"poorly stated joke" (1 Viewer)

[Matty]

What would you consider a normal country?

 

[Rich]

The UK, Australia,NewZealand,Canada, how many do you need?

 

[FoFa]

Exactly the Republican spin machine tried to make it about the military personnel, when it was actually addressed to their idiot boss.

Sorry, I was offended (being ex-military) and took it as an insult to the military.
And I saw the address on the news, and right after that President Hillary came on and basically said what a dumb $hyt. SO republican spin, (well DUH), but the dems are back pedalling also. Of course it would be the same if the reverse were true also. I mean, admit it, everyone says something stupid now and then. It seems as a world population we are just more teechy on it any more.
I mean look at that Falkland islands war the British started over a stupid (It's Mine) quibble.

 

[Matty]

Do you have facts to back up the notion that they elect less military figures?

 

[Rich]

Do you have facts to back up the notion that they elect less military figures?

You'll have to research it for yourself

 

[Matty]

Why should I? You're the one who said:

"It does when you compare the figures with those of a normal country."

I'm assuming you have some figures. It'd only make sense that I base my response on the same figures, no?

 

[Rich]

I mean look at that Falkland islands war the British started over a stupid (It's Mine) quibble.

We didn't start it, Argentina did and the Islanders in a free and not rigged vote elected to stay British
Oh and by the way we won that one, how did you do in Nam?

 

[FoFa]

We didn't start it, Argentina did and the Islanders in a free and not rigged vote elected to stay British
Oh and by the way we won that one, how did you do in Nam?

Yea, OK, still look how many died for no reason! BUT it's OK cause it was the British, not the US right? I mean almost as many military as the WHOLE POPULATION of the islands died in that little squabble (OK closer to half) so how can you defend that? And all over the "It's Mine, Not Yours" mentality. There was no genicide, there were no terrorist, pretty much nothing. Makes GWB look like a frigg'n genius in comparison!

 

[Rich]

Yea, OK, still look how many died for no reason! BUT it's OK cause it was the British, not the US right? I mean almost as many military as the WHOLE POPULATION of the islands died in that little squabble (OK closer to half) so how can you defend that? And all over the "It's Mine, Not Yours" mentality. There was no genicide, there were no terrorist, pretty much nothing. Makes GWB look like a frigg'n genius in comparison!

There were no terrorists in Iraq, what's your point?

 

[Matt Greatorex]

Yea, OK, still look how many died for no reason! BUT it's OK cause it was the British, not the US right? I mean almost as many military as the WHOLE POPULATION of the islands died in that little squabble (OK closer to half) so how can you defend that? And all over the "It's Mine, Not Yours" mentality. There was no genicide, there were no terrorist, pretty much nothing. Makes GWB look like a frigg'n genius in comparison!

Only if you take genius to mean something markedly different from the usual definition.

Spot the difference:
Situation 1: A group of islands belonging by choice to one country is claimed and invaded by another country. The 'owner' (for want of a better word) moves in to defend its citizens living on those islands.

Situation 2: A group of terrorists attack a country. After serious attempts by the victim country and its allies, the leader of the terrorists isn't found. The leader of said victim country is under pressure to provide a victory of some sort so war is declared on a completely unrelated country which may possibly at some undetermined point in the future pose a threat.

Yes, both had political undertones and both involved countries with vastly superior forces attacking countries with vastly inferior forces, but there is no real comparison. Unless, of course, you believe that the US would stand back and allow, for example, some country to invade Long Island without retaliating? It's not as if the UK attacked some third party country who hadn't initiated the aggression.

It's just unlucky for GWB that it's damn hard to fight a guerilla war at sea, so Iraq is dragging on way longer than the Falklands conflict did.

 

[Rich]

It's just unlucky for GWB that it's damn hard to fight a guerilla war at sea, so Iraq is dragging on way longer than the Falklands conflict did.

and of course Iraq doesn't share the American dream

 

[Rich]

I'm assuming you have some figures.

No, just an education outside of the US

 

[FoFa]

There were no terrorists in Iraq, what's your point?

1825 Britain and the Government of Buenos Aires sign a Treaty of Amity, Trade and Navigation which makes no reference to the Islands
1829 The United Provinces of Rio de la Plata appoint Vernet Governor of East Falkland;
Britain formally protests Vernet's appointment and reiterates its sovereignty claim
1833 British warships force departure of Don Pinedo and warship Sarandi, then depart leaving William Dickson in charge until Matthew Brisbane's return;
1834 British warships HMS Challenger and HMS Hopeful arrive at Port Louis;
Lt Henry Smith supported by a boat crew is left in charge as British military administrator;
Antonio Rivero and his gaucho gang are arrested and taken to England for trial;
Colony at Port Louis re-established and re-named Anson's Harbour;
now does this sound familiar
1884 Argentina asks that the sovereignty dispute be submitted to international arbitration but Britain ignores the request;
1960 UN Resolution 1514 calls for an end to colonialism;
Britain lists the Islands as a colony and Argentina objects
1961 Antarctic Treaty comes into effect freezing sovereignty over Antarctica for 30 years;
Establishment of local political party National Progressive Party;
UN establishes Decolonisation Committee by Resolution 1654
1973 Newly-elected Argentine Peronist government renews sovereignty claim in the UN which passes Resolution 3160 urging sovereignty negotiations;
Britain refuses to discuss sovereignty;
1981 British Nationality Act removes British nationality from any Falkland Islander who does not have a parent or grandparent born in Britain;
Argentina protests to UN over lack of progress on sovereignty dispute;
I like that "Liberated", almost sounds like Iraq
1982 2 April to 14 June 1982 Islands occupied by Argentine army until liberated by British Task Force - 257 Britons including 3 Islanders killed in the Conflict
1984 Talks between Argentina and Britain in Berne fail because Britain refuses to discuss sovereignty
1994 Amendment to Argentine Constitution ratifies Argentina's 'legitimate and imprescriptible sovereignty' over the Islands and makes their recovery 'a permanent and unrenounceable object of the Argentine people';

 

[Rich]

1994 and makes their recovery 'a permanent and unrenounceable object of the Argentine people';

Not if we have anything to do with it they won't

 

[Matty]

No, just an education outside of the US

My education is outside the US as well.

 

[Rich]

My education is outside the US as well.

Too close for comfort though

 

[Adeptus]

The UK, Australia,NewZealand,Canada, how many do you need?

Woohoo, we're normal!

 

[Adeptus]

I honestly think we'd do better if we just got a president using a lotto...

Oh wait that wouldn't work, the guys with all the money would just buy more tickets...

...as opposed to buying more votes, like they do now?

 

[Rich]

...as opposed to buying more votes, like they do now?

Especially the current one
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15519404/

 

[jsanders]

Especially the current one
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15519404/

And that, from American censored news.