Obama the blowhard

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Wednesday, May 11, 2022 17:34
VIEWED: 28456
PAGE 10 of 15

PREV PAGE 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT PAGE

SIGNYM

Wednesday, June 11, 2014 6:43 PM

It IS just that simple, NIKI.The military is how you impose your will on any other nation. Do you think that the USA would have gotten to this point of economic and financial dominance WITHOUT the military? Here's one example: That deal that we made with Saudi Arabia... the one about the petrodollar that was made in 1971... the one that made the USA dollar the world reserve currency... was made on the back of complete USA military dominance of the middle east, the kind of dominance that allowed us to CREATE a leadership that never existed before i.e.- the Saudi Royal Family. Originally they were nothing more than a tribe like the other tribes on the Saudi Peninsula until the USA came along and backed them as the leadership.

Nearly every nation that we conquered militarily was in order to gain dominance for our banks and corporations. We were quite successful at it too, robbing the indigenous wealth and labor power from our neighbors to the south before turning our attention to the Philippines, SE Asia, the ME, and elsewhere.

Here's an example of one economically dominant kingdom which DIDN'T do what we did: China has been a self-identified kingdom since long before the Christ was born. It could have conquered much of southern Asia and the Middle East, if it so chose. In fact, one of the emperors began the process of colonization by sending out fleets of Chinese ships. The subsequent emperor, however, burned them to the waterline.

http://asianhistory.about.com/od/china/f/zhenghefaq.htm

I could point to many kingdoms of the past- advanced civilizations such as Mojenjo-Daro and the Minoan cultures which existed far longer than the USA has (so far)- which did NOT engage in militaristic domination. I'm sure that if I were a true historian and knew more of African, South American, Asian and other histories, I could point to more.

And of nations today, my point - which you may not have understood- is that if these nations were "as bad as" the United States, they would be engaging in militarism at least on an economically proportionate scale as the USA but they don't. That is why USA militarism is so disproportionately large, compared to economic ranking.

Yeah, there've been other empires as militaristic as ours in the past (Roman and British empires come to mind) but they weren't the ONLY advanced, economically dominant cultures around, and not everyone became an international predator.

You always like to think that It's not really that bad but the reality is that it's far worse than you think, especially if you happen to be the one ground under the bootheel.

AFA cyberwarfare... pffffttt! If our NSA was really interested in computer security, they would have NEVER insisted on building so many backdoors into the dominant operating systems. It IS possible to have real security, you just need to know what you're doing and have a system-wide approach to achieving it.

I gotta say, IMHO the world's worst problem right now is the USA. So many nations would be doing so much better if we just stopped deliberately fucking everyone over.

NIKI2

Thursday, June 12, 2014 6:06 PM

I'm not going to debate you, it's not worth either of our time; the days when I was willing to spend the time getting into a detailed debate here are long past. And I believe your opinions are too firmly entrenched for us to have a reasonable debate. I'm merely making the point that our nation's behavior isn't that much different from others, in perspective.

You don't know me: "You always like to think that It's not really that bad" is your judgment, and, as usual when it has come to me, untrue. I'm well aware of our government's negatives, and I freely admit "the world's worst problem RIGHT NOW is the USA. So many nations would be doing so much better if we just stopped deliberately fucking everyone over." That does not change my opinion that almost all nations will behave the same as ours has, given the wealth and opportunity.

I agree to disagree. Let's leave it at that.

NIKI2

Friday, June 13, 2014 5:38 PM

Relatively speaking I'm sure, Brenda, but again, I was talking perspective...and into that go so many things, including how rich we got from WWII and how it thrust us into a power position and so many others. I never said we weren't the worst currently, just not the only ones. Who knows, in another century, could be you guys, or Magons', as our empire weakens, or anyone else, is what I'm trying to say. Throughout human history, as nations grow, as they get rich and powerful, they exert that power. I don't think there's an exception to that...yet. Certainly I could be wrong.

SIGNYM

Friday, June 13, 2014 11:46 PM

Quote:
That does not change my opinion that almost all nations will behave the same as ours has, given the wealth and opportunity.

Then you have chosen to ignore the historic examples of nations/ kingdoms that COULD HAVE been hemispheric-class predators but chose not to be.

You/re right, NIKI. Your opinion is too firmly entrenched to be changed by anything as simple as mere facts.

THGRRI

Saturday, June 14, 2014 12:02 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:
That does not change my opinion that almost all nations will behave the same as ours has, given the wealth and opportunity.
Then you have chosen to ignore the historic examples of nations/ kingdoms that COULD HAVE been hemispheric-class predators but chose not to be.

You/re right, NIKI. Your opinion is too firmly entrenched to be changed by anything as simple as mere facts.

What history is that?

si shen

SIGNYM

Saturday, June 14, 2014 3:14 AM

China, the Harrapan civilization, and the Minoan civilization. Quite possibly more, it's just that I'm not a historian.

I don't think that great economic powers inevitably become great military powers and colonizers, so while the USA seems to be following in the tradition of the western colonialism, in the spectrum of great civilizations it's on militarized end of the spectrum.

THGRRI

Saturday, June 14, 2014 3:55 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
China, the Harrapan civilization, and the Minoan civilization. Quite possibly more, it's just that I'm not a historian.

Harappan Civilization: Existed in ca. 3000-1500 BC. Of course the Harappan Civilization did not try and influence its neighbors too much, it would be a long walk.

Minoan civilization: The island of Crete, is an Island and had I guess what you could call a fleet back in the days of Plato.

China: If you mean back then, In 206 BC, when the Han dynasty was founded,
China stretched from modern Shenyang (some 500 km north of Beijing) in the north to around Guilin in the south; from the Pacific in the east to well past Chongqing in the west. Until Russia laid claim to Far East Siberia, China was the largest country in the world.

How do you think it got that big?

If you mean China today it is starting to grab territory. Look what is happening off the coasts of Vietnam and Japan. They did not have the resources in the more recent past to get involved around the world.

Quote:

China: http://countrystudies.us/china/83.htm
Despite the burst of progress in the 1980s, the Chinese economy still shared many basic characteristics with the economies of other developing countries. The gross national product per capita in 1986 was -Y849, or about US$228 (at the 1986 exchange rate), reflecting the low average level of labor productivity. As in many countries that did not begin sustained industrialization efforts until the middle of the twentieth century, the majority of the Chinese labor force--over 60 percent--was still employed in agriculture, which produced around 30 percent of the value of national output. Agricultural work still was performed primarily by hand. Modern equipment was in general use in industry but was largely typified by outdated designs and low levels of efficiency.

I wonder why you would make accusatory statements about a country being overly aggressive when compared to the rest of the world, and then admit you do not know too much about the history of the rest of the world?

si shen

SIGNYM

Saturday, June 14, 2014 5:20 AM

I'm talking about China when it burned its imperial fleet, but could have easily taken over southern Asia and parts of the ME. (I posted about that and provided a link earlier)

The civilizations that I mentioned were advanced and economically powerful for their day. The Harappan civilization and its cities covered a large part of the Indus valley, and traded far and wide, with Mesopotamia and ancient Egypt. Unlike many of the extant civilizations, the Harappans didn't field any armies or engage in conquests. Because of the intricate seals and standardized weight sets, it appears the Harappan civilization cities depended primarily on trade of surplus agricultural and artisan goods. The same could be said for Minoan civilization, which depended on trade, not conquest, for its wealth.

THGRRI

Saturday, June 14, 2014 5:24 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I'm talking about China when it burned its imperial fleet, but could have easily taken over southern Asia and parts of the ME.

I'm sorry, I did not realize you were talking about a small part of their history and ignoring the rest.

My mistake

si shen

SIGNYM

Saturday, June 14, 2014 7:35 AM

Quote:
I'm sorry, I did not realize you were talking about a small part of their history and ignoring the rest.

I was responding to NIKI, who said

Quote:
That does not change my opinion that almost all nations will behave the same as ours has, given the wealth and opportunity.

I was merely giving examples of civilizations which had the wealth and opportunity, and chose not to, at various points in history not to become conquerors (not at ALL points in history)

As it turns out, NIKI and I agree on one thing, and that is

Quote:
the world's worst problem RIGHT NOW is the USA. So many nations would be doing so much better if we just stopped deliberately fucking everyone over.

This isn't short-term aberration from out history, however, but unfortunately describes the arc of almost our entire development, which began in slavery and genocide and has "progressed" through hemispheric and then world domination and exploitation.

And what's the point whether other nations would behave the same or not? We criticize Nazi Germany, do we not? We don't try to excuse their behavior because they acted just like some other horrific conquering nation. I hear a lot of excuses about our militarism and inequity. From the right, it's all about fear and greed. From liberals, its to support President Milquetoast, who has betrayed them in every possible way. Nothing ever changes.

PREV PAGE 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT PAGE