Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."

You do have a hard time with reading comprehension, don't you? It doesn't say 'Just Us 'muricans' it says all men. Everyone has those rights. Every where in every nation on this globe. Jefferson was right in that.

LIFE.


LIBERTY.


THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Youre using those lines? Just look at the rest of history after they wrote this. It doesnt even hold meaning to those who wrote it.

I'd suggest it clearly meant something to someone, because more Americans gave their lives in a war over slavery then in any other war.

 Medium of Death wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."

You do have a hard time with reading comprehension, don't you? It doesn't say 'Just Us 'muricans' it says all men. Everyone has those rights. Every where in every nation on this globe. Jefferson was right in that.

LIFE.


LIBERTY.


THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.

I'm sure England is a beacon of morality throughout history, what with their attempts to try and deny sovereignty to a nation whom they are stealing resources from. The 'UK' hasn't a leg to stand on.

The UK has experienced worse atrocities commited by one of its member countries than anything in those pics.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Youre using those lines? Just look at the rest of history after they wrote this. It doesnt even hold meaning to those who wrote it.

I'd suggest it clearly meant something to someone, because more Americans gave their lives in a war over slavery then in any other war.

After other nations had already abolished it without a Civil War? Holding a Civil War over slavery just shows how much support it still had. And its not like everyone was instantly equal after that war. That why were celebrating the MLK dream speech 50 years later.
Those lines held no meaning at the time and for a long time after that. The ones who wrote those things down even had slaves in some cases.

Its like saying more Germans died fighting against Totalitarianism, even though they were made to do it by a totalitarian regime themselves.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

Yeah, specifically, our yoke - not everyone else in the worlds.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."

You do have a hard time with reading comprehension, don't you? It doesn't say 'Just Us 'muricans' it says all men. Everyone has those rights. Every where in every nation on this globe. Jefferson was right in that.

Sure. Now show me the part that says we're the ones who enforce that. Maybe I'm just too stupid to read that.

Trial balloon for cruise missile strikes. No regime change, no boots on the ground. Shoot something up to feel like you're helping. Don't take any responsibility for the future of Syria, after all that might have to involve some kind of plan for what happens after Assad, there’s some great contenders for his job, that rebel leader who eats the hearts of his enemies seems like a class act. For now this seems like it will be a raytheon love tap, nothing more.

On a side note, isn’t it creepy how excited network news people get when the drums starts to beat? The talking heads look like they’re in mid orgasm while desperately trying not to fart. They can hardly contain themselves.

The threat of attack is starting to seem like a bunch of horse gak anyway, Obama's not going to start throwing cruise missiles at a Russian backed regime while he's attending the G20 in Russia. At least, I don't think he has the balls to do that.

I say the west should do sweet feth all about Syria, they really can't afford to do much other than try and look tough, either way the security council is never going to approve anything seeing as Russia and China will veto that gak into the ground.

 Ouze wrote:
Sure. Now show me the part that says we're the ones who enforce that. Maybe I'm just too stupid to read that.

There is a certain amount of irony in using the Declaration of Independence to justify violating another nation's sovereignty, and meddling in their affairs.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Youre using those lines? Just look at the rest of history after they wrote this. It doesnt even hold meaning to those who wrote it.

I'd suggest it clearly meant something to someone, because more Americans gave their lives in a war over slavery then in any other war.

Well, there were Americans on both sides.

And it wasn't exactly over slavery. It was over states rights. It was made to be about slavery to get more Northern support

 xole wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Youre using those lines? Just look at the rest of history after they wrote this. It doesnt even hold meaning to those who wrote it.

I'd suggest it clearly meant something to someone, because more Americans gave their lives in a war over slavery then in any other war.

Well, there were Americans on both sides.

And it wasn't exactly over slavery. It was over states rights. It was made to be about slavery to get more Northern support

That's adorable.

Lee was a terrible general.

 xole wrote:
And it wasn't exactly over slavery. It was over states rights.

The state right they were fighting about? Slavery.

Scottish nationalist debate aside. Quoting some irrelevant bs about how everyone is equal and this is done under the best intentions is just risible.

I'm not pointing the finger solely at America, the Great Satan, most Nations don't have a leg to stand on/glass houses etc in that regard.

 MrDwhitey wrote:
Lee was a terrible general.

But a wonderful singer.

 xole wrote:
And it wasn't exactly over slavery. It was over states rights. It was made to be about slavery to get more Northern support

I've said as much to Baron before, but as far as he's concerned the only reason was slavery. Social and economic differences and State's rights were not a concern.

 Medium of Death wrote:
Scottish nationalist debate aside. Quoting some irrelevant bs about how everyone is equal and this is done under the best intentions is just risible.

I'm not pointing the finger solely at America, the Great Satan, most Nations don't have a leg to stand on/glass houses etc in that regard.

HEY I'll have you know we are totaly clean!

Wait..

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
There is a certain amount of irony in using the Declaration of Independence to justify violating another nation's sovereignty, and meddling in their affairs.

Clearly the founders of a country who, at the time it's constitution was written had no permanent standing army, intended for us to sally forth across the globe and liberate everyone who wasn't free. Today, Syria, tomorrow we're penciling in China.

I mean, Baron, you are endorsing a war with China, right? Because, they're pretty short on freedom too.

Yes, those men disgraced the uniform, and let me think for a moment...



GOD



SAVE



THE



KING

 Ouze wrote:
Clearly the founders of a country who, at the time it's constitution was written had no permanent standing army, intended for us to sally forth across the globe and liberate everyone who wasn't free. Today, Syria, tomorrow we're penciling in China.

I mean, Baron, you are endorsing a war with China, right? Because, they're pretty short on freedom too.

Well we still have the racial divide in the US, parts of the world have less wealth than we do, Darfur is still a mess, ditto Rwanda, Mexico is spiraling out of control, Russia has little freedom too, etc. Where do we begin our liberation efforts? Do we start with the nearest? The longest standing??

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

Trying to feel starving children is not a worthy goal? Bravo, sir. 10/10, I'm sure you'll get some bites.

Well, if preventing them from being exposed to poison gas isn't a worthy goal, then clearly feeding them wouldn't be either.

Yeah, really. I mean, come on. The little fethers are just asking to die, being born into poverty and overpopulation. Screw 'em! We're better off without 'em!

~Tim?

(And yes, this is sarcasm aimed the stupidity expressed by Mr. Hyena in saying that "feeding starving children isn't a worthy goal")

 Medium of Death wrote:
Scottish nationalist debate aside. Quoting some irrelevant bs about how everyone is equal and this is done under the best intentions is just risible.

I'm not pointing the finger solely at America, the Great Satan, most Nations don't have a leg to stand on/glass houses etc in that regard.

Just let me quote that for you again, Baron.

 Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

Trying to feel starving children is not a worthy goal? Bravo, sir. 10/10, I'm sure you'll get some bites.

Well, if preventing them from being exposed to poison gas isn't a worthy goal, then clearly feeding them wouldn't be either.

Yeah, really. I mean, come on. The little fethers are just asking to die, being born into poverty and overpopulation. Screw 'em! We're better off without 'em!

~Tim?

(And yes, this is sarcasm aimed the stupidity expressed by Mr. Hyena in saying that "feeding starving children isn't a worthy goal")

Would a Dog Pound-like scheme be better? Injections could be simpler and more humane.

Poverty IS a misery that can't be grown out of.

 Medium of Death wrote:
**snip**

 BaronIveagh wrote:
**snip**

If you two fine gentlemen would like to have a p*ssing contest over nationality perhaps you could take it to PMs or another thread

As an aside, if everyone could cool it with the image macros that would be swell.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:
**snip**

 BaronIveagh wrote:
**snip**

If you two fine gentlemen would like to have a p*ssing contest over nationality perhaps you could take it to PMs or another thread

Are you paying attention? It's not a pissing contest. I'm clearly saying that no nation is in the right with regard to invading for the sake of "liberation".

 Medium of Death wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:
**snip**

 BaronIveagh wrote:
**snip**

If you two fine gentlemen would like to have a p*ssing contest over nationality perhaps you could take it to PMs or another thread

Are you paying attention? It's not a pissing contest. I'm clearly saying that no nation is in the right with regard to invading for the sake of "liberation".

Explain WW2.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

Trying to feel starving children is not a worthy goal? Bravo, sir. 10/10, I'm sure you'll get some bites.

Well, if preventing them from being exposed to poison gas isn't a worthy goal, then clearly feeding them wouldn't be either.

Yeah, really. I mean, come on. The little fethers are just asking to die, being born into poverty and overpopulation. Screw 'em! We're better off without 'em!

~Tim?

(And yes, this is sarcasm aimed the stupidity expressed by Mr. Hyena in saying that "feeding starving children isn't a worthy goal")

Would a Dog Pound-like scheme be better? Injections could be simpler and more humane.

Poverty IS a misery that can't be grown out of.

You were found in a dog pound weren't you?

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

Trying to feel starving children is not a worthy goal? Bravo, sir. 10/10, I'm sure you'll get some bites.

Well, if preventing them from being exposed to poison gas isn't a worthy goal, then clearly feeding them wouldn't be either.

Yeah, really. I mean, come on. The little fethers are just asking to die, being born into poverty and overpopulation. Screw 'em! We're better off without 'em!

~Tim?

(And yes, this is sarcasm aimed the stupidity expressed by Mr. Hyena in saying that "feeding starving children isn't a worthy goal")

Would a Dog Pound-like scheme be better? Injections could be simpler and more humane.

Poverty IS a misery that can't be grown out of.

You really are twisted, aren't you? Poverty IS a misery that CAN be grown out of. Saying otherwise is simply an excuse ripe for manipulating into justification for genocide.

~Tim?

 Medium of Death wrote:

Are you paying attention? It's not a pissing contest. I'm clearly saying that no nation is in the right with regard to invading for the sake of "liberation".

The French and a lot of Western Europe might disagree with you. I seem to recall they currently exist because they were 'liberated'. Or do you think that it was wrong for the Allies to have landed and thrown the Nazis out?

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:
**snip**

 BaronIveagh wrote:
**snip**

If you two fine gentlemen would like to have a p*ssing contest over nationality perhaps you could take it to PMs or another thread

Are you paying attention? It's not a pissing contest. I'm clearly saying that no nation is in the right with regard to invading for the sake of "liberation".

Explain WW2.

Well thats easy enough. The UK and France got in to defend Poland against Nazi aggression. Then the Soviet-Union got in because of Nazi agression too and to finish of the list so did the US.

 Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

Trying to feel starving children is not a worthy goal? Bravo, sir. 10/10, I'm sure you'll get some bites.

Well, if preventing them from being exposed to poison gas isn't a worthy goal, then clearly feeding them wouldn't be either.

Yeah, really. I mean, come on. The little fethers are just asking to die, being born into poverty and overpopulation. Screw 'em! We're better off without 'em!

~Tim?

(And yes, this is sarcasm aimed the stupidity expressed by Mr. Hyena in saying that "feeding starving children isn't a worthy goal")

Would a Dog Pound-like scheme be better? Injections could be simpler and more humane.

Poverty IS a misery that can't be grown out of.

You really are twisted, aren't you? Poverty IS a misery that CAN be grown out of. Saying otherwise is simply an excuse ripe for manipulating into justification for genocide.

~Tim?

Its clearly working well in africa and most nations then.