The Anti-American sentiment on here...

In Democracy the people have a moral obligation to remain informed for their tax dollars pay for the bullets and bombs.


Even Shakespeare writes about this in Henry V

So, if a son that is by his father sent about
merchandise do sinfully miscarry upon the sea, the
imputation of his wickedness by your rule, should be
imposed upon his father that sent him: or if a
servant, under his master's command transporting a
sum of money, be assailed by robbers and die in
many irreconciled iniquities, you may call the
business of the master the author of the servant's
damnation: but this is not so: the king is not
bound to answer the particular endings of his
soldiers, the father of his son, nor the master of
his servant; for they purpose not their death, when
they purpose their services. Besides, there is no
king, be his cause never so spotless, if it come to
the arbitrement of swords, can try it out with all
unspotted soldiers: some peradventure have on them
the guilt of premeditated and contrived murder;
some, of beguiling virgins with the broken seals of
perjury; some, making the wars their bulwark, that
have before gored the gentle bosom of peace with
pillage and robbery. Now, if these men have
defeated the law and outrun native punishment,
though they can outstrip men, they have no wings to
fly from God: war is his beadle, war is vengeance;
so that here men are punished for before-breach of
the king's laws in now the king's quarrel: where
they feared the death, they have borne life away;
and where they would be safe, they perish: then if
they die unprovided, no more is the king guilty of
their damnation than he was before guilty of those
impieties for the which they are now visited. Every
subject's duty is the king's; but every subject's
soul is his own. Therefore should every soldier in
the wars do as every sick man in his bed, wash every
mote out of his conscience: and dying so, death
is to him advantage; or not dying, the time was
blessedly lost wherein such preparation was gained:
and in him that escapes, it were not sin to think
that, making God so free an offer, He let him
outlive that day to see His greatness and to teach
others how they should prepare.
​

 

That's simply not true. There were plenty of people who wanted to be free of the Mongols, but an idea can be killed with fear. The idea that nobody can stop people who want independence is pretty naive. The question is always about cost, which is why I am usually against most wars. I think that the human cost is usually just not worth it. I think the US government KNEW that it had chosen a path that couldn't lead to victory, but at the same time didn't want to admit defeat. Bottom line, defending a crappy S. Vietnamise government was never worth one American life.

The Indian independence movement was an example of force being repelled. Then you have the Indian government, which like all governments, derives its power from the people through some level of force. In the absence of force, we are all individuals with total freedom. I don't see any power being benevolent. It all needs to be viewed with distrust and carefully controlled. Look at what the Bush administration has slowly done to individual liberties in the US... and he really is just following a chain of erosion that has been going on for a while. Clinton excercised federal power over individual citizens in ways never before done, too. Meh... maybe we just have a philosophical difference here.

Well, yeah, but the comparison was made that the US has the worst record of abuse of power. I think the Brits learned their lesson by force. The Empire bled the motherland dry, but they sure were willing to fight for the few scraps left behind, like in the Faulklands campaign.

I also question what lessons France learned. After the Algerian situation, they set up an entirely new government and militarily declined rapidly. Did they learn lessons about colonialism and imperialism, or did they simply lose the ability to project power? Their navy is pretty much mothballed, and they have been trying to rebuild it for years, but can't seem to meet their own readiness standards.

This is a wierd discussion, because I don't really want to defend the US international position, since I am personally opposed to it. At the same time, the demonization I've seen here has a lot of misinformation. I still say that most American people don't know or care about any of this, just like most people don't know what's going on outside their country other than what comes through government controlled/influenced news sources.

 

I agree. That doesn't change the fact that most people just want to worry about their lives and leave politics to the politicians. I read a ton of current event sources and am obsessive about learning various histories. So of course, I agree that we have an obligation to police our government. On the other hand, most people don't have any interest in current events or history... in that case, I'm not sure I would WANT them having too much say in our policy. No input at all is better than ignorant input.

 

I haven't ever sat down and read one of his entire books, but I've read many exerpts and articles. I've also listened to lectures of his. I don't think the guy is an idiot, just a kook. I know he has a huge following. Populist socialists always do. People like hearing things that feel right to them, regardless of validity. Keynes economic beliefs have been largely proven false, which invalidates much Marxists/socialist principals. I don't disagree with everything that comes out of Chomsky's mouth. He talks a good game about personal freedom, but I think he turns around and loses his own arguments based on his economic beliefs.

Read some Von Mises and Rothbard, and you'll get a better handle on my political philosophy.

 

I didn't vote for him. And no, he's ridiculous, but our whole system of selecting presidents sucks now that it been turned over to the "people" in primaries. I don't know what the best system is, but the old smoked-filled rooms worked better than voting by the most extreme fanatics of each party.

 

I have noticed that most hate Oleg Maskaev and want his to lose to Peter even if it's crooked, yet it is Oleg Maskaev who in an American Citizen, Peter is not!

Oleg is an American citizen!

Oleg is an American citizen!

 

All three of Vitali Klitschko's children were born in America, yet most here want him to lose to Peter. Most do not want Vitali to even get a shot at Peter, want Don King to cheat!

And again, Oleg Maskaev is an American citizen, yet they want a non-American to beat him. Hmmm, sounds like racisim to me.

 

No, I am saying that the people that he beat were even worse for the job than he was. I am saying that we don't have the choice of who runs for president and have to pick within certainly limitations.

If you knew a great deal about our country and government, you wouldn't have made such a broad statement. Don't quote an ideal as though it's reality.

Bush was not elected by a wide margin. Are you saying that if 45% of the country did NOT vote for him, that we are responsible for him being there? Don't make broad statements.

 

Right now, the lobbyist carry so much influence in our government you can just say that whoever gives away the best perks controls ALL aspects of our government.

I wouldn't say that the only people who determine our polcies are corporate interests though. Check out the Heritage Foundation and even many of the leftist think tanks. There are plenty of heavy hitters who believe that our position in the world is reliant on military dominance of any rival. We're already positioning forces to contain China's sphere of influence... for no real tangible benefit for the country.

The conservative arguments are that markets and trade can't be guaranteed without military insurance around the world. The old left liberals believe the same thing and also think that US leadership is all that is holding parts of the world from a slide into barbarism.

My reasons for my opinion are simply that the economics don't make sense and the best laid plans of policy makers here tend to be wrong for other cultures, not matter how noble the initial intentions were. Best laid plans of mice and men...

 

I think Kerry and especially Gore would have made far better Presidents than Bush. He is an ignorant man and I wouldn't hire him to wash my car! Anyway, he would probably just declare war on dirt.

False religious conviction and fear have been his (really Karl Rove's) tactics for getting a mostly ignorant public motivated to vote for such an unqualified President.

If the people were more informed they wouldn't have voted in this puppet for big oil and the NRA, so yes, I do hold the American public responsible for it's leadership, isn't that what a democracy is?

 

And we are not a democracy. And if you knew so much, you would know that the American public DID vote Gore in. He lost because of an old system stil in place from the 1700's. He won the popular vote. Something we have no power to change.

So, you hold 100% of the population responsible for what 54% wanted? That's rich.....That's like saying all the judges were payed off in a bad decision when one of them got it completely right, but since he is still a judge, you lump him in with the other 2.

 

I am aware olf the electoral college and how it operates, you are making huge assumption there mate that I am ignorant. This system is or should be known by all voting Americans and should either be changed or allowed for. I stant by my assertation.

 

Stand by your assertion. But it is just as ignorant as the people you condemn. I stand by that assertion. We didn't elect Bush against Gore...and we cannot change the electoral college system ourselves. If we had the power to end such things, wouldn't it follow that we would have ended the Iraq war long ago? 70% of the country wants out of Iraq, but we can do nothing to remove ourselves.

If you know so much about the process (and I think you only know what you read) then you should know the limitations on the American public to control it's politics.

 

I thought the American constitution was great and stuff.

I blame George Washington and all them ****s for the dire situation today.

 

I for my part think that all you guys should keep politcs out of this thread.
There are surely a lot of people who dislike the USA for political reasons,but I am quite sure that they are also a lot of people outside the USA who support the USA and its political agenda.
I for my part surely tend to be very critical of American fighters,their fight records,and the American media and experts who hype them.However,that doesnt mean that I dislike the USA or its inhabitants.
Quite the opposite I have always found American tourists to be more friendlier and polite than-say-Italian or French ones.
And the Americans I know are either quite religious and boring or crazy but very nice human beings.
Of course I am not American,and therefore I am not that interested in American's political agenda,but if forced I would surely favour the USA 's present government over a lot of governments in western europe.
Anyway! I am still very sceptical of american fighters.:yep