Flypaper Theory

[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Typical how you continue to blame the US for everything, including discovering and conquering the entire continent.

Discovering the continent? Ha, good one.

[/quote]

Yeah, this is funny if you think about it. I don’t think the US was in existance in Europe somewhere when Christopher Columbus or Eric the Red sailed.

What else would:

“you” had your fair share of killing and got a whole continent out of it."

mean?

That somehow the US was behind the colonization of this entire continent from the get go, even though, as I pointed out, different countries were involved in different parts of the continent?

The “YOU” in quotes, would have to actually mean “Eurpeans” but somehow that got shifted to point the finger at the United States. (??!!)

Maybe it happened in Bizarro world.

(It’s almost as if you can not even acknowlege your part in the colonization of the new world.)

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
It isn’t about someone using something that happened 50 years ago in court as a defence, it’s about someone who raped their nephew 50 years ago thinking he has the moral high ground to tell me what is right and wrong. [/quote]

No. It’s about the kids of someone who raped their nephew 50 years ago telling you what’s what.

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
That somehow the US was behind the colonization of this entire continent from the get go, even though, as I pointed out, different countries were involved in different parts of the continent?

The “YOU” in quotes, would have to actually mean “Eurpeans” but somehow that got shifted to point the finger at the United States. (??!!)

Maybe it happened in Bizarro world. [/quote]

It did happen.

Look at the number of regimes you overthrew in Latin America. Look at the number of people killed by groups you trained, financed, and supported. Look at the history of your military interventionism in the area.

[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
That somehow the US was behind the colonization of this entire continent from the get go, even though, as I pointed out, different countries were involved in different parts of the continent?

The “YOU” in quotes, would have to actually mean “Eurpeans” but somehow that got shifted to point the finger at the United States. (??!!)

Maybe it happened in Bizarro world.

It did happen.

Look at the number of regimes you overthrew in Latin America. Look at the number of people killed by groups you trained, financed, and supported. Look at the history of your military interventionism in the area.[/quote]

If he was indeed talking about the last 50 years and not 1400 years. Yeah, it would have been all candy and roses if the Soviets military intervention took over middle and South America. You mean to tell me that THEY never killed a single person?

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
No,it doesn’t excuse anything that was done by us.But having done these things is also what makes modern Europe less than gung ho in going to war,and repeating the same mistakes over again.

Been there,done that.
And correct me if I’m mistaken,but is your argument “You guys did it,so now we can do it too and don’t dare criticize?”

Say it isn’t so…

You’re the one who gets what I am trying to say, almost. I understand what you are saying in your first paragraph and you have a point.

Secondly, I never said it excuses what we do. I never said they should not criticize us.
It seems like it is the other way around here. They can point to things the US does time and time again, but their countries and their co-religious have done it all before us. If anything, we learned this kind of acting from them. And why am I wrong for pointing this out?

It isn’t about someone using something that happened 50 years ago in court as a defence, it’s about someone who raped their nephew 50 years ago thinking he has the moral high ground to tell me what is right and wrong.

It is almost like they are attacking the US because they are projecting their own self loathing, and the current inadequacy of their countries and co-religious onto us.

Think about that last part.[/quote]

To point out what was done before,is not wrong in and of itself.However if it used to justify doing the same thing again,then that is wrong.

I’m not saying that is what you are doing,I’m just stating my view.I believe that most of what passes here for ‘debate’ actually comes down to misunderstandigs of delivery over content.

What I mean is that,just as when one is having an argument with a loved one,most of the time what raises tempers and ire is not WHAT is being said,but HOW it’s delivered.

I have said it on these forums before,Europe and the US have far more in common than they have in opposition.And that applies across the board,regardless of the subject you care to pick.

It is precisely this close relationship that allows us to argue like a bunch of screaming fishwives,and allows our relevant governments to differ so broadly in matters of policy.

It is the kind of dialogue that only comes from having a shared and extremely close relationship.Would we argue or talk this way with a complete stranger?Absolutely not.Would you kick a loved one out for not sharing your views?Even though you know you share the same basic human values?No.

But I’m not too fond of the mutual,strident name calling here,from both sides.

Of course this is only the internet.But it has been my opinion,that the things we say,or in this case type,carries through into our world view,and how we treat each other.Go around telling everybody to fuck off in ones daily life,and I guarantee you it’s only a matter of time before you tell your wife or loved one in to fuck off in a moment of anger.Words and language have power,whenever they are used.

And I’m just using ‘you’ generically here,meaning everyone .

But what the fuck do I know…apologies for the hijack hehehe

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

But what the fuck do I know…apologies for the hijack hehehe[/quote]

No problem.

I think what happened was after WW2, there was a power struggle between the old colonial powers and the communist powers.

Show me one country, except for maybe Hong Kong, where the colonial goverments gave up power to the nationalists without a fight.

If it was not for the Communists trying to wrestle power from the Colonialists, under the guise of workers of the world uniting, the Colonial powers would still be ruling their colonies.

Another reason why they hate the US because we are seen as colonial, our military bases being “colonies.” The Red propaganda worked so well they can’t see many of these leftist nationals are worse dictators then the pro-US ones. The only faults the pro-western dictatorships have is they are pro-western.

An example of what I am talking about here is China. The Communists wanted to overthrow the ruling class and make it a worker’s paradise. In the process, 60 million were killed. Under the former Chinese goverments, were that many killed in 20 years time? I don’t think so. Yet most on this forum can’t wait until the Chinese succeed us as a world power.

edit: so the point of all of this is: If it was not for the Communists, the European countries would have held on to their colonies and nothing would have changed. They are upset with us because we still carry on their tradition as world leader and left them in the dust.

As far as you guys saying, we can cut down your country because we used to do the same things but have stopped…it’s bull, (read above paragraph). You totally disregard what you did in the past. It’s as if everything the US does is in a vaccume. Time and circumstances do not exist there. We seem to be eternally wrong regardless.

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:

But what the fuck do I know…apologies for the hijack hehehe

No problem.

I think what happened was after WW2, there was a power struggle between the old colonial powers and the communist powers.

Show me one country, except for maybe Hong Kong, where the colonial goverments gave up power to the nationalists without a fight.

If it was not for the Communists trying to wrestle power from the Colonialists, under the guise of workers of the world uniting, the Colonial powers would still be ruling their colonies.

Another reason why they hate the US because we are seen as colonial, our military bases being “colonies.” The Red propaganda worked so well they can’t see many of these leftist nationals are worse dictators then the pro-US ones. The only faults the pro-western dictatorships have is they are pro-western.

An example of what I am talking about here is China. The Communists wanted to overthrow the ruling class and make it a worker’s paradise. In the process, 60 million were killed. Under the former Chinese goverments, were that many killed in 20 years time? I don’t think so. Yet most on this forum can’t wait until the Chinese succeed us as a world power.

edit: so the point of all of this is: If it was not for the Communists, the European countries would have held on to their colonies and nothing would have changed. They are upset with us because we still carry on their tradition as world leader and left them in the dust.

As far as you guys saying, we can cut down your country because we used to do the same things but have stopped…it’s bull, (read above paragraph). You totally disregard what you did in the past. It’s as if everything the US does is in a vaccume. Time and circumstances do not exist there. We seem to be eternally wrong regardless.[/quote]

So your two points are:

Nature, red in tooth and claw, and

Might makes right.

So far as I can see that makes the war on terrorism an amoral competition, kind of like a sporting event.

In a world where WMDs get increasingly cheap, my money is on the terrorists.

Want me to spell it out?

The Europeans had colonies all over the world. They would have still had these colonies if it were not for the Communists promoting “freedom” to the people the Europeans oppressed.

When the USSR fell, we became one of the most influencial nations on the earth for our time. I feel Europeans are angry because if it was not for the Communists, they would rule the roost.

Because of this, they feel like they are entitled to take pot shots at us, like they are some how superior, when in reality, they were and are not.

There’s nothing about an amoral competition here? If Europe were still # 1, (possessing all of it’s pre-world war II colonies) how would they handle these terrorists? The same way we are now?

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Want me to spell it out?

The Europeans had colonies all over the world. They would have still had these colonies if it were not for the Communists promoting “freedom” to the people the Europeans oppressed.

When the USSR fell, we became one of the most influencial nations on the earth for our time. I feel Europeans are angry because if it was not for the Communists, they would rule the roost.

Because of this, they feel like they are entitled to take pot shots at us, like they are some how superior, when in reality, they were and are not.

There’s nothing about an amoral competition here? If Europe were still # 1, (possessing all of it’s pre-world war II colonies) how would they handle these terrorists? The same way we are now?[/quote]

It is kind of the other way around, if we still had those colonies we`d have a much bigger problem with terrorism.

And far less resources to fight the little domestic terrorism we have.

As long as we have established that they kill because they have their goals and you kill because you have yours…

In a world were you can build a biological weapon for 30000$ and less, they´ll win.

They only need a success every 5 years or so, you need a successrate of 100% and are allready ruining yourselves, paying for your troops and sponsoring your enemies.

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Want me to spell it out?

The Europeans had colonies all over the world. They would have still had these colonies if it were not for the Communists promoting “freedom” to the people the Europeans oppressed.

When the USSR fell, we became one of the most influencial nations on the earth for our time. I feel Europeans are angry because if it was not for the Communists, they would rule the roost.

Because of this, they feel like they are entitled to take pot shots at us, like they are some how superior, when in reality, they were and are not.

There’s nothing about an amoral competition here? If Europe were still # 1, (possessing all of it’s pre-world war II colonies) how would they handle these terrorists? The same way we are now?[/quote]

Most wars of liberation in European colonies happened long before Communism was even mooted as an ideology.

[quote]orion wrote:
So far as I can see that makes the war on terrorism an amoral competition, kind of like a sporting event.

In a world where WMDs get increasingly cheap, my money is on the terrorists.[/quote]

Well there it is right there.

This was my point to you earlier. I don’t mind looking at it through that lens for the sake of discussion, and looking at it as an amoral competition I pick this side. I prefer liberal democracy to sharia law, even without regarding notions of “right” and “wrong”.

My money is on this side.

[quote]Moriarty wrote:
orion wrote:
So far as I can see that makes the war on terrorism an amoral competition, kind of like a sporting event.

In a world where WMDs get increasingly cheap, my money is on the terrorists.

Well there it is right there.

This was my point to you earlier. I don’t mind looking at it through that lens for the sake of discussion, and looking at it as an amoral competition I pick this side. I prefer liberal democracy to sharia law, even without regarding notions of “right” and “wrong”.

My money is on this side.[/quote]

No, all your stakes are.

If you want to or not.

Quite a difference.

The intelligent money is on the other side.

If you insist on spreading your set of beliefs the same way they do.

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
Most wars of liberation in European colonies happened long before Communism was even mooted as an ideology.

[/quote]

The American Revolution is a great example of that. But the majority of the revolutions were a result of the Communists exporting terrorism and revolution around the globe.

[quote]orion wrote:
If you insist on spreading your set of beliefs the same way they do.
[/quote]

You still did not tell me how (without the natives having the weapons, training and funds from the Communist powers) the Eurpeans would respond to the threats to their colonies.

Check out the Boxer Rebellion in China, the Brits war for the Faulklands. They would handle the terrorists no differently then we do. Perhaps they would be even more brutal.

[quote]orion wrote:
In a world were you can build a biological weapon for 30000$ and less, they´ll win.

They only need a success every 5 years or so, you need a successrate of 100% and are allready ruining yourselves, paying for your troops and sponsoring your enemies.
[/quote]

Great to see whose side you’re on. You think they will stop with America? They will pick up right where General Jebel and Sultan Suleiman stopped.

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
orion wrote:
In a world were you can build a biological weapon for 30000$ and less, they´ll win.

They only need a success every 5 years or so, you need a successrate of 100% and are allready ruining yourselves, paying for your troops and sponsoring your enemies.

Great to see whose side you’re on. You think they will stop with America? They will pick up right where General Jebel and Sultan Suleiman stopped.[/quote]

That is completely irrelevant.

They can build weapons of mass destruction no matter where I stand.

We just have an easier time finding them within our countries not wasting any resources on foreign adventures, which, at the same time, would reduce our chances of not being attacked.

They can do this forever, the playingfield is slightly tilted to their advantage every day that passes.

Your best hope are people like Lixy…

Cool, huh?

[quote]orion wrote:
Moriarty wrote:
My money is on this side.

No, all your stakes are.

If you want to or not.

Quite a difference.
[/quote]

Wouldn’t have it any other way.

[quote]orion wrote:
The intelligent money is on the other side.

If you insist on spreading your set of beliefs the same way they do.
[/quote]

That’s fine with me. I rather like being the underdog.

[quote]orion wrote:

Your best hope are people like Lixy…

Cool, huh?[/quote]

Nah,

maybe someone more like this:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/23/60minutes/main2602308_page3.shtml

[quote]orion wrote:
Your best hope are people like Lixy…[/quote]

Their (and transitively our) best hope, is a White House that’s not hell-bent on invasions and conquests. And that’s not far-fetched…

[quote]orion wrote:

“you” had your fair share of killing and got a whole continent out of it.

[/quote]

Who is “you”? Smallpox?