- Messages
- 264
- Likes
- 0
lol - it was an even bigger nonsense when I was posting
Libya wises up, realize that USA/UK Coalition are not to be messed with. Gives up WMD
- Thread starter Car Key Boi
- Start date
- Watchers 2
Hey Alan,you wanna trade?
The wrong thread of course!
Write Leap Puts on A+ to B+ S&P stocks 2 strikes OTM.
Over the last 5 years 770 trades only 5 assignments(they went on to make decent profits).
Oh BTW,you can't touch the money but you can buy stocks and sell CC's.
Other peoples money,easy!!
The wrong thread of course!
Write Leap Puts on A+ to B+ S&P stocks 2 strikes OTM.
Over the last 5 years 770 trades only 5 assignments(they went on to make decent profits).
Oh BTW,you can't touch the money but you can buy stocks and sell CC's.
Other peoples money,easy!!
Hi all,
My tuppence worth - didn't V. Putin announce a short while
back that Russia was thinking of pricing it's oil in Euro's ??
As for the collapse of the Communist regime in Russia this was
bought about by the combination of the cost of going into
Afghanistan, plus the fact that the USA, under Ronald Reagan,
upped the stakes in the Nuclear game by deploying Tomahawk
Cruise missles outside America in sites such as Greenham
Common. The Russians blinked first and this led to the meeting
in Iceland between Gorbachov and Reagan which led to the
dismantling of ICBM's. It was also under R. Reagan that the
USA bombed Libya - the long term benefit came to fruition
last week. I'll finish by stating that if the Clinton administration
had shown more resolve then all this would have come sooner!
Reddragon.
PS. as for the USA having the largest stockpile of WMD -
"Speak softly and carry a big stick"
My tuppence worth - didn't V. Putin announce a short while
back that Russia was thinking of pricing it's oil in Euro's ??
As for the collapse of the Communist regime in Russia this was
bought about by the combination of the cost of going into
Afghanistan, plus the fact that the USA, under Ronald Reagan,
upped the stakes in the Nuclear game by deploying Tomahawk
Cruise missles outside America in sites such as Greenham
Common. The Russians blinked first and this led to the meeting
in Iceland between Gorbachov and Reagan which led to the
dismantling of ICBM's. It was also under R. Reagan that the
USA bombed Libya - the long term benefit came to fruition
last week. I'll finish by stating that if the Clinton administration
had shown more resolve then all this would have come sooner!
Reddragon.
PS. as for the USA having the largest stockpile of WMD -
"Speak softly and carry a big stick"
Car Key Boi
Well-known member
- Messages
- 396
- Likes
- 8
well, i'm glad some of yuo guys remembered that Eurotard history is drenched in blood. Way more blood than anything we've ever managed. It is a fact that Eurotard imperialism has been responsible for almost every single major conflict since anyone can remember, and i include Vietnam
and here's another FTS. When WWII broke out, lefty liberals back home were calling for the US to stay out of it. They argued that it was a Eurotard problem, that those assholes are always going to war against each other every 30 years or so, and we should let them kill each other and not get involved. Even after Pearl Harbor the anti-war tards were saying the same sh!t in regard to Europe. Yeah, go to war with Japan but stay out of Europe, it's got nothing to do with us, Nazi Germany can't touch us blah blah blah
in a way, they had a point. Germany couldn't even cross the English Channel, there's no way in hell they could've landed on our East Coast. But we did get involved, and we saved yuor asses and spent billions of our dollars rebuilding YUOR MESS, not ours. And since Uncle Sam laid the smack down, yuo guys have been relatively peaceful, so go figure
anyways, i've already OWNED all the peacetards in the "Bush Visit" thread, and i could easily do the same to all the anti-American tards in this one, but i'm feeling tired. Maybe tomorrow
but whatever yuor beef is with the USA, know this
someone has to be the dominant power in the world and at the moment it happens to us. But if in the future, say someone like China, or a United States of Eurotard, whatever, were to replace the US as being the dominant force in world affairs, history has shown that WHOEVER it is, THEY ARE GONNA F*CK WITH THE WORLD EVEN WORSE THAN WHAT WE CURRENTLY DO
that is all
and here's another FTS. When WWII broke out, lefty liberals back home were calling for the US to stay out of it. They argued that it was a Eurotard problem, that those assholes are always going to war against each other every 30 years or so, and we should let them kill each other and not get involved. Even after Pearl Harbor the anti-war tards were saying the same sh!t in regard to Europe. Yeah, go to war with Japan but stay out of Europe, it's got nothing to do with us, Nazi Germany can't touch us blah blah blah
in a way, they had a point. Germany couldn't even cross the English Channel, there's no way in hell they could've landed on our East Coast. But we did get involved, and we saved yuor asses and spent billions of our dollars rebuilding YUOR MESS, not ours. And since Uncle Sam laid the smack down, yuo guys have been relatively peaceful, so go figure
anyways, i've already OWNED all the peacetards in the "Bush Visit" thread, and i could easily do the same to all the anti-American tards in this one, but i'm feeling tired. Maybe tomorrow
but whatever yuor beef is with the USA, know this
someone has to be the dominant power in the world and at the moment it happens to us. But if in the future, say someone like China, or a United States of Eurotard, whatever, were to replace the US as being the dominant force in world affairs, history has shown that WHOEVER it is, THEY ARE GONNA F*CK WITH THE WORLD EVEN WORSE THAN WHAT WE CURRENTLY DO
that is all
F
ford
You what? It was the leftwing 'liberals' that tried to keep the U.S. out of WW1 and WW2?
I don't quite think so. It was the laissez faire individualists, 'old right' who were trying to keep the U.S. out of two wars that didnt involve them, which was based upon the wisdom endowed upon the country by the founders who drafted the constitution. It was drafted that way for a reason
Wilson and Roosevelt were the ones who took the U.S. in the war, both of which were 'progressives'. It wasnt the left who tried to keep the U.S. out of the war, it was the left who took the U.S. into them!
G W. Bush is a statist as far as I'm concerned, he is not 'rightwing', hes a typical corrupt Republican who talks small government but has expanded it further than Clinton, and the expansion of government is the only reason we're dragged into wars.
And talking of Imperialist wars, what may I ask would you call the Norths invasion of the South? The confederacy was actually a country which the North invaded. That constitutes Imperialism doesnt it?
I don't quite think so. It was the laissez faire individualists, 'old right' who were trying to keep the U.S. out of two wars that didnt involve them, which was based upon the wisdom endowed upon the country by the founders who drafted the constitution. It was drafted that way for a reason
Wilson and Roosevelt were the ones who took the U.S. in the war, both of which were 'progressives'. It wasnt the left who tried to keep the U.S. out of the war, it was the left who took the U.S. into them!
G W. Bush is a statist as far as I'm concerned, he is not 'rightwing', hes a typical corrupt Republican who talks small government but has expanded it further than Clinton, and the expansion of government is the only reason we're dragged into wars.
And talking of Imperialist wars, what may I ask would you call the Norths invasion of the South? The confederacy was actually a country which the North invaded. That constitutes Imperialism doesnt it?
Ford
You mean like North Vietnam wanting South Vietnam and North Korea Wanting South Korea. Nice Left of Left Wingers trying to impose their will on the FREE peoples of the South.
You need to check your history though, as unless they've rewritten the history books, Imperialism didn't come into the US Civil War, it was about the removal of slavery.
As for your wording, No, invading another country doesn't constitute Imperialism. If you invade another country, for whatever reason, and leave it soon after, to be governed by it's people, then no 'Imperialism' has taken place.
You mean like North Vietnam wanting South Vietnam and North Korea Wanting South Korea. Nice Left of Left Wingers trying to impose their will on the FREE peoples of the South.
You need to check your history though, as unless they've rewritten the history books, Imperialism didn't come into the US Civil War, it was about the removal of slavery.
As for your wording, No, invading another country doesn't constitute Imperialism. If you invade another country, for whatever reason, and leave it soon after, to be governed by it's people, then no 'Imperialism' has taken place.
F
ford
I know my history, thanks.
Its popular opinion that the South formed the confederacy to protect slavery and the North invaded to free the slaves - it's balony.
Many of the confederate states only seceded until *after* the War began.
Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas voted to remain in the Union even after the Confederacy was formed. They only joined the Confederacy when the North began the war which they viewed as immoral and unconstitutional.
I havent even began to touch on the tariff business, the fact that slavery was to be protected under the constitution, the fact that the Republican party was quote: "a party of the North pledged against the South." -- Wendell Phillips (A Republican leader), and Lincoln was a white supremist who wanted to deport all Africans out of the United States.
By all means, this isnt an Anti American rant, I have great respect for the country of America and the people, but I have an axe to grind against all governments.
As for your examples about North Vietnam, North Korea etc.. Yep you're right, they were wars waged against free peoples. The same with the U.S. 'Civil war' North invading the South. You cant escape the fact that the Southern states, infact all states had a *right* to leave the Union.
The Southern states formed their own nation, they were invaded by the North, the North won and the states were forced back into the Union. That was an Imperialist war, but I doubt many Americans today would say that, but there are remnants of the legacy living on today.
Its popular opinion that the South formed the confederacy to protect slavery and the North invaded to free the slaves - it's balony.
Many of the confederate states only seceded until *after* the War began.
Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas voted to remain in the Union even after the Confederacy was formed. They only joined the Confederacy when the North began the war which they viewed as immoral and unconstitutional.
I havent even began to touch on the tariff business, the fact that slavery was to be protected under the constitution, the fact that the Republican party was quote: "a party of the North pledged against the South." -- Wendell Phillips (A Republican leader), and Lincoln was a white supremist who wanted to deport all Africans out of the United States.
By all means, this isnt an Anti American rant, I have great respect for the country of America and the people, but I have an axe to grind against all governments.
As for your examples about North Vietnam, North Korea etc.. Yep you're right, they were wars waged against free peoples. The same with the U.S. 'Civil war' North invading the South. You cant escape the fact that the Southern states, infact all states had a *right* to leave the Union.
The Southern states formed their own nation, they were invaded by the North, the North won and the states were forced back into the Union. That was an Imperialist war, but I doubt many Americans today would say that, but there are remnants of the legacy living on today.
Ford
Nice reply - respect.
I can't fault you having an axe to grind against all governments as they often seem to do the opposite of what seems right and proper.
If no one challenged their Governments they would just try and get away with more and more.
Have a good Xmas
Darren
Nice reply - respect.
I can't fault you having an axe to grind against all governments as they often seem to do the opposite of what seems right and proper.
If no one challenged their Governments they would just try and get away with more and more.
Have a good Xmas
Darren
Car Key Boi
Well-known member
- Messages
- 396
- Likes
- 8
heh, Ford
yuo're right about the 'old skool libs' like Wilson blah who took us into WW2. Like i said, at the time of posting, i was tired and half drunk blah. I was also feeling a little ratty having just watched a movie featuring that traitorous skank Jane Fonda aka Hanoi Jane
but there was an anti-war view coming from the veiny drifter cock libs who didn't want us to get involved because "there was no clear and present danger blah" and yeah, the right wing tards were arguing that "one drop of American blood is worth more than all the Eurosavages combined", just like what's happening now in regard to Iraq
and yuo certainly know yuor sh!t about the American Civil war. Abe Lincoln WAS a racist, and yes, like ANY war, economic issues were a factor (tariffs, the Bank of the U.S., internal improvements blah) but they never directly triggered the civil war. Nor did the explosive issue of states rights. Civil war only came about when the issue of slavery became an intractable problem
look at all of the states that seceded, and their documented reasons for secession. They wanted to secede to protect slavery
but i agree that Lincoln went to war as a last resort to prevent them from seceding, and not because the abolition of slavery was his primary concern. But slavery was THE issue on which the southern states were refusing to accept the authority of Congress
so in that sense it was about slavery, however, the war wasn't to free the slaves. Abe would have allowed slavery to continue in the south if they'd have accepted modifications, but the south wouldn't budge
anyways ford, we seem to be in complete agreement that ALL govts PAST AND PRESENT, of WHATEVER political persuasion (dem / repub / commie / blah ) of WHATEVER nationality, decide policy, for the most part, out of self interest
QUESTION FOR LIBS #25443
now that we've established that Bush's, sorry i mean Lincoln motives for going to war were not 100% pure as snow, the war which led to the abolition of slavery was totally unjustified, right? and if yuo had been posting on message boards at the time, yuo would have opposed it
right?
DIDN'T THINK SO
OWNED!!!
oh, and regarding southern tards, know this...
southern accents (drawls)=instant 30 point IQ deduction
and here's how yuo deal with SOUTHERN FOOLZ!
if a Southern Boi steps to yuo, and talks sh!t! THROW ALTOIDS ON GROUND AND HOLLER OXYCONTIN!
WHEN BILLY BOB DROPS TO HIS KNEES, KICK HIM IN HIS GOOD TOOTH!
Southern Bois=WEAKLINGS
O W N E D !
- Car Key Boi,
STRONG AS F*CK / 6' 0" / 203 LBS / BENCH 300LB+ / D N T / DIG TBK!!!
yuo're right about the 'old skool libs' like Wilson blah who took us into WW2. Like i said, at the time of posting, i was tired and half drunk blah. I was also feeling a little ratty having just watched a movie featuring that traitorous skank Jane Fonda aka Hanoi Jane
but there was an anti-war view coming from the veiny drifter cock libs who didn't want us to get involved because "there was no clear and present danger blah" and yeah, the right wing tards were arguing that "one drop of American blood is worth more than all the Eurosavages combined", just like what's happening now in regard to Iraq
and yuo certainly know yuor sh!t about the American Civil war. Abe Lincoln WAS a racist, and yes, like ANY war, economic issues were a factor (tariffs, the Bank of the U.S., internal improvements blah) but they never directly triggered the civil war. Nor did the explosive issue of states rights. Civil war only came about when the issue of slavery became an intractable problem
look at all of the states that seceded, and their documented reasons for secession. They wanted to secede to protect slavery
but i agree that Lincoln went to war as a last resort to prevent them from seceding, and not because the abolition of slavery was his primary concern. But slavery was THE issue on which the southern states were refusing to accept the authority of Congress
so in that sense it was about slavery, however, the war wasn't to free the slaves. Abe would have allowed slavery to continue in the south if they'd have accepted modifications, but the south wouldn't budge
anyways ford, we seem to be in complete agreement that ALL govts PAST AND PRESENT, of WHATEVER political persuasion (dem / repub / commie / blah ) of WHATEVER nationality, decide policy, for the most part, out of self interest
QUESTION FOR LIBS #25443
now that we've established that Bush's, sorry i mean Lincoln
motives for going to war were not 100% pure as snow, the war which led to the abolition of slavery was totally unjustified, right? and if yuo had been posting on message boards at the time, yuo would have opposed itright?
DIDN'T THINK SO
OWNED!!!
oh, and regarding southern tards, know this...
southern accents (drawls)=instant 30 point IQ deduction
and here's how yuo deal with SOUTHERN FOOLZ!
if a Southern Boi steps to yuo, and talks sh!t! THROW ALTOIDS ON GROUND AND HOLLER OXYCONTIN!
WHEN BILLY BOB DROPS TO HIS KNEES, KICK HIM IN HIS GOOD TOOTH!
Southern Bois=WEAKLINGS
O W N E D !
- Car Key Boi,
STRONG AS F*CK / 6' 0" / 203 LBS / BENCH 300LB+ / D N T / DIG TBK!!!
Car Key Boi
Well-known member
- Messages
- 396
- Likes
- 8
In This Post, a link containing the documented reasons by those SOUTHERN FOOLZ, for quitting the Union
http://sunsite.utk.edu/civil-war/reasons.html
http://sunsite.utk.edu/civil-war/reasons.html
Car Key Boi
You sound like the sort of person you wouldn't want to meet down a dark alley off Olympic. LOL
Sometimes you do talk a load of c**p (maybe it's quite sensible but I just don't understand the lingo, or you've been bashing the grass).
Sometimes you talk a lot of sense.
Your last post was the latter.
Don't expect an answer to your excellent question posed to the libs about their resistance to a war that ended slavery. That is a dilemma that will scramble their brain. So they'll just ignore your question as they have no logical answer that doesn't show up the weakness of their thinking.
Your healthy respect for your fellow citizens - particularly those south of the Mason Dixon line- is laudable. LOL
BTW, what is OXYCONTIN, and would you recommend I shout it at an Arkansas dungaree wearing gorilla (I'm NOT a 6' 200 pounder)
Have a great Xmas.
Darren
PS. I've just realised it's Christmas Eve and I'm still on a PC. Sad or what?
You sound like the sort of person you wouldn't want to meet down a dark alley off Olympic. LOL
Sometimes you do talk a load of c**p (maybe it's quite sensible but I just don't understand the lingo, or you've been bashing the grass).
Sometimes you talk a lot of sense.
Your last post was the latter.
Don't expect an answer to your excellent question posed to the libs about their resistance to a war that ended slavery. That is a dilemma that will scramble their brain. So they'll just ignore your question as they have no logical answer that doesn't show up the weakness of their thinking.
Your healthy respect for your fellow citizens - particularly those south of the Mason Dixon line- is laudable. LOL
BTW, what is OXYCONTIN, and would you recommend I shout it at an Arkansas dungaree wearing gorilla (I'm NOT a 6' 200 pounder)
Have a great Xmas.
Darren
PS. I've just realised it's Christmas Eve and I'm still on a PC. Sad or what?
Car Key Boi
Well-known member
- Messages
- 396
- Likes
- 8
darrren said:
TROOF!
CAR KEY BOI,
OPIE WITH A HIPPIE HEART AND A CONSERVATIVE HEAD / KNOWS THE QUESTIONS THAT LIBS CANNOT ANSWER / DIGTBK!
