All you need to know about the Syrian "rebels"

[co_gator89]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsq5ZRir-0k

[Juggernautz]

Interesting...

[AmericaFirst]

Which is why I've been pulling for Assad's Army since the beginning. Pretty damn disgusting that our government and media try to make these scumbags seem like the good guys in this war. The rebels in Libya had similar views. Remind me again why we should care if Assad uses chemical weapons on this particular group of "rebels?"

[ChartsandGrafs]

This short clip is well worth a listen. It explains the system of international terrorism for hire and why the U.S. would support Al-Qaeda "rebels" just ten years after supposedly being attacked by Al-Qaeda on 9/11.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ER4gG0w-dk&list=UU1vTH0ByVIcIOB83FbvHP7Q&index=16

[co_gator89]

Which is why I've been pulling for Assad's Army since the beginning. Pretty damn disgusting that our government and media try to make these scumbags seem like the good guys in this war. The rebels in Libya had similar views. Remind me again why we should care if Assad uses chemical weapons on this particular group of "rebels?"

Kind of funny and also sickening to hear our media outlets chastise Assad for referring to the opposition as terrorists. How is he wrong? Who is setting off all the car bombs?

[surfn1080]

Hey I think these people bring it upon themselves too, but how do we know what they are really singing? Just because the video editor puts what we are to believe captions for what they are saying does not make it true.

[co_gator89]

The fact that they all cheer whenever the dude says "Osama bin laden" should say everything.

[northgagator]

Ever since (and maybe before) the days that the competing empires on the Mesopotamia and Nile Rivers start fighting over the Middle East the political scene there has been cluster f##k.

The inhabitants there will cut a deal with the devil if they could live on their own.

As for the current we can go back to the end of WWI. The drawing up of the Middle East map set the table for what we have today. We can thank the UK and France for that..

[VAg8r1]

Which is why I've been pulling for Assad's Army since the beginning. Pretty damn disgusting that our government and media try to make these scumbags seem like the good guys in this war. The rebels in Libya had similar views. Remind me again why we should care if Assad uses chemical weapons on this particular group of "rebels?"
So you are pulling for the side aligned with the Iranian mullahs? The rebels represent many groups; they are not a single monolithic entity. If Assad does decide to use chemical weapons the vast majority of victims will be civilians, not the rebel fighters. I assume that you also had no problem when Saddam Hussein was using chemical weapons against Kurdish civilians.

You may want to educate yourself be reading the following:

Syria’s Rebel Rivalry Between Jihadists And FSA
Jan 12, 2013 4:45 AM EST
Infighting and revenge killings have broken out between jihadist groups and the more secular Free Syrian Army.

The gunning down by jihadists of a top Syrian rebel commander near the Turkish border on Wednesday morning risks triggering internecine warfare between rebel brigades competing for power and war spoils in northern Syria.link (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/12/syria-s-rebel-rivalry-between-jihadists-and-fsa.html)

[co_gator89]

Assad may be aligned with the Iranians but he's better than the likely alternative which is a coalition of al qaeda and nusra aligned militants or the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood who have been waiting for this for 30 years. And so what if he uses chemical weapons? There's no point in getting involved, just like there was no point to getting involved in Iraq.

[Lawdog88]

Either side sounds like a peachy-keen bunch.

[northgagator]

Either side sounds like a peachy-keen bunch.

Personally I believe that we are approaching a period of instability in the Middle East (and else where). If you don't like the political regime in Libya, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and so forth then just wait a couple of months or years. There will be a change or multiple changes.

[CHFG8R]

Which is why I've been pulling for Assad's Army since the beginning. Pretty damn disgusting that our government and media try to make these scumbags seem like the good guys in this war. The rebels in Libya had similar views. Remind me again why we should care if Assad uses chemical weapons on this particular group of "rebels?"

Good guys? In that region of the world?

Not many, if any. Maybe the Jordanian government. But they're too western and will be the next domino to fall. You heard it hear first.

[gatormoe1]

There are a lot of websites out there that will show you some of the things Syrian Rebels and the other side do to eachother and to the civilians around there. They are VERY graphic.

[gatorev12]

Personally I believe that we are approaching a period of instability in the Middle East (and else where). If you don't like the political regime in Libya, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and so forth then just wait a couple of months or years. There will be a change or multiple changes.

Probably a very astute observation.

Middle Eastern countries have had exploding populations for several decades now...but no subsequent take-off in GDP or their economies. Millions of disaffected youth and young adults sit unemployed and with no future prospects either--which has historically been the catalyst for many revolutions and unstable societies.

[ChartsandGrafs]

So you are pulling for the side aligned with the Iranian mullahs?

The Iranian mullahs aren't going around invading and occupying multiple countries, drone-murdering children, and trying to pass it off as a humanitarian cause.

[co_gator89]

There are a lot of websites out there that will show you some of the things Syrian Rebels and the other side do to eachother and to the civilians around there. They are VERY graphic.

Throwing people off rooftops, mass executions. Upstanding bunch.

[bluelang]

So now we're in favor of dictatorship and opposed to democracy if the democratic government is voted into place by Muslims?

Fascinating.

[northgagator]

The Iranian mullahs aren't going around invading and occupying multiple countries, drone-murdering children, and trying to pass it off as a humanitarian cause.

Iran has conducted assassinations and espionage other countries.
Lets not forget the arming a funding of outside organizations in Gaza, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, the Gulf Stated, North Africa, and other countries.

The arrests in July of Iranian Quds members in Cyprus targeting Israelis, and the Bulgarian bus attack, are recent examples of Iran's subversive operations....
The arrest in New York City of Iranian nationals accused of enlisting Los Zetas cartel members to assassinate the Saudi ......
Iran's ability to disrupt the global economy does not end at the Strait of Hormuz, but includes the financial centers of the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Dubai. Despite the network of relationships between the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and the U.S., Iran is undeterred from quietly interfering in the internal affairs of Bahrain and Qatar......
Bahraini opposition movements -- such as al-Haq, Bahraini Hezbollah and the Islamic Front for the Liberation of Bahrain -- received strong financial and organizational support from the Iranian Quds force. Additionally, training in urban warfare made these organizations incredibly effective during the upheaval in the Middle East and North Africa over the past 18 months.....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/daniel-wagner/globalization-of-covert-action_b_1869134.html

Iran may not want to occupy other countries but they sure are greasing the wheels got the unity of Muslim nations to form a be Grand Caliph

But all of that that does not signal any plan or attempt at merge a large union of predominantly Muslim countries into one unified Muslim world, does it? No. However, you might reconsider when the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of Iran’s Armed Forces, Major General Hassan Firouzabadi says something like this;
“Unity and solidarity present Muslim governments and nations with the best and most effective way to counter the plans, plots, and conspiracies of the enemies of Islam.”
As the Major General talks of “unity and solidarity” between Muslim nations, we see that eleven countries in the Middle East are currently experiencing protests on a daily basis. Their fragile governments, like Egypt could start falling like dominoes, leaving a power vacuum. Even MSNBC picked this up, and showed a map similar to the one that appeared on Beck’s February 1st program.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2011/02/15/high-capacities-if-iran-calls-for-a-unified-muslim-world-coalition-would-that-be-a-um-uh-caliphate/

[ChartsandGrafs]

Iran has conducted assassinations and espionage other countries.

So? We do all that stuff too, except on a far greater scale.

Lets not forget the arming a funding of outside organizations in Gaza, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, the Gulf Stated, North Africa, and other countries.

So? We do all that stuff too, except on a far greater scale.

Iran may not want to occupy other countries but they sure are greasing the wheels got the unity of Muslim nations to form a be Grand Caliph

It sounds to me like they are trying to create a coalition to defend themselves from the likes of us and our neocolonial empire. Can you honestly blame them for that? The Anglo-American Establishment has been meddling in their affairs since, well, forever. Who's occupying and drone-bombing who?

They are simply doing as any rational actor would under the same circumstances. We are the aggressors, not them.

[AmericaFirst]

Assad may be aligned with the Iranians but he's better than the likely alternative which is a coalition of al qaeda and nusra aligned militants or the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood who have been waiting for this for 30 years. And so what if he uses chemical weapons? There's no point in getting involved, just like there was no point to getting involved in Iraq.



Well said.

[northgagator]

So? We do all that stuff too, except on a far greater scale.

So? We do all that stuff too, except on a far greater scale..

Multiple wrongs do not make it right.
Iran would catch more flies with honey.
Instead of exporting revulsion they should me pushing ahead to develop as a high tech, energy supplying, and an economic power, Many Middle Eastern countries are leery of Iran .
Also, Iran's window of opportunity is closing. Very soon (with months or a couple of years) the Mullahs and the Revolutionary Guards will not be able to control the Iranian Kurds/Arabs and a young liberal growing Iranian population.

http://m.thenational.ae/thenationalconversation/comment/the-world-can-only-watch-as-iran-implodes-from-within
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/10/iran-nuclear-sanctions-economy-exchange-reserves-tehran.html
http://mobile.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2012/10/03/iran-president-ahmadinejads-regime-is-in-trouble

It sounds to me like they are trying to create a coalition to defend themselves from the likes of us and our neocolonial empire. Can you honestly blame them for that? The Anglo-American Establishment has been meddling in their affairs since, well, forever. Who's occupying and drone-bombing who?.
Again I say that Iran can accomplish this goal by peaceful and legal methods. When the resort to murder and treachery they are no better than the Western villains they carp about.

They are simply doing as any rational actor would under the same circumstances. We are the aggressors, not them.

Iranian has no business in meddling with the affairs of other countries (neither foes the US or any other country). If another country wants to line up with Iran under their own free will then we have no reason to interfere.

Please keep in mind what many fanatical Muslims believe. That is World Domination.
http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/ultimate_goal.htm
http://muslim-academy.com/the-ultimate-goal-of-islam/

[ChartsandGrafs]

Multiple wrongs do not make it right.
Iran would catch more flies with honey.

If that's true, why doesn't the U.S. government follow this policy?

Instead of exporting revulsion they should me pushing ahead to develop as a high tech, energy supplying, and an economic power, Many Middle Eastern countries are leery of Iran.

And? Many Middle Eastern countries are leery of the United States and Israel? So?

Also, Iran's window of opportunity is closing. Very soon (with months or a couple of years) the Mullahs and the Revolutionary Guards will not be able to control the Iranian Kurds/Arabs and a young liberal growing Iranian population.

Possibly, but I don't see what this has to do with anything.

Again I say that Iran can accomplish this goal by peaceful and legal methods.

What do you base this on? The U.S. government doesn't always accomplish their goals through peaceful or legal methods, so why should Iran?

When the resort to murder and treachery they are no better than the Western villains they carp about.

If you admit that you are living under a government filled with villains, why are you so focused on Iran and not your own government?

Iranian has no business in meddling with the affairs of other countries (neither foes the US or any other country). If another country wants to line up with Iran under their own free will then we have no reason to interfere.

Iran has no choice but to meddle the same way we meddle. They didn't start it, we did. They do it to defend themselves from us.

Please keep in mind what many fanatical Muslims believe. That is World Domination.

Yet, fanatical Muslims don't dominate the world at all. It's just random propaganda from some fanatics. It doesn't mean anything, it's wishful thinking.

If you can possibly blame any group for trying to dominate the world, there's no greater example than the United States. If world domination is what you're truly concerned about, why are you deflecting attention about from U.S. foreign policy to focus on Iran?

You're not saying anything of substance.

[northgagator]

If that's true, why doesn't the U.S. government follow this policy?

Because at the best US Policy is a two headed beast (Repub/Dem) that is also corrupted by influence peddlers.

And? Many Middle Eastern countries are leery of the United States and Israel? So?
If the US can clean up its foreign policy act and be a partner instead of a exploiter or a meddler then these countries will hopefully work with us, stay independent and not align with Iran.

Possibly, but I don't see what this has to do with anything.


What do you base this on? The U.S. government doesn't always accomplish their goals through peaceful or legal methods, so why should Iran?
The world had changed. Colonialism is dead (or should be). We all are living in a global economy. It is important that we all play nice and leverage the synergy that globalism can produce.

If you admit that you are living under a government filled with villains, why are you so focused on Iran and not your own government? As I said we are now in a global age. I am just as concern about Iran as I am about the US. Every action on the world's stage can impact a lot of countries.

Iran has no choice but to meddle the same way we meddle. They didn't start it, we did. They do it to defend themselves from us.
We started it? Please go back and review the History of Western Civilization. The first battles over empires and resources fought in the Middle East and it was predicted in Revelations that the last battle will be fought there.
Besides Iraq which country had attacked Iran in the last 50 years? Iran is exporting revolution to satisfy what it feels is a religious destiny. Not every Islam country wants to jump on that band wagon.

Yet, fanatical Muslims don't dominate the world at all. It's just random propaganda from some fanatics. It doesn't mean anything, it's wishful thinking. back in the 1920's and 30's a lot if people thought the same about the Nazi party and Hitler. The manipulation and hysteria that swept Germany and its allies could sweep the Arab/Muslim world.

If you can possibly blame any group for trying to dominate the world, there's no greater example than the United States. If world domination is what you're truly concerned about, why are you deflecting attention about from U.S. foreign policy to focus on Iran?
The history of American foreign policy at its best is spotty. I am praying that our country waked up and make the correct decisions. As I said earlier website living in a global economy. We need partnership and not dominance.

[QUOTE{
You're not saying anything of substance.[/QUOTE]

I hope I can clear up that misconception.

[ChartsandGrafs]

The world had changed. Colonialism is dead (or should be).

This is where you are wrong. Colonialism isn't dead, it just morphed into something a little more well disguised and palatable to the masses. Why do you think we have troops stationed all throughout the world 20+ years after the "Cold War" supposedly ended? Why do you think we've been menacing the Middle East with our military the last couple of decades?

We're managing an economic/monetary (petrodollar) empire.

We all are living in a global economy. It is important that we all play nice and leverage the synergy that globalism can produce.

What does that even mean, global synergy? Sounds like propaganda.

Globalization is just another way for the ruling elites to undermine national sovereignty in favor of an international system of government. It's much easier to manage the herds with one supranational government than it is through 200 smaller, less powerful governments.

There's not going to be any "playing nice". That's a fantasy.

As I said we are now in a global age. I am just as concern about Iran as I am about the US. Every action on the world's stage can impact a lot of countries.

Look, man, this has always been the case. It has nothing to do with a new "global age". We've had a system of international trade for hundreds of years, where actions in one part of the world have an impact on nations on the other side of the world.

We started it? Please go back and review the History of Western Civilization. The first battles over empires and resources fought in the Middle East and it was predicted in Revelations that the last battle will be fought there.

We as a nation weren't even around back then. I'm talking about contemporary history here. You know, relevant history.

We've been meddling in the internal affairs of Iran since the 50s. Are you aware that we assassinated their leader and overthrew their government in 1953? Are you aware the we replaced their democratically elected leader with a dictator? Is it any wonder why they still hate us?

Besides Iraq which country had attacked Iran in the last 50 years? Iran is exporting revolution to satisfy what it feels is a religious destiny. Not every Islam country wants to jump on that band wagon.

Iran doesn't need to be militarily attacked to have their national interests threatened. They are being encircled by U.S. client states/puppet governments, and they're fomenting dissent outside their borders as a way to defend themselves.

They're not over here bombing and invading our neighbors. We're the ones doing it.

back in the 1920's and 30's a lot if people thought the same about the Nazi party and Hitler. The manipulation and hysteria that swept Germany and its allies could sweep the Arab/Muslim world.

You're kidding, right? Germany in the 20s and 30s was an advanced industrial nation with a rich military tradition and immense scientific and technological know-how.

How can you possibly compare the Arab/Muslim world to that? You're not being realistic. You've fallen for typical scare tactics.

The history of American foreign policy at its best is spotty. I am praying that our country waked up and make the correct decisions. As I said earlier website living in a global economy. We need partnership and not dominance.

To call the history of American foreign policy "spotty" is to be quite generous. I call it "criminal".

I hope I can clear up that misconception.

Fine, I'm all for having a rational discussion. Just don't try to sell me on globalization as the international version of singing Kumbaya and "playing nice". I'm long past that nonsense.

[northgagator]

This is where you are wrong. Colonialism isn't dead, it just morphed into something a little more well disguised and palatable to the masses. Why do you think we have troops stationed all throughout the world 20+ years after the "Cold War" supposedly ended? Why do you think we've been menacing the Middle East with our military the last couple of decades?

We're managing an economic/monetary (petrodollar) empire.

Menacing the Middle East? How about playing a cat and mouse game with the former USSR? Keeping the USSR Navy out of the Indian Ocean and away from the West's petro? The Arab oil producing countries have done pretty good on the other side of this exchange. They made a ton of money and had to pay nothing for the protected provided by the US.

What does that even mean, global synergy? Sounds like propaganda.
Sorry for the confusion. It was a term that I coined on the fly.
It is my way of describing how corperations are no longer rooted in one country. Many corperations have investors from all over the world. Since some of these investers are in the position of having an interest they have a good say on the direction of the corperation. That is one aspect. The other aspect is that today some of our most expensive and complex products such as airplanes are made in factories in multiple continents. These planes may be produced by Boeing or Airbus but these two companies have farmed out parts of the planes to companies all over the world. Why? To leverage the advantages of naural resources, cheap labor, skilled labor, taxes, finances, and so forth. These parts or components are shipped to assembly plants for the final process.

Globalization is just another way for the ruling elites to undermine national sovereignty in favor of an international system of government. It's much easier to manage the herds with one supranational government than it is through 200 smaller, less powerful governments.
There's not going to be any "playing nice". That's a fantasy.

It is also a way to provide jobs to keep the home folks from storming the castle walls.
It is also a way to import technology, knowhow, and most important thoughts.
A good example of what I am talking about is the booming economy in the former Indo China area along with Indonesia. Per capital income is rising and it seems that oppresive governments in Myanamar and North Vietnam on the decline. By the way this area used to be UK, French, and Dutch colonies. Now it is comprised of indepenent countries. Also, the US military does not have any bases there to menace the local population.

Indonesia is the largest economy in Southeast Asia and is one of the emerging market economies of the world. The country is also a member of G-20 major economies.[10] It has a market economy in which the government plays a significant role through ownership of state-owned enterprises (the central government owns more than 160 enterprises) and the administration of prices of a range of basic goods including fuel, rice, and electricity. In the aftermath of the financial and economic crisis that began in mid-1997 the government took custody of a significant portion of private sector assets through acquisition of nonperforming bank loans and corporate assets through the debt restructuring process. Since 2004 the economy has recovered and growth has accelerated to over 6% in recent years.[11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Indonesia
Singapore has a highly developed and successful free-market economy.[7] It has an open, pro-business environment,[8][9] relatively corruption-free and transparent,[10] stable prices, low tax rates (14.2% of GDP) compared to other developed economies,[11] and one of the highest per-capita gross domestic products (GDP) in the world. Its innovative yet steadfast form of economics that combines economic planning of Singapore Economic Development Board with free-market[12] has given it the nickname the Singapore Model. The economy of Singapore is dominated by government-linked corporations that produce as much as 60% of the country's GDP. These government-linked companies are owned by a government holding agency, Temasek Holdings. Notable Government-linked corporations include Singapore Airlines, SingTel, ST Engineering, MediaCorp and Singapore Temasek Holdings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Singapore

Burma has taken another step towards reintegration into the global economy with the announcement by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) of a strategy that sets the stage for a resumption of full operations in a country cut off from western funds for decades.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2012/oct/26/burma-emerge-global-economic-wilderness

The dependent economy, with exports accounting for more than two thirds of its gross domestic product (GDP). In 2011, Thailand has a GDP at current market prices of THB10.54 Economy of Thailand is a newly industrialized economy. It is a heavily export-trillion[1] (USD345.65 billion approx.[13] ) with the growth rate of 0.1 percent, much lower than the expected growth rate of 3.5 percent due to severe damage from the historic flood the Kingdom confronted mainly in the last quarter of the year. In 2012, the Thai economy is expected to grow by 5.5-6.0 percent, a V-shaped recovery from last year’s flood.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Thailand

Look, man, this has always been the case. It has nothing to do with a new "global age". We've had a system of international trade for hundreds of years, where actions in one part of the world have an impact on nations on the other side of the world.

The CSR debate has largely revolved around the conduct of multinational corporations (MNEs) and other large private companies which, due to their size, have the ability to significantly influence domestic and international policy and the communities in which they operate. Central to the debate is the perceived deficiency of national and international law remedies regarding corporate accountability, in particular the ability of available regulation to successfully regulate a corporation’s conduct in
jurisdictions outside the corporation’s home state. Proponents of CSR argue that the efficient functioning of global markets depends on socially responsible business conduct.
http://epublications.bond.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=cgej&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Fsa%3Dt %26rct%3Dj%26q%3Dglobalism%2520and%2520its%2520imp act%2520on%2520international%2520business%26source %3Dweb%26cd%3D9%26ved%3D0CGUQFjAI%26url%3Dhttp%253 A%252F%252Fepublications.bond.edu.au%252Fcgi%252Fv iewcontent.cgi%253Farticle%253D1003%2526context%25 3Dcgej%26ei%3DElH0UNmRIsbX0QHBmYDwAQ%26usg%3DAFQjC NFaMOBfDQr9CwJCtwT1HAq1OIGOGg#search=%22globalism% 20its%20impact%20international%20business%22

We as a nation weren't even around back then. I'm talking about contemporary history here. You know, relevant history.
The History from 3,000 years ago to current times has forged or molded the culture and society of the Middle East. To ignore its impact would be ignorant.

[QUOTE=ChartsandGrafs;6316765] We've been meddling in the internal affairs of Iran since the 50s. Are you aware that we assassinated their leader and overthrew their government in 1953? Are you aware the we replaced their democratically elected leader with a dictator? Is it any wonder why they still hate us?

To be accurate in 1941 the UK, USSR, and USA forced out one Shaw and install his son. The reason for the bloodless coup was that the older Shaw was entertaining the thought of allying with the Nazis. Another reason they hates us is the the Shaw used his secret police (SAVAK) to brutally keep his subjects at home and abroad in line.

Iran doesn't need to be militarily attacked to have their national interests threatened. They are being encircled by U.S. client states/puppet governments, and they're fomenting dissent outside their borders as a way to defend themselves.
A little thick on the rhetoric there aren't you. The US cannot even get a budget passed and you think we are the puppet master? Yes I agree that we have a lot of pull but there are other puppet masters in the mix.
You are correct about not being militarily attacked. It appears that the economic sanctions are having a big impact on Iran. As for threating Iran...they are bringing a lot of this onto themselves. They need to be open about their nuclear weapons program. By being open they probably could get some good deals like North Korea did.

They're not over here bombing and invading our neighbors. We're the ones doing it. Are you aware that Iran has put agents and special forces in Afghanstan, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and Sudan? These agents and advisors have carried out assassinations and helped the local insurgents stir up things.
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/11/what-is-the-quds-force/ (http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/11/what-is-the-quds-force/)

You're kidding, right? Germany in the 20s and 30s was an advanced industrial nation with a rich military tradition and immense scientific and technological know-how.
After WWI the ecomomy of eastern Europe was beyond needing life support.
Hyper inflation, demonstrations, bombings, unemployment, and starvation were the norm. Hitler used the Jews for his bogey man to get the German people riled up.
Also, Germany did not exist as a nation until the last half of the 19th century. Prior to that it was a loose federation of kingdoms.

How can you possibly compare the Arab/Muslim world to that? You're not being realistic. You've fallen for typical scare tactics. No I haven't. You are over looking an important fact. Warfare as we know it has changed in the last 100 years. Any country with the basic know how and motivation can deal us a painful blow. They do not need a carrier task force or an ICBM. A dirty bomb or two, a vial or two of some nasty germs, a back pack or two of Sarin gas, a truck of fertilzer, a highjacked airliner, and as of recent a computer virus can cause us great harm.


Sorry for sugar coating it. You are correct there were some criminal actions.
It is a wonder that anyone likes us.



[QUOTE=ChartsandGrafs;6316765Fine, I'm all for having a rational discussion. Just don't try to sell me on globalization as the international version of singing Kumbaya and "playing nice". I'm long past that nonsense.

I believe that the world will never sit down and sing Kumbaya or even Free Bird. However I do believe that the world eventually for the most part figure out how to be economic partners instead of competting colonial empires.

[ChartsandGrafs]

Thanks for the response, northgagator. It's pretty obvious we see things very differently.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

[northgagator]

Thanks for the response, northgagator. It's pretty obvious we see things very differently.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

I agree that you agree to disagree.
On to the next debate

[Juggernautz]

I disagree to agree.