America vs. the world

Remove all ads!

kemanmaldea - any talk on the Kill and Clinton subject can be prosecuted by the secret service . . .

On the Cuba thing, it is very dangerous to lift the blockade. Remember, Cuba is a that is ideologically opposed to everything America stands for, and they are within striking distance.

We don't have to be friends with everyone . . . we have to protect our interests.

ON that subject, recent polls have GW Bush rated unfavorably in Europe. The news is all over that story, but my question is, "Who Cares!!!???!!" They don't like us because our foriegn policy promotes America's interestes. What is wrong with that? Sheesh . . . if we let Europe have veto power over our foreign policy . . . (I'll save that ramble for later )

 

"IMO the entire continuing process with the US blocanding Cuba has to do with Castro. I believe that within a week of Castro's death relations with cuba will be normalized and we may even see them become one of the US's biggest friend, once we come through and help them out with all the things that ouer blocade is hurting."

I believe that too....but, since we know he's gonna die soon, and since we probably will lift sanctions when he does...why not not end the blockade now! If only for the satisfaction of seeing him squirm! I mean really, how freaked out would Castro be if we did ent the sanctions, and flooded his poorly depressed(economically speeking, I have the feeling that the Cuban people are NOT depressed)country with goods, a free press, and MOBS of US tourists! That would probably give him a heat attack!

 

He-llo. How can Cuba be a danger for the U.S?
I mean, if they would be so stupid as to try anything, that island of theirs would be a nuclear wasteland anyway. Just cut them some slack, man!

 

Right... now you make a mistake.... America maybe the leader in the world, but they are still part of NATO, they can't just start throwing with nucleair weapons etc. America can't do that much on his own without getting problems with other countries..... They also need the support of others.....

 

Yeah, right, wahtever.
Then they'll just start throwing napalm and set the entire island on fire....

 

and then they got a problem with the rest of the world.. it's not that easy Brega.

 

All im saying is that if CUBA would dare to ATTACK the usa, the allies would bomb the island to smithereens no matter what. And besides no country would dare stick up against that controlfreak Bush and his pet NATO countries.

 

No one would dare??? What about Saddam and Slobodan Milosevic(I know bush wasn't the president at those times, but still...) At least they had the balls to try and fuck with the US. And don't say it won't happen again, cause it most probably will...

 

Well, Both Saddam Hussein and Milosevic are insane, and they did not openly attack the u.s or any of pet nations.

 

lol, I wouldn't call NATO his pet countries, I'd say NATO is more respected here in the european regions than US or Bush (especially Bush). I'd say NATO and US are of equal size (to some extend) and that non of them really controls what the other one does (might approve or disapprove, but can't tell the other part what to do)

 

Dragonslayer21: there's one important difference between Saddam and Milocevic: Milocevic wasn't aggressor! He led his state into a very nasty civil war, but didn't attack other countries, actually the Nato attacked Yugoslavia. (Okay, the attack was a the right thing, but it makes a little difference) And he's not insane. In fact I think, he's a very clever man, and it's a luck, that he's arrested now. Brega: I can imagine that Milocevic would have attacked Hungary though we are the member of the Nato (a pet nation, as you've said.)

 

Nice to see that you've calmed down a bit since i left Brega.

IMO, Saddam would be the only one insane enough to openly attack NATO or America openly. Now that terorist guy from over in the mid-east(can't remember his name at the moment) has been attacking NATO and America fro years with terrorist attacks, but we have delt with several of those attacks.

To tell you the truth, i do think that America IS selectivly policing. Take a look at desert storm for example. The only reason that Bush got involved in that "war"(i don't think it was even a war considering how one sided it was) is so that we could still drive our SUV's over here. we could of(and maybe should have) left it to the rest of nato because they were well able to take care of the situation themselves. The reason that we are not involed in the Israile crisis, is because there is absolutly nothing in it for america.(exept for a very small allie..maybe)

P.S. Regaurding what i said above about no one being able to last for more than a half-an-hour with the US, i did alittle research. I was compleatly correct. The US has NEVER used more than 6.7% of their armed forces in any war EVER, and that includes WWII as well.


also P.S.- I also did some research on my school... The average GPA is about a 3.4
sorry, i was trying to prove a point though.


[This message has been edited by jack-of-all-trades (edited August 17, 2001).]

 

(this board seems to have gone mad in my absence)

I know this is a bit of an old saying but can't we all just get along.
The fact is that at one point i did hate Americans. I did not like the way they seemed to take over our country and after being refered to as the 51st state i got angry.
However that has gone now. It is true that the Americans are taking over but that is probably not the will of 99% of the population and infact is just the will of a few power crazy people who rule.

The thing that bugs me is that the president has almost total control. What happens if he has a mental breakdown or says to do something with out thinking!

Personally i have seen the light and now embrace americans as my own. After all they did all come from europe!

As for the war then i have no comment except this.
The only people who suffered and deserved to win the war were the french, the british and every other country that were beaten to a pulp by Hitler.
Sure america lost troops and that is saddening for the families. But at least they could sleep without the fear of dying in their beds.
The fact that america never used its full military power even in times of great strife in friendly countries is NOT something to be proud of.


[This message has been edited by Avooch Dar (edited August 17, 2001).]

 

Yes that maybe but only becasue of its size proportionally, almost all european nations r better. Secondly if the USA keeps isolating its self i.e pollution treaties then it wont be 1 nation, but all of thema t war, did u know Bush coulndnt even remeber the German leaders name at ameeting. Thirdly, of cousre the USA didnt use all its military in the IIWW becasue u were not being invaded or having it threatend, if the USA was in Europe it would of.!

 

You know guys, America isn't at all interested in "taking over the world". Americans by and large aren't interested in conquest or imperialism. They never have been. Even when the West was "settled" it wasn't by and large a matter of policy, it was just people going out and living somewhere else and dealing with Natives and bears and animals and so on. The most "world conquering" America ever got was in the Spanish-American war. And we held short. America hates to send its troops places actually. We would rather outsource it to locals sympathetic or mutual in interests, or support the side we like. As far as world domination goes, and I've said it more than once in this same thread, its business, not politics. American businesses explore new markets to sell procucts and develop labor and in exchange earn sympathetic policies from host nations, or try to. Our government isn't particularly involved, other than all but guaranteeing the opportunities in the US for businesses to grow. Politics and business intertwine? Sure they do, and thats the idea that is the US in large part *is*. The state grants a stable dollar and we go with it. Do we consume most of the fuel and produce most of the waste? Probably, but you have to understand *why* that is. It isn't that Americans are sitting around running motors for the sound they make, or leaving lights on or the fridge open 'cuz, hey, we're American, we do stuff like that! It so happens that right now, *right now* America rocks. In the past it has been other countries I suppose. The British in India, the French in Africa, South America and, well, North America, too. The Dutch in S. Aftrica. The Italians in, uh, Italy. The Spanish, etc etc. As far as America not sending its entire army to WWII, why should we have? Prior to Pearl Harbor, why should we have been involved? I don't get some of the attitude here, like the resentment. Is it class/economic resentment? Unless some of you guys are a little young, I can't see how you might think the US not signing the Kyoto agreement could lead to war. Thats ridiculous. I don't take to kindly to the notion that Europe (or European nations)are like this innocent babe trying to get her act together in the millenium while she's getting screwed over by economic giants like Disney and McDonalds. As if Mickey Mouse and Ronald McDonald posed a real threat to European culture. Give me a break. Consumers do what they want and make their choices, wherever they are in freer mnarkets. The idea that companies excert enough cultural and psychological power to direct culture (yes, even American culture) is balderdash and should be insulting to anyone's intelligence.
As far as Canada being a better place to live? It may be, for Canadians. Health care may be free, but why do so many Canadians catch a bus to the US for procedures with ewaiting lists in their home country? The truth of the matter is, all countries utilize systems to deliver whatever they determine their responsibilities are to their citizenry, and all those systems involve shortcomings, all of them. Every nation has to determine how to go about its operations. If free healthcare would really work in the US, and continue to provide for R & D, new breakthroughs and innovations and the types of salaries MDs can make (and are entitled to make due to their unique talents and huge investment in education and training) then we would have it. But it doesn't, not here in the US. The desire for profit and private property encourages the intellient and strategic use of personal resources here, including brains and labor.
Oh, and we don't regularly "blockade" any country, we sanction them. And, the US spies regularly on every country in the world, except Canada and Australia. And it goes both ways.

 

I've mostly been trying to stay out of this, but I just wanted to give an example of the kind of US influence that irritates Canada in particular since we seem to be getting off track with hypothetical invasions:

Canada is currently seriously considering legalising marijuana. We already have the most permissive sex and drug laws of any other country save the Netherlands, and polls show a majority of Canadians is in favour of legalisation. Suddenly- what a coincidence- the US Drug Enforcement Agency starts opening offices all over British Columbia, the province with the largest number of marijuana crops. One of the biggest reasons our politicians are still hedging on giving our taxpayers and voters the freedom we clearly want is that the US has made it fairly clear that they won't like it and that there will be "consequences" (a number of politicians and diplomats have brought this up in the Canadian press lately).

My feeling is, it's terrific you all have such strong feelings on drugs and if you want to enforce your laws within your own borders, that's your privilege. But it's frustrating for me that despite paying my taxes, doing military service and generally being a good citizen, I have less influence on my own country than a US voter does.

Yes, I have read all the posts above from Americans saying, "Frankly, we don't care if other countries are unhappy with us". Don't bother saying it again in response to this, please, the message has already been received very clearly. Actually that's interesting since the real question that started this thread is, "why don't people outside America have a good opinion of Americans", and the vocal minority on this board which has basically said "#### on other countries, we're bigger than you and can get away with it" have answered that pretty clearly.

 

Hear Hear Sprite!!! I never knew you were Canadian.. cool !!

I agree wholeheartedly... being from British Columbia i am experienceing that first hand. And that is not the end of that stuff either. Now there is some soft lumber thing restricting us from importing to the states without higher taxes and money. thus hurting our economy. Our pot has been said to make more money then our trees. And this is forceing many familys to turn to pot growing as a supplemental income. The americans are causing the problem themselves and should look in their own yards at the crack problems and poverty surrounding them. And stop worrying about the rest of the world!

 

Kitiara-So, is the US *bad* because we charge tariffs/taxes/import duties on outside resources that might compete with our own domestic resources and put Americans out of jobs instead of Canadians? Why? Sell more lumber to Canadians and avoid the hassle. Or other parties. Whoever's offering a better deal. I really don't get it here. People need jobs everywhere. The trick is to either find a stable job and keep it (like in the DEA maybe) or stay flexible and be ready for changes and adapt to them, isn't it? If lumber is bad, change your industry or your avocation. It sounds glib, but for real. In the US, for example, we subsidize farmers which is probably a mistake. We should be encouraging them to *stop farming* and to do something else with policies that encourage a change or pay for education to allow for it.(Which we do, actually) But, I digress.
As far as pot goes, what does the presence of a DEA office have to do with Canadian law? The DEA can't prosecute a Canadian for violating US law in Canada. Have you assented to that rule? The DEA is everywhere, but not to keep Canadians from smoking pot, instead to prevent Canadians from importing pot illegally into the US and selling/distributing it here. Yes, we have enough problems with controlled substances, we don't need someone elses! Do you?
What I think those outside the US fail to realize is that the same pressures on them and their families and their fellow citizens are *the same* pressures on US families and citizens. Sure, there's poverty in the US, and drugs, prostitution and date-rape and murder and everything bad. Probably more so than elsewhere. Why is there the impression that we're all reclining in our lazy boys watching bad TV on FOX and eating frozen food thinking about how to make other people miserable? It isn't that those in the US don't care about the plight of lumberers in Canada, we just care more about the plight of those in the US, just like you do for those in Canada. Access to our markets isn't guaranteed for any industry, but frankly things are pretty open. I see, for example, my PC was made in Canada, or at least assembled there. The parts probably came from 10 different companies in 10 different countries. Its not US policy, its the changing face of global enterprises under pressure to show revenue quarterly for global investors. That will do more to shape the world of the near future than 100 DEA offices full of overweight rednecks with political science degrees ever will.
There is an attitude in the US towards pot and other controlled substances in general that may be seen as backward and antiquated, and it may be, but thats the way people see it here. We cooperate with bordering nations to insure that we don't get more than an annual ton or two of pot from the outside, but we can't enforce our laws on other nation's citizens in general, not without an agreement of some kind.
Put yourself in the shoes of the US, if it doesn't disgust you too much. Is there, and from what I get from the posts here there seems to be the thinking that there *is*, something that is owed to the rest of the world by the US? A guarantee that we will buy your goods? Irregardless of domestic competitors? A guarantee that the US will disregard its own national policy and interests so that Mr and Mrs McClean can make a living selling lumber? No one "forces" them to grow pot. They choose, out of many options. They can grow a different crop, sell everything and buy a VW van and drive around, go to school, aquire bankruptcy protections or the Canadian equivalent, sell their land to a ski resort, open a bed and breakfast, who knows? Growing pot, I'm assuming for the Canadian market, isn't the only option. Industries change, focuses of growth change. Are the vast majority of people mourning the loss of the handwritten, leatherbound book binders of yore? A living tradition to be sure, but not a lucrative one. Those who would be doing that in a static world are doing something else in a dynamic one.

[This message has been edited by Orkrist the Cleaver (edited August 18, 2001).]

 

Kit, i believe that the real reason(still not good enough IMHO) is that if Canada legalizes maajuana, then the US wil be dealing with two countries smuggling drugs from both the north and the south as well.(i am dealing with big drug problems down here close to the mexican border as well. It is nothing to do with us not wanting you to legalize it, but rather that it will obviously be smuggled.

Also, avooch, if you would read alittle more carefully, that statment that i had made about our military had nothing to do with pride or being proud of it, but it had to do with a previous statment by brega saying that all the countries that we had *harased* could rise up and crush us. I was stating that it was not true by backing myself up. I am actually sickened by that fact because i could see that hundreds of thousand lives could have been saved if we had used or full force in WWII. so don't try to turn things around on me. i know what i am talking about.

 

It's not that Americans are stupid it's that we act stupid or have no comon scence I mean America has one of the top lititure level in the world so we can't be stupid. So