Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #5 - byobgraffpro (01/31/2014) [-]
because no other country messed up a city during a war
User avatar #6 to #5 - feelythefeel (01/31/2014) [-]
How many of them did it in an attempt to help said city?
User avatar #7 to #6 - byobgraffpro (01/31/2014) [-]
okay man. lets say you live in a country ruled by a dictator or is being overcome with a terrorist organization. Civilians are being executed in the street by the military and police. Now please explain to me why the most powerful military force in the world wouldn't feel obligated to step in and do something about it. And then tell me your plan to rid an area of an extremist group without damaging the city. Then also let me know how well the world would be if we just let a bunch of psycho paths with bombs own a country.
User avatar #9 to #7 - feelythefeel (01/31/2014) [-]
I'm not making a statement on whether it's right or wrong, I'm just saying that there's little point in trying to claim that the situations that the US finds itself in of late aren't historically unique. The only thing to compare it to is the USSR's involvement in the middle east, and even then it pales in comparison.
User avatar #11 to #9 - byobgraffpro (01/31/2014) [-]
im just saying man, don't criticize something if you don't have a better solution. also, im strictly talking about extremists, not muslims or arabs in general.
User avatar #12 to #11 - feelythefeel (01/31/2014) [-]
The only thing I'm criticizing is your >implication that this kind of stuff happens every time someone cracks their knuckles.
User avatar #13 to #12 - byobgraffpro (01/31/2014) [-]
I didn't say it always happens. I said its happened before. Plus, to compare the magnitude of destruction today to the past doesn't make sense, since military technology is way more advanced now
User avatar #14 to #13 - feelythefeel (01/31/2014) [-]
When has a world power having the ability to influence the politics of literally any country in the world and the secondary ability to freely invade a quarter of them ever happened before?
User avatar #31 to #14 - toensix (01/31/2014) [-]
I agree with the point you're making. But Britain could do that on top of it's power.

Although I don't think they destroyed an area like that trying to help said area.
#32 to #31 - xxmemosxx (01/31/2014) [-]
We can and we did.

India's many dirty water problems? Partly because the British went around putting in canals and streams in and around cities to prevent damage during the monsoon rains but after that the water in the canals become stagnant, due to the lack of rainfall for the other 10 months a year, and ends up rife with diseases and bacteria.

We tried to help... ended up ******* everything up. USA is just carrying on our legacy
User avatar #33 to #32 - toensix (01/31/2014) [-]
Like father, like son.
User avatar #8 to #7 - captainpatters (01/31/2014) [-]
I think you just merica'd a little to hard there soon
User avatar #10 to #8 - byobgraffpro (01/31/2014) [-]
honestly man im against violence, I hate it, it sickens me. But when people, whos only objective is to kill, are running around tearing cities apart around the world, theres no reasoning with them. You just have to erase them so the world can progress, im not saying the u.s. is a shining white knight, but if there is a country that can combat a crazy ass bunch of **** wits, its the states.
#17 to #10 - myjeren (01/31/2014) [-]
Like my Father always said; "Fight fire with fire", which was kinda bad since he was a fireman.    
He was fired.
Like my Father always said; "Fight fire with fire", which was kinda bad since he was a fireman.

He was fired.
 Friends (0)