As a British person: It doesn't really affect me since I don't go abroad and haven't been abroad for 11 years, but now I'm not really allowed to go abroad because of ISIS gunning down a bunch of British citizens in Tunisia. The Islamic State is only powerful enough to do this because of the US. Erm, no. Go and research what you're talking about before you come up with stuff like this. They won't kill you if you have more than one child: they won't provide support for the child, they'll fine you, and then they might tear your house down. They don't take your life. Yes, it is. The Earth can only sustainably supply for 1.5 billion people. We're 7 billion strong and aren't feeling the adverse effects of our overpopulation because it takes time. Eventually, we'll have housing shortages, food shortages, and we'll have a huge crisis on our hands where the population we've built up declines faster than it gets numbers added to it for a few years until everything levels out. Not really sure where the comparison is here? Murdering babies is indeed sick, but how is it just as bad as overpopulation? Your statement makes no sense. I'm pretty sure food shortages in California only affect California. California and the U.S aren't the only places in the world. Of course it is... Lol. This post is hilarious. I don't even know what to say to it other than... like, wow. You gave me a good laugh.
What even classifies as the "American" thing to do to you? Also, I think we all understand that you aren't an Obama supporter. Don't see why it's necessary to make distasteful remarks about him at every corner. I don't know much about the in's and out's of politics, but I do understand that the United States has "earned" it's disapproval from the world, and a huge part of it is caring about everyone else's business except their own.
lol wat. obama? destabilizing the middle-east? like he's the first president to interfere US business in the middle-east? You realize that he's the one ending wars and making treaties? Or at least trying. WHAT. YOU MEAN THAT DEBT DIDN'T EXIST UNTIL OBAMA BECAME THE PRESIDENT? ARE YOU KIDDING ME. And "and other stuff"? That's the NSA. That's not Obama. The NSA has been a government agency since 1952. And they've been allowed to collect information on people since 2001, during George Bush's presidency. Don't act like it's new. Neither of these have evidence. Can you actually supply at least three for each point?Dang, edits everywhere in this post of mine, my apologies
I mean, I'm from the United States, so yea. Also, I don't know - sometimes I think getting opinions from objective, unbiased sources is a good way to learn more about how things are in the eyes of the rest of the world - don't get me wrong, I think those kinds of sources from within my country are just as useful, but somehow I don't think your unbiased. I, by no means, am I fan of Obama - it doesn't mean I don't think he's done some good for this country, and I must certainly wouldn't write off other view-points just because they don't relate to my own. Insinuating he's saying that he WANTS anyone to die is kind of absurd.
Jaysus... I'm not sure if you're joking or not. Either way, this is absolutely hilarious. Bush destabilised the Middle East by sending people over there in the first place. Obama tried, and is still trying, to get it back on its feet after Bush's eagerness to get over there and mess stuff up. It's because of George Bush's government that the Middle East is a total mess, not Obama's. I'm pretty sure every country keeps files on that stuff about their people, whether they admit to it or not. It's not intrusive at all - it's just as intrusive as CCTV cameras are, which are everywhere in Europe but Americans have massive problems with them for some reason. They don't care about you unless they think you've done something horribly wrong. You misunderstood me. Aye, I'm game for population control, sort of. Two children per family, unless they're willing to pay a little bit more in their own taxes or whatever for every extra child they have. That will keep the population stable and sustainable. There's no need to force abortions on women, kill people, or stand by and let poverty and starvation run rife throughout the world that may drive humanity to extinction. I don't like discussing my viewpoint on this, since it's largely not thought out - it's not something I like to dwell on and haven't thought of for a year or two. Some kind of system needs to be put in place to stop a population crisis, though.
The thing is, he didn't need to go into Iraq to do that. It was his decision. That's why outsiders don't like America, politically - they seem to feel the need to get involved in everyone else's business, much like the other big power (it is debatable as to whether or not it shares a the superpower title with America) in the world, the European Union - who aren't liked by many Europeans and European nations. The difference between the EU and the US is that the EU's citizens aren't brainwashed to love it. I'll state it again: I don't support the one child policy. I never once even hinted that I liked it. You just read between some non-existent lines and deduced that I did and apparently want to kill people.
You're blaming presidents for things that are forced upon them, not for what they are trying to accomplish.
Looks like a website to me EDIT: I happened to read the title as well, and to you I throw you another source with a title and no analysis! http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...rgeted-liberal-groups-bush-years-jim-mcdermo/
I'm pulling out of this discussion because I had my say and I also had the opportunity to read other people's view on it (thanks Lance). Still, one thing is obvious for me: to me this is a classic situation of having to agree that you disagree on certain topics.
