Well when you use terms like "teabaggers" "reactionaries" and "wingnuts" in your opening paragraph it kind of sets a tone for the rest of your post, don't you think?

And you may not believe this but both of us were actually being nice to the ignorant foreigner by trying to make a joke of such a rude and inaccurate assessment.

FYI the hoopla over black helicopters and UN stormtroopers, which BTW was never nearly as extensive as the foreign media (and some domestic media too) made it out to be, did indeed go out of style 20 years ago. I don't think anyone here still actually thinks that the UN could fight it's way into a wet paper bag let alone successfully invade our country especially filled as it is presently with war veterans. I'm also sure that few if any of my younger students would have even heard of black helicopters let alone be able to describe their significance so yeah you are indeed behind the times.

In fact just about everything you wrote in that post shows a marked lack of understanding about my country and the mood of it's people which I was not really inclined to spend all that much effort in correcting so I made a quick joke and moved on.

But i'm not wrong about Market Garden either. Montgomery's plan to rely on a single road for the offensive was just as unrealistic as your post was.

But hey, if it upsets you then how about substituting the Charge of the Light Brigade instead? The whole Crimean war? Burgoyne's strategy to split the colonies? Henry Clintons belief that sitting in New York and not supporting Cornwallis was a good strategic move? Withholding parachutes from British pilots in WW1 to keep them from "needlessly" abandoning their burning aircraft? Harold thinking the Normans would just break themselves mindlessly against the English line at Hastings? What?

I'm totally flexible with my disparaging analogies! :DL

go easy august, it's not just cohaagen you are slurring here, and it's not's like the good ol' USA has shown itself to be a fount of foresight and wisdom over the last, say, 10 years. is it?

Actually it is just Cohaagen he's slurring. The man made a simple unwarranted attack for no good reason, and he got what he deserved.

You don't see August using that kind of language against Jimbuna, Steed or Reece.

Cohaagen's points and opinions are as valid as anyone's, but his style is nothing short of arrogant, dismissive and rude.

I thought this was supposed to be a theoretical argument? Where'd all the trolls come from? (not you August)

Hm, Cohaagen's tone and points were unwarranted for. But he has a point insofar that it appears (<- not saying it is that way) as if Americans these days are a rather paranoid and freighted folks, seeing bogeyman all over the place in various forms, be it fascism, communism, terrorism etc, so entrenched in their political positions that it makes any kind of democratic politics near impossible.

Democracy is utterly reliant on compromise and understanding. But those two points, again, appear to be utterly discredited in the US these days.
It also appears that a lot of intellect in American politics is replaced by gut feeling. But if the basics of democratic discourse are removed, what then is left?

All this from an outsiders POV, so I may be completely wrong in that picture. Also, if you prefer outsiders stay out of US domestic affairs, just say so. Do not want to be disrespectful.

We're not democratic, we're represenative republic. I think the big problem with US politics, is that the elected reps do what's in the party's interest first. The US has always had nasty, partisan politics, but that is the great beauty of the US, we are able to have this debate between ideas.

The other problem with the US, is that everybody wants the goodies, but nobody wants to pay for them.


Oh, and thanks for the opinion. I always find non-US opinions interesting. It's the flame-trolls that ruin it for everyone. What country are you from?

Where is the contradiction in that?

But is there a real debate? Do not want to be provocative, but it looks less then a debate but more like an opinion war these days. I've been following US politics quite a while, but since Bush took office the fights appear to have reached a new quality, so much that the US almost makes a dysfunctional impression, especially in the face of the many urgent matters faced today in international politics and the economy. Are people more loyal to their party or their country? (country->including all people and opinions)

Well ok, that much is true for almost any country and people.

Germany. Which makes nowadays US politics highly interesting, as many parallels can be drawn to Weimar and Imperial Germany (obsession with the military/huge military potential, radical political opinions and radicalization in general , strained international relations, economic problems etc.). This may read odd, but the US today helps me in understanding my own countries past in some ways. It is more an academic interest then an emotional one.

Something I seriously miss in American politics these days is a clear picture of how the US should look like by all parties involved. You hear a lot of individual opinions, but is there is a broader consensus amongst people? Most of the times people only state what they don't want. May I ask what political direction you are following? In your views, what should the US look like, based on what ideals/ideologies and why?

Once again, this is all based on what news come over here and what is presented in American TV that found it's way to the internet, so it may all be based on wrong impressions. Please take this into account towards everything I write here.

The only disagreement I would have with that is the "today" part. American politics have always been vicious, going right back to the battles between the first Secretary of State, Thomas Jefferson, and the first Secretary of The Treasury, Alexander Hamilton.

No, you're not wrong at all. Sometimes someone will try to dismiss a comment by suggesting that an outsider is incapable of correct observation. While true to a point, I don't think this is the case here. Yes, our politics can be downright nasty. On the other hand, we're not alone in that.

While true, that is also a nit-pick usually bandied about by the hard-core right-wingers, and I don't think it has any real relevance here. While we are indeed a representative republic, our operating system is indeed correctly called the democratic process.

Other than that, I think your comments are spot-on.

Partly due to the fact the American media is, by and large, VERY factionalized, presenting each sides' arguments in absolute extremes - there really is no "moderate" American media, and so, what gets out to the world at large in a globally-connected society is that divisiveness, rather than the places of unity.

At the Federal scale, this is very true. The two sides are incapable of working together, and seem to draw pride from that very fact. That said, on the smaller community scale, I've never seen someone turned away from a business here in town because they voted in opposition to the community's prevailing political theory.

Where all the political division arguments fall apart is at the level of communities. At the global scale, America appears quite dysfunctional. But down here on the streets, most of us can differ in opinion and get along quite famously.

I was going to say something along those lines as well. There are numerous forms of democractic governance, with a reperesentative [democractic] republic being one of them. To simplify by stating that the United States is a democracy would not be inaccurate. Technically, we are a western liberal democractic republic, as we elect represetatives to serve our interests in running the nation, in which civil liberties are protected. Modern polispeak has rendered some of those terms so that they are associated differently than their classical definitions.

Thanks guys for the answers guys, that was enlightening.


Where all the political division arguments fall apart is at the level of communities. At the global scale, America appears quite dysfunctional. But down here on the streets, most of us can differ in opinion and get along quite famously.

I think this is noteworthy, I will keep that in mind. So folks from different parties are capable to have a beer and discuss politics without going at their throats? I think that is an important bit of information, as most news coming out of the US is indeed based on the federal level.

Ooo. That's very true and you have, by the starting of this thread, made a very good point of it. I didn't see that coming; you suprised me and I don't get suprised around here very often. :up:

EDIT: Cool sig.

That really depends on the two people. There are those who hold opposite views, but are able to discuss their ideas, and then there are those who feel the need to turn the discussion into a fight at every opportunity.

No idea what exactly I did, but a pleasure :DL

About the Sig, want one, too? 10 minute editing job if you find a good picture to work with.

Granted, but that is also true to most nations/people/groups. It's all a question of what kind of people are in the majority.

Most definitely.

I know that our media would have everyone (including us) believe that we're on the verge of going after each other but that just isn't the way it is in reality. Politics are almost never a factor in anything that goes beyond a bit of spirited debate.