Community > Posts By > HotRodDeluxe
hey opto, uh... I mean happybun Was it that obvious? |
|
|
|
...endoctrinated...
Is this another anal sex reference? |
|
|
|
O "Yes, we all know about Gehlen" Do you mean we Europeans, you and I? We are the only ones on this thread. What are their usernames? OMG. I don't believe you fell for that. You Sir have made my day. Well, judging by the quality of your threads, it wasn't much of a stretch. Judging by the quality of your slaphead replies you are a major contributer to that quality. It's only a response to the naïve content displayed on this, and your other bigoted diatribes that masquerade as 'Current Affairs and Politics', there is no need to get so upset. Let's face it, your contention in the OP is rather tendentious and ill-informed to say the least. You could be more optimistic. LOL Whatever. |
|
|
|
O "Yes, we all know about Gehlen" Do you mean we Europeans, you and I? We are the only ones on this thread. What are their usernames? OMG. I don't believe you fell for that. You Sir have made my day. Well, judging by the quality of your threads, it wasn't much of a stretch. Judging by the quality of your slaphead replies you are a major contributer to that quality. It's only a response to the naïve content displayed on this, and your other bigoted diatribes that masquerade as 'Current Affairs and Politics', there is no need to get so upset. Let's face it, your contention in the OP is rather tendentious and ill-informed to say the least. You could be more optimistic. Less optimistic might be a wiser choice Good point! How are you, Gorgeous? |
|
|
|
crikey some chillax pills needed on here.end of the day why worry about others lives or their habits.do yer own thing and worry about what concerns you.dont get het up over mankind and its behaviour.you cant change it or what anyone else does.you can only ever look after your own business.its life.get over it.folks will do what they want in their own lives.the moral police stopped recruiting ages ago.good lord.am glad am English.we not so strung up. I agree. Why the fuss over what others do in the privacy of their own homes as long as no one is being hurt? I hear the 'sanctity of marriage' excuse and I wonder how sacred can it be with the divorce rate so high? I just don't see the point of all the furore. |
|
|
|
Yeah, you hate the West. We get it.
|
|
|
|
Edited by
HotRodDeluxe
on
Fri 05/17/13 02:09 PM
|
|
O "Yes, we all know about Gehlen" Do you mean we Europeans, you and I? We are the only ones on this thread. What are their usernames? OMG. I don't believe you fell for that. You Sir have made my day. Well, judging by the quality of your threads, it wasn't much of a stretch. Judging by the quality of your slaphead replies you are a major contributer to that quality. It's only a response to the naïve content displayed on this, and your other bigoted diatribes that masquerade as 'Current Affairs and Politics', there is no need to get so upset. Let's face it, your contention in the OP is rather tendentious and ill-informed to say the least. You could be more optimistic. |
|
|
|
"Yes, we all know about Gehlen" Do you mean we Europeans, you and I? We are the only ones on this thread. What are their usernames? OMG. I don't believe you fell for that. You Sir have made my day. Well, judging by the quality of your threads, it wasn't much of a stretch. |
|
|
|
No thank you, not worth it. Of course it isn't worth it-you won't be able to prove this tired anti-US rhetoric. |
|
|
|
"Yes, we all know about Gehlen" Do you mean we Europeans, you and I? We are the only ones on this thread. What are their usernames? |
|
|
|
You specifically mentioned alleged "American imperialism". Yet, you gave no evidence of such a thing. Many just parrot the rhetoric without understanding the nature of 'imperialism'. Once upon a time, the USA had possession of the Philippine Islands, but the USA set the Philippines free. Once upon a time, the USA had complete possession of Cuba, but the USA set Cuba free. Once upon a time, the USA had possession of the Panama Canal, but then the USA gave it back to the nation of Panama. The giving away of such possessions is the opposite of what an imperial nation would do. Indeed, and many are fashionably and erroneously attributing the US involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan to 'imperialism' when it is clearly nothing of the sort. TYPES OF IMPERIALISM Europeans began building their empires in the western hemisphere in the early 1500s, but by the 1800s, Spain and Portugal were no longer powerful countries, and the largest British colony had become the United States. Britain, France, Germany, Russia, and the Netherlands continued to colonize during this era, but they also devised other ways to spread their empires. In the late 19th century Japan and the United States joined the European nations as an imperialist power. Types of imperialism in the 1800s included: Colonial imperialism - This form of imperialism is virtual complete takeover of an area, with domination in all areas: economic, political, and socio-cultural. The subjugated area existed to benefit the imperialist power, and had almost no independence of action. In this era, almost all of Africa and southern and southeast Asia were colonized. Economic imperialism - This form of imperialism allowed the area to operate as its own nation, but the imperialist nation almost completely controlled its trade and other business. For example, it may impose regulations that forbid trade with other nations, or imperialist companies may own or have exclusive rights to its natural resources. During this era, China and most of Latin America were subjected to economic imperialism. Political imperialism - Although a country may have had its own government with natives in top political positions, it operated as the imperialist country told it to. The government was sometimes a relatively permanent "puppet government," as happened in late Qing China, and other times the control was temporary, as occurred in the Dominican Republic when the United States ran its government until it got out of debt. Socio-cultural imperialism - The dominating country deliberately tried to change customs, religions and languages in some of the countries. A good example was British India, where English was taught in schools, Indian soldiers dressed British-style, and western trading rules were set up. Generally, the imperialist countries assumed their cultures to be superior, and often times they saw themselves as bringing about improvements in the society. This opinion piece still doesn't prove the existence of 'US Imperialism'. Try again. |
|
|
|
Topic:
why we wont get along...
|
|
How about this. I'll be the first to do it. Personal responsiblity. I'll take the blame, for all of it. It was my fault, I admit it. I meant well, but things just got out of hand, and I lost control. I apologize and will do my best not to let this happen again. Now, let us start from scratch. Careful with that, you may become the subject of a mediaeval form of persecution. |
|
|
|
He could have cooked the meat first!
|
|
|
|
Topic:
why we wont get along...
|
|
Everybody wants to make this world a better place for themselves and the people who come after them. The problem is that everybody has a different idea of what that better world should be like and how we should get there. And nobody wants to admit that they might just maybe could be wrong. Everybody else is just trying to get through the day with enough to eat, a dry place to sleep, and not getting shot by one of the other folks. That's it in a nutshell. |
|
|
|
You specifically mentioned alleged "American imperialism". Yet, you gave no evidence of such a thing. Many just parrot the rhetoric without understanding the nature of 'imperialism'. Once upon a time, the USA had possession of the Philippine Islands, but the USA set the Philippines free. Once upon a time, the USA had complete possession of Cuba, but the USA set Cuba free. Once upon a time, the USA had possession of the Panama Canal, but then the USA gave it back to the nation of Panama. The giving away of such possessions is the opposite of what an imperial nation would do. Indeed, and many are fashionably and erroneously attributing the US involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan to 'imperialism' when it is clearly nothing of the sort. |
|
|
|
You are asking the wrong questions.
I recognise the validity of his questions, but then, perhaps I don't share your confirmation bias. Your government has just sanctioned $123 million to the Syrian opposition which includes the Nusra Front and Al Qaeda who according the your government are terrorists.
Incorrect, the funds are awarded to the FSA via the SNC who aren't affiliated with Al-Qaeda or the Nusra Front. What you have in Syria is a proxy poxy war.
This is a myth put about by those who merely hate the US and don't know what they are talking about. I'd just ignore it. I see, so accuracy is irrelevant to your confirmation bias. So be it. |
|
|
|
If we want to understand why US-led wars of aggression, covert and overt, are plaguing the planet, from Iraq, Afghanistan, to Libya, Syria and Iran, we can gain much insight into today’s problems by going back to events at the end of the Second World War. http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/05/11/302975/us-driven-by-nazi-war-machine/ |
|
|
|
Hyperbole
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article is about the term used in rhetoric. For the mathematical term, see Hyperbola. Hyperbole (pron.: /haɪˈpɜrbəliː/ hy-PUR-bə-lee; Greek: ὑπερβολή hyperbolē, "exaggeration") is the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech. It may be used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, but is not meant to be taken literally. Hyperboles are exaggerations to create emphasis or effect. As a literary device, hyperbole is often used in poetry, and is frequently encountered in casual speech. An example of hyperbole is: "The bag weighed a ton." Hyperbole makes the point that the bag was very heavy, though it probably doesn't actually weigh a ton. In rhetoric, some opposites of hyperbole are meiosis, litotes, understatement, and bathos (the 'letdown' after a hyperbole in a phrase Example: "U.S. Currently Fighting 74 Different Wars." |
|
|
|
Edited by
HotRodDeluxe
on
Wed 05/15/13 05:31 PM
|
|
Sure I see the problem.....you don't have a clue.
Now, now, there is no need for this belligerence. Clearly you are missing my point as usual. Please think about your question again and you may see the problem. You are also not an American either so have no horse in this race
That is irrelevant to your question and this is an international website. I'll post your question, yet again, for clarity: "Are we a democracy or a republic?" As to your comment about any past posts of mine, you reference it with slander and don't offer it for rebuttal? I post many things, some for laughs, some for discussion others just to get a rise.... that's what forums are
It can't be slander for it is the written word. Moreover, I remember you being rather angry over my, and others' comments regarding that asinine video. Then again, you're always angry over something. Anyway, it was just an aside, my point was more about the validity of most boobtoob tripe. As far as telling me what my country has or doesn't have, the merits of a video that you didn't even watch yet bothered to comment on...... get a life!
Again, you project. My comment was about your question (see all previous posts), why is that so difficult for you? Many others clearly haven't watched the video either, and yet, you haven't attacked them for it, so, please calm down and step away from the computer, you're over-reacting. |
|
|
|
Topic:
why we wont get along...
Edited by
HotRodDeluxe
on
Wed 05/15/13 05:40 PM
|
|
maybe Plato was right,and it just has become too big! Probably smaller Republics with Treaties among each other! Or return the power to Govern where it rightfully belongs to,The States! We see it here in Switzerland,small Country,yet every year,the Federal Government arrogates itself Powers that traditionally belonged to the Cantons(States)! Most political ideologies were created by ancient city-states (for the sake of this debate I will exclude those societies ruled by an absolute monarch). The citizens tended to participate in government more than we do in modern democracies (cf. Democratic Athens and Republican Rome), but not every individual was a citizen. As these states grew into empires and nations, so did the bureaucracy. States federated into nations and federal governments came into existence and the concomitant bureaucracy wanted uniformity across the states for efficiency and equity, so the federal government assumes some of the powers of member states. The problem is that many states wish to retain control and argue from a parochial stance in order to justify their existence as another tier in government. Many idealise the city-state system as opposed to the federal and national form of political structure, however, they tend overlook the constant interstate warfare that existed with such a system. |
|
|