ReTox
Member
+100|6935|State of RETOXification
I think countries should clean up their own houses before meddling in other peoples laundry.
madmurre
I suspect something is amiss
+117|7147|Sweden
I would just go with Africa there“s to much shit going on there to make a list.

Then you could add the narcotic business and you have work for eternity.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6842|North Carolina

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

do you honestly think any of those problems would get solved without US intervention? Either because of the military or diplomatic force needed, or because we're so damn nosy we have to stick our fingers in everything, in some form or fashion the US would be involved in the solution.
That.... and it's still better that we get involved rather than China.
Skorpy-chan
Member
+127|6781|Twyford, UK
- Global cooling. I'm freezing. That's an issue that needs to be solved.

- Wireless data transmission that isn't blocked by the human body. I'm stick of my feet stopping my keyboard working right,
deeznutz1245
Connecticut: our chimps are stealin yo' faces.
+483|6929|Connecticut
Null vote. Here is an issue that pisses me off. I have no choice but to pay for two fucking Spanish channels and I do not recieve the NFL network. That is fucked up. I honestly care more about my cable bill than I do about Africa.
Malloy must go
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,072|7208|PNW

The one thing at a time approach isn't how things are done.
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6882|The Land of Scott Walker

sergeriver wrote:

-Israel-Palestine
*giggles quietly* Doubt that one will ever be solved.
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|7080
Cure for Cancer, Alzheimer's and diabetes
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,072|7208|PNW

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Cure for Cancer, Alzheimer's and diabetes
What about the common cold?
konfusion
mostly afk
+480|6986|CH/BR - in UK

Stingray24 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

-Israel-Palestine
*giggles quietly* Doubt that one will ever be solved.
I've lost hope as well, but it's still a top priority. In my dreams

-konfusion

...wait, no, I dream about chicks. nvm

Last edited by konfusion (2008-01-05 02:09:13)

Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|7202|Cambridge (UK)
- America
- America
- America
- America
- America
- America
- America
- America
- America
- America


PspRpg-7
-
+961|7134

The Sheriff wrote:

-Political Correctness
I doubt that'll be fixed any time soon.
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7194|Argentina

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:


I don't care about being the World Police, sounds fine to me, but we've got so much shit that's wrong inside the country let's try to fix that first before we try to fix everyone else's problem.
The thread isn't about the US helping to end these conflicts.  The UN should deal with them.
I don't care if a nuke goes off on the other side of the world if the US isn't involved.

That, and do you honestly think any of those problems would get solved without US intervention? Either because of the military or diplomatic force needed, or because we're so damn nosy we have to stick our fingers in everything, in some form or fashion the US would be involved in the solution.
Well, that's probably because of the useless UN, they should be able to deal with these things without the US.  The US has no obligation at all with foreign countries, the US must take care of US citizens, period, and the UN should be reformed because the way it is right now is a real joke tbh.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|7088|USA

sergeriver wrote:

Arrange the following issues/conflicts in descending order, starting with the one you consider should be solved first. 

-Somalia
-Israel-Palestine
-Pakistan
-Iraq
-Darfur
-Zimbabwe

I included Pakistan because they have nukes and the country has turned a bit unstable lately.  Feel free to comment on the subject.
I see no need to solve any of these issues, for us to do so would be sticking our nose in other countries business and it has been made very clear on this forum that the US budding in where it does not belong is a no no. Or are we to only bud in to these conflicts when it become inconvenient to the Eurotrash when we do not?

I say, you Euroweenies are closer to all of these places, you seem to have an opinion on everything, you deal with it, and let us know how you are doing, we will be here critiquing your progress.
mikkel
Member
+383|7038

lowing wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Arrange the following issues/conflicts in descending order, starting with the one you consider should be solved first. 

-Somalia
-Israel-Palestine
-Pakistan
-Iraq
-Darfur
-Zimbabwe

I included Pakistan because they have nukes and the country has turned a bit unstable lately.  Feel free to comment on the subject.
I see no need to solve any of these issues, for us to do so would be sticking our nose in other countries business and it has been made very clear on this forum that the US budding in where it does not belong is a no no. Or are we to only bud in to these conflicts when it become inconvenient to the Eurotrash when we do not?

I say, you Euroweenies are closer to all of these places, you seem to have an opinion on everything, you deal with it, and let us know how you are doing, we will be here critiquing your progress.
Oh so feisty, lowing.

The problem that you don't see here is that most of these are actual humanitarian crises, as opposed to the US engagements that are being criticised by the rest of the world. Most of the Western world is or was in Afghanistan, no one with any shred of sensibility critcised the US for going into Somalia in the 90s, and people were actively encouraging Western intervention in Darfur before the African Union forces.

It's this puzzling black and white mentality you have going. There seems to be absolutely no middle ground on anything as far as you're concerned, and it seems to limit your ability to think rationally fairly often.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|7088|USA

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Arrange the following issues/conflicts in descending order, starting with the one you consider should be solved first. 

-Somalia
-Israel-Palestine
-Pakistan
-Iraq
-Darfur
-Zimbabwe

I included Pakistan because they have nukes and the country has turned a bit unstable lately.  Feel free to comment on the subject.
I see no need to solve any of these issues, for us to do so would be sticking our nose in other countries business and it has been made very clear on this forum that the US budding in where it does not belong is a no no. Or are we to only bud in to these conflicts when it become inconvenient to the Eurotrash when we do not?

I say, you Euroweenies are closer to all of these places, you seem to have an opinion on everything, you deal with it, and let us know how you are doing, we will be here critiquing your progress.
Oh so feisty, lowing.



The problem that you don't see here is that most of these are actual humanitarian crises, as opposed to the US engagements that are being criticised by the rest of the world. Most of the Western world is or was in Afghanistan, no one with any shred of sensibility critcised the US for going into Somalia in the 90s, and people were actively encouraging Western intervention in Darfur before the African Union forces.

It's this puzzling black and white mentality you have going. There seems to be absolutely no middle ground on anything as far as you're concerned, and it seems to limit your ability to think rationally fairly often.
Nope, I just do not view the US as a puppet for the Eurotrash to try and manipulate. We are not a genie in the bottle for you to conjure up whenever it suits you or your interests. THe US has internal interests just like the rest of the world, however, we are not allowed tol ook after those interests. In doing so, makes us the great world evil power.

I get a little pissed off when I am being told how much we suck and then at the next breath asked why we are not somewhere solving problems YOU are watching and are not busy solving yourselves.

Oh and the "humanitarian effort in the 90's was answered by RPG and small arms fire. There is no humanitarian efforts in Africa, it is get involved at your own risk, and you had better do it the way the EU tells you to or you will be condemned in your media. Screw you, fix your own side of the worlds problems, we are too busy trying to keep nukes out of YOUR backyard already.
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|7143|67.222.138.85

sergeriver wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

sergeriver wrote:


The thread isn't about the US helping to end these conflicts.  The UN should deal with them.
I don't care if a nuke goes off on the other side of the world if the US isn't involved.

That, and do you honestly think any of those problems would get solved without US intervention? Either because of the military or diplomatic force needed, or because we're so damn nosy we have to stick our fingers in everything, in some form or fashion the US would be involved in the solution.
Well, that's probably because of the useless UN, they should be able to deal with these things without the US.  The US has no obligation at all with foreign countries, the US must take care of US citizens, period, and the UN should be reformed because the way it is right now is a real joke tbh.
So at the top of the list is

-UN

?
konfusion
mostly afk
+480|6986|CH/BR - in UK

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

So at the top of the list is

-UN

?
Fair enough - I'm sick of the veto right!

-konfusion
mikkel
Member
+383|7038

lowing wrote:

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

I see no need to solve any of these issues, for us to do so would be sticking our nose in other countries business and it has been made very clear on this forum that the US budding in where it does not belong is a no no. Or are we to only bud in to these conflicts when it become inconvenient to the Eurotrash when we do not?

I say, you Euroweenies are closer to all of these places, you seem to have an opinion on everything, you deal with it, and let us know how you are doing, we will be here critiquing your progress.
Oh so feisty, lowing.



The problem that you don't see here is that most of these are actual humanitarian crises, as opposed to the US engagements that are being criticised by the rest of the world. Most of the Western world is or was in Afghanistan, no one with any shred of sensibility critcised the US for going into Somalia in the 90s, and people were actively encouraging Western intervention in Darfur before the African Union forces.

It's this puzzling black and white mentality you have going. There seems to be absolutely no middle ground on anything as far as you're concerned, and it seems to limit your ability to think rationally fairly often.
Nope, I just do not view the US as a puppet for the Eurotrash to try and manipulate. We are not a genie in the bottle for you to conjure up whenever it suits you or your interests. THe US has internal interests just like the rest of the world, however, we are not allowed tol ook after those interests. In doing so, makes us the great world evil power.

I get a little pissed off when I am being told how much we suck and then at the next breath asked why we are not somewhere solving problems YOU are watching and are not busy solving yourselves.

Oh and the "humanitarian effort in the 90's was answered by RPG and small arms fire. There is no humanitarian efforts in Africa, it is get involved at your own risk, and you had better do it the way the EU tells you to or you will be condemned in your media. Screw you, fix your own side of the worlds problems, we are too busy trying to keep nukes out of YOUR backyard already.
No one is condemning the US for taking care of domestic issues. Why do you think Ron Paul enjoys such broad international support? The US is largely only condemned for taking care of supposedly domestic issues in foreign countries without sufficient warrant, just like any other country would be. There's no sympathy for you to get on that account, no matter how hard you try.

The fact of the matter is that the US is a big country with a big influence, and when the US makes mistakes, the mistakes are big as a consequence thereof. Mistakes are allowed, but arrogantly perpetuating them through dishonest justification, and spinning any dissatisfaction with this to glorify these desperate measures and antagonise anyone why voices discontentment is ridiculous and juvenile. A pathetic attempt to elicit sympathy through the fear of antagonism, similarly to how patriotism is being abused.

You aren't busy keeping nukes out of our backyard. If the EU had any reason to believe that it was under nuclear threat, quite frankly, it would be more than capable of dealing with the situation itself. These ghosts you chase are of little interest to the rest of the world, so don't expect gratitude for what is essentially nothing.

This thread is a classic example of this self-righteous whining and complaining from a good portion of conservative America. This thread had absolutely NOTHING to do with the US. This was a neutral thread asking which conflicts are in the most urgent need of being resolved. Not how or by who. It took mere minutes for someone to come sobbing and moaning about how unfair everything is for the US and how everyone else sucks. Guess what? Shut up. That these conflicts persist is a criticism of human kind of any nationality, so how about you stop feeling so damned persecuted and butt hurt over being criticised for your mistakes, and either take initiative to do something good, or sit back and shut up.

Africa sucks for letting these conflicts exist, Europe sucks for letting these conflicts exist, North America sucks for letting these conflicts exist, South America sucks for letting these conflicts exist, Asia sucks sucks for letting these conflicts exist, and Oceania sucks for letting these conflicts exist. Stop sympathising with yourself.

Last edited by mikkel (2008-01-05 14:11:30)

NantanCochise
Member
+55|6415|Portugal/United States

Superslim wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

-Domestic issues
-Issues that deal directly with US security/interests
-Don't care
Have to agree. Why does the US constantly have to play the role of the world police, not only that, but constantly being criticized for playing that role. Its a no win situation, plus the sad part is that we are losing many awesome men and women fighting other peoples battles. We should take care of our own and fuck the rest of em. If they threaten us, slam em hard and start setting some hard core examples.
Unfortunately the international community will always critisize us no mattter what. They will expect us to help and when we do, we get slammed. When we become more isolationist we get critisized even more. I agree with you, but its almost impossible for NATO, the US, the EU to ignore most of the developing world and unstable, waring countries. Afterall, we in the west are always blamed for causing most of the problems in the world, which to some extent may be true, but without us, the world would be a serious shithole, Fact!
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|7057|London, England
The thread asked what conflicts should be solved asap, it didn't say what conflicts should be solved by the west asap. No need to start talking about "we shouldn't do this" or "we shouldn't do that", because nobody gives a fuck whether you think country X should help country Y. The thread was asking which of the current world issues do you think are the most important and whether we'd benifit more from certain places being peaceful and whether we wouldn't see much of a chance with certain places being peaceful or not.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6842|North Carolina

mikkel wrote:

No one is condemning the US for taking care of domestic issues. Why do you think Ron Paul enjoys such broad international support? The US is largely only condemned for taking care of supposedly domestic issues in foreign countries without sufficient warrant, just like any other country would be. There's no sympathy for you to get on that account, no matter how hard you try.

The fact of the matter is that the US is a big country with a big influence, and when the US makes mistakes, the mistakes are big as a consequence thereof. Mistakes are allowed, but arrogantly perpetuating them through dishonest justification, and spinning any dissatisfaction with this to glorify these desperate measures and antagonise anyone why voices discontentment is ridiculous and juvenile. A pathetic attempt to elicit sympathy through the fear of antagonism, similarly to how patriotism is being abused.
Good points.  I prefer that America be honest about its intervention.  We usually do things for business interests.  Granted, I'd rather we do it than China or Russia.  Someone has to play policeman, like it or not.  Wouldn't you rather we be the police than China?  I know we've done some bad things, but we've still got more morals than they do.

mikkel wrote:

You aren't busy keeping nukes out of our backyard. If the EU had any reason to believe that it was under nuclear threat, quite frankly, it would be more than capable of dealing with the situation itself. These ghosts you chase are of little interest to the rest of the world, so don't expect gratitude for what is essentially nothing.
The EU has actually sided with us on encouraging Iran to end its nuclear program.  I personally think we should leave Iran alone about it, but apparently a lot of people in high places in both America and Europe don't want Iran to go nuclear.

mikkel wrote:

This thread is a classic example of this self-righteous whining and complaining from a good portion of conservative America. This thread had absolutely NOTHING to do with the US. This was a neutral thread asking which conflicts are in the most urgent need of being resolved. Not how or by who. It took mere minutes for someone to come sobbing and moaning about how unfair everything is for the US and how everyone else sucks. Guess what? Shut up. That these conflicts persist is a criticism of human kind of any nationality, so how about you stop feeling so damned persecuted and butt hurt over being criticised for your mistakes, and either take initiative to do something good, or sit back and shut up.

Africa sucks for letting these conflicts exist, Europe sucks for letting these conflicts exist, North America sucks for letting these conflicts exist, South America sucks for letting these conflicts exist, Asia sucks sucks for letting these conflicts exist, and Oceania sucks for letting these conflicts exist. Stop sympathising with yourself.
All good points.  Nevertheless, America will remain the world's police for the next few decades (at the very least).
jord
Member
+2,382|7115|The North, beyond the wall.
Leave them all, as they kill eachother my country grows stronger relative to the ones in conflicts.

England prevails.
NantanCochise
Member
+55|6415|Portugal/United States

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

- America
- America
- America
- America
- America
- America
- America
- America
- America
- America


-Snotty little boys from Cambridge

Last edited by NantanCochise (2008-01-05 15:11:34)

NantanCochise
Member
+55|6415|Portugal/United States

Mek-Izzle wrote:

The thread asked what conflicts should be solved asap, it didn't say what conflicts should be solved by the west asap. No need to start talking about "we shouldn't do this" or "we shouldn't do that", because nobody gives a fuck whether you think country X should help country Y. The thread was asking which of the current world issues do you think are the most important and whether we'd benifit more from certain places being peaceful and whether we wouldn't see much of a chance with certain places being peaceful or not.
Oh relax man, you should get out more often, I see that the London weather is really getting to you!

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard