Panda
Does the Black Hole of Calcutta ring a bell?
Yes, it's was when 146 British were held by the Nawab of Bengal in a small dungeon, after Fort William was captured by his troops in 1756. 43 died of heat exhaustion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hole_of_Calcutta
That's like calling the US Embassy seige in Iran an American war attrocity, LOL.
But then no one has said British troops have never done bad things; I far prefer it when you deal with the criticism ('cause you're perfectly able to) rather than try to find ways of attacking those who make it.
The Taliban claim support from the Muslim brotherhood because --- well they're muslims, and according to the Mohammedans this is Koranic law.
Yes, and Christian nut-jobs claim they are backed by all 'true' Christians. Many Christians would not touch said nut-jobs with a barge pole.
Just as many of the intolerent problematical Christian groups today claim they are doing it like Jesus did, so too do Islamic fundies - the Salafis to be precise. The Taliban are just a particlary nasty subgroup of Salafi Muslims; those who believe they should practice Islam as they believe the first few generations after Muhammed practised it.
And just like peaceful, tolerent Christians don't back the excesses of Christian extremists, so too peaceful, tolerent Muslims (at least two thirds by the harshest of measures) don't back the excesses of Islamic extremists.
The worst of the Salfi actually believe they have the right to use violence against other Muslims if they don't agree with them. They are everyone's enemy.
And they don't allow girls to be educated; women to work outside the home so that they starve to death if they are widowed; or espousing any other religious tradition all on pain of beheading.
The Taliban are IslamoNazis. Scum. Many Muslims feel similarly.
The murderous cult members in Iraq are not Iraqi. They come from places like Syria, Egypt, UAE, Pakistan and Israel/Palestine. These men (and sometimes women) are generally ignorant or sociopaths. They are feeding the megalomaniacs who proselytise them and often PAY the families for the "sacrifice". It's all quite convoluted.
For a large part true, although the native Iraquis have their own agendas and some cause part of the civil unrest.
I almost forgot to mention that I am sincerely sorry that you have to deal with the economics of the Euro. Imagine one currency for an entire continent ...
Bother the geography; look at the populations. A far better measure of a currency's viability than miles. Why is it silly for a group of 310 million Europeans to use a single currency, and not silly for a group of 300 million North Americans to use a single currency?
You won't catch us doing that.
Heh... as I've pointed out, you ahad already done it. We've copied you. Historically as the US expanded into what they regarded as virgon land (much to the Indians surprise), they took their currency with them. Modern Europe is already full. Each country already had its own currency. Why not change? Why not look for the strength of a larger and more stable currency? Even if it took a decade or so for benefits to be commonly accepted, it's a change that would earn all the troubles back and lead to greater efficiency in the future.
I can go through four countries when I go to see my kids; 400 miles. Imagine driving from NH down to Washington DC and having to change money three times! I used to have that problem; now it's only when I get back to England I have to switch to Pounds, because the English are a bit thick sometimes (being one I know).
I do think they could have done a similar trick with the sizes and denominations of the Euro. There are country versions of the coins, but not the notes. It's a pity. I've always thought it would have been better to have revalued all european currencies to 'the Euro', so that 1 Mark was 1 Pound was 1 Franc was 1 Lira. All of these would be 1 Euro, but would be called locally as they'd always been (albeit at a new valuation) AND would (being worth a Euro and having identical denomination sides and sizes) be usable in any Eurozone country.
Half the objections are around the name changing as far as most people go.
And will there still be a Mexican Peso and a Canadian Dollar in 2050. Nope. It's a silly idea. There will be a dollar, based on the US dollar. US notes will probably look the same (on the rare occasions you'd see paper money), and the sizes and denomination sides of the Mexican and Canadian dollars will be identical to the American, with a bit of local flavour on the reverse. I bet you.
Is that why you hate America?
Stop with the straw men. You obviously have a good knowledge of the situation in Iraq as your comments show. That's far more interesting than fallaciousness.
You know we're related, right? Maybe it's a sibling rivalry ... Big older brother England and younger better looking brother America.
We're your DADDY.
And further we should just blame religion ... which is, actually, fine with me.
Gregor
Angry? Pffff! What for? You made a statement which I responded to in the way you might if someone would if they told you Babe Ruth played football, there's no anger in it, it is more "!!??!!??!?!!??!?". You're so sure of America's preminence in justice that you ask for countries that did a better job of governing with justice that also had a free press, like there isn't an entire Continent that equals or betters America in many ways and I'm sure is surpassed by America in others. I have no interest in an international contest to see which country pisses up the wall highest. This is about the tragedy of the attrocities committed, of the brutalisation of normal young men that allowed this to occur, and of why it is happening. Joe Blow from Montana wouldn't normally be running around Iraq with a gun. Those who took the decisons that took us there have responsibility, and I think those represented by such people should be angry with those who represent them. A country that is filled with basically quite nice people (like most countries) gets such criticism and see it's name soiled, not because of YOU or an individual American, but because of the those in charge acting with a/ incompetence and/or b/ malfesience and/or deceit.
Get some perspective, this isn't personal.
The marked countries all had their respective asses saved from either the Nazis or the Imperial Japanese army primarily by we corrupt, mean, selfish Americans in WWII.
Which the UK made the last repayment of War debt for in 2002 I think. The US had a vested self-interest in joining the European War, and no choice about the Pacific War. America would not have neccesarily won the inevitable war fought against a Third Reich that ruled Europe (including England) on its East coast and a Japanese Hegemony on its West. Kill bad things before they get worse.
Hell, if the US hadn't gone to war WWII, a Nazi Europe, the USA and Russia could have fought a nuclear war in the fifties. George Orwell was an American non-intervention away from being even more true with 1984... the US did a great thing and many brave Americans died, but it wasn't altruism in terms of National Interest, even if those who fought arguably were.
Why not deal with the actual criticisms? No one has said all Americans are corrupt, mean, selfish Americans in WWII. People have gone out of their way to say soldiers get brutalised and do terrible thing no matter what religion or nationality they are. You're leaning backward to take offense. This isn't about you or your fellow Americans. It is about the political entity that represents you in the world.
