Is the U.S.A. the most extreme terrorist nation?

sxt

Terrorism 

1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.

2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization


A Country that can attack and invade oil rich countries with no consequences for their actions. A country that can invade Iraq under false pretenses killing up to 1 million people, according to the British lanclet report, and suffer no consequences

A country that can impose crippling sanctions on oil rich countries

A country that is willing to drop atomic bombs with the knowledge that it will kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

Was it An absolutely hideous war crime that was used as a political tool?

Admiral Leahy, Chief of Staff to presidents Roosevelt and Truman, later commented:

"It is my opinion that the use of the barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan ... The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons ... My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children


General Douglas MacArthur, Commander of US Army forces in the Pacific,

"My staff was unanimous in believing that Japan was on the point of collapse and surrender"

Admiral William Halsey, commander of the U.S. Third Fleet,

"the first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment." The Japanese, he noted, had "put out a lot of peace feelers through Russia long before" the
bomb was used.

the_syco

sxt wrote: »

Admiral Leahy, Chief of Staff to presidents Roosevelt and Truman, later commented:

"It is my opinion that the use of the barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan ... The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons

What a complete f**king moron. Not only were they ready to fight until the last man, they had tanks in kilometres of underground tunnels waiting for the invasion.

Thelonious Monk

If you read about their interference in countries in the 20th century they are definitely meddling in everything

Quantum Erasure

Deleted User wrote: »

http://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/3441.jpeg

a lot of those would be raids by British sailors, especially around the Caribbean, and I presume south America and elsewhere

MMXX

They're certainly the most aggressive nation, and they've certainly started more wars, invaded more countries - in modern history, they've certainly dropped more bombs, sold more weapons, killed, maimed and destroyed more people than most nations - but... don't they say one man's terrorist, is another man's freedom fighter?

And that's why they do it after all, freedom.

They kill so they can be free. They need to keep Americans safe - from bad countries like Iran, and Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya - and all the bad countries. They're bad countries, and even though they live thousands and thousands of miles away - the people in the bad countries don't REALLY want to get on with their own lives - they want to take away the freedoms that Americans enjoy.

That's why they do it, freedom.

The bad countries don't like America's way of life. It's not about oil, or global domination, power, control - like some would have you believe. It's about FREEDOM. Is wanting to be free extreme? Does wanting freedom make you a terrorist? If America doesn't kill the people from the bad countries - how will America be free?

They can't - it's not possible.

Freedom - it's all about freedom, not oil - freedom.

Sheridan81

I'm just wondering:

1. With our limited knowledge, how could we possibly compare?
2. Does the second option you've provided in the poll stand for 'no' or 'Northern Ireland'?

B.A._Baracus

To quote Edmund Blackadder from Series 4: "it was bollocks"

That being what people say or do is all bollocks. No one thinks they are the bad guy in this world. From that scumbag pick pocketing you to even Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. They were all "right" to do so.

Americans and Iranians are going at it right now and both sides feel they are doing the right thing. The other are the terrorists in each view.

pablo128

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Americans and Iranians are going at it right now and both sides feel they are doing the right thing. The other are the terrorists in each view.

The Iranians are in their own backyard. The Americans are on the other side of the world.

XsApollo

You can liken their policy to something like continuous improvement in one of the big multinational companies here.
Always looking to fix problems and never satisfied.
They have an agenda in that they are always looking for threats to their national security as they put it.
So if they got their way and neutralised Russia then China they would just seek out the next country they think is a threat.
There will always be a threat to them.
Their has to be a threat to their security as they have a whole department dedicated to it I presume.

suicide_circus

I'll repeat myself and ask; from the viable options, who would you rather be the dominant world power if not the US?

sxt

sxt wrote:

"the first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment." The Japanese, he noted, had "put out a lot of peace feelers through Russia long before" the bomb was used.

Vietnam also tried to guarantee peace a number of times before US commitment to the war. I've seen speculation that US actions pushed them towards Communism.. It worth taking a look at the documentary done by McNamara, since it touches both on Japan and Vietnam. He doesn't pull any punches. Excellent documentary.

Actually, I view the bombing of Japanese cities (whose residential areas were mostly made of wood) using incendiary bombs to be a worse series of acts. You should take a look at the number of deaths associated with those months of bombing before "the bomb" was used.

The US is a nation of double standards. Most countries are. They'll put their own interests ahead of others while suggesting that they're seeking to make the world a safer place.

In the past, the effects of empires were limited by technology, but now? OP I can understand your pov, and consider it reasonably valid if you take a non-western perspective. I live abroad, and have heard such comments from those in the M.East or Asia.

suicide_circus wrote: »

I'll repeat myself and ask; from the viable options, who would you rather be the dominant world power if not the US?

As long as it's not a religious nation in modern times, I generally wouldn't care too much... but then I've lived in both Russia and China. Simply as a superpower, they wouldn't be incredibly worse than the US. As an overlord, frankly, they're all scary propositions. The US is no longer what it once was... and it's core values have gradually become more tarnished since Vietnam. Who's to say what they'll be like in another decade? Will Guantanamo Bay be extended to apply to more offenses against US interests?

FTA69

At this moment in time it’s plain as day the USA is the most aggressive, manipulative and belligerent country in the world - and it does this not in the interests of “freedom” or any of that rubbish; but for its own political, strategic and ultimately economic self-interest.

suicide_circus

Deleted User wrote: »

As long as it's not a religious nation in modern times, I generally wouldn't care too much... but then I've lived in both Russia and China. Simply as a superpower, they wouldn't be incredibly worse than the US. As an overlord, frankly, they're all scary propositions.

based on the way Russia and China treat their own citizens, i'm very glad the US is the one in the driving seat militarily.

Whats the saying "Ones man terrorist is another mans freedom fighter" and visa versa, USA terrorist? it depends who is on the end of the military action id say, but i was reading somewhere that the US military has the most bases around the world.

For me it's more about control.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

suicide_circus wrote: »

I'll repeat myself and ask; from the viable options, who would you rather be the dominant world power if not the US?

Either Norway or New Zealand

MMXX wrote: »

They're certainly the most aggressive nation, and they've certainly started more wars, invaded more countries - in modern history, they've certainly dropped more bombs, sold more weapons, killed, maimed and destroyed more people than most nations - but... don't they say one man's terrorist, is another man's freedom fighter?

And that's why they do it after all, freedom.

They kill so they can be free. They need to keep Americans safe - from bad countries like Iran, and Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya - and all the bad countries. They're bad countries, and even though they live thousands and thousands of miles away - the people in the bad countries don't REALLY want to get on with their own lives - they want to take away the freedoms that Americans enjoy.

That's why they do it, freedom.

The bad countries don't like America's way of life. It's not about oil, or global domination, power, control - like some would have you believe. It's about FREEDOM. Is wanting to be free extreme? Does wanting freedom make you a terrorist? If America doesn't kill the people from the bad countries - how will America be free?

They can't - it's not possible.

Freedom - it's all about freedom, not oil - freedom.

It's not about freedom either. Iran is doing nothing to restrict Americans' day-to-day freedoms.

I'd futher argue that the biggest threat to freedom - and it's interesting to note the the techniques used are fear and terror - is the US government and media themselves.

branie2

I don't think so

suicide_circus

suicide_circus wrote: »

based on the way Russia and China treat their own citizens, i'm very glad the US is the one in the driving seat militarily.

China treats certain minorities badly. Most people never feel any negative (or any) attention from the government. Russia is pretty much the same.

But as I said, again, as a superpower, it wouldn't matter much. As an overlord, I wouldn't want any of them. The US has been driving towards the extreme end of things for decades. They're preferential because they're a western culture.

EDIT: But I just realised that you said " is the one in the driving seat militarily". How would you see China as being worse militarily than the US? They haven't had any foreign adventures since their peoples congress. Tibet, Korea, Vietnam, some border incidents with their neighbors,... The US has used its military far more on foreign soil than anyone else, and often for very dubious reasons. But then, although you said militarily, you linked that with their manner of governance. Which is different, so why the distinction of using "militarily"?

Zebra3

I've seen the effect of US terrorism in Vietnam.

A child born with three faces around the year 2000 because of the effects of chemical weapons dropped by the US in Vietnam.

And in 2002 they were using depleted uranium in Iraq.

Absolute vermin.

2lazytogetup

usa - only country to drop nuclear bomb on people, hiroshima and nagasaki.

usa- only country to succesfully complete genocide. how many native americans are there left

OP- you arent really coming up with a revelation. Have you not seen Team America World Police film.

suicide_circus

Deleted User wrote: »

China treats certain minorities badly. Most people never feel any negative (or any) attention from the government. Russia is pretty much the same.

But as I said, again, as a superpower, it wouldn't matter much. As an overlord, I wouldn't want any of them. The US has been driving towards the extreme end of things for decades. They're preferential because they're a western culture.

EDIT: But I just realised that you said " is the one in the driving seat militarily". How would you see China as being worse militarily than the US? They haven't had any foreign adventures since their peoples congress. Tibet, Korea, Vietnam, some border incidents with their neighbors,... The US has used its military far more on foreign soil than anyone else, and often for very dubious reasons. But then, although you said militarily, you linked that with their manner of governance. Which is different, so why the distinction of using "militarily"?

i say militarily because their military superiority is a large part of their hegemony. They hold the balance of power, "world police" etc

s7ryf3925pivug

Mongolia is the most extreme terrorist nation by the logic of this thread.

marieholmfan

Salvatore Polite Trance wrote: »

Mongolia is the most extreme terrorist nation by the logic of this thread.

I was shocked to see the pictures of Ghenghis Khan on the banknotes when I was in Mongolia.

partyguinness

the_syco wrote: »

What a complete f**king moron. Not only were they ready to fight until the last man, they had tanks in kilometres of underground tunnels waiting for the invasion.

Obviously you are far more knowledgeable on the subject that Admiral Leahy..:rolleyes:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_D._Leahy

partyguinness

It is widely accepted that dropping the nukes on Japan was not solely about ending the war with Japan.

It was used by the US to demonstrate to the rest of the world (well the Russians really) that they had nukes.

Sure so what if 200-300k civilians get incinerated and without warning- without doubt two of the single greatest wartime atrocities committed in human history.

Good old Uncle Sam.

ebbsy

Trump is the champ that runs the camp.

partyguinness

Zebra3 wrote: »

I've seen the effect of US terrorism in Vietnam.

A child born with three faces around the year 2000 because of the effects of chemical weapons dropped by the US in Vietnam.

And in 2002 they were using depleted uranium in Iraq.

Absolute vermin.

I visited the War Remanent Museum in Ho Chi Minh in 2010. There is a whole room dictated to Agent Orange and Napalm with photographs showing the effects on the Vietnamese population.


Not a comfortable place to be especially if you are American.

partyguinness

How many countries has the US invaded over the past 70 years?
How many wars has the US started?
How many wars/revolutions/overthrowing of governments has the US assisted?
How much of the world's armaments have originated in the US?

Compare this to practically any other country on earth and it is pretty damn clear who is the greatest terrorist nation and who is the greatest threat to world peace.

s7ryf3925pivug

partyguinness wrote: »

How many countries has the US invaded over the past 70 years?
How many wars has the US started?
How many wars/revolutions/overthrowing of governments has the US assisted?
How much of the world's armaments have originated in the US?

Compare this to practically any other country on earth and it is pretty damn clear who is the greatest terrorist nation and who is the greatest threat to world peace.

I'll brace myself to be pounced on by the putinbots and point out the Russia/the Soviet Union did more

https://www.numbers-stations.com/articles/soviet-and-russian-invasions-since-1917/#Countries_invaded_by_Soviet_RussiaSoviet_UnionRussian_Federation

marieholmfan

Salvatore Polite Trance wrote: »

I'll brace myself to be pounced on by the putinbots and point out the Russia/the Soviet Union did more

https://www.numbers-stations.com/articles/soviet-and-russian-invasions-since-1917/#Countries_invaded_by_Soviet_RussiaSoviet_UnionRussian_Federation

USSR 12 in past 70 years counting Korea, China and Vietnam which are on your list but is inaccurate.

partyguinness

Salvatore Polite Trance wrote: »

I'll brace myself to be pounced on by the putinbots and point out the Russia/the Soviet Union did more

https://www.numbers-stations.com/articles/soviet-and-russian-invasions-since-1917/#Countries_invaded_by_Soviet_RussiaSoviet_UnionRussian_Federation

Well I am going to point out that the USSR no longer exists...:D

s7ryf3925pivug

marieholmfan wrote: »

USSR 12 in past 70 years counting Korea, China and Vietnam which are on your list but is inaccurate.

There are 20 on that list since 1950. It discusses the inclusion of each item on the list.

marieholmfan

Salvatore Polite Trance wrote: »

There are 20 on that list since 1950. It discusses the inclusion of each item on the list.

Only 12 in the period during which the USSR existed. You've edited your post after the response and I'm going to report it.

s7ryf3925pivug

marieholmfan wrote: »

Only 12 in the period during which the USSR existed. You've edited your post after the response and I'm going to report it.

I didn't edit my post. If I did you would see "last edited by" at the bottom of it.

RobertKK

The Pentagon probably runs the US with the Democrats and Republicans fighting to make it look like they have democracy when all they seem to disagree with are social issues.
On the international stage, not much changes in a big way, for a person who won a Nobel peace prize and lauded by people who call themselves liberals, Obama ended up with the US involved in more wars than at the start of his presidency, took the drone program to a new level which is a form of terrorism and by all accounts Trump has taken this further with drones but so far he seems far more hesitant on wars of invasion.
The drones should be listed as a form of state terrorism, no one could live under a drone humming overhead 24 hours a day, 7 days a week as it seeks its target, not knowing when the payload will be delivered, it kills many innocent people who get associated with the 'declared' terrorist if in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Many innocent people have been killed, three farmers in Afghanistan were killed at one stage for being tall because Osama Bin Laden was tall.
This is terrorism and a nation that shows it has little regard for life when it does this.
The drone program is out of control and worse than ever and no accountability for the crimes being committed.

noodler

the_syco wrote: »

What a complete f**king moron. Not only were they ready to fight until the last man, they had tanks in kilometres of underground tunnels waiting for the invasion.

Historians mostly agree the bombs were unnecessary.

He's not the one who comes off like a moron there.

partyguinness

The one thing about the US generally is that they are terrible bad losers.

Even in sports especially athletics when they are beaten they are first out crying foul and throwing doping allegations around when everyone knows the US are the biggest dopers out there.

It's almost like: "We have the most money, best facilities, the best doctors and best access to drugs. Sure if we are still being beaten then the winner absolutely has to be doped up."

Even this week Trump was banging on the Iranian hostage crisis from 79-81 so you really have to question the bona fides of this latest episode..well as if there was a doubt.

Bricriu

Not only is the US the most extreme terrorist nation, it is the greatest force for instability for nearly every country in the World.
It's filthy hands can be found at the bottom of a lot of international atrocities.

For an academic, thoroughly researched catalogue of some of the US's worst atrocities in the last 50 years, read Canadian intellectual Naomi Klein's brilliant book The Shock Doctrine - a must-read for anyone who wishes to know how the World works.

For further info read US intellectual Noam Chomsky.

Winning_Stroke

Ah here lads, I thought ye'd be all guns a blazin' for Israel to get that award.

partyguinness

marieholmfan wrote: »

I was shocked to see the pictures of Ghenghis Khan on the banknotes when I was in Mongolia.

Not at all. He has Godlike status in Mongolia.

jester77

US are only looking out for their own business interests, US politics are controlled by large corporate entities and they are looking out for themselves. And the saddest part is they have enough of the US public brainwashed into voting puppets into power to keep the status quo.

It's not a coincidence that this Iran issue is now bubbling with a general election on the horizon.

Bricriu wrote: »

Not only is the US the most extreme terrorist nation, it is the greatest force for instability for nearly every country in the World.
It's filthy hands can be found at the bottom of a lot of international atrocities.

For an academic, thoroughly researched catalogue of some of the US's worst atrocities in the last 50 years, read Canadian intellectual Naomi Klein's brilliant book The Shock Doctrine - a must-read for anyone who wishes to know how the World works.

For further info read US intellectual Noam Chomsky.

That's a must read, great book.

Edgware

Bricriu wrote: »

Not only is the US the most extreme terrorist nation, it is the greatest force for instability for nearly every country in the World.
It's filthy hands can be found at the bottom of a lot of international atrocities.

For an academic, thoroughly researched catalogue of some of the US's worst atrocities in the last 50 years, read Canadian intellectual Naomi Klein's brilliant book The Shock Doctrine - a must-read for anyone who wishes to know how the World works.

For further info read US intellectual Noam Chomsky.

You were doing fine until you wheeled in that scote Chomsky. Why is it every pinko thinks the sun shines out his arse?

Rodin

sxt wrote: »

Terrorism 

1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.

2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization


A Country that can attack and invade oil rich countries with no consequences for their actions. A country that can invade Iraq under false pretenses killing up to 1 million people, according to the British lanclet report, and suffer no consequences

A country that can impose crippling sanctions on oil rich countries

A country that is willing to drop atomic bombs with the knowledge that it will kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

Was it An absolutely hideous war crime that was used as a political tool?

Admiral Leahy, Chief of Staff to presidents Roosevelt and Truman, later commented:

"It is my opinion that the use of the barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan ... The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons ... My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children


General Douglas MacArthur, Commander of US Army forces in the Pacific,

"My staff was unanimous in believing that Japan was on the point of collapse and surrender"

Admiral William Halsey, commander of the U.S. Third Fleet,

"the first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment." The Japanese, he noted, had "put out a lot of peace feelers through Russia long before" the
bomb was used.

Yes.

BeerWolf

When the US spends an insane amount on Military compared to other countries combined, selling their weapons and all... war is a huge money maker, so it's hardly surprising they want to be the "world police" delving into the affairs of every country possible.

2011

Vote yes and your J1 application may be declined :pac:

marieholmfan

partyguinness wrote: »

Not at all. He has Godlike status in Mongolia.

Yeah they love him and see him as a force for good in history.

partyguinness

partyguinness wrote: »

I visited the War Remanent Museum in Ho Chi Minh in 2010. There is a whole room dictated to Agent Orange and Napalm with photographs showing the effects on the Vietnamese population.


Not a comfortable place to be especially if you are American.

Same. Interesting place, Vietnam. Same with the memorials in Cambodia about the people killed by US airstrikes, carpet bombing, and the dropping of mines in a country the US was neutral with.

RobertKK wrote:

The drones should be listed as a form of state terrorism, no one could live under a drone humming overhead 24 hours a day, 7 days a week as it seeks its target, not knowing when the payload will be delivered, it kills many innocent people who get associated with the 'declared' terrorist if in the wrong place at the wrong time.

You could also add the use of private contractors, black sites, and their perspective on "collateral damage".. High precision weaponry that often kills the innocent.. Ever notice how a report of collateral damage comes up, but it's forgotten pretty quickly afterwards these days? People have become so used to hearing about it happening, that it's no longer shocking that it does, and there's rarely any demands for accountability. No heads get chopped. It's become a necessary evil.

partyguinness

Then again I was in Peru years ago and they despise the Spanish.

Mad_maxx

suicide_circus wrote: »

I'll repeat myself and ask; from the viable options, who would you rather be the dominant world power if not the US?

They are the least worst option of the thug nations

Zebra3

partyguinness wrote: »

It is widely accepted that dropping the nukes on Japan was not solely about ending the war with Japan.

It was used by the US to demonstrate to the rest of the world (well the Russians really) that they had nukes.

Sure so what if 200-300k civilians get incinerated and without warning- without doubt two of the single greatest wartime atrocities committed in human history.

Good old Uncle Sam.

I was in Hiroshima a few years ago.

Interesting fact in the peace museum there was that the US preserved four Japanese cities to test their bombs on.

After all, no point dropping the bombs on a city that has already been damaged when you want to see the full effect of it. And let other nations see the full effect.

partyguinness

suicide_circus wrote: »

I'll repeat myself and ask; from the viable options, who would you rather be the dominant world power if not the US?

You assume that there are other entities that wish to act in the same manner as the US.