GOG.com

This.

You seem completely clueless, so I'm not sure that there's anything I can say that you would understand, but killing hundreds of thousands of civilians, then building a couple of free schools to make up for it doesn't mean you get to claim Christianity is great and everyone else is crap. That would be completely retarded.

You also completely sidestepped my point, which wasn't so much that "America is ebil", but more the fact that the problems in these nations stem as much from being bombed to shit by your country as they do from any religion.

You go and bomb the hell out of them, then sit back and say "you brought it upon yourselves"? You are the epitome of the dumb American stereotype that has become so unanimously despised across the world. You are truly an embarrassment to yourself, your religion, and your nation.

To be fair the dumb American is nothing special. There are equally many dumb people all over the world. For example Chinese, they don't seem to care at all what's going on or the Russians sell their weapons to every dictator. The Germans try to do it like the Chinese but with the occasional (faked) moral outburst which doesn't make it better. And all the others? They trust that the USA will make the world right for them instead of standing up and taking responsibility on their own. Because then you'll see that people die all the time, even if you're doing nothing.

You're confusing immorality with stupidity, they are very different things.

I'm not quite sure who you think "trust that the USA will make the world right for them", but I can assure you that's not a sentiment I've found anywhere on my travels. Georgia perhaps?

Now how on earth did I miss this little nugget when you first spouted it? You clearly have neither a modicum of self awareness nor a grasp of the concept of irony, so here's a little lesson for you:

When you make a statement condemning millions of people who are being slaughtered as having "brought it upon themselves" through their choice of religion, you get to lay absolutely no claim what so ever that your religion has taught you the first thing about compassion. Oblivious doesn't even begin to describe you.

Oh that is for example germany's inofficial stance. Of course we are interested in peace and free trade all over the world, but mostly we keep out of any military intervention. We can always say that our special history includes making a bad impression when we turn up somewhere outside of our borders. So we definitely rely on somebody else doing the dirty job.

Also there are many arabian countries around syria. In analogy to a neighbourhood I see it mostly as their responsibility to take care that their neighbour syria is behaving well. But they don't do much. Either they don't care or they rely on the help of mighty nations like the US.

Iran with a nuclear bomb is a danger for the whole world. The world is not safe if everybody can have nuclear bombs. Although we can surely discuss this point if you like.
In principle the United Nations as the world government should deal with Iran. But they don't do anything. Either they think that the danger is exagerrated, which I would say is very dangerous in itself, or they don't care or they rely on the last minute intervention of a mighty nation like the US.

As I see it one reason why the US is a world policemen is because the other nations want them to be it.

Now please tell me about the sentiments you've found?

In a not so subtle (or skilful) attempt to defuse the thread:

Has anyone ever played the game Conflict:Middle East political simulator. I've sunk so many hours into that game in the past. It's amazing how interesting it can be with just numbers, text and an atlas.

Really its the different choices you can make. I frequently end up with nuclear holocaust however.

I always remember it when these things happen in the middle east.

I love that game, but it was hardly what you would call "politically correct". As the only way to win the game was to destabelize the sourrunding arab countries by war or internal strife. My final score was always "Fascist".

Yeah I know what you mean. Frequently I tried to play the peaceful, UN supporting, Palestinian loving Israeli prime minister but I could never get it to work. Probably quite realistic then, or maybe I'm just an inept politican.

I was just googling the game and it looks like some guy made a remake a couple years back. Gonna give it a try now. The download link is http://files.filefront.com/13537306

Despotic governments are slowly getting replaced with something resembling a republic. Of course the results are going to be bloody. But it's downright depressing that a good chunk of casualties are going to be non-combatants, and even more depressing is that these victims are little more than political currency on the world stage.
It's high stakes chess, and ultimately, you will loose some figures, thus a total victory is an impossibility. When anyone can be a general/politician in hindsight, it's a loose-loose situation no matter how you try to solve the conflict.

Germany wanted to be world policeman? I thought we just wanted to rule the damn place, and failed miserably (on many levels).

But we fucking saved the History Channel!

/thread winner! :)