http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Am%C3%A9rica_Football_Club_%28disambiguation%29


Maybe the Mexicans? Even Col and Rich could go for one of these surely - you could join the fan club?

We love you America we do , we love America we do, we love America we do,oh America we love you.

Could bring some harmony to the boards?

I noticed in the paper the other day that Wikipedia is no longer telling actual facts - in other words it's made-up stuff. Posters are now going to be vetted before they can post.

Well it is American so it's bound to be biased

Col

Maybe they can re-name Man U to America UK.

I was very disappointed Paul. When I read the topic I thought it would be a place where you could make a pledge to keep the USA from going broke, what with shape the dollar is in. Support America...get it.

Professional Bowlers always have a point too statsman...mine is generally the 10th board.

I always get the 7-10 split in the 10th frame so I don't get my third ball.

I've seen two of those converted on television. Mark Roth did it in the 70's and John Mazza in the 90's.

Maybe they can re-name Man U to America UK.

I was very disappointed Paul. When I read the topic I thought it would be a place where you could make a pledge to keep the USA from going broke, what with shape the dollar is in. Support America...get it.

If the USA didn't spend trillions of dollars on a hopeless war, maybe they could get their finances in order.

Col

I've seen two of those converted on television. Mark Roth did it in the 70's and John Mazza in the 90's.


Yes...but they can actually play the game.

If the USA didn't spend trillions of dollars on a hopeless war, maybe they could get their finances in order.

Col

Technically (if you check my posts on the other topics), they haven't spent anything. They're just borrowing the money.

Well they're certainly not borrowing it from General Motors!!

I've seen two of those converted on television. Mark Roth did it in the 70's and John Mazza in the 90's.

Both are available on YouTube :cool:

Booty's location: "Planet 10, by way of the Eight Dimension

Hearing that Pluto has been dismissed as the ninth, how far away is number 10 now?? I would guess its quite a distance... :cool: :cool:

I support the USA. Usually by paying taxes.

In a way, it really makes little difference whether GWB or Bill Clinton was in the White House. In one case, we spent money and employed people to improve infrastructure. In the other case, we spent money and employed people to make weapons and ammunition. Either wa, folks were employed, folks were paid, money returned to the people through circulation among manufacturers, shippers, etc.

The only thing that would be TRULY bad for the economy would be to stop money from circulating. NO country would be able to endure a shutdown of cash flow among its various layers of sub-populations.

So all of you who criticize the USA, stop and think. If we didn't spend all that money, it would just be moldering in a bank somewhere that did no one any good.

So all of you who criticize the USA, stop and think.
It would be more useful if the USA spent its money on less war orientated things. Spending trillions in a war you're going to lose is a real failure, it'll go down as yet another brilliant USA catastophe.

I'll ask an honest question - I'll not expect a sane answer.

Why does the USA think it has to rule the world, then make a right tit of itself in the process? and do Americans ever feel embarrassed by the actions of their freak leader and the amount of deaths the USA has caused?

Col

In a way, it really makes little difference whether GWB or Bill Clinton was in the White House. In one case, we spent money and employed people to improve infrastructure. In the other case, we spent money and employed people to make weapons and ammunition. Either wa, folks were employed, folks were paid, money returned to the people through circulation among manufacturers, shippers, etc.

The only thing that would be TRULY bad for the economy would be to stop money from circulating. NO country would be able to endure a shutdown of cash flow among its various layers of sub-populations.

So all of you who criticize the USA, stop and think. If we didn't spend all that money, it would just be moldering in a bank somewhere that did no one any good.


They could rebuild New Orleans? I see a differance. Its not what you've got it what you do with it!

I don't remember the circulation of money verse in the Edwin Starr song?

Haven't thought of the Edwin Starr song (I presume you mean "War (What's It Good For)") in a LONG time.

I see a differance. Its not what you've got it what you do with it!

Paul, that's what so many guys tell their girl friends. It ain't the size of the wand, it's the magic you do with it that counts...

Colin, it's easy to know why we make a right tit of ourselves.

When a Democrat is in office, something else will happen and the USA will make a LEFT tit of itself. You have to know that for USA politics, "left" and "right" refer to the sides of the main aisle in Congress where people sit. Obviously, Republicans on the right, Democrats on the left.

And there is that phrase of inscrutable USA wisdom: Where you stand on an issue often depends on where you sit. (A subtle reference to the seating arrangement in Congress.)

Why does the USA think it has to rule the world, then make a right tit of itself in the process? and do Americans ever feel embarrassed by the actions of their freak leader and the amount of deaths the USA has caused?

Rule the world? No. But expect folks to recognize that you get less turmoil overall if you respect the rights of others? Yeah, we're near-evangelical 'bout that. And the problem we see is that the religious extremists milk that cow for all the power they can get out of it. Read also below about why we are activists in some issues.

Make a tit of ourselves? Shoot, we have no lock on that ability. How many times have other governments tried to clean things up only to make a horrid mess? Shall we look to history (which all of us are bound to repeat since we ignore it so often...)? There was that action regarding the British in the Arabian peninsula - movie Lawrence of Arabia tells some of that story. Or the wonderful times in India and the craziness that they still have as a leftover from the British Colonial period. Then, the Germans brought peace to Europe in the late 1930s and early 1940s because they thought they had a divine right... We could take examples from lots of places and lots of times. But it boils down to HUMAN arrogance. (Notice I did not say USA arrogance). We have no lock on arrogance either. Your very question betrays a certain degree of arrogance. But I'll let it pass for the moment.

Are we ever embarrassed by GWB? HELL YES. He's a troll. Only problem is degree, not kind. The trolls that ran against him both times were uglier, each in their own ways. It was a case of damned if we do, damned if we don't. Looks like we are going to face that same problem again very soon, just different faces, diferent names. Same trolls.

I grieve for the deaths at the hands of USA forces. I grieve for the deaths of the Kurds when they were attacked by Saddam's elite forces, the Republican Guards. I grieve for the barely post pubescent girls who lost their virginity to either of Saddam's sons. And the girls were lucky if that's all they lost. Parents who protested had a way of vanishing.

I grieve for the thousands killed by lethal gas when Saddam used it in an Iraq/Iran war. I grieve for the hundreds or thousands of Kuwaiti citizens maimed or killed by the Iraqi invasion of that country. I am able to see the evil that Saddam did - and to remember something we (should have) learned from the history of World War II.

It is only necessary for good men to do nothing in order for evil to flourish.

Think about that for a LONG time before you ask me again about why we sometimes appear to take on the world. And I've tried to make this a VERY serious answer. I just don't know if you can accept it as such - but it was intended as such, said with an absolutely straight face, and with no joking at all.

I learned that saying, by the way, when talking to a fomer of neighbor of mine who still wore her concentration camp number permanently inked into her flesh.

If Saddam was so bad, it's odd that many of the Iraqi citizens are wanting a similar regime there now - and the Yanks out. Many say it was by far a safer place under Saddam than under Bush.

The USA has drawn insurgents from everywhere to Iraq (like moths to a flame), just to have a pop at the Yanks - and as a result many innocent people get killed.

I love your phrase

But expect folks to recognize that you get less turmoil overall if you respect the rights of others?

Does the USA respect the rights of others? maybe it does on your censored news, but not on the BBC - the USA thinks it owns the place.

Col

Shoot, as much as we pay for oil, we OUGHT to own the place...

Yup, we drew insurgents to Iraq - and away from you guys. What kind of thanks do we get? Not a farthing's worth.

Yup, we drew insurgents to Iraq - and away from you guys. What kind of thanks do we get? Not a farthing's worth.

We never had any insurgents until Iraq, where are you getting this news from, the US state propaganda machine (aka George, shit for brains Bush)?:rolleyes:

We never had any insurgents until Iraq, where are you getting this news from, the US state propaganda machine (aka George, shit for brains Bush)?:rolleyes:


I guess the IRA don't count as insurgents.

I guess the IRA don't count as insurgents.

The IRA was funded by Americans, have they now moved to Iraq?

The IRA was funded by Americans, have they now moved to Iraq?

The IRA are IRISH (regardless of where they get their money from)
Thier INSURGENCIES were aimed at the BRITISH

Point

There are INSURGENTS in Britain who have nothing to do with Iraq.

Don't you read your own posts?

We never had any insurgents until Iraq, where are you getting this news from, the US state propaganda machine (aka George, shit for brains Bush)?

The IRA are IRISH (regardless of where they get their money from)
Thier INSURGENCIES were aimed at the BRITISH

Point

There are INSURGENTS in Britain who have nothing to do with Iraq.

Don't you read your own posts?

We never had any insurgents until Iraq, where are you getting this news from, the US state propaganda machine (aka George, shit for brains Bush)?

So by yours and Docs logic the IRA have been removed by Bush:rolleyes:

So by yours and Docs logic the IRA have been removed by Bush:rolleyes:

By your logic it would appear the IRA don't exist. I guess the Northern Irish Protestant extremists (who have also killed a few British soldiers and blown up a few British buildings) must be figments of our imagination. We'll get to the Tartan Army later.

Britain has plenty of home grown insurgents. You may be able to blame George W for a lot (and I would be the first to join you), but he's not guilty of this one.

On a totally different line of thought - when may we expect the next UK election? It will be interesting to see if Iraq is a factor.

On a totally different line of thought - when may we expect the next UK election? It will be interesting to see if Iraq is a factor.

My guess is sooner rather than later and no I don't believe Iraq will be that important to most voters.

It will hinge on whether Brown's version of spin (more subtle and insidious than Bliar's) will be more credible to the average voter (and they're not necessarily that bright) than Cameron promising tax cuts. As in the US nowadays it will come down to who performs best on TV for Mr & Mrs Braindead, rather than an intelligent assessment of the facts by those who can think for themselves.

If only I had enough dough to emigrate.........

The IRA are IRISH


I think you missed the supposed point of it all!:rolleyes:

but he's not guilty of this one.

.

Where did I say he was?:confused:

We never had any insurgents until Iraq:rolleyes:

Surely you remember typing this?

I think you missed the supposed point of it all!:rolleyes:

Wouldn't be the first time.:D

It would be more useful if the USA spent its money on less war orientated things. Spending trillions in a war you're going to lose is a real failure, it'll go down as yet another brilliant USA catastophe.

I'll ask an honest question - I'll not expect a sane answer.

Why does the USA think it has to rule the world, then make a right tit of itself in the process? and do Americans ever feel embarrassed by the actions of their freak leader and the amount of deaths the USA has caused?

Col

damn right we do. I'm tired of living in the most hated country in the world. There are so many great things the USA could do with its money and might. I have 4 grandchildren. I don't want them to have to live in fear all their lives because GWB wanted a legacy like his CIA Dad.

expect folks to recognize that you get less turmoil overall if you respect the rights of others? Yeah, we're near-evangelical 'bout that.

Yeah your foreign policy towards countries such as China and Israel really support that.

Surely you remember typing this?

So then you are claiming like Doc that Bush removed the IRA, do me a favour, that twat can't even remove the sh*t off his shoes:rolleyes:

damn right we do. I'm tired of living in the most hated country in the world. There are so many great things the USA could do with its money and might. I have 4 grandchildren. I don't want them to have to live in fear all their lives because GWB wanted a legacy like his CIA Dad.



Good answer
coming in on the end of this - witha certain amount of cool headediness (?)
THe US at the moment is probably the most hated nation . and yet it has the posssibility to be one of the greatest nations and is/has been blowing this away

Not only on foreign issues but home grown ones as well
the state health scheme for kids is a good example.. the divide between black/white (both sides on this one- both sides have come up with some stupid statements)

Instead of leadership by example - so far Bush (w*nker) has tried to bully his way through,

As to green issues Bush is now trying to make it his idea that the world needs saving , - it does but its from Bush himself...

I personally feel that the US could be so much more than it is, I also feel that about the UK - this labour goverement is full of tossers, and I hope to god that they are out on their ear come the next election ,


some of the US problems come from bing such a large country this actually makes them small minded in their views , because their is less interaction with other societys ( I genarilise here) - its the presumption that the US way is the right way, well not all is well inthe States, sometimes a dictator is what is required Yugoslavlia being a good example (?) their was less blood shed under their dictator than when they didn't have one ...

It really depends upon the set up of the country - America (and the UK) sometimes should keeps its nose out of these affairs - but then there are other times when we should interveen - and we don't Uganda - we should be there , but we aren't
as to Afganistan (?) and Iraq - the first yes we should be there the second , hmmmm not too sure.. ( this does not mean I don't support the men and women on the field - its the polictics thats bollocks )

If we were just to free a nation from a dictator then hte oil should belong to
the country , without any interferance for the US . as it is the oil is going to the US - even though G Bush said it wasn't about oil - he has branded the US a liar and this just fuels the terrorists .

I ramble

that twat can't even remove the sh*t off his shoes:rolleyes:

A lot of that sh*t soaked through his shoes and created his brain...

Good answer
coming in on the end of this - witha certain amount of cool headediness (?)
THe US at the moment is probably the most hated nation . and yet it has the posssibility to be one of the greatest nations and is/has been blowing this away

Not only on foreign issues but home grown ones as well
the state health scheme for kids is a good example.. the divide between black/white (both sides on this one- both sides have come up with some stupid statements)

Instead of leadership by example - so far Bush (w*nker) has tried to bully his way through,

As to green issues Bush is now trying to make it his idea that the world needs saving , - it does but its from Bush himself...

I personally feel that the US could be so much more than it is, I also feel that about the UK - this labour goverement is full of tossers, and I hope to god that they are out on their ear come the next election ,


some of the US problems come from bing such a large country this actually makes them small minded in their views , because their is less interaction with other societys ( I genarilise here) - its the presumption that the US way is the right way, well not all is well inthe States, sometimes a dictator is what is required Yugoslavlia being a good example (?) their was less blood shed under their dictator than when they didn't have one ...

It really depends upon the set up of the country - America (and the UK) sometimes should keeps its nose out of these affairs - but then there are other times when we should interveen - and we don't Uganda - we should be there , but we aren't
as to Afganistan (?) and Iraq - the first yes we should be there the second , hmmmm not too sure.. ( this does not mean I don't support the men and women on the field - its the polictics thats bollocks )

If we were just to free a nation from a dictator then hte oil should belong to
the country , without any interferance for the US . as it is the oil is going to the US - even though G Bush said it wasn't about oil - he has branded the US a liar and this just fuels the terrorists .

I ramble

Gary, you are preaching to the choir. :D

So then you are claiming like Doc that Bush removed the IRA, do me a favour, that twat can't even remove the sh*t off his shoes:rolleyes:

I am claiming nothing of the sort.
I am challenging your assertion that there were no insurgents in Britain until the US invaded Iraq.

I quote:

"We never had any insurgents until Iraq, where are you getting this news from, the US state propaganda machine (aka George, shit for brains Bush)?"

I am claiming nothing of the sort.
I am challenging your assertion that there were no insurgents in Britain until the US invaded Iraq.

I quote:

"We never had any insurgents until Iraq, where are you getting this news from, the US state propaganda machine (aka George, shit for brains Bush)?"

The IRA had ceased their attacks before the invasion of Iraq, therefore the statement that there were no insurgents in Britain until the US invaded Iraq, is correct. And Bush had nothing to do with bringing peace to NI or anywhere else for that matter:mad:

I have never claimed, am not currently claiming and will never claim George W had anything to do with Northern Ireland.

Your comment (and I quote):
"We never had any insurgents until Iraq, where are you getting this news from, the US state propaganda machine (aka George, shit for brains Bush)?"

is not accurate.

There were insurgents in Britain while George W was still at school, of which the IRA blowing things up in N. Ireland and London is just one example.

Insurgency in the UK is not a new trend and can't be laid at the feet of George W.

I hope you're happy. You have placed me into a position of defending the man.

The prosecution rests M'lord.

Yeah your foreign policy towards countries such as China and Israel really support that.

Your policy is to betray anyone who you disagree with.

O a new bash America thread, sadly I am unprepared, got distracted during my absence and have forgotten to keep a tally on reasons to tease the neighbours to the south of me.

Sorry to dissappoint, perhaps tomorrow I will jump on the bandwagon ;)