CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
USA is the best nation of all time, they have contributed the most to the world.
I've been hearing that some people on this site think me as some sort of troll. Well to clear things up I'm settting up a serious debate. Please may no-one ruin this.
We gave the world the modern Republic. We gave them jazz, rock 'n' roll and gangsta rap. We've been the great melting pot, taking the best of every culture and threshing the chaff. We gave them them potato chips, jelly beans and the machine gun, and we probably either saved your country's ass in some war or took some of yours away and made it better. We gave the world football. God bless America.
I don't know why that arsehole up there thinks that he is somehow partially responsible for all those things, and also seems to hold the rather popular and rather uninformed belief that America somehow won world war two single handedly, but that's not the point.
I just burst out laughing because axmeister, one of the most nationalistic, imperialist nutjobs on this site, just called someone else racist. And insinuated that America is the only place where races are discriminated against. Axmeister: you are a racist.
Why do you people give so much of a shit what side of the imaginary line you were born on?
"I just burst out laughing because axmeister, one of the most nationalistic, imperialist nutjobs on this site, just called someone else racist. And insinuated that America is the only place where races are discriminated against. Axmeister: you are a racist"
Just because I'm an imperialist doesn't make me racsit, the fact that you stated I was racist just goes to show how "open minded" you are. And I didn't call "someone else" racist, I said America has a racist history, which it does.
"Why do you people give so much of a shit what side of the imaginary line you were born on?"
Because wars have been fought over this "imaginary line", empires rose and fell over "imaginary lines", Britian created most of these "imaginary lines".
Though you've spent a short time on this site you seem to have arrived at some conclusion about me, which is wrong. I may be prejudiced but I am prejudiced against American, not Americans.
Just because I'm an imperialist doesn't make me racsit
You're right, but thinking you are superior to other races is racist. You think the British race is inherently "better" than other races, therefore you do not believe races are equal, therefore you are racist.
America has a racist history, which it does.
So does Britain...
Because wars have been fought over this "imaginary line", empires rose and fell over "imaginary lines", Britian created most of these "imaginary lines".
So what? You still haven't really answered the question. Why is it that the people on one side of the imaginary line are better than the people on the other? You realise that nations are a completely arbitrary measure of race, let alone how good a person you are?
And even so, why does it matter that some British people fought in some battles many years ago to shift around the imaginary lines? I still don't understand how that would make a difference.
"You're right, but thinking you are superior to other races is racist. You think the British race is inherently "better" than other races, therefore you do not believe races are equal, therefore you are racist."
When have I ever said that Britain is superior to other races?
"So does Britain..."
Of course Britain has had a racist history, I never denied that fact. I just told Assface, who claimed that America was like the mixing pot of race and culture, that America had a prominent racist history.
"So what? You still haven't really answered the question. Why is it that the people on one side of the imaginary line are better than the people on the other?"
That was not your question, you asked "Why do you people give so much of a shit what side of the imaginary line you were born on?" which I answered.
"And even so, why does it matter that some British people fought in some battles many years ago to shift around the imaginary lines? I still don't understand how that would make a difference."
Because borders were important in the past and are still important now. The country you belong in suggests that you belong to a certain culture, a certain belief and a certain way of life. I'm happy being British, the idea of countries not existing is a dangerous notion, it's the same as imagining a country without social class or hierarchy.
Rock and Roll was mainly pioneered by British people touring in America.
If you're referring to the British invasion, I'm gonna be really mad.
Britain's done the same
If that were true, our cultures would be identical.
America has often been racist or prejudice in some form of another throughout their history.
So? That's kind of implied in the filtration part. The point is that we're the best, not the most sensitive.
USA has barely fought a single war one their own and won.
What significant, non-civil war has been fought without any external aid whatsoever?
unless your talking about American football
No, I'm talking about ballerina-ball, because that would totally be something to take pride in.
which is like British Rugby but with padded protection.
I trust you haven't watched much football. The similarities are pretty much limited to the object of the game, and it's a fairly common objective in gaming and sporting.
All of your arguments seem to amount to "Britain did it first." But is that really such a good thing if you never perfected it?
I don't know what you mean by this, but if you look at the history of Republics you'll see many civilizations that had them before the U.S.A did.
"If you're referring to the British invasion, I'm gonna be really mad."
Be mad then.
"If that were true, our cultures would be identical."
Cultures are affected by other means than how lenient we are to other races.
"So? That's kind of implied in the filtration part. The point is that we're the best, not the most sensitive."
But you're not the best, Britian is better.
"What significant, non-civil war has been fought without any external aid whatsoever?"
Exactly America has fought no wars on their own, if you're talking about other countries then I'll give you examples of wars Britain has fought on their own.
The first Modern Republic was actually Corsica, America may have given the world Jazz, Rock N Roll and Gansta Rap but Britain gave the World The Beatles, The Rolling Stones and Psychobilly, America may have given the World American Football but Britain gave the World Football (I refuse to call it Soccer) so when it comes to Sport and Music America and Britain may well be on a par but wether one is better than the other all depends on your taste and point of view
Just because it was short lived does'nt mean it was'nt the first Republic which pre-dated the American Republic
While the Rolling Stones, The Beatles and Psychobilly might be based on American music they are typically British especially Psychobilly, the English were the first to mix Punk and Rockabilly and come up with what is Psychobilly and to say nobody likes it is wrong, it has been popular since the 80's and still is with many of the original bands still playing to sell out crowds and new bands appearing all the time.
Writing off British bands as all being corruptions of an American formula is the same as saying Jazz and Rock "N" Roll are just corruptions of the Blues which originally started in Africa so using your argument Jazz and Rock "N" Roll is just a corruption of an African formula
In order for my argument to be that all contributors to an event are the direct cause of that event, I would have to be literally retarded. That's a matter for another debate.
You were trying to give America credit for giving the World the Modern Republic because of the American Revolution, if it had'nt been for the Spanish and French there is a chance the revolution would have been unsuccesful, so you cannot give America credit for something they did not succeed in single handedly
You must be aware that line of reasoning results in an infinite regress of blame-shifting. The Spanish and French didn't become militarily successful enough in their own right to have supported the US, so credit for the revolution shouldn't go to them, etc. One could carry on in this manner until he simply credits nature or God, and I don't think I'm feeling quite that nihilistic today.
I think you need to check your History, Spain and France were always Military powers long before America even existed, the Spanish discovered America and they allied themselves with France and supported the American Revolution because they saw this as a chance to weaken the British Empire and the Revolution was won by the slightest of margins and a lot of historians think this was only because they were aided by the French
U.S miltary dominates our current world. U.S media greatly influences Europe. America has liberated most LEDC's into Democracies and we lead the western world by getting rid of our Monarchy first!
Why don't you PM yourself before interrupting our debate? And how dare you swear on my debate you fucking shithead! If I hear one more swear word come out of the fucking craphole you call a mouth you shall be banned.
As President you command all of the world to bow before the great nation of America, knowing their fate if they disobey, the other countries come uner your rule. We force homosexuality to be accepted everywhere and all religions to be banned.
Real Americans don't say 'mum'. You can say they do all you want, but that doesn't make it so. I told you to drop this but it appears you don't want to??
If there was one army, that dominated the entire world, as you appear to think that there is, would that be a good thing?
I think that such a thing would be a ridiculous imbalance of power that can, and frequently does, endanger innocent lives. Having such an imbalance of power as for a certain country to dominate the entire world would be ridiculous.
I do not think that if there was an army that had the power to control the world, it would be a good thing.
-
I don't think the US Military does dominate the current world.
There are all sorts of armies in the world, America is one of many armies in the world and could not solve all of the worlds problems by the power that provides itself. In America there are over 500000 soldiers, whereas in armies such as Pakistan there is almost an equal amount, and therefore if you simply combine two together America would be overpowered.
Your trust in the American army is not logical, countries such as China have two million soldiers, that's 2000000 for you. That is almost four times the size of the American army, how do you really think that America would combat that?
"We lead the Western world by getting rid of our monarchy first"
There are some places in the world that still have a monarchy.
Monarchies are great figureheads for a country, they are something that can bring in millions of pounds from tourism and America is really losing out of some of the dosh that other countries can gain because of their monarchy.
All the Americans I have met say British, the only people I know of who say Britons are historians when referring the the Ancient people who built Stonehenge etc. Most people say British these days and a lot (not all) of Americans seem only to refer to the English when saying British which I find very funny
Yes, only the United States knows what is the right thing to do in military circumstances. That's why we are the most ethical country in the world.
"There are all sorts of armies in the world, America is one of many armies in the world and could not solve all of the worlds problems by the power that provides itself. In America there are over 500000 soldiers, whereas in armies such as Pakistan there is almost an equal amount, and therefore if you simply combine two together America would be overpowered.
Your trust in the American army is not logical, countries such as China have two million soldiers, that's 2000000 for you. That is almost four times the size of the American army, how do you really think that America would combat that?"
Everyone knows that China is being bought up by American businessmen, sooner or later our economic empire will by up little Britain too.
"There are some places in the world that still have a monarchy.
They don't count, America has clearly rebelled against monarchies, it took Britain two wars with us to realise that. Maybe we better give you a good ass-whooping again to prove our point.
"Monarchies are great figureheads for a country, they are something that can bring in millions of pounds from tourism and America is really losing out of some of the dosh that other countries can gain because of their monarchy.
Having a monarchy isn't a bad thing."
Monarchies are there for religious reasons, as an atheist I am anti-monarchy and thus anti-britain. I know for a fact that the Queen sacrifices atheists on her shrine to Jesus.
"Only the United States knows what is the right thing to do in military circumstances"
That is just wrong.
There have been countless examples of when America has been stupid in military circumstances. When they were fighting the Native Americans they first sent cavalry and were utterly massacred, but, for honour, they kept on fighting and were slaughtered. It took a while for them to change their tactic after that.
Another example would be when they dropped two consecutive nuclear bombs on Japan in WW2, thus ending the lives of millions of innocent people - and they still suffer from the radiation poisioning today.
There are, of course, examples where countries such as Britain have made fantastic military decisions, such as how they once owned most of the world through their military knowledge and how they "knows what is the right thing to do in military circumstances".
"That's why we are the most ethical country in the world"
You have killed, as I have mentioned above, millions of innocent people for no reason other than you wanted to use nuclear bombs. To say you are the most ethical country in the world is to say that you would not dream of any of these things, let alone perform them. America has large issues with things such as racism, whereas other countries, such as Brazil, have no problem with racism. America contributes bad ethics to the world and a lack of open-mindedness. Why else would you write that comment?
"They don't count"
Really? I have given examples of how America still has 13 monarchies and yet, for some bizarre reason, they do not count? Why?
"America has clearly rebelled against monarchies"
America has not.
They have 13 active monarchies in America.
That is not known as a rebellion against having a monarchy if you have 13 of them.
"We better give you a good ass-whooping again to prove our point"
You have 13 monarchies.
To prove my point I gave you proof of that (Wikiepedia), and yet you do not think it is relevant? Why? Anyway, America couldn't beat Britain in a war, we have are united with too many allies - but that is another debate.
"Monarchies are there for religious reasons"
No, they are there as figureheads.
Religion may play some part in their role, but religion does not dominate their career. The Queen, for example, is head of the military in England, and is doing a fantastic job of it. They are also figureheads for the country among other things: the Queen is on a coin.
"I know for a fact that the Queen sacrifices atheists on her shrine to Jesus"
America have never single handedly won a war, they did'nt enter WWI until the war was nearly over and the only reson they joined was because the Government thought it would be advantagous for America to have a say in Europe and this could only be done if they joined the War and had a seat at the table to discuss the peace treaty
America were a great help in WWII but they only joined because of Japans attack on Pearl Harbour. Before America joined the war Hitler had already decided not to invade Britain, the Luftwaffe had been smashed by the RAF and the Germans knew they would never get accross the Channel because of the British Navy, yes America were a great help with the Normandy landings etc but Hitlers big mistake was trying to invade Russia that move was what ended the war for Germany and without American troops being in the way Stalin may have pushed further than Berlin if that had happened then Europe would have replaced one dictator for another but who knows if this would have happened. I think without America the Allies would still have prevailed but the War would have lasted longer.
America did not win the American Revolution on it's own they had help from the French and there is a high possibility that without France they would not have won.
I know for a fact that Britain was helpless during WWII and that the Nazi's had stormed Parliment. It was only because of USA at the Allies won the war.
There's a kernel of truth to what he's saying. Russia's doing was far greater than ours, and Germany's mistakes are what ultimately led to their downfall, but our aid came at a crucial point in the war. Churchill "slept the sleep of the saved and thankful" in confidence that we'd back them up.
The United States has undoubtedly contributed the most to the modern world. They created a way to harness electricity, created the production line which made products more affordable to the everyday person, they where the first to cross the atlantic with an airplane, the first to use a submarine, the first to the moon, defeated numerous world powers, like great Britain, Germany, and Japan. The United States where also the first to split the atom, cure a number of diseases, and uncoded human DNA and RNA, so in conclusion yes the United States has contributed the most to the modern world.
The United States has contributed the most to the world and all of the other countries should be thankful for the aid the United States has given to them.
America is not best country of all time, however Britain is the most warmongering empire in history so I don't believe they made the world a better place.
I agree, please stop embarrassing the British people on this site who aren't chauvinists and don't like the idea of opressing various developing countries like we did in the empire days Axmeister pines for.
"During the late 19th century, Britain's primary goal in foreign policy was to maintain the balance of power in Europe and to intervene should that balance be upset. Its secondary goal was to protect its overseas interest in the colonies and dominions, as free trade was what kept the Empire alive. The sea routes to the colonies, especially those linking Britain to India (via the Suez Canal), were vital."
Here's the thing, you can not sum up an entire empire's history in a link or a comment, it would help if you knew a little more about the country your from.
And no, reading the wikipedia page on England dose not mean you understand its history.
"Here's the thing, you can not sum up an entire empire's history in a link or a comment, it would help if you knew a little more about the country your from."
Neither can you sum up a whole empire's history by claiming it as the most "warmongering empire" in history, such a comment without any evidence is clearly the statement of someone who know's little about history.
"And no, reading the wikipedia page on England dose not mean you understand its history"
Not to say that the British Empire wasn't warmongering, but I disagree that it's the most. That probably falls onto Genghis Khan, and the Mongol's. They started off as warring tribes, for hundreds of years, then under his leadership came together and invaded the Xia regions of China, then ravaged all over the South of China, before leaving to attack various places in the Middle East. They cut straight through parts of Russia, India, and got as far West as Rome, before domestic disputes drew the empire back to its origins.
What makes it the most warmongering, to me, is that it never conquered cities in the way that most empires did. It simply destroyed them, killed most of the people, organised trade routes for them to send tributes and left them to live their lives. They didn't stay, they didn't build cities, they just killed. Genghis Khan's philosophy was that the best thing in life was to see an enemy and to prove your strength against them. They were simply bloodthirsty violent people.
While America has contributed to the World to call it the best Nation in the World and say they have contributed the most to the World is an overexaggeration, Europe and the Far East were contributing to the World long before America was even a Nation
Most haven't existed under the same regime--they're simply similar peoples who have occupied similar lands. Hell, even China didn't begin to exist in its current incarnation until '49.
I don't mind helping people..., as long as it is under my control and under my terms. I don't want the government taking my money and using it to support things I do not condone. For example, a few days ago this young guy had a "Need money for food" sign. So I walked up to him and said, "Come with me and I'll buy you some food." All of a sudden he was full and wasn't really hungry.
I believe that charity should be a personal thing. That's all ;)
Oh..., and one more thing..., I don't hate liberals. Liberals and conservatives want to solve the same problems. What divides liberals and conservatives is the approach. That's where we differ. I hate the liberal approach to solving problems. I think it makes America weak.
Do you prefer to just give money to someone organization who will distribute it as it sees fit? Or do you prefer to take a more active role in meeting the people who get the charity and see how they spend it? I mean, some people just want to write a check just to make themselves feel good about themselves. They don't care who gets the money or how they use it. They could be spending it on heroine for all they care. So long as they feel good about themselves for just writing a check. Just so long as they don't have to actively get involved in the actual helping of people. Why get your hands dirty? But that's just me being joe ;)
Are you able to visit every destitute child in your country and give them each a sandwich, every day? Well the government can. That is why state funded welfare is better and more effective than individuals randomly dishing out help to people.
This only applies, however, in a monetary system. Personally, I would rather we live without money, and simply give and recieve without trade or barter. Unfourtunately, there are too many people with the attitude of "fuck those guys, this is my money/cow/cabbage" for that to work.
And I personally do get my hands dirty helping people, but that's beside the point.
You seem to be under the impression that everyone deserves to live. I hold no such delusions ;)
As an atheist, you must believe in evolution. And the corner stone of evolution is that the strong survive so that the species as a whole prospers. I don't have to give every destitute child a sandwich everyday. I just have to decide which child gets the sandwich.
And if you believe in Global Warming, you are well aware that the problem is that there are too many humans producing too a lot of green house gases. By reducing the number of humans, you reduce the amount of green house gases released into the atmosphere.
As someone wiser than me once said, "You can't have it all." ;)
You seem to be under the impression that everyone deserves to live. I hold no such delusions
You think that some deserve to die? Isn't that kind of the antithesis of your libertarian philosophy?
I don't have to give every destitute child a sandwich everyday. I just have to decide which child gets the sandwich.
So you are being dishonest when you say you don't mind helping others. Really, you don't care, you just want to keep your money to yourself.
And if you believe in Global Warming, you are well aware that the problem is that there are too many humans producing too a lot of green house gases. By reducing the number of humans, you reduce the amount of green house gases released into the atmosphere.
Are you actually in favour of exterminating humans in their droves, oh, what am I saying, of course you are, you're a libertarian!
So basically, you are more important than everyone else, which is why you don't have to share, and why everyone else has to die just because you don't want to pay a little tax. And then you have a go at me for calling you selfish.
It's not that I think that some should be put to death but rather that some do not deserve to be saved.
No, I am honest about helping others. I just want to be in total control of who I help. I don't want someone forcing me to help someone I do not want to help.
I'm not a libertarian. I am a Pissbyterian. I piss people off who do not have a sense of humor ;)
I hold myself to the same standards as i hold everyone else. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you are young (under 30). I am 50. I don't view death as a BAD thing. I've made my peace with it.
BTW, I'm sorry if you feel that I'm "going after you." I am not attacking you personally. I am just presenting an opposing point of view. Please don't take it personally. I don't believe I have attacked your person by calling you a name or something. I have attacked the liberal philosophy because I do not agree with it.
Let me see if I could put it a different way.
I wish that we could divide the planet in half. Send the liberals to go live on their half and leave the rest of us alone.
I believe that the rest of us, since we are self sustaining, will do well. We will keep ourselves lean and mean by picking of the weaklings that can't pull their own weight and thus drag us down with them.
The libs will be in trouble because it will be like one welfare recipient asking for welfare from another welfare recipient. In other words, too many liberal people looking for a handout and not enough liberals capable of providing it. Kinda like one parasite trying to leech off another parasite.
Well, seeing as the USA has only been around for a few centuries, and is itself an offshoot of Britain, no.
In my opinion, the Greeks contributed the most to the world than any other nation throughout history. Some of the greatest and most free thinking philosophers were part of Greek culture. They gave us an amazing set of mythology, as well as a wealth of actual knowledge, that we still use today.
America has contributed many many good inventions, some scientific breakthroughs, some amazing literature (is anyone else wet for the On The Road film about to come out based on Kerouac's book?), and some cool buildings.
However, they have also brought us some of the most annoying things, like the nuclear bomb, countless religious fanatics, a philosophy which seems in turmoil over whether poor people or the government are to blame for everything, and far too much violence (the USA is very high on the global peace index, which is not a good thing).
While I'd argue the Bomb is a glorious testament to mankind's power, science brought it to us, not America. The Soviets or the British or whatever inferior world power that would've taken our place if we hadn't been so awesome at being a country would've figured it out sooner or later.
countless religious fanatics
Human nature brought us religious fanaticism. Remember the Crusades?
a philosophy which seems in turmoil
Our philosophy wouldn't be in turmoil if it weren't under constant attack by European fag-queens.
far too much violence
And yet, I wouldn't give up the (increasingly endangered) American way even if it meant 3 Columbines a week.
the USA is very high on the global peace index
"Peace" isn't a virtue. It's just the condition defaulted to when nothin's happenin'.
Oh right, that was a different debate where I said that, I think it was micmacmoc's one about Britain. What I mean is that the Greek peoples contributed more than any other country's people.
How is it not bad? The USA has a high rate of killings, assaults, rapes, shootings, it starts more conflicts, etc etc. I really don't understand your point, surely, if what you're saying is correct, you wouldn't mind a jot living in an area where people are just shooting eachother across the street, seeing as peace is apparently not a good thing.
Oh, and, peaceful countries are also the happiest. And least religious. And most socialist. Check out Scandinavia.
What I mean is that the Greek peoples contributed more than any other country's people.
Still doesn't prevent you from collectivizing them in your mind for the purposes of this debate, which you are still doing to some degree; you're just putting them under an ethnic/cultural banner rather than a national one.
How is it not bad?
Oh, and, peaceful countries are also the happiest. And least religious. And most socialist.
There's one red flag.
The USA has a high rate of killings, assaults, rapes, shootings
As I said, I would not give any of it up for a compromise of American values, which are the best in the world.
it starts more conflicts
I have a problem with a single variable measuring issues as disparate as crime and international belligerence as well.
you wouldn't mind a jot living in an area where people are just shooting eachother across the street, seeing as peace is apparently not a good thing.
I said there was nothing wrong with it, not that I'd want to live around it. And, despite not living in an upper-class neighborhood, I don't. Crime is a lot less pervasive here than you seem to think it is.
“While I'd argue the Bomb is a glorious testament to mankind's power,”
Yes, it’s a glorious testament to mankind’s power to destroy itself and every other animate being or living organism within the bombs blast radius, or within range of its nuclear fallout.
“The Soviets or the British or whatever inferior world power”
I assume you mean your nations current global position given that your country has been inferior to Britain for the majority of the time it has existed.
“that would've taken our place if we hadn't been so awesome at being a country would've figured it out sooner or later.”
Your position as the dominant world superpower for the last 60-70 years is the result of being one of the very few powerful global powers to come out of histories most destructive war relatively unscathed, not trying to understate the incredible achievements of the US but this is a far more valid a reason than some “innate awesomeness” as a country, but maybe I’m just jealous of your power and envious your nations continually expanding waistline.
“Our philosophy wouldn't be in turmoil if it weren't under constant attack by Europian fag-queens.”
Juvenile gibberish.
“And yet, I wouldn't give up the (increasingly endangered) American way even if it meant 3 Columbines a week.”
Really? I wonder would you be saying the same thing if it occured in your presence, or the presence of those you hold dear. It's very easy to make such statements when your own life and the lives of those you love are not in the firing line.
“"Peace" isn't a virtue. It's just the condition defaulted to when nothin's happenin'.”
Then why not join the army, I’m sure there’s plenty of what you would deem “virtuous action” available for people of your age group in Afghanistan, particularly for someone as spunky as yourself;-)
Yes, it’s a glorious testament to mankind’s power to destroy itself and every other animate being or living organism within the bombs blast radius, or within range of its nuclear fallout.
That's not power?
I assume you mean your nations current global position
As well as that that it's occupied for the last century or so, yes. We're in the decline now, but I do hope we can put a stop to that.
Your position as the dominant world superpower for the last 60-70 years is the result of being one of the very few powerful global powers to come out of histories most destructive war relatively unscathed, not trying to understate the incredible achievements of the US but this is a far more valid a reason than some “innate awesomeness” as a country,
Our advantage in the war was due party to our innate greatness.
but maybe I’m just jealous of your power and envious your nations continually expanding waistline.
Juvenile gibberish.
Juvenile gibberish.
More like hyperbole, sir. Calm your European fag-horses.
I wonder would you be saying the same thing if it occured in your presence, or the presence of those you hold dear.
More importantly: who cares? The reasoning of non-hypothetical me isn't clouded by emotional trauma.
Then why not join the army
Only if I don't get into the Marines.
what you would deem “virtuous action”
I never said anything about war being virtuous either; just said peace wasn't.
I believe that what Gary is trying to communicate to you, is that destructive power is not a laudable contribution to the world.
As well as that that it's occupied for the last century or so, yes. We're in the decline now, but I do hope we can put a stop to that.
I hadn't known that the United States of America has been the dominant world power since 1912.
Our advantage in the war was due party to our innate greatness.
And nothing to do with your separation, by an ocean, from the theatre in which was wrought the most terrible devastation? The separation which entirely precluded the possibility of air raids against your industrial bases?
More like hyperbole, sir. Calm your European fag-horses.
How a continent that is populated entirely by homosexuals can possible contain more people than the United States, whilst enduring a lower immigration rate, is frankly mysterious to me.
I'm aware of that. I'm just waiting for him to contradict something I've said.
since 1912.
Note: "or so." Attention to detail will behoove you in all your pursuits.
And nothing to do
This one's my bad, but you could've assumed that "party" was intended to be "partly." Qualifiers aren't entirely useless, you know.
homosexuals
I've asked you if you're autistic before, but I'll ask again in case you've gotten some important test results since the last time we interacted: Are you goddamned assburgered, sir?
"is anyone else wet for the On The Road film about to come out based on Kerouac's book?"
Ya, kinda, but I wouldn't get your hopes up, the best I'm hoping is that they don't completely destroy it. Kerouac petitioned Marlon Brando in the 50's to adapt the story to the big screen, he was going to play himself (AKA Sal Paradise) and Brando would star as Neal (AKA Dean) - that pairing may have done the story some justice but I won't be going to watch this with high expectations, in fact, I may just skip it, all modern mainstream cinema is hard to take seriously.
Ken Keseys documentary road trip film 'Magic Bus' isn't bad f you've never seen it, the real Neal Cassidy stars in it:
While I love my country the USA, England Has contributed the most to the world. The fact they used to rule the vast majority and still did until not too long ago, has a great deal to do with it. We are just an offshoot of this great country...yes, we are looking more and more unique, but so does every other country they used to rule.
Absolute and complete nonsense. The USA is not the best nation of all time. There is no such thing. The US government is the first to initiate any kind of invasion e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, and we still see them plotting to invade other countries like Iran. When you say 'contribute', their efforts and largely based on self advancement with disregard to others, one example is their space exploration programme. Many of the evidence of moon landing footage is questionable, and result from fierce competition with Russia. Another example is their nuclear energy programme, why is it acceptable for America to build and expand their nuclear programme, then threaten other countries than try to do so?
People say we win all of our wars (i.e. WWII) but additionally:
-we lost to Vietnam
-we lost to NK
-Our war in Iraq, Iran, etc did NOTHING important and it was an economic war that made no sense
So, we've barely won anything after WWII.
I also would like to say, what the FUCK is our culture? World contributions come from culture. Fries, burgers, etc are basically what American food is. The large majority of famous American salads are PROBABLY from somewhere else. We contributed fries and burgers to food. That's it.
As for music? We invented Jazz, rap, etc, but that's one VERY NARROW subculture.
EVEN IF we have the strongest military, our government is corrupt shit and that's NOT how the average American citizen is.
Also, for any of you that want to argue that the US government is NICE and NOT corrupt, you're wrong. Why? We're one of the FEW countries in the world where GMOs ARE NOT BANNED OR AT LEAST LABELED!!! I mean since "banned" may have an argument, but not labeled. You know why? Because our government protects biotech bully companies, like Monsanto from getting sued when they hurt everyone.
Want more proof? Look how immature the Republicans are being in office right now. They are forcing Congress to ignore the debt ceiling for no good reason, other than a FUCKING HEALTH CARE LAW THAT THEY DIDN'T LIKE SIX FUCKING MONTHS AGO!!! I'm serious, remember the debt ceiling issue last October? It's happening A SECOND TIME IN FUCKING FEBRUARY ALMOST FIVE MONTHS LATER!!!!
Yet, NO ONE in the nation cares about the second time because this is old news to them. Everyone's fucking CRAZY the first time, BUT NOT THE SECOND FUCKING TIME!!! Does Obama care THIS TIME, or are we having a global depression. This could cause a global depression because I'll admit we the highest trading rate of any economy in the world. And the AMERICAN Congress has ignored it for years. Say good by to your gold toilets everyone.
One thing about our economy that is fucking amazing is that buys the most from other economies and is probably the biggest trading economy. That one golden thing I just said that you could use for your argument is our downfall. We're going to destroy Earth's economy. Even in the rich countries, including the US, in a few years we are ALL GOING TO BE FUCKING POOR!!!
We aren't strong, smart, or artistic anymore. We're a bunch of losers. The people in the country who run it control the world's strongest military. So what? That doesn't come from the CITIZENS not being losers. It comes from the people in the military who have training passed on from when we used to be awesome.
By the way, guess which country has the highest obesity rate.
Yup. True heroes indeed. Did I mention that Congress is effectively run by fourth graders because we can't make a good decision about our award winning economy?
Having a good economy means SOMETHING, but VERY LITTLE if that's how we're going to essentially ruin EARTH!!!
