Red army to receive 250 new types of weaponry in 2006

Originally posted by White Chapel
Oh really? You've once again proven your idealogical stance can not objectively approach a question such as this. Your anti-US stance is making you completely delusional.

Anyone who is well informed MUST be Anti US foreign policy ESPECIALLY if their actually a foreigner. Since i am, i am and logically so.

Article on US private aid

Most importantly, I'd direct your attention to this quote:
"The United States is the clear leader in all measures of private assistance to the developing world."

And that depends entirely what you your definition of assistance IS. If you are a Jew hating Nazi( Kurd hating Turk ; pick your example) , for instance, giving them just enough food to survive your frequent beatings and 18 hour work days would in fact qualify as assistance. If you are serious about these issues try figure out the terms those 'aid' comes based on and then decide if you would want to be the 'beneficiary' of said 'aid'.

And this article:
Private Aid for 2003

Most importantly this quote:
"Of the 108.5 billion given by major countries in foreign aid and investment in 2003, the US contributed 35% or 37.8 billion."

What's 37 billion of the TAXPAYERS money when your corporate elite is raking in hundreds of billions? Comparing apple's and oranges is a neat way to distract the uninformed masses who desperately want to ( with little prodding) believe that they are in fact 'on the balance' doing 'good'.

Keep holding on to that "US is crumbling" dream though, the gutter is lined with people who have thought that way through the generations.

The US has long since lost it's independence ( 1977) in any general sense and what's been happening for the last quarter century is just the slow death it's enemies is inflicting on it to save themselves the bloodshed a showdown ( which they would still likely get hurt in ) would result in.

We should all be thankful that they are in fact so patient in destroying America....

Stellar

You're really too far gone to reason with, every response from you is just "US is bad and controlled by a shadow organization and has slowly been eroding freedoms for years and the corporate elite have hundreds of billions"...it's like Christians who defend any argument with "Because God made it that way"...well yes, but in that case it just gives you carte blanche to disagree with anything based on your flawed premise.
I can't keep arguing this, you have your opinions, I have mine and I think we'll have to leave it at that.

Originally posted by donwhite
The greatest invention of WW2 was said, by some especially in foxholes, was the Model P38 can opener every GI was issued and carried. Small, foolproof in operation and always worked. [You can still order them via Google for $1 each.]

You can buy those? wow I may go for that, they are amazing. Maybe the Russians just opened their cans by running them over with a tank or shooting them with their rifle or punching it with their bayonnets or..

Originally posted by White Chapel
You're really too far gone to reason with, every response from you is just "US is bad and controlled by a shadow organization and has slowly been eroding freedoms for years and the corporate elite have hundreds of billions"...

Well i did not come up with the 'shadow organization' or even related quotes; you can think at least half a dozen US presidents and senators for that line. It's not ONLY happening in the USA so why take the victim role as if your living in some kind of 'victim' state?

it's like Christians who defend any argument with "Because God made it that way"...well yes,

The only one dismissing all counter arguments with ' it 'can't be so because i am a economies professor' is you , as if being involved in any industry means you automatically understand something about it. I am NOT Christian and i certainly do not like the logic most all religions employ.

but in that case it just gives you carte blanche to disagree with anything based on your flawed premise.

My premise is admitted by one and all who is at all informed ( the US senate does not disagree with me but i guess that bunch of damn 'liberals' - anyone who disagrees with you- must be making it all up)

I can't keep arguing this, you have your opinions, I have mine and I think we'll have to leave it at that.

I have many opinions but i did not really have to employ them in this argument so far as the evidence is damning in it's own right. You can keep attacking my person while i will keep showing up the flawed base you apparently consider your 'knowledge base'.

Stellar

It's not flawed though, that's the point. You are wrong, and you are removed and wrong. You live in a different continent, all you have to go on is websites and biased news reports, so you really don't know what you're talking about. You think you do, though, which is the dangerous thing. Which is why I said we're going to have to leave it at that because you've made up your mind, then used carefully selected articles to back up your premise. Instead of doing research and then making up your mind, we see it all the time in academia and it's not something I'm a stranger in dealing with, but because I'm used to it I know that there isn't really anything I can do or say that will get through to you so I really don't care.

your saying he's dilusional from looking at biased resources and news reports, well do you really think CNN or Fox News, or Bloomberg news, or BBC are unbiaed and just. most US based or WEstern Based News Channels and news reports except for many of those based in Mainland Europe, are some of the most biased in the world. and i gave examples as to how they are biased and controlled. i think we have a really big problem if you think your looking at unbiased resources when your Looking at CNN or the like!

^^^ I have to laugh at all these people from both sides who get their facts " from infotainment channels. When you have actually seen the world, done some actual reading and I don't mean websites, tehn maybe you can say you're informed until then ......

Originally posted by rogue1
^^^ I have to laugh at all these people from both sides who get their facts " from infotainment channels. When you have actually seen the world, done some actual reading and I don't mean websites, tehn maybe you can say you're informed until then ......

I agree...although I hope you aren't talking about me since I get my information from academic sources and from having boots on the ground. Although, I'm sure you were insinuating that I am uninformed....

btw i don't get my info from Entertainment news sources, such as the ones i mentioned up there, or any other media source, i get mine based on lengthened reading on many subjects in many encyclopedias and research studies, thank you.

Originally posted by White Chapel
It's not flawed though, that's the point. You are wrong, and you are removed and wrong

I gather you consider yourself so 'right' that your not even going to bother with evidence? I guess being part of the 'consensus' is good enough for you; rather popular than accurate or truthful.

You live in a different continent, all you have to go on is websites and biased news reports, so you really don't know what you're talking about.

I have provided you with my sources and if you can not dispute their factual content ( you can attack their credibily as well but you will need actual honest to god reason)
your not doing much screaming for me to accept your 'opinion' on the matter.

You think you do, though, which is the dangerous thing.

I test my theories and facts against the bigger picture every day and as long as they fit the facts and general events i have no reason to change them. I could be wrong in what i said but that is what my research suggests and you have offered nothing to dispute it.

Which is why I said we're going to have to leave it at that because you've made up your mind, then used carefully selected articles to back up your premise.

My mind is made up only insofar as my current knowledge base indicates that being reality. If i find information disputing current facts i will investigate but it will be in my own time as your clearly incapable of denfending your dogma in any logical fashion.

Instead of doing research and then making up your mind,

I have no reason to want American living standards down as they are but that is what the evidence indicates so untill i find something more accurate in explaining social and economy phenomenon in the USA i will work with what i know. I change my mind daily on a number of issues and it's really not my fault that you contribute nothing towards correcting the mistakes you suggested i made.

we see it all the time in academia and it's not something I'm a stranger in dealing with, but because I'm used to it I know that there isn't really anything I can do or say that will get through to you so I really don't care.

Academia ( especially American which have no excuses for it's current situation )is largely a joke as it's based on the premise that humans are not self interested and that the scientific method can somehow negate that. Academia is nothing but another aspect of the global elite's self deceiving propaganda machine hell bent on sticking to dogma and avoiding discovery and change at any/all cost for if it did someone's ego might very well be affected. The horror.

Stellar

Originally posted by INc2006
btw i don't get my info from Entertainment news sources, such as the ones i mentioned up there, or any other media source, i get mine based on lengthened reading on many subjects in many encyclopedias and research studies, thank you.

Look, i personnally went to the Bilderberg meeting in Ottawa in June. They are real. I saw Rockefeller, Kissinger, Conrad Black, the queen of Netherlands, Wolfowitz and a lot of powerful people. Corporates who owns the occidentals countries exists and they control everything. The occidentals countries are not controlled by us anymore, it's the corporate that own everything and take every decision. If you can't understand that, we can't nothing for you.

Wish light enlight you.



[edit on 2-8-2006 by Vitchilo]

[edit on 2-8-2006 by Vitchilo]

what does that have to do with waht i posted, vitchello...

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Look, i personnally went to the Bilderberg meeting in Ottawa in June. They are real. I saw Rockefeller, Kissinger, Conrad Black, the queen of Netherlands, Wolfowitz and a lot of powerful people. Corporates who owns the occidentals countries exists and they control everything. The occidentals countries are not controlled by us anymore, it's the corporate that own everything and take every decision. If you can't understand that, we can't nothing for you.

I couldn't stop laughing after reading this, stay off the psychotropic drugs they tend to turn you into a raving lunatic

I couldn't stop laughing after reading this, stay off the psychotropic drugs they tend to turn you into a raving lunatic

Yeah? Were you there? NO. Was I there? Yes. So thank you to shut.

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Look, i personnally went to the Bilderberg meeting in Ottawa in June. They are real. I saw Rockefeller, Kissinger, Conrad Black, the queen of Netherlands, Wolfowitz and a lot of powerful people. Corporates who owns the occidentals countries exists and they control everything. The occidentals countries are not controlled by us anymore, it's the corporate that own everything and take every decision. If you can't understand that, we can't nothing for you.

Her Majesty must have had a busy month...

Queen Beatrix meets Yuschenko

Queen Beatrix visits mosque, annoys MP

Of course, you can just go here

www.bilderberger.org...

if you want to spend a few months reading all about it. There are a few blinding insights, such as the fact that Her Majesty Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands owns Royal Dutch Shell, never knew that one before ( ), and a couple of metric tonnes of speculation...

[edit on 3-8-2006 by HowlrunnerIV]

StellarX,
If you can't see the difference between quoting a source who's mission statement is to "bring about a communist United States" and getting information from a paper of record such as the New York Times, then no one can help you..you are already too far gone. Is the NYT completely unbiased? Of course not, but it's not off-the-wall nuts like the sources you quote.
As far as testing your theories, how are you testing your theories on the US while in South Africa? Do you run sophisticated computer simulations using the Cray in your basement?

Originally posted by White Chapel
StellarX,
If you can't see the difference between quoting a source who's mission statement is to "bring about a communist United States"

Well communism is pretty much dead since the USSR is no more, right? What am i missing and who are these powerful communist that use the same information used by American senate commissions? Are the American senate a communist assembly?

and getting information from a paper of record such as the New York Times, then no one can help you..you are already too far gone. Is the NYT completely unbiased? Of course not, but it's not off-the-wall nuts like the sources you quote.

My sources just use facts and figures they get on government websites so PLEASE stop pretending they created them from thin air. I do not know who you think your fooling here as everyone following this read the Senate report agreeing with what i said.

As far as testing your theories, how are you testing your theories on the US while in South Africa?

Well if we can get history from books i guess we can get current events from newspapers? Is history entirely false as portrayed in the west or is it just current events programs and article's that disagree with your views? You have provided NO information directly disputing my original statements.

Do you run sophisticated computer simulations using the Cray in your basement?

I relied on a multitude of news sources and authors to form my current views and i keep building on them or changing them when required. If you think a cray can help you understand the world, when you have no interest in changing your mind anyways, your missing the point completely. All you really need is a open mind, and no permanent allegiance to any specific point of view, and super computers can't help with that.

Stellar

Originally posted by rogue1
^^^ I have to laugh at all these people from both sides who get their facts " from infotainment channels. When you have actually seen the world, done some actual reading and I don't mean websites, then maybe you can say you're informed until then ......

One sees the world as you are , not as it is. It's surprising that you pretend you know the world when you have ( according to you ) done these things and yet remain so very ignorant of what really happens in 'the world'. How do you explain this disparity?

Stellar

I'd consider China communist. Fine, let's say that your sources aren't making up statistics, they are still drawing conclusions from those statistics as they are filtered through their biased lens. It's like my old economics professor at Brown would say, statistics are like a bikini: They show you a lot, but they don't show you everything.

Originally posted by StellarX

Originally posted by rogue1
^^^ I have to laugh at all these people from both sides who get their facts " from infotainment channels. When you have actually seen the world, done some actual reading and I don't mean websites, then maybe you can say you're informed until then ......

One sees the world as you are , not as it is. It's surprising that you pretend you know the world when you have ( according to you ) done these things and yet remain so very ignorant of what really happens in 'the world'. How do you explain this disparity?

Stellar

Quite simple, I believe in reality. I don't believe everything I read, such as yourself who reads fringe books and websites. Let me know when you actually travel out of good ole South Africa, tell me when you have some world experience, because we both know right now you have none.
So I believe what I have seen and expereienced, you believe in fantasy, you are an easy person to convince. Quite franly I hvae proven your statements wrong too mnay times to hold too much stock in what you say anymore, haven't I

I relied on a multitude of news sources and authors to form my current views and i keep building on them or changing them when required.

And here we have your strategy. Some author doesn't agree with whta you say, you get on google until you find someone who does - typical tactics. I find it funny especially when you have quoted articles in the past, which actually prove your statements wrong, then you find something else which agrees with you - unfortunately not factual though.

[edit on 3-8-2006 by rogue1]