Racist Nonsense

I agree. The Jews have done nothing wrong. Er... except for all those
lawyers. :P

Really though, the bad ones are the lousy English/British. If you ask
me, that country should have been gone by now.

They're at least part of the reason for the dark ages in human
history. Them and all of their different Christian churches and
attacking those other churches who aren't part of the state. They are
the ones who did the book burning. They started the crusades. Their
religious persecution forced some people to leave Europe for the
Americas, which was good for us anyways but it's still wrong for them
to have opressed us.
They're the ones who got jealous of the American colonies and demanded
they remain a part of England, and they overtaxxed them and forced
them to be virtual slaves to Europe. Then when America refused they
attacked us.
They're the ones that did imperial acts in Africa and totally screwed
everything up over there, instituting racist policies that hurt the
locals.
They're the ones who tried to **** around with the economy, changing
the price of their pound and our dollar and caused the Great
Depression out of sheer jealousy of America's wealth.
They're the ones whose hypocricy over imperialism made Germany react
in WWI, and then who signed a treaty which slung Germany into
depression, thus causing the rise of Naziism and Hitler and WWII.
They're the ones who ****ed up China by manipulating it and selling it
massive amounts of Opium and made it become a communist state because
of their making it impoverished.
They're the ones who did all that stupid stuff with the middle east
and made it so dangerous. They did so many things, trying to conrol
the Middle East from afar. They tried to create countries that
responded to them over there and they abused them. Then they gave
lands they promised to the Muslims to the Jews and are responsible for
the war between Jews and Palestinians because of this.
They totally messed us up in Vietnam because they didn't help us out.
Maybe we shouldn't have been in there, but they should've helped us
anyways. They acted like utter cowards.
They are also the reason why America has incurred such a debt. They
make us do all sorts of stuff around the world, AND give them military
protection because they're so weak. And we spend money on them,
forcing us to borrow. When they borrow from us they ask us to forgive
them, but when we borrow from them they DEMAND us to pay it back!
They put all these trade barriers against us, but whine like little
bitches when we put trade barriers back. They also pay their
businesses to compete with us and make us lose money, but when we do
the same they sling mud at us, and yell "Capitalist PIGS!" just
because they're intolerant of our system with economic freedom.
They are a bunch of sell outs. They only are going along with America
now to hide the fact that this 9/11 thing is really their fault. In
fact, they also want part of the 'cut', so to speak. They want us to
do the war, and them to do all the goody goody humanitarian stuff and
take all the credit.

Any good historian can verify these facts. And these facts aren't even
the tip of the iceburg. They have done so much wrong that it would be
impossible for me to list them all here.

America's wrongdoings pale in comparison to the
English/British/UK/Whatever and yet we still take the blame simply
because we're on the top. Then again, that's us. The responsible,
reliable Americans, who take the crap because unlike other countries
who try to pass the blame, we, like a mature country, accept
responsibility.

It's so stupid. Why does America want such a treacherous, backstabbing
ally anyways? I think we're right to establish unilateral
international dominance. Anything to prevent the UK from getting any
more power!

(...Starblade Riven Darksquall...)

[Only registered users see links. ] (Starblade Darksquall) wrote in message news:<4aa861fb.0310240254.3346592@posting.google.c om>...

[snip massive ranting paranoid tirade]

I see your grasp of world history and economics is on a par with your
knowledge of physics. There's scarcely a sentence in what you've
written which doesn't betray a major error or misconception.


Perhaps you should have consulted one before posting.

In <[Only registered users see links. ]> , on 10/24/2003
at 03:54 AM, [Only registered users see links. ] (Starblade Darksquall) said:


The British have a lot to answer for, but so do many other countries.
French colonial behavior was worse than the British, and you really
don't want to know what Belgium did. As for slavery, England outlawed
it well before we did.

We had as much to do with causing the Great Depression as the English
did. As to WW I, it was the triumph of diplomacy over sanity; the
basic cause of the war was a bunch of mutual defense treaties with
hair triggers.


Actually, they promised the land to both, and were restricting Jewish
immigration even during the Holocaust.


Indochina was a French colony. Why should the British get involved. We
were the ones that messed up, first by helping the French get back in
and second by going in when the French pulled out. We should have gone
in as Ho Chi Mihn's ally when he invited us.


Why Britain more than other countries that got Marshall Plan and
military assistance money? Our contributions to NATO are also not just
for the UK's benefit.


How? They ignored intelligence warnings? Well, so did we.


Only some of them.


Sometimes. And sometimes we're the irresponsible ones.


As a taxpayer, I'd prefer that other countries pay their fair share.
Which isn't going to happen if they aren't consulted. Unilateral
action should be a last resort.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT

Unsolicited bulk E-mail will be subject to legal action. I reserve
the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail.

Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do
not reply to [Only registered users see links. ]

In <[Only registered users see links. ] >, on 10/24/2003
at 07:24 AM, [Only registered users see links. ] (Richard Herring) said:


While there are major errors, quite a bit of what he wrote is true.
It's unfortunate that he singled out England and that he ignored our
responsibility for some of it.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT

Unsolicited bulk E-mail will be subject to legal action. I reserve
the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail.

Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do
not reply to [Only registered users see links. ]

"Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <[Only registered users see links. ].invalid> wrote in message news:<3f9b3232$4$fuzhry+tra$[Only registered users see links. ] t>...

Agreed, at a superficial level some of the individual statements are
true - if you isolate them from the context, make allowances for the
oversimplifications of complex events and ignore the all-pervasive
fallacy of composition. Even there, it's obvious from the simplistic
presentation that they are based on elementary-school folk-renderings
of history.

In article <3f9b319e$3$fuzhry+tra$[Only registered users see links. ]>,
"Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <[Only registered users see links. ].invalid>
wrote:


*
It is only very rarely that we see this point of view expressed. The
US mistake in Viet Nam was not that we got involved in the war; our
problem was we were on the wrong side.

Not one in a hundred Americans know that Ho Chi Minh was a great fan
of the US. His hero was George Washington. Like Washington, he
wanted his country free of outsiders. He made many trips to the US,
asking congressmen for help to evict the French.

Our refusal drove him to China and the communist position that he
eventually took.

The Viet Nam constitution, which was authored by Ho Chi Minh, is
patterned after the US constitution.

For much more detail, read Schlessinger's book, "Ten Thousand Days".

It's an eye opener.

earle
*

In article <[Only registered users see links. ]>, Earle Jones <[Only registered users see links. ]> writes:
One cannot reasonably evaluate the decisions the US made there, at the
time, without taking into account what was going on in Europe, at the
same time. Global politics is not compartmentalized.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
[Only registered users see links. ] | chances are he is doing just the same"

[Only registered users see links. ] wrote in message news:<S3Crb.3$[Only registered users see links. ]>...

What was going on in Europe? And what is meant by Ho Chi Minh wanting
to evict the French? What were they doing in there?

(...Starblade Riven Darksquall...)

[Only registered users see links. ] (Starblade Darksquall) wrote in message news:<4aa861fb.0311110214.6ce76716@posting.google. com>...

Evicting the French simply means telling the French every
few years or so that Napoleon was obviously a moron.
So they're obviously better advised to do Frenchish things
that are within their limited cerebral powers to
accomplish, such as buying up some Saudia Arabian
or Hong Kong musuem property, and let Viet Nam
take care of Viet Nam trees. Since the only quicker
death that following a Frenchman to the
North Pole is following a Frenchman to a
Vietnamese jungle.