View Single Post
Old 08-19-2007, 10:36 AM  
woodsix
So Fucking Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jai View Post
man this post has a lot of naive thinking in it caused by simple brainwashing of left wing fanatics

first off.. THE BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN IRAQ AND ZIMBABWE is not oil BUT LEVEL OF THREAT

zimbabwe can do whatever UNETHICAL SHIT that want to but if it doesnt HARM or THREAT any other Nation WHY THE FUCK SHUD THEY CARE..

you dont spend BILLIONS in army spending to HELP PPL, you spend billions on Armies to DEFEND YOURSELF WHEN A THREAT COMES ALONG

my friend, you shouldnt blame bush or even compare this to IRAQ since theres not even 0.0000001% similarity BUT YOU SHOULD BLAME UN

THE UN should be fixing these areas, and actually your first person to BLAME is AU "african union", they should be spending all army presences in these kind of areas..

dont expect outsiders to help you until you help yourself

southasia, africa were all under colonial rule...where as south asia is flourishing now and have armies to help themselves even when the worst tsunamis and earthquakes are happning there..

africa for some reason is still having trouble fighting man made disasters..

they need to pick up their game
So why did Bush invade Iraq?

Saddam Hussein was no THREAT to the US because he feared precisely what happened.

So tell me again, why did the Bush invade Iraq?

You people never give a straight answer.

The situation in Zimbabwe could be solved easily with US help but it has no oil. The same with the sitation in Sierra Leone, Apartheid South Africa, or Liberia.

The US only gets in involved when they can exploit the situation. They care nothing about freedom, democracy, or peace, if there is no financial gain.

There is nothing wrong with that, just be honest about it.
woodsix is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote