America Bashing

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
241

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
orion wrote:
Chushin wrote:
orion wrote:

You just think I am an arrogant ass, which I am.

At last the truth, but not the whole truth, which is, you also have a mediocre mind, on continuous narcissistic display.

My bid, by the way:

San Marino is the oldest continuous republican democracy (founded 301 AD). And the United States is a republic with democratic institutions, to split the hair.

But, somehow, no one bashes poor, neglected, San Marino.[/quote]

And my poor mediocre mind disturbs so many sound, plain, American minds.

Let us not forget that.

242

[quote]orion wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
orion wrote:
Chushin wrote:
orion wrote:

You just think I am an arrogant ass, which I am.

At last the truth, but not the whole truth, which is, you also have a mediocre mind, on continuous narcissistic display.

My bid, by the way:

San Marino is the oldest continuous republican democracy (founded 301 AD). And the United States is a republic with democratic institutions, to split the hair.

But, somehow, no one bashes poor, neglected, San Marino.

And my poor mediocre mind disturbs so many sound, plain, American minds.

Let us not forget that.

[/quote]

Its called, “the fascination with the abomination.” (A phrase, I believe, from another noted Austrian, S. Freud. Oh, but the conditions of his departure are to be denied.)
We Americans tend to pity and to charity for fools and freaks of nature.

But I am done, too, with this slimeball. He just is too “icky” for this sound, plain–and proud–American.

243

[quote]Dustin wrote:
The U.S has no history of showing restraint.
Dustin[/quote]

  1. we did not invade and devistate Lebanon when the marines and others were killed there

  2. we did not invade and devistate Iran and Lebanon when hostages were held there.

  3. We did not attack Palestine in the face of various PLO, and Palestinian terrorist attacks against US civilians in the 70’s and 80’s including many hijackings and killings.

  4. We did attack Lybia, and Grenada. But we did not invade Lybia.

  5. We did not invade North Vietnam during the war and did nothing when our allies in South East Asia were over run by Commies. If we did not show restraint, we could have nuked the entire area.

  6. We did not respond when al-qaeda attacked several US instalations and embassies around the world. We did launch cruise missiles against several hot spots, but nothing like a full scale invasion of Afghanistan to root out the terrorists.

  7. When the Somalians shot down 2 helecopters, we did not strike back, we left.

  8. We did nothing when a Russian shot an American serviceman in a base in East Germany.

  9. We did nothing when the Russians invaded both Czechoslavia and Hungary.

  10. We did nothing when a Russian pilot shot down a civillian South Korean jet.

I think there was a lot of restraint shown.

245

[quote]Chushin wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
Are there sociopaths contributing to this thread?

"Antisocial personality disorder (APD) is a psychiatric condition characterized by an individual’s common disregard for social rules, norms, and cultural codes, as well as impulsive behavior, and indifference to the rights and feelings of others.
Central to identifying individuals exhibiting characteristics of the disorder is that they appear to experience a limited range of human emotions. This can explain their lack of empathy for the suffering of others, since they cannot experience the emotion associated with either empathy or suffering.

"The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders defines antisocial personality disorder as a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others as indicated by three (or more) of the following:

  1. failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest
  2. deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure
  3. impulsivity or failure to plan ahead
  4. irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated fights or assaults
  5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others
  6. consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain steady work or honor obligations
  7. lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another"

One lunatic, a frequent poster, may fit criteria 2-7.

One thing about lunacy…it should not be an infectious disease. Do not catch it from the lunatic or sociopath. Ignore him; he is unworthy of response. And responding only encourages further childish and self-destructive behavior, eliciting only pity from responsible contributors.

Doc,

With all due respect, I think I’d have to go with an NPD Dx:

Narcissistic Personality Disorder Symptoms

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

  1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)

  2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

  3. believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)

  4. requires excessive admiration

  5. has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations

  6. is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends

  7. lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others

  8. is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

  9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

[/quote]

That’s it! Thank you, and I stand corrected!

246

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Dustin wrote:
The U.S has no history of showing restraint.
Dustin

  1. we did not invade and devistate Lebanon when the marines and others were killed there
    [/quote]

Why did we have Marines there?

But no we didn’t devastate Lebanon, we just fund and support Israel so they can do it.

Correct, we didn’t. Again, do you not see a pattern of the U.S. government sticking it’s nose in places it doesn’t belong? Why did the Iranian’s take American’s hostage?

Nope, you’re right. We just leave Israel to do the dirty work, along with our tax dollars.

No, we just bombed Lybia, for no reason.

We showed restraint in South Vietnam? Are you an idiot? We dropped more bombs on south Vietnam than we did in WWII. We used chemical agents (agent orange) that still affects Vietnamese babies being born today, as well as American G.I.s.

North Vietnam was the “enemy”, yet their country and infrastructure was largely untouched.

Vietnam still has not recovered from the war because of all this restraint that was shown.

Al Queda is decentralized. What country are going to bomb?

That was actually the correct move.

Wow, two in a row. That was the right move. What, should get into a war with Russia?

What the hell does that have to do with the U.S. Oh, right, they’re commies, I forgot.

Now you’re just being ridiculous. What does South Korea have to do with the U.S.?

[quote]
I think there was a lot of restraint shown. [/quote]

You conveniently forget to mention every major conflict of the last 160 odd years where constraint was not shown.

Dustin

247

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

how would you know if I don’t know what I am talking about?

We have shown restraint. You do know what they do in other countries don’t you?

[/quote]

I know because you said the U.S. shows restraint.

We showed restraint by invading Iraq? How far back in history do we need to go?

What other countries do has no relevance to the discussion. I’ll hold my country responsible for what it does.

Dustin

248

[quote]Dustin wrote:

You conveniently forget to mention every major conflict of the last 160 odd years where constraint was not shown.
Dustin[/quote]

I believe we had reasons for everything we did. We attacked Lybia because they committed terrorism against us. We were in Lebanon as part of a UN peace keeping mission along with the French, Russians and many other countries. When al-qaeda attacked us, their hqs were in Sudan or Afghanistan. Hell, they even knew which house Bin Laden lived in.

As for not helping our allies who were attacked…what is your take? Should America become an isolated country, kind of like China, trade but don’t get involved?

When is it a good time to use force? A “Red Dawn” situation, the enemy coming at us from Canada and Mexico, then it is ok to attack?

What is your opinion on how to attack the terrorists?

249

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

As for not helping our allies who were attacked…what is your take? Should America become an isolated country, kind of like China, trade but don’t get involved?
[/quote]

I would prefer the U.S by more isolated, yes. I think other countries would be more diplomatic with the U.S. if we didn’t have military bases in their countries or we weren’t dropping bombs on them.

Secondly, America doesn’t have allies. We have client states that will play by the rules (what we tell them to do). I mean, Britain might as well be our 51st state.

Think about it. Saudi Arabia is our ally? Of course they’re not, but they do play by the rules. Iraq was a similar situation in the 1980s. George H.W. Bush didn’t give a damn about what Saddam did to his countrymen. Saddam was one of the U.S. top trading partners in the region. This was the status quo until Saddam quit playing by our rules and tried to get a slice of the pie by invading Kuwait.

[quote]
When is it a good time to use force? A “Red Dawn” situation, the enemy coming at us from Canada and Mexico, then it is ok to attack?

What is your opinion on how to attack the terrorists?[/quote]

One uses force when their home is in danger.

If one is attacked by terrorists, first thing to do is look at why the act was carried out. That doesn’t mean spreading propaganda and lies saying, “we have freedom, so therefore they hate us”, or “they’re jealous of us, so they attack us.” That just sounds incredibly stupid and is not reality.

Obviously, the next step one would do is investigate the terrorist attack, since it is a crime. Determine who carried out the attack. You don’t just invade a country (Afghanistan) and tell the civilians, “turn over Bin laden or we’ll bomb you.”

Terrorist acts aren’t acts of war, they’re crimes. They should be treated as such.

Dustin

251

[quote]Chushin wrote:
Dustin wrote:
If one is attacked by terrorists, first thing to do is look at why the act was carried out.

Dustin

[/quote]

HA! You got to be shitting me. You don’t know? I’ll tell you then. They hate us, that’s why. Maybe we should just go arrest all the terrorists and charge them with a hate crime.

252

[quote]Dustin wrote:
Gkhan wrote:

As for not helping our allies who were attacked…what is your take? Should America become an isolated country, kind of like China, trade but don’t get involved?

I would prefer the U.S by more isolated, yes. I think other countries would be more diplomatic with the U.S. if we didn’t have military bases in their countries or we weren’t dropping bombs on them.

Secondly, America doesn’t have allies. We have client states that will play by the rules (what we tell them to do). I mean, Britain might as well be our 51st state.

Think about it. Saudi Arabia is our ally? Of course they’re not, but they do play by the rules. Iraq was a similar situation in the 1980s. George H.W. Bush didn’t give a damn about what Saddam did to his countrymen. Saddam was one of the U.S. top trading partners in the region. This was the status quo until Saddam quit playing by our rules and tried to get a slice of the pie by invading Kuwait.

When is it a good time to use force? A “Red Dawn” situation, the enemy coming at us from Canada and Mexico, then it is ok to attack?

What is your opinion on how to attack the terrorists?

One uses force when their home is in danger.

If one is attacked by terrorists, first thing to do is look at why the act was carried out. That doesn’t mean spreading propaganda and lies saying, “we have freedom, so therefore they hate us”, or “they’re jealous of us, so they attack us.” That just sounds incredibly stupid and is not reality.

Obviously, the next step one would do is investigate the terrorist attack, since it is a crime. Determine who carried out the attack. You don’t just invade a country (Afghanistan) and tell the civilians, “turn over Bin laden or we’ll bomb you.”

Terrorist acts aren’t acts of war, they’re crimes. They should be treated as such.

Dustin

[/quote]

True. We didn’t invade Ireland because the IRA started bombing us.

Eventually we talked it out, and they haven’t bombed us in a quite a while. Maybe the US should try it.

253

[quote]AdamC wrote:
…True. We didn’t invade Ireland because the IRA started bombing us.

…[/quote]

Sarcasm?

254

[quote]pat36 wrote:

HA! You got to be shitting me. You don’t know? I’ll tell you then. They hate us, that’s why. Maybe we should just go arrest all the terrorists and charge them with a hate crime.[/quote]

Okay killer, why do they hate us? I’m not kidding either. Can you honestly answer that question.

I know why they hate us. The reality is that they’re hatred for us has nothing to do with freedoms or jealousy or any other lies the mainstream continues to feed us.

And since you seem to have all the answers, how should the U.S. deal with terrorism?

Dustin

255

[quote]Chushin wrote:

Because the terrorists must certainly have a legitimate reason, which we clearly need to understand and then take immediate steps to address?
[/quote]

What would you do if, for about the last 60 years or so, a foreign country built military bases on your homelands, opened up your lands to foreign investors, and propped up dictators that treated you and your family like animals?

After decades of this crap, it might just piss off someone to the point that they’ll take action.

I’m not excusing terrorism at all, it just makes sense for the U.S. to apply its own standards to itself. We wouldn’t want other nations to do to us what we do to them.

Dustin

257

I’m for peace as much as the next guy, but it’s tough when the other countries are competing with you and trying to take you down.

I agree with what Chushin said about China and Islamic fundamentalism being dangerous to our way of life.

What should we do, sit back while China becomes a technological military threat to Japan, Taiwan? Should we sit back and let the terrorists set up a nuclear armed Caliphate bent on destroying us?

You might laugh and say it’s science fiction, but I lived through the cold war and it was no fun. And the way we won it was to stay one step ahead of the Commies militarily, or make them think we were.

You may condemn the actions this country took in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s, but, as Chushin said, look at the alternative.

258

[quote]Chushin wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
Are there sociopaths contributing to this thread?

"Antisocial personality disorder (APD) is a psychiatric condition characterized by an individual’s common disregard for social rules, norms, and cultural codes, as well as impulsive behavior, and indifference to the rights and feelings of others.
Central to identifying individuals exhibiting characteristics of the disorder is that they appear to experience a limited range of human emotions. This can explain their lack of empathy for the suffering of others, since they cannot experience the emotion associated with either empathy or suffering.

"The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders defines antisocial personality disorder as a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others as indicated by three (or more) of the following:

  1. failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest
  2. deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure
  3. impulsivity or failure to plan ahead
  4. irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated fights or assaults
  5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others
  6. consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain steady work or honor obligations
  7. lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another"

One lunatic, a frequent poster, may fit criteria 2-7.

One thing about lunacy…it should not be an infectious disease. Do not catch it from the lunatic or sociopath. Ignore him; he is unworthy of response. And responding only encourages further childish and self-destructive behavior, eliciting only pity from responsible contributors.

Doc,

With all due respect, I think I’d have to go with an NPD Dx:

Narcissistic Personality Disorder Symptoms

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

  1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)

  2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

  3. believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)

  4. requires excessive admiration

  5. has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations

  6. is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends

  7. lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others

  8. is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

  9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

[/quote]

Now you only have to show that I show four or more of this traits on a consistent level withing relationships.

Good luck with that on the internet.

Ceterum censeo, that this has of course nothing to do with the validity of anything I posted.

260

[quote]Chushin wrote:
orion wrote:
Now you only have to show that I show four or more of this traits on a consistent level withing relationships.

No, we don’t.

It, like you, means nothing.[/quote]

If you want a valid diagnosis you do.

If not continue to find reasons to dismiss my arguments.

Labelling dissenters as psychiatric cases has a lot of not so proud history.

Maybe you will lead the way for the rest of American society?