Military
Don't you just love the American Military? Surely the best military in the world if you define that by the number of innocent people killed and allies accidentally shot down because they're too thick to point the rocket launcher in the other direction.
For a start the USA is famed for engaging in pointless wars. Vietnam and Iraq are too that spring to mind. In Vietnam there only reason for going to war was the irrational fear of the Communists, even though Communism is undoubtably a better political ideology than Capitalism. This war resulted in some of the great anti-war cinema, and few other wars have been so universally hated and assosciated with negatively. It was the first war when images could be broadcast instantly around the world, hammering home the atrocities being committed.
Then, the Iraq war. Why did we go to war? Was it because of the WMDs? No, of course it wasn't. The report prepared for Bush even said that there was no way Iraq had any nuclear, biological or chemical weapons. It was laid out, in black and white for him, and unless he is unable to read (an interesting hypothesis) he simply ignored what his generals were telling him. He went to war to unite the American people behind him (like Thatcher and the Falklands) and because the Twin Towers had given him an excuse to attack any country in the Middle East that isn't Israel.
I believe there is a fair chance that Iran is next on the list. Iran have just as much right as any other country to own nuclear missiles (if, indeed, that is their aim) and there is no reason we should stop them. If one country should be denied nuclear weapons it is the USA. There's even a possibility that a "tactical" nuclear missile (how can such a powerful explosive be considered tactical? It just kills everything in sight) will be used to destroy Natanz, no doubt killing thousands more innocent civilians in the process.
That is the next comment about the USA Military, killing of innocents. Just like Israel when it comes to Palestine, the USA seems to have no regard for those innocent people caught up in a pointless war. But then, what do the lives of thousands of arabs matter compared to one American? What a silly question. Forget I ever asked. There is a video of American soldiers firing a bazooka into an Iraqi house, watching it collapse while apparently shitting themselves with laughter. Gulf War II has resulted in an Iraqi Civil War, and Bush and Blair should be tried for war crimes far more than Saddam Hussein. Actually, add Sharon to that list if he ever stops being a vegetable.
Finally, Black Ops projects. Recently the US Military flew an Aurora plane over the UK but denied that it even exists, let alone that they'd been test-flying it over our country. It travels at Mach 8, the upshot of which is that it crosses the Atlantic Ocean in around an hour. Just like Area 51 the American Military denies all knowledge of it. Billions of dollars are poured into projects like the Aurora, the Nano-Armour thing, and the various things Black Ops soldiers do around the world, such as assorted assassinations. One man who tried to speak out "fell" from his penthouse suite the day before he was about to speak and fell eighteen floors. How convinient.
America puts too much reliance on their military, but nothing compares to the sheer oodles of information for tomorrow about American Lies.
For a start the USA is famed for engaging in pointless wars. Vietnam and Iraq are too that spring to mind. In Vietnam there only reason for going to war was the irrational fear of the Communists, even though Communism is undoubtably a better political ideology than Capitalism. This war resulted in some of the great anti-war cinema, and few other wars have been so universally hated and assosciated with negatively. It was the first war when images could be broadcast instantly around the world, hammering home the atrocities being committed.
Then, the Iraq war. Why did we go to war? Was it because of the WMDs? No, of course it wasn't. The report prepared for Bush even said that there was no way Iraq had any nuclear, biological or chemical weapons. It was laid out, in black and white for him, and unless he is unable to read (an interesting hypothesis) he simply ignored what his generals were telling him. He went to war to unite the American people behind him (like Thatcher and the Falklands) and because the Twin Towers had given him an excuse to attack any country in the Middle East that isn't Israel.
I believe there is a fair chance that Iran is next on the list. Iran have just as much right as any other country to own nuclear missiles (if, indeed, that is their aim) and there is no reason we should stop them. If one country should be denied nuclear weapons it is the USA. There's even a possibility that a "tactical" nuclear missile (how can such a powerful explosive be considered tactical? It just kills everything in sight) will be used to destroy Natanz, no doubt killing thousands more innocent civilians in the process.
That is the next comment about the USA Military, killing of innocents. Just like Israel when it comes to Palestine, the USA seems to have no regard for those innocent people caught up in a pointless war. But then, what do the lives of thousands of arabs matter compared to one American? What a silly question. Forget I ever asked. There is a video of American soldiers firing a bazooka into an Iraqi house, watching it collapse while apparently shitting themselves with laughter. Gulf War II has resulted in an Iraqi Civil War, and Bush and Blair should be tried for war crimes far more than Saddam Hussein. Actually, add Sharon to that list if he ever stops being a vegetable.
Finally, Black Ops projects. Recently the US Military flew an Aurora plane over the UK but denied that it even exists, let alone that they'd been test-flying it over our country. It travels at Mach 8, the upshot of which is that it crosses the Atlantic Ocean in around an hour. Just like Area 51 the American Military denies all knowledge of it. Billions of dollars are poured into projects like the Aurora, the Nano-Armour thing, and the various things Black Ops soldiers do around the world, such as assorted assassinations. One man who tried to speak out "fell" from his penthouse suite the day before he was about to speak and fell eighteen floors. How convinient.
America puts too much reliance on their military, but nothing compares to the sheer oodles of information for tomorrow about American Lies.
posted by Mkzrj at 9:22 pm
6 Comments:
There's nothing wrong with spending money on defence - it's just that America spends far too much.
America already has enough of a deterrent in its military that no-one's going to attack them (there's no denying it - the USA has the most powerful military in the world) and they don't need any more to win necessary wars (they kicked ass in Iraq - let's face it (though of course - that war wasn't necessary)) so why build a bigger military?
Take any present day country - and put them to war against a 1990s America - who'd win? America. No question - so why do they wan't more than is necessary at the expense of living conditions in their own country.
American is too gung-ho in their military campaigns. They don't spend enough time THINKING about what their actions might come to.
Here' is the sequence of events of the Iraq war:
We need oil.
Iraq has oil.
We need a reason.
Iraq has nukes!
Get 'em lads!
Let's exploit this fact to secure the oil that the western world (undoubtedly) needs.
*time passes*
Wait. We killed lots of innocent Iraqis in an illegal war just to secure ourselves some oil. We didn't think about the consequences of our actions - we just carried them out without the blindest bit of though as to the aftermath.
Whoops.
This is the Americans problem. They could have kicked Iraq with one finger - found the "weapons" within a week and killed all of Saddam's clones if they'd wanted to. Unfortunately, the failed democratic system, the scores of freedom fighters that remain and the hundreds of civilian deaths under America's belt pay testemony to the cliched fact that bigger is not always better.
Hayden.
Ps. Not that Britain did much better - but do you see stories of British soldiers parading Iraqi prisoners like dogs? Or mowing down whole families (including children) and being internationally tried for it? No.
America has enough of a deterrent in Evangelism. Who would want to take over a country with that kind of person in?
What I don't get is how America can claim to be a peace-keeping force when:
1. Iraq is now less stable than it was before George Bush stopped the "random country select" button and invaded.
2. They just stand by while Israel bombs innocents in Palestine all day, every day to "make the nasty terrorists give our soldier back".
The American military obviously doesn't rely on tactics or out-thinking the opposition (impossible for the US of A). It's a case of:
1. Pick a country (preferably with large oil reserves).
2. Attack with everything they've got in a fairly unorganised fashion.
3. Use sheer might of weapons and numbers to win.
I'm sure Montgomery (British leader in WW2) would be able to tactically beat the Americans.
Depends on what equipment they were using - and how many men. Equal equipment and men? No doubt about it - Montgomery would win. America relies solely on it's technology and size - but there's nothing wrong with that. It get's the "job" done with as few losses as possible.
Of course - whether it is the right job is another question, and I think it is obvious to most that America does not use her power effectively.
Hayden.
Well if it were a fair test, there would be equal armies. However, due to the American's heavily incorrect "We can't lose, we're American" idea they wouldn't count it as a defeat. As they say, they have never lost a war. Vietnam and Korea were "conflicts".
I think Tom's point stands too. Although, hopefully the Evangelists would be wiped out during the take-over.
Along with the entire Bush family and the entire population with IQs below 100 (who wouldn't be intelligent enough to run away). This would then begin a golden age for America as only the intelligent people would remain. Chances are that this could lead to the end of all the world's problems. Pollution would go down with fewer idiots driving "SUVs", people would actually do something about poverty, we might even find cures for currently incurrable diseases.
Of course, this new America would be called Faf-land in honour of its wonderful founder.
All hail Faf! Leader of the People's Democrativ Republican Dictatorship of Faf!
Yours humbly,
Hayden.
Post a Comment
<< Home