The part about creating the war on terror for oil makes no sense. America can make its own oil at home for cheap. Yes, spend 800 billion dollars annually on a military war budget in order to make a little bit of money on oil. The war on terror was valid, but stupid. All they did was make poorer, less-educated refugees, which made people even more susceptible to extremism. Even today, Afghanistan is still being held together by American tax dollars. Without American money, Afghanistan would just fall to extremists once again.
Welfare IS great. Have you ever been a single parent? Work your ass off and give 40% of your money to a babysitter before any can go to you or your children? That's why welfare exists - so single parents can afford to give their families a decent standard of living. So that if their child turns out to have potential, they will be able to capitalize on that potential.
Your stupidity knows no bounds, does it, Arcanicus? And whoever said the Middle East was justified but stupid- Justified- Yes Poorly Executed- Yes Stupid- No. If I were in charge, I would stop helping Iran, because they won't help themselves, stay in Afghanistan, build up the government, etc., all the while sending in troops to get rid of ISIS and whatnot.
Yes, we do need some welfare, but it should be very limited. Only for certain amounts of time, and you have to be working if you can. If the single parent is working? Give them all they need, but no more. Teach the parent a trade, kids get the poverty benefits from school, etc. But if the parent won't get a job, take away the kids, put them in foster care, and cut off the parent. I think there should be assessors who go and figure that kind of thing out. We need a safety net, but then we need to help them get back on the rope.
I noting everything else. "We'll known and undisputed fact that is being suppressed by the government" That's called an oxymoron. Now assuming you don't understand that, I'll use untrue , but more amusing definitions of the word to explain. It's calling the person who used it a moron. (In reality it's when the two parts conflict) and that's because your statement can't possibly be true. For information to be suppressed it cannot possibly be we'll known. For information to be undisputed every single possible entity must agree Neither of those are the case
You do realize that the American government can have someone detained forever for no reason at all, right? http://bit.ly/1x5rybc http://bit.ly/1ApJkSa
Are you implying that the information included in the two Wiki pages is false? Wikipedia has always been a source, or rather, a collection of sources. Every Wikipedia page has a "references" or "bibliography" page at the bottom. I suggest you look into that sometime. The only people who have a problem with using Wikipedia as a source are teachers because they expect you to find your own sources as opposed to copy/pasting a page of information that already has a huge list of sources. You go edit those pages and fill them with false information and tell me how many seconds it takes for moderators to change it back.
Allow me to illustrate the difference between US and Europe.. Cheese: US: Processed Cheddar Kraft Singles Europe: Stinky