Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Oliver Stone's American history: 'We’re not under threat. We are the threat'


TOMapleLaughs

Recommended Posts

Lol what? Being the only polititian that is self funded = no moderation or responsibility. Do you read what you type??

So hildog with her 180m net worth and using other peoples money (remaining 720m) is more responsible then trump?

Please clarify wtf you meant other then meaningless slander

Well, it's obvious that someone is unbiased.... :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's obvious that someone is unbiased.... :rolleyes:

Im canadian and cant vote but your right. Id vote for a self funded POLITICIAN over a funded LOBBIEST that doesnt have enough morals to leave a husband who cheats on you.

I am not a conservative or liberal or at least in any traditional sense. I believe capitalism is best when its supported by a sociaist base. Example: free market economy but public health/education. Label me how you see fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im canadian and cant vote but your right. Id vote for a self funded POLITICIAN over a funded LOBBIEST that doesnt have enough morals to leave a husband who cheats on you.

I am not a conservative or liberal or at least in any traditional sense. I believe capitalism is best when its supported by a sociaist base. Example: free market economy but public health/education. Label me how you see fit.

Actually, i thought you had made a decent post....

...but then ruined the point you were making by using a disparaging name for Hilary Clinton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He conflates a lot of things.

He conflates Wall Street Banking with criminal activity, so the guy who argues that "greed is good" is also a criminal. You can be greedy and still follow the law, which is in fact the case for the majority of the people.

He conflates the Vietnam war with terrible atrocities. While there may have been crimes committed, I would be reluctant to say that war-crimes was the norm. While it may be the case, I still believe people, whether individuals or groups like the military, are innocent until proven guilty.

While we can blame America for creating an environment that created ISIS, we cannot blame them for the acts of ISIS itself. Every human being is responsible for their own actions, and ISIS has to answer to keeping sex slaves. I don't think they can rationalize it by saying America has destabilized our region, therefore, we can keep sex slaves with impunity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He conflates a lot of things.

He conflates Wall Street Banking with criminal activity, so the guy who argues that "greed is good" is also a criminal. You can be greedy and still follow the law, which is in fact the case for the majority of the people.

He conflates the Vietnam war with terrible atrocities. While there may have been crimes committed, I would be reluctant to say that war-crimes was the norm. While it may be the case, I still believe people, whether individuals or groups like the military, are innocent until proven guilty.

While we can blame America for creating an environment that created ISIS, we cannot blame them for the acts of ISIS itself. Every human being is responsible for their own actions, and ISIS has to answer to keeping sex slaves. I don't think they can rationalize it by saying America has destabilized our region, therefore, we can keep sex slaves with impunity.

Valid points, however they don't exonerate American involvement/puppet-mastering at all, nor does it mean that Oliver Stone is wrong when he exposes it, for entertainment purposes or political.

Wallstreet profiteers had the benefit of having the laws changed for them. Vietnam shouldn't have happened. And neither should ISIS. All these events did though, for the good of America and American values.

In that light, I suppose we could do worse. Americans brought us Cheetos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Valid points, however they don't exonerate American involvement/puppet-mastering at all, nor does it mean that Oliver Stone is wrong when he exposes it, for entertainment purposes or political.

Wallstreet profiteers had the benefit of having the laws changed for them. Vietnam shouldn't have happened. And neither should ISIS. All these events did though, for the good of America and American values.

In that light, I suppose we could do worse. Americans brought us Cheetos.

Who says they exonerate anything? I see absolutely nothing that exonerates anybody in his post. However, it does prove his point about the lack of credibility of the source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Valid points, however they don't exonerate American involvement/puppet-mastering at all, nor does it mean that Oliver Stone is wrong when he exposes it, for entertainment purposes or political.

Wallstreet profiteers had the benefit of having the laws changed for them. Vietnam shouldn't have happened. And neither should ISIS. All these events did though, for the good of America and American values.

In that light, I suppose we could do worse. Americans brought us Cheetos.

America, like everyone else, is a country which will act in it's own best interest, at times at the expense of others. There in nothing in their constitution about them having to be altruistic. Anyone who believes America is a kind, and benevolent country is deluded. Like all countries, they will look out for their own interests.

That being said, America is one of the relatively better superpowers that has existed. In contrast, British, French, Dutch, Russians etc were a lot worse at the height of imperialism.

Whether American actions have resulted in a net benefit or harm for them long-term is difficult to determine.

I think it's unfair just to point the finger at America as if they are the only ones that are involved in the business of other countries or take part is so called "puppet-mastering."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

America, like everyone else, is a country which will act in it's own best interest, at times at the expense of others. There in nothing in their constitution about them having to be altruistic. Anyone who believes America is a kind, and benevolent country is deluded. Like all countries, they will look out for their own interests.

That being said, America is one of the relatively better superpowers that has existed. In contrast, British, French, Dutch, Russians etc were a lot worse at the height of imperialism.

Whether American actions have resulted in a net benefit or harm for them long-term is difficult to determine.

I think it's unfair just to point the finger at America as if they are the only ones that are involved in the business of other countries or take part is so called "puppet-mastering."

Not denying it. Not ignoring it either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...