What are they thinking?

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by scandium

Or at least that is what they teach you to believe (and many of us as well, whose school books also happen to be written in the United States).

You have a valid point that up until, and including, WWII this was exactly what other countries were doing in one form or another.

Oh they have been doing it for quite a bit after that. Remember the Soviet Union? Or China? Or to some extent England and France (holding on to what they had in a death grip). What does the US do? Hay Puerto Rico, statehood, independence or the same old same old? Go ask your people and let us know, we’re cool with what ever you decide.

And there's no denying that many things the US has done have had a benevolent impact (the Marshall Plan is a prime example). But is this the full story of US intervention? Is its foreign policy really driven by a desire to maintain peace and help the less fortunate around the world? I think not, on both counts.

The Marshall Plan was to maintain peace by preventing the Soviets from getting a bigger foot hold in the Med. Remember the Monroe Doctrine? Europe say out of the Americas. The Korean War? The Communist Bloc decides it wants to help the North Korans invade their neighbors.

There's a much more modern and effective way of achieving imperial style wealth and power without conquering anyone: economic imperialism. Like the imperialism of old it transfers the wealth and resources out of the client state and into the imperial power, but without all of the expense and mess of old fashioned colonialsm with its need for occupation and risk of rebellion. Its a subtler, kinder imperialism that all Western countries wage but that the US wages better than anyone.

So we can't act for the common good simply because we have so much money? If say Portugal or Norway or Lesotho had billions and billions of dollars and a huge military and they didn’t act to prevent a country whose leaders have determined their people’s goal should be the systematic extermination of another group of people by the most heinous acts imaginable you would be screaming at the top of your lungs (…err typing at the tips of your fingers?) for them to act, you would probably be even saying that’s its criminal not to act. Everyone complains when the US acts and they don’t like what we are doing and everyone complains when the US doesn’t and everyone doesn’t even bother to remember when the US acts and does good. As for money coming in to the US there has been a huge discussion in how Illegal Immigrants to the US come here for the sole reason to send money out.

[Iceman]

Scandium...what country are you from? In your profile you list no information. Just curious. I always try to understand where people come from on there point of view. I find it very intresting that many people who enjoy alot of freedom tend to forget at what price it comes at.

Maybe Skybird can enlighten this topic on the guy who came up with the Art of War theory...I have read some of it in the past and war and conquering seems very simple...mafias generally have it down as well too...Subduing your enimes,crushing there will, killing all out if neccessary. All these traits is where America falls short in it's "Conquests". Trying to sustain a war like we are doing in Iraq and Afghan...always trying to be the stand up guy and not taking advantage of the spoils of war is folly on the part of the conquerer.

Maybe it is a good thing after all not being so absolute.But the question I think was brought up in this thread..If America does not stand up who will?....we all know the answer...no one.So should America sit back and do nothing...no she should ACT and consult no one but her own people and those who would seek to live in peace.

A city divided against itself cannot stand....Peace out Scandium.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Oh they have been doing it for quite a bit after that. Remember the Soviet Union? Or China? Or to some extent England and France (holding on to what they had in a death grip).

Not really, and not on the same scale, no. By far, and I mean by far (we're talking entire continents here, not little third world countries like Korea... think Africa, North America, South America) the great imperial ventures were pre-20th century. In fact pre-18th century if we want to get into its peak. Much of the history since then has been marked by independence (whether bloody or bloodless) in the colonies and what colonialism has taken place since the 18th century has been on a smaller scale and shorter lived.

So we can't act for the common good simply because we have so much money?

Wouldn't that be rather socialist and run counter to the American ideal of rugged individualism? Is there so much of this "acting for the common good" (ie: socialism/liberalism) in the US that its spread to your foreign policy as well? Obviously no. Domestically the US spends among the lowest amounts (as a percentage of GDP) of industrialized countries (compare it to "socialist" Europe... or even "socialist" Canada) on social programs. In terms of foreign aid, again as a percentage of GDP, it is also one of the cheapest industrialized countries. This extends to foreign policy as well: if the policy is beneficial to the indigenous peoples then so be it; if it isn't, so be it. What matters in either case is that the policy is beneficial to the US and the "common good" is not a variable there (let alone the prime one). Of course other countries are no different but to believe the US is some lofty exception to this not only absurd, but profoundly naive.

Everyone complains when the US acts and they don’t like what we are doing and everyone complains when the US doesn’t and everyone doesn’t even bother to remember when the US acts and does good.

Well certainly this is what Americans have been telling themselves since they invaded Iraq. Ironically, at the time I remember only the worldwide protests begging the US not to invade but this goes to the parallel universe I believe many inhabit these days.

Incidentally, this may come as a surprise to you, but believe it or not its actually Canada, and not the US, that has led the most peace-keeping missions in the world. That despite our much smaller military and population. Of course Canada doesn't pretend to be the world's protector and savior... but we don't have God on our side like you do

[scandium]

Originally Posted by Iceman

Scandium...what country are you from? In your profile you list no information. Just curious. I always try to understand where people come from on there point of view. I find it very intresting that many people who enjoy alot of freedom tend to forget at what price it comes at.

Maybe Skybird can enlighten this topic on the guy who came up with the Art of War theory...I have read some of it in the past and war and conquering seems very simple...mafias generally have it down as well too...Subduing your enimes,crushing there will, killing all out if neccessary. All these traits is where America falls short in it's "Conquests". Trying to sustain a war like we are doing in Iraq and Afghan...always trying to be the stand up guy and not taking advantage of the spoils of war is folly on the part of the conquerer.

Maybe it is a good thing after all not being so absolute.But the question I think was brought up in this thread..If America does not stand up who will?....we all know the answer...no one.So should America sit back and do nothing...no she should ACT and consult no one but her own people and those who would seek to live in peace.

A city divided against itself cannot stand....Peace out Scandium.

Canada... one of these days I'll get around to filling out more of my profile.

As to Sun Tzu: I've only ever read parts of the Art of War and, though its timeless and as relevant then as it is now, the advent of capitalism has meant some necessary modifications to the way imperial powers operate (modern forms of government and technology have played a part too).

I don't think the US should "sit back and do nothing" but that implies a false dichotomy; ie, that there are only two choices: the way its done things so far or nothing at all. Of course there are alternatives and always have been. You only need to look back and the choices made so far and consider alternatives to see this. For instance, consider the so-called "War on Terror":

What do terrorism and warfare have in common? Both rely on violence and fear to achieve their objectives (you win a war by destroying, through violence, your enemies will to fight, by making him fear the consequences of prolonging the conflict - for instance, a third a-bomb on Japan in WWII). In fact terrorism is little more than assymetrical warfare by non-nation participants. This is the problem with a "war on terror" though, how do you sap the will of participants, who are not defined by national boundaries, through violence and the fear that refusal to surrender will lead to more violence? Who signs the surrender? Isn't fear, through violence, exactly the goal of terrorism? Wouldn't it therefore make sense that a "War on Terror" cannot be won and is actually a paradox?

To me it follows logically that if the War on Terror is based on a paradox and cannot be won, then the actions taken to date in fighting in it are not reducing Terrorism. Rather, I believe the US's actions to date are worsening the problem.

This is not to say that you can't fight terrorism. I believe you can, but I think you do that by combatting the ideologies that promote it, by changing the living conditions in the places where it breeds, and by training and funding skilled counter-terrorist professionals. Then you capture, try, convict and imprison the perpetrators rather than detain them indefinitely in secret.

Sure the US is at least claiming to be fighting terrorism, I just believe that its doing about as poorly a job of it as its possible to do. It has been very successful at creating new backwaters for it to thrive in though.

[retired1212]

did a little bit digging.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060519/...NlYwN5bmNhdA--

[scandium]

Originally Posted by Oombongo

did a little bit digging.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060519/...NlYwN5bmNhdA--

Much of this artcle is also covered in the one I posted in this thread earlier. I especially liked this part of the Yahoo one though:

Iran's Islamic law imposes tight restrictions on women. They need a male guardian's permission to work or travel. They are not allowed to become judges, and a man's court testimony is considered twice as important as a woman's.

Despite such restrictions, Iranian women have more rights than their counterparts in Saudi Arabia and some other conservative Muslim countries. They can drive, vote and run for office.

Interesting how we never hear a peep about Saudia Arabia on these topics isn't it? Even though they're more restrictive than their Iranian counterparts and even though 15 of the 19 Sept 11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian... wonder why that is... :hmm:

[retired1212]

I love one thing in SArabia. Death for death traffickers who are protected by law in West.

Would love to put 1Kg of heroin in a spammer's bag and send him to SArabia for vacations

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by The Noob

Please do not Flame Iran or muslims, after the Muslim Cartoon disaster this could make the Situation even worse. I am NOT a muslim or a friend of iran, but i think we should be careful that we don't make them even more angry.

When reading comments of this callibre, I can feel intensively myself that Buddha was right: living is suffering.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by scandium

Not really, and not on the same scale, no. By far, and I mean by far (we're talking entire continents here, not little third world countries like Korea... think Africa, North America, South America) the great imperial ventures were pre-20th century. In fact pre-18th century if we want to get into its peak. Much of the history since then has been marked by independence (whether bloody or bloodless) in the colonies and what colonialism has taken place since the 18th century has been on a smaller scale and shorter lived.

Excuse me? Think Europe think half of Europe and a chunk of Asia; Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan plus Albania (until 1962), Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, and Romania and Soviet or proxy forces in Angola, Afghanistan, Cuba, Mozambique, Ethiopia, and Mongolia. That was the world in the 1980s. Your telling me that is not a massive empire held together at gunpoint?

Incidentally, this may come as a surprise to you, but believe it or not its actually Canada, and not the US, that has led the most peace-keeping missions in the world. That despite our much smaller military and population. Of course Canada doesn't pretend to be the world's protector and savior... but we don't have God on our side like you do

Who has put down the most homicidal dictators?

Oh and we don't have God on our side that would violate the 1st Amendment.

Oh well your Canadian so whatever we Americans do you hate. As Barbara Amiel said: "If America was trying to keep the bubonic plague out of its hemisphere, Canadians would import it just to show their independence of American foreign policy."

[The Noob]

Originally Posted by Skybird

When reading comments of this callibre, I can feel intensively myself that Buddha was right: living is suffering.

Yup. Budda Rocks!

No Seriously...

[tycho102]

Originally Posted by The Noob

The World According To America

Actually, we're on fairly friendly terms with the Aussies. In part because they get a lot of Yank tourists, part because they get to ship us their "convicts" like Paul Hogan and Steve Irwin, and part because our rednecks bare striking resemblance to their rednecks. Switch the Canada and Australasia bits, and that might be fairly accurate. You should probably re-label the eastern side of South America with "Here be shemales". :rotfl:

As for Iran, the "president" gets over-ridden by the "Supreme Mullah". The badges would have flown two years ago when they were introduced, just as Ayatollah Kohmeni (however it's spelled, I'm not going to do him the courtesy of checking google) could have fired/removed Mahoumed from his position as president.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by The Noob

@Ducimus
Are you american? I don't have to discuss politics with a Bush loving manipulatet Person. And thats like you sound.

If i can have one too, yes.

Personally i hope america and Iran both get Nuked in the Process of the Upcoming war.

You sure are drawing up a whole lot of assumptions.

First of all, i hate bush. But im also not stupid. Ive been around the world enough to realize that you just cant hand over some things to some countries. That metphorical knife, you'd be an idiot to hand one over to the mass murder the example i use. The object is to let allow that conflict to start to begin with. Weather you also have a knife is irrelvant, because you've set the stage for a fight that you'd rather not have to begin with.


I can tell you love Americans a whole lot. Guess what, your not really hurting my feelings. After 7 years in the military, ive heard it all. Words alone can't relate the joy of staring down an enemy that threatens to destroy a people, and have that people turn around and say, "**** you GI", or "Yankee go home" to my face, as if i really wanted to sit in their rat ****hole of a country to begin with. Or being denied service in a resturant or store, simply because im an American. So, ive heard it all, if slamming americans makes you feel good, go for it, its very fashionable these days.

Personnaly i would love it if we went back to isolationism. Stopped bying all forign, get our own craftsmanship back up to standards, and start buying american again. The following really sums how how i feel, and if such a man were to run for president he'd have my vote in a heartbeat.

My fellow Americans:

As you all know, the defeat of Iraq's regime has been completed. Since congress does not want to spend any more money on this war, our mission in Iraq is complete.

This morning I gave the order for a complete removal of all American forces from Iraq. This action will be complete within 30 days. It is now time to begin the reckoning.

Before me, I have two lists. One list contains the names of countries which have stood by our side during the Iraq conflict. This list is short.

The United Kingdom, Spain, Bulgaria, Australia, Norway and Poland are some of the countries listed there.

The other list contains everyone not on the first list. Most of the world's nations are on that list. My press secretary will be distributing copies of both lists later this evening.

Let me start by saying that effective immediately, foreign aid to those nations on List 2 ceases immediately and indefinitely. The money saved during the first year alone will pretty much pay for the costs of the Iraqi war.

The American people are no longer going to pour money into third world hell-holes and watch those government leaders grow fat on corruption. Need help with a famine? Wrestling with an epidemic? Call France.


In the future, together with Congress, I will work to cut taxes and solve some local problems. On that note, a word to terrorist organizations. Screw with us and we will hunt you down and eliminate you and all your friends from the face of the earth. Thirsting for a gutsy country to terrorize? Try France, or maybe China.



To Israel and the Palestinian Authority. You, boys. Work out a peace deal now. Just note that Camp David is closed. Maybe all of you can go to Russia for negotiations. They have some great palaces there. Big tables, too.



I'm ordering the immediate severing of diplomatic relations with France, Germany, and Russia. Thanks for all your help, comrades. We are retiring from NATO as well. Bon chance, mes amis.

I have instructed the Mayor of New York City to begin towing the many UN diplomatic vehicles located in Manhattan with more than two unpaid tickets to sites where those vehicles will be stripped, shredded and crushed. I don't care about whatever treaty pertains to this. Pay your tickets tomorrow, or watch your precious Benzes, Beamers, and limos be turned over to some of the finest chop shops in the world. I love New York.

A special note to our neighbors. Canada is on List 2. Since we are going to be seeing a lot more of each other, you folks might want to try not pissing us off for a change. Mexico is also on List 2. President Fox and his entire corrupt government really need an attitude adjustment. I have a couple extra tank and infantry divisions sitting around. Guess where I'm gonna put 'em? Yep, border security. So start doing something with your oil.

Oh, by the way, the United States is abrogating the NAFTA treaty--starting now.

It is time for America to focus on its own welfare and its own citizens.

Some will accuse us of isolationism. I answer them by saying darn tootin'.

Nearly a century of trying to help folks live a decent life around the world has only earned us the undying enmity of just about everyone on the planet.


It is time to cut taxes here because we will not be spending on other people's problems.

To the nations on List 1, a final thought. Thanks guys. We owe you. To the nations on List 2, a final thought. Drop dead. God bless America. Thank you and good night.

[The Noob]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

After 7 years in the military, ive heard it all. Words alone can't relate the joy of staring down an enemy that threatens to destroy a people, and have that people turn around and say, "frick you GI", or "Yankee go home" to my face, as if i really wanted to sit in their rat ****hole of a country to begin with.

If you don't wan't to "sit in their rat ****hole of a country" why then you are in the military? Why do you invade thier country? Don't you realised that Irak was only invaded for getting thier oil? I do not want to hurt your feelings, but you seem to be manipulatet/"Brainwashed". I know what you are thinking. "We just invaded thier country to
Free them". Bullsh!t i say! The governement wantet to make thier soldiers think that way. If America would be invaded by...Germany for Ecsemple, wouldn't you say "Frick you German" or "Kraut go Home"?

Too many "America Loving Brainwashed soldiers" around here...

[scandium]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Who has put down the most homicidal dictators?

Oh and we don't have God on our side that would violate the 1st Amendment.

Oh well your Canadian so whatever we Americans do you hate. As Barbara Amiel said: "If America was trying to keep the bubonic plague out of its hemisphere, Canadians would import it just to show their independence of American foreign policy."

All of which pales compared to the colonialism pre-18th century when it was at its peak. Also many of the countries you list were ones that were liberated from the Germans in WWII and with the USSR having been invaded and all its a safe bet colonialism wasn't on Stalin's mind when they were nearly over-run by the Germans. Later, after the loss of entire cities and huge chunks of their population it was a factor, but it would be revisionist history at its worst to say that WWII was fought as a war of Imperialism for the Russians. And many of their gains were short-lived, lasting of all of 40 or 50 years before these countries became independent.

Who has put down the most homicidal dictators?

Who has put most of them in power to begin with? Who has supplied most of them with the training, weapons, "aid", and other forms of support they've needed to come to power or remain in power?

Oh well your Canadian so whatever we Americans do you hate.

That is also out of touch with reality... like almost everything else you've written. In the wake of the Iraq war, with US support abroad at perhaps its lowest level ever, an international survey was conducted to measure how people felt about the US in various parts of the world. A majority of Canadians were found to have favourable opinions of Americans, and I believe in this regard we were second only to Israelis.

It also does an injustice to our soldiers who have fought and died in Afghanistan on your behalf, who would not have been there if we 'hated whatever you Americans do'. In fact our parliment voted only yesterday to extend our mission there to 2009, this done the very same day another one of our soldiers was killed there.

Canadians are critical of Americans but so is everyone else. Naturally since we share a border and many mutual interests our criticism will seem loudest. If you think our criticism equals hatred then you really do have your head in the sand.

Editted to add to that last paragraph: it seems kind of hypocritcal when Americans such as yourself get their panties in a bunch 'because everyone criticizes them' while feeling, at the same time, that the US is somehow above criticism as the US President rails on the frontpage almost daily against other countries.

Recent examples: when Canada proposed legislation to decriminalize small quanties of pot possession the US Ambassador wasted no time criticizing our country for it and proclaiming that much of it would find its way into the US. Sorry, but how is our Criminal Code his business again? Why is your inability our unwillingness to police your own border our fault? Then the US did the same thing when Mexico proposed its own modifications to its drug laws. Those are two trifling examples of something anyone here can cite thousands more of and which happens so often you take it for granted. Of course if it were done in reverse, if our ambassador had the temerity to criticize any such minor revision of American law then every pundit in the US would be outraged and people like yourself would be saying its another example of how 'Canadians hate everything Americans do'

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by The Noob

If you don't wan't to "sit in their rat ****hole of a country" why then you are in the military? Why do you invade thier country? Don't you realised that Irak was only invaded for getting thier oil? I do not want to hurt your feelings, but you seem to be manipulatet/"Brainwashed". I know what you are thinking. "We just invaded thier country to
Free them". Bullsh!t i say! The governement wantet to make thier soldiers think that way. If America would be invaded by...Germany for Ecsemple, wouldn't you say "Frick you German" or "Kraut go Home"?

Too many "America Loving Brainwashed soldiers" around here...

You have absolutely no clue what your talking about.

First of all, people don't join the military thinking, "WOW, i wanna go invade some countries!"

Secondly, i could care less about why where in Iraq at this point, because its irrevlvant. What is relevant, is what were going to do to solve the situation. Orginally i supported of the idea toppeling saddam because i beleived the false intelligence that was held in front of our nose. That intelligence was all about what the media calls "WMD's". An acronym developed, probably because bush can't proprerly pronounce Nuclear. The proper term is NBC.. meaning Nuclear, Biological, Chemical.

Ever have NBC training? I have, and what i learned during that training is that NBC' is nothign to **** around with. For instance, there is a vaccine for maybe 5% of the worlds total Chemical and Biological weapons. The reality is, there IS NO DEFENSE against it. Sure you can don a gas mask and suck rubber for 16 hours, but thats not gonna help much for the other nasty stuff, and thats only if you had advanced warning. If a biological vectors were released into a country, but the time we found out about it , it would be too late to do anything. All it takes is one raghead, with a few barrels, a bright idea, and the determination to do it. So on THAT basis, and THAT basis alone i suported the idea. Turns out our intelligence was full of ****. Well, not much you can say about that except we ****ed up. Plain and simple.

Thirdly im far from brainwashed. Any US citizen who's read my posts in here would probably accuse me of being a liberal weenie or something. All you have to do is say , "**** bush!" and someone will be up your ass. Many people here are over patriotic. I however am not one of them. Infact i dislike people who wrap themselves in our nations flag, watch CNN like the war is a football game, and say things like, "We're gonna kick their ass" or whatever. From my perspecitve, What do you mean, we? I dont see your ass doing anything. Am i patriotic? Yes, but i am not blind and fervantly so, despite what you may think.

Fourthly, Freedom is an overused buzzword. It lost its meaning years ago, and truth be told ill wager alot of people could give less then a **** about the Iraq' peoples freedom. Alot of people tout "liberation" so it makes them feel warm and fuzzy so the entire debacle isnt a lost cause. On top of that, to a US serviceman, whos taken away from his home, his family, his loved ones, EVERYTHING he knows and lvoes in life, to sit in some ****hole country, watching his friends die, he wants to know it was for a reason, a good and honorable reason, so people cling to the whole liberation thing.