How about YOU get the FUCK out of MY country I spent 10 years in the Army fighting for this county and lost my leg!!!!
Is that supposed to mean you are more American than me? That makes you a higher status American? Sorry, Sonny Jim. I'm not going to reflexively lionize you just because you were in the military. If you had the consideration or courage to read the links you would see that this country was based on the principles of human rights. You don't care about them. Thus you are against the principles of this country. To me, that makes you not just unAmerican, but antiAmerican.
Go back and read my links, particularly the ones about George Washington. Those are particularly germane to the topic.
And by the way, you weren't fighting for this country. You were fighting for corporate interests and fringe right wing political strategies. I know that is a tough thing for you to believe. I understand that you guys have to dress up your awful experiences in patriotic garb. But the fact is, you were used. That is also a national embarrassment and I'm sorry that is so.
how old are you?
So, old enough to know better. I asked because you sounded about 13. That's not meant as a dig. I genuinely thought you were a kid.
You don't even understand how government functions.
Majored in political science
Well, your professors would weep if they read your posts.
It would take an awful lot of time and effort to correct everything you got wrong
how so? I dont think i got anything wrong.
Of course you don't. Nobody thinks what they think they know is wrong.
For starters, the Japanese American citizens interned in WW2 were not POWs, and that was a classic example of unAmerican bigotry triumphing over principles. Second, gitmo detainees are not legally classified as POWs. They are "enemy combatants". Third, the president cannot
declare war by executive order. He may initiate combat via the [wiki]War Powers Resolution[/wiki], but he is required to consult with congress within 48 hours. So we are not technically, legally at war. We were de facto at war.
That is just skimming. There ismore, but I doubt it will sink in. You are so fundamentally misinformed and stubborn about it, I am not willing to give it any more effort.
Seriously man, if you don't care about human rightsI never said I didn't not care about human rights, I just made a statement that I should of reworded to say, Why should we care about human right for them when they dont care to use them for us.
Because that is when human rights matter the most. If they only apply to a privileged class of people during certain times, then we cannot actually say we care about civil rights. They matter most in times of stress and turmoil because that is when the temptation is greatest to throw them away. It is like when my old grandad said "criminals shouldn't have any rights, goddammit!" Well, grandad was wrong. Our Bill of Rights was made specifically for
accused criminals. Citizens not under arrest or investigation have no need of a 5th amendment.
Their can be exception, but i guess the 10 year bombing that america did to Iraq after the 1991 invasion up till the 2003. OOO.. wait that right you probably never heard of the "No-Fly Zone" war and the thousands of innocent people that died in Iraq from that.
I think you have not been paying attention to the fact that I know more than you. I know about the No Fly Zone.
You'll fit right inYou sure would fit right in considering you follow the most popular ideas no matter right or wrong.
I know you are but what am I? It is replies like this that make me think responding to you is a waste of my time and effort. Please, do better than this.
As for what I "follow", you haven't a clue. Going to war in Iraq was the popular idea from 2001-2007. I was against it from the start.
the ability to influence other people, was never our militaryI would love to see the proof of this. In my opinion, it was more so our military then anything else, no wait was it the trade embargo's, or wait was it the threat that we may not send them money, or wait is it that.... I could go on and on and on... The simple fact is we do not always use our military but other things to influence others.
Incoherent. First you disagree with me. Then your last sentence sort of agrees. Make up your mind.
If the military is our greatest tool for promoting America, our best method of persuasion, that means our best method of persuasion for the last 65 years has been the threat of violence
There are two problems with that. First, threatening people does not make them respect you. If someone told you to do something - go to the store, take a shower, give them a dollar, vote them, whatever - and if you didn't they would hurt you, how would that make you feel? I would feel afraid, resentful, hateful. I would not respect that person because he is a thug and an extortionist.
The second problem with that is oppressed people throughout history have never been "broken". It seems to be a predictable human quality to resist oppression. Always. So, if one person (or country) is threatening another to make the second do what the first wants, smart money bets that eventually the second person (country) is going to fight back in some way. You see this is the case in Iraq and Afghanistan, both adventures of Bush who operated under the delusion that might makes right.
So our military has only on a few occasions made other nations do what we wanted and it has never made them like us. A nation that bullies others is a nation of thugs, unworthy of respect. We call them "rogue nations". I had a friend who, when I was griping about the Iraq war, revealed he was a republican. He said "as long as we are there we should get what we can." With that sentence I lost a lot of respect for him and it affected our friendship deeply. It meant we were pirates and he seemed okay with that.
Is that what we are? Is that what you want the US to be? Pirates with a nuclear arsenal?