You like America? Watch this

https://youtu.be/WlLqm3eDYMg

Spread this like wildfire, this needs to be heard, the people need to gain back the power ::Monkey65::

i would had watch all of it but the next video was
Scarlett Johansson Nude Picture Hacker Gets 10 Years
though they had nude pics

And yet you don't post videos of the human rights violations in Burma, civil disputes in the Middle East, dictatorship in Africa, or the Mexican drug cartels. Yes, focus on America because we're solely the most evil people on Earth, and the actions of all peoples are entirely negligible in comparison.

I love how people excuse actions not based on the nature of humanity, but on the perceived nature of a nation, and only the negative things at that.

This is why war needs to be a democratic decision. Right now, the chief just authorizes it through his own power

War =/= military conflict. With that said, the President can't constitutionally declare war. Moreover, Obama doesn't see the majority of all military operations, likely including this one. They're overseen by a line of officers. That's irrelevant though since my point that the U.S. is not the only nation involving themselves in military or paramiltary conflict, including civil wars, drug wars, terrorism, ect.

If you think the President is the most powerful man is the USA, think again

He has no power what-so-ever over the Military actions, Congress tells the president what to do and how to do it.

(1) I had never stated that the President was the most powerful figure in the U.S., but in fact he is. He single-handedly can press for and approve laws that are unconstitutional, merit change in foreign relations, and have general power over the goal of the entirety of the military. (2) Congress has no control over military actions. The people who do are underneath the direct control of the President or his respective branch. Not to imply that he has absolute control over all the power presiding under him, but Congress as an entity has no expressive power over the military aside from the gathering of troops and control of the Navy. Their most indirect powers are pushing for policies regarding the military (although not specific military operations), and Department policies. Again though, these aren't single men, but a collection of men, and therefore makes the President the most powerful government figure.

Edit: How is this relevant though? My position is the inclusive negative nature of all peoples, and not exclusively the U.S., as was the rhetoric of the OP.

.....i honestly don't care about Obama and his power but the power of all elected officials who choose to ignore this. Obama doesn't have the power to declare war but he does have the power to let the "terrorist" reporter go from prison for doing his job, but for an 'unknown' reason he's not let go.

and it doesn't matter that other peoples have wars, we shouldn't concern ourselves with their actions but with our own. We should be concerned about what we do to others more than what others do to us. We set standards for free men centuries ago so why can't we set standards for peace rather than bombing where you think terrorists may be....why is it that we tactically arrest and execute people who hold others hostage here but over there be blow up buildings...just because some say "oh maybe those children there are hostages"

even if we couldn't act tactically ask this, "is it worth it?" is a child hostages life worth destroying to become the enemy we are so eager to destroy? If this terrorist war does end and we win...we will be the terrorists of the world, if we learn to look at what's happening in cost of our victories and act upon it then maybe we can learn to defend the country more efficiently and learn more strategic and safer ways of killing the right people, instead of saying everyone who's 7 or older is a militant just to make ourselves seems less cruel while the patience of other countries are tested....

Have you thought about that maybe the picture is a little bigger than just the U.S.? We don't assume the sole responsibility of all the negative forces in this world, and only thinking within our own sphere isn't going to help contribute to the problems we're having on a global scale. If the U.S. stopped then we still have people who aren't assuming their roles of responsibility, and if we're only assuming our role of responsibility then you're caring for humans is nothing more than a facade for little more than making us look good to everybody else.

I'm just going to interject with a sentence or two of wisdom

If Americans think they're free, they're so radically mistaken. And if they think they set the standards of freedom centuries ago, they are wrong again.

Now continue on.

wow, interesting conversation over here. Well, i guess I can say just only this since we all know this is a fact. U.S. only reason to send that man to jail was for to save themselves. News, like that reporter try to spread, only puts more oil on the fire of our world's cycle of hatred. U.S. tries to save themselves from a conflict they don't want to be in. Yeah, I do feel bad that the journalist went to prison because he was doing his job, but hey, that is the evil of the world. Politicians save face so others don't harm them, even at the cost of human lives, journalists tries to get the most dirties of news just for business or probable for justice, and we, the viewers and readers, just eat it up and get pumped up for conflicts that we think is wrong, ignoring the fact that most of our actions are wrong as well. I know this may be a bit off topic to what you guys are talking about, but at least think of this, is doing whatever you are doing is right for the world or not? I like America, but we can't blame the whole country for it, only the men who orders it. That sentence is what most people in the world never understood.
Thank you for reading this.

Naito Raizu wrote:

I'm just going to interject with a sentence or two of wisdom

If Americans think they're free, they're so radically mistaken. And if they think they set the standards of freedom centuries ago, they are wrong again.

Now continue on.

Anybody of any "modern" government has some degree of freedom, but it's mutually understood that by being a part of a society and its government that you relinquish some of your freedom in exchange for security. Americans for the most part are free, but nobody is completely free, otherwise we'd be living in anarchist commutes.

Danica, the Great wrote:

Have you thought about that maybe the picture is a little bigger than just the U.S.? We don't assume the sole responsibility of all the negative forces in this world, and only thinking within our own sphere isn't going to help contribute to the problems we're having on a global scale. If the U.S. stopped then we still have people who aren't assuming their roles of responsibility, and if we're only assuming our role of responsibility then you're caring for humans is nothing more than a facade for little more than making us look good to everybody else.

Good point but I'm saying if we're obviously having more negative influence on others rather than and positive one then in order to create a positive impact in order to inspire a peaceful and logical influence into others then we must take back the choices we've made before making them again in the future.

If anything is said in the video it's that we are ALREADY self centered because the officers who give orders care more about our people than their kids...their people. If an american kid is kidnapped and held hostage we don't treat the situation the same as we do to terrorists. It's not viewed as equal situations either.

and the picture out of the US is we are killing their kids and parents and yet we wonder why Al Quida is growing so fast and become more and more vigilant in their attempts to create WMD's? We're creating recruits from the terrorists we eliminate....that's pure unguided recklessness from the government that claims to protect citizens. Now our actions are just as justified in killing innocents over their as terrorists actions and intentions for killing innocents here. If we don't change that then there's no point in saying that the dying soldier in other countries are dying for our freedom and protection.

I'd like to address two things. Firstly, I agree that the annexations and military operations that the U.S. is conducting is progressing the rate of Al-Quida recruits; however, many people join due to promise of money so they can aid their families (similar to civilians joining drug cartels in Mexico as a means to support their family). Secondly, all people relate more to groups that they're a part of. Similar to the inquisitions in Europe, all followers of the Catholic faith who were exempt from claims of witchcraft prosecuted those who were claimed as witches, despite being a part of the same nationality. Further still, it's common for charity organizations to focus the entirety of their donations to women and/ or children. Further still is breast cancer aid to women exclusively, despite the fact that men can also get breast cancer. It's on a larger macro scale, but the concept is the same.

I sincerely doubt the President has enough free time to be helping mourning the loss of children in a foreign country. He's too busy driving our economy into the dirt.

But, I also sincerely doubt he WANTS little children dead.

Sabo-Chan wrote:

why can't we set standards for peace rather than bombing where you think terrorists may be....

I don't think you realize just how much terrorists hate us.
Their goal is to end us: they train from childhood to fight for "Allah" to kill Americans. Why? Their screwed up version of religion dictates it so.

They'll keep trying to kill us until they succeed. Basically we have to kill them before they kill the rest of us. That's what the entire "war" on terrorism is about.

Sabo-Chan wrote:

we will be the terrorists of the world, if we learn to look at what's happening in cost of our victories and act upon it then maybe we can learn to defend the country more efficiently and learn more strategic and safer ways of killing the right people, instead of saying everyone who's 7 or older is a militant just to make ourselves seems less cruel while the patience of other countries are tested....

Random people on the internet hating on the U.S. is not a notable enough a hatred to start a war.
Even IF the entirety of ANY country of notable size and/or strength hated us, little-nothing would be done about it.
I doubt any country larger than the size of a dime on the world map would be stupid enough to officially declare war on us; considering each country probably has enough nukes to end humanity about 6-7 times over.

Last edited by Eheroduelist on Mon Dec 24, 2012 5:39 am; edited 1 time in total

I like the above post, save for Obama driving the economy into the dirt. I would disagree with that based on current statistics and policies that correlate with historical trends leading the economy in a positive direction.

tell that to medical care costs. My Dad's hardly going to be able to afford to pay medical insurance costs since he just went through a lot of medical treatments for Multiple Sclerosis and Kidney Cancer, not to mention the costs of dealing with other health problems my family and I have been having.

These costs mean sacrificing other privileges my parents pay for, like being able to pay the car insurance costs if I were to start driving. (17 + driver's license = really high insurance costs)

Not even to mention the cost of gas and what little I can see is being done about it.

Presidents have no control over the monopoly of gasoline, be it Obama or anyone else. Secondly, his administration is working on government medical plans, so private medical plans aren't directly related, aside from mandatory coverage of said things.