View Full Version : Harvard students US is more dangerous than ISIS
yeah we are hosed when you listen to this again not dumb people at Harvard just %100 brain washed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EtuPJ0H-Fc
some of the videos of on the street folks are always as bad but this is our futures political leaders etc...
after all ISIS is only bad because we have a skewed view of them !!!! maybe we should send him over there for a first hand look :)
scoutfsu99
10-07-14, 17:51
maybe we should send him over there for a first hand look :)
I'm curious to see how their opinions would change, if they would change, as their heads are being sawed off...
Moose-Knuckle
10-07-14, 17:58
Indoctrination at it's zenith.
YUP
sadly I feel they would somehow think they deserve it ?
I'm curious to see how their opinions would change, if they would change, as their heads are being sawed off...
MorphCross
10-07-14, 19:07
No, it's funny how opinions change once you step out of college into the real world. America never set out to radicalize the Islamic faith. We may have taken steps back when we were fighting the Soviets, or more recently took steps in other regions of the Middle East to aid in stabilization of certain regimes. That being said, I don't think this video which has probably been heavily edited from cherry picked footage is an accurate representation of the thoughts of a bulk of Harvard undergrads.
No, it's funny how opinions change once you step out of college into the real world. America never set out to radicalize the Islamic faith. We may have taken steps back when we were fighting the Soviets, or more recently took steps in other regions of the Middle East to aid in stabilization of certain regimes. That being said, I don't think this video which has probably been heavily edited from cherry picked footage is an accurate representation of the thoughts of a bulk of Harvard undergrads.
The fact that people of such low practical intellectual caliber exist is disheartening enough IMO.
YUP
sadly I feel they would somehow think they deserve it ?
Nah... it's be a mix up. ISIS just would have mistaken them for one of use dumbies.... It'd be the fault of us un-enlightened Westerners.
bushes fault ! :)
OH wait NRA fault :)
Nah... it's be a mix up. ISIS just would have mistaken them for one of use dumbies.... It'd be the fault of us un-enlightened Westerners.
The fact that people of such low practical intellectual caliber exist is disheartening enough IMO.
Remember: We are told that these are the elite, the future leaders, the brightest and most gifted amongst us. How dare you question and doubt them?
I keep hearing these types talk about American Imperialism.
Can somebody explain to me what countries are the American colonies that we have full control of? Also why didn't we pick a good one that we could get "free oil" from?
Seems to me that rather than profiting from the resource of other countries and having their citizens fight "our" wars, which is what Imperialism would be, American citizens are dying fighting wars in other countries and we are spending American wealth fighting those wars, which is sort of the opposite of Imperialism.
Of course I never went to Harvard.
BoringGuy45
10-08-14, 00:13
I'd be more surprised if you told me that the sun is hot.
These are a bunch of do-nothing, know-nothing kids getting an extremely expensive education that is going to help them a lot less than they think. For some reason, America thinks the smartest thing a person can do is supposedly debunk what is believed to be common knowledge. These idiots don't really believe what they're saying. And if they do, I say damn right America is more dangerous than ISIS. I like it that way. I feel a lot safer being part of the most dangerous entity on the planet.
MountainRaven
10-08-14, 00:42
It's funny watching people change positions because someone else agrees with them: I feel like a key word here is, "World."
As in, "What is the bigger threat to world peace?"
On the one hand, we have a group of diaper-wearing savages running around the Middle-East lopping people's heads off. Versus a country that alone spends 1-in-3 of every dollar spent on defense globally, that possesses ten of the world's twelve super carriers and is building half of those still under construction - the only country to possess nuclear-powered super carriers, that has troops stationed on every continent on earth, &c., &c., &c.
It wasn't that long ago that many of the posters on this forum were talking about ISIS being a distraction, that it was created by the US, that the US was destabilizing Libya, Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, &c. To say nothing of Ukraine, Japan/China, Africa....
Where are all the people who were saying that ISIS are Obama's buddies? That the US was putting fascists into power in Ukraine? That America withdrawing from Iraq was reckless? That withdrawing from Afghanistan is reckless? That all the US touches turns to ash?
To put it another way, ISIS is a regional power. Its reach is too short to threaten the US, China, or even Europe - except with terrorist attacks. It is a regional threat and not a global one. ISIS could not threaten world peace if it wanted to: It cannot turn France or China into mass killing fields. There are only three countries with that capability and one of them has a helluva lot more capability than the other two. And those are the Russian Federation, the Peoples Republic of China, and the United States of America. Now, in light of these facts, which poses a greater threat to world peace?
Just because some libtard fresh out of high school finally gets to think for themselves - under the guidance of primarily libtard instructors - and comes to some derpy conclusions about "American Imperialism" and trying to "understand Islamists as human beings" doesn't mean that their conclusion - that ISIS is a lesser threat to world peace than the US - is and must be erroneous.
(Note: I'm not passing judgement on whether the US or the American people want world peace. I'm not saying that the US is damaging world peace. But when it comes to a strict threat assessment, the party with the nuclear attack submarines, stealth bombers, cruise missiles, and the ability to deploy a combat-ready force anywhere on earth in 48 hours or less is going to beat out a couple tens of thousands of guys with dull machetes, Kalashnikovs, some artillery, and half an understanding of how to service and operate a captured AFV.)
I'd be more surprised if you told me that the sun is hot.
These are a bunch of do-nothing, know-nothing kids getting an extremely expensive education that is going to help them a lot less than they think. For some reason, America thinks the smartest thing a person can do is supposedly debunk what is believed to be common knowledge. These idiots don't really believe what they're saying. And if they do, I say damn right America is more dangerous than ISIS. I like it that way. I feel a lot safer being part of the most dangerous entity on the planet.
I don't think that you're quite right about Harvard.
Some of the most powerful people in the land are Harvard alums. And they're going to tend to want to work with and help other Harvard alums - even recent ones. And these Harvard alums are going to be turning around and getting their college friends - also Harvard alums - jobs, too. It's not what you know - it's who you know.
Plumber237
10-08-14, 06:29
It's funny watching people change positions because someone else agrees with them: I feel like a key word here is, "World."
As in, "What is the bigger threat to world peace?"
On the one hand, we have a group of diaper-wearing savages running around the Middle-East lopping people's heads off. Versus a country that alone spends 1-in-3 of every dollar spent on defense globally, that possesses ten of the world's twelve super carriers and is building half of those still under construction - the only country to possess nuclear-powered super carriers, that has troops stationed on every continent on earth, &c., &c., &c.
It wasn't that long ago that many of the posters on this forum were talking about ISIS being a distraction, that it was created by the US, that the US was destabilizing Libya, Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, &c. To say nothing of Ukraine, Japan/China, Africa....
Where are all the people who were saying that ISIS are Obama's buddies? That the US was putting fascists into power in Ukraine? That America withdrawing from Iraq was reckless? That withdrawing from Afghanistan is reckless? That all the US touches turns to ash?
To put it another way, ISIS is a regional power. Its reach is too short to threaten the US, China, or even Europe - except with terrorist attacks. It is a regional threat and not a global one. ISIS could not threaten world peace if it wanted to: It cannot turn France or China into mass killing fields. There are only three countries with that capability and one of them has a helluva lot more capability than the other two. And those are the Russian Federation, the Peoples Republic of China, and the United States of America. Now, in light of these facts, which poses a greater threat to world peace?
Just because some libtard fresh out of high school finally gets to think for themselves - under the guidance of primarily libtard instructors - and comes to some derpy conclusions about "American Imperialism" and trying to "understand Islamists as human beings" doesn't mean that their conclusion - that ISIS is a lesser threat to world peace than the US - is and must be erroneous.
(Note: I'm not passing judgement on whether the US or the American people want world peace. I'm not saying that the US is damaging world peace. But when it comes to a strict threat assessment, the party with the nuclear attack submarines, stealth bombers, cruise missiles, and the ability to deploy a combat-ready force anywhere on earth in 48 hours or less is going to beat out a couple tens of thousands of guys with dull machetes, Kalashnikovs, some artillery, and half an understanding of how to service and operate a captured AFV.)
I don't think that you're quite right about Harvard.
Some of the most powerful people in the land are Harvard alums. And they're going to tend to want to work with and help other Harvard alums - even recent ones. And these Harvard alums are going to be turning around and getting their college friends - also Harvard alums - jobs, too. It's not what you know - it's who you know.
This is very well stated, it's easy to jump to conclusions (especially with sound bites). We are DEFINATELY more capable of destruction anywhere in the world, but the saving grace is that our capabilities aren't controlled by bloodthirsty fanatics who want to wipe out large groups of other people based on their religion, culture, etc. As clueless and incompetant as much of our countries leadership is their primary concern isn't genocide.
There is at least one Harvard grad that I know for a fact frequently posts on M4C. There's probably more than one.
Also you can't really make anything of this video besides that a handful of people standing in Harvard answered a certain way. They might not be students. They might be students but were the only ones who answered America out of dozens if not hundreds who answered ISIS. It's like any number of videos showing people signing stupid petitions or whatever. I mean seriously, 4 people said America was worse in the video, out of a student body of roughly 21,000. Of course he didn't interview all the students, but if you're making a video, you can easily find 4 people out of 21,000 that'll push any view point you can think of.
This is very well stated, it's easy to jump to conclusions (especially with sound bites). We are DEFINATELY more capable of destruction anywhere in the world, but the saving grace is that our capabilities aren't controlled by bloodthirsty fanatics who want to wipe out large groups of other people based on their religion, culture, etc. As clueless and incompetant as much of our countries leadership is their primary concern isn't genocide.
It's also uncontested that America's military and economic might is so much greater than ISIS's that they barely register as an organization capable of resisting. They mostly just die when up against American military power.
The question is also ambiguous. Does "threat to world peace" mean "ability to end world peace" or "intent to end world peace" or both? Does "world peace" mean "if there is conflict anywhere in the world, world peace has ended" or is it peace without large amounts of nation states fighting each other? How you interpret the question will change how you answer it.
I would agree with the Harvard peeps, with one change. Change the word 'threat' to 'influence'. Many of them actually responded to the question as if they were asked about 'influence'.
Side note, I would've been a damn good student at Harvard. Them ladies are beat. No distractions.
Eurodriver
10-08-14, 08:53
Fjallhrafnnasfha posted what I came in here to say. While it makes for a provocative talking point - I seriously doubt there are more than a handful of Harvard students that would rather stand in a room with a Jihadist than a U.S. Marine. They do exist, but not to the point this video makes it out to be.
Yeah and look at who he asked. Completely judging a book by its cover, but they say exactly what I expect them to.
BoringGuy45
10-08-14, 09:54
I don't think you're quite right about Harvard.
Some of the most powerful people in the land are Harvard alums. And they're going to tend to want to work with and help other Harvard alums - even recent ones. And these Harvard alums are going to be turning around and getting their college friends - also Harvard alums - jobs, too. It's not what you know - it's who you know.
True in many cases. A person at an Ivy League school, especially Harvard or Yale, who really does aspire for high powered positions will be more likely to get there than someone who went to a state school in most cases. However, Harvard is like most other schools, in that the majority of the students are there on their parents' dime and getting pointless degrees in things like 18th Century French Gay Literature. They then spend most of their time after college working their part time barista job at some fair trade coffee shop in Cambridge and winning political debates by saying, "Don't argue with me. I go to Harvard!" (true story; happened to me :D).
It is sad that Ivy League schools are held to such esteem when, from what I have seen time and time again, their undergrad programs do not prepare students for the world any better than any other quality state or private school. The only advantage to an Ivy League diploma, as you pointed out, is name recognition and the fact that a lot of Harvard alum want to keep the whole "legacy" thing going beyond school.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.