Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/08/2017 in all areas

  1. What scholars up until this point in this topic you've presented 3 opinions of 3 generals on what they thought of the use of the atomic wpn on Japan...are these the scholars you talk about.....perhaps you'd like to let us in on your sources or the supposed scholars..... You have yet to prove your original statement....USA war crimes - atomic bombs....what you have produced is 3 opinions from 3 US generals.....nothing more.....So they all agree that the atomic bomb was not needed.....big deal.....the last time i checked the US was engaged in a total war with Japan....meaning pretty much ev
    3 points
  2. Their relatives probably shouldn't have been gassing kids, but you do have a point. Best use caution when letting folk in.
    2 points
  3. I don't make assumptions about who or what someone might be but I agree with this part. Or is it no longer allowed to quote someones post and agree with it on this forum? Are we now only allowed to do it anonymously by this stupid reputations score?
    2 points
  4. We have a fundamental difference of how we look at the world. Being an idealist, I would like the world to be a place where countries try to live peacefully, based on mutually defined rules. You believe in the clash of civilizations based on self interest of individual civilizations. So sure, let's agree to disagree...
    2 points
  5. You know that Assad is a secular dictator who has nothing to do with terrorists. Terrorists from Al Qaida, ISIS are supported by Saudi Arabia and Saudi Arabia is a strong US ally. Middle East is confusing place. Don't ever believe your leaders to give a truthful answer. If you want to support job creation in military and arms industries by starting unjust wars, then that's a totally different story. Don't bring ethics, human rights and good vs. bad in the picture.
    2 points
  6. Correct, except that the U.S. does not act to save the world. The U.S. acts to save American and allied interests. Anyone who disagrees with U.S. interventionist policies is welcome to try and stop them. Good luck....
    2 points
  7. How do you define a troll? Because I wouldn't consider many of the people you've bragged about blocking to be a troll. But there is a poster that seems to have been put in Der Cooler, that you're cool with, that's objectively a troll.
    2 points
  8. Thank you for the back up.....and i 100% agree with your post....
    1 point
  9. Luton fan. I probably scrapped with his dad back in the seventies...
    1 point
  10. Of course they do. Tyrants have a long history of using terror to keep their subjects in line. Stalin killed more Russians than Hitler.
    1 point
  11. When I was young, I could never understand why old people thought young people were all as thick as planks. Now I'm old, I understand that it's because they are.
    1 point
  12. The evidence is pretty strong that Assad's crowd did this and he deserves punishment. After six years of unspeakable atrocities and a flood of refugees across the world, he can hardly be considered a force for stability.
    1 point
  13. What is "right to take action"? That has no meaning in a corrupt world where many hostile powers exist and will do what ever they wish or what they think they can. The reality is the countries that have the power, use it when and where they deem. The U.S. doesn't report to some other power. There are times they might try to get a coalition as for example with NATO to take some action, but they are not required by any law.
    1 point
  14. Yes. UN isn't doing what it's supposed to do. But that doesn't mean US has the right to take an initiative unilaterally. It's like if police doesn't help you what you perceive to be is right, you pick a gun and start doing your perceived "right" thing on your own.
    1 point
  15. I am really trying to understand you. It seems like you genuinely think that US military inventions around the world are for good cause. I, like many others, think that it isn't the case. US military interventions are perceived by international community as either a way to promote its arms industry or expand its political influence. The question is not that who would save the world, US or Canada. Question is : Will US or Canada or any self righteous country spare the world and not take any military actions on its own without consulting other powers.
    1 point
  16. The UN has been an abysmal failure in many cases in the world. What has the UN done about the civil war in Syria? There was no indication the UN was going to do anything at all about the chemical attack on innocent people in Syria. The UN just talks but does little. The UN also is unable to act because the Russia and China veto an proposed action.
    1 point
  17. OTOH = On the other hand... Defining bad actors isn't the job of Americans. Bad is a relative term and Americans, Chinese and Russians have varying opinion on the definition. If you are going to allow every powerful country to take action against the bad actors according to their definition, there will be many unjust wars. It would be better to go through UN in order to have a consensus against a bad actor and a mutual agreement should be reached before taking unilateral actions.
    1 point
  18. You know that US is no more the lone super power. Right? Not that China or Russia are great alternatives, it's probably better to have options for weaker countries to choose their poison. OTOH, allied or westerners, whatever you call them, need to get over their privilege. They don't run the world anymore.
    1 point
  19. If Iraq having WMDs justifies war on Iraq by Americans, would US having WMDs (nuclear bombs) justify war by other countries on the US? We have examples when US has even used chemical and nuclear weapons on other countries. Actually, US is the only country that has used nuclear weapons on other countries. Do Americans feel any shame for their acts or only that Trump's conscience wakes up only when he sees Assad killing a few children? Any idea, how many children have died because of US invasions around the world.
    1 point
  20. Compared to what's happening in Syria, in Iraq and Yemen, in South Sudan, in North Korea, in Mali and Nigeria and other places - it IS the equivalent of hungry cats. When have you EVER required the slightest evidence, let alone proof, to point fingers at Israel? Were you snickering when you wrote that? Given your incredibly one-sided expositions about Israel, which have been so one-sided they could have been written by the UN's human rights council, you are really in no position to make such an allegation against anyone at all. Horrific? There are death camps in
    1 point
  21. I have a lot of work I have to do. But I might create a thread.
    1 point
  22. Are you sure that no Chemical wpns were found in Iraq......because the above sources say different ....0f course your sources may trump mine, but you did'nt list one.....I could get more if you like......And i don't recall saying that the mass production facility was in operation today.....what i said was they found one , shown in the video below.....according to the last source provided 412.5 tons of chemical agents were destroyed by UN teams, and that 1.5 tons were unaccounted for.....thats tons......20 liters of water wieghs in at 62 lbs.....so 1.5 tons is alot of VX agent....the worlds dea
    1 point
  23. Trudeau and the PMO look weak and impotent in the wake of Trump's action. Trudeau spends more time in the U.S. to channel his "feminism".
    1 point
  24. You're not a clairvoyant and neither am I. Unlike you, I am prepared to accept that once Assad is neutralized, that situation will be addressed and resolved. And you never know, the solution to the "power vacuum" that you so dread, might just come from the Syrians themselves.
    1 point
  25. Then they should release that information to the public.
    1 point
  26. Cool, now if only you could deal with that pesky thing called evidence.
    1 point
  27. Cause that approach has been working so well the past 15 years...
    1 point
  28. Oh I see, you're major concern is what happens after Assad. So you would keep a war criminal in power because you fear the result of taking him down. Power vacuum means nothing when a country's innocents are being wiped out. I say let's deal with one problem at a time.
    1 point
  29. And a 10 second violation justifies shooting down a pilot and a fighter plane? I thought Turkey and Russia were on the same side fighting ISIS. Or at least Turkey claims it is against ISIS. Cause we know Turkey is trustworthy. *sarcasm*
    1 point
  30. Hey that's fine by me. If it makes you feel any better, I don't doubt millions feel the same way.
    1 point
  31. How do we know that the rebels didn't create this stockpile?
    1 point
  32. When someone gets banned, he can't participate anymore. He cannot post. When someone is put on ignore by you, he can still post - he can still actively participate - but you won't see his posts (unless you take a peek). He won't get any replies from you. Yes, he can still get responses from others. He'll get replies unless everyone decide to put him on ignore - if it gets to that point, I bet he'll end up getting banned. Someone you put on ignore might not even care that you don't reply to his posts - but he can still post in your threads. When you pu
    1 point
  33. America bombs syria and the PMO send out a statement, if this was a pop culture event ,trudeau would have made sure he was in front a camera.
    1 point
  34. Plus he had Paul Martin as his Finance Minister. IMO, a very good Finance Minister but a disastrous Prime Minister.
    1 point
  35. 1 point
  36. And that is what is killing the country, we hardly produce anything and the oil sands are not the problem. But in canada you have some idiot hollywood celeb fly over the oil sands and say how evil they are, and the left actually believes it, when the dirtiest oil comes from california, home of hollywood. I just wish the left would pull its head out of it's arse and see how the enviros are deflecting the real problems by blaming canada for everything. And I am getting tired of paying for it so a few can sleep at nite.
    1 point
  37. Because he had to, remember that situation? Trudeau did not have to do what he did, Harper is by far one of the best PM's we had. We went from 1st to worst. And everyday the liberals prove me right. As I have said before every bad thing the liberals had to say about harper is coming true under trudeau. And who is actually running the country?? And now the bald face lies about the jets? He made a fool out of us in front of our allies.
    1 point
  38. Do you not feel, Charles, that a person who persists in posting the same message all across the spectrum of conversations here, always trying to bring the subject to the same thing, is derailing discussions?
    1 point
  39. Really? There are 15 million Jews in the world and 1.6 BILLION Muslims. The problem is the Jews? "Why we hate you and why we fight you" - by ISIS 1. We hate you, first and foremost, because you are disbelievers; you reject the oneness of Allah – whether you realize it or not – by making partners for Him in worship, you blaspheme against Him, claiming that He has a son, you fabricate lies against His prophets and messengers, and you indulge in all manner of devilish practices. It is for this reason that we were commanded to openly declare our hatred for you and our enmity towards you.
    1 point
  40. Shit, I backed off already. I was going for Archbishop or Pope. You see (I guess you don't) when you have lived to personally witness the damage done to Canada by PET first hand, as a Canadian it kind of sticks in your craw. But, I guess once we elected a person still clutching his communist party card tight (from his Sorbonne years), the royal "we" pretty much deserve what we got.
    1 point
  41. Had a conversation with a business acquaintance who is a long time friend of someone who is...well let's just leave it as VERY close to JT. In a candid moment, he was informed that in all of his decades dealing with such individuals, JT is the least intelligent and capable he has ever encountered. There were some pretty rude and crude comments applied that I need not repeat, but you get the gist. Now, that was no big surprise at all, but what DID catch my attention was that apparently, the whole cabinet has not only abandoned the people of Canada (also, no big surprise) but are now goin
    1 point
  42. You wouldn't know that since you have no knowledge of history yourself. Or logic.
    1 point
  43. Then you are obviously severely hampered by your lack of history.
    1 point
  44. Completely unfit to beget children.
    1 point
  45. Myths are not a legal justifications for committing war crimes.
    1 point
  46. A myth is not a legal justification for committing war crimes. And even if it wasn't a myth, it is still not a legal justification for committing war crimes.
    1 point
  47. All myths and no sources for your myths.
    1 point
  48. No, this thread is about US war crimes. The Japanese paid for their war crimes in the farcical but "legal" Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal. The US has been committing massive, vicious war crimes from way before WWII right up to this very day. But unlike other threads I won't demand that people's justified opinions be censored.
    1 point

Announcements



×
×
  • Create New...