Oh I understand, it's called being caught by the short and curlies...the UK has been systemayically fist-fucked by the same group of assholes that has been fucking the US
since the fed took over policy at the beginning of the last century-and no doubt the US will not begin to see light until our proposed merger, it's the only out unless there is a collective awakening. Obama is a yes man for wall street, a brilliant actor who is probably scared -shit-less to speak against his keepers......he's a good house nigger for the bossman........I can't return responses privately...the only function I can't use post-ban.....sorrry bout that

In reply to this comment by rasch187:
The European Economic Community (European Union now) is the best thing that ever happened to the UK. Without it, they would be fucked economicly. Another approach would have been to join EFTA, but that would have been suicide for a powerful nation in the European area, as they would have to accept all the legislation made by the EU and the European Commission deciding how much they would have to pay to stay a member (which would have been unproportional if based on what Norway, as a member of EFTA pays).

Yeah, what the government did wasn't very democratic, but trust me, the UK citizens and businesses have prospered greatly by being a part of the EU.

In reply to this comment by choggie:

Endless mind-numbing editorials on issues which be merely symptoms of the beast, the emperor with no clothes or skin, for that matter.....The United States will fall in lock-step not unlike the UK did when she was welcomed into the EU against the will of the people, and by mandate of her cunt royal family, god-damned empire-building elitist scumbag fucks that they are. Kill them all, scatter their children's ashes on the dung heap of history.

"I don't find your logic compelling." PRICELESS from a man on the street

Your point being?

Where was I uncivilized?

[edit]

Oh...I see what you mean. I went back and checked out the thread. All better now.


In reply to this comment by EDD:
Dude, it's CaptainPlanet, with whom you've conversed in a civilized manner before, not CaptainPlanet420, the fundie racist troll.

In reply to this comment by rougy:
You know what's really smug?

To presume that you are correct and everybody else is wrong by asking questions that have no answers, and then having the gall to think that your answer to the question is the only answer there is.

What has really been displayed here, both by you and that pushy prick in your video, is your insecurity, your weakness of faith.

When other people don't think exactly as you do, it means you might not be right, and that fills you with doubt, and you are simply too weak to handle that.

[edit]
Somebody should have asked him to have his god make the honey or milk for them right then and there, because that would prove his existence, right?

>> ^EDD:
Dude, I'm 99% sure it's CaptainPlanet, with whom you've conversed in a civilized manner before, just submitting an example of evangelical stupidity with a sarcastic video description, not CaptainPlanet420, the fundie troll.
>> ^rougy:
What has really been displayed here, both by you and that pushy prick in your video, is your insecurity, your weakness of faith.
When other people don't think exactly as you do, it means you might not be right, and that fills you with doubt, and you are simply too weak to handle that.



what he said please don;t get me confused with that 420 asshat, i'm the real deal.

Dude, I'm 99% sure it's CaptainPlanet, with whom you've conversed in a civilized manner before, just submitting an example of evangelical stupidity with a sarcastic video description, not CaptainPlanet420, the fundie troll.

>> ^rougy:
What has really been displayed here, both by you and that pushy prick in your video, is your insecurity, your weakness of faith.
When other people don't think exactly as you do, it means you might not be right, and that fills you with doubt, and you are simply too weak to handle that.

^ I think the entire tax argument is false.

The vast majority of Americans aren't necessarily pissed about how much they pay in taxes, rather where that money goes.(overstating, but follow me here)

I watched a great documentary about taxes, and when the question was asked to the "man on the street":
"Would you spend more in taxes to make sure every child had health insurance?" - Everyone, Dem/Repub/etc answered an emphatic "Yes".

Same with: "Would you spend more in taxes if every child in the country had a decent education?" - Again, the answer is "Yes".

The problem is that our money goes to exactly the places we don't want it to go. Funding corrupt politicians, massively bloated defense spending. Subsidies to corporate industries who don't need our help. Paying interest on loans from foreign governments due to our own govt's shite job of trying to balance anything... And worst offender; Slaughter of innocent people in faraway lands.


I think the only solution is for us to pay a little less in taxes, but to ensure that our tax money goes to bettering our country, and the common good. The libertarians can go get their own state (take Texas, please!) where they can do their "I got mine, fuck you" game to eachother.

This is a hilarious video, I love the Onion (the hired "man-on-the-street" actors really make it), but if they're looking to endorse the perfect third party candidate then I thin I've found him:

http://www.theelderparty.com/

If you haven't seen it, The Onion's Ninja Parade bit is too funny as well, but politically unrelated. =)

That was really fascinating... an empty building because the ad revenue is so high, amazing.

The presenter doesn't do too well with the man on the street "That's amazing isn't it?" "Er, yeah, I guess" "Come on, that's really amazing.... come oooon"

Well, not quite, but that's what it felt like, the people really weren't that amazed by how he explained things.

That's some serious money for those spots though, serious money.

Congrats, welcome to the club, you will be approached by a man on the street soon with more information.

ah! new york, no better place for the "man on the street beat down"

Who thinks the man on the street interviewed for this video was in on it?

hahaha. anus.

anyway, notice how all the viewers' alternatives that were sent in were total utter shit.

i mean, i hate the official logo, the designers are clearly overpaid wankers, but at least they've had more than 2 minutes of training.
this clip is proof that when the "man in the street" says "that's rubbish, my 2-year old child could do better" they are talking out of their.... well, their anus actually.

The lyrics...

All you women who want a man of the street
But you don't know which way you wanna turn
Just keep a coming and put your hand out to me
'Cause I'm the one who's gonna make you burn

I'm gonna take you down - down, down, down
So don't you fool around
I'm gonna pull it, pull it, pull the trigger

Shoot to thrill, play to kill
Too many women with too many pills
Shoot to thrill, play to kill
I got my gun at the ready, gonna fire at will

I'm like evil, I get under your skin
Just like a bomb that's ready to blow
'Cause I'm illegal, I got everything
That all you women might need to know

I'm gonna take you down - down, down, down
So don't you fool around
I'm gonna pull it, pull it, pull the trigger

Shoot to thrill, play to kill
Too many women with too many pills
Shoot to thrill, play to kill
I got my gun at the ready, gonna fire at will
Shoot to thrill, ready to kill
I can't get enough, I can't get the thrill
I shoot to thrill, play to kill
Pull the trigger

That is an extremely professional police officer. I want that man on my streets.

Why isn't what we're doing now working? The strategy applied up until now, the light footprint approach, clearly has not worked. The idea behind such an approach was that we limit our presence so as to minimize the appearance of an occupation, and therefore limit violence against the occupying forces. Simultaneously we train up Iraqi security forces and build up an Iraqi government so that they can take over control of the country and we can stand down. Meanwhile reconstruction money is funneled in to rebuild the economy. The problem with that strategy is that we were never able to establish a baseline of security to allow political and economic developments to occur. With out a relatively stable political authority, newly trained security forces will not serve the Iraqi state but will instead serve their sectarian interests, which is exactly what has happened. Without economic development, angry young men have no jobs and the only opportunity they have is to fight. As violence escalates, retaliations occur and a feedback loop of increasing violence and political disintegration occurs. If we allow this feedback loop to operate much longer the situation will spin completely out of anyone's control and even worse disaster will be the only result.

Are their any potential alternatives? The only sane policy that I can see is an escalation of American forces on the order of 100,000-150,000. If we do so we can finally have enough soldiers on the ground to establish security in the key neighborhoods of Baghdad and other important cities. If their is a rifle squad patrolling the same few block of the same neighborhood everyday, you can bet that insurgent and sectarian activity in those few blocks will decrease markedly. It is only once we establish that level of security that any sort of political or economic development can occur, and only political and economic development will stabilize Iraq and the region. To arrest the feedback loop of violence and political disintegration, we need to establish security, and we can only establish security with a major increase in the troop level in country. In other words, we need a classic counterinsurgency policy.

Such a drastic raise in troop levels sparks the question as to how we will sustain such levels for the 18 months to 2 years that would be necessary. Obviously we will need to expand the size of the military and to do so we will need to raise taxes and cut social spending. In other words we need to start acting as if we are at war and make the necessary sacrifices. Sacrifices suck, but not only are the consequences of Iraq disintegrating worth stopping, it is also the honorable thing to do because we are after all the cause for this current mess.

At the beginning of this post I mentioned that this is probably the only sane policy. I say probably because it is based off the assumption that there are still enough people in Iraq who want a stable Iraqi state. If however the man on the street can only think of killing the people that killed his brother, then we have probably crossed the point of no return and it's best to just cut our losses, get out and then hope for the best with the shitstorm that will result. If my assumption is correct then I think we can still make this work, if in fact the Iraqi people have reached a point where revenge is their only motivation than we are too late.