He was a warmonger. He consciously deceived the world in his 2003 presentation making the case for war with Saddam Hussein. His actions caused incredible death, suffering and conflict for decades. He doesn't deserve any praise after death.
Still, I wish his family well and it's sad that the pandemic claims another victim.
I understand you being on the other side of his national interests. Perhaps you forget that in this country we were mourning our dead from 9/11. The prevailing wind pointed at Saddam Hussein as the most likely culprit. I still remember how “weapons of mass destruction” was bandied about here. I also remember that our national belief was that those weapons were destined to destroy Peoria, Illinois. If you are going to place the blame for the ( how did you put it?), incredible death, suffering and conflict for decades, I have to clarify that this was not just one man’s fault. The whole country felt it was right.
As far as my personal feelings, I mourn my countrymen’s death, but, if you think I’m going to mourn for people who wanted to destroy or harm my people or country, you are sadly wrong. Hussein was a monster any way you look at it and my only regret is that we didn’t just overran the whole Middle East and made it a US territory. --------------------------------------- added after 11 minutes
And let me remind you that the Dutch Empire, during their time of power, controlled parts of four continents. I’m sure the Netherlands did not count the “Incredible death and suffering, and, yes, conflict for centuries” that they caused. I’m not naive as to think there were no profits to be made during Powell’s path to glory, but, it was secondary to well intentions of national security. He didn’t do it to enrich some puffed up European king.
It was a complete and utter lie that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with 9/11 and they knew they were lying. Also it was complete bullshit that Saddam Hussein would ever attack the US, even if he had the weapons to do so. The only reason to attack Iraq was for control in the region and oil. Even the myth that they thought they could turn Iraq into a democracy is a lie, they wanted to turn it into a vassal state.
This lie was not just Colin Powell's idea, but he was surely one of the war-hawks behind the plan. You should understand that the harm these people did to your country are many, many times worse than 9/11 itself.
Saddam Hussein was a horrible dictator with blood on his hands, but his country was stable. There was no reason for the US to attack Iraq. The citizens of Iraq didn't have freedom, but they were developing. Eventually they would have built a society capable of outgrowing dictatorship. The actions of the US set that back for decades. Now the situation in Iraq is atrocious, they are under occupation of the US, which is not better than a dictatorship and when the US leaves it will fall into chaos. It will probably turn
into another Afghanistan, which is much worse than the had under Saddam Hussein.
These wars didn't improve the world, they didn't make you safer and the costs are hurting the American people. The only people who gained are the executives and shareholders of defense contractors and oil companies. Those are the people that
Colin Powell answered to. They are more powerful than any European king ever was and they hide behind your elected leaders, so they never answer to you. At least the Europeans revolted every now and then and executed their traitorous, self-serving kings. These people will never be punished, because they have you in their pocket, without you even noticing.
What right do you think the US has, to just randomly attack and occupy any state?
The Dutch empire grew out of that, when is the US?
What right? We came out of WWII as a powerful entity that many countries are jealous of. We are constantly in the cross hairs of every second and third world country that traded their spears for an AK47. Yes, many of our policies and actions contributed to it, but, laying down and asking for the coup d'état is not in our nature. If we think it’s good for our interest to overrun the world, so be it. Don’t like it? Kiss 💋 it baby.
Water with lead and mercury is better than no water at all, or drowning in it.
Europe is also very popular with immigrants, it's just a bit of a long swim for people from South America. Besides that, you're country just lies in the way of their actual destination, 'home of the free'; Canada.
"If we think it’s good for our interest to overrun the world, so be it."
It's not good for YOUR interest, it's just good for the military industrial complex
and oil companies. YOU are just picking up the bill and sending your kids to die.
Or am I not talking with a middle-class American, but with the CEO of Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP or Shell?
Your not even a tiny bit safer, but maybe you FEEL safer, occupying Islamic states, filled with people in poverty and misery, who hate you a bit more each day.
Ananas, quit beating the horse. He’s dead. THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX AND OIL COMPANIES? Really? You think I’m James Bond? Do you see me going around saying, “T####, Candy T###?
My interest are on a par with my country’s policies. Don’t mistake my outrage for inequality in my country for outright repudiation of my country’s world politics.
sure Ananans , talk shit about a man after he is dead, shows the kind of man you are.
Saddam Hussein was NOT a nice guy to have wallering around in the middle east.
Iraq will never improve above what it has been for centurys.
I do not respect men that lie countries into war, just because they died.
"Saddam Hussein was NOT a nice guy" is all that is left as an argument, because
the lies about him being responsible for 9/11 and him having weapons of mass destruction were proven lies, that Colin Powell was part off. Those lies are responsible for 2,401 deaths and 20,752 wounded Americans in Afghanistan, 4,431 deaths and 31,994 wounded in Iraq. Your wars killed about 241,000 civilians in the Afghanistan and Pakistan war zone and between 461,000 and 655,000 Iraqi civilians. The wars costed the US taxpayer around $6.4 trillion. Why do you want to honor a man who
has shared responsibility for starting those horrible wars, under false pretenses?
He should have been charged as a war criminal.
Gee, Ol saddam was a nice guy wasn't he?
Could be as many as a HALF MILLION lives lost due to his orders and actions.
only registered users can see external links
From ABC news,can't get much more liberal than that.
only registered users can see external links
Did the US go there to rid people of their dictator?
No, they told you he was responsible for 9/11 and he had WMD's.
Bush and Powell lied to you 24/7 to make you support that war.
Colin Powell stood in front of the UN and lied his pants off.
only registered users can see external links
And then you killed more civilians than the dictator ever did.
I'm sure the survivors were happy it was over, but then the US didn't go away.
Those Iraqis have not been better off with the US occupying their country.
To keep the country under control, the US has been just as brutal as Saddam was.
Fuck, Just gotta say 911 was the biggest hoax of all time. You need to install fear to be a superpower and that they did. Quiet happy to sacrifice a few" casualties of war" for gain.
Nothing different to Israel/ Palistein or in Ireland... Protestants and Catholicism. Just on a bigger scale. Yep Saddam was a bad person ...many dictators in the world and we " supposedly saw him dead. Don't forget about Osama... apparently he dead 🤣.
The best word unsettelers are the media, and you guys always posting clips of who is right and wrong.
Do some homework on the Bin laden family and see they were and still are a major contributor of US funds, STILL to this day.
You are all speculating and flogging a dead horse.
Cars and bikes are way more good forum topics. Oh and burgers 🙂
Just be kind as the majority there and here don't matter anyway.
Love you all --------------------------------------- added after 3 minutes
And no hate mail please, Just offering my side of events which I can't say are real, Just a more probable side to politic rhetoric bullshit.
There's a lot of dictators in the world and many of them are friends to the US.
Saudi Arabia is just as brutal as Saddam Hussein ever was. They behead people for apostasy and which-craft, based on a form of Shari'ah law.
But US leaders like them, because of lucrative weapons deals.
Then the US government supports them, when they do genocide in Yemen.
You're right about the fearmongering. That's how they get people to support
all those wars in the middle east, that have never made anyone even a bit safer, but only created more terrorists.
Denmark’s new law stripping refugees of cash and valuables is “so strange”, says the 24-year-old, who has just 400 krone (£40) to his name.
“When people have lost their homes, their lives are in ruins, how can you take things from them?” he says, five days after arriving in Copenhagen. “Everyone knows that without money you cannot travel, sleep or eat. Are they telling people to go out and steal?”
"The legislation allows police to confiscate cash and valuables above 10,000 kroner from arriving migrants and asylum seekers."
Still not OK. If people are fleeing from a murderous regime, they should be helped. If they are allowed to stay, they will need any money they still have to start-up their new life. Starting with nothing will only make it harder for them to integrate and participate in society.
That’s less than $1200.00 USDs. Of course the only way to compare different money is to quote how much a loaf of bread costs and how long it takes to earn the equivalent in identical jobs
I know you are the very last human on earth that would be able to understand the SIMPLE logic behind the legislation for those folks.
First off, granted, I DO NOT LIKE THE IDEA of taking what someone owns ok? Just so you know I think it is equal to stealing BUT THERE IS LOGIC in this situation.
IF those immigrants know they will loose alot if they go in that country, or at leas think they might, perhaps they will go elsewhere and not be a burden to Denmark at all.
OR if they go to Denmark, they will have to find a friggen job to support themselves in order to stay. Denmark gains a employee and not a BUM.
Denmark has very strict immigration laws, but this policy is for refugees and asylum seekers who just walk into their country. If you go trough the proper procedures, like I would do when I decide to Denmark, they won't take my stuff, because I wouldn't ask for their help. Denmark wouldn't need to pay for my housing and I wouldn't ask for unemployment benefits.
Denmark has generous unemployment benefits in the form of private insurance funds. Immigrants didn't buy in for this system.
A country that doesn't support people, can have less strict immigration policies, because immigrants would need to support themselves or get support from friends or family.
My apologies, Ananas. I pride myself on being good on geography but the Nordic countries always confuse me. Denmark and The Netherlands are two different countries. This Danish immigration law has nothing to do with your country. I brought it up because you said
Europe is also very popular with immigrants, it's just a bit of a long swim for people from South America. Besides that, you're country just lies in the way of their actual destination, 'home of the free'; Canada.
Europe and the US are close in size and the EU makes it similar to our system of states. European refugee immigration is mostly from the North African countries and they have not been received by the general population with open arms. I submit that 🇩🇰 Denmark’s immigration laws are racists but hidden in general laws. They are part of the EU and they know most immigrants would not be inconvenienced by such a law.
Dev01, I new the answer before I did some research. More later but this
Even as the smoke was still rising from the ruins of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in September 2001, conspiracy theories sprang up blaming the attacks on anyone but al-Qaeda. The specific claims varied. The 9/11 attacks were an inside job. Carefully placed explosives rather than commercial passenger jets brought down the Twin Towers. The U.S. military fired missiles that struck the Pentagon. The Bush administration knew of the impending attacks but did nothing. Israel orchestrated the attacks as a false-flag operation. The list goes on.
None of these conspiracy theories is true. Many are preposterous on their face. And more than a few recycle long-standing anti-Semitic tropes.
Was posted here
only registered users can see external links
Now, I watched the whole attack on the towers that morning. It happened. If you think it was not perpetrated by Bin Laddin, that’s your right. I think you are wrong--------------------------------------- added after 2 minutesDev01. You are right there are other topics to discuss in the forums, but, let me quote my own post, the first post in this
“We lost a man of honor and understanding. He dedicated his life to the service and preservation of our country. Go in peace you formidable warrior. We will miss you,” --------------------------------------- added after 6 minutes
It was a simple goodbye to a man I admired. No politics. No right or wrong, just a goodbye.
Dev01, I found this in one of those facts check web sites
At the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan, American Airlines Flight 11 struck the northern facade of the north tower less than 20 minutes before United Airlines Flight 175 struck the southwestern facade of the south tower.
Anyone in the world watching TV at the time saw two planes strike the twin towers of the World Trade Center. I’m no expert but, two aircraft DID hit the towers. Were they comercial airline planes? I don’t know but, either way, it happened. At least you have to admit the towers were destroyed and by aircraft. Here’s were my two cents come in. While it is extremely difficult to enter by force the cockpit of a passenger flight, it’s next to impossible to board a freighter and getting the use of such an aircraft is even harder. So, I’m reasonably sure that there were terrorists who hijacked commercial aircraft and used them as ramming vessels. All else may be true or not, but the towers are rubble, hundreds of flight passengers disappeared that day, and many Middle East people cheered the disaster.
Actually, Ananas, he reminded the UN that Hussein had broken every accord for verification in the previous 12 years. Weather the Bush administration was pushing for a policing action or not, the Iraqis were pushing the envelope. Hussein had used chemical weapons against Iran and his own Kurds. Are you now coming here to say the UN did not investigate and agree to invade Iraq? The English Commonwealth, France and Germany were on board. Did he use faulty intelligence? Did he lie? Maybe he did. Let me remind you that countries are amoral and he was working for BushII.
You assume we have an interest to attack. Sovereignty goes out the window when you factor in terrorizm. We are a rich country and I’m not going to apologize for that. Being so, we have many interests, some we are vested in, some we just happen to be in the wrong place at the right time. Oil and other cargo traversing the Hormuz Straits is important to many countries, even ours. Maybe especially ours. Irán has attacked not only the foreign flag ships but our navy’s ships. This is pure terrorizm and to stop it we really should overrun Iran. If a country wants it’s sovereignty respected, they should not be belligerent. I’m sure that if Sweden destroyed your windmills your country would ignore Sweden’s sovereignty
"if he was so great why did his own people tear down his statue the moment they found out he was dead"
Sure, but they didn't know yet how many Iraqis the US would TORTURE,
just like Saddam.
And I don't know where you got that Saddam made half a million victims, but I only found numbers around 250.000. Higher numbers blame your victims on him.
You were probably trying to make the number of victims of the US' attack more acceptable and think I wouldn't notice.
The reality is that the US killed many more Iraqis than their dictator ever did, destroyed their stable but vulnerable economy, with the only effect of changing
a brutal, autocratic regime for a corrupt, fake-democracy and sectarian violence.
It leaves you with another country you can never leave, without it turning to a Islamist terror state. You can either leave and hope it will eventually turn out better (like Afghanistan), keep it as your bitch-state and eternal money-pit or really invest in their stability and future, so you can leave safely.
There's site that say the Iraq war might have caused Iraqi victims up to a million as well; 1,033,000 if we use excess deaths. I didn't refer to those numbers, because they weren't argumented correctly. The list in your link is displayed on other sites as well. They add up to around 250.000. Maybe they used excess deaths too, to get to half a million.
Still, again I admit Saddam Hussein was horrible. I wasn't sad when they executed him. If the US had just assassinated him, without all that 'collateral damage', you wouldn't get any grief from me. If Colin Powell had arranged that, WITHOUT THE LYING PART, I would have given him all the respect, he would have earned then.
On Iraq, Qoura (that I don’t entirely trust) posted
t's helpful as well to distinguish between armed combatants and civilians. To the extent that Bush and the armed forces he commanded killed combatants, they were doing precisely what they meant to do. That's what happens in war. It's not a good thing. When two countries can't coexist peacefully, they go to war and kill as many people as they can until one side gives up. C'est la guerre.
To the extent that Bush and US armed forces killed civilians, it was a result of collateral deaths. I don't use that term lightly. But it's important as a definition; those civilians died because the US was trying to kill combatants in their midst. There is no reliable report that we bombed hospitals, as another answer here asserts. Remember that there is nothing that would legally prevent us from doing so. My father's generation fire-bombed Dresden with the express purpose of killing German civilians. We dropped two atomic bombs in Japan. Morality is different from legality; many people would say that it's flat out evil to kill another human being for any reason. More would say that it's evil to kill an innocent person even if it's accidentally caused by an effort to kill a combatant. What is clear to me, even if it's not clear to everyone, is that the US did not set out to kill any non-combatants and used appropriate measures to minimize collateral deaths. According to Wikileaks documents, the US estimate of Iraqi civilians killed is 66,081. Other sources say twice that many, and then some talk about "excess deaths", which presumably include deaths related to all the effects of war, such as reduced access to food or medical care.
What does that prove? It’s war, no matter who’s to blame or why.
"talk shit about a man after he is dead, shows the kind of man you are"
You are here saying you want people to STARVE, if they don't go back to their horrible minimum wage jobs. That shows the kind of man you are.
Not honoring a war criminal should be the norm.
Before Colin Powell became secretary of state, he was a great statesman.
He deserved to be the first African-American secretary of state. However, he used
all that credibility to start an illegal war with a country that didn't attack you, on false pretenses.
Later he lied, how he tried to avoid the war:
only registered users can see external links
He agreed to take it to the UN and THERE HE LIED HIS PANTS OFF.
I didn't know about Powell's death, until I saw this forum topic.
I was surprised how you all are so positive about him.
Do you all have such short memories?
When I watched YouTube before sleep yesterday, I found several lefty YouTubers saying exactly the same as me. They explained that ALL off your media, from left to right, is fawning over this guy's death. And they have done a reformation campaign for him for years. Are you just parroting that PR campaign? Are you that gullible?
Maybe listening to some other perspectives might help.
only registered users can see external links only registered users can see external links
IF people are stupid enough to walk off a paying job ,then they deserve what ever negative happens.
A job that pays some is better than none.
The world will never be safe,but when you find a bin laden or a saddam,take their ass out .at least disrupt the chain a bit to keep the threat weaker.
Yea,some pay means you keep the house,loose the car. NO job means you loose house and CAR or vice versa.
Yea,I thought it out. makes NO fucking sense to walk off a job this day and time.
"IF people are stupid enough to walk off a paying job ,then they deserve what ever negative happens."
Hell no, fuck employers who pay just enough to survive on.
People should work together, to not get exploited like that.
That gives people leverage, which benefits everyone.
But if you allow people to starve if they don't work,
everyone will be exploited.
read my above post.
You must live in a utopia.
Where do you think that extra pay is going to come from?
Part of thinking this out is simple.
YOU get a 10% raise for working on a assembly line.
You go buy a hamburger and the cost has went up 10% ,the car battery went up 10% and so on,so those people could get a 10% raise.
It is all a big hamster wheel.UNless you do like china, and the government owns it all and NO one makes any fucking money to speak of.
10% of a hamburger is about $0.55. 10% of a battery is about $8.00. That is about $8.55 extra expense. 10% of $400.00 is $40.00. That puts you ahead $31.45. That’s the difference
Ok, take the state and federal income tax out of that 40 before you start with the rest that gave you 31.45
I just used 3 items,and you accurately explained the difference with those 3 examples BUT life is alot more than that.
For a short time you might be ahead.as it takes time for all industrys to catch up.BUt before long,that difference will be in the less than 10 bracket.
When life catches up you strike for another raise. It’s the way of the world --------------------------------------- added after 6 minutes
And, yes, life has more than 3 items but every paycheck is slightly different. Don’t think $31.45. Think $400.00 PLUS $31.45. B fore the raise this employee might have ended up with $60 of discretionary money. Now he will have $91.45. There are more possibilities for a happier life.
Ananas, assuming there’s a need for your company’s product , all else being equal, your company can create a fictitious supply shortage in order to boost the price. Competition in the market is what controls availability. The liquidity in the economy controls sales. The breaking even point is the amount of sales needed to turn a DECENT profit.
"your company can create a fictitious supply shortage in order to boost the price"
That's true for companies that control a big part of the supply. The average bakery on your street corner can't do that.
"Competition in the market is what controls availability." True!
"The liquidity in the economy controls sales." True!
That's why an economic crash can be caused by stagnant or declining wages.
If people don't have money to spend, there is not enough demand and businesses can't survive. The first to go are the small shops and non essential services. The bigger companies that sell essential goods will benefit from that, for a while. Those bigger companies are more efficient and have more leverage over their employers to keep wages low. That only exacerbates the wage decline, until they see their demand drop too. It can either lead to massive strikes or to an enormous economy crash.
This is basically what happened in the UK in the 80's, because of the policies
of Margaret Thatcher. She caused significant decline in GDP and record high unemployment.
This has been going on for a while in your country. Don't you see the signs?
Raising the minimum wage will boost the economy:
only registered users can see external links
How To Fix Stagnant Wages: Dump The World's Dumbest Idea:
only registered users can see external links
I do but I also blame the big box stores and Amazon and other Internet stores. Funny you mention a bakery. I had a friend from grade school who was Jewish. At that time Miami had huge number of Jews. The family owned the bakery on 8th street close to our houses. They used to invite me to dinner a lot and their cooking was excellent. Most of the time the conversation was light and happy but, because they were business people, there was an occasional concern with taxes, the value of a dollar and locations for “a cash cow”. I remember Mr Stern say,”if you see a corner with three identical shops, open a fourth because there’ll always be customers. Competition is good
Still, I wish his family well and it's sad that the pandemic claims another victim.
As far as my personal feelings, I mourn my countrymen’s death, but, if you think I’m going to mourn for people who wanted to destroy or harm my people or country, you are sadly wrong. Hussein was a monster any way you look at it and my only regret is that we didn’t just overran the whole Middle East and made it a US territory.
--------------------------------------- added after 11 minutes
And let me remind you that the Dutch Empire, during their time of power, controlled parts of four continents. I’m sure the Netherlands did not count the “Incredible death and suffering, and, yes, conflict for centuries” that they caused. I’m not naive as to think there were no profits to be made during Powell’s path to glory, but, it was secondary to well intentions of national security. He didn’t do it to enrich some puffed up European king.
This lie was not just Colin Powell's idea, but he was surely one of the war-hawks behind the plan. You should understand that the harm these people did to your country are many, many times worse than 9/11 itself.
Saddam Hussein was a horrible dictator with blood on his hands, but his country was stable. There was no reason for the US to attack Iraq. The citizens of Iraq didn't have freedom, but they were developing. Eventually they would have built a society capable of outgrowing dictatorship. The actions of the US set that back for decades. Now the situation in Iraq is atrocious, they are under occupation of the US, which is not better than a dictatorship and when the US leaves it will fall into chaos. It will probably turn
into another Afghanistan, which is much worse than the had under Saddam Hussein.
These wars didn't improve the world, they didn't make you safer and the costs are hurting the American people. The only people who gained are the executives and shareholders of defense contractors and oil companies. Those are the people that
Colin Powell answered to. They are more powerful than any European king ever was and they hide behind your elected leaders, so they never answer to you. At least the Europeans revolted every now and then and executed their traitorous, self-serving kings. These people will never be punished, because they have you in their pocket, without you even noticing.
What right do you think the US has, to just randomly attack and occupy any state?
The Dutch empire grew out of that, when is the US?
Europe is also very popular with immigrants, it's just a bit of a long swim for people from South America. Besides that, you're country just lies in the way of their actual destination, 'home of the free'; Canada.
It's not good for YOUR interest, it's just good for the military industrial complex
and oil companies. YOU are just picking up the bill and sending your kids to die.
Or am I not talking with a middle-class American, but with the CEO of Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP or Shell?
Your not even a tiny bit safer, but maybe you FEEL safer, occupying Islamic states, filled with people in poverty and misery, who hate you a bit more each day.
My interest are on a par with my country’s policies. Don’t mistake my outrage for inequality in my country for outright repudiation of my country’s world politics.
Capitalizing on conflict: How defense contractors and foreign nations lobby for arms sales:
only registered users can see external links
Black money behind war: How the US military-industrial complex has thrived after attacks in Middle East:
only registered users can see external links
The Oil Market May Have Tanked, but Companies Are Still Giving Plenty to Keep Republicans in Office:
only registered users can see external links
Oil-Funded Lawmakers Resist Biden’s Energy and Climate Plans:
only registered users can see external links
Cable News Military Experts Are on the Defense Industry Dole
only registered users can see external links
This Is How the Biggest Arms Manufacturers Steer Millions to Influence US Policy:
only registered users can see external links
Saddam Hussein was NOT a nice guy to have wallering around in the middle east.
Iraq will never improve above what it has been for centurys.
"Saddam Hussein was NOT a nice guy" is all that is left as an argument, because
the lies about him being responsible for 9/11 and him having weapons of mass destruction were proven lies, that Colin Powell was part off. Those lies are responsible for 2,401 deaths and 20,752 wounded Americans in Afghanistan, 4,431 deaths and 31,994 wounded in Iraq. Your wars killed about 241,000 civilians in the Afghanistan and Pakistan war zone and between 461,000 and 655,000 Iraqi civilians. The wars costed the US taxpayer around $6.4 trillion. Why do you want to honor a man who
has shared responsibility for starting those horrible wars, under false pretenses?
He should have been charged as a war criminal.
Could be as many as a HALF MILLION lives lost due to his orders and actions.
only registered users can see external links
From ABC news,can't get much more liberal than that.
only registered users can see external links
No, they told you he was responsible for 9/11 and he had WMD's.
Bush and Powell lied to you 24/7 to make you support that war.
Colin Powell stood in front of the UN and lied his pants off.
only registered users can see external links
And then you killed more civilians than the dictator ever did.
I'm sure the survivors were happy it was over, but then the US didn't go away.
Those Iraqis have not been better off with the US occupying their country.
To keep the country under control, the US has been just as brutal as Saddam was.
Nothing different to Israel/ Palistein or in Ireland... Protestants and Catholicism. Just on a bigger scale. Yep Saddam was a bad person ...many dictators in the world and we " supposedly saw him dead. Don't forget about Osama... apparently he dead 🤣.
The best word unsettelers are the media, and you guys always posting clips of who is right and wrong.
Do some homework on the Bin laden family and see they were and still are a major contributor of US funds, STILL to this day.
You are all speculating and flogging a dead horse.
Cars and bikes are way more good forum topics. Oh and burgers 🙂
Just be kind as the majority there and here don't matter anyway.
Love you all
--------------------------------------- added after 3 minutes
And no hate mail please, Just offering my side of events which I can't say are real, Just a more probable side to politic rhetoric bullshit.
Saudi Arabia is just as brutal as Saddam Hussein ever was. They behead people for apostasy and which-craft, based on a form of Shari'ah law.
But US leaders like them, because of lucrative weapons deals.
Then the US government supports them, when they do genocide in Yemen.
You're right about the fearmongering. That's how they get people to support
all those wars in the middle east, that have never made anyone even a bit safer, but only created more terrorists.
It's hard enough to deal with idiots in real life.
Just had to put my bit in. I could have articulated more but tired.
Hope the world as a whole can sort their shit out
after he lied them into a war, that almost no one likes anymore.
Denmark’s new law stripping refugees of cash and valuables is “so strange”, says the 24-year-old, who has just 400 krone (£40) to his name.
“When people have lost their homes, their lives are in ruins, how can you take things from them?” he says, five days after arriving in Copenhagen. “Everyone knows that without money you cannot travel, sleep or eat. Are they telling people to go out and steal?”
Still not OK. If people are fleeing from a murderous regime, they should be helped. If they are allowed to stay, they will need any money they still have to start-up their new life. Starting with nothing will only make it harder for them to integrate and participate in society.
only registered users can see external links
First off, granted, I DO NOT LIKE THE IDEA of taking what someone owns ok? Just so you know I think it is equal to stealing BUT THERE IS LOGIC in this situation.
IF those immigrants know they will loose alot if they go in that country, or at leas think they might, perhaps they will go elsewhere and not be a burden to Denmark at all.
OR if they go to Denmark, they will have to find a friggen job to support themselves in order to stay. Denmark gains a employee and not a BUM.
Denmark has generous unemployment benefits in the form of private insurance funds. Immigrants didn't buy in for this system.
A country that doesn't support people, can have less strict immigration policies, because immigrants would need to support themselves or get support from friends or family.
Europe is also very popular with immigrants, it's just a bit of a long swim for people from South America. Besides that, you're country just lies in the way of their actual destination, 'home of the free'; Canada.
Europe and the US are close in size and the EU makes it similar to our system of states. European refugee immigration is mostly from the North African countries and they have not been received by the general population with open arms. I submit that 🇩🇰 Denmark’s immigration laws are racists but hidden in general laws. They are part of the EU and they know most immigrants would not be inconvenienced by such a law.
Even as the smoke was still rising from the ruins of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in September 2001, conspiracy theories sprang up blaming the attacks on anyone but al-Qaeda. The specific claims varied. The 9/11 attacks were an inside job. Carefully placed explosives rather than commercial passenger jets brought down the Twin Towers. The U.S. military fired missiles that struck the Pentagon. The Bush administration knew of the impending attacks but did nothing. Israel orchestrated the attacks as a false-flag operation. The list goes on.
None of these conspiracy theories is true. Many are preposterous on their face. And more than a few recycle long-standing anti-Semitic tropes.
Was posted here
only registered users can see external links
Now, I watched the whole attack on the towers that morning. It happened. If you think it was not perpetrated by Bin Laddin, that’s your right. I think you are wrong--------------------------------------- added after 2 minutesDev01. You are right there are other topics to discuss in the forums, but, let me quote my own post, the first post in this
“We lost a man of honor and understanding. He dedicated his life to the service and preservation of our country. Go in peace you formidable warrior. We will miss you,”
--------------------------------------- added after 6 minutes
It was a simple goodbye to a man I admired. No politics. No right or wrong, just a goodbye.
Just some food for thought.
At that I will leave it, But I will say after watching this had changed my thoughts as it has some very factual stuff that is hard to deny.
Regardless thoughts and prayers to all the fallen and first responders. I think my part of this thread can be closed now
At the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan, American Airlines Flight 11 struck the northern facade of the north tower less than 20 minutes before United Airlines Flight 175 struck the southwestern facade of the south tower.
Anyone in the world watching TV at the time saw two planes strike the twin towers of the World Trade Center. I’m no expert but, two aircraft DID hit the towers. Were they comercial airline planes? I don’t know but, either way, it happened. At least you have to admit the towers were destroyed and by aircraft. Here’s were my two cents come in. While it is extremely difficult to enter by force the cockpit of a passenger flight, it’s next to impossible to board a freighter and getting the use of such an aircraft is even harder. So, I’m reasonably sure that there were terrorists who hijacked commercial aircraft and used them as ramming vessels. All else may be true or not, but the towers are rubble, hundreds of flight passengers disappeared that day, and many Middle East people cheered the disaster.
That's what Trump has been saying about Iran too. UN inspectors don't agree. It's a very easy argument to use against a country.
Can we please check every secret base in your country?
Eh, why? YOU ARE NOT COOPERATING, now we attack you!
Even though Saddam was a horrible dictator, countries still have Sovereignty.
Sure, but they didn't know yet how many Iraqis the US would TORTURE,
just like Saddam.
And I don't know where you got that Saddam made half a million victims, but I only found numbers around 250.000. Higher numbers blame your victims on him.
You were probably trying to make the number of victims of the US' attack more acceptable and think I wouldn't notice.
The reality is that the US killed many more Iraqis than their dictator ever did, destroyed their stable but vulnerable economy, with the only effect of changing
a brutal, autocratic regime for a corrupt, fake-democracy and sectarian violence.
It leaves you with another country you can never leave, without it turning to a Islamist terror state. You can either leave and hope it will eventually turn out better (like Afghanistan), keep it as your bitch-state and eternal money-pit or really invest in their stability and future, so you can leave safely.
Still, again I admit Saddam Hussein was horrible. I wasn't sad when they executed him. If the US had just assassinated him, without all that 'collateral damage', you wouldn't get any grief from me. If Colin Powell had arranged that, WITHOUT THE LYING PART, I would have given him all the respect, he would have earned then.
t's helpful as well to distinguish between armed combatants and civilians. To the extent that Bush and the armed forces he commanded killed combatants, they were doing precisely what they meant to do. That's what happens in war. It's not a good thing. When two countries can't coexist peacefully, they go to war and kill as many people as they can until one side gives up. C'est la guerre.
To the extent that Bush and US armed forces killed civilians, it was a result of collateral deaths. I don't use that term lightly. But it's important as a definition; those civilians died because the US was trying to kill combatants in their midst. There is no reliable report that we bombed hospitals, as another answer here asserts. Remember that there is nothing that would legally prevent us from doing so. My father's generation fire-bombed Dresden with the express purpose of killing German civilians. We dropped two atomic bombs in Japan. Morality is different from legality; many people would say that it's flat out evil to kill another human being for any reason. More would say that it's evil to kill an innocent person even if it's accidentally caused by an effort to kill a combatant. What is clear to me, even if it's not clear to everyone, is that the US did not set out to kill any non-combatants and used appropriate measures to minimize collateral deaths. According to Wikileaks documents, the US estimate of Iraqi civilians killed is 66,081. Other sources say twice that many, and then some talk about "excess deaths", which presumably include deaths related to all the effects of war, such as reduced access to food or medical care.
What does that prove? It’s war, no matter who’s to blame or why.
You are here saying you want people to STARVE, if they don't go back to their horrible minimum wage jobs. That shows the kind of man you are.
Not honoring a war criminal should be the norm.
Before Colin Powell became secretary of state, he was a great statesman.
He deserved to be the first African-American secretary of state. However, he used
all that credibility to start an illegal war with a country that didn't attack you, on false pretenses.
Later he lied, how he tried to avoid the war:
only registered users can see external links
He agreed to take it to the UN and THERE HE LIED HIS PANTS OFF.
I didn't know about Powell's death, until I saw this forum topic.
I was surprised how you all are so positive about him.
Do you all have such short memories?
When I watched YouTube before sleep yesterday, I found several lefty YouTubers saying exactly the same as me. They explained that ALL off your media, from left to right, is fawning over this guy's death. And they have done a reformation campaign for him for years. Are you just parroting that PR campaign? Are you that gullible?
Maybe listening to some other perspectives might help.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
A job that pays some is better than none.
The world will never be safe,but when you find a bin laden or a saddam,take their ass out .at least disrupt the chain a bit to keep the threat weaker.
Yea,I thought it out. makes NO fucking sense to walk off a job this day and time.
Hell no, fuck employers who pay just enough to survive on.
People should work together, to not get exploited like that.
That gives people leverage, which benefits everyone.
But if you allow people to starve if they don't work,
everyone will be exploited.
You must live in a utopia.
Where do you think that extra pay is going to come from?
Part of thinking this out is simple.
YOU get a 10% raise for working on a assembly line.
You go buy a hamburger and the cost has went up 10% ,the car battery went up 10% and so on,so those people could get a 10% raise.
It is all a big hamster wheel.UNless you do like china, and the government owns it all and NO one makes any fucking money to speak of.
I just used 3 items,and you accurately explained the difference with those 3 examples BUT life is alot more than that.
For a short time you might be ahead.as it takes time for all industrys to catch up.BUt before long,that difference will be in the less than 10 bracket.
--------------------------------------- added after 6 minutes
And, yes, life has more than 3 items but every paycheck is slightly different. Don’t think $31.45. Think $400.00 PLUS $31.45. B fore the raise this employee might have ended up with $60 of discretionary money. Now he will have $91.45. There are more possibilities for a happier life.
You go buy a hamburger and the cost has went up 10%"
You really don't understand anything about economics.
Price = Demand vs Supply
Profit = Total Revenue - Total Expenses
Wages are only a fraction of the Total Expenses.
(In my business, 'big pharma', Total Expenses are 5% of the price and labor costs are only about 20% of the Total Expenses. Yep, it's a gold mine.)
Demand = people having interest and money to buy your product or service
If people don't have money, there is low or no demand.
If there is low demand, profits are low / if there is high demand, profits are high.
Competing with China is a fantasy. Everything that can be outsourced,
is already outsourced.
The 'profits over people' crowd is harming the economy.
They are playing chicken and that can result in a giant crash.
That's true for companies that control a big part of the supply. The average bakery on your street corner can't do that.
"Competition in the market is what controls availability." True!
"The liquidity in the economy controls sales." True!
That's why an economic crash can be caused by stagnant or declining wages.
If people don't have money to spend, there is not enough demand and businesses can't survive. The first to go are the small shops and non essential services. The bigger companies that sell essential goods will benefit from that, for a while. Those bigger companies are more efficient and have more leverage over their employers to keep wages low. That only exacerbates the wage decline, until they see their demand drop too. It can either lead to massive strikes or to an enormous economy crash.
This is basically what happened in the UK in the 80's, because of the policies
of Margaret Thatcher. She caused significant decline in GDP and record high unemployment.
This has been going on for a while in your country. Don't you see the signs?
Raising the minimum wage will boost the economy:
only registered users can see external links
How To Fix Stagnant Wages: Dump The World's Dumbest Idea:
only registered users can see external links
New Comment Go to top