agreed.

Maybe, the thread had to fail because of the provoking start.
Still, it had become an exchange of different views on certain world politics.
Some statements seemed to be misunderstood, which resulted in hurt feelings, and caused insulting statements in return, causing other insults or bad ass habits.
Most shocking to me was Redeemer's reply with the picture to a serious post about consequences of the Iraq War. (Didn't understood it right away, because I couldn't imagine such a provoking gesture.)

I don't see a reason to condemn the politics of the USA in general, there have been good presidents and good decisions, too.

There is no general 'this nation is doing everything bad', as the opposite isn't either true.
The USA have been involved in more conflicts actively, resulting in 'more guilt in doing wrong', while others are more guilty in doing nothing.


You always have to look into detail of a given conflict and how it is connected to other conflicts.
Each nation is complex in its own, and it is more promising to find out the different ways how their decisions evolved to get a clear sight on their acting than to state that a certain nation has general 'properties'.

The target should be to find ideas about how to collaborate with the people of each country who care about how the world goes on... Talking respectfully with each other, explaining their point of views and collecting information to improve their concept of the political reality is a first step.
Could have happen in this tread, too - but didn't...

The picture wasn't put up to taunt the victims of the Iraq war. It represented my realization that the OP is not willing to change his mind based on anything I said.

I fully agree with Pappenheimer, but think twice before saying that everyone tries to live like people in West!

3run, that's the problem of sentences with 'everyone', 'all', 'always' - we don't know who is actually meant. In case of 'to live like in the west' there are actually a lot of people who dream of that - not such a bad dream, when living in poverty or under dictatorship like the fugitives who try to get to Europe...
Let's call it 'to be free to live one's own way of life'.
It wasn't possible to decipher it that way.
Anyway, in discussions it is easy to get that impression of one's opponent, but don't expect a change of the others opinion right within the discussion.
Beliefs are not meant to be skipped or switched after one argument, they have settled within a certain time, and changes have to grow over time while weighting such argument in comparison with other beliefs which seem to contradict.

I'm not sure you can say that, when spike understood the meaning perfectly. :\

But like I said before, there's no point in continuing this thread. Signing off...

But When you read carfully, you will lern alot of this thread.
Just for exsample;
We started to talk over amerika and what happend?
We started to ask us amerika and terrorisum or freedoms fighter?
We found out or alredy know that a freedom fighter is the same as a terrorist, it just depense on with aspeckt you see it.
To be honest, I know from the begining this threand will go in a totaly diffrent direction.
I meen how could a disscusion about this term could stay good
I don`t whant to attack somebody, thats why I say neutral.
Hate = Terrorisum/Freedoms fighter = Fear = control...
Easy way to get power, isènt it?