The USA Should be Charged with Treason

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

You really can’t just step back and listen to those comments and understand how people dislike that, that it comes across as self- rightious. For example, on a one to one basis; the guy always saying how great he is at everything, normally people dislike this guy(unless your this guy,lol)Imagine it on a global scale and now imagine it being a country. I would be able to be impartial and reconize it in my own country. Can you?

Canada for example is too soft military wise, we could be crazy strong like you guys. We have all the same technology and money. We just don’t spend the money on it.
I fuck’in wish we would.
So ayways, thats the question I pose to you.

62

Yea. I know we are self-righteous to a sense. I feel there is nothing wrong with having pride in your country. Why not strive to be the best at everything you can? Its not like we blantly saw outright lies like “We have the best long distance runners” (Kenya) or “We are greatest steel producers in the world” (Japan).

US does not go around boasting itself to the world I feel. The US donates money to humanitarian efforts, just like many other nations of the world. The US is involved in peace keeping mission, just like many other nations around the world.

The rest of the world gets pissy at us for being top ranking in so many categories. So if people are gonna be pissed at us for it, why not talk about it.

You didn’t see a thread called “USA is best at everything…ever…period”…people in the US don’t run around braggin about anything, we just do our own thing and everybody watches. Is it my fault you have McDonalds in your home town, no? Is it my fault you watch CNN at night, no? It is what it is…if you want to be mad at anythign for those things, I guess be made at the market, but you can’t place blame on things and all the worlds problem on the US. We dont bring up “the greatness of America” till somebody else does (or lack of greatness in your case)

64

The “lack of greatness” meant lack of greatness of the US that you say…sorry I didnt know I had to spell it out…

top 10 places to live…you really got me shakin in my boots…life expectancy…its ok if i die a 79 and not 81, I can live with that

Better healthcare…please…you have such a long waiting list for surgery it is ridiculous. People complain about wanting universal healthcare and all I say is “look at Canada…” and they shut up

Prosperous…you got me. Your more prosperous because we have the largest economy in the world…

Honest and humane…weak argument because it is subjective

I’m not bashing Canada at all. Canada is a very beautiful with very nice people. I enjoy traveling there. I am simply defending my country from the rest of the world that hates on us…

65

[quote]lixy wrote:
tg2hbk4488 wrote:
This man gives Canada a bad name…

True. But, you see, Canada can afford it![/quote]

Canada is the U.S.A.'s gay cousin.

66

[quote]Mr.Irish wrote:
You really can’t just step back and listen to those comments and understand how people dislike that, that it comes across as self- rightious. For example, on a one to one basis; the guy always saying how great he is at everything, normally people dislike this guy(unless your this guy,lol)Imagine it on a global scale and now imagine it being a country. I would be able to be impartial and reconize it in my own country. Can you?

Canada for example is too soft military wise, we could be crazy strong like you guys. We have all the same technology and money. We just don’t spend the money on it.
I fuck’in wish we would.
So ayways, thats the question I pose to you.[/quote]

You don’t have to. If you get into a jam we will bail you out.

67

[quote]Mr.Irish wrote:
So I was reading your post and in the beginning,ok, civil. Few disagreements, thats ok. You really do know that I was talking about the general persona of the States to the rest of the world, not dick and Jane visiting other countries & saying how great the US is. C’mon!! And CNN yeah I watch it some but I watch my own and the BBC.
But then I got to the end of the post and not so civil. I was asking a legit question and you couldn’t be objective, Self-rightious is not pride. And you had to end it with saying Canada’s not great.
So you know what? Piss on you. I’ll show you that self-rightious pride you covet so well. Canada ranks consistantly higher on best places to live than you do.(sometimes your not even in the top 10,& remember thats an independent body looking over lots of stats to determine this, not a Canadian), our life expectancy is greater than yours, we have better coporate taxes for companies,less crime,better healthcare and we are viewed as peaceful,prosperous,honest and humane.
Dicussion over, continue to bitch if you wish (I know your Americanism won’t let you do any less) but you can’t argue with facts. Because in life all that should matter is where to rise a family and live in peace, and the above shows that we have you beat on that.

Done and done. [/quote]

Yes you cannot argue with facts and the fact is that the U.S. has helped far more people than it has hurt. That that is a fact you can verify repeatedly.

68

[quote]pat wrote:

Yes you cannot argue with facts and the fact is that the U.S. has helped far more people than it has hurt. That that is a fact you can verify repeatedly.[/quote]

How?

We can count the ones killed and maimed, but how do we count those that have been helped?

Do we count those you think you have helped or those that actually agree that you have helped them? I do not expect those numbers do be the same.

How many people must have been “helped” and to what degree in order to justify one person killed by the US military or an embargo and does it matter how that person died, i.e. quick and painless or burning alive?

And, once you have come up with a system, would you be willing to apply it to American citizens or would you tar and feather any senator who would come up with such an idea?

"Well Ladies and Gentleman, using our formula we have found out that by killing 53378 Texans, bombing half of Minnesota and burning 2876,5 New Yorkers alive, life will be better for the rest of us.

Let´s get to it and God bless America!"

69

[quote]orion wrote:
pat wrote:

Yes you cannot argue with facts and the fact is that the U.S. has helped far more people than it has hurt. That that is a fact you can verify repeatedly.

How?

We can count the ones killed and maimed, but how do we count those that have been helped?

Do we count those you think you have helped or those that actually agree that you have helped them? I do not expect those numbers do be the same.

How many people must have been “helped” and to what degree in order to justify one person killed by the US military or an embargo and does it matter how that person died, i.e. quick and painless or burning alive?

And, once you have come up with a system, would you be willing to apply it to American citizens or would you tar and feather any senator who would come up with such an idea?

"Well Ladies and Gentleman, using our formula we have found out that by killing 53378 Texans, bombing half of Minnesota and burning 2876,5 New Yorkers alive, life will be better for the rest of us.

Let´s get to it and God bless America!"

[/quote]

How? We stopped your country from its horrible deeds.

70

Canada, refuge of deserters, psuedo french frogs, and gernal whiners.

But they have good beer.

71

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
pat wrote:

Yes you cannot argue with facts and the fact is that the U.S. has helped far more people than it has hurt. That that is a fact you can verify repeatedly.

How?

We can count the ones killed and maimed, but how do we count those that have been helped?

Do we count those you think you have helped or those that actually agree that you have helped them? I do not expect those numbers do be the same.

How many people must have been “helped” and to what degree in order to justify one person killed by the US military or an embargo and does it matter how that person died, i.e. quick and painless or burning alive?

And, once you have come up with a system, would you be willing to apply it to American citizens or would you tar and feather any senator who would come up with such an idea?

"Well Ladies and Gentleman, using our formula we have found out that by killing 53378 Texans, bombing half of Minnesota and burning 2876,5 New Yorkers alive, life will be better for the rest of us.

Let´s get to it and God bless America!"

How? We stopped your country from its horrible deeds.[/quote]

So?

You helped create a situation that lead to WWII.

His claim is that I could “verify repeatedly” that your country has “helped far more people than it has hurt.”

May question still stands:

How?

72

[quote]orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
pat wrote:

Yes you cannot argue with facts and the fact is that the U.S. has helped far more people than it has hurt. That that is a fact you can verify repeatedly.

How?

We can count the ones killed and maimed, but how do we count those that have been helped?

Do we count those you think you have helped or those that actually agree that you have helped them? I do not expect those numbers do be the same.

How many people must have been “helped” and to what degree in order to justify one person killed by the US military or an embargo and does it matter how that person died, i.e. quick and painless or burning alive?

And, once you have come up with a system, would you be willing to apply it to American citizens or would you tar and feather any senator who would come up with such an idea?

"Well Ladies and Gentleman, using our formula we have found out that by killing 53378 Texans, bombing half of Minnesota and burning 2876,5 New Yorkers alive, life will be better for the rest of us.

Let´s get to it and God bless America!"

How? We stopped your country from its horrible deeds.

So?

You helped create a situation that lead to WWII.

His claim is that I could “verify repeatedly” that your country has “helped far more people than it has hurt.”

May question still stands:

How?

[/quote]

Your country was instrumental in starting both those wars. To accuse our country of “helping create the situation” is complete and utter bullshit.

73

[quote]Mr.Irish wrote:
I always thought about this in a semi-serious way, why can’t we charge you for treason, find you guilty and take over your country. No war, just nice and civil like. Take for example your saying of being a “Benedict Arnold” meaning a tratior. But he was being loyal to Britain. How do you figure? who was the first to betray? We could have had one big Kingdom of Canada(thats what they were gonna call it first or the Dominion of Canada before settling on just Canada).[/quote]

74

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
pat wrote:

Yes you cannot argue with facts and the fact is that the U.S. has helped far more people than it has hurt. That that is a fact you can verify repeatedly.

How?

We can count the ones killed and maimed, but how do we count those that have been helped?

Do we count those you think you have helped or those that actually agree that you have helped them? I do not expect those numbers do be the same.

How many people must have been “helped” and to what degree in order to justify one person killed by the US military or an embargo and does it matter how that person died, i.e. quick and painless or burning alive?

And, once you have come up with a system, would you be willing to apply it to American citizens or would you tar and feather any senator who would come up with such an idea?

"Well Ladies and Gentleman, using our formula we have found out that by killing 53378 Texans, bombing half of Minnesota and burning 2876,5 New Yorkers alive, life will be better for the rest of us.

Let´s get to it and God bless America!"

How? We stopped your country from its horrible deeds.

So?

You helped create a situation that lead to WWII.

His claim is that I could “verify repeatedly” that your country has “helped far more people than it has hurt.”

May question still stands:

How?

Your country was instrumental in starting both those wars. To accuse our country of “helping create the situation” is complete and utter bullshit.[/quote]

So you are saying that the situation after WWI would have been the exact same had the US not intervened?

Why did the US intervene then?

And if the US had some influence in the outcome of WWI which did undoubtedly lead to WWII, well, because it undeniably actually happened, how much are you to blame for the victims of WWII, using your magic formula that leads you to believe the US has verifiably done more good than bad ?

Please note that I never made any similar claim for my country so even if Austria was sith lord evil it would not help your case.

75

[quote]orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
pat wrote:

Yes you cannot argue with facts and the fact is that the U.S. has helped far more people than it has hurt. That that is a fact you can verify repeatedly.

How?

We can count the ones killed and maimed, but how do we count those that have been helped?

Do we count those you think you have helped or those that actually agree that you have helped them? I do not expect those numbers do be the same.

How many people must have been “helped” and to what degree in order to justify one person killed by the US military or an embargo and does it matter how that person died, i.e. quick and painless or burning alive?

And, once you have come up with a system, would you be willing to apply it to American citizens or would you tar and feather any senator who would come up with such an idea?

"Well Ladies and Gentleman, using our formula we have found out that by killing 53378 Texans, bombing half of Minnesota and burning 2876,5 New Yorkers alive, life will be better for the rest of us.

Let´s get to it and God bless America!"

How? We stopped your country from its horrible deeds.

So?

You helped create a situation that lead to WWII.

His claim is that I could “verify repeatedly” that your country has “helped far more people than it has hurt.”

May question still stands:

How?

Your country was instrumental in starting both those wars. To accuse our country of “helping create the situation” is complete and utter bullshit.

So you are saying that the situation after WWI would have been the exact same had the US not intervened?

Why did the US intervene then?

And if the US had some influence in the outcome of WWI which did undoubtedly lead to WWII, well, because it undeniably actually happened, how much are you to blame for the victims of WWII, using your magic formula that leads you to believe the US has verifiably done more good than bad ?

Please note that I never made any similar claim for my country so even if Austria was sith lord evil it would not help your case.[/quote]

Feeble straw man argument.

76

I think reading this is actually making me dumber.

77

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
pat wrote:

Yes you cannot argue with facts and the fact is that the U.S. has helped far more people than it has hurt. That that is a fact you can verify repeatedly.

How?

We can count the ones killed and maimed, but how do we count those that have been helped?

Do we count those you think you have helped or those that actually agree that you have helped them? I do not expect those numbers do be the same.

How many people must have been “helped” and to what degree in order to justify one person killed by the US military or an embargo and does it matter how that person died, i.e. quick and painless or burning alive?

And, once you have come up with a system, would you be willing to apply it to American citizens or would you tar and feather any senator who would come up with such an idea?

"Well Ladies and Gentleman, using our formula we have found out that by killing 53378 Texans, bombing half of Minnesota and burning 2876,5 New Yorkers alive, life will be better for the rest of us.

Let´s get to it and God bless America!"

How? We stopped your country from its horrible deeds.

So?

You helped create a situation that lead to WWII.

His claim is that I could “verify repeatedly” that your country has “helped far more people than it has hurt.”

May question still stands:

How?

Your country was instrumental in starting both those wars. To accuse our country of “helping create the situation” is complete and utter bullshit.

So you are saying that the situation after WWI would have been the exact same had the US not intervened?

Why did the US intervene then?

And if the US had some influence in the outcome of WWI which did undoubtedly lead to WWII, well, because it undeniably actually happened, how much are you to blame for the victims of WWII, using your magic formula that leads you to believe the US has verifiably done more good than bad ?

Please note that I never made any similar claim for my country so even if Austria was sith lord evil it would not help your case.

Feeble straw man argument. [/quote]

Well, you never bothered to make one and I notice you do not bother to point out where I go wrong now either.

Anyway, the claim was that I could verify, “repeatedly” no less, that " the U.S. has helped far more people than it has hurt".

So far you were not able to do that.

And I would so like to verify that!

Repeatedly!

78

[quote]Standndeliver wrote:
Mr.Irish wrote:

You have 18 posts and spend most of them insulting a country that has done more good for the world than all the others combined.

[/quote]

How do you measure that?

And would that not be quite an achievement for a country that has only be around for 200something years?

To outdo Egypt, China, Greece and Rome combined!

79

[quote]MightyMaus wrote:
I think reading this is actually making me dumber.[/quote]

You need to be more inquisitive.

When they cannot show anything for their claims and start to insult you and/or your country when you ask them for evidence, they are usually talking out of their own ass.

80

[quote]MightyMaus wrote:
Mr.Irish wrote:
I always thought about this in a semi-serious way, why can’t we charge you for treason, find you guilty and take over your country. No war, just nice and civil like. Take for example your saying of being a “Benedict Arnold” meaning a tratior. But he was being loyal to Britain. How do you figure? who was the first to betray? We could have had one big Kingdom of Canada(thats what they were gonna call it first or the Dominion of Canada before settling on just Canada).

[/quote]

OMG, that is one of the most awesome pics ever! We need to have a vote: either yours or DK44’s pic of ‘TITS’.

Wow, its close!!

81

California has nearly twice as many people as all of Canada. There are no big barriers preventing just some of those people from moving to Canada.

The USA is God’s Good Right Hand, here on earth. God created this special country to bring goodness to this miserable planet!

God Bless the United States of America!!!