US Assistant Secretary Of State Campbell Meets Red-Shirts Protesters

[pornsasi]

I however will not be protesting for new elections. I will not take part in any movement that will further damage Thailand. In a democracy if you don't like the outcome you have to wait for the next election and come up with better alternatives. Otherwise you end up with the circus we have now.

Agree with you 100% , provided there are elections so that the PM has a popular mandate

[lazurus]

Just because the USA has not formally added the red shirts to their list of Terrorist organizations in not evidence that they are not terrorists. Firstly unless they target American interests it is unlikely that step would be taken, and if it was it would take many months for it to happen. A meeting between Red representatives and an American official does not mean they could not be considered terrorists. US officials have met with leaders of the PLO and other organizations that could be considered terrorists to mediate in other circumstances.

"criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act, which constitute offences within the scope of and as defined in the international conventions and protocols relating to terrorism, are under no circumstances justifiable by considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or other similar nature," UN resolution 1566 defining terrorism.

Seems like making a case that the reds have committed terrorism would be pretty simple. If you were honest with yourself.

You are mistaken . Many terrorists group that are not targetting american interest are IN their list of terrorist organisation . And then there is the EC with same set of rules . Because one protest against a PM elected by a parliament without a popular mandate and a PM that calls for state of emergency and suspend all medias that dont agree with him , does not make him a terrorist .

Else half the word would be terrorists ...

What I meant was that unless you are targetting American interests getting on a list of terrorist organizations takes time. You can still get on it, so don't lose hope reds. There is a difference however between legitimate peaceful protests and terrorism. It is the violent nature of the attacks, and the use of intimidation and fear to influence the government that crosses the line. A prime minister does not need to be elected by the majority of the population to get the job, Samak didn't have 50%, Somchai wasn't elected into office by the people.

Throwing blood on the PM's home to intimidate him. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Launching grenades at the skytrain targeting civilians. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Shooting police and soldiers who are enforcing the law. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Intimidating the population by conducting unlawful searches. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Creating fear in the population to restrict their ability to travel and go to work. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

[oceano]

They are amongst the protesters, shooting at the army. That makes them part of the protesters in my book. You obviously want to see their red id card before you accept that they are on the red side. Up to you.

For example: i hate you( not real i only talk about ok?) i want kill you, i know you fight whit someone else, i know can be confusion meanwhile you fight whit some else, so what i do? i wait the fight i put a black tshirt and from one windows i shoot you.

Ok can be made from red people, can be their guilty but till someone dont show evidence we can talk forever for nothings.

I mean if thei are red why they shoot most at their own people than to the soldier?

Why, why one soldier must to shoot live bullet to some people and try to kill them? is not same like the black shoot to someone? if someone have hostage in one bank what the police do? try to kill everybody?

Why all are crazy and use the 90% of reds/yellows/phinks for make this things?

[pornsasi]

What I meant was that unless you are targetting American interests getting on a list of terrorist organizations takes time. You can still get on it, so don't lose hope reds. There is a difference however between legitimate peaceful protests and terrorism. It is the violent nature of the attacks, and the use of intimidation and fear to influence the government that crosses the line. A prime minister does not need to be elected by the majority of the population to get the job, Samak didn't have 50%, Somchai wasn't elected into office by the people.

Throwing blood on the PM's home to intimidate him. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Launching grenades at the skytrain targeting civilians. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Shooting police and soldiers who are enforcing the law. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Intimidating the population by conducting unlawful searches. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Creating fear in the population to restrict their ability to travel and go to work. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Samak was elected by a parliament that had a popular mandate .

Somchai was just a replacement for Samak , like Gordon Brown for Tony Blair

Abhisit was elected by a doctored parliement where number of seats to each party did not reflect

a popular vote , thus he has no popular mandate . If he had one , he would not agree to elections before

due date .

There is a bit more to democracy then just respecting the constitution . Hitler also respected the constituition

Not that Abhisit is trhe same as Hitler of course . Perhaps you should go to the UK

and ask if something like this is possible there without mass protests

Throwing blood . Yes so what .... ? Big deal . And was not directly at the PM

Launching grenades ... no proof

Shooting police ... no proof

Rest yes true , hospital too , well they got paranoid with some reasons , i dont agree

with them but that is NOT terrorism

[justasken]

Dear Thailand anti Reds.

Please list one nation, other than Thailand, that has the Reds on a list for being a terrorist organization.

There is not one.

So please stop your nonsense.

[Redsunset]

US have done agreat job with middle east "road map".

Last thing we need is more lunatics taking over the asylum!

CAMPBELL = CAMPBELL SOUP

[brianbiegler]

Seems like elections coming at the end of the year in Thailand will look something like this..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8671673.stm

violence between factions in Philippines recent elections.

[justasken]

US have done agreat job with middle east "road map".

Last thing we need is more lunatics taking over the asylum!

CAMPBELL = CAMPBELL SOUP

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thailand

18 coups

And still it goes on.

Thailand soup

[noahvail]

Ex-army or serving army officers have weapons at home . What do you expect ? In the Philippines some of my friends , that are neither police or army have M16's at home , i saw those myself . Does not mean they are using them ? No ! That actor is a plant , obvious . We are talking about red shirts , not some nutcase shooting at army or police . If you have proof that red shirts shot the policeman 2 days ago or shot the grenade in Silom , show them , or else dont speculate non sense and waist everybody's time

You certainly have interesting friends, who have M16s in their home. Are they used for deer hunting? When I hunted, the rule was one shot, one drop. Why do they have weapons that fire some 12 rounds per second?

Do you happen to have friends in Bangkok, too?

[pornsasi]

Dear Thailand anti Reds.

Please list one nation, other than Thailand, that has the Reds on a list for being a terrorist organization.

There is not one.

So please stop your nonsense.

Good remark ...

[justasken]

Why does it upset so many of you that there might be an election?

You say the reds will lose.

You say they are not popular.

So have the election.

Simple.

Maybe you are full of it and you know the reds will win.

One can always tell the loser in a game.

They scream and cry.

We see the posters here and they are not happy Reds are going to get an election.

[noahvail]

What I meant was that unless you are targetting American interests getting on a list of terrorist organizations takes time. You can still get on it, so don't lose hope reds. There is a difference however between legitimate peaceful protests and terrorism. It is the violent nature of the attacks, and the use of intimidation and fear to influence the government that crosses the line. A prime minister does not need to be elected by the majority of the population to get the job, Samak didn't have 50%, Somchai wasn't elected into office by the people.

Throwing blood on the PM's home to intimidate him. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Launching grenades at the skytrain targeting civilians. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Shooting police and soldiers who are enforcing the law. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Intimidating the population by conducting unlawful searches. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Creating fear in the population to restrict their ability to travel and go to work. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Samak was elected by a parliament that had a popular mandate .

Somchai was just a replacement for Samak , like Gordon Brown for Tony Blair

Abhisit was elected by a doctored parliement where number of seats to each party did not reflect

a popular vote , thus he has no popular mandate . If he had one , he would not agree to elections before

due date .

There is a bit more to democracy then just respecting the constitution . Hitler also respected the constituition

Not that Abhisit is trhe same as Hitler of course . Perhaps you should go to the UK

and ask if something like this is possible there without mass protests

Throwing blood . Yes so what .... ? Big deal . And was not directly at the PM

Launching grenades ... no proof

Shooting police ... no proof

Rest yes true , hospital too , well they got paranoid with some reasons , i dont agree

with them but that is NOT terrorism

Sheesh....the bloody "unelected no mandate" thing again.

Tell ya what - go read the Thai constitution. There's a link to the English translation on this forum. The go read the 50 or so posts that have explained thoroughly why you are just soooooo wrong on this.

Plus, you got to play the Nazi card. Oh, I thought there was much more to you than this, Pornsasi!

[Jerrytheyoung]

What I meant was that unless you are targetting American interests getting on a list of terrorist organizations takes time. You can still get on it, so don't lose hope reds. There is a difference however between legitimate peaceful protests and terrorism. It is the violent nature of the attacks, and the use of intimidation and fear to influence the government that crosses the line. A prime minister does not need to be elected by the majority of the population to get the job, Samak didn't have 50%, Somchai wasn't elected into office by the people.

Throwing blood on the PM's home to intimidate him. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Launching grenades at the skytrain targeting civilians. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Shooting police and soldiers who are enforcing the law. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Intimidating the population by conducting unlawful searches. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Creating fear in the population to restrict their ability to travel and go to work. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Samak was elected by a parliament that had a popular mandate .

Somchai was just a replacement for Samak , like Gordon Brown for Tony Blair

Abhisit was elected by a doctored parliement where number of seats to each party did not reflect

a popular vote , thus he has no popular mandate . If he had one , he would not agree to elections before

due date .

There is a bit more to democracy then just respecting the constitution . Hitler also respected the constituition

Not that Abhisit is trhe same as Hitler of course . Perhaps you should go to the UK

and ask if something like this is possible there without mass protests

Throwing blood . Yes so what .... ? Big deal . And was not directly at the PM

Launching grenades ... no proof

Shooting police ... no proof

Rest yes true , hospital too , well they got paranoid with some reasons , i dont agree

with them but that is NOT terrorism

if i understand some posters, the fact to have a militia is terrorism.

First, the militias are flourishing in Thailand, so the terrorists are everywhere, on all sides. even apparently some mafia (Pattaya) have their gangs....I am a supporter of the Full interdiction of Militias.

Secondly, we are not without ignoring the weaponry smuggling, particularly at the North Western boundary....This activity has never stopped since the Vietnam war (who has started this activity?). Too much circulation of weaponry in Thailand: should be very severely repressed on every side.

Thirdly, plenty of veterans on this website, former VW soldiers, nostalgic, specialists in weaponry, commandos, from their keyboards giving advices "how to clean" a democratic demonstration, we can extend the definition of potential terrorists to them....(flaming)

we have to be serious... terrorists are people who are involved in ACTIONS not only talking, because nowadays 50% of the TV posters can be considered as terrorists if we consider the definition given by some posters

[bkkjames]

Dear Thailand anti Reds.

Please list one nation, other than Thailand, that has the Reds on a list for being a terrorist organization.

There is not one.

So please stop your nonsense.

Good remark ...

These things take time and diplomacy. Just because you are labeled terrorist domestically, doesnt mean you get the upgrade to international overnight. You have to earn it.

First of all the USA and the rest of the international community have to be sure who is going to win...can't go around calling somebody a terrorist one week and then Ambassador to the UN the next.

[pornsasi]

You certainly have interesting friends, who have M16s in their home. Are they used for deer hunting? When I hunted, the rule was one shot, one drop. Why do they have weapons that fire some 12 rounds per second?

Do you happen to have friends in Bangkok, too?

Yes i have friends in BKK too . One of em runs a 7-11 . Not sure if he has a firearm but heard that in Thailand its quite common .

Well in the Philippines the number of firearms is staggering , my friend like to shoot at targets i.e objects for pleasure .

nothing wrong with that .

[Jingthing]

Why does it upset so many of you that there might be an election?

You say the reds will lose.

You say they are not popular.

So have the election.

Simple.

Maybe you are full of it and you know the reds will win.

One can always tell the loser in a game.

They scream and cry.

We see the posters here and they are not happy Reds are going to get an election.

Not happy if Thaksin buys the election with money and violent thuggery. That's for sure. And such an election would not bring peace.

[justasken]

Why does it upset so many of you that there might be an election?

You say the reds will lose.

You say they are not popular.

So have the election.

Simple.

Maybe you are full of it and you know the reds will win.

One can always tell the loser in a game.

They scream and cry.

We see the posters here and they are not happy Reds are going to get an election.

Not happy if Thaksin buys the election with money and violent thuggery. That's for sure. And such an election would not bring peace.

Do we have peace now with No election?

[pornsasi]

What I meant was that unless you are targetting American interests getting on a list of terrorist organizations takes time. You can still get on it, so don't lose hope reds. There is a difference however between legitimate peaceful protests and terrorism. It is the violent nature of the attacks, and the use of intimidation and fear to influence the government that crosses the line. A prime minister does not need to be elected by the majority of the population to get the job, Samak didn't have 50%, Somchai wasn't elected into office by the people.

Throwing blood on the PM's home to intimidate him. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Launching grenades at the skytrain targeting civilians. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Shooting police and soldiers who are enforcing the law. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Intimidating the population by conducting unlawful searches. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Creating fear in the population to restrict their ability to travel and go to work. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Samak was elected by a parliament that had a popular mandate .

Somchai was just a replacement for Samak , like Gordon Brown for Tony Blair

Abhisit was elected by a doctored parliement where number of seats to each party did not reflect

a popular vote , thus he has no popular mandate . If he had one , he would not agree to elections before

due date .

There is a bit more to democracy then just respecting the constitution . Hitler also respected the constituition

Not that Abhisit is trhe same as Hitler of course . Perhaps you should go to the UK

and ask if something like this is possible there without mass protests

Throwing blood . Yes so what .... ? Big deal . And was not directly at the PM

Launching grenades ... no proof

Shooting police ... no proof

Rest yes true , hospital too , well they got paranoid with some reasons , i dont agree

with them but that is NOT terrorism

Sheesh....the bloody "unelected no mandate" thing again.

Tell ya what - go read the Thai constitution. There's a link to the English translation on this forum. The go read the 50 or so posts that have explained thoroughly why you are just soooooo wrong on this.

Plus, you got to play the Nazi card. Oh, I thought there was much more to you than this, Pornsasi!

Did i say that he is illegally the PM . No , i did not say that , he did not violate the constitution .

So coming with this argument is like trying to force an open door , waste of time .

What i said , however , is that he has no popular mandate . He has'nt got any

and he knows that ... trust me ...

[whybother]

Samak was elected by a parliament that had a popular mandate .

Somchai was just a replacement for Samak , like Gordon Brown for Tony Blair

Abhisit was elected by a doctored parliement where number of seats to each party did not reflect

a popular vote , thus he has no popular mandate . If he had one , he would not agree to elections before

due date .

There is a bit more to democracy then just respecting the constitution . Hitler also respected the constituition

Not that Abhisit is trhe same as Hitler of course . Perhaps you should go to the UK

and ask if something like this is possible there without mass protests

Throwing blood . Yes so what .... ? Big deal . And was not directly at the PM

Launching grenades ... no proof

Shooting police ... no proof

Rest yes true , hospital too , well they got paranoid with some reasons , i dont agree

with them but that is NOT terrorism

The PPP got 40% of the vote. Similar to the Democrats. Neither "won" the election. Neither "had a mandate" (depending on how you define "mandate"). All the people voted for MPs.

Samak was voted in as PM with the help of MPs from smaller parties.

Samak was forced to step down as PM because he had another job. He could have stood for PM again, but the PPP decided to put Somchai up instead.

Somchai was voted in as PM with the help of MPs from the smaller parties.

Somchai was banned for electoral fraud.

The PTP (ex-PPP) were still in government with a care-taker PM. They had a choice to call elections or put a new person up for a vote for PM by the MPs.

Abhisit was voted in as PM with the help of MPs from the smaller parties. The smaller parties decided to change their support, most likely because the PPP/PTP government was incompetent.

In all three cases, all the MPs that voted for PM were elected by the people. All the people had representation of MPs in parliament. The three PMs were all elected in exactly the same way.

Abhisit has offered to have elections in November because he is being forced to by a violent mob. He has offered elections so that the economy doesn't get ruined more than it already has, and so that the country can move forward.

Let's see if the reds want to move forward.

[whybother]

Why does it upset so many of you that there might be an election?

You say the reds will lose.

You say they are not popular.

So have the election.

Simple.

Maybe you are full of it and you know the reds will win.

One can always tell the loser in a game.

They scream and cry.

We see the posters here and they are not happy Reds are going to get an election.

It upsets many posters that a violent mob can force a legitimate government to call elections more than 12 months before they are scheduled.

[pornsasi]

Why does it upset so many of you that there might be an election?

You say the reds will lose.

You say they are not popular.

So have the election.

Simple.

Maybe you are full of it and you know the reds will win.

One can always tell the loser in a game.

They scream and cry.

We see the posters here and they are not happy Reds are going to get an election.

Not happy if Thaksin buys the election with money and violent thuggery. That's for sure. And such an election would not bring peace.

According to Thaksin himself if the PM were to form a coalition Dems+PTP , Thaksin undertakes to abandon entirely the political arena

and forever publicly . That was in the news . So here goes the Thaksin future role

Of course Thaksin made it a prerequisite for the reds to terminate the protest , which i agree with the PM is difficult to accept

coz negiociating under threat .

But once the protest is over , hopefully this happen , if Thaksin maintains his offer .

Cant see other way of bringing back stability , let alone get elected .

[justasken]

Why does it upset so many of you that there might be an election?

You say the reds will lose.

You say they are not popular.

So have the election.

Simple.

Maybe you are full of it and you know the reds will win.

One can always tell the loser in a game.

They scream and cry.

We see the posters here and they are not happy Reds are going to get an election.

It upsets many posters that a violent mob can force a legitimate government to call elections more than 12 months before they are scheduled.

And you would have a good point if not for the facts that proceeded this time.

The Coup comes to mind.

Then the throwing out of a party and PM over a cooking show.

Just have an election.

THE PM has said there will be one in 6 months so that is already in the cards.

[Jingthing]

THE PM has said there will be one in 6 months so that is already in the cards.

It is NOT in the cards if the reds don't accept the road map. It is a CONDITIONAL offer as well it should be. And, wake up, they are NOT accepting the road map.

[noahvail]

What I meant was that unless you are targetting American interests getting on a list of terrorist organizations takes time. You can still get on it, so don't lose hope reds. There is a difference however between legitimate peaceful protests and terrorism. It is the violent nature of the attacks, and the use of intimidation and fear to influence the government that crosses the line. A prime minister does not need to be elected by the majority of the population to get the job, Samak didn't have 50%, Somchai wasn't elected into office by the people.

Throwing blood on the PM's home to intimidate him. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Launching grenades at the skytrain targeting civilians. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Shooting police and soldiers who are enforcing the law. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Intimidating the population by conducting unlawful searches. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Creating fear in the population to restrict their ability to travel and go to work. Peaceful protest or Terrorism?

Samak was elected by a parliament that had a popular mandate .

Somchai was just a replacement for Samak , like Gordon Brown for Tony Blair

Abhisit was elected by a doctored parliement here number of seats to each party did not reflect

a popular vote , thus he has no popular mandate . If he had one , he would not agree to elections before

due date .

There is a bit more to democracy then just respecting the constitution . Hitler also respected the constituition

Not that Abhisit is trhe same as Hitler of course . Perhaps you should go to the UK

and ask if something like this is possible there without mass protests

Throwing blood . Yes so what .... ? Big deal . And was not directly at the PM

Launching grenades ... no proof

Shooting police ... no proof

Rest yes true , hospital too , well they got paranoid with some reasons , i dont agree

with them but that is NOT terrorism

Sheesh....the bloody "unelected no mandate" thing again.

Tell ya what - go read the Thai constitution. There's a link to the English translation on this forum. The go read the 50 or so posts that have explained thoroughly why you are just soooooo wrong on this.

Plus, you got to play the Nazi card. Oh, I thought there was much more to you than this, Pornsasi!

Did i say that he is illegally the PM . No , i did not say that , he did not violate the constitution .

So coming with this argument is like trying to force an open door , waste of time .

What i said , however , is that he has no popular mandate . He has'nt got any

and he knows that ... trust me ...

What you did say is: "Abhisit was elected by a doctored parliement"

"Doctored" ??? Do you understand the meaning of this term? From the Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

2 a : to adapt or modify for a desired end by alteration or special treatment <doctored the play to suit the audience> <the drink was doctored> b : to alter deceptively <accused of doctoring the election returns>

So, when you say "doctored" do you mean a? or b? Think of a doctored photo, a doctored passport, a doctored election pamphlet. All are lies, wrong... when you say "doctored" you are saying that the parliament was illegally and/or deceptively altered.

Ok, you know what I'm going to ask next. Where is your proof???

And did you read the post directly below yours? None of the several PMs before Abhisit had mandates, either.

A lie, told long enough, becomes the truth. Keep talking. And why did you think you had to play the Hitler/Nazi card?

[stingray]

Never understud why US always put his nose in other countries affairs. US allways like to control everything. This must have a end! It's not their problem. I'm Swiss and if Swizterland would have a conflict with Italy tommorrow (just for example), than it's not the USA's Problem either.

[bkkjames]

Never understud why US always put his nose in other countries affairs. US allways like to control everything. This must have a end! It's not their problem. I'm Swiss and if Swizterland would have a conflict with Italy tommorrow (just for example), than it's not the USA's Problem either.

That's right mate, raise the white flag jk.

[whybother]

It upsets many posters that a violent mob can force a legitimate government to call elections more than 12 months before they are scheduled.

And you would have a good point if not for the facts that proceeded this time.

The Coup comes to mind.

Then the throwing out of a party and PM over a cooking show.

Just have an election.

THE PM has said there will be one in 6 months so that is already in the cards.

The coup happened. It's the past. Nothing can be done about it now.

An appointed care-taker PM was kicked out by the coup. Since then there have been elections.

Samak was kicked out over lying to the court and having two jobs. The fact that it was a cooking show is irrelevant. He should be concentrating on being PM, and he shouldn't be lying to the court.

The party wasn't kicked out because of a cooking show. They were kicked out because of electoral fraud. But only a few MPs (the PPP executive) were banned. All the other PPP MPs continued on in the PTP.

The PM has offered an election, which is what the reds want. Why are they taking so long to accept it and go home?

[Jingthing]

Never understud why US always put his nose in other countries affairs. US allways like to control everything. This must have a end! It's not their problem. I'm Swiss and if Swizterland would have a conflict with Italy tommorrow (just for example), than it's not the USA's Problem either.

It helps sometimes. Sometimes it doesn't. As an American, I support it when it helps. It remains to be seen whether this will help or not. You're Swiss? Big surprise. BTW, if the Nazis had won the war, would the Swiss still be neutral?

Edited May 10, 2010 by Jingthing

[pornsasi]

The PPP got 40% of the vote. Similar to the Democrats. Neither "won" the election. Neither "had a mandate" (depending on how you define "mandate"). All the people voted for MPs.

Samak was voted in as PM with the help of MPs from smaller parties.

Samak was forced to step down as PM because he had another job. He could have stood for PM again, but the PPP decided to put Somchai up instead.

Somchai was voted in as PM with the help of MPs from the smaller parties.

Somchai was banned for electoral fraud.

The PTP (ex-PPP) were still in government with a care-taker PM. They had a choice to call elections or put a new person up for a vote for PM by the MPs.

Abhisit was voted in as PM with the help of MPs from the smaller parties. The smaller parties decided to change their support, most likely because the PPP/PTP government was incompetent.

In all three cases, all the MPs that voted for PM were elected by the people. All the people had representation of MPs in parliament. The three PMs were all elected in exactly the same way.

Abhisit has offered to have elections in November because he is being forced to by a violent mob. He has offered elections so that the economy doesn't get ruined more than it already has, and so that the country can move forward.

Let's see if the reds want to move forward.

Morally he knows that going for elections is the right thing to do . And even the army thinks likewise

I know the story repeated 100 times . Well if you look at the foreign press BBC , CNN , almost in every article

that refers to the PM by name it is mentioned that he was elected by the parliament , a polite way to say "without

popular mandate" . Am sure the US also knows that ...

But its old story by now so yes as you say lets hope the reds want to move forward and work their differences

with the PM and terminate very very soon their protest .

[justasken]

Never understud why US always put his nose in other countries affairs. US allways like to control everything. This must have a end! It's not their problem. I'm Swiss and if Swizterland would have a conflict with Italy tommorrow (just for example), than it's not the USA's Problem either.

Yeah

Europe did great all on its own.

WW I

WW II

Your nation sucked in lots of stolen money from the nazis.

It is funny anyone from Europe trashing America.

All Europe ever did for 1000 years was have war.

How many died in WW II in Europe? Was it 15 million or was it 20 million?

America is stupid but not that stupid Europe.

Australia also called for elections here.

the UK also has done so.

Why not trash them?