Test Message - Mandrake

This is a discussion on Test Message - Mandrake ; Aragorn wrote: >> Not to mention the damage done in Africa by imperialist European powers >> invaliding Africa. > > You mean "invading". *But yes, I agree with you. *Certain European nations > - notably the French, the English, the ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 30 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 582

Thread: Test Message

  1. Re: Test Message

    Aragorn wrote:

    >> Not to mention the damage done in Africa by imperialist European powers
    >> invaliding Africa.

    >
    > You mean "invading". *But yes, I agree with you. *Certain European nations
    > - notably the French, the English, the Spanish, the Portuguese and to a
    > lesser extent the Dutch -


    Don't forget the Germans, They were colonizing the USA. The fact of the
    matter is, over the history of the USA, Europeans are responsible for more
    cultural genocide than the USA. European countries have invaded vastly more
    lands than the USA has. Europe was responsible for slavery in the USA. No,
    Europeans like Chris have no business looking down the nose at the USA.

  2. Re: Test Message

    Aragorn wrote:

    >> Wrong again, I am LEFT WING. You can't get your facts straight can you?

    >
    > Then why are you putting so much emphasis on the glorifying of the United
    > States


    Where did I glorify the US? Please do not put words in my mouth, I have
    claimed that Europe was as bad or worse, that is hardly glorifying the USA.

    If you would actually be accurate in your research (something I no longer
    think you are capable of), you would find that it was a clown from Europe
    that claimed that USA citizens were under educated. IT was a clown from
    Europe that started denigrating USA. I am simply rising to defense of the
    USA by providing factual information.

    Of course I can see why you, of all people, would not want someone telling
    the TRUTH. You seem to feel that people that agree with you can denigrate
    anyone with lies and those that denigrate are wrong for responding. It was
    Chris that stated all of this, but I would not expect YOU to be fair and
    put the blame where it actually belongs.

    > and on the denigration of Europe?
    >


    Because it it the TRUTH. Being left wing does not mean I hate the US and
    love Europe, ONLY A COMPLETE IDIOT WOULD THINK THAT, which, evidently,
    would be YOU. This is why I do not believe your claims of being
    intelligent, because your actions do not show it. I do not agree with much
    of what the USA has done, but to have Europeans look down their noses at
    the USA as if they have done better is a JOKE.

    Here are somethings I find the typical European do not know or refuse to
    acknowledge:

    Europeans have been responsible for more deaths in war, by a staggering
    margin, than the USA during the entire history of the USA.

    Europeans were responsible for slavery in the Americas, something you and
    other Europeans don't seem to be taught in Europe.

    Europeans were responsible for starting the war in Vietnam.

    Europeans went to war and are also responsible for the war in Iraq.

    Before the USA got involved, and stayed involved, in the European affairs,
    Europeans were almost constantly at war with each other, meaning the
    culture of Europeans is that of war.

    Europeans were responsible for taking far more land from indigenous people
    than the USA. Even the vast majority of land in the USA was taken from the
    native people by European Imperialists before the USA took control of the
    land.

    Anyone that COULD get out from under the rule of Imperialist Europe HAS.
    Virtually everyone other than Europeans has wanted to get out from under
    the rule of Imperialist Europeans.

  3. Re: Test Message

    Aragorn wrote:

    > I am aware of how slavery in North America started, but this was on the
    > cusp of the US becoming a nation of its own.


    No, it was 157 years BEFORE the US became an independent nation. It was
    clearly the fault of Europeans. It was under European Rule that slavery
    STARTED and continued until the USA got sick of European Imperial rule.

  4. Re: Test Message

    On Thursday 09 November 2006 19:03, left_coast stood up and addressed the
    masses in /alt.os.linux.mandrake/ as follows...:

    > Aragorn wrote:
    >
    >>> Wrong again, I am LEFT WING. You can't get your facts straight can you?

    >>
    >> Then why are you putting so much emphasis on the glorifying of the United
    >> States

    >
    > Where did I glorify the US? Please do not put words in my mouth, I have
    > claimed that Europe was as bad or worse, that is hardly glorifying the
    > USA.


    Okay then, but you were leaning far more towards the "or worse" part.

    > If you would actually be accurate in your research (something I no longer
    > think you are capable of), you would find that it was a clown from Europe
    > that claimed that USA citizens were under educated. IT was a clown from
    > Europe that started denigrating USA. I am simply rising to defense of the
    > USA by providing factual information.


    While I too share the belief that the European education system is much more
    strict and elaborate than the American system - although I must say that
    I'm beginning to see a failure arising in the current Belgian educational
    system; I can't vouch for others - I would not necessarily say that
    Americans are under-educated.

    > Of course I can see why you, of all people, would not want someone telling
    > the TRUTH.


    Oh please, Matt. Be serious, will you?

    > You seem to feel that people that agree with you can denigrate anyone with
    > lies and those that denigrate are wrong for responding. It was Chris that
    > stated all of this, but I would not expect YOU to be fair and put the
    > blame where it actually belongs.


    As I said above, I do not necessarily share Chris's convictions on
    everything regarding Americans. But I do share some of them, yes. And you
    did attack Europe there.

    For a moment there, I thought you were becoming a copy of Dan C, and $DEITY
    knows how wrong that man's political convictions are.

    >> and on the denigration of Europe?

    >
    > Because it it the TRUTH. Being left wing does not mean I hate the US and
    > love Europe, ONLY A COMPLETE IDIOT WOULD THINK THAT, which, evidently,
    > would be YOU.


    That is a cheap /ad/ /hominem/ attack, and unwarranted as well. I have not
    stated that being left-wing would imply that you love Europe or that you
    hate the US.

    I do however expect someone who claims to be left-winged to have a clearer
    view on US international politics, *especially* the ones being practiced
    today, as we speak.

    > This is why I do not believe your claims of being intelligent, because
    > your actions do not show it.


    I'm afraid that it is rather you who misunderstands me. At least when I
    misunderstand you - see other (earlier) replies and the first paragraph of
    this post - then I'm willing to admit it.

    > I do not agree with much of what the USA has done, but to have Europeans
    > look down their noses at the USA as if they have done better is a JOKE.


    I don't really know whether Chris Hunter actually does look down his nose on
    the US. I only know that I for one don't. But I do on the other hand look
    down my nose on past and present Republican US administrations. In fact,
    the only Republican I found to be reasonable and acceptable with regard to
    international affairs was the late Ronald Reagan - his Vice-President was
    of course a joke, but that's another affair.

    > Here are somethings I find the typical European do not know or refuse to
    > acknowledge:
    >
    > Europeans have been responsible for more deaths in war, by a staggering
    > margin, than the USA during the entire history of the USA.


    The United States have only existed for some 200 years, while Europe is much
    older already. And even then, you can't compare that, because Europe is
    not one unified nation. They are different countries, with different
    regimes.

    Hell, even despite the European Union, there are different prices for lots
    of stuff - things are often more affordable abroad then in the own country
    - and as you may know, the UK still doesn't use the Euro as currency.

    > Europeans were responsible for slavery in the Americas, something you and
    > other Europeans don't seem to be taught in Europe.


    I already did acknowledge that it was European colonists who instated
    slavery in America, but I also added that those colonists did not do so by
    command from "their homeland", and that they were already no longer
    considering themselves to be Europeans.

    > Europeans were responsible for starting the war in Vietnam.


    No, the war in Vietnam was an internal conflict. It was a civil war. The
    French messed with it yes, but it wasn't until the US Government intervened
    that the war escalated, and that was particularly the case under Lyndon B.
    Johnson.

    North Korea had the support of the Soviet Union, and the US felt that as a
    threat. It was the middle of the Cold War, and anything pertaining to
    Communist regimes was considered a threat to the United States and the
    capitalist world.

    The US could not sit by and watch the South Vietnamese troops lose ground to
    the North Vietnamese ones, who were supported by Russian military advisers
    and Russian and Chinese weapons. So a US battleship entered the
    territorial waters of Vietnam and when it was fired upon by North
    Vietnamese troops, the US claimed they had been attacked by North Vietnam
    in international waters, which legally gave them grounds for a declaration
    of war, and thus the right to invade Vietnam and intervene in the
    Vietnamese civilian war.

    > Europeans went to war and are also responsible for the war in Iraq.


    They would not have been involved in the war in Iraq if that war hadn't been
    started by George Walker Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsvelt in the first
    place. Except maybe for the UK, because Tony Blair was just sitting and
    waiting to kiss George W.'s ass.

    And yes, the people in the UK do condemn Tony Blair for his political
    responsibility over the incompetence of MI-6 at gathering adequate
    intelligence reports regarding the alleged weapons of mass destruction and
    the subsequent involvement of the UK in the war in Iraq. Even Tony Blair's
    own political party members have chastised him over that, and so did - of
    course - the political opposition party, which surprisingly exists of
    right-wingers.

    On the other hand, Tony Blair is a left-winger, and he's still to a large
    extent beneficial to the British people, which is why and how he managed to
    stay on three terms now as a Prime Minister.

    Note that I do not pick sides in any of the above. I am merely reporting.

    > Before the USA got involved, and stayed involved, in the European affairs,
    > Europeans were almost constantly at war with each other, meaning the
    > culture of Europeans is that of war.


    That is hyperbole. Besides, the US have had their shares of international
    wars just as well as Europeans have had, or as the Russians have had - even
    now, under Putin - or as the Chinese have had.

    War is an internationally occurring phenomenon. It has always been part of
    human nature. In quantity and relative to the years of existence as an
    independent nation, the US is no better or worse than any other country in
    that respect.

    However, in terms of *starting* wars at the end of the twentieth century and
    the beginning of the twenty-first century, the US *have* done far worse
    than Europe. In the global picture, they're not the only ones, of course.
    The Middle East has already been at war for as long as I can remember. But
    that's not Europe, is it?

    > Europeans were responsible for taking far more land from indigenous people
    > than the USA. Even the vast majority of land in the USA was taken from the
    > native people by European Imperialists before the USA took control of the
    > land.


    Those imperialists were already no longer eligible for the designation
    "European Citizens". They were imperialists with roots in Europe, but an
    intended future on another continent. If anything, they were rogues.

    > Anyone that COULD get out from under the rule of Imperialist Europe HAS.


    Europe has by far not been so imperialist as you think. Certain nations
    have been - I repeat: the Spanish, the British, the French, et al - but
    certainly not all European countries have been.

    > Virtually everyone other than Europeans has wanted to get out from under
    > the rule of Imperialist Europeans.


    I think that if you look at what Europe is like now today, you'll find that
    it's far less imperialist than the US is, and than the US _have_ been in
    the past *under* *Republican* *rule* - I specifically emphasize this.

    And furthermore, Europe is becoming even much more capitalist now *because*
    of the US influences via American businesses here, and via American
    cultural influences.

    P.S.: I have not replied to all of your replies, because of the hostile tone
    in many of them. I am always open to a serious debate such as this one,
    but I'm not going to waste my time refuting false claims that have already
    been refuted plenty of times before, or fending off insults.

    --
    With kind regards,

    *Aragorn*
    (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

  5. Re: Test Message

    On Thursday 09 November 2006 19:17, left_coast stood up and addressed the
    masses in /alt.os.linux.mandrake/ as follows...:

    > Aragorn wrote:
    >
    >> I am aware of how slavery in North America started, but this was on the
    >> cusp of the US becoming a nation of its own.

    >
    > No, it was 157 years BEFORE the US became an independent nation. It was
    > clearly the fault of Europeans. It was under European Rule that slavery
    > STARTED and continued until the USA got sick of European Imperial rule.


    .... And chose to instate an American Imperialist Rule instead...?

    --
    With kind regards,

    *Aragorn*
    (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

  6. Re: Test Message

    On Thursday 09 November 2006 20:56, I stood up and addressed the masses
    in /alt.os.linux.mandrake/ as follows...:

    > North Korea had the support of the Soviet Union, and the US felt that as a
    > threat. [...]


    My bad, I goofed up there. That should have read *North* *Vietnam,* of
    course.
    --
    With kind regards,

    *Aragorn*
    (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

  7. Re: Test Message

    Aragorn wrote:

    >>> I am aware of how slavery in North America started, but this was on the
    >>> cusp of the US becoming a nation of its own.

    >>
    >> No, it was 157 years BEFORE the US became an independent nation. It was
    >> clearly the fault of Europeans. It was under European Rule that slavery
    >> STARTED and continued until the USA got sick of European Imperial rule.

    >
    > ... And chose to instate an American Imperialist Rule instead...?
    >


    I never said the USA was RIGHT, only that Europeans are just as bad. But the
    fact is, the USA has been far less imperialistic than Europe and Asia.

  8. Re: Test Message

    Aragorn wrote:

    >> Time for you to stop stalking me.

    >
    > Look who's talking! *And anyway, I posted what I posted because I resent
    > the way you rightwing zealots keep proclaiming American supremacy and
    > denigrating us Europeans - from which you stem!
    >


    Wow, name calling from YOU. The fact is, you STARTED the attacks in the last
    three threads we have engaged in debates, YOU ARE THE ONE DOING THE
    STALKING. It does not matter how you justify your staling, you are
    stalking.

  9. Re: Test Message

    Aragorn wrote:

    >> Europeans were responsible for starting the war in Vietnam.

    >
    > No, the war in Vietnam was an internal conflict.


    You really should get your facts straight:

    http://www.rationalrevolution.net/wa...in_vietnam.htm

    The issues in Vietnam were driven by the struggle for Independence from
    FRANCE. "In 1945 Ho Chi Minh declared Vietnamese Independence, and conflict
    between the French and the Vietnamese people officially began." Yes, Ho Chi
    Minh tried to appeal to the USA for help with Independence from France, one
    must remember that the USA had no power, other than diplomatic presser or
    declaring war on France, to declare Vietnam independent from France. French
    refusal to grant Independence was principle in Ho Chi Minh to the Communist
    and setting up the conditions for the civil war.

    You have ignored WHY there was a civil war. Typical European, ignore the
    impact of European imperialist failures so they can place all the blame on
    the USA. This also shows your true lack of understanding of history.

  10. Re: Test Message

    On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 19:56:44 GMT, Aragorn wrote:

    > Oh please, Matt. Be serious, will you?


    *sigh*

    Let it believe what it wants. Just killfile it, you'll not win any debates
    with it, it's too stupid to see reason.

    --
    Linux: because I work with Windows, and that's bad enough.
    AOLM FAQ - http://blinkynet.net/comp/faq_aolm.html
    RLU #300033 - MDV 2006 - WindowMaker 0.92.0

  11. Re: Test Message

    left_coast wrote:
    > Aragorn wrote:
    >
    >>>> I am aware of how slavery in North America started, but this was on the
    >>>> cusp of the US becoming a nation of its own.
    >>> No, it was 157 years BEFORE the US became an independent nation. It was
    >>> clearly the fault of Europeans. It was under European Rule that slavery
    >>> STARTED and continued until the USA got sick of European Imperial rule.

    >> ... And chose to instate an American Imperialist Rule instead...?
    >>

    >
    > I never said the USA was RIGHT, only that Europeans are just as bad. But the
    > fact is, the USA has been far less imperialistic than Europe and Asia.


    That might be stretching it. Until the current administration, the US
    never simply went in and took over a government by force, true, but they
    have insisted that countries change their laws to allow the Americans to
    buy them for years. Your own ambassador to the United Nations recently
    stated it would be a huge mistake for the USA to even admit that
    international law existed, let alone had any validity. Economic
    imperialism is as bad as any ..., maybe worse, as it is harder to fight.

    I rather like doing business with American individuals. Dealing with one
    of their multi-nationals, though, or with their government, is a lesson
    in dishonesty and double-dealing. Not that our government (I am
    Canadian) is much better. The yanks are getting ready to toss the liars
    out. Our own government is starting to suck up to them, just like the
    Brits. Two steps forward, one step back. I am not a fan of unbridled
    capitalism, regardless of who preaches it.

    The model Linux sets out, with thousands of individuals making the
    choices rather than "the powers that be", has a lot going for it, and
    not just in software development.

    Donald

  12. Re: Test Message

    Aragorn wrote:

    >> Europeans were responsible for slavery in the Americas, something you and
    >> other Europeans don't seem to be taught in Europe.

    >
    > I already did acknowledge that it was European colonists who instated
    > slavery in America, but I also added that those colonists did not do so by
    > command from "their homeland", and that they were already no longer
    > considering themselves to be Europeans.


    If not by command, the people responsible for the governing of the colonies
    ALLOWED IT. The kept slavery LEGAL. By doing so, they are RESPONSIBLE.

    The bottom line, the governing body responsible for slavery in the Americas
    all the way up to the Independence of the USA was EUROPEAN, PERIOD. It was
    BRITAIN that governed colonies that became the USA, it is that governing
    body that was RESPONSIBLE for governing the existence of slavery. If the
    Europeans responsible for the governing of the colonies did not want
    slavery, they could have made it illegal, they did not do so for 156 years,
    so the governing body, BRITAIN, supported slavery for those 156 years.

  13. Re: Test Message

    Aragorn wrote:

    >> Europeans were responsible for slavery in the Americas, something you and
    >> other Europeans don't seem to be taught in Europe.

    >
    > I already did acknowledge that it was European colonists who instated
    > slavery in America,


    But your original claim was you did not recall Europeans going to kidnap
    Africans, then all of a sudden, when your ignorance was pointed out, you
    know all about slavery. Sorry, your ignorance of history was shown in your
    original statement, because you decided to do some research when your
    ignorance was pointed out does not excuse your trying to make slavery a USA
    issue when it was allowed to exist by European policy, the people
    responsible for governing the colonies, for 158 years.

  14. Re: Test Message

    Donald Tees wrote:

    > left_coast wrote:
    >> Aragorn wrote:
    >>
    >>>>> I am aware of how slavery in North America started, but this was on
    >>>>> the cusp of the US becoming a nation of its own.
    >>>> No, it was 157 years BEFORE the US became an independent nation. It was
    >>>> clearly the fault of Europeans. It was under European Rule that slavery
    >>>> STARTED and continued until the USA got sick of European Imperial rule.
    >>> ... And chose to instate an American Imperialist Rule instead...?
    >>>

    >>
    >> I never said the USA was RIGHT, only that Europeans are just as bad. But
    >> the fact is, the USA has been far less imperialistic than Europe and
    >> Asia.

    >
    > That might be stretching it.


    Not at all.

    > Until the current administration, the US
    > never simply went in and took over a government by force, true, but they
    > have insisted that countries change their laws to allow the Americans to
    > buy them for years. Your own ambassador to the United Nations recently
    > stated it would be a huge mistake for the USA to even admit that
    > international law existed, let alone had any validity. Economic
    > imperialism is as bad as any ..., maybe worse, as it is harder to fight.


    Now THAT is stretching it. Claiming that invading a country is worse than
    investing in a country is idiotic. Since companies based in countries other
    than the USA can and do buy companies in the USA, the idea that the USA is
    the only country investing in other countries and that it is somehow wrong
    is laughable. Here is an older article that shows that other countries have
    been trying to buy America for years.

    http://bea.gov/bea/ai/0497iid/maintext.htm

    Even Canada is trying to buy the USA:

    http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21857.pdf

    "while Dutch, British, French, and Canadian investments account for over
    half of the investments in the finance sector... " And you should really
    take a look at the total amount of dollars Canadians have devoted to buying
    the USA as of 2003. It is not only the USA that is buying other countries.
    Other countries are buying the USA. One should understand that this issue
    is actually a two way street before one shoots off their mouth.

    But it does reinforce my belief that USA bathers do not understand the
    issues they discuss. The single claim of a single ambassador does not mean
    that that is the true US policy.

    >
    > I rather like doing business with American individuals. Dealing with one
    > of their multi-nationals, though, or with their government, is a lesson
    > in dishonesty and double-dealing. Not that our government (I am
    > Canadian) is much better.


    That has been my point, no government is clean. To bash the USA without
    acknowledging the fact that there are others that have been as bad, or
    WORSE, is just nonsense. To be Canadian and bitch about the USA trying to
    buy other countries when Canadians are trying to Buy the USA, is, how
    should I say it? HYPOCRITICAL.

    > The yanks are getting ready to toss the liars
    > out. Our own government is starting to suck up to them, just like the
    > Brits. Two steps forward, one step back. I am not a fan of unbridled
    > capitalism, regardless of who preaches it.


    True. But to hold the USA responsible for all the worlds woes is nonsense.

    >
    > The model Linux sets out, with thousands of individuals making the
    > choices rather than "the powers that be", has a lot going for it, and
    > not just in software development.



    So? Yes, I would rather more business models would work this way, it does
    not have anything to do with counties buying each other.

    >
    > Donald



  15. Re: Test Message

    Dave wrote:

    >> Oh please, Matt. *Be serious, will you?

    >
    > sigh
    >
    > Let it believe what it wants. Just killfile it, you'll not win any debates
    > with it, it's too stupid to see reason.


    Trust me, If I actually saw reason from aragorn, I would see it. But his
    down playing of the European responsibility for slavery in the Americas is
    just more proof that he is so biased he is uninterested in an actual
    reasoned debates.

  16. Re: Test Message

    left_coast wrote:

    > Claiming that invading a country is worse than
    > investing in a country is idiotic.


    That should be reversed, to claim that investing in a country is worse than
    investing in a country is idiotic.

  17. Re: Test Message

    left_coast wrote:

    > Claiming that invading a country is worse than
    > investing in a country is idiotic.


    It should read Claiming that investing in a country is worse than invading a
    country is idiotic.

    Even Canada is buying the USA, so you would be claiming that Canada is doing
    something worse than invading the USA! Bwhahahahahahahhah.

  18. Re: Test Message

    Aragorn wrote:

    >> Yes, Europeans DID Travel all the way to Africa to kidnap some people
    >> there, AND they did it for a LOT longer than the USA did.

    >
    > As I said, Matt: those Europeans were already more American than European,


    It does not matter, they were GOVERNED by a European power, BRITAIN. It was
    Britain's responsibility to GOVERN slavery. It was BRITAIN that should have
    made Slavery illegal the because the colonies were part of BRITAIN under
    BRITISH LAW. The fact that slavery was LEGAL is the responsibility of the
    GOVERNING BODY, that would be BRITAIN.

    The fact that you try to deflect the responsibility away from the
    governments that were legitimately responsible for the keeping slavery
    LEGAL shows once again that you are a biased, non-neutral person.

    Get it? It was BRITAIN that was responsible for making slavery LEGAL. Since
    they were the governing body and they made slavery LEGAL, they were
    RESPONSIBLE. It does not matter if the Americans considered themselves
    British citizens, a claim you have not backed up, they WERE British
    citizens of Britain UNDER BRITISH LAW. It was British LAW that allowed
    slavery, it was Britain that was RESPONSIBLE.



  19. Re: Test Message

    left_coast wrote:
    > Donald Tees wrote:
    >
    >> left_coast wrote:

    >
    >> Until the current administration, the US
    >> never simply went in and took over a government by force, true, but they
    >> have insisted that countries change their laws to allow the Americans to
    >> buy them for years. Your own ambassador to the United Nations recently
    >> stated it would be a huge mistake for the USA to even admit that
    >> international law existed, let alone had any validity. Economic
    >> imperialism is as bad as any ..., maybe worse, as it is harder to fight.

    >
    > Now THAT is stretching it. Claiming that invading a country is worse than
    > investing in a country is idiotic. Since companies based in countries other
    > than the USA can and do buy companies in the USA, the idea that the USA is
    > the only country investing in other countries and that it is somehow wrong
    > is laughable. Here is an older article that shows that other countries have
    > been trying to buy America for years.
    >


    Oh, i don't disagree with that. there is a major difference, however,
    between trying to buy, and bribery of public officials. Or blackmail of
    government officials, by another country.

    > "while Dutch, British, French, and Canadian investments account for over
    > half of the investments in the finance sector... " And you should really
    > take a look at the total amount of dollars Canadians have devoted to buying
    > the USA as of 2003. It is not only the USA that is buying other countries.
    > Other countries are buying the USA. One should understand that this issue
    > is actually a two way street before one shoots off their mouth.
    >
    > But it does reinforce my belief that USA bathers do not understand the
    > issues they discuss. The single claim of a single ambassador does not mean
    > that that is the true US policy.


    If you cannot believe the official spokesman for the government, then
    who can you believe? That is a good part of the problem with USA
    international relationships. If you send out people who start with a lie
    as a negotiating tactic, then why should you be upset when people listen
    to the lie, and act as if it were your real position?

    The fact remains, it is not only the stated position, but also the
    position that the Bush government has dealt from ... that international
    law has nothing to do with the USA, and the USA has no intention of
    paying any attention to it.

    >
    >> I rather like doing business with American individuals. Dealing with one
    >> of their multi-nationals, though, or with their government, is a lesson
    >> in dishonesty and double-dealing. Not that our government (I am
    >> Canadian) is much better.

    >
    > That has been my point, no government is clean. To bash the USA without
    > acknowledging the fact that there are others that have been as bad, or
    > WORSE, is just nonsense. To be Canadian and bitch about the USA trying to
    > buy other countries when Canadians are trying to Buy the USA, is, how
    > should I say it? HYPOCRITICAL.
    >
    >> The yanks are getting ready to toss the liars
    >> out. Our own government is starting to suck up to them, just like the
    >> Brits. Two steps forward, one step back. I am not a fan of unbridled
    >> capitalism, regardless of who preaches it.

    >
    > True. But to hold the USA responsible for all the worlds woes is nonsense.
    >

    Agreed, 100% . Blaming anybody is a mug's game. As is shouting insults
    in a newsgroup. On the other hand, understanding the issues and talking
    in a reasonable manner to other *can* improve understanding. It takes
    more effort to understand people, though, than it does to understand
    computers.

    Donald<--a believer in the global village.

  20. Re: Test Message

    Donald Tees wrote:

    >> Now THAT is stretching it. Claiming that invading a country is worse than
    >> investing in a country is idiotic. Since companies based in countries
    >> other than the USA can and do buy companies in the USA, the idea that the
    >> USA is the only country investing in other countries and that it is
    >> somehow wrong is laughable. Here is an older article that shows that
    >> other countries have been trying to buy America for years.
    >>

    >
    > Oh, i don't disagree with that. *there is a major difference, however,
    > between trying to buy, and bribery of public officials. Or blackmail of
    > government officials, by another country.


    Bribery was not even mentioned in your first reply. You are moving the goal
    post when shown wrong, shame on you. It is what I expected from USA
    Bashers, sling as much mud and hope some sticks. "buy" was YOUR term, when
    I discussed this issue using YOUR term, it suddenly changed to bribery.
    PATHETIC.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 30 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast