Exploring Anti-Americanism
POSTED BY: Khyron
UPDATED: Monday, April 30, 2007 03:01
VIEWED: 18266
PAGE 18 of 23
So while Ozzy comes up with the complete answer, I'm going to comment on some of the points that lack of time prevented earlier:
CAUSAL-
Quote:Because all those guns, tanks, missiles, shells, bombs, planes, and ships aren't exactly candy-stores. And since we're talking about how people- not governments or militaries- respond to our presence, my contention is that it's impossible for a population to ignore the fact that it may have several hundred thousand hostile troops near its border, all chock-o-block full or weaponry, no matter that we say its a forward defensive posture.
If it's the case, as you say, that the line between offense and defense is not clear cut, than what justifies you in saying that anytime a military unit leaves the borders of its home nation, it is threatening someone?
Quote:Which is why I restricted my point to militaries outside of their borders
Well, I hate to get all technical on you, but I'm not sure that I agree that that is what military power is by definition. That may be part of the definition, or one of the uses to which military power is put, but that's not the sum total of what military power is for. Consider the use the French put their military power to from 1914 to 1918: they used it to defend their nation against the agression of Germany.
Quote:I didn't say or mean it was always malicious. But the Allied forces did threaten the Axis forces and nations. Militaries are, by definition, always about force and threat. Sometimes that use of force is justified, as in the defense of Europe and the UK. But is still force.
Or the use to which military force was put by the Allies in the Second World War: stopping fascist states (one of which was exterminating millions of people). My point is not that the use of military force is always noble-just that it isn't always malicious, as you seem to suggest.
Also, I wanted to get back to the "rank ignorance" thing. It extends to more than just being unaware of other cultures and viewpoints. about half of the people in the USA are functionally illiterate. (I noticed that many English-speaking nations have literacy problems. It may be the difficulty of English spelling.) and we're way behind in science and math.
---------------
FREM- Corporate Personhood. I agree. That is the poison that is eating this nation away.
----------------------------
FINN
Quote:Which is different from us and our "Freedom Fries" how? Also, anti-Americanism is not "Nazism". I can think of about 20 poitns of difference right offhand, so either she said more than you reported or you're amking a very biased connection. All I can say is: We reap what we sow. And knowing (even unconsciously) what we've sown we've every reason to be paranoid about other people in power.
I can remember sitting in a café in London next to a French woman who began to tell me what she thought about Americans, unaware evidently that I was one. She told me that Americans were dogs and they should all be treated like dogs. And as she said it she had one of those smirks that people get when they think they’ve said something clever and stylish. She really thought she was something because of what she had to say about Americans, but in reality, all she was doing was towing the Nazi line. And as she sat there, so proud of herself for her hatred, I thought to myself, thank god America is a strong nation, because if we weren’t, what would people like this woman do to us if she was in power?
-----------------------------
I think DTH said it best.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ozzy- go paintball. That's what you're good for.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yes the US has invaded many countries in the last 100 years, so what? How many of those countries remained independent or became independent with free governments follow US invasion?
Korea? Result of US invasions/occupation: South Korea is a free prosperous democratic nation, unlike North Korea, that the US was unsuccessful in holding, which remains an oppressive Stalinist state with a starving population.
Germany? Result of US invasions/occupation: West Germany was a free prosperous democratic nation, unlike East Germany (that went to the Soviets), until 1990 reunification, which was an oppressive Stalinist state.
Japan? Result of US invasions/occupation: Japan is a free prosperous democratic nation.
Vietnam? US failed to occupy. The US completely cut off all assistance to the region. Vietnam continues to be an oppressive regime.
Afghanistan/Iraq? Result of US invasions/occupation: Both countries have free democratic governments and increasingly prosperous economies. Insurgencies remain a problem in both cases. Whether these countries become free and prosperous probably depends a lot on how long the US is willing to provide assistance them.
There are others, but none of them were every acquired, unlike the Soviets.
Let’s look at some of the countries that the USSR invaded or acquired though military action in the last 100 years. All of these countries lost their independent governments, none of them could have been called free or prosperous and some of them lost or almost lost their cultural identity to Soviet oppression. None of them found their independence until the 1989 collapse of the Soviet Empire. None of them have achieved the liberty or prosperity of Japan, Germany or even South Korea. This does not include about a dozen or so others which the USSR toppled using clandestine operations.
Aremenia
Azerbaijan
Byelorussian
Estonian
Kazakhstan
Georgian
Latvian
Lithuanian
Moldavian
Ukraine
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Nope. Not to us. More to their own peeps, yeah.
Originally posted by Ozzysun:
Was Iraq a huge threat?....Maybe,
Quote:Nope. Saddam had little use for them.
I'm sure a few terrorists got their start there.
Quote:I'd like 'em all put on ice, but all-out invasion is silly, unless you're in a position to reap a profit from it...
That being said I'm all for putting a stop to dictators that do what they did to the Kurds for example.
Quote:He was a creep and then some, we get that, but look at other places in the world; Iraq was just not that pressing- look at Darfur for example!
I'm all for putting a stop to dictators that have a policy of taking people for supposed crimes and torturing them. I'm not talking putting underwear on someones head or sleep deprivation, I'm talking about making a father watch while his wife(etc.)
Quote:And if you talk to Iraqui PEEPS right now you'll find MANY long for the relatively peaceful days of Saddam.
If you talk to most of the troops in Iraq right now you'll find out that the Iraqi people like us alot,
Quote:I'm truly glad he thinks we're making a positive contribution to world peace, there are positive aspects to the Iraqi invasion...I can't think of MANY right this moment...well, Sadam's gone, I guess...
When my brother left for Iraq he was steadfastedly opposed to the war, after just 1 month there his opinion was changed.
Quote:So, we take 'em out in order of how much profit we can make off 'em? That seem kinda heartless...
That being said I think theres alot more countrys out there that have terrible dictators but we can't get them all at once.
Quote:Had to end it with a patriotic speech, eh? Like there's peeps here that hate their country or something? Justifying something to yourself? Jeeze, we KNOW we have it good (GREAT) here compared to Africa or the Middle East.
Irregardless of how America is looked upon by certain countrys in the world I truly think we live in the best country in the world. I can walk the streets and not worry about the violence that goes on in most of the world. I can send my kids out to play and know that their not going to be killed by some extremist that is planning on killing innocents in the name of his god.
The answerman Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:To the extent that some use it to hate an entire ethnic (or national) group of people, it shares some similarities. She reminded me of Nazis talking about Jews. That was my impression, yes.
Originally posted by SignyM:
Which is different from us and our "Freedom Fries" how? Also, anti-Americanism is not "Nazism".
And you can't tell the difference between calling an entire national group “dogs” and renaming a fried vegetable? That’s funny.
Or sad, now that I think about it.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yes, there are others: Panama, Grenada, Puerto Rico, Phillipines, the various island protectorates that we acquired in WWII, and the miscellaneous banana republics that we supported, not counting the times we sent in small numbers of troops and agents to internally interfere with democractic processes abroad.
www.zmag.org/ZMag/articles/blum.htm
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:What about Nicaragua? Panama? Your case sounds good, Finn, but our invasions don't always end up rosy. Besides, invasions are becoming more and more motivated by whims as opposed to long term planning, but that's the corporate way, satisfy your immediate superior above all else. Even reason.
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Yes the US has invaded many countries in the last 100 years, so what? How many of those countries remained independent or became independent with free governments follow US invasion?
Flower child Chrisisall
EDIT: sorry, we didn't invade Nicaragua, we just illegally funded the bad guys- my bad.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Okay then, how about "cheese-eating surrender monkeys", George Will's comment on retreat as "an exercise for which France has often refined its savoir-faire since 1870", "Iraq first, France next!", and "First Iraq, then Chirac!". The fact that you don't acknowledge our strong anti-French sentiment is intellectually dishonest at best, and yet another example why people hate Americans: our rather strong aversion to honest self-examination. Or maybe I should just call it what it is: hypocracy.
To the extent that some use it to hate an entire ethnic (or national) group of people, it shares some similarities. She reminded me of Nazis talking about Jews. That was my impression, yes. And you can't tell the difference between calling an entire national group “dogs” and renaming a fried vegetable? That’s funny.Or sad, now that I think about it.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The US didn’t invade Nicaragua. And what about Panama? Noriega suspended democratic elections in Panama and declared war on the US threatening the US interest including thousands of US citizens and the Canal which was, by treaty, neutral. The US returned free elections to Panama, and the US never occupied Panama, only the Canal, and it wouldn’t have done that if Panama hadn’t have declared war on the US. Invasions never end up rosy, Chris. That’s not my point.
Originally posted by chrisisall:
What about Nicaragua? Panama? Your case sounds good, Finn, but our invasions don't always end up rosy. Besides, invasions are becoming more and more motivated by whims as opposed to long term planning, but that's the corporate way, satisfy your immediate superior above all else. Even reason.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
So how do you suppose the American population would look at being ringed by Chinese forces? I think that it would create strong anti-Chinese sentiment.
Not if the Chinese were helping protect us from the Venezualans. It really does depend on the frame of reference.
Quote:
Geezer, I think you're demonstrating exactly why it is that so many people hate America. It seems constitutionally impossible for Americans to see anyone but themseleves and their own interests and viewpoints.
Where did I say that? I said that opinion should be based on the situation, not just "Oh, gosh, there's troops overseas, aren't we evil?"
Quote:So the invasion of France in WWII was a bad thing? Frame of reference, SignyM.
Nobody should fear us -despite the fact that we've outright invaded more nations than the USSR!
Quote:So? The Soviet Union did the same thing, but they'd take over the entire country first. Which would you prefer? Frame of reference.
We have positioned our troops, ships, planes, and prisons everywhere- Panama, Spain, Iceland, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Japan, Turkey, Italy and Africa
Quote:
BTW, I wanted to answer your question about us maintaining a base where we were asked to leave by the government. We do. I'm going to leave it to you as an exercise in mental flexibility to figure out where that is.
You got nothin', huh? Khyron came up with Cuba in a few minutes. Sorry, if you can't defend your own assertions, I'm sure not going to do it for you.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME