[quote]Headhunter wrote:
If we don’t act in our self-interest, then in whose interest should we act? Should we then wait around for others to act in OUR interest?
LOL! Enjoy the wait…
[/quote]
No, it is just that you did not fight WWII because you are the champion of all that is innocent, pure and fluffy, but because rational self interest forced you to do it.
If that insight helps to tone down the rhetoric concerning WWII, that would be a lot.
HA, Rational self-interet? How about losing all of Western Europe, last time I checked we don’t get too many natural resources from there do we? We protectd you and your intrests.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
I don’t think the anti American position in Europe is as deep rooted as you may think…by the very fact that this is a,for lack of a better phrase,hard core training site,it will attract a lot of younger guys that haven’t got the broader viewpoint and historical perspective that we middle aged guys have.Europe in the post world war 2 and cold war eras,slept under a blanket of protection provided by you guys.There was no doubt in any Europeans mind at that time,that if there had been an act of aggression,wether conventional or nuclear,that the US would have reacted immediately and comprehensively in our defense.
Don’t for a second think that it has been forgotten.
We live in very strange and fragmented times,but I believe that Europe and the US still have far more that unites them,and that this will always be the case.
It’s the nature of this relationship that allows for the disagreements in viewpoint and the current level of debate.
I also think that it’s because of the relatively minor (and I use the word with reservation,to try make a point,not to belittle the war or the opposition to it)nature of the differences, that debate has been so heated.The current situation is not a deep schism in viewpoint between the two camps,it’s the leading nations of the world hammering out concensus amongst themselves as to how the challenges of a new and very different geopolitical situation is to be faced,managed and resolved.
A bit like having a difference of opinion and heated argument with your wife about something peripheral like plans for the evening…
I’m not really sure If I have managed to get my point over effectively here…it’s late.
So I hope no one gets offended,wasn’t my intention![/quote]
This post did not get enough attention, so I’m remarking on it. I really appreciate the sincerity that it reflects. I also tend to agree with the gist of it; that Europe and American have too much in common to let things get between them.
I also believe that this site draws out the more extreme Euros like a lamp does moths.
Then perhaps we should invest in an e-bug zapper?
I appreciate neuromancer’s post. He is probably more right than I want to admit in front of the current batch of Euro-centric America haters we have on this site.
He’s welcome in Texas anytime.
[quote]blck1jack wrote:
HA, Rational self-interet? How about losing all of Western Europe, last time I checked we don’t get too many natural resources from there do we? We protectd you and your intrests.[/quote]
You’re an idiot, this isn’t the 17th century, we’re not talking about national resources here.
[quote]Bullmoose wrote:
Heliotrope wrote:
Like Headhunter said its the blood of our kids and the sweat of our tax payers that is once again bearing a burden that benefits not just our own interests but those of the entire free world.
Both you and Headhunter made it seem as if you don’t realize that soldiers from other countries are fighting and dying over all this. The total contribution by the US may be greater than anybody else’s, but all the fallen fighters make the same sacrifice, no matter how many ‘bad guys’ they bring down. Just something to keep in mind when you’re tempted to act as if the entire western world is hiding behind you from every menace.
On the original topic, I don’t know if it makes me anti-american or not, but I absolutely hate it when American tourists get drunk and start chanting “USA!USA!” or start talking shit with strangers about how much better they are than everybody else. Americans are the only people I’ve ever seen try to start fights based on the fact that they don’t like us.
Polite american tourists (which is most of them) usually don’t mention where they’re from unless it comes up, but assholes always identify themselves, which makes it pretty easy to get a skewed perspective of the US, if you’ve never been there. I know you’re mostly talking about foreign policy hate on the part of Europe, but I think it’s easier to bitch about your foreign policy for people who think you’re a country full of jackasses.
Mainstream entertainment coming out of the US (Tom Cruise, Paris Hilton, etc) also makes it easy to paint a real ugly picture about what the US is about, when that combined with american tourists is the only exposure someone gets to your culture.
[/quote]
Bull,
That was the most coherent and thoughtful analysis of where some of the bad press comes from.
Most of us are absolutely aware and are thankful that others have joined in the fight against terrorism.
Australia deserves special recognition. You guys have been there through thick and thin and this American thanks you.
I agree with everything you wrote about dinks that travel abroad. Some make us look bad.
All I can do is make sure me and mine act politely when a guest of other countries.
Oh, I’ll try to smack around the next American embarassing him/herself.
JeffR
[quote]orion wrote:
rainjack wrote:
My job isn’t to babysit you to make sure you get it. If you are having trouble - maybe find another hobby. Or try reading back in the archives if you are having trouble understanding the Euro-centric superiority complex that is pervasive among most of the non-american posters down here.
We don`t feel superior to the US.
Only to Texas.[/quote]
austria is superior to quebec.
It is certainly not superior to any American state.
That is all,
JeffR
[quote]dannyrat wrote:
To anyone- I don’t assume to have all the answers for America. Just the problem the OP commented upon.
If you truly believe self-awareness in your interactions is pussy, whatever man.
All i was saying, for the OP, is that from my valid perspective, which is non-US, it is problematic that you would expect respect but not give any, or assume that all of Europe’s ‘socialist whingers’ hate all of USA. This isn’t true.
I don’t really need to deal in generalisations like this.
If you’re cool, cool. If not, not.
The fact that you read my post as an assault or insult is very telling rainjack.
Id another guy made refrence to China.Seriously, 50 years max, USA vs China, will happen. China will try to take Taiwan.
How will you reconcile arrogance with being crushed by a nation of tiny people? America is just a nation the same as any other. Each has its era of dominance. Each believes it’s golden age will last for all times. It won’t.
Ever heard the phrase ‘be nice to people on the way up because you’ll meet them on the way down’?
[/quote]
Greetings to THE BLADE,
Serious question: Will you be rooting for china if the conflict comes?
Can I count on a Pro-china rally from you?
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
orion wrote:
rainjack wrote:
My job isn’t to babysit you to make sure you get it. If you are having trouble - maybe find another hobby. Or try reading back in the archives if you are having trouble understanding the Euro-centric superiority complex that is pervasive among most of the non-american posters down here.
We don`t feel superior to the US.
Only to Texas.
austria is superior to quebec.
It is certainly not superior to any American state.
That is all,
JeffR
[/quote]
We could handle Vermont!
And Delaware!
[quote]Bullmoose wrote:
Heliotrope wrote:
Like Headhunter said its the blood of our kids and the sweat of our tax payers that is once again bearing a burden that benefits not just our own interests but those of the entire free world.
Both you and Headhunter made it seem as if you don’t realize that soldiers from other countries are fighting and dying over all this. The total contribution by the US may be greater than anybody else’s, but all the fallen fighters make the same sacrifice, no matter how many ‘bad guys’ they bring down. Just something to keep in mind when you’re tempted to act as if the entire western world is hiding behind you from every menace.
[/quote]
Point taken. I never intended to trivialize the sacrifices and support of any other nation.
I definitely don’t believe that “the entire western world is hiding behind you(The U.S.) from every menace”. I was trying to call attention to the idea that perhaps some of these people that hate America should give us more credit.
I also think that some of our European allies could or should contribute and support our efforts more than they do.
[quote]Bullmoose wrote:
I think it’s easier to bitch about your foreign policy for people who think you’re a country full of jackasses.
Mainstream entertainment coming out of the US (Tom Cruise, Paris Hilton, etc) also makes it easy to paint a real ugly picture about what the US is about, when that combined with american tourists is the only exposure someone gets to your culture.
[/quote]
Couldn’t agree more with this observation.
We also have quite a few glaring social issues that do little to improve our reputation. We have shameful rates of violent crime and incarceration of our citizens. The rates of obesity and rampant use of prescription antidepressant drugs could definitely be added to a list of social embarrassments. Lets not even talk about something like Katrina and FEMA.
Add this to Bullmoose’s point and our leaderships tendency to represent America in what many feel is an arrogant elitist tone and I think America could really use some help in winning the hearts and minds of intelligent people across the world.
The social problems are complex difficult issues to tackle but man our leaders could really do us all a favor and be a little more careful about what they say and how they say it.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
Bull,
That was the most coherent and thoughtful analysis of where some of the bad press comes from.
Most of us are absolutely aware and are thankful that others have joined in the fight against terrorism.
Australia deserves special recognition. You guys have been there through thick and thin and this American thanks you.
I agree with everything you wrote about dinks that travel abroad. Some make us look bad.
All I can do is make sure me and mine act politely when a guest of other countries.
Oh, I’ll try to smack around the next American embarassing him/herself.
JeffR[/quote]
Well, I’m not actually Australian, but I’m sure the Aussies appreciate the acknowledgement whenever they can get it.
[quote]Heliotrope wrote:
Point taken. I never intended to trivialize the sacrifices and support of any other nation.
I definitely don’t believe that “the entire western world is hiding behind you(The U.S.) from every menace”. I was trying to call attention to the idea that perhaps some of these people that hate America should give us more credit.
I also think that some of our European allies could or should contribute and support our efforts more than they do.
[/quote]
That’s not unreasonable. I did actually assume that’s what you meant, but I’ve seen plenty of posts on this site and others that don’t make that clear. I just wanted to make sure, because I think that pro-Americanism (or anywherism) is just as bad as anti-Americanism if it comes at the expense of respect for your allies.
[quote]
Couldn’t agree more with this observation.
We also have quite a few glaring social issues that do little to improve our reputation. We have shameful rates of violent crime and incarceration of our citizens. The rates of obesity and rampant use of prescription antidepressant drugs could definitely be added to a list of social embarrassments. Lets not even talk about something like Katrina and FEMA.
Add this to Bullmoose’s point and our leaderships tendency to represent America in what many feel is an arrogant elitist tone and I think America could really use some help in winning the hearts and minds of intelligent people across the world.
The social problems are complex difficult issues to tackle but man our leaders could really do us all a favor and be a little more careful about what they say and how they say it.[/quote]
Big time. Back home in Canada, I’d interact with Americans probably everyday, be it visitor/vacationers, longterm visitors/students, or permanent immigrants, so I think I’ve got a handle on the culture (basically there’s no difference between our cultures, except you’ve got less hockey, less french, and less winter. Oh yeah, and less gay marriage). I’ve been in Australia for months, and haven’t actually had a real conversation with an american at all, which means if I didn’t already know better, there’d be nothing to tell me that my TV isn’t an accurate representation of the US.
Of course, much of the stuff you mentioned is worldwide, like obesity and legal drug dependency, so that doesn’t really reflect badly on you, I don’t think.
I don’t post here much, but it’s good to see the Politics forum isn’t as hate-filled or angry as it seems at first glance.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
orion wrote:
rainjack wrote:
My job isn’t to babysit you to make sure you get it. If you are having trouble - maybe find another hobby. Or try reading back in the archives if you are having trouble understanding the Euro-centric superiority complex that is pervasive among most of the non-american posters down here.
We don`t feel superior to the US.
Only to Texas.
austria is superior to quebec.
It is certainly not superior to any American state.
That is all,
JeffR
[/quote]
The women in Quebec are far hotter.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
The women in Quebec are far hotter.[/quote]
Quebec’s got some damn fine girls.
People who oppose America’s actions post 9/11 and it’s foreign policy are not all liberals – plenty are libertarians and paleocons. In fact, mainstream liberals really don’t have any gripes with an interventionist foreign policy, aside from the fact that it’s being carried out by a Republican admin. When Clinton defied the UN and bombed Serbia in 1999, everyone on the left was cheering. Liberals are NOT anti-war. They haven’t been since the 60’s.
Nobody within 1500 miles of any mainstream outlet is implying that 9/11 was “funny”. Everyone who is in the public eye on both sides of the aisle continues to tread softly around the subject, as if it were made of glass. You are acting as if the incident is being mocked nightly on cable TV. Don’t go overboard.
There are people who are simply cheering for the sake of cheering - one side or the other - and then there are people who have legitimate opinions and points of view about the way that certain events transpired. For example, you make reference to the sentiment that ‘America had it coming’. Well, what if America really did have it coming, on a strictly historical, cause-and-effect level? In other words, what if 9/11 was primarily a retaliation against U.S. intervention in the Middle East? To take such a view does not necessarily imply that one must hold any anti-American sentiment.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Most of the world feels towards us like Wreckless does — no matter what we do, we’re evil. The problem is that America is the first country created by reason and not by chance or a club.[/quote]
“No matter what we do”? No, it matters very well what you do. The trouble is precisely what you HAVE done that is making you appear evil to the rest of the world. America was created by an armed revolt against an imperial Western power. Not by an intellectual discussion followed by a round of tea.
What the fuck are you talking about? Do you really think that any person, in any other country in the world, is somehow “reminded of what their country could be”, when they look at America? That might have been the case in 1900, not anymore. What the hell are you reminding people in Sweden of? Only bad things, which explains anti-America sentiment around the world.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
As for socialism, you can see that I praise capitalism above. I’m no socialist, if you read my post carefully.[/quote]
You pay lip service to “capitalism” and Ayn Rand but you’re a statist, through-and-through. I’ve commented on this before. You’ve never provided an adequate explanation for why you oppose intervention at home but champion it abroad. The latter leads directly to the former. It’s the oldest game there is in the history of governments.
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
And what Bin and you don’t understand is that the US has been instrumental in holding Israel back from doing much more damage than they have in the past to all the Arab nations around them. Having them as an ally means we have more control over their actions then as a enemy.
Look at recent 6-day war in 1967, Israel kicked ass against Egypt, Jordan, Syria, etc. They took a lot of land during that war, that at the urging of the US, they later gave back.
So we have actually helped these Arab nations around Israel more than Bin seems to understand. [/quote]
As usual, you rewind the tape of history only as far back as it suits you - never further.
Question: Who was instrumental in CREATING the illegitimate state in the first place?
And who gave it the military capability to challenge it’s neighbors to the point where it would be necessary to “hold it back”? It sure as shit didn’t dig up Patriot missiles in the sands of Palestine. There’s no escaping the simple fact that all of America’s current problems are a direct result of prior intervention in the Middle East and elsewhere.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
[/quote]
Very good point. I think people can be overly sensitive and instantly discount or percieve malice in logical statements based on reasonable conclusions just because the side they cheer for didn’t say it. This type of behavior is not constructive and interferes with the effectiveness of the entire debating process.
[quote]Bullmoose wrote:
I just wanted to make sure, because I think that pro-Americanism (or anywherism) is just as bad as anti-Americanism if it comes at the expense of respect for your allies.
[/quote]
This is dead on. To be so polarized that you refuse to even hear the other sides concerns and even offend and ignore your allies is to cause paralysis to the democratic process. We all have right to our opinions but all opinions are not created equal.
Too often people that hate on whatever side are also the people that are too lazy or ill equipped to do some work and actually explore the complexity of all the different views. Hate or even faith and devotion are tools that the informed use to manipulate the ignorant.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
And who gave it the military capability to challenge it’s neighbors to the point where it would be necessary to “hold it back”? It sure as shit didn’t dig up Patriot missiles in the sands of Palestine. There’s no escaping the simple fact that all of America’s current problems are a direct result of prior intervention in the Middle East and elsewhere.[/quote]
I can’t disagree here but I would like to add more.
The famous meeting of F.D.Roosevelt and King Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia on 2/14/45 is a convenient mark to the begining of our nations acute awareness of the huge strategic importance of that regions energy resource.
History has proven F.D.R a great visionary. The region has only grown in importance and will surely continue to do so in the coming years. The key reason for this is that the only region on earth with the resource to match the worlds rapidly increasing demand for energy is the Middle East.
Unfortunately there is a catch along the lines of trillions of dollars of infrastructure improvements needed in nations such as Iran and Iraq in order for the supply to keep pace.
America may well have the most to lose if the demands aren’t met or alternative energy sources are still unviable any time soon.That said, world wide energy shortages and instability in world wide markets and economies including but certainly not limited to America are very real possibilities.Such facts are should not be taken lightly.
The political atmosphere in the region, including the threat of extremist gaining more control, is just not conducive to allow the required investment that energy experts agree is needed to meet future world demand.
Based on the worlds energy realities America never had much of a choice about acting powerfully in the region.Whether or not our policies are helping or hindering all this is debateable. The fact that time is runing out is not.
Barring some unforseen breakthrough in energy technology completely revolutionizing our entire civilization Middle East energy and who controls it is going to have ever increasing power over all our fates.
I have my doubts that intervention in the Middle East was, or continues to be, necessary to secure America’s oil interests.
The view that I’ve heard from paleo-conservative commentators such as Pat Buchanon, and one which I tend to agree with, is that the Arabs need to sell us the oil in order to survive. It’s a mutually-dependent and mutually-beneficial relationship. They have nothing to gain by withholding oil from us and this is simply a scare tactic used by the advocates of intervention.
I’m open to debate on this issue but that’s my current inclination.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
I have my doubts that intervention in the Middle East was, or continues to be, necessary to secure America’s oil interests.
The view that I’ve heard from paleo-conservative commentators such as Pat Buchanon, and one which I tend to agree with, is that the Arabs need to sell us the oil in order to survive. It’s a mutually-dependent and mutually-beneficial relationship. They have nothing to gain by withholding oil from us and this is simply a scare tactic used by the advocates of intervention.
I’m open to debate on this issue but that’s my current inclination.[/quote]
It is true that the Arabs and Persians and other peoples of the Middle East need the revenue from oil sales but the threat of extremist or terrorist such as Bin Laden opposing such cooperation is real(he has publicly threatened to destroy key energy facilities) not to mention such things as sanctions or war preventing new investment or even destroying exsisting production facilities. The possiblity of a nuclear conflict in the region is not surprisingly a scenario Washington is adamant about minimalizing.
There will come a day in the near future when the world will still have vast supplies of cheap and easily used oil but almost all of it will be in the middle east. Even though the oil will be there waiting for use without immense improvements(estimates in the trillions) in the current production infrastructure of the region supply will not be able to keep up with demand.
The debate among energy companies and scholars is not really if this will happen but when and if we still have enough time to make the needed development in the middle east.
I don’t have any internet references to site off hand but if you do research into energy you will find a pretty strong consensus about projected world demands and world production potential.
High end and low end estimates do not differ by signifigant time frames especially when factoring the financial incentives of energy companies and nations to pad their proven reserve estimations.
For example a keyword search found this article excerpt as a first result:
Oil Production in the 21st Century; March 1998; Scientific American Magazine; by Anderson; 6 Page(s)
On the face of it, the outlook for conventional oil–the cheap, easily recovered crude that has furnished more than 95 percent of all oil to date–seems grim. In 2010, according to forecasts, the world?s oil-thirsty economies will demand about 10 billion more barrels than the industry will be able to produce. A supply shortfall that large, equal to almost half of all the oil extracted in 1997, could lead to price shocks, economic recession and even wars.
Fortunately, four major technological advances are ready to fill much of the gap by accelerating the discovery of new oil reservoirs and by dramatically increasing the fraction of oil within existing fields that can be removed economically, a ratio known as the recovery factor. These technologies could lift global oil production rates more than 20 percent by 2010 if they are deployed as planned on the largest oil fields within three to five years. Such rapid adoption may seem ambitious for an industry that traditionally has taken 10 to 20 years to put new inventions to use. But in this case, change will be spurred by formidable economic forces.
End
One of the main but rarely emphasized (perhaps it should be obvious enough anyway) goals of U.S. policy in the middle east has always been clearing the way for energy companies to develop and invest in middle east oil.
Its not just enriching to our business and the nations of the middle east its an outright necessity for meeting the worlds future energy demands. The urgency of the need to do this is only going to grow as the non middle east oil grows scarcer each day. Some already think we are far behind schedule in developing the regions capacity and a future worldwide energy crisis of a severe nature is already inevitable.
Like I said earlier we can still hope for some miracle breakthrough technology or even less likely some great new oil discovery to make all this moot…
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Most of the world feels towards us like Wreckless does — no matter what we do, we’re evil. The problem is that America is the first country created by reason and not by chance or a club.
We especially remind the rest of the world of what THEY COULD BE, if they had balls and brains. Sure, we’re not perfect, but who is? We are the most moral and most noble country on earth and this will forever be a reproach against the immoral, the slothful, and the just plain evil in the rest of the world.
God bless (and has blessed!) the United States of America, God’s strong right hand here on earth!![/quote]
HH, you’re an extremist right wing pig. You don’t have a clue and only half a brain cell.
I’m not anti-American. I’m anti-stupidity. You don’t see the difference, because in your case, there IS no difference.
That being said, let’s explore the original post.
I’m not saying the US had it coming, but that’s what people like you hear when someone explains to them why it happened. You want to live in this pretty little magic world, where you stupid actions don’t have any consequences. That’s your choice. But don’t call me anti-American for shoving the realitiy back in your face.
Is it anti-American to say 9/11 was nog big deal?
I dunno. Was it a big deal? That depends what you compare it to. Was it a big deal compared to the dent in my car. Yeah, it was a very big deal. 3000 people dead, compared to a dent in my car, there’s no comparison.
But was it a big deal compared to the holocaust? To WWI & WWII? 3000 people dead compared to millions dead. In that light, it’s not so big a deal.
Is it a big deal compared to the situation in Africa where thousands die every day. Can you imagine that? Thousands dying every day? A 9/11 every day? Of course you can’t. Nobody can.
So why are a cheering on from the sidelines when the shit hits the fan?
Why is that Headhunter.
Is it because you’re a stupid, stupid, stupid extremist right wing nutcase? A christian fascist?
You’re as dangerous as Osama. He also believes he’s on a mission from God, striking infidels left right and center.
And like Osama, you prefer to keep a safe distance from the actual danger.
And the same goes for your ugly cheargirl Lorisco.
I’m sure you’ll both rot in hell.