abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
The countries with high starvation rates are all net producers of food while in the US alone, more money is spent treating diabetes than it would cost to eradicate starvation worldwide.
should sex be a right?
- Thread starter ThickStemz
- Start date
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
In 2003, there were 25 million Iraqis. There are now 33 million. This is despite an exodus of 2-3 million refugees to surrounding countries and a million (at least) violently killed.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Because that is our responsibility...
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
It is actually, since the US is such a vast importer of food. You have your head so far up your ass you don't even realize that it is the poor people who feed you.Because that is our responsibility...
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Like Monsanto?
What responsibility does the other countries of the world have regarding starvation considering that it is happening in their own countries?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
If they refuse to bow to US economic demands, they are hit with sanctions, regime change, political assassinations, drones and even military invasions. I'm not talking about Monsanto, I'm talking about how you benefit from imperialism.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
It is your contention that the US extorts so much food from countries that their citizens starve. Yet you cling to the ideas of a bigger government.
How do you correlate the two? LOL!!! Yes, the criminal government cares about you and is going to protect you from the bad people. Seriously?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
it is difficult to watch this much unremitting stupidity.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Yet somehow also entertaining?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
There you have it, just a complete and utter failure. First off, the US extorts the entire world of ALL resources leaving most of the world desperate as fuck and no, I do not cling to the ideas of big gov't, that would be you since you rely completely on privatization and heavy handed policing in order to sustain status quo or even some regressive old version of it.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
I am for smaller government including military. You got me confused for someone else.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
No, you're clearly the one who is confused. You say you're for smaller gov't, but you favor policies which require a huge military and police force.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Which policies are those?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
how are you going to build and patrol a wall on the southern border, block all muslims from entering the country, and vastly expand the military (as your candidate donald trump wants to do) without a massive military, police, and bureaucratic government?
you are unremittingly stupid.
ThickStemz
Well-Known Member
Landmines at the border and predator drones with heat sealing missiles honed to 98.6 f.
Don't let anyone in from a country with violent movements. Don't let individuals in from any country with Islamic sounding names. Simple.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
When your arguments fall flat and you've failed to defend your principals, just do like this dipshit and turn it into a silly waste of time.
ThickStemz
Well-Known Member
It's sovereign territory. We have every right to defend it with deadly force if we so choose.When your arguments fall flat and you've failed to defend your principals, just do like this dipshit and turn it into a silly waste of time.
Just litter the place with claymore land mines miles deep. Put signs up in Spanish. No one need die. They would have to take the steps that proved fatal.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Except your withholding agreements argument is absurd. Since if people start a business, they must first have government permission and government will take their money whether they signed a piece of paper or not.
The word duress is the word you are conveniently ignoring.
By the way you suck at arguing, Toby McNanny State.