No significant threats that warrant 500 billion dollars per year of military spending, is not "no threats".

If that is not making shit up, it is lying.
This is the comment that was out of context. I was asking how you expected China to pose a serious threat, I can see NO way bush would be related to the economic aspect of such a war.

Well thanks for proving to me that you're just trying to argue for the sake of arguing. What's the expendature of the "War on Terror" so far?

Over a Trillion at least. And we don't have threats? If we didn't have and "significant threats", then why would we be in a stalemate right now?


Obviously "Terror" is our main threat now days...... If you believe the propagandeous bull-shit that the media and congress portrays (Which honestly, judging from your mentality on this subject, you do)


And so because I've been told by five+ American Soldiers that the media constantly lies to us, I'm lying about the number of troops dead there? Hooookay. Whose your source.... Fox News? CNN? Mine are relatives and friends within the Military.


And I'm sorry that I don't just eat the shit-sandwitch that the media portrays to the American citizens of the United States. I'm not a blind and dumb sheep like the rest of America


And I already explained how China would pay for it:
I'm pretty sure that the United States of America isn't the only country that fabricates its money out of nothing, so my hypothetical situation still is plausible and possible.

Your claims of no threats still stands on shakey ground.


Oh, another way China could attack us: Biological/Chemical Warefare


So honestly, it's pretty stupid/falliable to claim that there are no "significant threats" against the United States because hell, even our CEO say's we're threatened.... That's why we're in this "War on Terror" (Since when can you fight emotions?)

What the hell? Are you seriously suggesting terrorists are a serious threat to the borders of this country, which is abated by our massive military spending? Terrorism prevention is a law enforcement problem, not a military problem. You should know as well as anyone that Iraq was NOT a significant military threat to this country, yet was invaded in the name of the war on terror.what makes you think that?I am well aware the state of our media, but it is a fact that our casualties in the invasion phase of Iraq are trivial when compared to the casualties in the occupation phase.In the US, wars are started for personal and corporate profit by those in power, China is dependent on the united states for a capital, and while they would be technically capable of attacking us, It would not be profitable.Show me a credible imminent threat, or stop with the fear mongering and paranoia.And the united states has enough nukes to sterilize the entire continent.The war on terror is propaganda. Your chance of dying to terrorism in this country are over 100 times less than your chance of dying from a bee sting. (1 in about 7 million to about 1 in 60,000)

Fear mongering and paranoia?

I'm not paranoid, and I'm not fear mongering. I think you're talking about the United States Government on that one buddy. I'm simply providing my opinion (Which the last time I knew, I'm entitled to) against your rather rediculous claim.

Iran
Venezuela

Those two are threats two the US. Big ones that will attack us? Who knows.

But we want to go to war against Iran already (Oh wait, Cheyney wants to go to war against Iran so Haliburton can get more money so he can get more money in his monthly pensions from Haliburton) so obviously their a threat to us.




If you're a blind sheep that follows what the government says that is.



Because of the hastey actions of George Bush and the incompetance of the late Republican Congress, I believe that the whole world is a "threat"


Call it paranoia, whatever. I'm just smart enough to look at what our Dictator has done to push even our closest allies away from us, and not eat the shit-sandwitch of "We still have allies"

We may still have allies, but very few.


Why would our president (I mean dictator) ask the UN to kick us out of almost everything UN related?



Oh. Probibly so he could get away with the shit he's doing right now.




And with that, I'm done with this because of your inhability to open your mind and accept the possibility that you're possibly wrong, and that we are in danger.

Its going to be a continous circle of bickering because I'm too hard-headed (along with you) to believe the lies the government feeds to us.

When did I say we should attack Iran? I have been saying we should cut military spending to about 1/10 it's current level. Using the military only for self defense(NO PREEMPTIVE WARS).

Also, we would have a few more allies if we minded our own damn business.

and I really do not understand what government propaganda you think I believe.

He didn't say that you said that.


Right, but are the two countries he gave (Iran, Venezuela) threats to us now (while spending all this money), as you said they are not (by saying no one is)?


I'm not sure if he's directly saying that you do, but sometimes it seems like he is, and if so he couldn't be anymore wrong. It is clear to me that you are the antithesis of people who believe in propaganda.

keep the ownage up anti, ur making kelli look really stupid

Actually, don't keep it up. I've read through the arguements and you've clearly won. Now pull a cheeze and abstain before he starts dragging you down with him.
"Never argue with an idoit. He will just bring you down to his level and then beat you with experience." -Kenoli

And dapper, when will you ever learn to use Quote=Name ?

I only use it when it is necessary. And, I do use it enough that you would know I did if you paid any attention to it. Btw, the reason it's not necessary for me to say those quotes are from AntiSleep because he said them in the post directly above.

Wow, this was one of the lamest posts I've ever seen on V5, lmao!

How has he won? Because he ignores the own falliable claims he creates?

He said there are no threats to the United States. I've shown three possible (and very plausible) threats, and he still ignores even the slightest possibility of them being threats.

How is that winning? Its more like being hard-headed, and non-acknowledgable of possible ideas in retort to his falliable claim of the United States having no threats.

And honestly, I'd like you, ClansAreForGays, to show me the exactly location "i'm looking stupid".



If trying to present possibilities to a falliable claim is being and looking stupid, you sure kick my ass on that one.

I'm still trying to decide whether Kellimus or Yenku has the most lame post...

Kellimus is the one listing countries at random, claiming they are planning to attack us. Aggressors win battles far more often than they win wars. I am not willing to spend 500 billion dollars a year on paranoid speculation, and I question the reasons you are.

Here is an alternate perspective: Stop draft registration, redeploy our military to defend our own borders, make basic military training part of the high school curriculum. Make boot camps available with no further obligation. In the event the country is attacked, the problem will be neither volunteers nor equipment, but the complacency of the populace, this is a way to stop that. This course of action is the single best way to stop an invasion of this country.

Where in the fuck did I claim that they are planning to attack us? I simply created hypothetical situations to refute your falliable claim.

Damn you need to quit the fabrication of words, its getting old.

But you'd spend 500 billion on a useless, and on-going civil war that we shouldn't be in, eh?

Typical.

NO, I never said we should be in Iraq, how about you read my fucking posts?
I asked for a credible threat that justifies the expenditure of 500 billion dollars per year on military hardware, facilities, and personell, you replied with Iran, Venezuela and China, none of which would have anything to gain by attacking this country. Saying those countries is a threat to us, is like saying the EU is a threat to this country.

Well with your logic and reasoning, IRAQ is a threat to us because we have spent 500+ billion in our total allocated time there.

Oh, and I did read your post. Its not my fault that you post shit in a way to try to make anyone who creates retorts against you, "stupid" because they didn't (or couldn't see, due to your inhability to post things so people don't have to read between the lines) agree with you.

I never said you said we should be in Iraq.

I mearly replied (with your logic and reasoning in mind) to your comment about 500+ billion plus per year spent.

But again, with your reason and logic, Iraq is a threat to us (because we've spent 500+ billion since we've been there)


Which means that you're inconsistant with your views, and therefore your claims of no threats to the United States of America is: falliable due to your own inconsistancies.

Half half I'd have to say.

Now first of all, your posts are being directed towards Military actions and not the actual topic: Government.
Next, Kellimus is correct on the fact that yes, the news is a lying to us, and that in truth --- US deaths = ---- US deaths. However, being in Canada, I cannot properly justify my statement.
Now, Anti-Sleep brings up interesting points of how the US is a supreme power, and that the invasion of any country to it is inprofitable.

Chinese forces attacking the US would call in NATO support to come justify the assault. I've posted this before, but I'll say it again: US = NATO, China = Russia... thats it isnt it?

The US pissed off Brittain? They still must oblige to support due to NATO resolves. And think of it this way, 60-70 years ago, the US shitlisted Germany, yet now, Germany is a NATO country and supports the US cause.

Why is the US in Iraq? Because at first, they wanted to protect the Iraqis from the Iranians (Desert Storm). Next, to forge an I-O-U system, they demanded that Iraq share it's oil with the US (as it is one of the largest oil consumers). The US sent about 20 AH-64-D Longbow helicoptors, tanks and logistical supplies to the Iraqi cause, only to be betrayed.

We also look at another thing: There was a secret laboratory just off the coast of the US developing biological and chemical warefare. The Virgin islands I beleive housed these weapons. A top secret plan was developed by an Iraqi scientist, which was then stolen and given towards the Taliban. The militant group apparently used this gas to "temporarily sterilize" an area's biological inhabitants.

IRAQ IS A THREAT TO THE US? Not so much. If you think about it, if you just pull out, you would save money, political expidentures, lives and gain civilian influence.

I also would like to bring up a question. We could of easily avoided WW1, and thus WW2 by listening to the Germans. WW1, Germany and Italy began realizing something: Nationalism. With kingdomships broken and the ties and ranks of unfairness were out ruled. Yet, Brittain saw some problem with this, like it was a threat to their society. The US alligned with the "Allied Powers" to actually help the English. This was a faulty error. The US and Germany had idealistic point of views. Alone at this point, could a new possible alliance crush the Soviet Union.

Basicily, what im trying to say is: Blame Brittan for all of your problems.

And at last, a final note to all:

Like the Soviet Union's collapse in 1993, Russian influence of communism will die with it.

THANK YOU COME AGAIN

- Vi3t-X - 12 - Dec 13, 2007 - 8pm EST -