"Interesting. I don't recall anyone going to Australia and dragging your troops into any war. "

the US made it rather clear that if we did not offer assistance, our "contract" with them would come under serious scrutiny. yes, our government did make the decision to go, because it is more or less the US's lap-dog, and has been since it began relying upon it for defence. in a sense, i think they were dragged into the war because while america can decide when it will honour the alliance between us (east timor, thanks), we have to participate in all of americas excursions or we lose the alliance.

the australian government is to blaim for making that alliance and depending upon it in the first instance

few australians want to see their "defence" forces follow america into every battle, unfortunately most are vapid enough to vote the same parties in year after year, so the policy will not change.

"Imagine anyone getting off with such light numbers in a war."

yes

"When almost everybody is against you? You have a strange imagination, child."

low blow, mate. at least i have an opinion and the nerve to argue it. almost everyone may be against *me* but these are the opinions i have drawn about the world based on the things the world has shown me. i am not about to conform to more conventional opinions unless i believe them, and frankly i think conventional opinion is rife with lies. most teenagers would have world politics continue on its path so long as no pop culture gets harmed. and i am eighteen, anyway, which makes me an adult in my country.

when almost everybody is against you? all i have to say is that the french nobility had its hey-day. for a time they were worshipped by their people, and they were very very rich. then everybody up and chopped off their heads, because they had had enough. keep up the over-ambition and whether or not there are a million lesser-evils, it is the most obvious and most glorious one that they will begin to lose patience for. guess who that is.

"Half successful? What would you define as successful?"

originally i meant it in the sense that the trade centre was nowhere near full when the plane hit (at least thats what i heard) and in the sense that one plane accomplished nothing (other than crashing). definition of successful? i guess if it wiped out your government and all of the squeeze-bags it is composed of, i would say it was successful.


but i digress. ive only tried to rebutt some of what you said (the rest was a bit hard) because this is all something that i... regret bringing up to some extent, and for bringing it up i do apologise, for two reasons. not just because i should already know that it is offensive. but because it is true that i am directing my anger for the worlds puppet-masters toward the most conveniant target - the US - which is not the worlds puppet master but simply a puppet which goes about its business quite obviously. just as the US can put a squeezer in a position of power so that it knows it can always give them the squeeze, the puppet-masters have put squeezers into power in the US so that the US is always ripe for squeezing.


but this happens everywhere, and its origin is evil, not the US government, which is merely its favourite weapon. i should be directing any effort at countering evil and propogating good, rather than insulting countries and bothering countrymen. i should not say everything is the US's fault, because when i really think about where i stand on the matter, i realise that i know there is much greater evil around. im sorry for bringing this up.

but im still curious why jr is so proud.