Why is the US such a great nation?

2010-03-21 18:36:46

#51

Canin: Conservative Roman Catholic; +280|6867|Foothills of S. Carolina

In all seriousness, what made the US a great nation was that the government was once for the people, of the people and by the people. Not so anymore, and as such, we can no longer be considered a great nation.

When corporations and lobbyists hold more sway over our government than the people who elect the officials, the government is no longer for the people but for those with the most power and money.

2010-03-21 18:48:14

#52

m3thod: All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz; +2,197|7063|UK

porn output

Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.

2010-03-21 18:49:44

#53

m3thod: All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz; +2,197|7063|UK

knowing you can be thick as pigshit but still have a excellent chance at becoming ze furhur.

Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.

2010-03-21 18:53:52

#54

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6921|Global Command

The ideals of personal liberty and freedom that were foundation.

Never mind the slavery of the time and the sorry state that we are in now.

2010-03-21 19:11:43

#55

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6862

the philosophy of american exceptionalism is what makes america seem/be so 'great'

it's a fundamental part of their ideology

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2010-03-21 19:22:14

#56

Morpheus: This shit still going?; +508|6391|The Mitten

Because we stole black people, duh

EE (hats

2010-03-21 22:38:47

#57

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7067|Canberra, AUS

Big population, lots of natural resources, resourceful populace. Those would be big ones IMO.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2010-03-21 23:17:30

#58

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7108

Spark wrote:
Big population, lots of natural resources, resourceful populace. Those would be big ones IMO.

Puritan work ethic really jump started the new colonies.

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2010-03-21 23:48:16

#59

Ioan92: Member; +337|6114

CapnNismo wrote:
Outside of military accomplishments.

What accomplishments? Being the most incompetent army in the last century?

There is a difference between arriving at the end of a war and winning it opposed to successfully invading a country without getting your ass handed by kids that make bombs with Duracell batteries. Vietnam and the M-E come to mind.

2010-03-22 00:27:05

#60

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,820|6498|eXtreme to the maX

The whole 'economic superpower' thing is fairly bogus since its built on debt which will need to be repaid some day.

I could be a big wheel for a while if I borrowed $100m without a plan to repay it.

Fuck Israel

2010-03-22 00:33:50

#61

ruisleipa: Member; +149|6614|teh FIN-land

Ioan92 wrote:
CapnNismo wrote:
Outside of military accomplishments.
What accomplishments? Being the most incompetent army in the last century?

There is a difference between arriving at the end of a war and winning it opposed to successfully invading a country without getting your ass handed by kids that make bombs with Duracell batteries. Vietnam and the M-E come to mind.

lmao

2010-03-22 00:37:11

#62

Ioan92: Member; +337|6114

ruisleipa wrote:
Ioan92 wrote:
CapnNismo wrote:
Outside of military accomplishments.
What accomplishments? Being the most incompetent army in the last century?

There is a difference between arriving at the end of a war and winning it opposed to successfully invading a country without getting your ass handed by kids that make bombs with Duracell batteries. Vietnam and the M-E come to mind.
lmao

Show me a war led by the USA that succeeded without help.

Thank you and good luck.

2010-03-22 01:26:04

#63

jsnipy: ...; +3,277|6914|...

CameronPoe wrote:
The concept of what constitutes a 'Great Nation' is entirely subjective and most of those that use the term are usually unwittingly using it as an advert for how unintelligent they are.

the only intelligent thing said in this thread tbh

2010-03-22 01:30:20

#64

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7108

Ioan92 wrote:
ruisleipa wrote:
Ioan92 wrote:

What accomplishments? Being the most incompetent army in the last century?

There is a difference between arriving at the end of a war and winning it opposed to successfully invading a country without getting your ass handed by kids that make bombs with Duracell batteries. Vietnam and the M-E come to mind.
lmao
Show me a war led by the USA that succeeded without help.

Thank you and good luck.

War of 1812. Spanish American war (Teddy kicked ASS) and a few asses.

The US can simply bomb a country back to the stone age and declare "victory." But it is more beneficial in the long run to stay and rebuild a fucking country.

Getting their asses handed by a bunch of kids? Really? Go look at how many insurgents the US killed compared to US soldiers killed. Same with 'Nam. US still achieves a higher KDR.

2010-03-22 01:30:27

#65

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6797|North Carolina

Ioan92 wrote:
CapnNismo wrote:
Outside of military accomplishments.
What accomplishments? Being the most incompetent army in the last century?

There is a difference between arriving at the end of a war and winning it opposed to successfully invading a country without getting your ass handed by kids that make bombs with Duracell batteries. Vietnam and the M-E come to mind.

What? Did you like miss the Pacific War during WW2 in your history class?

Ioan92 wrote:
Show me a war led by the USA that succeeded without help.

Thank you and good luck.

As if that's a valid condition.... Show me a modern conflict involving a major developed country that didn't enlist help in order to gain international credibility.

There were past threads I've seen you respond to where you made good points, but in this one, it looks like you really have no grasp of how war is staged.

It's a good thing to have allies by your side in a major conflict, regardless of whether you truly need their help or not, because when you do something unilaterally, it opens the door for criticisms of imperialism. Granted, some amount of that will occur even with help, but for example, if you thought we took a lot of heat for invading Iraq -- imagine how much more we would have gotten if we had literally invaded without any allies.

Think it through, man.

2010-03-22 01:32:46

#66

jsnipy: ...; +3,277|6914|...

Ioan92 wrote:
ruisleipa wrote:
Ioan92 wrote:
What accomplishments? Being the most incompetent army in the last century?

There is a difference between arriving at the end of a war and winning it opposed to successfully invading a country without getting your ass handed by kids that make bombs with Duracell batteries. Vietnam and the M-E come to mind.
lmao
Show me a war led by the USA that succeeded without help.

Thank you and good luck.

2010-03-22 01:36:59

#67

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7067|Canberra, AUS

Ioan92 wrote:
CapnNismo wrote:
Outside of military accomplishments.
What accomplishments? Being the most incompetent army in the last century?

There is a difference between arriving at the end of a war and winning it opposed to successfully invading a country without getting your ass handed by kids that make bombs with Duracell batteries. Vietnam and the M-E come to mind.

Don't mistake counter-insurgency with normal warfare. The US army, in a conventional fight i.e. a fair fight with another country... well, there's really no other country in which that would be anywhere near "fair".

How quickly did Saddam lose in GWI again?

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2010-03-22 01:41:51

#68

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7108

Spark wrote:
Ioan92 wrote:
CapnNismo wrote:
Outside of military accomplishments.
What accomplishments? Being the most incompetent army in the last century?

There is a difference between arriving at the end of a war and winning it opposed to successfully invading a country without getting your ass handed by kids that make bombs with Duracell batteries. Vietnam and the M-E come to mind.
Don't mistake counter-insurgency with normal warfare. The US army, in a conventional fight i.e. a fair fight with another country... well, there's really no other country in which that would be anywhere near "fair".

How quickly did Saddam lose in GWI again?

GW1 was about 1990 August till 1991 end of Feb.

OIF was like 3 weeks lol

2010-03-22 01:58:41

#69

Shahter: Zee Ruskie; +295|7167|Moscow, Russia

an enormous financial fraud - a world wide financial pyramid build around oil market and usa's national currency - that's what enabled america to become the dominant power in the world.

if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.

2010-03-22 02:00:32

#70

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7067|Canberra, AUS

Shahter wrote:
an enormous financial fraud - a world wide financial pyramid build around oil market and usa's national currency - that's what enabled america to become the dominant power in the world.

Yeah um. Don't know where to start with this post.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2010-03-22 02:02:48

#71

Ioan92: Member; +337|6114

Shahter wrote:
an enormous financial fraud - a world wide financial pyramid build around oil market and usa's national currency - that's what enabled america to become the dominant power in the world.

Agreed, also, to those who bothered to reply to me.

trlolololololololololololol

yeeyeyeyeyeyyeyeyeyeyey

EDIT: Wait, I've actually read your replies.

1- Civil wars don't count.
2- Nukes don't count.

Last edited by Ioan92 (2010-03-22 02:08:18)

2010-03-22 02:08:12

#72

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7108

Spark wrote:
Shahter wrote:
an enormous financial fraud - a world wide financial pyramid build around oil market and usa's national currency - that's what enabled america to become the dominant power in the world.
Yeah um. Don't know where to start with this post.

FUCKING CALIFORNIZATION DESTROYED RUSSIA. its all americas fault.

2010-03-22 02:15:46

#73

Spearhead: Gulf coast redneck hippy; +731|7082|Tampa Bay Florida

Relevant article....

Time magazine wrote:
In 1941, prior to the U.S.'s entry into World War II, the co-founder of this magazine, Henry Luce, penned an essay in LIFE that exhorted "unhappy" Americans, "[distracted] with lifeless arguments about isolationism," to "create the first great American century" — the first, mind you, not the last. We are now entering the second decade of what will be an even more markedly American century; in fact, the Americanization of the world will characterize the foreseeable future far more than the past.

It's true that Brand America took a hit this decade. The global superpower botched an election at home and an occupation overseas. Its vaunted financial markets were roiled by sketchy accounting early in the decade, then triggered a global economic crisis later on, thanks to Wall Street's leveraged gamble that it had conquered risk once and for all. All these missteps dented the U.S.'s credibility but were also a reminder that, fairly or not, the U.S. retains an enviably large margin of error. And times of economic dislocation only accentuate America's competitive advantage — its nimbleness and adaptability.

Last edited by Spearhead (2010-03-22 02:19:40)

2010-03-22 02:16:31

#74

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7067|Canberra, AUS

Ioan92 wrote:
Shahter wrote:
an enormous financial fraud - a world wide financial pyramid build around oil market and usa's national currency - that's what enabled america to become the dominant power in the world.
Agreed, also, to those who bothered to reply to me.

trlolololololololololololol

yeeyeyeyeyeyyeyeyeyeyey

EDIT: Wait, I've actually read your replies.

1- Civil wars don't count.
2- Nukes don't count.

...

Gulf War I wasn't a civil war. And I think you'll find no nukes were involved...

now, if you would stop trolling...

Last edited by Spark (2010-03-22 02:19:47)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2010-03-22 02:23:23

#75

Ioan92: Member; +337|6114

Spark wrote:
Ioan92 wrote:
Shahter wrote:
an enormous financial fraud - a world wide financial pyramid build around oil market and usa's national currency - that's what enabled america to become the dominant power in the world.
Agreed, also, to those who bothered to reply to me.

trlolololololololololololol

yeeyeyeyeyeyyeyeyeyeyey

EDIT: Wait, I've actually read your replies.

1- Civil wars don't count.
2- Nukes don't count.
...

Gulf War I wasn't a civil war. And I think you'll find no nukes were involved...

now, if you would stop trolling...

FINE.

BF2S Forums Why is the US such a great nation?

Spark wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

Spark wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

Shahter wrote:

Shahter wrote:

Spark wrote:

Shahter wrote:

Time magazine wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

Shahter wrote:

Spark wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

Shahter wrote:

Board footer