for the gasoline and you want people like me to believe that`s because your Government fights the evil of this world. Otherwise i am ignorant, hate, a little fluff, jealous, and have not experimented freedom. You use also a Chameleons skill, but is the color change.

Edited By: Alin on Sep 24th 2014, 8:28:54

melvin85 Game profile

Member
91

Sep 24th 2014, 8:23:58

who going win

Link Game profile

Member
4677

Sep 24th 2014, 8:23:59

im in favor of making glass over there lol
Link.


I Am a meat popsicle.


Elders
ICN
NBK
PanLV
SALT
MaK
Valks
CwG

mdevol Game profile

Member
3239

Sep 24th 2014, 8:30:08

Originally posted by Alin:


1. One is just easy to manipulate and does not understand what this is all about. He will always believe propaganda, and think they are searching for WMDs, terrorists and "human rights" in middle west.



2. One realizes that most of the "war" reasoning are just a wave of fog thrown in his eyes. He also realize that while he pays an average of 3 USD / gallon of gasoline, the rest of the world pays 6-10 USD / gallon.



1.) the international community fully agreed that there were WMD's the UN agreed, nato agreed, and most intel we had showed he did. the "he didn't have WMD's" argument is a strawmans argument, he just moved them in the 3 months between us telling him we are attacking him and actually attacking him. Whereto? We don't know, likely Syria.

2.) That is what happens when you have a little bit of a free market and low gas taxes in comparison. Kinda neat huh?
Your European-socialist gas taxes and auto taxes are insanely high because they help offset the outrageous costs for your public transportation and infrastructure.
Surely what a man does when he is caught off his guard is the best evidence as to what sort of man he is. - C.S. Lewis

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 24th 2014, 9:04:41

Sure - Saddam moved the WMDs ( and did not used them instead ) because that`s exactly what "evil" dictators do when they have WMDs. They don`t attack their enemies with the WMDs, they just die hanged and move the WMDs to the next "evil" dictator ( Assad ? Gadaffi?).

And the answer to your tax thing is NO. Whatever tax rate you want to figure into the scheme there there is no justification ( in tax ) for that. Europe is not exactly a whole like the US is. Taxes apply different from country to country. There is VAT that varies in all the UE countries, there are the outside UE countries. UE does not work like the states, and the tax justify is weak.

Further more - The asians pay the same expensive price for it. So is "almost" everybody. You must understand that your country did not necesarlly invented "hot water and the wheel" thus while you pay an amount for gasoline - the rest of the world pays double or triple. And 80% of the answer for that is "Middle East" Oil while maybe 20% can be debated in taxes and infrastructure.


Edited By: Alin on Sep 24th 2014, 9:47:39

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 24th 2014, 10:04:18

Originally posted by Alin:
You didn't?!?!?

you started your case with:
" this is not about oil and interests this is about eradicating a dangerous group of terror".

You momentum status is :
" it isnt all about the oil, but i will agree with you that it is usually about power and aligning leaders with our goals "

you are unable to see in all the direction. you see things like a horse - just in front.
blid (as a counter example) sees like a Chameleon (180 grades view angle).


I really don't understand how you take your self seriously with stateements like this. You clearly have no grasp of the English language if you believe what you are saying. It is the only explination. I suggest you try to understand what someone is saying before you run around looking like an idiot. You are dangerously close here.

Edited By: mrford on Sep 24th 2014, 10:11:04
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 24th 2014, 10:25:25

What the actual fluff. Ok maybe this is a language barrier. But didn`t you just said up there that

"this is not always about the oil ( which implies sometimes it is), but i agree with you that it is usually about power and aligning leaders with our goals ( which in middle east means that you align leaders with the goals of ExonMobile and Chevron )."

Ford are you really that stupid, or that ignorant ? You really sound like a communist at this point. Stop calling me names if you don`t want 5 rows of how incompetent you sound here. Because i had this freaking talk, in real life, in groups of 20 and 30 persons, with all the sides involved ( pros, neutrals, contra). I had this debate sober, i had this debate drunk and i had this debate starting with 1998.

Stop fluffing with me and calling me names, asshole.

Edited By: Alin on Sep 24th 2014, 10:29:04

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 24th 2014, 10:36:48

That is a rich request comming from you.

Now go back and read both posts in their entirety. They arnt even about the same conflict, or country. They arnt even responding to the same idea. But they both say it isn't about the oil.

You have a problem of taking things out of context and using and twisting the words. I don't know if this is a language barrier, maybe it is your style, but it is getting tiring debating with someone who acts in this manner. Maybe you should stick to arguing in a language you understand


You don't see me debating in spanish, even though I speak it fluently.
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 24th 2014, 10:49:15

Originally posted by mrford:
Egypt wasnt an immediate threat is the only real excuse i can come up with. you wont see me here praising the government for consistency, honor, and philanthropy, but im not going to throw them under the bus for things they did in good faith in addition to serving their own agenda. they will always be accused of having an alternate adgenda by their opponents. It isnt all about the oil, but i will agree with you that it is usually about power and aligning leaders with our goals.


I rest my case. Unfreakingbelivible ... One can never debate with you. You always spin this fluff like is a matter of life and dead. You can not take a conversation as it is and learn something, like i truly did from blid. You will always spin the fluff out of everyone, troll me because of earth 2025 ( this thread is not about it ) and try to mock me because i am doing this in my 3rd. Weak.

Aligning leaders in Egipt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran UAE or whatever other fluffing country you want in that zone, has the ultimate goal the Oil. You don`t want the sand, or the camels, or the curved swords, but THE OIL. This movie started in 1989-1990 ( with the Gulf War) after USSR finally disbanded and they were in their weakest phase. Same year, i got my freedom.

Why the fluff am i even doing this - i don`t even know.




Edited By: Alin on Sep 24th 2014, 10:57:02

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 24th 2014, 10:53:22

You rest your case? Lol. Never change alin. The world needs people like you.

Playing the victim card here is quality entertainment though. Thanks.
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 24th 2014, 11:00:28

fluff off - martiana redneck 36 guns Ford

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 24th 2014, 11:01:17

There is the classy alin I was waiting on.
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 24th 2014, 11:07:09

you are as ignorant as an pig when it`s having sex.

you talk about classy you redneck ? go look over your 35 posts in this thread - and count the numbers of "names" you have called me.

ASS HOLE!!!

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 24th 2014, 11:13:51

Angry angry alin here to save the day! Anyone that dissagrees is ignorant and should go away!
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 24th 2014, 11:30:34

neah - Trife mdevol and others disagrees. Others agrees or partially agrees. But you are the only truly ignorant redneck that was pwned by 4 different persons in 2 different threads ( because you have a brainwashed fluffed opinion) until you got so Soft and you started to change your opinion and backed off.

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 24th 2014, 11:36:00

Originally posted by Alin:
Stop fluffing with me and calling me names, asshole.


Additionally, you still havnt shown where I changed my stance, or where I was "PWNed" Have fun with that proof.

Edited By: mrford on Sep 24th 2014, 11:41:12
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 24th 2014, 11:58:42

Well your discussion with Detmer and HW in the "brother" thread started like a typhoon and ended with you in a state of submission and acceptance. you softed the talk down and started to view "strong points" and "weak points" in both USA and Canada systems.

Meanwhile here you started the discussion with blid from the point where you named him a straight communist. Than you softed it down ( using like a child excuse, "i didn`t read that part") to the same submission and acceptance stance ( but that`s because blid made some brilliant points ). Ended up in the same status Que:
"yea i agree here, but see maybe we should talk a little more about that - your point stands - yea yea yea i agree " stuff like that.

With me ? i could shake the hand with you and give you a white ball and tell you " here ford take this white ball as a gift ". That ball will never be white for you, but black - because you consider me inferior ( race, world zone, education ) altough i am almost sure i am superior to you on many levels ( maybe not at english and wording ).



mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Sep 24th 2014, 12:14:32

Yep, it is clear you are having trouble with the English language and differentiating between a joke (blid is communist) and serious responces.

Correct that fallacy and maybe this might make a bit more sense. Until then you are just as ignorant and biased as you accuse me of being. It would be funny if you wernt so serious and convinced in your righteousness.

Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Alin Game profile

Member
3848

Sep 24th 2014, 12:21:00

In 2-3 years since we chase our tails around here did i ever made a righteousness point to you ? If yes - please give it as an example.

KoHeartsGPA Game profile

Member
EE Patron
30,085

Sep 24th 2014, 12:58:45

What I've learned in this thread thus far...

-blid is a commie
-Alin has a language barrier
-fordy is a gun happy red neck
-Trife is and will always be a libtard
-auto correct sux balls

To be continued...
Mess with me you better kill me, or I'll just take your pride & joy and jack it up
(•_•)

https://youtu.be/...pxFw4?si=mCDXT3t1vmFgn0qn

-=TSO~DKnights~ICD~XI~LaF~SKA=-

S.F. Giants 2010, 2012, 2014 World Series Champions, fluff YEAH!

Zorp Game profile

Member
EE Patron
953

Sep 24th 2014, 13:07:25

Originally posted by mrford:
Yep, it is clear you are having trouble with the English language and differentiating between a joke (blid is communist) and serious responces.



Wait... that was only a joke? Are you telling me blid isn't a communist?!