US Government executes US citizen with no trial!!!

OhWiseOne

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Posts
4,518
Media
251
Likes
2,967
Points
358
Location
Florida
Verification
View
Sexuality
60% Straight, 40% Gay
Gender
Male
So if I'm in a battle situation and it is me or the other person that may die, I should stop and ask them a series of human rights, nation of origin questions? That's an enteresting plan.

Also, fuck the lib/con BS on this thread. I could care less who is currently in the white house. This is not the issue as many want to make it.
 

SprinkleMe69

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Posts
7,459
Media
0
Likes
244
Points
223
Verification
View
Sexuality
No Response
The Constitution was not followed at all in this act of killing this guy. Sure he should have been brought forward for treason but he wasn't. As far as public outcry, if the OP feels that strongly about it, confront your congressional rep about it instead of name calling in this thread because others disagree or have their own opinion.
 

B_24065

1st Like
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Posts
639
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
163
The Constitution was not followed at all in this act of killing this guy. Sure he should have been brought forward for treason but he wasn't. As far as public outcry, if the OP feels that strongly about it, confront your congressional rep about it instead of name calling in this thread because others disagree or have their own opinion.

Ive already sent my congressman a letter.
 

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
i dont get it...
Why this diskusion? Is there a difference between killing an american or a non-american without a trial? Murder is murder... And torture is torture no matter if u do it inside the usa or on kuba
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
i dont get it...
Why this diskusion? Is there a difference between killing an american or a non-american without a trial? Murder is murder... And torture is torture no matter if u do it inside the usa or on kuba
The discussion is because the only guarantee anyone has of not being killed or tortured lies in the hands of a government and is written in a few pages of law. We have no enforcible natural right to live happily. US law makes a distinction between US and non US people, as do most national laws. If the US law does not even protect US citizens, then it is not surprising some of them start to worry.
 

Phil Ayesho

Superior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Posts
6,189
Media
0
Likes
2,790
Points
333
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
Where is the Liberal outrage on this? Liberals like to march around everywhere calling Bush, Cheney, and Ashcroft war criminals because of Gitmo. Here, the Obama administration went waaaayyyy further than Bush ever did by executing 2 US citizen without a trial.

Where is the outcry???????

- The Washington Post


You Conservatives slay me.... For a year or more it was all ragging about Obama was soft on terrorism or wouldn't be able to protect the US from terrorists...

But it turns out he is far better at finding and eliminating the men responsible for 9/11 than Bush was... and at far lower cost in both American lives and money.
Rather than throw more armies into more countries that had nothing to do with the attacks... He is actually waging war against an elusive, undercover opponent thru the means that really work... rather than going up against the lunatics willing to martyr themselves... he is cutting off the heads of this organization... the guys convincing folks to be martyrs, but who, themselves, would rather keep on living.

By finding and eliminating these leaders, By making them into Involuntary martyrs, he makes it really hard for them to recruit, raise and disperse funds, and find more guys interested in management level positions in Al Queda... you know, the guys who really don't want to become martyrs, themselves...

Had Al Awlaki been IN the US, where he could be gotten to, the FBI would absolutely have nabbed him and put him up for trial.

But Awlaki renounced the US, left the country, and at the very least offered aid and assistance to a group dedicated to armed attack against his own nation.
He was actively participating in a terrorist organization, and therefore, made himself a legitimate Target in the WAR ON TERROR that a republican controlled legislature authorized back in 2002.

Obama has shown that, under his watch, ANY terrorist, regardless of nationality, that comes within the jurisdiction of US legal authorities, gets arrested and tried.
And those that remain out of reach, participating in conspiracies against the US in foreign lands, regardless of nationality, are treated as Combatants and subject to the kind of killing that happens when you take up arms against the US.


Sorry... but those suggesting this is somehow worthy of outrage are either idiots, or spin artists who just don't like Obama.

There is NO constitutional protection for traitors engaged in anti US operations in a covert war.

And the idea that only US citizens are afforded the protection of US law is also bullshit.
ANYONE within the jurisdiction of the US is given the exact same legal rights, REGARDLESS of citizenship.

Awlaki wanted jihad, and he got it.

Enjoy those virgins, pal...
 

Phil Ayesho

Superior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Posts
6,189
Media
0
Likes
2,790
Points
333
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
PS... try this simple thought experiment.

If a US citizen, during WWII, has moved to Germany, Put on a nazi uniform, and produced propaganda for the the Third Reich... DO you imagine that FDR would have had any difficulty with the idea of authorizing an airstrike to try and eliminate the SOB?

When we have had opportunity, in the past, to arrange the targeting of specific individuals who are prominent in enemy operations, or even just responsible for specific attacks, we have taken them. That is how we killed the architect of the Pearl Harbor attack.
If Yamamoto had been a US citizen, we still would have sent a bunch of over-fueled P-38s well beyond their range to try and kill the bastard... if only for the morale points.

Every bomb dropped on Berlin was an attempt to assassinate those high up in the Third Reich, and it had Nothing whatsoever to do with their citizenship... It was because they were actively at war with the US.

Sorry, Conservaturds.... Obama has done what SHOULD have been done after 9/11. Bush spent a trillion dollars of borrowed money over 7 years to NOT get Bin Laden.
That is what we get when we elect someone stupid to be president.

Obama found him and killed him in two years with a single seal team and some spy work.

That is what we get when we elect someone smart as president.
 

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
oky first thing

war against terror???? define WAR... war is allways between 2 states... who is the terrorcountry and who are there citizens?
and even doring a war it isnt allowed to kill civillists... only soldier and only if they attak you...
and even to torture soldiers isnt allowed

but when i follow ur arguemnts it would be absolutly legitim if britain would have assassin george washington bevor the independence war. and every single american, cause he COULD support the war

but it must be a cultural problem why i dont get it...
cause we believe that everyone has the same rights no matter where he comes from
in germany would the gov no longer exist as soon as they execute anyone no matter if with or without trial. no matter if alien or german...
we dont see a difference between a alien and a citizen

WE LEAREND OUT OF WW2

but american history shows that u dont care if ur gov kills aliens... or even abroad presidents (panama)
no wonder that america has sutch a bad image in the world

how would u reakt when canada send troops or plains into the USA to kill ur citizens without a trial?

why did Obama blame iran that they tryd to kill a arabien politican??? isnt it legal to kill someone as long as the gov dont like the person?????

what is FDR and SOB ????


AND NOT A SINGLE BOMB WAS TO ASSASSIN ONE OF OUR LEADERS... EVERY BOMB OVER GERMANY WAS TO DISTROY THE INDUSTRY AND TO DEMORALISE THE PEOPLE ( what dindt worked )
but im thankfull for every single bomb cause we deserved it... and now we a better country
 
Last edited:

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
The discussion is because the only guarantee anyone has of not being killed or tortured lies in the hands of a government and is written in a few pages of law. We have no enforcible natural right to live happily. US law makes a distinction between US and non US people, as do most national laws. If the US law does not even protect US citizens, then it is not surprising some of them start to worry.


i understand why people worry... but its ur own falls. when u allow ur gov to kill people without a trial its just a question of time till ur gov starts to kill there own citizens without a trial....

ITS UP TO U AMERICANS TO CHANGE THIS POLITIC... RESPECT EVERY COUNTRY AND THE RIGHT FOR EVERYONE FOR A PEACEFULL LIVE AND UR GOV WILL STOP KILLING AMERICANS
 

dreamer20

Worshipped Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Posts
7,963
Media
3
Likes
19,710
Points
643
Gender
Male
war against terror???? ...doring a war it isnt allowed to kill civillists... only soldier and only if they attak you...
and even to torture soldiers isnt allowed

but when i follow ur arguemnts it would be absolutly legitim if britain would have assassin george washington bevor the independence war. and every single american, cause he COULD support the war

but it must be a cultural problem why i dont get it...

but american history shows that u dont care if ur gov kills aliens... or even abroad presidents (panama)
no wonder that america has sutch a bad image in the world...

24065 must be part of your "cultural problem" as the following posts show him endorsing any U.S. president doing all of the above if faced with the war on terror challenge. He should have applauded Obama's action, but because of his hatred of Obama and liberals he has not.

http://www.lpsg.org/1946026-post22.html

http://www.lpsg.org/1946216-post28.html

Whether some see <torture> as an effective means or not is not the issue. The issue remains that Bush saw it as a Legal means to gather information in order to protect us... the rabbid left is using everything they can to bury Bush and the Republicans in order to solidify power.

This is nothing but a witchhunt driven by the media and far left pundits and polititians. If we are one day attacked and we come to find out that it may have been prevented had we obtain information using extreme coersion, and we did not, then that president should be impeached immediately for surrending to the geneva convention instaed of the oath of office...to protect the american people.

The fact that Bush is being treated like a criminal for doing whatever it takes to ensure our safety is sick and demented. I think exteme coersion should be an Ace in the whole that all US presidents have in cases where there is a potential immenant threat against US citizens. Fuck International law, Fuck the Geneva convention, Fuck it all. Because when push comes to shove, protecting US citizens against foreign attack is job #1.
 

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
24065 shows another problem of america... tha americans realy HATE americans who doesnt vote like them... TEA PARTY ;) and the problem of his argumentation is, when america akts like this ( shit on int. law ) sooner or later every country will akt so. and how will 24065 reakt when other states send little special forces into the usa without asking the gov and start killing american citizens...

HE would be the first one who wants a war with these countries. but as long as HIS country does so everything is fine... or what would happen when his gov beliefs he would have information about an attack and they start to torture him...

and the example with 24 is greate... i also never saw it, but i understand it... there is NEVER just one person you have to torture to get all the informations u need to stop an attack.
and even IF tere would be these single person, what are u defending? the life of ur citizens... but u sacrifice the american way of life
 
Last edited:

Phil Ayesho

Superior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Posts
6,189
Media
0
Likes
2,790
Points
333
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
oky first thing

war against terror???? define WAR... war is allways between 2 states... who is the terrorcountry and who are there citizens?

Are you actually stupid? or merely ignorant of history?
War is the use of lethal force for political purposes. Period.
All thru history, nations have fought irregular and oblique warfare.
The US dropped bombs on Cambodia, because North Vietnamese COMBATANTS were in Cambodia.

The American revolution was not a war between two 'nations'... it was a war that created a separate nation.
And Zionist Jews in palestine had no difficulty with covert actions against the british, engaging in their own terrorist bombings to attain their political aims.

the notion that war must be "declared" is ridiculous... MOST wars in history were declared by one side opening fire.

And, while I think the term 'war on terror' is patently stupid- since you can not wage war on a 'tactic', it is just the Operational name, the bumper-sticker label, as it were, for what really is a mostly covert attempt to prevent small groups of irregular combatants from being able to mount attacks against the citizenry and military of this nation.

Given that the US spends close to 3 Billion dollars a year, around the world, just trying to prevent these groups from getting hold of weapons grade fissiles, and that these groups, hidden within cities and states around the world are actively trying to get enough fissile material to make and USE a nuclear weapon, ought to be enough for guys like you to comprehend that we are not in the musket and uniform era any longer...

States do not generally USE nuclear weapons... they are there to keep them from being attacked... but a first use would simply not make any sense... it would lead to the immediate retaliatory dissolution of that state.

But Using a nuke does make sense for terrorism. If they get one... they WILL use it.

So wake up, and support the Effective use of force by your president, even if you don't like the fact that he's black or calls himself a democrat


and even doring a war it isnt allowed to kill civillists... only soldier and only if they attak you...
and even to torture soldiers isnt allowed


Really? you think armies are not "allowed" to kill civilians? US soldiers in Iraq routinely killed civilians approaching checkpoints who did not follow the instructions on posted SIGNS, in a nation where only half the population can even read signs.

And what were the 3,000 folks killed on 9/11, if not civilians?

How many civilians died in the blitz on London? How many Died in Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union?
How many died in the allied bombing campaigns against the Third Reich?

Stop being naive and READ something about history.

There is a difference between trying to "limit" civilian casualties... and saying it is 'not allowed'.

When you have a lethally dangerous enemy, Hidden among a group of civilians, in a place where you can't just arrest them... you can do what Bush did... Send in an army, ( to the wrong country ) and as a result kill 100,000 civilians....

Or you can do what Obama is doing... wait until that target is identified as being in one place, preferably with as few civilians nearby as possible... and drop a missile on him. and as a result kill only a few civilians.

Your only other option is to just ALLOW your enemy to operate with impunity... to plot and and execute mass casualties of your OWN civilians.

Awalaki was targeted for his actions against his country.

His SON was NOT targeted... he just got killed because he was palling around with some al queda guys that WERE targeted...

the moral of the story? Be careful with whom you consort.
Sit next to an enemy of the US, and you may find yourself dead.


but when i follow ur arguemnts it would be absolutly legitim if britain would have assassin george washington bevor the independence war. and every single american, cause he COULD support the war

You really need to bone up on history. Both revolutionary forces and British forces killed the officers on the opposing side every chance they got.
British soldiers DID lock an entire town full of women and children in a church and burn it down.

The US won a critical battle in the war of 1812 BECAUSE a sharp shooter nailed the opposing commander from across a river.
And what the fuck do you think Benedict Arnold was trying to do in HANDING the British West Point?

War is not all pretty and honorable... It is KILLING TO GET YOUR WAY.


What you actually refer to is a fairly recent (1970's) law that proscribes the US from conducting covert assassinations of other heads of state.
The law says nothing about other folks.
And as you point out, Al Queda is NOT actually a "State", is it?
Ergo, there is no law in the US proscribing the president from ordering the killing of the head of a terrorist organization. And No law stating that the president can not order the killing of a US citizen actively engaged in armed conflict against his own country.




in germany would the gov no longer exist as soon as they execute anyone no matter if with or without trial. no matter if alien or german...
we dont see a difference between a alien and a citizen

Everytime a police or SWAT officer kills a suspect in the commission of a crime, or even just for pointing something that "looks" like a gun at an officer, that is an example of the State killing a citizen without trial.
Self defense is considered just cause for any individual or State to use lethal force.
Obama was defending YOU AND ME against another US citizen who has implemented attacks targeting YOU AND ME, and announced he was committed to further attacks. HE declared jihad on us.

Its Obama's job, and he is actually doing rather well at it.

Why?
Because Commander and Chief stuff is the one area in which he can move that the GOP can not stymie...
He would do just as well in repairing this economy, if the GOP was not cynically and treasonously abandoning their responsibilities to the people thru actively preventing economic action for the sole purpose of defeating their lawfully elected president.

Frankly... I would support him in declaring martial law and arresting the GOP leadership for acts against the people of the US.


but american history shows that u dont care if ur gov kills aliens... or even abroad presidents (panama)
no wonder that america has sutch a bad image in the world
Look... I will agree that America was made to look pretty bad and for good reason under Bush... but, frankly, America only has a bad rep in shithole countries full of backward morons.
I really don't care of a bunch of ignorant culturally retarded rubes who live by 14th century Sharia laws don't like the US.
If the Western nations did not buy their oil, they would still be herding goats and picking dates... and warring exclusively on each other.

While I OFTEN strongly disagree with the actions of my own government, I have to point out that this nation and its people GIVE more help and assistance to the rest of the world than all the other nations combined.

I can not say that the US is without fault... we have many. But we are also one of the few places where a citizen has the freedom to actually say that... and agitate to change their government's policies.

And I would point out that, even in countries where they supposedly hate the US, that 7 out of ten of their people would jump at the chance to live in the US if they had it.

how would u reakt when canada send troops or plains into the USA to kill ur citizens without a trial?

The exact same way we reacted when Al Queda sent planes into my country to kill our citizens without cause.

After the huge success that was Japan's Pearl Harbor attack, Yamamoto, who planned it, is said to have commented that he was not celebrating... that he feared Japan had only awakened a sleeping giant whose wrath would be terrible and swift.

He was right.

Anyone attacking Rome in the first century was bound to be bested.
Anyone attacking Britain in the mid to late 1800s was simply going to get their ass handed to them.
Anyone attacking the US today will suffer the same...
And someday soon, anyone attacking China will be likewise screwed.

Sorry that the most powerful nations on earth any given time are powerful...
but they are powerful for good reasons. Their cultures work better and offer their collective citizenry greater security and greater influence than other competing cultures.

It was always this way.
It always will be this way.

The best way to get what you want, politically, from the dominant power at any time in history, is always to EMBARRASS them into it.

Like Gandhi did with Britian. Like Israel did with the US. Like Martin Luther King Jr. did with his own country...

I did not support the war in Iraq. I strongly advocated against it at every opportunity... but I am not a majority... my country over-reacted to 9/11 because people in general over-react to that kind of thing.

But the worst thing you can do is to pull something to which you know full well people will over react on a country that has the largest armed force in the world.

The result will NEVER be good... not for the ones committing the attack, and not for the country attacked.

The US over reaction to 9/11 did far more damage to the US than al queda ever has.
I am not happy about that and I would have stopped it if I could.

but I understand that there is no stopping mass demands for payback to something like 9/11.

Bin Laden ( with Bush's help) nearly destroyed the US economy.
And what has that done to the world economy?

How many people around the world are suffering because some group of cave dwelling dipshits decided to attack the sleeping giant on the block?


Sorry... As long as Obama is not slinging armies around... as long as he is trying to kill as few people as possible, and targeting the actually people who are planning this kind of thing... I am entirely on board with him.

If Bush had handled it this way, 100,000 Iraqi's would still be alive today, and the world economy would not be on the verge of collapse.



why did Obama blame iran that they tryd to kill a arabien politican??? isnt it legal to kill someone as long as the gov dont like the person?????
No. Nothing Obama did suggests such a conclusion. Trying to kill terrorists, in a foreign country, WITH THE SUPPORT OF THAT COUNTRY'S GOVERNMENT, is not the same as trying to kill diplomats from one country visiting another country that hosts the United Nations.

As the host country, the US has an obligation to protect the lives of visiting diplomats.
And, Frankly, EVRY guy Obama ever targeted in Yemen, Pakistan and elsewhere, he would have PREFERRED to arrest and try.

But, seriously... Yemen ALLOWS us to conduct drone strikes, and so does Pakistan.


what is FDR and SOB ????
FDR is Franklin Delano Roosevelt- president of the US during most of WWII.

And SOB is short for "Son Of a Bitch"


AND NOT A SINGLE BOMB WAS TO ASSASSIN ONE OF OUR LEADERS... EVERY BOMB OVER GERMANY WAS TO DISTROY THE INDUSTRY AND TO DEMORALISE THE PEOPLE ( what dindt worked )
but im thankfull for every single bomb cause we deserved it... and now we a better country

Sorry. You are wrong. EVERY attack on Berlin ALSO targeted anyplace they thought German high command might be holed up.

That's why Hitler lived in that bunker whenever the air raid sirens went off.

And nobody in the US thought the bombing would 'demoralize' the people... they already saw that that hadn't been the effect in the blitz on London. ( with the exception of the last part of the war... the allies DID try to convince the German High command to surrender without having all of Germany destroyed thru such actions as the firebombing of Dresden... which killed almost exclusively civilians... Dresden had been spared up till that time, and the action was intended not to demoralize the German people, but to shock them with the sudden utter desolation of a relatively untouched city. It was hoped by allied leadership that this would make clear to the German leadership the utter ruin that further resistance would result in. It was hoped that this might even spark a coup to take Hitler from power, and prevent untolled loss of civilian life and infrastructure... but, alas... that did not work, and Hitler fought on till Soviet tanks were in Berlin.)

The objectives of most bombing were to damage productivity... which actually did work. Germany lost because they simply could not field enough men or equipment to counter massive allied productivity.
( to wit: even the worst German tank was better than the US Sherman, but the US could lose 10 Shermans to every 3 panzers, and Still have 15 more Sherman's on the front the next day.)

Trust me. If we COULD have dropped a laser guided bomb on Hitler on day 3 of the war... we absolutely would have.

And, BTW... I look at my own country's right wing militarism in response to 9/11 as being very much like Germany's own right wing swing after the injustice of Versailles and the early failures of democracy in Germany. ( it is only thru the harsh example of the Third Reich's politicized anti-semitism that we avoided the trap of condemning all muslims outright)

Both resulted in nationalistic fervor and stupid invasions that any qualified accountant could have foretold as disastrous.

But your premise that killing citizens without trial is illegal in acts of war is simply untrue and proven false nearly every day.

It is not even illegal to kill citizens standing on the street, if they do the slightest thing to threaten your life.
 
Last edited:

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
sure its illegal to kill without getting attacked...

And lol your argumentation is: cause everybody did in the past... THATS KINDERGARTEN STYLE

And you make cleare that america is impotent to learn out of history...

GREATE :rolleyes:
 

monel

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Posts
1,638
Media
0
Likes
48
Points
183
Gender
Male
sure its illegal to kill without getting attacked...

And lol your argumentation is: cause everybody did in the past... THATS KINDERGARTEN STYLE

And you make cleare that america is impotent to learn out of history...

GREATE :rolleyes:

Your ignorance is only surpassed by your niavete. You suggest that because the typical war is a feud between two states, there is some illegitimacy in a war against terrorism. Regardless of the terrorist's lack of statehood, America is under no moral or legal obligation to put itself at risk. It, like any other nation, has a right and duty to protect itself from threats regardless of the source.

Your argument that the US is "imponent" to learn from history, while at the same time proclaiming claiming that an historic presedence for its actions is "kindergarten style" is inane.

Grow UP! Germany's and most of Europe's ability to condescendingly cling to an idealistic morality is because the US has been there to do the dirty work necessary to afford it protection. And for that, you are welcome.
 

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
no one ask you to do the dirty work no one want you to the dirty work
Its only you who think you do the world favor... But its not
You think you are the best nation and think that the hole world should live like america. And who doesnt want has to die

america akts like cancer to the world... I mean look at the economical crisis... Even this comes from america and its not even the end. It will get more worst


and now i wait for all the blaming... :biggrin1: :biggrin1: cause the most americans cant accept a different meaning and have to get rude
 
Last edited:

monel

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Posts
1,638
Media
0
Likes
48
Points
183
Gender
Male
no one ask you to do the dirty work no one want you to the dirty work
Its only you who think you do the world favor... But its not
You think you are the best nation and think that the hole world should live like america. And who doesnt want has to die

In the last 20 years america akts like cancer to the world... I mean look at the economical crisis... Even this comes from america and its not even the end. It will get more worst


and now i wait for all the blaming... :biggrin1: :biggrin1: cause the most americans cant accept a different meaning and have to get rude

Really, the extent of your naivety and ignorance knows no bounds. Please read a book and don't just just surrender to your prejudices. BTW, as a German you may wish to rethink your misplaced indictment of America being a cancer on the world.
 
Last edited:

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
why should i as a german rethink?
I know we made mistakes (and im thankfull to the world that they stoped germany)... Just like america does...

But the differenc is we learned out of it... We know now how to akt. Something you cant say about america

And read a book? I studied history and economy what is your reputation... So dont judge about someone you dont know...
 

monel

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Posts
1,638
Media
0
Likes
48
Points
183
Gender
Male
why should i as a german rethink?
I know we made mistakes (and im thankfull to the world that they stoped germany)... Just like america does...

But the differenc is we learned out of it... We know now how to akt. Something you cant say about america

And read a book? I studied history and economy what is your reputation... So dont judge about someone you dont know...

You should rethink your use of rhetoric in light of history.

Of course I can say that the US has learned from history. I challenge you to provide examples of where it hasn't.

I find it sad that you can be so learned in history and economics and yet cannot overcome your anti-American prejudice. It seems a waste of education.

(BTW, since you asked, I have also studied history and economics ... and also politics and law, not that any of that matters on a BIG DICK WEBSITE!)
 

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
again...
Phil ayesho's argumentation why america attacks everyone they want and assassin every leader they want, cause history shows that every "empire" from egypt to britain did so and cause of this america can an does...

THIS argumentation is kindergarten style and shows you are not willing to learn...

And take a look how many legitimated leader america killed in the last 50 years and how many wars america fought...
For example... Some leaders you have killed or tryd (without war): panama kuba argentina... If you want more search
And congratulations to your power study...
And this area is for politik and u told me to read a book... So yes to study count ;)
 
Last edited: