Will the battle tank become obsolete? - Page 12




 
--
 
November 28th, 2008  
SHERMAN
 
 
Quote:
Chavez did nationalise the oil compagnies to let the people profit from the wealth of their own soil
Like Naser, like Saddam, or like Khumeyni?
November 28th, 2008  
LeMask
 
Sherman, it's ridiculous...
They have a lot of wealth in these countries... plenty of oil. It's not normal to see poor people in such countries...

They have to tax the oil compagnies to fund schools, hospitals Etc... And provide a healthy life style to their people.
This is how we make powerful countries. By having ressources and using them to build a work force...

Saddam was a tyrant, and he was a good friend of the foreign powers... (still looking at you USA) I dont compare him to Chavez at all...

About president Naser, he just "cristalised" the will of the people. Is it a crime to see a people enjoy the wealth of their countries? Naser was a hero for its people.

And just think about the rich elite in Venezuela, driving luxury cars and enjoying life like if they were kings, while there is people living in houses made from scrap metal... In an oil rich country? this is a shame for all mankind.

Like the Saudis who have their king titles and rubbish protocols... while they have poor arab countries who desperatly need money to build an industry/agriculture...

Of course, a lot of western countries support these things because they are good for our bussiness.

Saddam sold his country's wealth to buy useless weapons to push his people to fight their brothers...
We did the same with Iran...

Same in Venezuela, we use the media to give Chavez a bad name... we even staged a coup against him...

today, It's a crime to put the interests of the people before the interests of the ruling powers... and this is a shame. it's criminal.
November 28th, 2008  
SHERMAN
 
 
the problem i was hinting at is that "socialist" tirants tend to use the profits of nationalised companies as their wallets and not to better the people. look at egypt during nassers rule...he used most of the profits from the Suez to build an army which was destroyed and than di it again. Thin k how much he could have done if he used it for better causes. He is a heroe because the egyptian gov pumps the people with his image.

anyway this is off topic completely.
--
November 28th, 2008  
Rorke
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SHERMAN
the problem i was hinting at is that "socialist" tirants tend to use the profits of nationalised companies as their wallets and not to better the people. look at egypt during nassers rule...he used most of the profits from the Suez to build an army which was destroyed and than di it again. Thin k how much he could have done if he used it for better causes. He is a heroe because the egyptian gov pumps the people with his image.

anyway this is off topic completely.
Much unlike America building an army when even a fraction of these funds could have been used for the benefit of the american people ?
November 28th, 2008  
SHERMAN
 
 
the american system in theory at least has checks and balances. more over, there is little to compare american poor people to 3rd world poor people. a poor american lives at 50 times the quality of a poor iraqi.
November 28th, 2008  
Rorke
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SHERMAN
the american system in theory at least has checks and balances. more over, there is little to compare american poor people to 3rd world poor people. a poor american lives at 50 times the quality of a poor iraqi.
Which poor american, the starving one living in the sewers ?
November 29th, 2008  
SHERMAN
 
 
no, the term poor is comperative. it depends on the avarage income in the country.
November 29th, 2008  
Rorke
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SHERMAN
no, the term poor is comperative. it depends on the avarage income in the country.
Do the hundreds of thousands of homeless people also depend on the average income of the country ?
November 29th, 2008  
SHERMAN
 
 
in a nation of 300,000,000 a few houndred thousend are hardly a large amount.
November 29th, 2008  
Rorke
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SHERMAN
in a nation of 300,000,000 a few houndred thousend are hardly a large amount.
Well Iraq had approximately 6 thousand homeless because the evil tyrant ran massive housing projects then the democratic US came and everything got better, oh wait no it didnt you ruined the country.

Since subtlety apparently bounces off you let me rephrase it in a more direct manner, US is full of bigots like you who think that whoever makes decisions that are opposed to what you want is a tyrant.

Naser was a hero for his people and did a lot of good for them, Saddam with all his cruelty was the sole reason for stability in Iraq, Chavez took over oil refineries because your corporations were bleeding the country dry.

Make no mistake i live next to Russia and Russia is an uncivilized shithole incapable of normal relations with its neighbours i'd love having US for a neighbour instead but dont call people who oppose US in the best interest of their countries tyrants, angels they're not but what they're doing is good for them and their people, there's two countries where US had it their way, Afganistan and Iraq, you made them both ruined hellholes so its no wonder others want to avoid that fate.
 


Similar Topics
Main Battle Tank Battle
US main battle tank destroyed in southern Iraq
What's your MOS (Military Occupational Specialty)?
I want Redleg banned.
Yom Kippur war - Shmuel Askarov story