Obama's Speech on Race & America

[Malacite]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

Funny I don't recall seeing you post this.

[jwalton]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

It's so cute how you're backpedaling!

I have already stated Obamas Entire foreign intentions involving the middle east.

So, explain this:

None of the candidates have acctually talked about what their foreign policy is.

You said that, not me. You're the one with consistency problems.

Obama shouldnt have to defend himself, the media is turning this democratic election into a 3rd grade class president race, and its become a he said she said thing.

So basically, you're unable to support your accusation of Obama being childish. Oh, OK.

As for your Cuban opinion, your full of shit, not trading with someone for 60 years is a real great way to show your there for them isn't. You do know that cuba had a revolution and wanted communism its what they chose as a nation.

My "Cuban opinion"? What the fuck are you talking about? I'm stating Obama's foreign policy stance on Cuba. You know, the foreign policy of one of the three candidates despite your stating that:

None of the candidates have acctually talked about what their foreign policy is.

[MrMageo]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

Wow that was pretty personal attack against me. I have already stated Obamas Entire foreign intentions involving the middle east. Where are HRC's. Obama shouldnt have to defend himself, the media is turning this democratic election into a 3rd grade class president race, and its become a he said she said thing. The problem is not me, the problem is the way this nation elects its leaders and how much power is afforded to them.

As for your Cuban opinion, your full of shit, not trading with someone for 60 years is a real great way to show your there for them isn't. You do know that cuba had a revolution and wanted communism its what they chose as a nation.

[jwalton]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

Obama defending himself from smear campaigns is child-like? What the hell else is the guy supposed to do?

Oh and, Obama and his advisors have already covered foreign policy. You're just too busy telling yourself that none of the candidates have talked about it and rambling in general. As an example, Obama wants to open up talks with Cuba rather than playing cold shoulder like we have for decades. The idea is to be a catalyst for democracy in Cuba rather than pretending they don't exist and hoping they do it on their own, which has been American policy there all this time. Obama also wants to start more direct negotiations with Iran, rather than continuing to label them as part of the "axis of evil" and acting surprised when they start taking a more aggressive posture which is what we've been doing. The other two candidates have been calling him "naive" because he wants to take a different approach.

The candidates' positions are very clear. The problem is you.

[MrMageo]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

well I wasnt trying to derail it I was trying to get into a similar discussion. None of the candidates have acctually talked about what their foreign policy is. Considering the type of world region we live in (capitalist). Foriegn policy is a very important issue, much more important then race, or sex. The real culprit is the media, derailing the topics for a week by talking about Rev. Wright and Obama. Im very excited for another debate because I strongly hope both obama nad HRC have grown up in the last couple weeks, because frankly im sick of their child like attitudes.

[TheGrandMom]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

Mageo, for once I have to agree with you.

Damn near fell out of my chair when I read this! Hey Mr. Mageo, did you ever think you'd see the day?? j/k


But I am going to have to ask you all to STICK TO THE OP'S SUBJECT PLEASE. If we can't get it back on track then the thread is going to be closed. The OP made a great point, start another thread for this discussion.

[WishMaster3K]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

Maybe what Bush was trying to do was to start a World War, and catapult us out of the ensuing recession.

[Neomage]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

Mageo, for once I have to agree with you. Much of what you said is true, and, in fact, most of the problems caused in the middle east today are results of the Allied Nations messing up big time when they divided up the Ottoman Empire after WWII. While I don't really agree with you about Japan being innocent in WWII, the part about the Middle East is one thing I agree with 100%.

[Malacite]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

If you want to debate the ethics of WW2, go start a thread on it.

[jwalton]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

You talk too much.

[MrMageo]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

im ashamed of you.

History always has a way of biting you in the ass, and as a direct off shoot, this hatred of the easteren world and vice versa is built in the exact same principles as the race situation in america.

By bridging the gap with these nations, instead of lableing them as terrorist nations or harboring nations, and infact recognizing them as nations the road to peace will begin to be laid.

By forcing western policy down the throats of easterners who o not wish for it we are no different then those who blow themselves up to make their point. By sending in an armed force to change a countries government in the case of afghanistan or restucter an nations entire political system, we are no different then those who plan coup's.

Obama's Speech spoke of race, now it can be directley extended to religion and regions of the world as well. The fact that the US chose to invade Iraq drring peace time with no head from the UN nor support from the majority of Iraqi's shows to them that nothing has changed and the west still wants to opress them with their policies and societal views.

So before you go off the depend YM and Feba maybe you should look at what we are talking about, sure we can dispute numbers etc. However you can't dispute the fact that the incidents america involved itself in have caused hate from countries around the world. (Including many of its strongest allies.)

It takes little money to extend a hand as opposed to running a war. Obama has acctually told the press and the people he plans to hold a summit of all arab leaders, to have them come together and work as one to a more prosperous middle east world. This has not happened as far back as I can remember when a leader of the west wishes to hold a middle east summit. A well known lesson, Never Bite the hand that feeds you. As of this year Canada has become the #1 Investor into the united states, for the 60 years prior it has been saudi araibia, followed by some other prominent middle east nations, iraq, and Iran for example. Driving these countries away with a decade long, or longer war in their own backyard hurts american intrest and lowers a countries ecconomy. The longer this goes on the more investment the pull out, the more investment they pull out the deeper america sinks into recession. The deeper america sinks into a recession the more other countries pull out their investment, and the more that happens the deeper the country sinks still.

The main factor in rebuilding a countries eakend ecconomy is selling itself to the world. Through exports, foriegn investment and what have you. The only way to rebuild these sales is to stop the war now nd rebuild relations with countries that feel wronged. That includes all the countries that feel wronged. Iraq, Iran, Syria, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Japan, Saudi Arabia, the list goes on. The world is a much smaller place then it was during the cold war, hell even the 90's. Holding past grudges against areas that were an "old time" enemy (Cuba, Middle East, Korea).

Imagine what kind of world we would live in today if Britain and France didnt reconcile their hundred years of hatred. Imagine what kind of world we would live in now if America and Britain never reconciled their differences. Imagine what kind of world we can live in when the western nations and eastern nations reconcile their differences. Imagine what kind of world we can live in when, Capitalism, and Communism can reconcile their differences. Imagine wat kind of world we can live in if all accross the world everyone could reconcile their differences, difference of religion, politics, society, and race. Imagine going some where without the fear of being attacked or kidnapped because you come from the rich western world, why cant we help to make it a rich eastern world, a rich southern world, an a rich northern world. Why must we build ourselves in from the outside world stroking our ego's and turning the blind eye when it dosent directly involve us. Why must we live in a country where the rich get rich and the poor get poorer. Why must we live in a nation where we consider it our responsiblity to change the lives of others because they are diffrent. Imagine a world where everyone is welcome, loved and respected.

It has to start somewhere, just need to find out who is the bigger "man" why can't it be the USA.

[Malacite]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

The USA did give Japan fair warning, and they didn't listen.

No, that did not justify the bombing of innocent lives, but just think about how many more people would have died had the USA gone through with their full invasion plan. I don't recall the numbers but the estimated casualties (on all sides) was just obscene.

And I believe it was England who bombed Germany's civilians first, and then they responded in kind.


Now, NO MORE DERAILMENT PLEASE. I'd rather not have to resort to PM mods to moderate this @_@;

[Feba]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

Goddamn people. Not only are you taking him seriously, but yellowmage of all people is the one that said something.


I'm actually somewhat ashamed of you right now.

[MrMageo]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

Ohhh I dunno, maybe because Japan was planning on war and building up for it? Your statment that Japan only attacked us because we sank their submarine that was attempting entry into port is completely bogus.

And ammasing a massive fleet, supplying weapons to one of japans allies is not a flex of aggresion, the US brought pearl harbour on them selves and they used scare tactics through mass murder to achieve victory.

There is a fine line between what occured in august over japan and what took place in the previous years with bomb dropings. The fact of the matter is this was a pre planned mass murder for the full effect of the power the US had. The other civilian deaths were in no way the same.

The same tactic was used by Germany against britain, Striking the homes and families of soilders to demoralize and terrorize them out of the war. This murder is counted as such because it happened to an Allied nation, however the deaths to the japanese is no its considered casualty of war.

Its great that those who win the past battles have the ability to write history isn't it.

You still want to deny the 400,000 deaths caused by the bomb post-drop. Your going to tell me the wall of names of those murdered by the lingering effects does not exist. Give your head a shake, Japan is still realing from this, and you claim it was the right thing to do. Give your head a shake. Acctually dont I'llgo with ya on this.

9/11 was just because the United States had being pulling strings throught the muslim world for years. Keeping tabs on its doings with its puppet regime in israel. The murers and autrocities that were run through Israel. Striking america on the homeland would cause terror and fear in its citizens. You know what it worked, all you hear on TVis terror, terrorist, Al Qaeda etc etc.

The US is a nation of hypocricy, they break from britain because they do not wish to have a tyrant thousands of miles away dictate policy to them, then turn around and do it all over the world.

[Vyuru]

Re: Obama's Speech on Race & America

Reread this again:

Next, the U.S dropped the bombs AFTER demanding Japan's unconditional surrender, twice I believe. Which was turned down by the Japanese.

The nuclear bombings served several purposes:

1) It showed that we could destroy them without ever needing to land on their shore. The nuclear bombings were the one thing that was able to shock the Japanese government into surrendering.

And you will see that it was not the case of reaching out and slapping them with nukes just because they slapped us first.

Also your comparision between conventional and nuclear bombing is whack. 2 bombs killed half as many people as hundreds did.

Who cares if it's one bomb or 200 bombs that killed them? They are still dead. Would it have been any better if a few thousand bombs were used to kill all those people? Death in war is just as horrible whether it is by nuke or conventional means.

If you really wanna go into which is the worse death, I can assure you that going down next to a flaming ship in an oil covered ocean with no land in sight and the pretty good possibility of sharks isn't a pleasent death. On the plus side, if you burn alive in the ocean first, the sharks don't get ya.

just thought you might like to know why korea hates the USA.

Gee, I thought that had something to do with the Korean war.

also Id like to know how you get exact numbers on the deaths. It strikes me as odd were you possibly working the pearly gates the day all these people died? Did you ask them how the were all killed. The fact is your exact numbers for civilian deaths are bogus, no one knows how many were killed.

Zero, written by Masatake Okumiya and Jiro Horikoshi, with some stuff by Saburo Sakai, lists the late 1947 casualty reports conducted by the Japanese Army at the time. I would tend to trust the people who buried and counted the dead over other, "estimates".

Look at any WW2 death toll, none deal in exact numbers.

Look at the figures on a squad based level and you get exact numbers, as it goes up to entire armies you get estimates. You know they did count as they buried the dead in those cities right?

As for your carrier debate who cares

Ohhh I dunno, maybe because Japan was planning on war and building up for it? Your statment that Japan only attacked us because we sank their submarine that was attempting entry into port is completely bogus.

Also, kindly have a more reliable source other than Wiki. It's a good basic guide, but nothing you should be quoting from.

however you are wrong about the total deaths assumed in both bombings is believed to be 200,000(hiroshima) by the end of 1945, 80,000(Nagasaki) by the end of 1945.

Considering the fact that I am sitting on the 1945 report made by the Japanese Army, let me tell you that YOU are wrong.

By the end of 1945, it was believed that in Hiroshima, there were 78,150 dead, 51,408 injured or missing. In Nagasaki it was believed that there were 23,753 dead, 43,020 missing or injured.

Frankly I'm amazed that you aren't wondering how I know the carrier tonnage, especially since the tonnage of the Japanese carrier's was lied about for so long.

As I said earlier, kindly read up on this stuff.
______________________________

Not a conventional destruction of key military targets, ammo dumps, oil feild.

That is because they were already destroyed, before we demanded their surrender.

But selected civilian areas that were left untouched by US bombardment. To maximize the terror,shock, and fear.

Both cities had been bombed previously.

Hiroshima contained the 2nd Army Group Headquarters, which commanded the ground defense of southern Japan. Hiroshima was also a major gathering point for troops and as such was also a major storage depo.

Nagasaki was a seapot that contained industries relating to producing weapons, ships, military equipment, and other materials. It also contained the Mitsubishi Steel Works, as well as dockyards and the Mitsubishi-Urakami Torpedo Works.

Hardly civilian only towns now are they?