PSX5Central
Non Gaming Discussions => Off-Topic => Topic started by: fastson on February 16, 2005, 05:55:06 AM
-
News reports are saying a aircraft has launched rockets against some sort of builing thought to be developing nuclear weapons inside Iran.
Israel?
-
Possible. Go Israel!
-
They are either quite dumb or very brave. Iran has weapons capable of reaching Israel, such a small country.
Btw, Iran and Syria has formed an "front" against outside threats.. Hmm.. Things are looking shaky!
-
Now it seems like it\'s from one of Iran\'s own planes that dropped a fuel tank on their nuclear plant.
BTW....Israel has had missiles (and possibly nukes) than can reach Iran for many many years.
-
uhm...does anybody have a link?...
-
Gmanjoe: Yep, red faces at the Iranian state news. :)
clips: news.yahoo.com , cnn.com , bbc.co.uk take a pick, lazy man. ;)
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&e=4&u=/ap/20050216/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_explosion
False alarm it seems.
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
Now it seems like it\'s from one of Iran\'s own planes that dropped a fuel tank on their nuclear plant.
BTW....Israel has had missiles (and possibly nukes) than can reach Iran for many many years.
I think its safe to bet your house that they have had nukes for quite a while now.
Isreal i mean. ;)
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
Possible. Go Israel!
Israel would be owned if Syria and Iran are joining forces. They both claim to have nukes and Israel is so small, they would be whiped out.
Unless, US of A sends a some soldiers over there to once again meddle in foreign affairs.
-
Originally posted by SirMystiq
Israel would be owned if Syria and Iran are joining forces. They both claim to have nukes and Israel is so small, they would be whiped out.
Unless, US of A sends a some soldiers over there to once again meddle in foreign affairs.
They took on 7 nations at one time and kicked all their asses. Believe me, the moment any missile is launched out of any country, Israel already knows.
Stupid kids.
-
Originally posted by SirMystiq
Israel would be owned if Syria and Iran are joining forces. They both claim to have nukes and Israel is so small, they would be whiped out.
Unless, US of A sends a some soldiers over there to once again meddle in foreign affairs.
Ok Mystiq - you get the dunce of the forum award this month(whats new) for the stupidest post in these forums all month.
Israel successfully fought off Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon in their war of independence (1949).
Israel successfully fought off Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq in the Six Day War (1967).
Israel was successful yet again in the Yom Kippur War against Egypt, Syria and Iraq (1973).
Notice a pattern here. The only people getting owned are the Arabs. Also Syria has never claimed to have a nuke and Iran is at the very least months away from having one. Also Israel is the the US\'s only reliable ally in the region - so it wouldn\'t be meddling in foreign affairs dipshit - it would be honoring an alliance.
Don\'t post any more of your ill thought out nonsense in here child. Really... your post was one big pile of your misguided shit.
-
lol
Damn.
-
Well damn Nicon, even you have to admit no thought went into his post. He claims he is an A student or whatever and he knows nothing about somewhat recent Middle Eastern history. I may disagree with a lot of you, but most of you at least put some thought and facts into your opinions. Not him... :rolleyes:
-
A lot has changed in the past 30 years you have to admit Giga. Its no garuntee that Israel alone can take on the two if something were to happen.
-
Originally posted by Halberto
A lot has changed in the past 30 years you have to admit Giga. Its no garuntee that Israel alone can take on the two if something were to happen.
The Israelis still have more lethal toys than Syria or Iran....combined.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Well damn Nicon, even you have to admit no thought went into his post. He claims he is an A student or whatever and he knows nothing about somewhat recent Middle Eastern history. I may disagree with a lot of you, but most of you at least put some thought and facts into your opinions. Not him... :rolleyes:
Yes. Damn Giga, i just might have to agree *shock* jk.
Being an A student doesnt make anybody smart when it comes to such things. Im still in college and I can tell you that nobody that i know that isnt into such things (like middle eastern history and affairs etc) knows all that much on the topic. Im not saying i dissagree. In fact i largely agree but stupid comments can be expected sometimes.
Big deal. *shrugs*
-
I know about Israel\'s superior military might from reading this forum so stupid comments like that really are stupid...
I mean...COME ON!!!
Any regular visitor should know by now...
-
Damn right Ashford - you will learn more in this forum than in any History class!!!!!! ;)
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Damn right Ashford - you will learn more in this forum than in any History class!!!!!! ;)
Thats so damn sad because its almost true.
-
I think many of us spent history class sleeping.
-
I learned more about US and European history in school than middle eastern. Not a big deal those are the only two places that matter. :)
-
Giga scared MissTiq away. Or that border patrol that Giga called visited his house. ;)
-
Damn Giga is getting all up in Mystiq\'s ass.
Sucks to be you, dude.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Ok Mystiq - you get the dunce of the forum award this month(whats new) for the stupidest post in these forums all month.
Israel successfully fought off Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon in their war of independence (1949).
Israel successfully fought off Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq in the Six Day War (1967).
Israel was successful yet again in the Yom Kippur War against Egypt, Syria and Iraq (1973).
Notice a pattern here. The only people getting owned are the Arabs. Also Syria has never claimed to have a nuke and Iran is at the very least months away from having one. Also Israel is the the US\'s only reliable ally in the region - so it wouldn\'t be meddling in foreign affairs dipshit - it would be honoring an alliance.
Don\'t post any more of your ill thought out nonsense in here child. Really... your post was one big pile of your misguided shit.
This reminds me of when I tried to tell my mom how to cook. Ouch!!!!!
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
Giga scared MissTiq away. Or that border patrol that Giga called visited his house. ;)
Don\'t think I haven\'t thought about it. ;)
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
Giga scared MissTiq away. Or that border patrol that Giga called visited his house. ;)
No he didn\'t. I was just out of school for President\'s day and the juniors are taking the incredibly easy TAKS test, so I didn\'t go to school today either.
Anyways, I could really care less about how many times Israel has beat all the other countries. It\'s a new world, a new face and there are people out there willing to kill themselves to destroy the US-or it\'s puppet countries like Israel. And now with the sudden and possible arms race, regardless of how big your army is, a nuke would whipe out so many people.
Contrary to what many believe, the US Government IS trying to negotiate with the insurgents in Iraq. They claim that Iran is controlling the new Iraqi government and yada yada yada.
How the hell is it now meddling in foreign affairs when you are helping an ally fight against another country. Yes it\'s an alliance but the goverment is still MEDDLING IN AN AFFAIR THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.
That\'s meddling. For example, if a friend of mine gets in a fight with another guy, and I help my friend fight the guy, regardless of my alliance with my friend, I\'M STILL MEDDLING.
It\'s a very bendable word dipshit.
And about that last post-
You and Gman are the biggest asses that I\'ve ever dealt with in my life. America sure is breeding idiotic bigots now adays.
-
Hehe! You said Israel is a puppet state of the US. BWAHAHAH!
Miss Tiq = stupid
So you\'re also saying that the US meddled in the affairs of Britain and France in WW2? Please tell your parents that they passed on the stupid gene to you.
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
Hehe! You said Israel is a puppet state of the US. BWAHAHAH!
Miss Tiq = stupid
So you\'re also saying that the US meddled in the affairs of Britain and France in WW2? Please tell your parents that they passed on the stupid gene to you.
Before you make any stupid assumptions about the word "puppet state" I know what it means. I could find no other word to fit the definition of a country that has the United States as it\'s main protector. Don\'t deny that Israel is always kept on a leash by the US...or the other way around.
Yes, I will tell my parents that a moronic fool called me stupid...
Oh, and by the way, king of intelligence. The US declared war against Japan with the backing of Britain. Then Germany declared war on the US. Therefore, there was no meddling. It\'s ironic that we look back at the Nazi\'s and cry over how they put the Jews under torture and grouped them all in concentration camps. When the phobia against the Japanese stopped short of torture.
-
Miss tiq, you are about as sharp as a bowling ball.
Israel does what it wants, when it wants.
You say that supplying war material to allies is meddling, then did you know that the US was supplying war materials to the British at least 3 years before the US entered WW2? So by your definition, the US was meddling the affairs of Germany by providing arms to Britain.
You need to drop the chalupa and pick up a history book, cabron.
The problem with stupid people like you, Miss tiq, is that you don\'t know you\'re stupid.
-
Originally posted by SirMystiq
Before you make any stupid assumptions about the word "puppet state" I know what it means. I could find no other word to fit the definition of a country that has the United States as it\'s main protector. Don\'t deny that Israel is always kept on a leash by the US...or the other way around.
Oh, and by the way, king of intelligence. The US declared war against Japan with the backing of Britain.
Israel a puppet state of the US? :laughing: As Gman said Israel does what it wants.
The US would have declared war on Japan with or without the backing of any other country moron.
Gman > Miss Tiq
Miss Tiq = owned.
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
Miss tiq, you are about as sharp as a bowling ball.
Israel does what it wants, when it wants.
You say that supplying war material to allies is meddling, then did you know that the US was supplying war materials to the British at least 3 years before the US entered WW2? So by your definition, the US was meddling the affairs of Germany by providing arms to Britain.
You need to drop the chalupa and pick up a history book, cabron.
The problem with stupid people like you, Miss tiq, is that you don\'t know you\'re stupid.
Your head is too busy bubbling with similies that it barely has time to actually digest and accurately summarize my post.
Yes, it is meddling. The US was aiding a war that was majorly European when the Nazi\'s where trying to wipe out the world of Jews and follow up with the neverending wish to conquer the world. The US responded to an attack FROM JAPAN and declared war ON JAPAN. Never on the European attackers. Germany was the one that decided to declare war on the US.
That is all besides the point. What the hell where you trying to prove by using my "definiton" to prove that the US was meddling in the affairs of Germany? It wasn\'t "Germany\'s" affairs moron, it was European affairs. And soon it turned into a world affair.
As for the rest of your post. I\'m really not one to respond to the flood of stupidiy coming from such a racist and insolent fool such as yourself and your like minded friends like Giga. Your attempts to heighten your level of security are only highlighted by your constant attempts to take a hack at my intelligence. Nice job moron, now you can cheer among your idiotic friends on how you called somebody names in order to add a dash of insult to your bland and pointless post.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Israel a puppet state of the US? :laughing: As Gman said Israel does what it wants.
The US would have declared war on Japan with or without the backing of any other country moron.
Gman > Miss Tiq
Miss Tiq = owned.
Who gives a shit Giga?
What the hell does the intention of the US declaring war on Japan alongside Great Britain have anything to do with the fact that it appeared it had no intentions in entering WW2?
You are so predictable. Relying on bull shit oberservations in order to strengthen your out of topic point. Thanks alot, you insulted and showed that you can look back into the past and predict actions, now go celebrate with Gman.
-
THE STRATEGIC FUNCTIONS OF U.S. AID TO ISRAEL
By Stephen Zunes
Dr. Zunes is an assistant professor in the Department of Politics at the University of San Francisco
Since 1992, the U.S. has offered Israel an additional $2 billion annually in loan guarantees. Congressional researchers have disclosed that between 1974 and 1989, $16.4 billion in U.S. military loans were converted to grants and that this was the understanding from the beginning. Indeed, all past U.S. loans to Israel have eventually been forgiven by Congress, which has undoubtedly helped Israel\'s often-touted claim that they have never defaulted on a U.S. government loan. U.S. policy since 1984 has been that economic assistance to Israel must equal or exceed Israel\'s annual debt repayment to the United States. Unlike other countries, which receive aid in quarterly installments, aid to Israel since 1982 has been given in a lump sum at the beginning of the fiscal year, leaving the U.S. government to borrow from future revenues. Israel even lends some of this money back through U.S. treasury bills and collects the additional interest.
Total U.S. aid to Israel is approximately one-third of the American foreign-aid budget, even though Israel comprises just .001 percent of the world\'s population and already has one of the world\'s higher per capita incomes. Indeed, Israel\'s GNP is higher than the combined GNP of Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, the West Bank and Gaza. With a per capita income of about $14,000, Israel ranks as the sixteenth wealthiest country in the world; Israelis enjoy a higher per capita income than oil-rich Saudi Arabia and are only slightly less well-off than most Western European countries.
AID does not term economic aid to Israel as development assistance, but instead uses the term "economic support funding." Given Israel\'s relative prosperity, U.S. aid to Israel is becoming increasingly controversial. In 1994, Yossi Beilen, deputy foreign minister of Israel and a Knesset member, told the Women\'s International Zionist organization, "If our economic situation is better than in many of your countries, how can we go on asking for your charity?"
ONE THIRD.
-
"U.S. Aid to Israel: Interpreting the \'Strategic Relationship"\'
by Stephen Zunes
"The U.S. aid relationship with ISRAEL IS UNLIKE ANY OTHER in the world," said Stephen Zunes during a January 26 CPAP presentation. "In sheer volume, the amount is the most generous foreign aid program ever between any two countries," added Zunes, associate professor of Politics and chair of the Peace and Justice Studies Program at the University of San Francisco.
He explored the strategic reasoning behind the aid, asserting that it parallels the "needs of American arms exporters" and the role "Israel could play in advancing U.S. strategic interests in the region."
Although Israel is an "advanced, industrialized, technologically sophisticated country," it "receives more U.S. aid per capita annually than the total annual [Gross Domestic Product] per capita of several Arab states." Approximately a third of the entire U.S. foreign aid budget goes to Israel, "even though Israel comprises just…one-thousandth of the world\'s total population, and already has one of the world\'s higher per capita incomes."
U.S. government officials argue that this money is necessary for "moral" reasons-some even say that Israel is a "democracy battling for its very survival." If that were the real reason, however, aid should have been highest during Israel\'s early years, and would have declined as Israel grew stronger. Yet "the pattern…has been just the opposite." According to Zunes, "99 percent of all U.S. aid to Israel took place after the June 1967 war, when Israel found itself more powerful than any combination of Arab armies…."
The U.S. supports Israel\'s dominance so it can serve as "a surrogate for American interests in this vital strategic region." "Israel has helped defeat radical nationalist movements" and has been a "testing ground for U.S. made weaponry." Moreover, the intelligence agencies of both countries have "collaborated," and "Israel has funneled U.S. arms to third countries that the U.S. [could] not send arms to directly,…Iike South Africa, like the Contras, Guatemala under the military junta, [and] Iran." Zunes cited an Israeli analyst who said: "\'It\'s like Israel has just become another federal agency when it\'s convenient to use and you want something done quietly."\' Although the strategic relationship between the United States and the Gulf Arab states in the region has been strengthening in recent years, these states "do not have the political stability, the technological sophistication, [or] the number of higher-trained armed forces personnel" as does Israel.
Matti Peled, former Israeli major general and Knesset member, told Zunes that he and most Israeli generals believe this aid is "little more than an American subsidy to U.S. arms manufacturers," considering that the majority of military aid to Israel is used to buy weapons from the U.S. Moreover, arms to Israel create more demand for weaponry in Arab states. According to Zunes, "the Israelis announced back in 1991 that they supported the idea of a freeze in Middle East arms transfers, yet it was the United States that rejected it."
In the fall of 1993-when many had high hopes for peace-78 senators wrote to former President Bill Clinton insisting that aid to Israel remain "at current levels." Their "only reason" was the "massive procurement of sophisticated arms by Arab states." The letter neglected to mention that 80 percent of those arms to Arab countries came from the U.S. "I\'m not denying for a moment the power of AIPAC [the American Israel Public Affairs Committee], the pro-Israel lobby," and other similar groups, Zunes said. Yet the "Aerospace Industry Association which promotes these massive arms shipments…is even more influential." This association has given two times more money to campaigns than all of the pro-Israel groups combined. Its "force on Capitol Hill, in terms of lobbying, surpasses that of even AIPAC." Zunes asserted that the "general thrust of U.S. policy would be pretty much the same even if AIPAC didn\'t exist. We didn\'t need a pro-Indonesia lobby to support Indonesia in its savage repression of East Timor all these years." This is a complex issue, and Zunes said that he did not want to be "conspiratorial," but he asked the audience to imagine what "Palestinian industriousness, Israeli technology, and Arabian oil money…would do to transform the Middle East…. [W]hat would that mean to American arms manufacturers? Oil companies? Pentagon planners?"
"An increasing number of Israelis are pointing out" that these funds are not in Israel\'s best interest. Quoting Peled, Zunes said, "this aid pushes Israel \'toward a posture of callous intransigence\' in terms of the peace process." Moreover, for every dollar the U.S. sends in arms aid, Israel must spend two to three dollars to train people to use the weaponry, to buy parts, and in other ways make use of the aid. Even "main-stream Israeli economists are saying [it] is very harmful to the country\'s future."
The Israeli paper Yediot Aharonot described Israel as "\'the godfather\'s messenger\' since [Israel] undertake the \'dirty work\' of a godfather who \'always tries to appear to be the owner of some large, respectable business."\' Israeli satirist B. Michael refers to U.S. aid this way: "\'My master gives me food to eat and I bite those whom he tells me to bite. It\'s called strategic cooperation." \'To challenge this strategic relationship, one cannot focus solely on the Israeli lobby but must also examine these "broader forces as well." "Until we tackle this issue head-on," it will be "very difficult to win" in other areas relating to Palestine.
"The results" of the short-term thinking behind U.S. policy "are tragic," not just for the "immediate victims" but "eventually [for] Israel itself" and "American interests in the region." The U.S. is sending enormous amounts of aid to the Middle East, and yet "we are less secure than ever"-both in terms of U.S. interests abroad and for individual Americans. Zunes referred to a "growing and increasing hostility [of] the average Arab toward the United States." In the long term, said Zunes, "peace and stability and cooperation with the vast Arab world is far more important for U.S. interests than this alliance with Israel."
This is not only an issue for those who are working for Palestinian rights, but it also "jeopardizes the entire agenda of those of us concerned about human rights, concerned about arms control, concerned about international law." Zunes sees significant potential in "building a broad-based movement around it."
The above text is based on remarks, delivered on. 26 January, 2001 by Stephen Zunes - Associate Professor of Politics and Chair of the Peace and Justice Studies Program at San Francisco University.
http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm
Military and Economic Aid
Since 1976, Israel had been the largest annual recipient of U.S. foreign assistance. According to a November 2001 Congressional Research Service report, Israel: U.S. Foreign Assistance, U.S. aid to Israel in the last half century has totaled a whopping $81.3 billion.
In recent years, Israel remains the top recipient of U.S. military and economic assistance. The most commonly cited figure is $3 billion a year, with about $1.8 billion a year in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) grants from the Department of Defense and an additional $1.2 billion a year in Economic Support Funds (ESF) from the Department of State. In the last decade FMF grants to Israel have totaled $18.2 billion. In fact, 17% of all U.S. foreign aid is earmarked for Israel.
For 2003, the Bush administration is proposing that Israel receive $2.76 billion in foreign aid, with $2.1 billion in FMF and $600 million in ESF. An additional $28 million will go to Israel for the purchase U.S. manufactured counter terrorism equipment.
FREE WEAPONS TO ISRAEL
The U.S. also gives Israel weapons and ammunition as part of the Excess Defense Articles (EDA) program, providing these articles completely free of charge. Between 1994-2001 the U.S. provided many weapons through this program, including:
64,744 M-16A1 rifles
2,469 M-204 grenade launchers
1,500 M-2 .50 caliber machine guns
.30 caliber, .50 caliber, and 20mm ammunition
You\'re right Giga. A country that receives the most aid from the United States, that just happens to be in the middle east, that just happens to be the only true ally the US has there, that just happens to be the strongest militarily and would probably be the only country the US backs up in a war. Yes, that is the complete opposite of a pet country.
-
What does aid have to do with being a puppet state?
What the hell does the intention of the US declaring war on Japan alongside Great Britain have anything to do with the fact that it appeared it had no intentions in entering WW2?
You brought it up not me. I still fail to see why you even brought up the UK declaring war on Japan when you are talking about why the US did.
Something you also fail to realize is what the word alliance means. Go look it up.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
What does aid have to do with being a puppet state?
You brought it up not me. I still fail to see why you even brought up the UK declaring war on Japan when you are talking about why the US did.
Something you also fail to realize is what the word alliance means. Go look it up.
It was for HISTORICAL REFERENCE. That is how I remember it:
History teacher:
"When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, that caused the US, alongside Great Britain, to declare war on Japan. Later on, Germany declared war on the United States"
It was NOT A MAJOR POINT OF MY POST. But there you go again, trying to find something nitpicky in order to chew on it and spit it out by attempting it to connect it for my "hatred" toward this country.
I know what alliance mean. What the hell does that have anything to do with it? Alliance, dependent state...whatever. Same thing.
And AID. The United States gives Israel ONE THIRD of it\'s foreign aid. What does that mean to you? Surely, Israel is not being taken care of by the US right? I mean, it\'s just a massive amount of money being spent on a tiny country, it\'s out of friendship, right?
Please, my dog could hide his shit better than that.
-
What the hell do you think the elections are about in Israel? That\'s it\'s rigged? So they can control Israel?
Please prove that Israel is a puppet state other than foriegn aid. Foriegn aid does not equate to puppeteering another country.
I mean....crikey....the US sent aid to the Philippines, Cyprus, Turkey, Jordan, several African nations....HOLY COW! MEXICO!!!!
AY CARAMBA! Drop the chalupa! YOU\'RE A PUPPET!
Miss Tiq....please castrate yourself so that you cannot have children. I\'m afraid your kids will be as stupid as you.
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
What the hell do you think the elections are about in Israel? That\'s it\'s rigged? So they can control Israel?
Please prove that Israel is a puppet state other than foriegn aid. Foriegn aid does not equate to puppeteering another country.
I mean....crikey....the US sent aid to the Philippines, Cyprus, Turkey, Jordan, several African nations....HOLY COW! MEXICO!!!!
AY CARAMBA! Drop the chalupa! YOU\'RE A PUPPET!
Miss Tiq....please castrate yourself so that you cannot have children. I\'m afraid your kids will be as stupid as you.
Here we go. I remember stating that the definition of a "puppet" country is not the literal term. Israel is the US\' baby and I\'ve never claimed that the US had any sort of control on the country. It might have influence, with such huge amounts of aid given to it, but other than that it\'s not literally a "puppet" country.
Nice try. You try to squeeze out as much as you could out of the denotation of a word.
The US sends Israel ONE THIRD of foreign policy. Why do you bring up all of those other countries? What the do they have anything to do with it? I never said the US doesn\'t aid other countries, they aren\'t as "generous" to them as they are to Israel, eventhough some of those countries need the aid alot more than Israel.
And then you continue with your racist remarks. Very predictable. Why don\'t you actually grow a penis so I can tell you to castrate yourself also?
We don\'t need any dogmatist walking around with their heads up their ass.
-
Originally posted by SirMystiq
Here we go. I remember stating that the definition of a "puppet" country is not the literal term. Israel is the US\' baby and I\'ve never claimed that the US had any sort of control on the country. It might have influence, with such huge amounts of aid given to it, but other than that it\'s not literally a "puppet" country.
Nice try. You try to squeeze out as much as you could out of the denotation of a word.
The US sends Israel ONE THIRD of foreign policy. Why do you bring up all of those other countries? What the do they have anything to do with it? I never said the US doesn\'t aid other countries, they aren\'t as "generous" to them as they are to Israel, eventhough some of those countries need the aid alot more than Israel.
And then you continue with your racist remarks. Very predictable. Why don\'t you actually grow a penis so I can tell you to castrate yourself also?
We don\'t need any dogmatist walking around with their heads up their ass.
So now you\'re back pedaling from the literal meaning of "puppet". Nice try. But it\'s quite difficult for me to argue with one who doesn\'t even know the proper definition and makes up his own. The reason why I brought up the other countries (coz you can\'t get a clue) is that since the US sends aid to them, they are also puppets to you.
I don\'t care if Israel gets 1/3rd or 1/30th of the total aid the US sends. I have a feeling you don\'t like Israel getting help from the US. Maybe coz you\'re anti-semetic.
I\'m not racist, you little chihuahua. I certainly ain\'t anti-semetic like you.
-
Originally posted by SirMystiq
Before you make any stupid assumptions about the word "puppet state" I know what it means. I could find no other word to fit the definition of a country that has the United States as it\'s main protector. Don\'t deny that Israel is always kept on a leash by the US...or the other way around.
I typed that about 6 posts ago. Before you attempted to prove a point by using a word to boost your stupidity. I know what a puppet state is, but I had no other word for it at the time. It happens. Deal with it.
I never said that about the other countries. And before you get any more happy with the word "puppet" let\'s make it clear now that I did not intend the word to be used in it\'s dictionary-or known meaning, instead I used it in a more connotative way.
Yes, GmanJane. You have figured me out. My blind hate doesn\'t end toward racist rednecks such as some in these forums, it also extends to the Jewish community. Nice job! Now, go on and masterbate to your own, self-acquired sense of intellectual security. Which you show by your tasteless, ignorant and tacky comments about my race.
-
The race of Chihuahuas?
Israel is an ally. Look up the definition of ally. Now look up the word "puppet state". I promise you\'ll be smarter if you do.
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
The race of Chihuahuas?
Israel is an ally. Look up the definition of ally. Now look up the word "puppet state". I promise you\'ll be smarter if you do.
Yes, the race of Chihuahuas...Idiot.
I think I already said. Regardless of the status of another country, the US has put alot of financial support to Israel, even though it has other allies. And like I\'ve said before Jane, I know what a puppet state is.
Did you look them up? Appereantly, your theory about looking them up doesn\'t exactly work.
-
Originally posted by SirMystiq
Yes, the race of Chihuahuas...Idiot.
I think I already said. Regardless of the status of another country, the US has put alot of financial support to Israel, even though it has other allies. And like I\'ve said before Jane, I know what a puppet state is.
Did you look them up? Appereantly, your theory about looking them up doesn\'t exactly work.
I can\'t take your argument seriously at all since this stupid definition of yours is plainly rediculous. Then you say the US meddled in the affairs of Germany and Britain when it provided arms to Britain.
Meddle : To intrude into other people\'s affairs or business; interfere.
But Britain obviously didn\'t think the US was meddling! Israel doesn\'t think so either. By your screwed up definition, they are puppet states of the US. YOUR DEFINITION.
You don\'t need me to point out how stupid you are. You do that on your own pretty well. You should be ashamed. Maybe that\'s okay in your family but in mine, stupidity is looked down upon.
-
puppet state
n : a government that is appointed by and whose affairs are directed by an outside authority that may impose hardships on those governed
Ally
n 1: a friendly nation 2: an associate who provides assistance; "he\'s a good ally in fight"; "they were friends of the workers"
Sir Miss Tiq
n: 1. A dumb ass and offspring of illegal aliens that flounders around trying to be a politcal know-it-all at PSX2Central.
2. Gman\'s bitch.
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
puppet state
n : a government that is appointed by and whose affairs are directed by an outside authority that may impose hardships on those governed
Ally
n 1: a friendly nation 2: an associate who provides assistance; "he\'s a good ally in fight"; "they were friends of the workers"
Sir Miss Tiq
n: 1. A dumb ass and offspring of illegal aliens that flounders around trying to be a politcal know-it-all at PSX2Central.
2. Gman\'s bitch.
That pretty much sums up the whole argument.
-
K just to clarify something for someone who has just started reading this:
Israel could walk over the Middle-East anytime. The world has indeed changed, and they have only become stronger with it. Don\'t kid yourselves, Israel is the only middle eastern country with a decent air force. I say decent but in truth they are muther fucking godly and everyone in their military is beyond well trained and has tons of experience from leaving under siege 24/7.
Israel>middle east. Sorry but nothing there touches their air force.
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
I can\'t take your argument seriously at all since this stupid definition of yours is plainly rediculous. Then you say the US meddled in the affairs of Germany and Britain when it provided arms to Britain.
Meddle : To intrude into other people\'s affairs or business; interfere.
But Britain obviously didn\'t think the US was meddling! Israel doesn\'t think so either. By your screwed up definition, they are puppet states of the US. YOUR DEFINITION.
You don\'t need me to point out how stupid you are. You do that on your own pretty well. You should be ashamed. Maybe that\'s okay in your family but in mine, stupidity is looked down upon.
I think the problem is that you just want to stick to the word instead of my claim.
Israel gets extraordinary help from the US. I could care less of their status as allies, the US has(or had) many allies but none are as crucial as Israel simply because of its geographical position. Israel is the only Middle-Eastern country that is not as hostile as the others. Therefore, the US feeds them absurd amounts of money.
The US DID MEDDLE in the war in Europe. What is so hard to understand? The US was in no way involved in the war or attack during the beginning. By providing arms to Britain, yes it was helping an ally, but IT\'S STILL MEDDLING!
I already stated, way before you decided to clinch on to a word, what I meant, or I MEANT to say by using the word puppet. I\'m aware of it\'s historical meaning and I don\'t need for you to boost your ego by pretending to educate me.
So, unless you can get over that one single word, the rest of your post as well as the recent ones only serve to highlight to the rest of us that you are well trained in 6th grade vocabulary.
And judging by your most recent post, you are also still at the mindset of one.
-
Israel definately has the best trained military in the middle east..what do you expect when we gave them most of their equipment and trained them ourselves.
Consider them a Jr. America as far as their equipment and training.
And constantly insulting someone in your posts is just a clever attempt at deflecting attention from your argument. But it sure is fun to read.
:)
-
Wtf is the argument about here?
Israel\'s government is more like ours. The people there think more like ours. The Allies (Mainly Great Britain) were the driving force behind the Zionist movement actually realizing its goal.
So of COURSE were allys. And of Course we back each other up, but now that the middle eastern situation has become more complicated, we are making a larger effort to NOT take sides.
And with that said.
The Zionist movement created a lot of problems, and in hindsight, it probley wasn\'t the best idea. Neither side is being very productive, and neither side is that "into" considering the others demands, mostly because the two sides demands are direct opposites.... but yeah.
It\'s fucked, and it\'s everybodys fault.
-
Originally posted by JBean
Israel definately has the best trained military in the middle east..what do you expect when we gave them most of their equipment and trained them ourselves.
Consider them a Jr. America as far as their equipment and training.
And constantly insulting someone in your posts is just a clever attempt at deflecting attention from your argument. But it sure is fun to read.
:)
That is my point. Israel would not be anywhere NEAR their current power without the extended help of the US. The US MADE Israel into what it is today.
I have tried to stay away from insulting, only because I like using this forums to try out new way for me to write(I have to take an AP Literature Test soon) I just get tired of constant racial hazing that Gman and Giga love to use.
-
Originally posted by SirMystiq
That is my point. Israel would not be anywhere NEAR their current power without the extended help of the US. The US MADE Israel into what it is today.
That\'s your POINT???? Crikey....that\'s common knowledge! Just to make you remember, you said Israel is a puppet state of the US. WRONG. So I pointed and laughed at you. You even said Israel would get owned by Iran and Syria. WRONG AGAIN.
Israel holds elections and choose their own leaders so how can they be a puppet state? If you had some real IQ, you wouldn\'t have said that. If you knew about Israel\'s history, you wouldn\'t have said they\'d get owned by Iran and Syria.
THen I got you baited to say that the US meddled in the European affair in WW2. WRONG. Britain and France WANTED the US to get involved. THAT IS NOT MEDDLING. Do you understand English or are you just stupid, stupid?
Miss Tiq....get your parents to read this. This way they know how ignorant their child is. Wait....can they even read in English?
-
Honestly, Gman and Giga.
You both need to shut the fuck up with the racist remarks.
-
WTF did I say? You need to watch yourself DH. You also need to take into account that Miss tiq has brought this upon himself with his "blame whitey" comments. If Gman or anyone else was attacking him like this and he had not said those things it would be different. That being said, Gman please don\'t keep instigating Miss tiq unless he sticks his foot in his mouth again.
Also DH don\'t tell me to STFU when I haven\'t attacked him racially - especially in this thread. I attacked him for the content (or lack of intelligence) of his posts. This is so typical of a left leaning person - not one mention on his behavior, yet if someone who leans right says something you crucify them... why am I not surprised?
One more racial attack or instigating reference by anyone in this thread and it will be closed.
-
Oh shit! And I was just about to say how all this is just another plot against the blackman.
-
Originally posted by QuDDus
Oh shit! And I was just about to say how all this is just another plot against the blackman.
It was that obvious? ;)
-
If he says racist things, then it goes for him too.
I just so happen to not read all of his posts. :P
-
Originally posted by Deadly Hamster
I just so happen to not read all of his posts. :P
Can\'t say I blame you there.
-
hmmm..i wasn\'t gonna chime in on this..mainly for the fact that my knowledge of wwII is not as in depth as most in here...but as far as israel is concerned...yes israel will dominate any arab country over there..imo tho i feel that the u.s. keeps a small leash on israel only for the fact that if they(israel) went all out and just started annihilating (spel) s**t over there other arab countries would get involved causing probably another major war...
yea i know it\'s been stated that israel took on several countries, but i only say that because in the gulf war the u.s. told israel not to get involved when iraq was lobbing missles at them for fear it would get other arab countries involved....that\'s my opinion..
as far as mystiq goes, i can see where he\'s comin from to an extent,i think he\'s trying to say that israel can pop alot of s**t because at the end of the day the u.s. has their back, it\'s like israel is a small spoiled rich brat poppin s**t at the lower income people and the u.s. is the parent sayin "stop it joey..it\'s not nice to call people names or to tease them" so the u.s. talks to the palestinians and states "don\'t worry we\'ll talk to joey about his behavior"
giga and gman i gotta admit you guys have proven your point ten times over, the ripping you\'re giving to mystiq is a little over the top, i mean i know what he was tryin to say and yet even tho in some aspects where he\'s been wrong...in some of the wwII facts you guys continue to shred him even after he tried to explain why he stated it...you cats just need to let it go....
-
The reason it keeps getting prolonged is due to Miss tiq posting and reposting the same argument. As long as the race baiting stops I don\'t care what they say to each other and I will continue to voice my pov whenever I see someone post something that is false.
-
Simply wow...
A major ally is under threat of annihilation and by providing help, its called meddling...
I hope no one close to you ever gets attacked in any way, Mystiq, cause they\'re a goner, since you certainly wouldn\'t be helping them, lest you be labelled as "meddling"...
-
since everyone is throwing the "meddling" word around does anybody know the relationship between syria and iraq before we invaded? i say that cause giga posted in another thread talkin about syria meddling in iraq affairs...if syria wasn\'t hostile toward iraq in any manner before the war, could they have been considered an ally?, and simply if they are indeed supplying insurgents with supplies, could it be looked at as if syria is helping an ally?
i\'m bein a little sarcastic, but at the same time bein serious about the question of the relationship between syria and iraq before the war...
-
You could look at it that way clips - but the fact is the Baathist Iraqi government is gone. If they wanted to help they should have done it when the US went in, but they didn\'t. Now they are supporting terrorists who not only kill Americans, but Iraqi civilians. The reality is the Baathist party is not coming back and no matter how much they help these insurgents it isn\'t going to happen.
If you want to bring up Syria and meddling you don\'t have to look much further and see what they have done to Lebanon. That I believe is their goal in Iraq - even though it is pure fantasy - to estabish a Syrian controlled Baathist government in Iraq.
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
That\'s your POINT???? Crikey....that\'s common knowledge! Just to make you remember, you said Israel is a puppet state of the US. WRONG. So I pointed and laughed at you. You even said Israel would get owned by Iran and Syria. WRONG AGAIN.
Israel holds elections and choose their own leaders so how can they be a puppet state? If you had some real IQ, you wouldn\'t have said that. If you knew about Israel\'s history, you wouldn\'t have said they\'d get owned by Iran and Syria.
THen I got you baited to say that the US meddled in the European affair in WW2. WRONG. Britain and France WANTED the US to get involved. THAT IS NOT MEDDLING. Do you understand English or are you just stupid, stupid?
Miss Tiq....get your parents to read this. This way they know how ignorant their child is. Wait....can they even read in English?
Yes, that was my point. I\'m sorry I didn\'t put it simple enough for you. That\'s the last time I try spicing up my sentences with allusions, connotation and other devices...
As I said before...Israel would be NOTHING without the states. I don\'t know if Israel has Nuclear capabilities, but if a war was to break out Israel would be wipped out with two of the damn things. And I\'m not even going to adress the "puppet" word again, I\'m sorry to have confused you.
You baited me...Yes. You did.
"Britain and France WANTED the US to get involved. THAT IS NOT MEDDLING"
How is that meddling. If I recall, the US had the full intention of not getting involved at all in the war. I wonder why? Could of be because they saw no reason to become militarily involved? Or maybe we thought the war was too far away from our shores and it wouldn\'t necessarily affect us? Who knows, the truth is that we were brought into the war by Japan. Not even that, we weren\'t technically in the European war until Germany declared war on the US.
I\'m beginning to think that my understanding of English supersedes yours...I don\'t know. It\'s probably your constant child-like insults.
And my mom\'s English sucks. My dad knows just enough to keep his job.
-
Originally posted by SirMystiq
Yes, that was my point. I\'m sorry I didn\'t put it simple enough for you. That\'s the last time I try spicing up my sentences with allusions, connotation and other devices...
As I said before...Israel would be NOTHING without the states. I don\'t know if Israel has Nuclear capabilities, but if a war was to break out Israel would be wipped out with two of the damn things. And I\'m not even going to adress the "puppet" word again, I\'m sorry to have confused you.
I\'m not arguing with you about Israel\'s strength. That was not what got me laughing at you. It was your skewed definition of "puppet" which meant "supplying arms to Israel is meddling". I baited you into saying the same thing about the Allies in WW2. It was very easy to intice you.
Originally posted by SirMystiq
You baited me...Yes. You did.
"Britain and France WANTED the US to get involved. THAT IS NOT MEDDLING"
How is that meddling. If I recall, the US had the full intention of not getting involved at all in the war. [/B]
I want to you read the definition of meddling again. The US supplied arms to Britain and the USSR, and even France and China. By their invitation. That is not meddling. Do you understand that? Again, you are completely ignoring this part. Again : That was not meddling. To the Nazis it was, to the Allies, it was not. What are you? A Nazi sympathizer now? Well...maybe I wasn\'t too far off about you being anti-semetic.
Originally posted by SirMystiq
I wonder why? Could of be because they saw no reason to become militarily involved? Or maybe we thought the war was too far away from our shores and it wouldn\'t necessarily affect us? Who knows, the truth is that we were brought into the war by Japan. Not even that, we weren\'t technically in the European war until Germany declared war on the US.
[/B]
WRONG. Not militarily involved???? If you think that the US had absolutely no intention of getting involved in the European war, you are extremely naive. The US had warships guarding supply ships destined for Britain. U.S. WARSHIPS GUARDING U.S. SUPPLY SHIPS. The US wasn\'t exactly neutral in practice, were they? Despite the "official" neutrality stance of the US.
The US and Canada had already made preparations for the war in Europe. If you opened yer damn history book, you\'ll see that by early 1941, the US had begun massing and training its troops for war Europe (they still did not believe that Japan would attack them). They supplied arms to their allies (Britain, USSR and even China) FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE UNITED STATES. Think of it as an undeclared war against the Axis.
THERE! I have shined more light upon you ignorance making smarter than you were a while ago. You should be thankful I\'m education your sorry ass. I schooled yer ass.
Originally posted by SirMystiq
I\'m beginning to think that my understanding of English supersedes yours...I don\'t know. It\'s probably your constant child-like insults.
[/B]
My insults about you are not unfounded. I call you stupid because you said stupid things. I called you ignorant, because you are ignorant. THEY ARE INSULTING TO YOU BECAUSE THE TRUTH HURTS. I will not apologize for your own ignorance and stupidity.
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
I\'m not arguing with you about Israel\'s strength. That was not what got me laughing at you. It was your skewed definition of "puppet" which meant "supplying arms to Israel is meddling". I baited you into saying the same thing about the Allies in WW2. It was very easy to intice you.
I want to you read the definition of meddling again. The US supplied arms to Britain and the USSR, and even France and China. By their invitation. That is not meddling. Do you understand that? Again, you are completely ignoring this part. Again : That was not meddling. To the Nazis it was, to the Allies, it was not. What are you? A Nazi sympathizer now? Well...maybe I wasn\'t too far off about you being anti-semetic.
WRONG. Not militarily involved???? If you think that the US had absolutely no intention of getting involved in the European war, you are extremely naive. The US had warships guarding supply ships destined for Britain. U.S. WARSHIPS GUARDING U.S. SUPPLY SHIPS. The US wasn\'t exactly neutral in practice, were they? Despite the "official" neutrality stance of the US.
The US and Canada had already made preparations for the war in Europe. If you opened yer damn history book, you\'ll see that by early 1941, the US had begun massing and training its troops for war Europe (they still did not believe that Japan would attack them). They supplied arms to their allies (Britain, USSR and even China) FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE UNITED STATES. Think of it as an undeclared war against the Axis.
THERE! I have shined more light upon you ignorance making smarter than you were a while ago. You should be thankful I\'m education your sorry ass. I schooled yer ass.
My insults about you are not unfounded. I call you stupid because you said stupid things. I called you ignorant, because you are ignorant. THEY ARE INSULTING TO YOU BECAUSE THE TRUTH HURTS. I will not apologize for your own ignorance and stupidity.
The US was preparing for the war. It doesn\'t necessarily mean that the intentions to join the war were still there. It proved to be a wise choice once the Japanese attacked.
You did not bait me into saying anything. The US gave arms to it\'s allies, but it is still meddling. Because it was not it\'s war, yadda yadda yadda...you know, the same tired old statement.
The US was not militarily involved. Until Japan attacked. Then it was a full involvement. Sending protection for your supply ships is not being militarily invovled. Just being careful. No, the US wasn\'t neutral in practice, but neutral on who the ideals of the war.
Actually, that was never in my history book. And your definition of meddling is different than mine.
And, for the rest of my comments. Just read any previous posts.
And yes, thank you for "education" me.
-
Originally posted by SirMystiq
The US was preparing for the war. It doesn\'t necessarily mean that the intentions to join the war were still there. It proved to be a wise choice once the Japanese attacked.
Does not necessarily mean that there were no intentions? Building new war planes? New warships? Investing a billion dollars into the atomic bomb? Helping the allies soften up Germany?
Originally posted by SirMystiq
You did not bait me into saying anything. The US gave arms to it\'s allies, but it is still meddling. Because it was not it\'s war, yadda yadda yadda...you know, the same tired old statement.
It\'s meddling if you\'re a Nazi. You have no real argument, do you?
Originally posted by SirMystiq
The US was not militarily involved. Until Japan attacked. Then it was a full involvement. Sending protection for your supply ships is not being militarily invovled. Just being careful. No, the US wasn\'t neutral in practice, but neutral on who the ideals of the war.
Sending US Warships into a naval warzone, getting sunk by u-boats....your argument is extremely weak.
Originally posted by SirMystiq
Actually, that was never in my history book. And your definition of meddling is different than mine.
Not in your history books? Then you aren\'t reading enough, chico. Your definition of meddling is incorrect. They were asked to send war supplies. They were asked to join the war against the Nazis. Your teachers would laugh at you.
Originally posted by SirMystiq
And, for the rest of my comments. Just read any previous posts.
And yes, thank you for "education" me.
Oh my....I made a grammatical error. WHOOPDIE! Breakout the tacos! You get 1 point. The rest of your comments and previous posts are all wrong. Why even consider them?
You realize no one here will support your theory about the US meddling in WW2 and Israel being a puppet.
I pointed out to you that your idea of meddle and puppet state were wrong. So you turn around and say "oops. Well, THEY\'RE MY DEFITNION!"
You are one ignorant Mexican.
-
Gman watch the race baiting please I have asked you once and I won\'t ask again. You easily make your point without having to stoop to that level.
-
What racist comment? What\'s derogatory about Mexican? He\'s ignorant. And he\'s Mexican.
-
Well it may help if you enlighten people about your own heritage - I had no idea myself until you PM\'d me. Sort of takes the steam out of his racism cries. Either way, I know its hard not to take jabs at people on here, but everyone involved needs to try and keep it under control and not let it overshadow the main point of your post.
-
Yes, people, I am part Spanish. Muh secret\'s out. Me and Miss Tiq are like distant cousins. Dammit.
-
Wait...wha???
Did Mystiq just say Israel would be wiped out with 2 nuclear missiles????
By whom, exactly?
-
An update on the nuclear situation in Iran.
Russia signed a deal Sunday for the supply and return of fuel for Iran\'s Bushehr nuclear reactor.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/csm/20050228/ts_csm/onukesale_1
Which of Irans missiles can carry a nuclear warhead? (Shahab-4, SS-4?)
They already have the ability to deliver a missle to a large area of the ME.
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
Does not necessarily mean that there were no intentions? Building new war planes? New warships? Investing a billion dollars into the atomic bomb? Helping the allies soften up Germany?
It\'s meddling if you\'re a Nazi. You have no real argument, do you?
Sending US Warships into a naval warzone, getting sunk by u-boats....your argument is extremely weak.
Not in your history books? Then you aren\'t reading enough, chico. Your definition of meddling is incorrect. They were asked to send war supplies. They were asked to join the war against the Nazis. Your teachers would laugh at you.
Oh my....I made a grammatical error. WHOOPDIE! Breakout the tacos! You get 1 point. The rest of your comments and previous posts are all wrong. Why even consider them?
You realize no one here will support your theory about the US meddling in WW2 and Israel being a puppet.
I pointed out to you that your idea of meddle and puppet state were wrong. So you turn around and say "oops. Well, THEY\'RE MY DEFITNION!"
You are one ignorant Mexican.
Well, I went over my notes for you Gman. After a year of haven taken the class. So, I also borrowed a copy from my US history book. There are something I noticed:
1.) The allies never "asked" the US for anything. It was Roosevelt and his friends that were the primary supporters for the lifting of the Neutrality Act. In fact, all of the embargos placed by the act covered civil wars. Furthermore, Britain, France and the US were fearful of a war so they all adopted policicies of noninvolvement. French and Britain met with Hitler in order to surrender the land he wanted in promise he would not attack. He did.
2.) They were never asked to join the war. Once again, we can thank Roosevelt and his people for trying to mobilize public opinion against Congress\' Neutrality Act. In favor of "measures of war" that would help the allies fight against the Axis.
Americans wanted strict neutrality and everybody was for it. Japan launched an attack on China. The US and Britain got together to prepare for a possible war in Asia. When Germany and Italy agreed to help each other out, and Hitler said he wanted to conquer a part of Sudetenland, Roosevelt followed by anouncing a program for a complete rearmament of the navy beyond some treaty they had with Japan.
The US itself lifted bans that would allow the army to sell arms to belligerents-it was called "cash-and-carry" because the country had to transport its own loot. And because you know so much, you know what two countries obviously benefited from this the most.
When Germany bombed London, Americans were sent into a state of shock. It was taken advantage by Roosevelt who moved ahead with his "destroyers-for-bases"
The A-Bomb was pushed by Mr. Einstein toward the end of the war. Many think the two bombs dropped were merely for demonstration of might, others that it was necessary.
Also about your naval comment. Roosevelt was secretly hoping for a provocative attack by Germany. The use of attack ships by the US was proposed by Churchill, to insure safe deliverance. As it so happens, Germany sunk a US destroyer and this helped Roosevelt prove a point and repealed the Neutrality Act. So, the use of the attack ships could have, and probably were, merely a bait in order to help strengthen the joining of the US in the war.
So in essence you\'re correct. The US did not "meddle" at the beginning, that is until Roosevelt pushed for the joining in the war. It suddenly became a plausible option when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. I say we "meddled" because we supplied arms by slowly breaking a part the Neutrality Act.
Israel would not be such a big hit without the millions of dollars of help of the US. I do recall, by the way, saying that I knew my use of the word "puppet" state is wrong. But that doesn\'t matter to you right. Well, I don\'t know about you, but a millionaire gave me money continuously over others to buy houses, cars, guns and maybe some private jets. I would think that I would try to please the millionaire. So, it might not be as strong as in a real puppet state, but influence and "puppeteering" is more than likely there.
Whoopdie?
-
Originally posted by SirMystiq
1.) The allies never "asked" the US for anything. It was Roosevelt and his friends that were the primary supporters for the lifting of the Neutrality Act. In fact, all of the embargos placed by the act covered civil wars. Furthermore, Britain, France and the US were fearful of a war so they all adopted policicies of noninvolvement. French and Britain met with Hitler in order to surrender the land he wanted in promise he would not attack. He did.
This is called appeasement Miss tiq. It doesn\'t work - they gave Hitler the Sudatenland and then he wanted the Polish corridor to Danzig.
Originally posted by SirMystiq
2.) They were never asked to join the war. Once again, we can thank Roosevelt and his people for trying to mobilize public opinion against Congress\' Neutrality Act. In favor of "measures of war" that would help the allies fight against the Axis.
Americans wanted strict neutrality and everybody was for it.
Really? Where are your sources? Is this just like the claim that there was no public support for the war in Iraq? :rolleyes:
Originally posted by SirMystiq
Japan launched an attack on China. The US and Britain got together to prepare for a possible war in Asia. When Germany and Italy agreed to help each other out, and Hitler said he wanted to conquer a part of Sudetenland, Roosevelt followed by anouncing a program for a complete rearmament of the navy beyond some treaty they had with Japan.
The Sudatenland was given to Hitler by Chamberlain and company for his word he would not go to war. Hitler knew he was dealing with spineless bureacrats who would not stand up to him.
Also what books are these they are passing out in HS? You make it sound like the US violated the Naval Treaties of 1922 and 1930 when in fact it was the Japanese that did so:
At the time of the signature of the treaty, Chairman Davis of the United States delegation and British Foreign Secretary Eden exchanged letters declaring that there would be no competitive naval building between the two countries and that the principle of parity would be maintained as between their Fleets. Subsequently Japan was approached by the British Government and asked to give assurances that it would adhere in practice to the qualitative limits laid down in the 1936 treaty. Japan declined to give such assurances. Japan\'s attitude marked the death knell, for the period under consideration, of naval limitation among the great powers.
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/WorldWar2/dangers.htm
Originally posted by SirMystiq
The US itself lifted bans that would allow the army to sell arms to belligerents-it was called "cash-and-carry" because the country had to transport its own loot. And because you know so much, you know what two countries obviously benefited from this the most.
When Germany bombed London, Americans were sent into a state of shock. It was taken advantage by Roosevelt who moved ahead with his "destroyers-for-bases"
Also about your naval comment. Roosevelt was secretly hoping for a provocative attack by Germany. The use of attack ships by the US was proposed by Churchill, to insure safe deliverance. As it so happens, Germany sunk a US destroyer and this helped Roosevelt prove a point and repealed the Neutrality Act. So, the use of the attack ships could have, and probably were, merely a bait in order to help strengthen the joining of the US in the war.
So in essence you\'re correct. The US did not "meddle" at the beginning, that is until Roosevelt pushed for the joining in the war. It suddenly became a plausible option when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. I say we "meddled" because we supplied arms by slowly breaking a part the Neutrality Act.
Miss tiq get a new book because the one your are reading is wrong. Roosevelt was very much against America\'s involvement in Europes problems. It was only until events like Japan\'s invasion of China, Italy\'s invasion of Ethiopia and German rearmorment that Roosevelt understood that America\'s isolationist policy was not a good idea considering the direction the world was heading.
President Roosevelt stated the policy of the Government toward national defense in a letter of April 20, 1936 to the Daughters of the American Revolution. He said that it was the aim of the Government "to make our national defense efficient and to keep it adequate"; that what was necessary for adequate defense was not always the same and was bound to change with changing conditions; that if this were a disarming world our needs obviously would be proportionally decreasing; that he regretted that the world of the time was not a disarming world; and that our defense forces were "on a stronger peace-time basis than before", and it was our purpose to keep them that way.
The President said that we would press continually for limitation of armament by international agreement and that if this should fail, we would not increase our own armament unless other powers by increasing theirs made increase by us necessary to our national safety.
In an address delivered at New York on September 15, 1936 Secretary Hull stated that the defense forces of the United States had been substantially increased; that this appeared essential in the face of the universal increase of armaments elsewhere and the disturbed conditions of the world; that "we would not serve the cause of peace" if we had inadequate means of self-defense; and that we must be sure that in our desire for peace we would not appear weak and unable to resist the imposition of force or to protect our just rights.
President Roosevelt, on January 8, 1937, announced that he had directed the Navy Department to proceed with the construction of two replacement battleships. This was the first battleship construction to be undertaken by the United States since the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922.
Unlike liberals such as your ignorant self - Roosevelt recognized the threat and prepared for it.
Originally posted by SirMystiq
Israel would not be such a big hit without the millions of dollars of help of the US. I do recall, by the way, saying that I knew my use of the word "puppet" state is wrong. But that doesn\'t matter to you right. Well, I don\'t know about you, but a millionaire gave me money continuously over others to buy houses, cars, guns and maybe some private jets. I would think that I would try to please the millionaire. So, it might not be as strong as in a real puppet state, but influence and "puppeteering" is more than likely there.
Do you realize Israel gets most of its money from private donations by Jews here in the US?
-
Originally posted by GmanJoe
Yes, people, I am part Spanish. Muh secret\'s out. Me and Miss Tiq are like distant cousins. Dammit.
damn..gman isn\'t that the kettle callin the teapot..eh you know the rest..;)...even tho it\'s not that serious, when you spout that stereotypical stuff about mystiq, even if it\'s in jest, knowing what i know now makes it seem like you\'re ashamed of your heritage to a degree...it\'s like me and nicon not agreeing on something and i tell him to go back to africa and go spear an elephant...
-
Originally posted by clips
damn..gman isn\'t that the kettle callin the teapot..eh you know the rest..;)...even tho it\'s not that serious, when you spout that stereotypical stuff about mystiq, even if it\'s in jest, knowing what i know now makes it seem like you\'re ashamed of your heritage to a degree...it\'s like me and nicon not agreeing on something and i tell him to go back to africa and go spear an elephant...
I ain\'t too uptight about race. But my Spanish heritage has some things in with Mexican heritage, but we\'re quite still distinct.