What the Rest of The World Thinks of America [Archive]

ruaidhri

08-11-2005, 08:24 PM

The topic on this thread is: “What the rest of the world thinks of America.” It’s a carryover from the original forum that existed from May until August 11, 2005. It was one of the most popular threads on the original forum.

This thread asks a very important question. Why is it important what the rest of the world thinks about America? I believe its because what America does affects everybody in the world.

While America may no longer be the king of production, much having moved to lower cost third-world countries it still exports technology, fast food, movies and attitudes. America isn’t the inventor of democracy but we have been its defender. Sometimes the world views our actions as good and sometimes as bad. One things for certain, we export the impact of our military actions. Today, countries that support us face the same terrorist attacks that threaten America.

I discovered from the previous forum that many people throughout the world have misconceptions about America and Americans. They see our movies, listen to our music and watch MTV. That paints a pretty poor picture of who we are. In reality, we’re not that different from people in other countries. Our primary desire is to live in peace with our families.

Many people don’t like our President, George Bush. Heck, I didn’t vote for him myself. I even campaigned against him and donated money to his opponent. While John Kerry won in my state, Wisconsin, he failed to win enough electoral votes nationwide to win the national election. So, now what? The only answer is that all of us have to live with what we’ve got.

Many people don’t like that America invaded Iraq. Neither do I. But, it happened and now we’re there. I believe it would be stupid to just pull out because that would endanger the entire Persian Gulf and the vital oil it provides to the world, not just America. What we need is help from the rest of the world. One of the posts in the previous thread brought up the question: Will the U.S. reestablish the draft?

That’s a loaded question because upon examination we also have to ask who’s fighting, dying and getting injured in Iraq and Afghanistan. Certainly, it’s not the children of the wealthy, upper middle or even the solidly middle class. It’s the true working class family from rural communities and inner cities. The government’s enlistment bonus and reenlistment bonus and later opportunities for college are their best opportunity to pull themselves up to a better standard of living. If they survive! The problem is that with Iraq and Afghanistan survival is a big issue.

The fact is enlistments are down because young people aren’t dumb. The benefits don’t outweigh the risks. They’re aware of the news of young people coming home in caskets. They know that the injuries suffered by those that “survive” the roadside bombs are serious and oftentimes completely ruin an individual’s life. Even with protective gear and blast shields roadside bombs rattle the soldiers’ brains around in their skulls. Many are never the same. No, definitely, the benefits do not outweigh the risks.

Ok, so what would happen if the U.S. were to reestablish the draft? Would they also reduce or even eliminate the bonus program? Would the quality and discipline of the military suffer? Many say it would. But, what about here at home? In my opinion the only thing that separates Iraq from Vietnam is the draft.

We don’t have the large protests because the government isn’t forcing anyone into the military. Change that and the Republicans would lose big time. They’re not dumb. They know that. And, they also know that if there were a draft it would have to include all young people regardless of gender. There would be no exceptions. There would be no long term college deferment. There would be no marriage deferment or children deferment. Imagine the protests, the marches and internal strife that would become America. In my opinion, it simply won’t happen.

So, if we won’t have a draft what happens when we don’t have the troops to remain in Iraq? Unless the U.N. and other nation’s step in to help, we’ll pull out just like we did in Vietnam. It’s our only alternative to reestablishing the draft.

What do you think America should do? How do you believe your country should react? And, do you believe the world would be a safer or more dangerous place without America?

We know what we see, read, hear and feel. Most of that comes from the news media. We read the paper, watch TV, listen to the radio and have our emotions manipulated by news pundits. They have the power to create issues out of nothing or to take what should be a big issue and hide or obfuscate it to the point where it simply disappears. We all need to remember that what’s not in the news is sometimes as important as what is.

The beauty of this forum is that it serves people from all around the world. The news media need not be our sole source of information. We have each other. If you read something about America that you just believe is plain stupid. Check it out on this site. We, Americans, can do the same thing if we hear or read something about your country. We can think for ourselves because we have each other.

But this thread is about what you think about America. It’s intended that Americans will respond to the comments. What do you like about America and Americans and what do you dislike?

TygressVirgo

08-11-2005, 09:33 PM

Nice topic,

I saw the other one, but was unable to respond in time. Glad to see a new one. I do hope many will participate in this. At the present time I don't have anything to add to your post at the moment. I do hope that this war ends soon and our troops come home.

- Ty

RDClip

08-11-2005, 09:35 PM

Well, if they reintroduce the draft, all hell will break loose. I don't think any administration will be willing to go through the crap like in Vietnam.

TygressVirgo

08-11-2005, 09:37 PM

I just thought of something. What does happen if we do not have any more troops and we leave Iraq to soon. What about the mass chaos that could occur than. And RDClip is right, no Admin. would want to reinstate the draft at this point in time.

Anders

08-11-2005, 11:14 PM

Bush Junior is doing the only thing he can do... Call in the reserves. As mentioned before in the old forum, soldiers sign up for an 8 year enlistment. They serve a number of years on active duty, then move to an inactive reserve status for the rest of the 8 years. Junior is re-activating soldiers on inactive reserve and making tours longer for the soldiers already risking their lives in Iraq. Of course this doesn't bother Bush Junior any... I'm willing to bet that he would keep soldiers in Iraq the entire 8 years if his term wasn't over in 2008.

KKF

08-11-2005, 11:19 PM

I wonder how the Iran problem will effect the draft and the gas prices. :(

Anders

08-11-2005, 11:33 PM

But Junior is vowing to end our dependence on oil! http://www.onion.com/news/index.php?issue=4132

KujiInRetsu

08-11-2005, 11:44 PM

Tonight's broadcast of the ABC Evening News left me very unsettled and upset with the state of affairs in the "culture wars" spreading throughout America. Terry Moran introduced the story of a museum in Kansas, where it fused biblical lore and science into an ungainly mishmash of sheer stupidity. According to that museum, Noah, before the 40-day rains came and flooded the rest of the sinful world, ushered a pair of dinosaurs onto his Ark.

Yes. Dinosaurs. Note that they never specified what kind of dinosaurs, but they simply stated that dinosaurs were on Noah's Ark.

WHAT PART OF 65 MILLION YEARS AGO DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND!?!?!?

Is it me, or do Americans, now that the godless, evil empire of the Soviet Union is gone and all that remains is an enemy fighting on ignorance and religious overtures, seem more willing to abandon the reason and progress that our Men of Science made since the end of World War II in 1945?

ADCS

08-11-2005, 11:44 PM

GAH! Political thread! Run away! Run away!

RDClip

08-12-2005, 12:37 AM

D-pad

08-12-2005, 12:51 AM

I almost want a draft because it would definitly tear the republicans a new ass hole that would take them at least 12 years or so to sew up.............OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT!

RDClip

08-12-2005, 01:01 AM

I almost want a draft because it would definitly tear the republicans a new ass hole that would take them at least 12 years or so to sew up.............OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT!
Well, if they bring back the draft the population will increase here in Canada.

KujiInRetsu

08-12-2005, 01:21 AM

OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT!Best thing I've heard out of you since the forums opened. :D

I think Jon Stewart said it best in his post-election coverage, Comedy Central's Indecision 2004, that Barack Obama is the rising star of the Democratic Party. If he ran for President, there would be no question that he would be the first black president ever elected to office. The only people that wouldn't vote for him would be some of those same conservatives who also happen to be in the KKK or various white supremacy groups.

Anyway, RDClip, I seriously hope you're right. The religious freaks are pushing pretty damn hard, and with people in government bolstering their position (thank God Bill Frist changed on stem cell research), they're gaining more ground than I'd like. A LOT more than I'd like.

Roxie

08-12-2005, 01:30 AM

:mad: GAH!!! all of our (mostly) brilliant posts are all gone

Marblehead

08-12-2005, 03:02 AM

I almost want a draft because it would definitly tear the republicans a new ass hole that would take them at least 12 years or so to sew up.............OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT!

You do realise that would mean you'd more than likely would get drafted, don't you?

setrict

08-12-2005, 03:37 AM

The religious freaks are pushing pretty damn hard, and with people in government bolstering their position (thank God Bill Frist changed on stem cell research), they're gaining more ground than I'd like. A LOT more than I'd like.

It would be a shame to let facts get in the way of some religion bashing, but I thought you might like to know your boy Obama is a Christian convert - though I'm not sure if the title was taken out of faith or political convenience. I've got no problem with Obama as a person, he actually seems very nice and quite likable. I do heavily disagree with his politics, they lean much too far in the socialist direction for my taste (as an independent moderate). He might be a poster boy for the democractic party, but I think he is too far to the left to actually get elected if people actually pay attention to his politics and aren't distracted by his charisma and speech giving ability. He's a very good speaker, just like Clinton was - and that counts for a lot with the ignorant masses, so anything is possible I guess. All of the presidential hopefuls for 2008 are looking kind of pathetic at this point regardless of party.

Not that this has anything to do with what the rest of the world thinks of us :p Then again maybe it does, since it reflects how self absorbed the US is. Apparently we occupy threads as well as countries now!

Josh

08-12-2005, 04:04 AM

Mark Warner would be a decent candidate for President in my opinion. Im not sure if he is running in 2008 or 2012 though. Last I heard though he was giving it some serious thought for the next election.

KujiInRetsu

08-12-2005, 04:11 AM

Well, Obama may be a Christian convert, but he strikes me as the sort of person who is able to successfully question his own faith and use the lessons learned to better himself as a person, rather than the sort of "thunder and damnation" stereotype that's proliferating around the country at this point. I'll admit, I haven't done much research into this political stance on issues; but his charisma is nigh-undeniable.

The presidential hopefuls for 2008 look pitiful? 2004's candidates were pretty pitiful. I can't state this enough, but America got the short end of the stick during the elections, forget the Democrats. America as a whole lost during the 2004 elections.

ruaidhri

08-12-2005, 04:15 AM

I am very proud of my country yet I am aware of its many blemishes. Sometimes we have acted selfishly and not in the best interests of the world or even of our own citizenry. However, for the most part, I believe America has upheld its principles. Lately, I have been very concerned about America’s future. I see our freedoms downgraded by such actions as the Patriot Act. I wonder if we are not doing exactly what the terrorists want, destroying America from within.

I believe America’s greatest problem is its image. We’re viewed by many as an arrogant bully. Our politicians are considered putty in the hands of our religious right. Our elections are viewed with disdain. Our people are viewed as redneck, fat, and dumb. We are no longer considered the Promised Land for immigrants from around the world.

What happened? Following September 11, 2001, we had the sympathy and respect of the world. The sad part is that we did it to ourselves. I believe we have to stop sitting on the top of the hill looking down our noses and saying “it’s our way or the highway.” We desperately need a new government that embraces diplomacy more than military might.

Obviously, nothing we write on this forum is going to change American foreign or military policy. Also, nothing we write is going to create more acceptances of American policies from other nations’ governments. But, one by one forums and threads like this will open eyes and ears of individual people to the one undeniable fact: Americans aren’t that much different from people in other nations. We’ll all be much happier if we work together for solutions to our common problems.

Terrorism affects everyone. It’s not a new problem. It’s been around for a long time because it takes very little resources and it works. It’s manipulative. It forces reaction. It diverts dollars and energy. It creates fear. It wears people down costing more and more to defend against an unseen enemy that can easily change targets.

Our Western values and our way of life are under attack. The terrorists don’t fear the consequences of their actions. They’re even willing to attack their own people to make an impact. Our only hope is to stand together. How do we do this? First we must support the creation of an independent Iraq that is capable of defending itself. America can’t do it alone. We need the help of all nations, including yours.

Marblehead

08-12-2005, 05:01 AM

Get it off your chest, brother. Get it off your chest. :cool:

raging lahar

08-12-2005, 05:02 AM

America is not hated because you have more GDP or freedom than the rest of the world. You are hated because you attack and destroy countries and sovereign governments when your economic interest dictates that, in the name of "liberating" the population (well, the part which you do not kill) while you do not give a hoot about hundreds of thousand dying when there is no money for you in it.

You are hated because you toot around against WMDs whlie you are the largest developers of named WMDs and, in fact, the only one who used nuclear weapons against civilian targets.

You are hated because you refuse to care about the environment because it would hurt your bottom line and the rest of the world suffers from your ignorance. You are hated because you define what "freedom" must mean to the rest of the world: the American Way of Life. Everyone who thinks differently is an enemy of Freedom and Liberty and the enemy of the US of A.

You are hated because you set up dictators when it suits you then try to depose them, with all your military might, when they do not toe the party line any more. Never mind how many people die in both turn and never mind what gets destroyed, as long as weapons sale profits are high enough.

You are not hated but looked down for touting freedom when you had seggregation just 30 years ago, for warning parents that the Origin of Species contains dangerous theories that are not in the Bible, for having a patent system that allows you to patent a way of combing your hair to cover a bald spot, for cranking out movie after movie with no plot but more blood and explosion than a slaghterhouse hit by a Pershing and you call it "culture" but in the same time you have no problem destroying many thousand year old remnants of human history - all in all, that was not American, thus it must have been worthless. You are looked down for being the largest porn manufacturing industry but with an unbelievable hypocricy make nudity a deadly sin. You talk about freedom but ban gay marriages. You talk about women's rights but ban abortus even to an underage rape victim.

The idea that the world envies you is false. It comes from the idea that the US is, by definition, the best. Therefore obviously the world wants to be like the US just evil forces want to stop development and in order to liberate the world in their quest to finally living "our way of life", as your great leader puts it in every speech, you should attack them by economic, political and military needs. The fallacy in the whole ideology is that the rest of the world does not want to live like you. Europe appreciates her own decadent ways you know, with all that culture rubbish and lack of rights to have machine guns but with some rights of not being killed by your fellow citizens. Asia has a culture that is a lot more ancient than even Europe's and they seem to be doing reasonably OK with it, thank you very much. Africa is just too poor to have its priorities around freedom and ideology, they think about the food and water and medication more than their liberty.

Noone would have a problem with the US wanting to lead the world.

The problem is that you do not want to lead, you want to rule

Marblehead

08-12-2005, 05:09 AM

You know why everything you said is untrue? It is because I am an American and I agree with you.

Oh, and abortions still legal here. At least it was an hour ago. I'd have to check if it still is legal. Give me a sec....uh...ok...yup, yeah it's still legal. Thanks for worrying. :)

Psychochink

08-12-2005, 05:21 AM

You know why everything you said is untrue? It is because I am an American and I agree with you.

Care to explain your logic there? Particularly when he(?) is talking about attitudes towards America as an entity, not towards individual Americans.

While the delivery was hostile, and I don't agree with some of what he said, most of it's pretty hard to argue against.

While I wouldn't use the word 'hate' to describe (most) international attitudes about America, I do think that you've got a pretty negative image as a country. In a nutshell, most of the reasons that lahar stated, as well as a numerous unspoken ones, for other people looking down on America can be summed up by two words: arrogance and hypocricy.

It's not Joe American that (most) people have the problem with.

Marblehead

08-12-2005, 05:47 AM

hapacheese

08-12-2005, 05:48 AM

Raging lahar hit the nail on the head. However, America's saving grace is that the people in general (not the vocal minority) are trying to do the right thing. A lot of the time, they simply don't understand the consequences of their actions or their nation's actions outside their circle of knowledge, but it does not automatically make them evil people. Just ignorant (not saying that in a condescending way, but in the literal meaning of the word).

In Europe, for instance, you have so many countries put so close together that you are forced to deal with other cultures. You are forced to at least be exposed to multiple languages. In the central areas of USA, outside of the major metropolitan areas, you have absolutely no contact with the rest of the world. Your horizons are narrow, and it is only natural that your view on politics and social issues becomes equally narrow.

I still have faith that this great country can pull out of the depths that it is currently sinking itself into (and I say this because at least 49% of the people voted for change), we simply need powerful leadership. I have been meaning to do more research on Obama's political stances, simply because he has the kind of charisma to pull the nation together. And assuming his views were not way out of whack, the simple fact that he could be the first black president would mean tremendous progress for the US.

I love this country, but am dubious of the government. I support our troops, but am against the war. I am patriotic to the people, which is why I think it is the people's responsibility to pay attention and force the politicians to face the consequences of their actions.

And on a side note, why does the government do nothing when gas prices are skyrocketing (it's $2.73 a gallon on my street)? Chevron and whoever are claiming it is due to the increasing price of crude oil, yet they have been posting record-breaking profits for the last however many quarters... Why does nobody say anything??? Damn our government. *Both* sides.

RDClip

08-12-2005, 06:10 AM

One of the things that still sticks to my mind is something that someone said in a chat room once, “Canada is bigger. And Canadians are smarter.”

I'm Canadian and I can say those guys give us a bad name.

Every Canadian child is taught that Canada is the 2nd largest country in the world (land mass wise) but a very high percentage of that land is uninhabitable. Those guys obviously failed 5th grade geography. Canada has almost the same population as Mexico city.

Most times you talk to a Canadian, they have less patriotism than anyone you'd expect. We pretty much lack the group mentality of most countries. No one really gives a crap about Canadian politics because it's boring. The only time we have a political crisis is when fucking Quebec wants to leave us.

So please don' get the bad idea about us.

RDClip

08-12-2005, 06:18 AM

Psychochink

08-12-2005, 06:49 AM

No, I'm just saying that I don't agree with the way foreign policy is directed in this country. I understand our countries image looks pretty bad. As ruaidhri stated earlier and this thread( if you were able to see the original threads) has clearly shown that our public image does not in any way represent the real America. To judge America by our exported entertainment would be just as silly as judging Japan by anime and manga. Ashton Kutcher and Jessica Simpson are not America. Nor are Paul Hogan and Fosters beer Australia. Yet those are the images that Australia gives us to understand them.

So, if you stick around for awhile and keep reading these threads you understand America a lot better. You'll understand that a lot of us are more frustrated and pissed off about the way things are going than you.

I think you misunderstand my point. You made a blanket statement that because you (and other Americans) happen to agree with a lot of the things that lahar said, that makes what he said untrue.

Lahar simply stated a number of reasons why America's international image is as bad as it is. Your response, in essence, said that those weren't in fact the reasons why America has a bad reputation (thereby implying that the reasons were something else entirely). Now if you want to say "OK, that's all true, but keep in mind that many Americans disagree with governmental policy" that's something else entirely.

As far as 'public image not representing the real America', I'd say that's true...but only to a point, and not really relevant to anybody outside America. Forget the 'judging by exported entertainment', I happen to agree that's silly, and it's where lahar's argument falls down the most. But let's use a non-American argument, to make it easier to distance yourself.

Not long ago, Australia decided to poke its nose into Indonesia's business and say, "Sorry, you can't have East Timor. Now bugger off." This pissed a lot of people in Indonesia off. Now, a lot of Australians may have disagreed with our military presence there (me, for example). But using the 'actions speak louder than words' principle, do you really think that Joe Indonesian (let alone the Indonesian government) gave a rat's ass about that? Or in fact that they should have given a rat's ass about it?

No, they didn't, and nor should they. At the end of the day, the yardstick by which all countries will be measured is in what they do, not what they talk about, and even less what their citizens talk about. To use a hypothetical example, let's say a country decides to make eradication of a certain ethnic group governmental policy, let's then say that a good chunk (or even the majority) of the population of that country would be against the way this group was being treated. Should anybody outside that country judge it by anything other than the actions that it is taking, and therefore be forgiving of things that they disagree with?

The answer is, obviously, of course not. Whether you like it or not (and clearly you don't) your country will be judged by its actions by everybody outside of it. Ultimately, nobody outside America really cares that half of the country is 'frustrated and pissed off' with your government's actions, you're still doing it. If we're talking on an individual basis, that's different. As I say relatively often when black-and-white people start to accuse me of being anti-American if I point out things that piss me off about its actions, "I hate America, but I'm quite fond of Americans."

On a side note, I have been around for a while, and I have read the threads. I just don't post unless I've got something to say (or I'm really bored).

Psychochink

08-12-2005, 07:12 AM

...America's saving grace is that the people in general (not the vocal minority) are trying to do the right thing...

Hey, I just thought of a succinct way to put my previous post. As every manager in history has said in one way or another, "I care about results, not excuses."

Marblehead

08-12-2005, 07:35 AM

Psychochink

08-12-2005, 08:09 AM

My failed original point was that because I am an American and I agree with him his argument is false. He implied that all Americans think this way and yet I am American that thinks like him. It's a sort of a Logic problem. I don't know if you ever took Logic in school... I suppose it's kinda obscure... My fault entirely.

I am well aware of how I am viewed as an American because of the actions of my government. I've travel a fair bit around the world and I fully understand this. I still don't agree with it. I don't believe that I should just fold and say,"Oh well! What are you going to do?" I think that attitudes dead wrong.

And it isn't an excuse. I'm not trying to explain away the actions of my government. I'm trying to figure out the best way to change it.

But that was precisely my point. The use of the word "you" in his post was used to reference America - the country, not Americans - the people. You therefore based your rebuttal on a fallacy, which while it would have been correct had he started his post with "Americans are not hated..." instead of "America is not hated...", was not in fact the case (hence my original query of your logic). No, I didn't take Logic in school, It was however a major portion of one of my university majors.

Now, as I said in my own post, I happen to make the distiction between hating America and hating Americans. Having said that, most people aren't as wonderfully enlightened as me :D so until some change is seen in terms of America's actions, individual Americans will have to accept a certain degree of antagonism, as simply by identifying yourself with a particular nation, you are ipso facto supporting that nation's actions.

Marblehead

08-12-2005, 12:55 PM

But I am America because I am an American. So naturally I take it personally. Any attack on America is an attack on me. Do you think the people involved in 911 didn't mean to get my attention as well? If I had gotten a letter or an email from Al Quaida saying otherwise than maybe I wouldn't think so but I do. Whether I like it or hate it, it's still my country for better or worse.

ruaidhri

08-12-2005, 01:43 PM

I have a lot to think about before I reply to the posts on the last couple of pages. They are all thought provoking and deserve my full consideration. I'll give them that. Sadly, I understand the anger, frustration and even hate for America's actions. Obviously, I also see another side of America and hope for the future. I have a somewhat busy day today so I might not be able to post until much later but I will comment as soon as I can.

Myrsilus

08-12-2005, 02:15 PM

I can't say I blame for the rest of the world seeing America through critical eyes.

First off, George W. Bush has proven to be an inefficient leader. I am not saying that every move he makes is a huge blunder, but for the most part he seems to be bringing way too many problems through his administration. I won't say I wish Kerry had been elected into office, because I felt he was a weak candidate as well. He had a silver tongue, and nothing else of true merit in my opinion.

The methods the Bush adm. took to handle this war were extremely boorish to many countries and America itself. I have no doubts that this war was inevitable, but somewhere priorities were misplaced. I suppose politically this war is much like Vietnam, but can't say I agree on a military standpoint. But enough of that.

I hate to admit that the current administration is hypocritcal and deaf to other countries that would not agree with their methods, but it's true. I love my country, but we're a mess right now. Every attempt to better the world seems rather two-sided now and it has been apparent throughout recent history that America has been more concerned with their own gains rather than the gains of the entire world. Yes, efforts are still in play to feed the world, save the environment, and bring peace. Though it seems hard to focus on that when we rush into a war with an enemey we really had no qualms with at the moment. It's not an excuse. I know America has dug itself into a deep hole that will take HARD work to climb out of. Especially with the current state of our economy.

America is having a hard time planning the future as well. I'm going to go a little ecological here... Bush loves his oil. And understandably so... America needs its oil to function. It has been so for a long time. The war, however, has lead to higher gas prices and great demand for it. Simple economics I won't get into. But since the country is sucking away so much oil, the environmentally-aware are obviously pissed. It's a vicious cycle trying to supply this nation's unquenchable thirst for resources. Oil can't be taken from the Middle East? Head to other places... like the rainforests. Many trees actually have oil in them, so they are torn down for their oil. This leads to soil losing its nutrients, which leads to infertile land, which leads to mudslides, and so forth... Granted we're not the only ones doing this, but we certaintly are a major factor in this. And so far little efforts have been made to correct this. The efforts actually put into play are miniscule at best. So yep... we're not quite ecologically friendly.

It is rather early, so maybe I'm not putting my points across so eloquently. What I am trying to get at is that America is trying to lead the world into prosperity, but long-developed dependencies (oil), shakey diplomacy (UN), askewed priorities (current trend of war), and other problems are halting us from true progression. And the manner America has handled these problems may not be politically correct... so America is not seen in the best light at the moment. And I fully accept that sad fact.

But like it was noted before, it's not an individual problem, but a nation-wide problem. So we are not all to blame. It should not be taken like that either. But it is the individual who starts the change, so voicing our views like this is actually helpful. So keep it coming. I know not what I want to do with my life, but I do know that whatever path I take I intend to work not only for the benefit of America, but the world. At least I wish for that.

Even given America's shortcomings, I am not detered from my goals to help this country. And that's it... sorry for making it so long and if my points seem weird, sorry for that, too. Way to early for politics.

KujiInRetsu

08-12-2005, 02:50 PM

setrict

08-12-2005, 03:12 PM

So it's silly to say that Canadians are naturally born smarter than Americans.

It's because the cold up there allows Canadian brains to work at a higher clock cycle by providing supercooling, it has nothing to do with genetics. :D

I do agree with the idea that America shouldn't be separated from Americans in terms of placing blame. Some of the greatest attrocities in history have been supported indirectly by the passive majority. Any centralized power is a breeding ground for corruption, and by submitting ourselves as citizens to such a government we have an increased responsibility to make sure that corruption does not happen. I think we've failed greatly in this respect, and I'm honestly not sure what we can do about it.

I've always felt government and politics were analogous to a Castle surrounded by a moat of mud; impossible to get to into without getting dirty.

Y.T.

08-12-2005, 03:41 PM

Oil can't be taken from the Middle East? Head to other places... like the rainforests. Many trees actually have oil in them, so they are torn down for their oil.
Sorry, but this is total BS. Oil is not found in trees. The main reasons
for deforestation in Brazil are claiming agricultural land, and also
extraction of wood. People there are stupid... cutting down their forests,
but what can one do?
As an aside, I read about a study in one Czech magazine, in which engineers
argued that they could replace all fossil fuel use in transport with woodgas, if about 25-30% of the land area of Czech Republic was converted to forests that would provide the necessary wood... But, it's messy technology, and CO is nasty..

ruaidhri

08-12-2005, 06:50 PM

Ok, I’ve had some time to review what everyone has written. I’m quite impressed. This is the third iteration of this thread and each one has been caused me to redefine my own opinions allowing me to better understand why I believe as I do

My first comment is probably the most telling. Doing nothing is doing something. If we (that means all of us throughout the world) simply sit on our hands and do nothing our governments will continue to act. Very possibly, we will not be in accord with our governments’ actions. Regardless, because we did nothing we are just as much at fault. We are part of the problem.

Raging Lahor bluntly noted that America is hated by much of the world. According to Lahar America isn’t just disliked; it’s hated. He lists a number of reasons all of which strike home because they have a basis in fact.

America does appear to only act when dictated by its economic interest. But, is that totally true? What was our overriding financial incentive to stop the war and killings in the former Yugoslavia? What about America’s outpouring of relief for the Tsunami victims and for countless other tragedies? What about the Marshall Plan and the rebuilding of Japan? Yes, oftentimes our actions do appear to be tied to our pocketbook but we’re not cold hearted. We’ve learned that we must be careful about where we act. Sometimes friendly attempts to help backfire as happened in Somalia. It does make us gun shy. What would you have us do? Truly act as the police force for the entire world?

Yes, America has a vast stockpile of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Yes, we did drop two nuclear bombs on Japan during WW2. We had an interesting thread on the old forum that if anything demonstrated that we’re still arguing if we did the right thing. But, that’s history. Today, we enough weapons of mass destruction that we could end all life on this planet. We know they can never be used. So did the former USSR. That’s why we had a cold instead of a hot war for so many years, mutually assured destruction. The big countries aren’t going to use those weapons. The third-world countries are the ones I’m nervous about. India and Pakistan have come close to blows several times. Would they use them if they were losing? What about Israel? If they felt truly threatened, how would they react. Then you throw in North Korea and Iran and my knees start shaking. I don’t believe it would ever start with the United States. But, if any nation started a nuclear war, I don’t know how it would stop especially if the other nation also had the weapon.

Yes, America did have and in many cases does continue to have racial problems. It is a stain on our identity. Our government, however, is not racist. Some of our citizens unfortunately are. We can’t legislate opinions but we do punish racist actions. The America of today is vastly different from the segregated America of yesterday.

Yes, America does have its bible thumpers that not only are zealots in their personal lives but want to enforce their views on everyone else. Yes, they are dangerous and do bear careful monitoring, So far, however, when brought to court, they’ve lost every battle.

I don’t really see your great problem with our patent system.

Certainly many of our movies are stupid but so long as people are willing to pay for them and watch them they will continue. It is a sick part of our culture but sadly it’s a part of who we are. Of course they don’t reflect “real Americans.” Real Americans are simply too boring and wouldn’t be worth the price of a ticket.

What thousand year old remnants of human history have we destroyed?

No, I stopped believing a long time ago that the world envies us. We are not necessarily the best. We are simply, and possibly temporarily, the most powerful nation in the world. Certainly, I believe we should attack terrorists by every means possible including economic, political and military. I don’t believe we really care if the rest of the world doesn’t want to live like us. Honestly, I don’t believe we think too much about the rest of the world unless we feel somewhat endangered or wish to help them through some catastrophe.

I definitely don’t believe Americans and America (not even George Bush) want to rule the world. At least I hope that’s not the case.

Next, Psychochink grabbed my attention. Yes, Americans can be arrogant and we can speak out of both sides of our mouth as the situation dictates. Are we that much different from leaders in other countries or is it just because we’re that much more powerful and, unfortunately, willing to take unilateral action? Psychochink wrote that “Its not Joe American that (most) people have a problem with.” I suppose that’s true but does it really make any difference that individual Americans disagree with our government’s actions. The actions still harm our image including that of the dissenting Americans.

Psychochink later went on to say that the “yardstick by which all countires will be measured is in what they do, not what they talk about and even less what their citizens talk about.” Absolutely true! Does it make any difference that there were Germans that opposed their government’s actions in the 1930’s? Of course not. All we remember is what Germany did, not what their citizens talked about.

Psychochink is correct when he said “Whether you like it or not (and clearly you don't) – America - will be judged by its actions by everybody outside of it. Ultimately, nobody outside America really cares that half of the country is 'frustrated and pissed off' with your government's actions, you're still doing it.”

Marblehead is correct. America’s Hollywood image does not accurately represent the “real America.” We are a diverse country with 50 states and numerous regions that are all very different from each other at the same time they are similar. We do have problems but they’re often not as widespread and serious as depicted in the news media which has always sensationalized news to increase readership or viewers and their corporate revenue.

And, yes, as Marblehead said, we can get more frustrated and pissed off about our government’s actions than you could ever be because those action reflect on us, not you.

Hapacheese is also correct. Americans are good people that don’t wish harm to anyone. We don’t live in close proximity to other countries. Outside of Canada, which is more like us than not, and Mexico, with which we have a love/hate relationship, we have no close neighbors. Most Americans are primarily concerned with their own little communities and at most their State.

I live in Wisconsin. What happens in Oregon or Wyoming may be interesting but it certainly doesn’t affect my life so we tend to shut out what doesn’t concern us. We pay attention to our federal taxes and our military because that takes money out of our pocket. We also expect those dollars to protect us from harm but oftentimes aren’t interested enough to really understand the issues that threaten us. That doesn’t make us stupid only ignorant of the true impact of our voting or not voting.

Americans are far too easily swayed by the flashy 30 second commercial. We’re quick to assume all politics is dirty and all politicians not to be trusted. We pay more attention to the negative charges thrown out by opponents, however unfounded, than we do to constructive plans to make meaningful changes. We just want to live our lives in peace and to be left alone. Sadly, it's that very inaction on our part that causes those in power to act in a manner that is not in our best interest. As I wrote at the beginning of this comment, “doing nothing is doing something.” By not being informed we allow our government to misrepresent us. The world can’t change that. It’s each American’s responsibility.

One thing the Democrats are going to have to learn is to pick a candidate that is attractive to more than just Democrats. I’m not sure who that might be just yet. While I like both Hillary and Obama I question if America is ready for either of them. I don’t want to make a statement. I want to win back the White House.

Yes, Hapacheese, what the hell is going on with our gas prices. Why isn’t anyone in our government on either side of the aisle jumping up and down and screaming.

setrict

08-12-2005, 07:23 PM

I don’t really see your great problem with our patent system.
The effects are far more subtle than the destruction of the Trade Towers or the London bombings, but the evolving patent system has the potential to be a much greater threat to freedom than terrorism. And with many of our trade agreements basically forcing nations to accept our IP standards, it truely does affect the rest of the world.

As technology increases traditional means for determining value will be shifting. How will traditional supply and demand theory be reconciled when supply is not a factor of practical limitations or resources, but by Intellectual Property law and market manipulation. Money can only buy so much, in the coming era true power will be that gained by exploiting Intellectual Propery law.

ruaidhri

08-12-2005, 07:53 PM

Setrict, you appear to know what you're talking about. Although I can sense where problems might occur, I certainly don't appreciate the potential impact especially one greater than terrorism. Do you or any other members have links to articles that go into depth about the problem of American patents and intellectual property?

setrict

08-12-2005, 09:54 PM

Setrict, you appear to know what you're talking about.

Boy have I got you fooled :) Now you go asking for facts and such to support my wild theories; that's hardly playing fair.

The problem with IP law is that it is slowly redefining ownership into terms that are more favorable to large corporate entities who will think nothing of eroding your freedoms if:

a) They can make a profit from it
b) They can get away with it

Quite the opposite of what the patent system was supposed to do by giving the little guy a chance to challenge the big players by innovation.

If you own something, you expect to retain control over it. As technology and patents become more prevalent, your ownership rights become dimished because you can never truly own something that is subject to IP law.

It's not just abstract software issues, or medical devices and drugs.

Even the seeds used in modern agriculture are subject to IP laws. I recently read about a case where Monsanto (?) sued a farmer for retaining spare seeds for planting the next years crop. Something farmers of course have been doing for thousands of years. The seeds were not 'sold' to the farmer however, and legally he did not own them. The seeds were licensed by contract to the farmer by the corporation for a single planting season.

It's my understanding that the worlds food supply cannot be maintained at this point without using gentically engineered crops. The power to control the food supply is no joking matter, though they do walk on the knife edge of public opinion.

Or Lexmark, and the Injet printer cartridge debacle. Long story short, Lexmark wanted to use the DMCA and copyright law (via software authentication) to prevent any competitors from making the consumables for their printer line, insuring the monopoly on the high priced print cartidges. Lexmark sued thier competitor and won. A year or so later a Federal Court reversed the judgement, but the fact that it got that far in the first place is of great concern to me. How many companies could afford to fight it far enough to get a reversal?

This ties directly in with my post regarding zero tolerance:

There are inherent dangers with laws that are enforced selectively, the primary danger being one of abuse by the powers that be. So long as the aggregate populace is relatively unaffected by the law, it can be used as a targetted tool. It effectively becomes legalized discrimination.

In the context of IP law selective enforcement basically becomes he with the most lawyers wins. Large companies with a legal staff can easily strong arm smaller companies using the leverage of IP and copyright law. Keep in mind, they don't have to win to win! All they have to do is make it unprofitable; and if you've ever had an attorney on retainer, you know how quickly that can happen. Even the threat of a lawsuit can cause a startup to fold, the validity of the suit is largely unimportant if the defendant can't afford to defend themselves.

Economic class structures in society exist because of distinct have/have not relationships. Abuse of the civil law system by targetting potential competitors over alleged IP violations is a just a new form of the same thing. You either have the money to fight, or you settle. The only possible winner in these conflicts are those with big money. The same people with the lobbying power to influence the political system to further expand IP law to their benefit.

I've consulted with an attorney about persuing a potentially patentable idea. I wanted to do a patent search to make sure what I was planning wasn't already patented. Do you know what he told me? I would be increasing my legal liability by performing a patent search because by doing the search I would be 'admitting' the possibility that my idea could be in violation of an existing patent. There is a significant difference in terms of liabilty between willful violation of a patent, and accidently violating one. His advice to me was to quickly develop and market the idea without doing a patent search. At best I would be establishing prior art which would prevent other people from patenting my idea (but not from using it), and at worst if it was patent and my idea flopped it wouldn't be worth the company pursing legal action. The middle ground would involve negotiations and probably an out of court settlement. I decided that my idea just wasn't worth all the risk and hassle. Way to stimulate innovation patent system! Yay!

Throw in criminal consequences (hello DMCA) for IP violations if you still aren't concerned. We are passivly giving up our rights to conglomerates, and hoping they won't abuse the new found power. It's kind of like giving a 2x4 to a bully and asking him not to beat you with it.

Praetorian

08-12-2005, 09:57 PM

Funny how the thread is called "What the rest of the world thinks about America", yet it's mostly Americans that post and discuss in it.

That "picture" is worth a thousand words. ;)

Myrsilus

08-12-2005, 10:52 PM

Sorry, but this is total BS. Oil is not found in trees. The main reasons
for deforestation in Brazil are claiming agricultural land, and also
extraction of wood. People there are stupid... cutting down their forests,
but what can one do?
As an aside, I read about a study in one Czech magazine, in which engineers
argued that they could replace all fossil fuel use in transport with woodgas, if about 25-30% of the land area of Czech Republic was converted to forests that would provide the necessary wood... But, it's messy technology, and CO is nasty..

Sorry, it was morning when I wrote all that, but now I am not entirely wrong.
http://rainforests.mongabay.com/1013.htm
This site was a major source for me when I did a report on the rainforest. Anyway, perhaps the palm oil of the trees may not be used as an oil replacement yet, but it is a sure possiblilty. With effective and nondestructive agroforestry, it could prove to be a new major source. But that would take years to accomplish as agroforestry is a slow process to get going. On that note, however, I was write about oil in the rainforest. Drilling is very common in the Amazon areas. It, of course, causes much destruction to the land and brings misfortune to the indigenous peoples.

And many less industrial countries today use wood as a source of energy simply because they lack the technology to move to anything else. Wood gas, at the current time, can be just as harmful as stripping the land to make our furniture. For the sake of not messing with the discussion, I won't go further into this, but I am a firm believer that if the world begins to understand that agroforestry is a key to our survival and progression, things will change. Something I think our next president should consider.

Roxie

08-13-2005, 04:29 AM

Funny how the thread is called "What the rest of the world thinks about America", yet it's mostly Americans that post and discuss in it.

That "picture" is worth a thousand words. ;)
well, it's only fair. Otherwise it'd just be a "Let's Shit On America!" thread. And that's really not thought provoking at all.

A conversation between the peoples of the world is what America really needs. So far, Sorry Everybody (http://www.sorryeverybody.com/gallery/single/se1.jpg/), is the only thing I've seen do this.

I mean to the point where you can buy the book "Sorry Everybody" -and- they're going to publish "Apologies Accepted" which will be full of responses from the rest of the world.

Check out what the press says about them.

*No matter what it is, it's called sorryeverybody.com and it expresses, better than any outpouring so far, a sentiment that's omnipresent and palpable and still going strong, and every single Democrat and every single Kerry supporter and every single liberal of any stripe whatsoever probably felt it like a white-hot stab in the heart the minute Kerry's concession speech hit the airwaves... - Mark Morford, San Francisco Gate
*

The site, begun by a 20-year-old University of Southern California student named James Zetlen, is the first genuine evidence I have seen of a global village that looks like a nice place to live. - Heather Mallick, rabble.ca
*

And so, Thanksgiving 2005. The morning papers, year in review: All agree that the end of the Iraq, Iran, and Syria wars came in large part from the Sorry Everybody movement, which started as a website but whose creativity fed on its own creativity and soon grew into a benefit album, a hit Broadway musical, and a chain of vegetarian restaurant/music clubs. It is no overstatement to say that, much like the Vietnam War protests of the '60s and '70s, www.sorryeverybody.com was the beginning of a new way of thinking and doing things. - Jim Walsh, Twin Cities CityPages.com
*

But therefs more to it than that. Zetlen and his friends have stumbled onto something that gets to the core of what, for many of us, it means to be an American, particularly in the post-9/11 world: terror at our own weakness. Thatfs what much of the election was about, after all\questions over whether we were going to allow even the slightest bit of self-doubt to creep into our national self-image, a stance popularized by the victorious president who, famously, couldnft think of a single mistake he made when offered the opportunity. - Mark W Anderson, Columbia Chronicle
*

hIt's absolutely intriguing, and quite an important example I think, where people are speaking to the rest of the world really and bearing testimony to the fact that what the U.S. government does is not supported by all of the people here,h according to Jim Paul, executive director of the New York-based Global Policy Forum. - Marty Logan, Inter Press Service News Agency
*

It's one thing for the British press to call Americans dummies, but now Americans are beseeching the rest of the world, please don't give up on us. "You youngsters will have a lot to be sorry about. At least we don't have to live much longer." An apology made out of candies, cookies and crackers makes you want to eat your words. Gee, wonder if the Web site is getting much hate mail. - Jeanne Moos, CNN Transcript
*

Dozens, then hundreds, of disappointed Kerry voters churned out their own remorseful portraits. On November 4, Zetlen's student account at USC, where the site was housed, was accessed 2.1 million times; 82 percent of the school's Internet traffic that day. - John Bronson, The Free Press, University of Southern Maine
*

Serious Ñ and sometimes seriously funny Ñ is http://www.sorryeverybody.com , where dismayed Dems from across the country are exorcising their demons by posting photos of themselves holding signs like "Sorry, world (we tried) Ñ (signed) Half of America," and another with "we're sorry" written in candy. - Liz Halloran, Los Angeles Times
*

"The world needs to understand that there are people in America who don't like what our government is doing," he said answering questions on the site about why he did it. - BBC Online
*

All the pictures share a common theme, asking forgiveness of the world for the re-election of Bush. - Taipei Times
*

Wie ein Waldbrand verbreitete sich nur einen Tag nach der Wahl der Link zu einem der wohl originellsten politischen Kommentare aus dem privaten Bastelkeller: "sorryeverybody.com" stand fŸr kurze Zeit auf einem privaten Server, zog Besucher aus aller Welt an - und Beifall wie Hassmails. - Frank Patalong, Der Spiegel
*

It's a simple idea and so far more than 5,000 people have taken up its offer, posting pictures of themselves holding up signs with messages such as "Believe me, almost half of us are very goddamn sorry." - Philippe Naughton, Times Online
*

On a typical page on sorryeverybody.com the contributions ran from belligerent to contrite to funny. - Gary Younge, Guardian Unlimited
*

For now, he is bemused by a marriage proposal from a 14-year-old in Britain and overwhelmed by the unread e-mails in his inbox. "I have homework, man. I have a test in an hour." Colette Bancroft, St. Petersburg Times
*

From red states and blue states, thousands of people have posted their faces (and those of their children and pets) and messages, mostly along the lines of "Sorry, world. We did the best we could. Can we sleep on your couch for the next four years?" They are often creative, sometimes bitter, frequently funny and, to those who share their perspective, touching. - The Weston Town Crier
*

The missive kicked off a torrent of apologies. Other signs include such messages as "Sorry, world, we deserve it. You don't"; "Sorry, world, at least you don't have to live with him" ; "Sorry, world, scientists are sad, too". - iafrica.com
*

About half of the more than 3,000 e-mails he received came from abroad. The worldwide reaction included responses from Germany, France, Italy, Bulgaria, the Netherlands, Australia, Canada, South Africa, Senegal, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Chile, Brazil, China and South Korea. - Kerala News, India
*

It started the day after the U.S. presidential election with one student posting a picture of himself on the Internet with a sign reading Ð "Sorry world (we tried) Ð half of America." - Leyla Linton, The Advertiser, Australia
*

Both sites are run anonymously. Sorry Everybody's operator noted that the site was created to reassure people in other countries that dissent was still active in America--and also because the idea was funny. - John Borland, CNET News.com
*

But if you're agonizing about how the rest of the world views the President's reelection, you're not alone. And the folks at www.sorryeverybody.com are providing a handy forum for Americans who'd like to apologize for their fellow citizens. - Isaac Guzman, New York Daily News
*

SorryEverybody.com is collecting photographs from across America to express to the rest of the world our deepest apologies for the present political situation in our country and how it will affect everyone for the next four years. Check out the pictures. - MichaelMoore.com's Link of the Week

One of my Favorites
http://www.sorryeverybody.com/upload_files/se31030.jpeg

MajorProblem

08-13-2005, 05:58 AM

Myrsilus

08-13-2005, 06:03 AM

Now, I'm only 16 and a Junior in high school, and I'll readily admit I am not good at debate, my arguments have more holes than Swiss cheese (overused, I know). Anyways, with energy though, why has there not been more effort placed in Fusion energy? From what I understand, it provides much more energy than fission power, yet is much safer, and it's not too far off in the future. If we could use fusion power for a large portion of our normal household and business energy needs and leave the oil to vehicles, would the oil not last longer than previously imagined and allow much more time to develop practical alternatives to the internal-combustion engine? Completely off the original topic, but you people seem to know what your talking about and I want to know your opinion.
I'm 18, so I can relate. I haven't been in school and debated politics in a while... and I've been sleeping a lot due to recent surgery. So I may not be up to date with everything. Don't worry, though. You bring up a nice idea.

Problem is, as I stated as best as my tired-self could, shifting the source of energy from oil to whatever takes time. Much of the world is WAY too dependent on oil, and attempting to shift too fast would bring the economy down to a worse state. You are right, though. Fusion power could be helpful in the future.

It takes time, though. And it has to be slow. If done right, it could gradually be incorporated into society and possibly become the new fuel for the world. Same thing with hydroelectric cars. They're not perfect quite yet, but they're getting there quick.

hapacheese

08-13-2005, 06:09 AM

Roxie

08-13-2005, 06:15 AM

Anyways, with energy though, why has there not been more effort placed in Fusion energy? From what I understand, it provides much more energy than fission power, yet is much safer, and it's not too far off in the future.
It's incrediably expensive.

I think we should really get up on the Solar nrg tip.

Crimson

08-13-2005, 06:19 AM

A conversation between the peoples of the world is what America really needs. So far, Sorry Everybody (http://www.sorryeverybody.com/gallery/single/se1.jpg/), is the only thing I've seen do this.

I posted a picture on that site!!
*ahem* Anyway...

It's not that we should immediately break away from petroleum. Because, like others have said, the bonds of the carbon rings in petroleum are very, very useful for tons of things. Namely, plastics. But what disturbs me is the lack of advancement towards using solar or fusion power. The fact that this administration is showing very little interest in either areas is very sad, and is one reason why the G8 isn't getting anywhere as far as energy and global warming. And don't make me bring up the Kyoto Treaty. Why they US won't accept it for this country is what makes me loathe bigwig energy CEO's.

Myrsilus

08-13-2005, 06:20 AM

Well, you have to remember: our dependency on oil is not *just* for fuel... plastics are all created from petroleum. Granted, we have genetically engineered trees to produce the proper compounds to create plastics, but those are not in wide production, and the world is still hesitant to allow the mass production of plants such as those.

To try to instantly get away from petroleum consumption would be very, very bad...
Of course. I discussed something like this in a previous post. It is just the same as moving from oil to fusion power. Any shift like this takes careful preparation and years of attentive care. Luckily there are possibilites out there. It's just very hard to break from the norm that has existed for many, many years.

Also, mass production of plants such as these would possibly get in the way of the lumber industry. It takes land to grow trees for harvesting, which means less lumber for the industry. Resolving this is not impossible, either. There is a tree I researched once called Lyptus. It is a very useful type of hybrid tree that can be used for building material and to promote growth around itself. This coupled with the aforementioned agroforestry could also replenish nutrients to soil. It also grows very fast(in tree standards, at least).

The point is that many of the world's problems could be resolved. The answers are right in front of us. But it takes too much time actually integrate these methods on the spur of a moment. Considering the state of the planet, these types of actions have to be implemented now.

hapacheese

08-13-2005, 06:23 AM

MajorProblem

08-13-2005, 06:33 AM

Sorry for a unprovoked remark, hapacheese, but aren't earthquakes among the least worries to plants? :confused: Just had to say that, sorry again

Roxie

08-13-2005, 06:36 AM

Sorry for a unprovoked remark, hapacheese, but aren't earthquakes among the least worries to plants? :confused: Just had to say that, sorry again
he meant using Bamboo to build buildings...

Myrsilus

08-13-2005, 06:36 AM

Or, bamboo. It's essentially a weed, so it grows extremely quickly in a multitude of environments, is extremely resilient and flexible, and can withstand earthquakes better (due to its flexibility). ;)
A fine example of a very useful plant. It makes a great building material for its resilience. I should know... I have a shinai(bamboo katana) I use for my martial arts training... and damn it can take a beating. I have beaten it over walls, other shinai, bodies, and other things. It will not break.

Oh, and Roxie. I like your other post concerning the apologies and stuff. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Solar power is also a promising source of energy,but as Crimson said, these energy sources are being ignored. Like I said, it is hard to break away from the norm. This counts on an economic AND psychological level. And the refusal with the Kyoto Treaty did piss me of as well. The ENTIRE world needs to start thinking about the future, and that includes our current and future administrations.

hapacheese

08-13-2005, 06:36 AM

I meant as building materials. Normal wood is much more stiff, and therefore, less likely to absorb movement/shocks than bamboo. That should clarify :)

(Or so my architect/engineer friend tells me. Could be bullshitting me for all I know :P )

edit: But Roxie beat me to it :) Oh, and yeah... Shinai. My fiance is a second degree black belt in kendo (it's alright, I tell her she's nothing without her sticks) and I've seen her break shinai over other girls' heads (they were wearing armor).

Myrsilus

08-13-2005, 06:43 AM

hapacheese

08-13-2005, 06:45 AM

MajorProblem

08-13-2005, 06:45 AM

he meant using Bamboo to build buildings...
SHUT UP! I knew that, I swear! I'll leave, now...

Myrsilus

08-13-2005, 06:52 AM

Oh yeah, I know... Just saying. It's kinda scary to see your woman bring the smack down like that.

Another friend of mine just had bamboo flooring installed in his house. It looks beautiful and was about 1/4 the price of normal wood flooring. I seriously don't know why it hasn't caught on yet.
Because people are too used to the norm. :rolleyes: Sad, isn't it? I would love dependable flooring like that. But well... not really a big market for that here in the U.S.

And I think seeing a woman you love bring down heaven's wrath and hell's fury is sexy. You're fortunate to have a strong woman like that. They're not common.

hapacheese

08-13-2005, 06:57 AM

Myrsilus

08-13-2005, 07:00 AM

The thing is, she's pretty much Ultimate Sweetness (with a sarcastic streak) without the kendo gear, which is the funny part. The first time I watched her do kendo and she let out a scream, I thought I was going to have to call an old priest and a young priest...

(Her sister is even worse... She's the #1 women's kendo champion in the US. *she* is tough.)

As for the flooring, it was dirt cheap, very nice looking, and easy to install. More bamboo for everyone!!!1!
lol. She sounds great. And a fighter needs a good kiai. And impressive with the sister being #1.

I should eventually look into bamboo flooring. It is a good feeling when you acknowledge the current state of the environment we inhabit and actually attempt to keep it from detiorating even further.

hapacheese

08-13-2005, 07:04 AM

Myrsilus

08-13-2005, 07:08 AM

Well, considering I live in San Francisco, there's a lot of people like that. Both my car and my fiance's car get 35+ mpg (I get over 40), and every day on the road, I see at least 10-15 hybrids. Makes me feel all warm and hippy inside.
Where I live it is much different. You rarely see hybrid cars. But our city isn't as big as yours. It's a small coastal city, so we're not as enlightened as a whole. I forget the source, but our city was voted the second dumbest city in the nation. Not that I can disagree, either. Most people here are pretty stupid. Besides me, that is. :cool: I hope the hybrid cars catch on more. It could benefit the U.S. and many other places.

hapacheese

08-13-2005, 07:15 AM

In fact, there's a neighborhood up in Sacramento where the builders received grants from the government to install solar paneling on all the houses, and install energy efficient appliances in all of them. The net result? Each house on average apparently pays less than $7 a month in energy bills. The reason is that the neighborhood is set up on a power grid where any time a house is collecting more energy than it is using, it distributes it to the houses that are using more. If your house actually generates more power than you consume, your power bill is $0 :)

I wish the government would help out with more projects like that.

Myrsilus

08-13-2005, 07:23 AM

The government should be helping the entire nation with projects like that. It seems more effective than some energy sources simply because it is cheaper and easier to manage. But to make a true impact, government intervention is needed. Or at least it certaintly helps. I am glad, though, that some places are taking the steps necessary to conserve energy while innovating at the same time.

Just wish the government would notice this more often.

Puchu

08-13-2005, 08:08 AM

....in my country, they started to make a type of cars called "think", I believe it was. eletric cars, though fairly small. The body was built in plastic, though (or so I believe), cause it was more durable that way. It became a big hit in my country, there were goddamn WAITING LISTS to get these cars, maybe partly because you pay less tax for an el-car than a normal one over here. Sadly, "Think" was bought by Ford, and not long after, they shut the thing down. one of the reasons why were not too happy about America over here. But what we don't like is the government and the big companies. I've talked to a lot of americans on the net, among the exchange students over here in Japan, and I've only met sensible people. So I'm wondering where the fuck the majority that voted for Bush is....
Btw, we don't like our own government either, cause we feel like they're all Bush's goddamn lap dog. I guess it's one of the bad things with being a small country. We try our best to change the world in a better way (we're practically obsessed with saving energy and the forests and stuff, to the point that we save too much. but I won't go into that now), but because we're small, we have to do what the big guys say, or we're pretty much screwed.

But like I said, I've liked pretty much every American I've talked to, and on the net, I see more non-bush, and smart, aware people, so I'm wondering where the hell the dumb, patriotic, biblethumping bastards that I hear about in the news etc are.... Just so I can stay the hell away from that place.... XD

KKF

08-13-2005, 08:14 AM

Where I live it is much different. You rarely see hybrid cars. But our city isn't as big as yours. It's a small coastal city, so we're not as enlightened as a whole. I forget the source, but our city was voted the second dumbest city in the nation. Not that I can disagree, either. Most people here are pretty stupid. Besides me, that is. :cool: I hope the hybrid cars catch on more. It could benefit the U.S. and many other places.

I doubt it will catch on in Texas any time soon. I also live here, Austin actually, we are the oil state. We also have the most amount of trucks in the US. Not only that we are a very Republican state. So don't expect any of those changes to happen soon in Texas atleast.

Myrsilus

08-13-2005, 08:17 AM

I doubt it will catch on in Texas any time soon. I also live here, Austin actually, we are the oil state. We also have the most amount of trucks in the US. Not only that we are a very Republican state. So don't expect any of those changes to happen soon in Texas atleast.
Oh another Texan. You're very close to where I live.

Yeah, which is why I have little hopes for such innovations making an impact here at the moment. I believe it could happen through slow integration... but yeah nothing is going to happen anytime soon. What we need are more moderates in America. The Democrat/Republican battle is annoying... My government teacher always said that the problems will never be solved on one side of the fence. Only in the middle.

Praetorian

08-13-2005, 09:44 AM

[COLOR=DarkOrchid]
well, it's only fair. Otherwise it'd just be a "Let's Shit On America!" thread. And that's really not thought provoking at all.

You naturally assume that any foreigner naturally dislikes America. Frankly, me and many people just don't care. You're neither the "facist dictatorial police state" that many seem to call you, nor the "Land of the Free", that many Americans prefer to call themselves. Because honestly, there are countries out there that have quite a bit more freedom.

To me? Neither. The United States is just one of the three economic and military superpowers. Nothing more, nothing less. You hold no power or even influence in me at all. So George Bush got reelected for president? Tough shit. Many of you seem to dislike him. I honestly have no idea what he's like, so I can't give my opinion. Like I said before, why should I care? The only thing I might care about is the war in Iraq (and not only because there are Dutch troops there) and the war on terrorism. But it seems even intelligence agencies don't know who or what they're dealing with, or what the exact situation is. You can't really trust all the media. So again, how can someone expect me to give my opinion about it? Was it justified? I don't know. Will it make the lifes of Iraqi people any better? I honestly don't know. Nor do I care, because it doesn't matter what I think either way.

This is what I and a number of other Dutch people think think of America and it's current actions. It's too far from our beds to really think or care about. I hope none of you take offense.

Myrsilus

08-13-2005, 09:53 AM

You naturally assume that any foreigner naturally dislikes America. Frankly, me and many people just don't care. You're neither the "facist dictatorial police state" that many seem to call you, nor the "Land of the Free", that many Americans prefer to call themselves. Because honestly, there are countries out there that have quite a bit more freedom.

To me? Neither. The United States is just one of the three economic and military superpowers. Nothing more, nothing less. You hold no power or even influence in me at all. So George Bush got reelected for president? Tough shit. Many of you seem to dislike him. I honestly have no idea what he's like, so I can't give my opinion. Like I said before, why should I care? The only thing I might care about is the war in Iraq (and not only because there are Dutch troops there) and the war on terrorism. But it seems even intelligence agencies don't know who or what they're dealing with, or what the exact situation is. You can't really trust all the media. So again, how can someone expect me to give my opinion about it? Was it justified? I don't know. Will it make the lifes of Iraqi people any better? I honestly don't know. Nor do I care, because it doesn't matter what I think either way.

This is what I and a number of other Dutch people think think of America and it's current actions. It's too far from our beds to really think or care about. I hope none of you take offense.
I don't take offense to any of that. I won't make this into another heated debate concerning freedom and the level it should be at, Bush's actions, the state of the war. We know enough of that I believe. While I am deeply concerned with the issues of the world, I can understand how some might not have the same feelings. It can be hard to really care deeply when we know very little of what is going on. I am not saying I or any of you are ignorant on the subject(You all seem very well educated), but there is so much that is being veiled from our vision.

This is just as bad for America, if not worse, for the negative attention America is getting. The media is a tool to control the masses, and to those who realize this it becomes harder to want to care.

Marblehead

08-13-2005, 01:40 PM

Didn't the Dutch pull out of Iraq? I know they're still in Afghanistan but I remember reading a few months ago that they were pulling out of Iraq. The Japanese were going nuts because the Dutch were the ones protecting them.

KujiInRetsu

08-13-2005, 03:23 PM

You naturally assume that any foreigner naturally dislikes America. Frankly, me and many people just don't care. You're neither the "facist dictatorial police state" that many seem to call you, nor the "Land of the Free", that many Americans prefer to call themselves. Because honestly, there are countries out there that have quite a bit more freedom.

To me? Neither. The United States is just one of the three economic and military superpowers. Nothing more, nothing less. You hold no power or even influence in me at all. So George Bush got reelected for president? Tough shit. Many of you seem to dislike him. I honestly have no idea what he's like, so I can't give my opinion. Like I said before, why should I care? The only thing I might care about is the war in Iraq (and not only because there are Dutch troops there) and the war on terrorism. But it seems even intelligence agencies don't know who or what they're dealing with, or what the exact situation is. You can't really trust all the media. So again, how can someone expect me to give my opinion about it? Was it justified? I don't know. Will it make the lifes of Iraqi people any better? I honestly don't know. Nor do I care, because it doesn't matter what I think either way.

This is what I and a number of other Dutch people think think of America and it's current actions. It's too far from our beds to really think or care about. I hope none of you take offense.Actually, we were kinda hoping all foreigners would be like you, not caring, because this means we get slightly less negative press around the world if people just don't care. To that end, we can clean up the mess Bush II made in Iraq and get things back to where they should be-- the United States, perhaps not the center of world affairs, but at least not an antagonistic power that has actual protests against it. This is all without international controversy if no one cares.

Trust me, if anyone as remotely stupid as Bush were elected to the Netherlands' highest seat of power, you'd start caring real quick. You're lucky you at least have some perceptibly competent leadership.

MeneerDijk

08-13-2005, 03:26 PM

D-pad

08-13-2005, 03:28 PM

The Dutch are still in Iraq, and doing a kickass job in not getting killed too much :confused:
Mento's=steroids for europians

The dutch are like super soldiers out there.......

akitaka

08-13-2005, 03:45 PM

Actually, we were kinda hoping all foreigners would be like you, not caring...
I know I am. George Washington himself stated that countries most certainly should not be involving themselves in another country's affairs, for better or worse. Right now each developed nation depends on each other for trades to support things like "economy". What ever happened to independance? I don't know.

But I also read in the news that some things are heating up between the Dutch and Muslim communities since the death of some film maker. I mean, I get the impression that Dutch are very tolerant, with all of the neat programs I've read from MeneerDijk. To each man, his own, I guess.

Praetorian

08-13-2005, 03:47 PM

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/print/news/nn01-2005/nn20050121a4.htm

Yes you're right. Dutch troops did withdrew. Not all of them, just those I think.

ruaidhri

08-13-2005, 04:23 PM

Some interesting side conversations there. Both of my sons were/are heavily involved in Martial Arts, specifically Doce Pares Philippine Eskirima. Also, yes, the world does need to examine all types of alternate materials and energy sources. Those are good topics for other threads, new or existing. I’m glad, however, that the thread is back on topic.

I apologize for again taking the thread somewhat off topic resulting from a question I expressed regarding the threat of America’s patent laws on the world economy as suggested by Raging Lahor. Setrict and Kos (Private Message) answered my question. I now appreciate the seriousness of what’s happening.

In his reply, Setrict wrote:

“Even the seeds used in modern agriculture are subject to IP laws. I recently read about a case where Monsanto (?) sued a farmer for retaining spare seeds for planting the next years crop. Something farmers of course have been doing for thousands of years. The seeds were not 'sold' to the farmer however, and legally he did not own them. The seeds were licensed by contract to the farmer by the corporation for a single planting season.”

I have a problem with this example. I understand a corporations desire to protect their innovations and sources for future income. Research and development costs a lot of time and money. Many studies go nowhere while their costs only increase a corporation’s expenses. When a new product or innovation is successful the corporation quite naturally wants to make a profit. Without those profits they would be unable to sponsor new studies and even better seeds. When the farmer used the seeds he was licensed by the corporation for a single planting season. Retaining spare seeds was outside of the agreement. If, following a cost/benefit analysis, the farmer didn’t believe it would be profitable to comply he shouldn’t have purchased the license in the first place.

I know this sounds very capitalistic of me but I believe its fair. Stockholders want to make a profit. They invest their money for that purpose. The corporation was protecting itself as it should.

Setrict also wrote:

“Or Lexmark, and the Injet printer cartridge debacle. Long story short, Lexmark wanted to use the DMCA and copyright law (via software authentication) to prevent any competitors from making the consumables for their printer line, insuring the monopoly on the high priced print cartidges. Lexmark sued thier competitor and won. A year or so later a Federal Court reversed the judgement, but the fact that it got that far in the first place is of great concern to me. How many companies could afford to fight it far enough to get a reversal?”

Here, I agree with Lexmark’s competitor. I also agree with Setrict that a large wealthy corporation can stifle competition by threatening a lawsuit that could cost millions to defend against. The corporation is in a no-lose situation because by filing the lawsuit they are sending out a warning that right or wrong they will put up a fight that will cost their competitor a lot of money. This, in my opinion, flies in the face of competitive capitalism. It’s simply wrong.

I also had problems comparing the threat of our Patent laws against terrorism as suggested by Setrict. Certainly the Patent laws can be manipulated by the wealthy corporations. I agree they can reduce competition, increase costs and correspondingly generate unholy profits. None of this however compares to flying passenger planes into the World Trade Center or bombing a train in Spain or the subways and busses in London. Terrorists deliberately target the unprepared and innocent for the purpose of creating terror.

Now, with all that said, I must add that I do appreciate Setrict’s argument that patent laws are moving in a more restrictive territory and that is bad for everyone. In his reply Setrict wrote:

“In the context of IP law selective enforcement basically becomes he with the most lawyers wins. Large companies with a legal staff can easily strong arm smaller companies using the leverage of IP and copyright law. Keep in mind, they don't have to win to win! All they have to do is make it unprofitable; and if you've ever had an attorney on retainer, you know how quickly that can happen. Even the threat of a lawsuit can cause a startup to fold, the validity of the suit is largely unimportant if the defendant can't afford to defend themselves.

Economic class structures in society exist because of distinct have/have not relationships. Abuse of the civil law system by targetting potential competitors over alleged IP violations is a just a new form of the same thing. You either have the money to fight, or you settle. The only possible winner in these conflicts are those with big money. The same people with the lobbying power to influence the political system to further expand IP law to their benefit.

I've consulted with an attorney about persuing a potentially patentable idea. I wanted to do a patent search to make sure what I was planning wasn't already patented. Do you know what he told me? I would be increasing my legal liability by performing a patent search because by doing the search I would be 'admitting' the possibility that my idea could be in violation of an existing patent. There is a significant difference in terms of liabilty between willful violation of a patent, and accidently violating one. His advice to me was to quickly develop and market the idea without doing a patent search. At best I would be establishing prior art which would prevent other people from patenting my idea (but not from using it), and at worst if it was patent and my idea flopped it wouldn't be worth the company pursing legal action. The middle ground would involve negotiations and probably an out of court settlement. I decided that my idea just wasn't worth all the risk and hassle. Way to stimulate innovation patent system! Yay!

Throw in criminal consequences (hello DMCA) for IP violations if you still aren't concerned. We are passivly giving up our rights to conglomerates, and hoping they won't abuse the new found power. It's kind of like giving a 2x4 to a bully and asking him not to beat you with it.”

I agree. Setrict’s argument was very well written and very persuasive.

Kos

08-13-2005, 04:37 PM

Alternative energy sources like solar and geothermal are very, very location dependent. In some locales, either of those two options are not feasible solutions regardless of the solution's efficiency. Furthermore, the highest efficiency solar cells that we can currently create (based on Germanium, IIRC) provide a net loss of energy over the lifetime of the solar cell; that is, the amount of resources taken to produce the cell dwarfs the energy output of the cell.

Fusion is still a good time off - right now, we need to be able to create a sustainable fusion reaction; again, most of the successes with tokamak-style fusion reactors has either been short lived, or required far more energy to initiate than it has produced. There's still quite a bit of research to be done before fusion becomes a viable alternative, but with the death of projects like the SSC, and the international bickering about some of the research projects (like the recently decided location of a tokamak reactor) are pushing the date of achievable fusion further off into the future.

Windmills and Wave Power generators have their own unique ecological problems and concerns, in addition to location and research issues. I'll admit that I don't know as much about these types of energy generation as the others, so I'll remain a touch quieter on these.

Hydrogen-based systems present other unique challenges - yes, hydrogen is among the most plentiful of elements available. The problem is, most of that hydrogen is bonded to something else, and it takes quite a bit of energy to break those bonds in order to get the hydrogen into a usable form. Another hurdle for hydrogen power is one of infrastructure, at least where vehicles are concerned. Companies with oil interests have invested quite heavily in transport, storage, and dispensation of crude oil and its refined forms.

All of this is not to say that these challenges are insurmountable - rather, that these challenges are surmountable, that the concerns are addressable, but it will take time, capital, and intelligence. Much research in terms of the energy problem is being done in parallel - research into solar, hydrogen, and fusion energy sources are taking place now, as is oil shale extraction research; all of these technological solutions will be required for our continued future, and resources are being committed to the advancement thereof.

Y.T.

08-13-2005, 06:58 PM

We already have a source of almost pollution free energy...
Integral Fast Reactors. Only on paper, thanks to certain
individual named JFK. He played a role in shutting down the
pilot reactor..

http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/designs/ifr/
http://www.anlw.anl.gov/anlw_history/reactors/ifr.html

It looks very promising. Reprocessing fuel on site..
relatively low level pollution in not quite small amounts,
very efficient fuel use(much more efficient than current
(non-breeder)conventional fission reactors, passive safety )
I do not understand why no one is building one..

Kos

08-13-2005, 08:00 PM

setrict

08-13-2005, 08:03 PM

Only on paper, thanks to certain individual named JFK.

Just to clarify for the American types who associate JFK with former President Kennedy. The reactor program was canceled by opposition raised by recent presidential hopeful John Kerry in the early to mid 90's who felt it would be a threat to non-proliferation efforts at the time. (Wikipedia has a good summary).

This does sound like a great alternative power source. It even takes care of the waste issue, which returns to original conditions after a few hundred years instead of many thousands. There doesn't seem to be a downside. It can even consume plutonium waste from traditional reactors, or from dismantled nuclear weapons and produce energy. It's even pretty much meltdown proof. It seems absurd to cancel such a promising project just 3 years from estimated completion.

Y.T.

08-13-2005, 09:44 PM

Of course.. there is a slight downside.
If you bomb the reactor with several tons of
high explosive... it goes : pfff.... and a
whole glowing mess is created.
That's why AAA batteries are a must around such
an installation. And a no-fly zone..

I do not understand how building atomic
powerplants in the country armed with
thermonuclear weapons could contribute to proliferation...
Besides, the fuel would be a highly radioactive mess..
not the kind of thing you want to carry around.
(and also easy to trace...)

KujiInRetsu

08-13-2005, 09:49 PM

I agree. Nuclear power has come a long way since the incidences of Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. Obviously, some more research has been done into nuclear processes and safety procedures have been refined. While it may not be the best idea to start constructing reactors all around the country, I feel one or two new reactors would be a first step on preserving this nation's dwindling fossil fuel resources. The IFR Reactor technology also presents a very, very promising solution to several problems at once, though therein lies the catch-- is it too good to be true? Generating massive amounts of power for the U.S. power grid and getting rid of weapons-grade fissile material in one fell swoop seems a little far-fetched. If it works though, I'm doubly for it.

KKF

08-13-2005, 09:55 PM

Im waiting on solar panals to be sent out in space. Put them in orbit around the sun and have them transmit energy back in micro waves. I heard something about it a long time ago but can't remember the specific's and even if they used micro waves to transmit the energy back to Earth or not. Just figued using the sun would be our best bet for unlimited energy pretty much. :)

Y.T.

08-13-2005, 09:59 PM

Among other things, many people are just too stupid.
A Gallup type poll in Austria showed that seventy percent
thought that the steam escaping from
cooling towers of nuclear powerplants was radioactive.
(it's not. Pure water cannot really be radioactive. Usually, dust
particles(anything) is.)
We all know Austrians are somewhat redneck and
backward(apart from say.. Wien) but the results
in rest of Europe were, as I remember not much better.

morganlefayw

08-14-2005, 02:34 AM

If I sit here, maybe some spark of intelligence will pass before my brain, whip it into a whirling frenzy, causing me to spit out this oh-so intelligent essay on my country. But I can't (sorry to all), all I can share are the day-to-day things I witness at my job.
I work in fast food. Won't say where or for who, but I've been working there full time for almost nine months and when I'm not spacing out while customers dig around in their purses and wallets for elusive change, I realize things about our culture that is "American".
It's become accepted to live by "quantity, not quality". Fast food, anyone? Have you seen the proportions?!! And when you go out shopping at some department store during their sales, it's mobbed and people would kill each other over that top that was originally $15, now marked down to $5. And you can't just have one- you need one of them in every color. And we buy clothes that are made on the cheap, come apart too quickly and everyone looks like everyone else. I'm sometimes terrified to drive b/c of the stupid things ppl do on the road or that I have seen (my friends are no exception).
We no longer have patience of any time- I want it, and I want it now! Fast food is a perfect place of study.
We prefer to complain about what was wrong about something or someone rather than talk about the positive aspects.
So many people I've encountered are either extremely judgmental of someone who dares to think outside the box regarding anything. Especially religion. In American, Christianity is deemed the "safe and acceptable" religion. Mention you're a pagan and people will look at you like you grew a third head. Or they try to convert you- they can't just let bygones be bygones. My father is a Catholic deacon, I've seen it happen with my friends and with myself. People have become more open and accepting about things, but sometimes I think it's becoming over-popular, and will soon loose its true meaning. It's okay to have a guy friend who's gay, but it's not okay to be pagan or actually be informed and intelligent on a topic (side note: at least, this is what I have witnessed. Not true for all), and have you're own say and thoughts on it. At least, this has become my experience.
And I'll be truthful right now about the war in Iraq: I have no clear definition or opinion of what the hell is going on, there's so much media and info being thrown about and I don't know what to trust and what not to. But I do know I didn't vote for Bush b/c I didn't agree with him that he landed us in hot water in the first place. All I have to say is: is he sending his daughter's off to war? When my siblings asked my dad why he voted for Bush, my dad turned to them and said, “Because the most important thing is that he’s pro-life.”
We are obsessed with ourselves, thinking that everyone else must bow down at our feet and grovel- general American attitude. That we must go stick our noses into everyone else’s business to distract ourselves from our own problems. Escapism much? Or is it that we think we hold such a high place of power, that it is our "duty" to try and help solve the worlds problems because we can?
I'm tired of being yelled at, told I'm stupid, that I'm wrong, everyone else is right. these things make me want to retreat from the human race.
Someone, please!! Come help remind us we are not the universal super-power!!
Please, please, please!!! Tell me what you think, but don't be rude and "flame" me. Or whatever. Honestly and kindly tell me what you think. I want to hear your opinions. YOUR thoughts!!!!

Roxie

08-14-2005, 03:50 AM

You naturally assume that any foreigner naturally dislikes America.
Wait, what? NOOO.

That was one hell of a hop, skip, and jump to an assumption. I wasn't even hinting in that direction at ALL.

Without disscusion, threads like this usually (from my previous forum experiences) turn into an all-hate thread. You've got to forgive me, I learned from SRK.

Marblehead

08-14-2005, 04:46 AM

ruaidhri

08-14-2005, 04:15 PM

I agree with Marblehead, Morganlefayw’s post was “the closest you could come to the true average American opinion. Well said.”

Read Morganlefayw’s statement slowly and contemplate each statement. You’ll discover America.

“I work in fast food. Won't say where or for who, but I've been working there full time for almost nine months and when I'm not spacing out while customers dig around in their purses and wallets for elusive change, I realize things about our culture that is ‘American’. “

How much do you believe Morganlefayw is earning for each hour s/he works, $6.00 to $7.00. Not much. There’s not much of a future in fast food. What about health insurance? Probably non existent, unless s/he is going to school and still covered by the parent’s coverage. Still living at home? Most likely. Nothing wrong with living at home but it does make it hard to declare your personal independence. Certainly, this doesn’t say much for opportunity in America. So many of our jobs, production, clerical and, yes, even managerial have left our shores that even college graduates find themselves working in fast food restaurants because there are no other opportunities.

“It's become accepted to live by "quantity, not quality". Fast food, anyone? Have you seen the proportions?!! And when you go out shopping at some department store during their sales, it's mobbed and people would kill each other over that top that was originally $15, now marked down to $5. And you can't just have one- you need one of them in every color. And we buy clothes that are made on the cheap, come apart too quickly and everyone looks like everyone else.”

More has got to be better, right? Morganlefayw is correct. Quality sits behind quantity. Have you checked out the size of the plates at American restaurants. Huge isn’t the word for it. Food covers every square millimeter of space on the huge plates and the overweight American wolfs it all down in a few short minutes barely taking the time to enjoy the taste. Quality is insignificant so long as the food is fried in grease. Ever wonder why American’s are fat? Clothing? Cheap is desirable. One thing you won’t find is a label saying “Made in America”. Our closets are overflowing with clothes bought because they were on sale. Have you noticed that American store’s always have a sale. Only a fool buys something at its regular price. Right?

“…everyone looks like everyone else. I'm sometimes terrified to drive b/c of the stupid things ppl do on the road or that I have seen (my friends are no exception). We no longer have patience of any time- I want it, and I want it now! Fast food is a perfect place of study. We prefer to complain about what was wrong about something or someone rather than talk about the positive aspects. So many people I've encountered are either extremely judgmental of someone who dares to think outside the box regarding anything.”

Conformity allows people not to think for themselves. They’re part of the herd. What they’re doing can’t be wrong so long as it’s what everybody else does. Could it? We don’t like people that are different. Never have, even back in the 1950’s when I was young. People that are different threaten the security of our conformity. That makes us uncomfortable and uncertain which direction we should move. We have to make a decision.

Americans are always in a hurry. They’re always impatient and quickly frustrated and angered by those in front of them. Road rage is our name. Heck, piss somebody off enough and they might just try to run you off the road or even shoot you. For what? Cutting them off in traffic or going slower than they want to? Those are certainly capital offenses deserving of the ultimate punishment.

Yes we do prefer to complain. That’s what this thread is all about. I hope we’re offering some positive alternatives. What we are doing that is good is bypassing the normal media for our information and opinion building.

“Especially religion. In American, Christianity is deemed the "safe and acceptable" religion. Mention you're a pagan and people will look at you like you grew a third head. Or they try to convert you- they can't just let bygones be bygones.”

Yes, religion is very important to Americans. I remember back in the 1950’s and 1960’s a common expression was “kill a commie for Christ.” Now, I’m not a Christian. I currently like to think of myself as a Theist (with the “a” separate from the “t”). Regardless, I was brought up in the Christian faith and do subscribe to the wonderful lessons taught by real man, Jesus. I honestly don’t believe He would want us to kill anyone. Why did I bring this up? It’s because we don’t like anyone that doesn’t believe what we believe. It threatens our faith. It angers us. If you’re not with us you’re against us. Kill ‘em, damnit.

“When my siblings asked my dad why he voted for Bush, my dad turned to them and said, “Because the most important thing is that he’s pro-life.”

Now that we don’t have the threat of Communism to motivate us what’s left to motivate the far Right? Why, it’s abortion, the killing of babies against God’s wishes. This Godly people have even bombed Abortion Clinics and killed people to express their anger over the killing of babies. Certainly, they’re God’s emissaries. Again, from what I’ve been taught of Jesus, I don’t believe for a second he’d believe that bombing and killing was an appropriate protest.

What’s my opinion on the volatile issue of Abortion? I’m against it, for myself. But then, I’m a 64 year old man with absolutely no chance of getting pregnant. Thank God! I don’t believe I have the right to speak for anyone else. If another person, hopefully a woman, decides that she wants an abortion, that’s her decision, not mine. I don’t believe in interfering.

“And I'll be truthful right now about the war in Iraq: I have no clear definition or opinion of what the hell is going on, there's so much media and info being thrown about and I don't know what to trust and what not to. But I do know I didn't vote for Bush b/c I didn't agree with him that he landed us in hot water in the first place. All I have to say is: is he sending his daughter's off to war?”

I believe Morganlefayw is becoming more aware of the world. S/he is correct. It takes a concerted effort to form an opinion. We are inundated with opinions from the media to the point where without true devotion it’s truly hard to find the truth. If the Republicans accomplished anything in Bush’s reelection it was to confuse the electorate. But, at least Morganlefayw didn’t vote for Jr. S/he’s correct. Jr. landed us in “hot water” and he certainly is not sending his daughters off to war.

“We are obsessed with ourselves, thinking that everyone else must bow down at our feet and grovel- general American attitude. That we must go stick our noses into everyone else’s business to distract ourselves from our own problems. Escapism much? Or is it that we think we hold such a high place of power, that it is our "duty" to try and help solve the worlds problems because we can? “

Yes, we Americans are obsessed with ourselves. We aren’t really familiar with others. We don’t have foreign borders with different people living a short distance from our homes. We haven’t had the wars on our own lands that have plagued Europe, We’re oblivious. Of course were obsessed with ourselves. Everywhere we turn we’re reminded that we’re American. Look at the bumper sticker in front of you at the stoplight. Look at the flags on the lawns of the homes. Go to a sporting event and sing the national anthem. We’re American and damn proud of it. Who’s to tell us any different. How dare they. Kill ‘em!

Why do we become so involved in other peoples problems? Good question. Sometimes, oftentimes, it’s for the right reason. Tsunami relief would be a good example. Somalia was originally a relief effort that turned sour. The Balkan war was to stop the genocide. But, then again, sometimes its for the big reason, money. The Persian Gulf is very important for our economy. Without their oil we would have problems surviving. Iraq’s continued defiance of Western demands threatened Jr. I believe he wanted to invade from the moment he was sworn into office in January 2001. Also, I do believe it helped him win reelection. After all, Americans don’t like to change horses in midstream during a war.

To repeat myself, read Morganlefayw’s statement slowly and contemplate each statement. You’ll discover America.

Kos

08-14-2005, 04:48 PM

Americans are always in a hurry. They’re always impatient and quickly frustrated and angered by those in front of them. Road rage is our name. Heck, piss somebody off enough and they might just try to run you off the road or even shoot you. For what? Cutting them off in traffic or going slower than they want to? Those are certainly capital offenses deserving of the ultimate punishment.

Truthfully, Americans aren't the only people in a hurry - although it makes for an excellent starting place. James Gleick wrote a fascinating book on the subject - "Faster: The Acceleration of Just About Everything"; one of the main points of the book is that "not having time" to do things has become a sort of status symbol - the less time one has for leisurely pursuits, the more important one must be.

KujiInRetsu

08-14-2005, 05:11 PM

It seems to me that the Puritan work ethic of some of the original settlers in the Massachusetts Bay Area has trickled down from generation to generation. Here, we're seeing its modern form, after several mutations to deal with emerging technology and immigrant cultural influences. It's not necessarily a bad thing that we want to get places quickly and accomplish as much as possible in a shorter given amount of time, but some of the ridiculous demands it places on us, and hence some of the stupid things we try in order to fulfill those demands, those are the bane of American productivity.

Look at Italy on the other hand. When someone feels hungry, they close up shop for THREE HOURS to go, sit down, eat, and enjoy life. For us, time is money, whereas to the Italians, time is life. That is a massively fundamental difference.

CBS Sunday Morning's Story on Italian Lifestyle (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/08/14/sunday/main777047.shtml)

Y.T.

08-14-2005, 05:49 PM

It's not like that.. people in the north of Italy are quite industrious...
and actually get a lot of things done. Southern Italy is another
matter.. it's a giant mafia riddled welfare slum, though those reports
might be exaggerated. Our only experience with a person
from there entailed paying about a 1100$ phone bill he left us
(a tenant) and selling a theodolite he forgot at our place for
about 1200$. He was a funny boy, to quote one of his
compatriots, who was also a tenant.

Roxie

08-14-2005, 05:56 PM

It's not like that.. people in the north of Italy are quite industrious...

He wasn't saying they're not industrious, they just have a different idea about work and life.

I don't understand what you're saying in the rest of your post.

Myrsilus

08-14-2005, 08:47 PM

He wasn't saying they're not industrious, they just have a different idea about work and life.

I don't understand what you're saying in the rest of your post.
I think he said the guy left them an ugly phone bill, so they sold one of his belongings that he left behind to pay for his bill.

KujiInRetsu

08-14-2005, 10:01 PM

Oh, I read the article at the address I posted, so I know that Italians are industrious. After all, like the article said, they couldn't be one of the G-8 nations unless they had a powerful economic engine running in their country. They just do it with a low-stress environment and increased spurts of productivity, compared to the United States' policy of round-the-clock productivity, an idea that has been taken to new heights in Japan.

Seriously, Italy sounds like a wonderful place to live, based on the stories I've heard from people who have been there, or better yet from people who have actually made that country their home for a couple of years.

Marblehead

08-14-2005, 10:59 PM

In case you were confused.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodolite

morganlefayw

08-15-2005, 12:23 AM

Hi, thanks to all for your feedback. As for the job, I am currently a shift supervisor and only get payed $7.10. When I'm finished with the "training", my raise is 50 cents. Wooo hoooo.
I've been chasing after then about health insurance for five months and finally got the paperwork out of them. It'll take me another month of chasing them to find out what it covers. I'm 21, and I stopped going to community college at the persuasion of my parents (i don't want to talk about it), and I seriously regreat and miss it. I had run out of money anyway, so there was no other option, really.....
No, there is no future for me in fastfood. Realized that months and months ago- currently looking for a way out. It's beyond frustrating- as a people, we are so ready to verbally abuse others at the slightest wrong to ourselves.
I am trying to form my opinion of the world- but I am also very young. I am trying to make a future for myself. Somehow. Sometimes I don't think I have one. That if there is anything to believe in, how can we have all these horrible situations going on that we do?
And all I know is that the world is in for a crazy time and I'm in for the ride of my life (no pun intended).

Y.T.

08-15-2005, 12:43 AM

Italy has a serious litter problem. Once you leave the northern mountains, there begins a zone of trash. We Slovaks feel at home there, because it is/used to be like that in Slovakia. (It's disgusting these days! There are villages that organize cleaning parties and actually look neat. I say that's detrimental to our national culture and goes against our uniquely Slovak cultural heritage. Ten or fifteen more years, and Slovakia could become indistinguishable from Germany, in outward appearance ! In fact, this invasion started some time ago, when Ze Germans bought many companies around here, and started to spread their dangerous ideas of doing things in an orderly manner. And cleaning up :( ).
At least we have Gypsy slums, so we are always going to have places where we can go and see some actual junk, waste, broken glass, zero mainternance policy, and so on....

Marblehead

08-15-2005, 02:18 AM

KKF

08-15-2005, 02:41 AM

Get student loans. Better to be in debt now than being poor later. As long as you are sure of what you want to do. If not just work till you find something you want to do. Good luck either way.

ruaidhri

08-15-2005, 04:19 AM

Morganlefayw, there are always options and opportunities. It’s up to you to find and exploit them. The problem is in coming up with a plan and then executing it in a timely fashion.

So, what are your options? You could just do nothing. That, believe it or not, is an action because it has results. Fate however usually does not produce good results.

Or, you could find a way to go back to school. First, how could you accomplish this without your parent’s help, assuming they’re not offering any assistance?

You could, as suggested, get student loans and other help, scholarships, etc. You would build up a considerable debt but depending on your major and what you do with it, your increase in income should make it worthwhile.

You could also enlist in the military. Hmmm, don’t want to go to Iraq or Afghanistan? I don’t blame you. I wouldn’t want to either. I joined the military in 1962. If I didn’t join I would have been drafted. Vietnam was the threat. I didn’t want to go there. I didn’t want to kill anyone. So, I joined the U.S. Coast Guard. Their primary mission was to save, not take lives. It’s still a good option today. Now, I’m not going to tell you that the Coast Guard doesn’t have a presence in Iraq. It does. In fact, they even lost a man to enemy action. But their mission is primarily Homeland Security. It’s a good way to get some training and money for college. Besides, you get to ride in small fast boats. It’s really kickass. At least check it out with a Coast Guard recruiter. You don’t have to join but it will give you the option.

Whatever you do remember that you are in control of your own destiny. You can have a future but it’s going to take some hard work and some time. Don’t take the easy course because the rewards are few and you deserve better.

Good luck.

TygressVirgo

08-15-2005, 05:51 AM

Morganlefayw, I echo the sentiments of the above posts concerning your future. Blessings to you.

Wow, what really enlightining posts. It's odd to read your own thoughts coming from another person. I plan to post something up myself as soon as I get the chance.

ruaidhri

08-15-2005, 02:57 PM

Here is a comment I wrote back on June 5th in the original OP9 forum. It asks some good questions, in particular, how America interacts with the rest of the world.

What the rest of the world thinks of American can easily be turned around to ask the question: What do Americans think of the rest of the world?

Actually, I don’t believe Americans think too much about the rest of the world. For the most part, we’re insulated from the rest of the world. Sure, we’ve fought wars in other countries but outside of our Revolutionary War. the War of 1812 and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and their temporary occupation of several Aleutian Islands during WWII, no other country has fought a war in the United States. The people and governments of our 50 states get along with each other. And, we don’t’ have a history of animosities like many European countries have for their neighbors.

Americans only have common borders with two other nations, Mexico and Canada and they’re thousands of miles apart. I don’t believe we even consider Canadians to be foreign; they’re more like our neighbors. We’re comfortable with Canadians because we’re not that much different. We look the same, we speak the same language and we’re both relatively affluent. Mexico, we both love and hate. We love the cheap labor but we’re afraid of their poverty. Many Americans also have problems with the language barrier. Mexicans speak Spanish. We’ve always expected immigrants to learn and speak English. Mexicans prefer to continue speaking Spanish forcing us to accommodate their language. It’s a slow process but we’re learning to accept that the U.S. is becoming a nation of two equally important languages.

From the very beginning of their lives Americans have been told that they live in the greatest country in the world. Most, believe it. Even though an American may be poor he or she still accepts (without question) that America is the land of opportunity. If someone questions American’s basic belief about their country you can expect to hear someone scream “Love it or leave it”. We accept America’s supremacy with the same faith that exists for God. We’re damn proud we’re Americans. Our citizens can criticize our leadership and change governments but we don’t appreciate other countries interfering in our business or questioning our actions.

Following WWII, America changed forever. Prior to the war America like the rest of the world was in the grip of the Great Depression. Jobs weren’t available and people starved to death. Following the war, we had Europe and the world to rebuild. Our government also offered the returning vets the opportunity to go to college at the public’s expense. We became an educated nation overnight.

With a booming economy, Americans prospered and felt secure that they were the best in the world. We feared the Soviet Union and the Communists because they threatened our security. Missiles could breach of oceans in minutes and the Communists could take away our property. We did everything we could to see the Soviet economy fail. We were successful. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States and capitalism reigned supreme.

In our own country we began to realize that even without the cold war we were vulnerable because we were no longer self-sufficient. We needed foreign oil. The Persian Gulf and other oil producing nations (OPEC) were vital to our national interests. We also started to import more and more lower costs goods from overseas producers. Our high wages and standard of living was threatened by foreign workers willing to work for pennies compared to our dollars. Our workers couldn’t compete so either they went on welfare or acquired new skills. More and more young men and women acquired college degrees. Soon, white collar jobs that used to require High School diplomas now demanded college degrees. Also, the employers changed the white collar jobs to exclude them from our overtime pay law. More and more Americans started earning a flat salary. While higher than before, the employers expected the new employees earning those flat salaries to work more hours. Worker productivity went up because they were working more hours without earning overtime.

As free trade competition brought even tighter profit margins companies cut the fat. Not only were products produced overseas and shipped to America but a new phenomenon arose. With computers, fiber optics, satellites and the Internet, companies began to outsource all types of jobs to overseas firms where the employee labor cost far less. Even with their hard work, long hours and infrequent vacations, Americans saw their jobs leaving their shores.

Yes, Americans love their country. We work hard and we’re basically good people. But we somewhat fear the future because we’re not comfortable competing in a world marketplace. This fear could be dangerous for us and the world.

KujiInRetsu

08-19-2005, 02:59 AM

Independent Nation: How Centrism Can Change American Politics (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1400050243/qid=1124419994/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-6061744-9704854?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)
This is a tome of pure gold. Nearest I can tell, it chronicles the history of centrist politicians and centrist thought, basically a panacea for the devisiveness that has pervaded our nation and turned it into the battleground for the Culture Wars that is taking place in the country.

Quite frankly, this is it. This, and other books pertaining to centrism, are what the American people need to read, and the message contained within, that there need not be only two sides, but a third, needs to be heard by the American people. This is the philosophy that can once again bind our nation together in unity as the United States.

ruaidhri

08-19-2005, 03:41 PM

KujiInRetsu, I will buy a copy of the book today. It sounds interesting. America sure does need another path than the one we're following today.

TygressVirgo

08-19-2005, 03:48 PM

I couldn't agree more. Thanks for the suggestion.

Y.T.

08-19-2005, 07:53 PM

From the very beginning of their lives Americans have been told that they live in the greatest country in the world.
And also this implies that everyone wants to live in the US.
Many Slovaks wanted to.. and many went to the US.
There is a million-two of them there. In various stages of
assimilation. 1880-1914(oppression, poverty), 1914-1939(poverty) 1948(Communist Putsch), 1968(Russians invade),
the people who hated oppression, and were free
(as in not burdened by either age, family, conscience, any obligations,
stupidity, or any combination of these elements ran away). Many of them just next door, to Germany, many
to the U.S.
(list of some Slovak names):
http://www.pivnice.co.yu/priezviska.htm
(well, of people living in I suppose Yugoslavia).

As conditions in Slovakia slowly improve, ... it's not
much of an issue. Still, the smartest people go
abroad. The US is now regarded by many as not the
'Promised Land', the ideal place to live, much more
a country where you can earn lots of money and then
return home. (besides Germany. Zillions of Slovaks
work in Germany).

A common thing that Slovaks encounter was pity
for coming from such a war-torn country.
(they assumed that Slovakia is in the Balkans).
Also, most can get away with claiming that
Slovakia is a steppe land inhabited by nomadic people
who ride on horseback and use lots of laptops..
:D. My uncle once had a chat with an US geography teacher(or an impostor)
who thought that Slovakia is in Africa...
(not that our teachers are any better)

Y.T.

08-19-2005, 07:57 PM

Get student loans. Better to be in debt now than being poor later.

Around here, a student loan is if you ask someone in a bar to
lend you beer money. (not that our schools are extremely good),
but we pay more taxes. And, if management were not so
ineffective and politicians so corrupt, it would be a lot better.

ruaidhri

08-28-2005, 06:48 PM

My wife and I were discussing America today. I mentioned that many people throughout the world believe we are stupid, particularly for electing Jr. our President, not once, but twice. She mentioned that politics has become so “dirty” in America that it’s hard to tell fact from fiction. People enjoy dirt. They believe where there’s smoke, there’s fire.

The American political party has perfected the 15 second commercial that panders to emotions rather than reason. While the Republicans appear to be better at slander it’s also not totally foreign to the Democrats. What a candidate is for doesn’t appear to make any difference to the campaign managers or the electorate. Everything is focused on good and bad with the opponent of course being the bad person. It’s not what a candidate will do for you if elected it’s what the opposition will do to you if elected.

In fact, it’s refreshing when a candidate that refrains from character assassination wins an election. Luckily, I have just such a politician in my home state. Wisconsin. Russ Feingold is our U.S. Senator and is respected on both sides of the aisle. He’s also liked by Wisconsin, which returned him to the senate in 2004 with 55 percent of the vote, while Kerry beat Bush with only 50 percent of the votes cast. Feingold has even been mentioned as a possible Democratic Presidential nominee for 2008. Problem is he’s Jewish, soon to be twice divorced and from the Northern Midwest. Another factor is that he is the only Senator that voted against the Patriot Act when it was first introduced in the U.S. Senate. That certainly hasn’t endeared him to the Neo-Cons.

Are Americans dumb? No, I don’t believe they are. Are Americans susceptible to negative advertising? Yes, I do believe they are. Our political machines are very efficient at confusing issues and destroying the opposition. How would people in other parts of the world react if inundated with the same volume and type of political ads showered on Americans? I believe they’d react is pretty much the same way Americans have. They’d elect idiots with winning campaigns. Sad, isn’t it?

What Democrats need to win is someone youthful, from the South with a God fearing background. A former state Governor would be best because they wouldn’t have voted on any national issues that could be used against them regardless of how they voted. Former U. S. Senators are way too vulnerable. The Democrats don’t need the best person for the job only the most electable.

The Democrats have to remember that it doesn’t do any good to have the smartest and most qualified candidate if (s)he isn’t elected. It’s too bad for the Democrats that we can’t return to the party bosses selecting the candidates in caucus. The primaries are popularity contests restricted to Democrats. They don’t take into consideration how independents and left leaning Republicans might vote. The Republicans let it be known up front who they want to win in the primaries. They aren’t even opposed to character assassination of one of their own as they did with John McCain when he dared run against Jr. in 2000. With the Democrats it’s a free for all, which often results in a candidate that’s not attractive to people outside the party.

So, if you believe Americans are dumb walk in our shoes for awhile. You could very well become us and react the same way we do. Ahhh, the power of advertising and human nature.

Marblehead

08-28-2005, 09:18 PM

Were politics really ever clean? Around the turn of the century, you'd could literally buy a persons vote. Sometimes all it took was a steak dinner. I'd say it's business as usual.

True, democrats need to pull it together. They shouldn't just take it for granted that Bush is fucking up. They need to learn from Karl Rove. That anti-Sheehan group didn't just pop into existence on it's own.

KujiInRetsu

08-29-2005, 02:11 AM

Speaking of Karl Rove, do we need to hire an army of freaking private investigators to get that man behind bars? It's been a month since I've heard any major developments on the case, and there is little doubt in my mind that the Bush administration has quietly swept the issue under the rug hoping people will forget. He is as guilty as Bush is incompetent, and I am aching to see him in jail for the things he's done.

Also, that group of 3,000 pro-Bush supporters that have gathered on the Bush ranch... it's gonna turn ugly between the two groups. Just watch and wait for the next schism in the American nation to appear.

TS-

08-29-2005, 09:18 AM

The problem is, I don't believe that the rest of the world was in the business of liking America in the first place...in many places, particuarly in the media, I'm quite convinced people LOVE to see America fuck up/in trouble, etc...it's good drama. It's nice to have someone to wave your finger at and say "YOU SHOULDN'T DO THAT, GUY, THAT'S REALLY WRONG." It's fun having a "bad guy" to watch who poses no actual threat to you or your friends (and who probably wouldn't hesistate to help you). So when I see essay-length posts from people saying how evil America is and so on, please don't hold it against me if I roll my eyes. Hey, I can't help it, I'm just an American.

I wonder if I'll ever live to see one of those about Mexico, or China, or Japan, or Korea, or Vietnam, or any NUMBER of places in Europe or Africa, etc.

As someone pointed out at the start of this thread, a lot of people who announce anti-American sentiment have, and this is a shock, it is....very little experience having KNOWN actual Americans, or having been there! Wow, I never would have guessed! How terribly ignorant... If you're going to pretend to be superior, you should act that way...for example, not be incredibly ignorant when pointing out the ignorance of others.

But it's OK to be anti-American, because they're popular. If you talked about how ignorant Africans are, and how they're bad people and why you hate Africa (not having been there actually knowing any Africans, and referencing things that happened 60 years ago as evidence)...Jesus Christ, you're a racist!! For shame! Make fun of the rich kid, like everyone else. Or, in this case, the somewhat richer kid.

I feel a lot of this is just the sad parts of human nature, and then rationalized afterward to give the animosity some sort of reasonable explanation. Can't praise someone who's doing too well already; point out those flaws, QUICK, or you'll start to feel inferior. But, surely, being an ignorant American, it's just that I can't tolerate any view different from my own. That must be it.

Being IN America, the most common group of America-bashers are, not surprisingly, Americans. Though I figure that'd actually be a surprise to some people, wouldn't it? Turns out, people who come here from other countries tend to LIKE it here, a lot! Go figure.

The American anti-U.S. people have "the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence" syndrome. They talk about how much better it is in Europe, and talk about how racist America it is because 40 years ago we had shitty laws in a lot of places, and how it's an oppressive nazi-esque police state because they can't smoke marijuana in public. For once, I'd appreciate it if someone talking about the ignorance of Americans would point to THESE people, but they're instead held up as our "vocal minority," which causes further polarization; nobody wants to be like the unkempt, west coast, communist, college-campus hippies, except for people of like mind.

I should point out that my issue is not that I think anyone who opposes the status-quo is a bad person, or a bad American, however you would define it. My issue is that I don't like dumbasses. So, while the idea of a website apologizing to the rest of the world because Bush was re-elected is charming, it's also quite disturbing. To think that there are people who can say with a straight face that anyone who voted for Bush is an idiot would be funny, if it weren't sad. Anyone who's political view is not your own is blind and/or a moron... NICE. How dangerous. If someone disagrees with you, it's because they're ignorant...they just don't understand, like YOU do. Anyone who approves of Bush is...well, wait. Let's look at Bush's approval ratings...let's see...what are they now...well, look here! WELL under 50%! So, you don't like to tolerate the minority viewpoint, eh? Don't like it when people diagree with that mainstream opinion, eh? How very facist of you. Let's add bigotry based on religion to that, with the comments made about fundamentalist Christians and how they're so dumb that they voted for Bush (they must be stupid, because they did). Ignoring the fact that Christianity in America is on the decline.

Regarding the nex president: anyone who's not a full-blown dumbass will do a pretty decent job of sewing the country back together, as they won't be doing it; the country will take care of itself. The war and the Bush administration are very polarizing issues, so all the new guy has to do is not fuck it up. The democrats certainly look to have the advantage.

Someone do me a favor and post the dicks/assholes/pussies speach from Team America: World Police. That is the summary of all of my opinions regarding geopolitics.

Praetorian

08-29-2005, 09:37 AM

From the very beginning of their lives Americans have been told that they live in the greatest country in the world. Most, believe it. Even though an American may be poor he or she still accepts (without question) that America is the land of opportunity. If someone questions American’s basic belief about their country you can expect to hear someone scream “Love it or leave it”. We accept America’s supremacy with the same faith that exists for God. We’re damn proud we’re Americans.

I'm sorry for my interference, but that seems awfully like... well... brainwashing to me.

ruaidhri

08-29-2005, 01:23 PM

Yes, Americans are patriotic. Yes, I am personally proud to be an American. I love my country and I love my people. I respect the office of the President even if I don’t respect the man holding that office. I criticize America because that is exactly how I believe a good citizen should interact with his/her government.

Patriotism is very emotional. Every day in school American children recite the pledge of allegiance to our flag. They learn American history and how we fought to gain our freedom and how we also fought to protect and restore the freedom of citizens of other nations, including many of those now criticizing America. It doesn’t take much convincing to love oneself. That’s what America is, the people themselves. Of course we have problems. Of course we make mistakes. Yes, we’ve done bad things. But, we’ve also helped many people and don’t have an evil intent like world domination as our goal.

Do I support our troops in Iraq. Absolutely! I wish we never invaded Iraq. It was a huge mistake. But, we’re there. I’d love to just bring our troops home and say “OK, you don’t want us; it’s your problem. We’re out of here.” That response would, I believe, compound our earlier mistake. Iraq isn’t Somalia. Iraq is a part of the Persian Gulf the center of oil production. Fleeing Iraq would jeopardize our’s and the world’s oil supply. We need that oil. Without it America’s economy and the economies of other nations that refuse to help America would suffer catastrophic damage. We simply can’t risk that. So, while other countries sit on their hands and do nothing it’s America that’s again protecting their way of life.

Yes, I do believe it’s proper to apologize for Jr. He is a dumb ass. He did get us in the quagmire of Iraq. He is responsible for the Patriot Act, which restricts our freedoms. I am amazed at how many Americans were duped into voting for him. I understand how politics and advertising, creating illusions and bending of the truth convinces people to vote against their own best interests. No, I don’t believe everyone that voted for Jr. is stupid. I wouldn’t want to live in a country where everyone agreed with my political philosophy. We need diversity and I welcome someone convincing me that I’m wrong on an issue. I’m willing to change my mind even if some people consider that waffling. I don’t see that as a sign of weakness but rather an indication of intelligence.

I do have a problem with single issue voters. I do have a problem with the religious right because they want to force me to abide by their moral dogma. I certainly don’t want to disenfranchise them. I don’t want to close their churches. I don’t want to shut them up. I do believe they have a right to their opinion. I just believe it’s wrong.

Does it make any difference that fundamentalist Christians are a minority? No, not in a country so polarized that elections are won by a few votes. They’re all that’s needed to carry a candidate over the top. That gives them far more power than their numbers indicate.

I started this thread to educate other people about the America they don’t know that’s oftentimes very different from what they been told by their news media. I’m not going to lie about America’s ills. Actually, my primary message is that we’re not that different from them.

JudoPorkChop

08-29-2005, 04:47 PM

Coming from a political and military standpoint, I can completely understand how the world could harbor a dim view of Americans.

Politically, it starts with the first election of Dubya. With Katherine Harris' interference with the voter rolls in Florida, combined with party-line handshaking down the legislative branch, Dubya became the second (?) President in American history to not win the popular vote. After that, the hardball politics combined with double-speak didn't win any friends, either. The Estate Tax repeal, Healthy Forests, Clean Skies, and Leave No Child Behind all colossal mis-representations, and the public bought it. That's bad enough. But when the bean counters and legislators began to take a good hard look at what was put on the books, there wasn't any call for accountability.

After that, the second election would seal the deal for anyone who already didn't have a poor view after the first. Diebold's CEO making a public statement about vowing to deliver Ohio's electoral votes to Dubya should have been a big red flag. The CEO of the company that makes VOTING MACHINES used in the election makes a statement about delivering the electorate to a candidate, and not a word was spoken in question.Hell, a UCSD/Johns Hopkins/ Rice University study (http://www.cs.utsa.edu/~shxu/CS6973-Fall2004/take-home-exam-1.pdf) shows how very easily one can hack a Diebold system. The subversion of the electoral process wasn't enough to rouse the masses. Further, military, foreign policy, and domestic failures should have put the nails firmly into the coffin for W. The combination of a weak candidate that was willing to ignore the South, the smear campaign courtesy of Rove, and uncertainty over a new leader's capability in taking control over a new situation allowed for W. to sidestep temporarily.

Scandals like the Valerie Plame leak and the Downing Street memo, and to a lesser extent, the whistleblowing of Bunnatine Greenhouse (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bunnatine_Greenhouse), Jeff Gannon, and now the persistence of Cindy Sheehan should have exhausted any political capital he had, but, Republicans control all branches of government. Hardball rules the day. Frist's Nuclear Option, the assignment of John Bolton to the UN, anything they can cram down America's throat before 2006, it's a-coming, approval ratings be damned.

Nevermind the messages they're using to drive the masses. Cheney flat out said that a terrorist attacks would occur non-stop if Kerry were elected. Postcards were sent throughout the bible belt with a picture of two men kissing, with the message that "this will be the norm in liberal America". Their entire message was a scare campaign. "IF YOU VOTE FOR JOHN KERRY, MARRIED GAY MUSLIM JEW NIGGERS WILL RAIN FROM THE SKY, RAPING BESSIE-MAE, AND BLOWING UP NASCAR! O NOES!" Though, not as bluntly stated, it was the same thing. Not voting for Bush, was likened to the same thing as supporting immorality. And, of course, the masses bought it, largely because there was no message coming from Kerry's corner.

The other part of the political fingerpointing fiesta, is toward the metropolitan, toward the academic, toward the intellectual elite. The first to be able to extract fact from fiction, to do the math, to be able to discern lies from truth, was utterly unable to relay any of their findings to people outside of their demographic. Do you really think people would support No Child Left Behind if they knew the brunt of the money was going to boards and administrators and not to teachers and students? That they would support Healthy Forests if they knew it provides logging companies access into what was previously protected woodlands? That the "Cleaner Skies" initative will allow for more pollution? I doubt it. But, the inability to effectively translate the message, reduced it's effectiveness.

From a military standpoint, it's absolutely mind-blowing how much rope W's been given with nobody yet calling to hang him. The actions taken in Afghanistan were and are sound. Oddly enough, his advisors had little to no input in it's operations. Iraq, however, is where the emperor is naked, and has been told as much. In the beginning, General Shinseki plainly stated that we would need from 300,000 up to 500,000 troops on the ground to take Iraq, and suppress any insurgent action. It's a simple truth: Insurgents don't exist when you have guns stuck up everyone's ass. But, Rumsfeld said he was off the mark, and summarily dismissed him. The invasion went as Rumsfeld planned, and Rumsfeld did manage to do what he set out to do initially. His air driven, shock and awe style worked for the invasion. However, there was a sense of "Now what?" after the dust settled. The elite attack squads didn't have the numbers to hold back the mobs of looters, and consequently, the looters hit stockpiles of Iraqi army weapons, and most famously, a cache of explosives from a sealed storage container, right under the nose of the army. With this, an insurgency formed and took hold. That was bad. Bad turned to worse when the official order came down for the cessation of the search for WMD. With no weapons being found, the originating reason for military action was rendered moot. This degrades even further when reports on equipment condition comes out. Soldiers are being deployed with no plating for their vests, vehicles have to improvise armor. On top of this, Stop Loss initiatives can only hold those at the end of their careers or enlistments for so long. Recruitment numbers are down. Now, there is a problem of those who were leaders are retiring, those who would be leaders are not re-enlisting. Because of this gap, those who have experience in vital technical fields can't be used as instructors, and because there are no instructors, proficiency training periods for new enlistees increase dramatically without capable guidance present. New enlistees crack under constant pressure to hurriedly get their certifications so that they may be used to help train other incoming enlistees. There are too many holes and not enough bodies to fill them.

This brings us to the draft. The need is there, and is becoming imminently larger as time passes. There cannot be a draft from a politcal standpoint, because not only would all the parallels to Vietnam be instantly validated, the balance of power would likely shift out of Republican hands for the next generation. Turning to the U.N. would be out of the question, because that would be a clear admission of error in policy. Such things are not done by this administration. So, the one tool they could use to form a proper exit strategy was put out-of-bounds by their own arrogance. By ignoring the advice of generals with three decades of military experience, they believed and declared that there wouldn't be any draft, that the situation would be fine with standing troops. Mind you, the draft would have been unpopular, but accepted nonetheless, as a means of approaching a final exit strategy. And now, because they promised America of the impossibility of a draft, they can not turn back on it now.

With lies in policy and legislation, ethical and legal scandals abound, and a royally botched unilateral hostile action, there isn't a call to impeach. Clinton lied about a blowjob, and the move was made to be rid of him. Ruling party or not, taxes have been cut while spending rises, American sons and daughters are dead over a falsehood, intelligence assets are burned for political revenge, and fallacies about the administration have been documented. One would think that was rope enough for the hangman, but no gallows looms. To tolerate being lied to, to accept the death of your people, to turn a blind eye to displays of ethical ambiguity.... I can surely understand why the rest of the world would take a dim view of the average American.

ruaidhri

08-29-2005, 05:43 PM

JudoPorkChop, Wow! I deeply bow to you. That was an awesome post.

Monkey

08-29-2005, 06:26 PM

The main thing that makes me think america is stupid isn't that you managed to elect Bush into office, it's that after everyone had seen the terrible things he'd done, the americans managed to vote him in again...

The same thing happened in Britain, taxes are higher than ever, our health system is apparently approaching third-world in standard and our transport system is absolutely terrible but somehow the Labour party managed to spin it and won a third term.

Incidentally, after Bush won the first election this funny article was written which I quite like.

http://www.stephaniemiller.com/declarationofrevocation.htm

As a rugby player I particularly liked this part :D

6. You should stop playing American "football." There is only one kind of football. What you refer to as American "football" is not a very good game.

The 2.15% of you who are aware that there is a world outside your borders may have noticed that no one else plays "American" football. You will no longer be allowed to play it, and should instead play proper football.

Initially, it would be best if you played with the girls. It is a difficult game. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which is similar to American "football", but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full kevlar body armour like nancies).

KujiInRetsu

08-30-2005, 03:18 AM

Just in response to that Rugby post, there are players in the NFL that weigh well over 250 lbs. Without that "kevlar body armor," every NFL player would have spinal cords snapped neatly in two, as well as several bones in their bodies.

Which leads me to another point-- why are they so goddamn fat if they spend hours outside in the sun training and running around? Whatever the reason, it's just another point that turns me off to American sports besides that each and every single one of the athletes is paid an exorbitant amount, and they have the unnerving gall to demand more. I really, really hate that.

I guess the trade-off for those big football players is that they end up dead for some reason that medical examiners are still tryin' to figure out.

They talk about how much better it is in Europe, and talk about how racist America it is because 40 years ago we had shitty laws in a lot of places, and how it's an oppressive nazi-esque police state because they can't smoke marijuana in public.For once, I'd appreciate it if someone talking about the ignorance of Americans would point to THESE people, but they're instead held up as our "vocal minority," which causes further polarization; nobody wants to be like the unkempt, west coast, communist, college-campus hippies, except for people of like mind.Here here. I appreciate rabid tree-huggers about as much I do the rightist zealots. They want marijuana? Well, they can go to Amsterdam and smoke it all they damn want, but the day I see the streets of America hazed over with bong fumes and stoners sprawled all over and not beat the crap out of a few is the day Dubya admits, under no duress, that he was wrong about Iraq, that he is very, very sorry about it, and that he plans to make immediate amends with the international community, especially France.

I cannot stress to you the improbability of either situation.

Nikki

08-30-2005, 06:03 AM

It's...It's my thread?!! You mean it didn't die out? I'm oddly proud. ^.^

Nikki

08-30-2005, 06:18 AM

....day Dubya admits, under no duress, that he was wrong about Iraq, that he is very, very sorry about it, and that he plans to make immediate amends with the international community, especially France.

I cannot stress to you the improbability of either situation.

*snort* Like that will *ever* happen. America has this mindset that we're always right, simply because we're the number one superpower, and if you're not with us then you *must* be against us. Like those supposedly evil french who hate us(notice I said supposedly). Yes, it's ignorant, and arrogant, but I honestly don't see a change anytime soon. Even if Bush gets out of office, the war will most likely still be going on. And it's not getting better over there, it's getting worse.

And Monkey? That link you gave was the greatest source of amusement I've had in a long time, and exactly what I needed after working a 13 hour shift at work. "....Louisianashire...." heheheheh. That alone made me fall in love.

StormShadow

08-30-2005, 06:27 AM

Nikki

08-30-2005, 06:39 AM

Who says? The media? If the news only showed good things, who would watch? The essence of drama would be gone. I've read about Iraqi civilians coming up to soldiers to rat out weapons caches. I've read about soldiers in Afganistan finding a large quantity of Heroin, resulting in a huge monetary loss for the insurgancy. Thing seem bad because you never really see all of what is going on. I am not saying things are going great, mind you, nor am I saying that they are being run the way they should, but things are getting better.

Do you honestly believe everything you read?(Don't mean to be rude here) Yeah, it's true that there are some Iraqi's rooting for us, so of course they're going to help us out, but for every 1 supporter, you've got another 10 who's trying to kill our guys. And if things were really getting better, then why aren't more of our guys coming home?

StormShadow

08-30-2005, 06:43 AM

Nikki

08-30-2005, 07:05 AM

My brother was in the 3 ID. He still keeps up communication with people there. So I do get info from actual soldiers there. It is believed that a substantial amount of the insurgents are not Iraquis but foreign fighters coming to the country. So even if Iraq wants us there, people will think they don't because of the actions of non-Iraqis that came to fight America

Yeah, my brother just went over there too, so I really do see what you're saying, but I also hear the other side of it as well. It's not coming to an end any time soon, and it'd be really nice if I didn't have to worry about if I'm going to receive any news of my brother's death. Maybe I'm biased, but damn if I don't have a reason to be. ^.^

StormShadow

08-30-2005, 07:16 AM

You have reason to be biased. I am going into the Army, and I am requesting Afganistan cause I don't want to go to Iraq. That shit is scary.

TS-

08-30-2005, 07:27 AM

Well that's a bit of an overstatement...maybe over 90% of Iraqis want us out of their country, but clearly it's not that many trying to kill people. And good news certainly never gets reported. A bunch of guys setting off car bombs makes the news...some guys handing out candy and building a school does not (unless some guy with a car bomb slams into the group of children and blows them up, as happened recently). That's the way it is, everywhere...it's more entertaining, that way. No matter how much people SAY they want to hear good things, when ratings come out, or they look at the newspaper issue which sold the most copies, etc...bad news being featured is always more successful.

I have heard many, many, many times from people who've been to Iraq (albeit secondhand) that it's not as bad as you see on TV, and there are a lot of people just trying to make due...going to their jobs, trying to raise their kids, etc. Can you imagine if the only news reported out of California were murders and bombings and bad stuff that happened in one of the prisons...? You could paint an ugly picture of anywhere if you just gathered up their worst news.

Iraq sucks, but not all cities are equally as bad, and every Iraqi who sees an American doesn't shoot at them. And there are certainly a lot of non-American foreigners in Iraq from neighboring countries who want to kill Americans more than most Iraqis do...and in the process, kill about 20 Iraqis for every one American soldier.

Anyway, you can't believe everything you read/see on the news, that goes for bad news too, right? Context.

Judo- I think that's more the reason why Americans don't like America too much, or why anti-Bush people don't like the administration. Other than the things regarding the Iraq war, I don't the world at large knows much else about Bush & company.

The Diebold thing was most likely ass-kissing in front of Bush supporters...the implication being that Bush's victory was inevitable, or just said in support of the candidate. I don't think if they were actually going to cheat, they'd make it known. That's just sort of silly.

Dick Cheney, however, is The Devil.

Roxie

08-30-2005, 10:46 AM

*snort* Like that will *ever* happen. America has this mindset that we're always right, simply because we're the number one superpower, and if you're not with us then you *must* be against us. Like those supposedly evil french who hate us(notice I said supposedly). Yes, it's ignorant, and arrogant, but I honestly don't see a change anytime soon. Even if Bush gets out of office, the war will most likely still be going on. And it's not getting better over there, it's getting worse.
that was the point dear.

He was being facetious.

Monkey

08-30-2005, 11:02 AM

Just in response to that Rugby post, there are players in the NFL that weigh well over 250 lbs. Without that "kevlar body armor," every NFL player would have spinal cords snapped neatly in two, as well as several bones in their bodies.

Most professional forwards in a rugby team weigh over 250 lbs (about 17 stone)
Even some of the backs weigh nearly that much and they are supposed to be the fast players. The difference is that rugby hurts, a lot. If there's a match without injury then you are lucky. Most players tend to shrug off the injuries though so you don't even know if they are injured until the end of the match. For instance in the rugby world cup, Johnny Wilkinson had managed to completely fracture his shoulder before the final had begun but they didn't realise till they took him for scans afterwards.

So yes you're right, playing without full kevlar body armour does mean that you get more injuries.

To get back on point however, I think that part of why people dislike America is the sheer arrogance of their current foeign policy.

They invade Afghanistan, that's fine. They decide to invade Iraq, that would be fine, if they'd actually had UN support. Instead they just said a big FU to the rest of the world who wasn't foloowing them and Invaded anyway. What's worse is that they didn't even find any WMD's. Personally I'd have much preferred it, and would have been more in support of the war if they'd just said "We're going to invade Iraq because Saddam Hussein is an evil asshat".

As it is now we are stuck in Iraq, as the reason we went in was useless (no WMD's), we can't leave until the insurgency has calmed down a lot, but meanwhile our brave soldiers are dieing out there and nobody really knows which cause they are fighting for...

ruaidhri

08-30-2005, 01:49 PM

Yes, Nikki, it's your thread and it hasn't died out. I've worked hard to keep it alive and kicking. There have been many very interesting and insightful posts on both the old and new forums.

I reestablished the thread on this forum but you were the original creator and I truly appreciate that. Thank you.

Marblehead

08-30-2005, 02:22 PM

I've read about soldiers in Afganistan finding a large quantity of Heroin, resulting in a huge monetary loss for the insurgancy.

Ok, that made me laugh. Finding Poppies (opium) in Afghanistan is like trying to find corn in Iowa. It's fucking everywhere and it has nothing to do with insurgents. It is the cash crop for all the villages. We would drive by fields of poppies and marijuna while we were hunting Taliban. If we had burned every poppy field we saw, we'd have every local trying to help the Taliban get rid of us.

Secondly, you do not get to request whether or not you go to Afghanistan or Iraq. You might get station of choice, but I doubt it. The way the Army works now is they have three-year life cycles. They fill up that unit to it's MTOW(unit allowance) and that's it. I would bet money that with stop loss the way it is now, you'll will go to both.

Boom

08-30-2005, 03:33 PM

Apologies in advance if anyone's offended by this but i found it pretty funny :)

Following the recent events in London the French government announced
yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from 'Run' to 'Hide'. The only two higher levels in France are 'Surrender' and 'Collaborate'. The rise was precipitated by a recent fire which destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively paralysing their military.
In response to the French raising their alert level other European countries have responded in kind.
The Italians have increased their alert level from "Shouting Excitedly" to "Elaborate Military Posturing". Two more levels remain, "Ineffective Combat Operations" and "Change Sides".
The Germans have also increased their alert state from "Disdainful Arrogance" to "Full Dress Uniform and Marching Songs". They have two higher levels, "Invade a Neighbour" and "Lose".
Seeing this reaction in continental Europe the Americans have gone from "Isolationism" to "Find Somewhere Ripe for Regime Change". Their remaining higher alert states are "Take on the World" and "Ask the British for Help".
Finally, here in GB we've gone from "Pretend Nothing's Happening" to "Make Another Cup of Tea". Our higher levels are "Chin Up and Remain Cheerful" and "Win".

JudoPorkChop

08-30-2005, 04:21 PM

The Diebold thing was most likely ass-kissing in front of Bush supporters...the implication being that Bush's victory was inevitable, or just said in support of the candidate. I don't think if they were actually going to cheat, they'd make it known. That's just sort of silly.

Well, TS, that's certainly a possibility. But, the simple fact that Clint Curtis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clint_Curtis) exists, and has passed a polygraph test is kinda interesting. Now, that's only Florida, but so is this. (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1106-30.htm) Again, (http://www.cs.utsa.edu/~shxu/CS6973-Fall2004/take-home-exam-1.pdf) I strongly suggest people read the PDF link to understand why e-voting machines are suspect. Those machines are still in use all over the country. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_U.S._presidential_election_controversy_and_ir regularities)

Nevermind that if your side wins the House, Senate, Presidency, and currently has an ideological majority in the Supreme Court, anyone who would question you gets rushed down, and fast. Donating heavily to Republican causes is a little eyebrow-raising, especially since they make voting machines, but nothing worth any high level of scrutiny. Then, Wally O'Dell, CEO of Diebold issues a statement proclaiming they're committed to delivering Ohio's electoral votes to George W. Bush. THEN, normally democratic counties swing to Bush, and these are coincidentally the same ones that switched from paper ballots to paperless E-voting, provided by Diebold. THEN, because Diebold was using a publically available FTP (http://ftp.die.net/mirror/diebold-memos/) to upload memos, bugs, and even election data,someone figures out and explains how to hack the vote. (http://www.equalccw.com/dieboldtestnotes.html#gemsinstalls)

If you follow the links, this should seem less and less silly to you.

KujiInRetsu

08-30-2005, 09:10 PM

^
JudoPorkChop... hooooooly shit. "Wide open to unlimited rape." Wow, I just love how they put that. Couple that with the hiring of some young and naive hackers that have no idea what stupidity they're about to keep in the White House, and BAM; you have an election in the bag.

Instead they just said a big FU to the rest of the world who wasn't foloowing them and Invaded anyway.This scared the living hell out of me. I'm not even out of high school yet, much less a seasoned diplomat, and already I know no good could come of it.

JudoPorkChop

08-30-2005, 09:24 PM

Holy shit, indeed. Very few people have kept up with the stories as they were followed up on, and as such, when stuff like this breaks, it's deemed old news and forgotten. It's amazing how easily someone can get away with the dirty deeds.

ruaidhri

08-31-2005, 12:56 PM

What does the rest of the world think of America? Today, I hope they’re shocked and want to help us. We need it. Whenever a disaster occurs throughout the world, America has been there to help. This help has not only come from our government but also from the millions of people contributing their dollars and time. Well, now America needs help.

We’ve experienced untold tragedy. We have no idea how many people have died. Predictions of loss exceed 25 billion dollars. We have whole cities destroyed and people without food, water, basic care and homes. The lives of many of our people will be forever altered.

I’m afraid for my country and my people. This wasn’t just a localized disaster where Katrina leveled homes and business and communities. This disaster will impact all of America. It will impact our economy and all our citizens. What I hear on my radio and TV scares me. In my limited world, on Monday I paid $2.69 for a gallon of gas. I thought that was ridiculously high. Yesterday, Gas was $2.99 and I heard on the radio that it’s expected to rise to $3.50 today. I heard talk about lines at gas stations and fights breaking out. I live in Wisconsin far from Katrina’s wrath. I heard that we can’t get grain down the Mississippi to port. That’s going to affect the American farmers and the people throughout the world that need our grain to survive. Natural gas and oil for heating is supposed to skyrocket because of the storm. Wisconsin has cold winters. We have to heat our homes so we won’t have money for other things. That will also impact our economy.

We need help!

While this is going on we have American troops over in Iraq. We’re spending billions to rebuild their country while insurgents are killing our troops. We could use those troops and billions here in this country to restore order and rebuild our country. But, if we just up and left Iraq we would create a crisis in the Persian Gulf. I have no doubt Anarchy would reign and the result would not favor America , any of the Western countries or the Persian Gulf itself.

We need help!

Americans are proud. We don’t like to admit we’re down. But, today, we are. It makes us feel good to be on the giving end. Today, we’ll have to swallow our pride and be on the receiving end.

You may not always appreciate America’s strong handed foreign policy. Heck, I’m a proud American and I certainly don’t. But, from reading both iterations of this forum I’ve learned that most of those that distrust America separate our people from our Government. What’s happening in our Gulf Coast today is affecting the American people. We, not our government, need your help.

Find a reputable relief agency and help America. Also, encourage your government to send relief and assistance in finding our dead and rebuilding our country. Today, we’re the ones needing help.

ruaidhri

08-31-2005, 07:53 PM

Come on Europeans, Asians, North and Central Americans and Canadians. Come on Pacific Islanders, Australians and Africans. How do you feel about America today? What can you do to help the suffering in America? We need your help. At the very least, we’d appreciate your comments.

As I wrote from my first day on this forum we’re no different from you. We share the same ancestors, our blood's the same color and our pain is as real as yours. How do you feel about America Today?

How is your country planning to help us?; we certainly need help. What are you doing to show that you care as much about us as we have about you? Now’s your opportunity to be on the giving end.

Boom

08-31-2005, 10:11 PM

I don't really feel strongly either way about America..or any other country for that matter..i mean sure i symphathise with countries that suffer natural disasters and terrorist attacks but apart from that..

Anubis Nine

08-31-2005, 10:25 PM

I have an opinion about America, and really just that. I know that there are smart Americans (I'm friends with many) and I know that there are some *really* dumb Americans, (I've seen them on TV) I know that I don't agree with the way things are run down there and I resent greatly that the american government affects my own. (Canadian).

But I have a hard time not generalizing and saying 'those idiots' when I see farmer joe on CNN stating how worried he is about terrorism. What in the name of all that's good and green? They'll get the tractor! XO Run!

I think that Americans get a little turned around in their ideals, having seen more than once the argument against getting better mass transit systems up and running as: "Yes, so that they can bomb us like those stupid Londoners." And wanting cheaper gas prices despite fact that Oil is going to run out and never exist again in our lifetimes.

But it's not like I hate them. My father said it, and in my trips to Seattle, I believe him, the American people can be exceedingly kind, even if they can also be loud and crude. Every country has it's jack asses, it's just that America seems to have this image labelled on them. It's a pity really, but as I read, (In a webcomic... >.> Don't judge me!)

It's a shame that the gentle kindness of some people is overshadowed by the loud brashness of others.

KujiInRetsu

09-01-2005, 02:45 AM

The fact of the matter is, we're a first-world industrialized nation. Hell, we're the only world superpower in existence today. The world's not exactly going to have an outpouring of sympathy and relief supplies for the richest, most powerful nation in the world, especially when that nation's democratically elected leader is doing stupid things in another part of the world.

I think we're going to have to pull ourselves out of this one. Not that people in every country outside of North America is going to be cold and condescending towards us, there are likely to be people fairly horrified and sympathetic. Thailand would definitely empathize with our situation, considering all the relief we gave them (at long last after that paltry first offering), though our death tolls are probably not going to be nearly as high. Thing is about Thailand is that they're still digging themselves out of their own Christmas tsunami, so we can't exactly expect any help from them. Then there's the fact I mentioned above, that we are assumed by the rest of the world to be rich and powerful enough to clean this up ourselves. We'll have their thoughts, their sympathies, their prayers, but in the end, it's all us. Let's not have to rely on the world in this situation.

Besides, we look better as constant givers. :D

RDClip

09-01-2005, 03:06 AM

I think we're going to have to pull ourselves out of this one. Not that people in every country outside of North America is going to be cold and condescending towards us, there are likely to be people fairly horrified and sympathetic. Thailand would definitely empathize with our situation, considering all the relief we gave them (at long last after that paltry first offering), though our death tolls are probably not going to be nearly as high. Thing is about Thailand is that they're still digging themselves out of their own Christmas tsunami, so we can't exactly expect any help from them. Then there's the fact I mentioned above, that we are assumed by the rest of the world to be rich and powerful enough to clean this up ourselves. We'll have their thoughts, their sympathies, their prayers, but in the end, it's all us. Let's not have to rely on the world in this situation.
Wrong even countries in North America are cold and condecending. Many-a-Canadians don't like what America does and thinks they are idiots. However as cowards we must mask our dislike with diplomacy.

KujiInRetsu

09-01-2005, 04:14 PM

StormShadow

09-01-2005, 04:37 PM

Ok, that made me laugh. Finding Poppies (opium) in Afghanistan is like trying to find corn in Iowa. It's fucking everywhere and it has nothing to do with insurgents. It is the cash crop for all the villages. We would drive by fields of poppies and marijuna while we were hunting Taliban. If we had burned every poppy field we saw, we'd have every local trying to help the Taliban get rid of us.

Secondly, you do not get to request whether or not you go to Afghanistan or Iraq. You might get station of choice, but I doubt it. The way the Army works now is they have three-year life cycles. They fill up that unit to it's MTOW(unit allowance) and that's it. I would bet money that with stop loss the way it is now, you'll will go to both.

I'm a reservist. As a reservist I can go with my reserve unit or request the sandbox. I will be a medic. Everybody needs medics, right?

ruaidhri

09-01-2005, 08:39 PM

Yes, I do believe that Hugo Chavez, Venezuela’s President, would offer aid to the United States. He believes in people and it’s people, not George Bush, that are suffering.

Thank you Hugo Chavez. Thank you people of Venezuela. I am but a single American but I am very thankful for your help.

You are a friend of the American people.

Myrsilus

09-01-2005, 10:25 PM

*UPDATE*

Human altruism triumphs again. In spite of Pat Robertson's remarks on his assassination and Bush's hardline rhetoric against him, President HUGO CHAVEZ of Venezuela has offered to donate fuel to help with the hurricane disaster relief efforts.

HUGO CHAVEZ.

HUGO CHAVEZ.

Do you have any idea how much this surprised the hell out of me??? So maybe he's doing this only to spite Bush, but the fact remains, HE'S DOING IT.
... that is just amazing. I can't begin to verbalize how ashamed I feel that the matter with Pat Robertson has been pretty much ignored, yet the man he could have gotten killed, Hugo Chavez, is actually helping us in this time of desperate need.

I am serious when I say my heart was warmed hearing that. He did not have to provide aid for us. I wish I could thank this man and the country in person.

ruaidhri

09-02-2005, 12:14 AM

America is not alone. Countries throughout the world are coming to our aid. You know about Venezuela but they are not alone. Below is a Reuters Foundation article:

Foreign governments line up to help after Katrina01 Sep 2005 20:53:25 GMTSource: Reuters
(Adds Israeli help, paragraphs 10-11)
By Sue Pleming

WASHINGTON, Sept 1 (Reuters) - More than 20 countries, from allies Germany and Japan to prickly Venezuela and poor Honduras, have offered to help the United States cope with the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

Accustomed to being a rich donor rather than on the receiving end of charity, the United States initially seemed reticent about accepting foreign aid, but later said it would take up any offers. The hurricane devastated New Orleans and other parts of the U.S. Gulf Coast, killing hundreds and possibly thousands.

"Anything that can be of help to alleviate the tragic situation of the area affected by Hurricane Katrina will be accepted," said State Department spokesman Sean McCormack.

"America should be heartened by the fact that the world is reaching out to America at a time of need," he added.
Earlier, President George W. Bush said in a television interview that the United States could take care of itself.

"I'm not expecting much from foreign nations because we hadn't asked for it. I do expect a lot of sympathy and perhaps some will send cash dollars. But this country's going to rise up and take care of it," Bush told ABC's "Good Morning America."

McCormack said there had not been a change of position over accepting foreign aid and White House spokesman Scott McClellan also said the United States would take up offers of help.

The State Department said offers so far had come from Belgium, Canada, Russia, Japan, France, Germany, Britain, China, Australia, Jamaica, Honduras, Greece, Venezuela, the Organization of American States, NATO, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Greece, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Mexico, South Korea, Israel and the United Arab Emirates.

Assistance ranged from medical teams, boats, aircraft, tents, blankets, generators and cash donations.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon wrote to Bush offering medical teams that specialized in trauma and natural disasters and said they could be ready in 24 hours.

"During these difficult times, we, the people of Israel stand firmly by your side in a show of solidarity and friendship," said the letter, which was released by the Israeli Embassy in Washington.

Where the United States really needs help is getting cheap oil and the Bush administration will be approaching Arab nations and other oil producers over the coming days.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, a vocal critic of the United States, offered to send cheap fuel, humanitarian aid and relief workers to the disaster area.

The State Department did not comment on Venezuela's offer but several officials smiled at the gesture from Chavez, who on Wednesday called Bush a "cowboy" who failed to manage the disaster.

Cuban President Fidel Castro, a close Chavez ally, led a minute of silence in remembrance of the victims of Katrina in parliament on Thursday. The parliament then returned to normal business with a resolution attacking Bush over the Iraq war.

I appreciate each and every country that has offered their assistance. Thank you for caring and doing something about it.

KujiInRetsu

09-02-2005, 01:21 AM

I'll have to apologize in advance. This post is extremely inflammatory, but it is warranted because sometimes, people of faith say the stupidest shit ever because they think they're above humanity and the Supreme Law of the Land, the Constitution of the United States of America. Those of you of the Christian faith, I heavily advise avert your eyes from the screen lest these words scar you. If you think you can handle it, read on, because this is what's wrong with you.

Earlier today, while the newscasts were going, there was news about remarks from a Christian sect posted at what I believe they said was a site called "Repent America", which said that the hurricane was God's punishment for a "gay and lesbian city". (If someone could check the source of these remarks, I would be more than grateful)

This is the absolute stupidest shit ever. I cannot believe this. Alright, I don't have a beef with God. I don't understand how you could have a beef with God. It's his so-called "followers" that I have a problem with. I'm not Christian, I'm not religious, but even I remember "LOVE THY NEIGHBOR". What the fuck happened to that, I ask you? WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT!? People are suffering, dying and you have the audacity to go and condemn people because of their sexual orientation. How's about a city in Utah or South Carolina gets hit by a massive earthquake, or all of a sudden their water supplies turn poisonous or infected with some sort of fatal disease? You want us to laugh at you while you suffer through some of the worst times of your life? Then keep denying your countrymen. Start judging people on whether or not they'll steal from your pockets and murder your children instead of whether or not they'll do stuff to another man or woman that you wouldn't to see anyways.

Oh, what's that? I'm going to hell? I'll fucking see you there, then!

ON ANOTHER NOTE
At least the other nations in the world have come to our aid. Truly, truly grateful, especially now that I know that a friend I have in northern Alabama is safe and dry. It is a bit awkward that we're on the receiving end, but so long as people get the help they need, it's all good.

Roxie

09-02-2005, 01:37 AM

well, think of it like this.

Extremists make better news stories than the kind, peace-loving Christians.

Marblehead

09-02-2005, 03:18 AM

I'm a reservist. As a reservist I can go with my reserve unit or request the sandbox. I will be a medic. Everybody needs medics, right?

I really don't know about the reservist side, I was active the whole time. True, medics can go a lot of different places. You could be in a hospital in Germany or a line medic with an Infantry unit. Do you have an infantry unit you work with? How does that work? On the active side, the medics are already part of the battalion (not attached) that they work with.

PiccoloNamek

09-02-2005, 03:46 AM

KujiInRetsu

09-02-2005, 03:50 AM

That's my point. They don't deserve God's wrath, and I certainly don't appreciate people thinking they're high and mighty enough to condemn people to it. It's that arrogance that I truly disapprove of, and that's what gets me so pissed off in this case.

Sometimes, when I look at those pictures, I wonder, are we seeing the same United States of America in those shots? I could swear it was some sort of third-world nation on the screen the way that city is shot with those cameras. It's just horrible down there.

StormShadow

09-02-2005, 12:42 PM

I really don't know about the reservist side, I was active the whole time. True, medics can go a lot of different places. You could be in a hospital in Germany or a line medic with an Infantry unit. Do you have an infantry unit you work with? How does that work? On the active side, the medics are already part of the battalion (not attached) that they work with.

It has been my understanding that with the reserve, I as a medic could either be sent with my reserve unit, at Madigan army hospitol, or be sent individually, like if the 3 ID needed more medics, or I could request ot be sent individually. The work that I do as a erservist is all in my reserve unit, wich would be at Madigan. Only downside is if I wait, my unit or myself could be sent where I don't want, as opposed to where I do want I I ask to go myself.

ruaidhri

09-02-2005, 01:54 PM

If there’s anything true about severe weather it’s that it doesn’t give a damn if you’re straight or gay. It also doesn’t care if you’re a millionaire living in a mansion or a pauper living in a rundown shack or apartment. The only advantage the rich had in New Orleans is that they could have escaped Katrina. That option wasn’t available to the poor.

What happened in New Orleans has absolutely nothing to do with God. People, not God, built New Orleans. People, not God, pushed back the water with dykes creating the opportunities for the dykes to fail. People, not God, failed to have an effective rescue plan to cover a long predicted and expected catastrophe.

Hurricanes are not a mystery created by God. They are a natural occurrence. They’re caused by the hot sun and air coming off of Africa heating the Atlantic Ocean. It was inevitable that New Orleans would eventually be hit by a big category 4 or 5 hurricane.

Yes, New Orleans is a city of the poor. Yes, even in the best of times, there’s crime and extreme danger in the vast poor sections of the city. Now, following Katrina and the flood there’s only one word to describe life in New Orleans, scary. Take away food, take away water and take away medicine and the basic conditions that make life livable for even the poorest of the poor and you will have anarchy.

Looting for food can be called survival. Looting for jewelry, VCR’s, computers and other niceties is desperation, fear and anger; it’s anarchy. It serves no purpose other than to destroy. People can’t eat or drink gold and silver. Computers don’t provide sustenance. They have absolutely no value when you’re dying of thirst and hunger. They are simply a manifestation of anger and inability to provide for yourself and your family. I question if America’s wealthy citizens would react any differently if they found themselves in as desperate a situation.

Every day since Katrina I’ve heard the pleas of the people of New Orleans for help. Every day I’ve heard our federal government report that they’re sending aid. Where is it? This catastrophe wasn’t unexpected. What’s taking so long? Why can we send troops halfway around the world to invade a country, remove their government and rebuild their infrastructure while we can’t help our own people in the Gulf States? My opinion is that it was an unwillingness on our federal government’s part to commit adequate money to prevent the unthinkable from happening and enough money to prepare for when it did happen. It will be interesting to observe how George W. Bush will use his folksy, cowboy ways to squirm out of this mess-up.

Opportunities cost is indeed opportunity lost. Our government couldn’t fight a war in Iraq and in Afghanistan, reduce taxes and still secure adequate funds to respond to New Orleans' constant pleas for federal help in shoring up their protective dykes. There simply wasn’t the money. So instead we played Russian Roulette with each hurricane another bullet in the chamber. Now, the federal government is scrambling to appear on top of the situation. The problem is that they never were and still aren’t. The result is that not only New Orleans, and not only the Gulf States will suffer. All of America will be impacted by Katrina. Fuel for our cars and trucks, heating oil and natural gas to heat our homes are merely the tip of the iceberg.

There are only so many dollars available to our government. What they spend in Iraq and Afghanistan is not available for Louisiana or Mississippi or Alabama. They have to come from somewhere. Without increased taxes we’ll have more dollars chasing fewer goods. What’s that called? Inflation! Most of you on this forum don’t remember inflation but that’s where everyone loses because your dollar is worth less and less and less.

So, how does our Federal Government prevent inflation? The only way I know is to either reduce other costs or to increase taxes. Which path do you believe they will take?

This is such a huge catastrophe and such a huge undertaking by an ill prepared government that I am truly afraid that America will never really be the same.

Enk

09-02-2005, 02:39 PM

Yes, it has to be agreed that Katrina hit a very bad spot with a very bad timing. A few years earlier and perhaps it would've been more manageable. And maybe that would've also reduced enthusiasm to go into Iraq. Now resources are tied up in the wars in Middle East. Can the US reconstruct New Orleans even if they receive help from many other nations? Does the government want to reconstruct?

The latter question is humanitarian if anything. I'm asking you Americans now since we don't hear many details about this: has the government taken any real steps in relocation or reconstruction? Have they made any official statements?

Ruaidhri mentioned the russian roulette the gov's been playing with hurricanes. After Katrina struck I've read some articles about the vulnerability of New Orleans due to its location (a freakin' bowl) and the fact that the American government has been mostly dismissing all that is alarming. Truly. That's one damn big bullet to play russian roulette with and they just got hit.

I hope that your government realises that arrogance and foolish pride have to go. The events of the past few years quite clearly state that not even America is able to stand alone (well, practically, you haven't been able to do that for a long while because of oil and same goes for the rest of us too). I hope that the rest of the world also realises that what we need is unification, not separation. There's no such thing as a stand alone nation.

One funny thing about how my view of America has changed is that, well, I wasn't too sympathetic towards the US before I came to this forum. Today, if someone throws comments like "The Americans deserve what they're getting" I feel like punching them.

These are dark times indeed.

ruaidhri

09-03-2005, 04:16 PM

It’s interesting that there are now five threads on this forum all dealing in one way or the other with Katrina and its aftermath. First, there’s this thread: What the rest of the world thinks of America. This was a natural because the disaster did happen in America and the thread is about America. Then there are two single issue threads. One decries the price of gas: Gas Price $3.00. The other (although I can’t load it) appears to praise countries that have offered aid to the U.S. because of Katrina: Katrina Aid, respect these countries. Then, there’s the fourth thread simply named: New Orleans. New Orleans is, of course, the focus of much of the news and the cause of most of the angst over the slow reaction of the government. And, the fifth thread is: America: State of Emergency.

My question is: Doesn’t anyone take the time to read existing threads before starting another?

I’m interested in everyone’s comments regarding this catastrophe. It would be nice if all the comments were centered in a single thread. That would make them far easier to read and to write a response. But they aren’t so I’ll have to live with what we have.

The problem is that without frequent posts a thread is soon lost to sight. By having multiple threads to discuss the same issue, that disappearance happens very quickly to one or more of the interrelated threads. If you’re interested in a topic it’s necessary to track all related threads. Because not everybody does this the same issues can be brought up in several threads. That, to me, is frustrating. My solution is to only respond in this, the original thread, to anything of interest brought up in any of the other named threads.

This is definitely an argument for a special forum for serious topics. As it is now, there are simply too many threads in the General Discussion area. It’s difficult to find a thread that’s discussing an issue of interest. Apparently, it’s far easier to just start a new thread, which oftentimes is redundant.

Anyway, that’s the end of my rant. Considering that it’s Saturday morning and I have several things I have to do I’ll get back later with my comments.

Snake eyeS

09-03-2005, 04:47 PM

What i think of America:
I dont have the time to read this entire thread but i do like to response to the OP.

Americans is hitting puberty, a good example is that they want to lead the fight against terrorism, they have taken upon themselfs to take care of the world. slowly the rest of the world is beginning to see that USA is not longer the country of unlimited cash, suburbs, movies/music and great military force. The day that USA showed itself to the world, we got an insight into a country that is desperatly trying to prove themselfs.. ignoring many calls from within, the USA keeps going outwards.. international trouble, thats where the fun is at. in the meantime USA suffers. seeing how USA deals with Katrina shows where there priorities are.
USA is running on reserve, they have taken to many responsibility's.. Just sort your own problems and then you can help the world again... in the meantime, the world wont roll over and die, we have been around for ages, and we will be around for ages, We dont need USA to take the wheel and take over.
An American salesman ones said to me, that he considered the EU a toothless tiger. My response was that many think that USA is a tiger thats gone mad. i know your not actually going mad, but seeing america portrait itself as a super power, many others see that cardhouse is slowly falling apart.

I hope USA will be over their puberty soon, so that we can finally work on a united world.. EU is making a step in the right direction, its just waiting for others to follow.

From the viewpoint of an 22 year old dutch man. this is my view on the great US of A.

caseylim

09-03-2005, 06:32 PM

I think USA is the trying to think that they are the most perfect creature in earth. I hate it when they say " America, the most livable place in the world". Yeah, they did that by monopolying other peopole and go aroundplaying politics like they are good.
I hate it when iraq invation, the citizens" I 'm sad that our country is his creul, we want peace" that bull shit. Not all but some.

Anyway, I thank US for being the a an advance country, sharing some of their techs, helping the world after destroyiing some, anyhow US is bad but not worse but is aboit worse, arrghh I not sure if they're good or bad.

anyway, US is......

baslisks

09-03-2005, 09:11 PM

There need to be moer boards news broad casts that have good info and better coverage of everything. People I talk to every day are completely lost on whats happening. Its like they are being with held knowledge of their own lives. Don't be a political maniac just support what you say with FACTS. Point the people who don't believe you to the facts and I think it will change. hopefully. I've always been an optimist.

ZMarie

09-03-2005, 09:33 PM

Nikki

09-10-2005, 05:38 AM

An American salesman ones said to me, that he considered the EU a toothless tiger. My response was that many think that USA is a tiger thats gone mad. i know your not actually going mad, but seeing america portrait itself as a super power, many others see that cardhouse is slowly falling apart.

I don't know about falling apart, but the foundation sure is crumbling a little bit(No, they're not the same thing. ^.^). My opinion on this is, I think we're taking on too many things at once, and because of this America appears to really be "a tiger that's gone mad".
Instead of playing the hero in Iraq, and setting up democracy in a country that will *never* fully accept it, I think we need to turn our attention to the problems we're having in our own country.If anything, Katrina has been a eye opener for America.
To put it simply, America has failed.
We knew that this was coming, we knew that the destruction would be terrible, but we brushed it aside, and only when it hit did we go "Oh shit!". We could have evacuated people earlier, we could have done so many other things that could have helped to alleviate the total destruction. We didn't though, because it didn't become real to us until the damage was done, and our countrymen dead.
America failed.

StormShadow

09-10-2005, 01:32 PM

[QUOTE=Nikki]I don't know about falling apart, but the foundation sure is crumbling a little bit(No, they're not the same thing. ^.^). My opinion on this is, I think we're taking on too many things at once, and because of this America appears to really be "a tiger that's gone mad".QUOTE]

I think America now is kind of like that "I love Lucy" Episode with the choclate candy factory. The conveyer belt has been going the same speed, but the US has been taking on new responsiblities and can't really handle it. I suppose that this is more for the love of talk than action. Let's look at any topic, say Gun rights. You could
A) Do nothing. Doing nothing doesn't really work back home, it won't get you re-elected, and who doesn't want to be re-elected?
B) Make efforts to enforce the laws in place. But that isn't really your job, is it? The most you could do about that is make a committee, which will continue to talk and not take action, then make a report that other people will talk about before deciding on it, and because the issue is so devided, probabloy nothing will come from these discussions on the report from the committee.
C) Create more laws on guns. This plays for the people back home, who look at you as a crusader, a person who is trying to save families, or if your against it, a person trying to keep the liberties that American's have. It plays into getting re-elcted, the goal of every politician. The only problem with this solution is the laws are already in place, why keep adding to it if you haven't tried to enforce it? To me, that's like buying a used car, saying it doens't run, then put on underglow and lower it and make if look fancy, get the new steering wheel. But the underlying problem is still there. Make it work before you try and add more things, what's the point of adding more laws to a policy that isn't really enforced?

Woko

09-11-2005, 09:40 PM

What I think of America?

Well, most of all I fear America. I find the fact that USA is more or less ruled by the corporations very disturbing, most of all because Europe starts to be the same. I also fear the PATRIOT act which forever removes many essential liberties (yes, only for 5 more years... like copyright) and again, Europe plans to follow the suite. And I also fear the (already mentioned) "free trade" agreements that impose American IP & DCMA-like laws to other countries.
Concerning foreign politics, I must admit that they could have screwed it up much worse than they actually did, so it's a good thing :)

Nikki

09-11-2005, 10:42 PM

I think America now is kind of like that "I love Lucy" Episode with the choclate candy factory. The conveyer belt has been going the same speed, but the US has been taking on new responsiblities and can't really handle it.

I like your comparison.
:)

setrict

09-11-2005, 10:49 PM

My response was that many think that USA is a tiger thats gone mad.

The political situation here is divided into two fairly equal parts, so I think you should expand your response to specify a two-headed tiger with ambitions to be pack leader that can't stop bickering with itself. We aren't completely mad, just bipolar and schizophrenic :D

JakeTheSwede

09-12-2005, 03:39 AM

I just came across this site, and this forum and thought I'd post a comment.

I am 'globally apathetic', like almost everyone else, living in a rich developed nation. -I'm a normal/upper middleclass guy and I like my life, like you guys.
When your war was proclaimed, the one that would 'never end' or at least go on for 10-15 years, I thought as someone always does, politics, power and economics. And I was glad I was not on the receiving end of all that power.

I thought no more of that, and did my usually routine of 'twisted morality', and tried to 'shake' all of that out of my mind. I was born in a rich nation, and some people are impoverished, and I care some, but not enough, to stand up for my self. What my government does concerns me, but my 'feel good' apathy makes me naive and uninterested. So what if my government joined the band of international brother for a war in afghanistan to secure a pipeline. There perfectly sane politicians, on the far left front, it must be the right thing to do. And the 'socialist left' in power in France and Germany does the same, so who am I to complain.

I have to accept this, if I want low gas prices, cheap plastics, and tarmac and all that stuff. You could say; I could almost not think of a world with out it.

So here I am, never hungry, I hardly have to do anything, and I can buy almost what ever I want. And I am enormously wealthy compared to the 10's of thousands that always seam to be dieing in 'some poor nation somewhere '. 25 000 'non people' killed in Iraq, that's nothing, I swallow that number at breakfast between bread slices. And now I am thinking of travelling to Japan(I really am), learning a new language , which is perfectly acceptable things for someone in a developed nation, not caring.

-Some thoughts from a non American, almost feeling like a part of the American society; thanks to almost getting all of the news channels, big tv-shows, and movies delivered to this small almost-english-speaking-nobel-prize-awarding-northen-country.

peace out or something
/Jake

PS
The US defence budget 2003 was ~46% of the global total and less then ~2% of that money was spent outside of the home market. And in 2005/06 the US will equal the rest of the world in 'defence' expenditure. /PricewaterhouseCoopers

http://monh.no-ip.org/Pipelinemap.gif

StormShadow

09-12-2005, 04:23 AM

DarkFire168

09-12-2005, 08:03 AM

I don't care what any of you say. McKane. Will. Be. President. In. '08. I will personally see to that.

Bob

09-12-2005, 09:33 AM

I don't care what any of you say. McKane. Will. Be. President. In. '08. I will personally see to that.

So, youre going to kill to jeb bush?

DarkFire168

09-12-2005, 09:50 AM

Damn. Skippy.

I will personally stop anyone who attempts to get in the way of future President McKane. That is a solemn oath.

JakeTheSwede

09-13-2005, 04:54 AM

I find it EXTREMELY offensive to suggest that a war against Afghanistan was created to allow for the construction of an oil pipeline. ONly other comment I will make is that I plan to request action in the Afghan theatre of operations. Only comments I will make.

Anyways... my guess would be that you haven't read a lot of literature on the subject of the middle east and central asia.

My dad actually went backpacking in Afghanistan in the sixties, when King Zahir Shah was the countries ruler and later his brother-in-law. Before the 'People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan' (the reds) killed the later and all of his family. see "The Great Game"

"From the British perspective, the Russian expansion threatened to destroy the so-called "jewel in the crown" of India. As the Tsar's troops began to subdue one Khanate after another the British feared that Afghanistan would become a staging post for a Russian invasion of India. It was with these thoughts in mind, that in 1838 the British launched the First Anglo-Afghan War and attempted to impose a puppet regime under Shuja Shah. The regime was short lived, and unsustainable without British military support. By 1842 mobs were attacking the British on the streets of Kabul and the British garrison agreed to a retreat from Kabul with guaranteed safe passage. Unfortunately for the British, the guarantee proved to be worthless. The retreating British column consisted of approximately 4,500 military personnel and 12,000 camp followers including many women and children. During a series of ruthless attacks all but a few dozen were killed on the march back to India."

And the "Great game renewed"

"With the end of the Second World War and the beginning of the Cold War the United States displaced Britain as the global power, asserting its influence in the Middle East in pursuit of oil, containment of the Soviet Union, and access to other resources. This period is sometimes referred to as "The New Great Game" by commentators, and there are references in the military, security and diplomatic communities to "The Great Game" as an analogy or framework for events involving India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and now the Central Asia republics from the former Soviet Union." /Wikipedia

My suggestion would be to watch the Documentary "Why we fight" that they aired on HBO a while ago, or go buy the DVD, and get a glimpse of what's going on. And while you are at it, watching Documentaries, try to pick up "The Corporation", that should clear up a thing or two, I hope. :)

/Jake

StormShadow

09-13-2005, 05:08 AM

The reaon why the US is involved in Afghanistan is because of Al Qeda. To attack a country where a terrorist force openly works with the government, and has large training camps, how does that equate to oil? Afghanistan was attacked by the US all the time, in the form of missiles launched at training camps. And your quotes on there fail to really shed light on a US conspiracy to start a war with Afghanisan merely for oil pipelines.

Afghanistan was the home ground of Al Qeda. This group bombed US embassies in Africa and attacked our towers. At the Duranta Camp near Jalalabad a film was done by Al Qeda in which dogs were subjected to gas to test there lethality. How did a war to dismantle a government that was openly working with those that wished to kill me and my family have anything to do with oil?

Roxie

09-13-2005, 05:22 AM

StormShadow

09-13-2005, 05:37 AM

I suppose because although those countries might work with terrorists, they didn't attack us on home soil. Besides, Saudi works openly with America, we have many bases there. Iran, it's a very interesting place. I would say that public opinion would drop faster then Ron Jeremies pants if even a hint of a wish to attack Iran came from the white house. Too many fingers in too many jars right now.

ruaidhri

09-19-2005, 10:06 PM

Past posters on this thread have charged that Americans are dumb, stupid, ignorant or just plain slow. I've always disputed that because the people I know are none of the above. Today, I watched some daytime TV. Now I know why the rest of the world believes Americans to be dumb, other than the fact we elected George W. Bush our President, not once but twice.

Yes, we do have dumb people in the United States. I'll bet you also have them in your country. The difference with America is that we put them on the TV and appear to glorify them. All I can say is that it is a sad commentary on America. The U.S. is supposed to be the land of opportunity. In a lot of ways, it is. But then, you have to take advantage of the opportunity. You have to make it work for you, not against you. A lot of Americans are just too lazy or unmotivated to improve their education and their lot in life. These unmotivated low income, poorly educated and often violent people are apparently what the rest of the world sees when they think of America.

America has always been the destination for refugees and immigrants. Many made the best of the opportunities and became educated, wealthy and powerful. Others, made the best of their situation and like most people throughout the world, live their lives from day to day. And some, live by hook or crook and mostly crook. They are the ones that entertain us on shows like Cops or Judge Judy. Usually they are people in unfamiliar and stressful situations. Surprise, they are not necessarily bad people. They usually have suffered bad fortune. If there’s any indictment it’s that Americans and apparently the rest of the world enjoy watching them suffer.

Thankfully, most Americans are not in such dire straits. The people depicted on the popular TV shows are a minority within a minority. They are people fighting every day to feed and clothe themselves and their families. They are the ever increasing American poor. I hope that my country will soon realize that we need to help those that need help not the rich through further tax cuts.

If you criticize Americans what are you doing in your country for the poor? How are your leaders attempting to improve their lot?

Marblehead

09-19-2005, 10:51 PM

My opinion of the Netherlands is based completly on the pop band K3. :D

yogi

09-20-2005, 08:53 AM

America appears to be a wasteful self centered nation.

This perception is due to my hideous form of accuiring information .. news. The organisations who I have noticed omit facts and take things out of their original context on a regular basis. As well as not covering information which is news worthy making me suspect of their motivations.

I think there would be far less arguments if we changed the way we communicated. Using precision i.e stating what is actually happening. I personally dont do this but its called E prime.

An example of E prime is-

Regualar: America is a terrible nation.
E prime: America seems to be a terrible nation.

See the second one is an opinion stated as an opinion rather then a fact.

Im aware of the fact im not using E prime.. Check it out on google if it peaks your interest.

Druid

12-29-2005, 11:19 AM

EDITED FOR CONTENT
Mainly things that involve me looking like a prick..

ruaidhri

12-29-2005, 01:41 PM

Welcome back old friend. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen ya. Nikki started this thread a long time ago on the old OP9 forum. When Azrael initiated this new OP9 forum, I reestablished What the Rest of the World Thinks of America.

I like this thread because I like my country and its people. I recognize is strengths and, most importantly, its weaknesses. Over its history, this thread has collected a lot of very intelligent comments from around the world. They’ve offered me true insight into how others view the “land I love.”

When I first resurrected the thread last August I asked the following question: Do you believe the world would be a safer or more dangerous place without America? What do you think?

How do you feel about America, and, most importantly, why?

Praetorian

12-29-2005, 04:30 PM

When I first resurrected the thread last August I asked the following question: Do you believe the world would be a safer or more dangerous place without America? What do you think? - I'm sure that without America there are still plenty of other countries that could keep the peace. I honestly don't know if the world would be safer or more dangerous without America. America got in and started some wars that really weren't necissary, simply due to the irrational fear of communism a while back. I don't know if I agree or disagree with any of the wars. I simply am not that interested in it, I'm sorry.

How do you feel about America, and, most importantly, why? - I feel America could be a great country to live in, for me. It has just about every desirable climate possible, and is a haven for people of middle and higher education. I feel that for middle and lower class people, northwestern Europe would be a better "country" to live in, and for America the middle-upper class and higher is a better place to live in. Of course, in both these "countries" (I'm refering to the EU as a country for convienence) the poor can not survive without the rich and visa versa.

I do feel that some (Far from all. Just a very small, vocal minority.) Americans can be pretty xenophobic and show rather limited knowledge of life outside America. It's not uncommon for me to hear Americans saying they have the highest quality of life of the entire world, which is entirely false. (The United States ranks 10th on the Human Development Index of 2005, which isn't bad at all, but far from the lonely top that some Americans view themselves to be). However, I do get very tired of Europeans constantly bashing Americans for no reason. I don't understand myself. I'm European, and if I did not want to live in America I'd not care one bit about American politics. Simply because America has no influence at all on my European life. Europeans moan for the sake of being able to moan. I don't know why - maybe it's simply as a retort against the nationalistic bollocks Americans spout, jealousy, or boredom. I just know that, especially in these times, I feel the bond between the EU and the US should be stronger than ever, rather than weakening.

To summarise, the United States is more than an OK country in my book. It has its faults - but which country doesn't? I just know that I'd like to leave this boring country with its boring language and its democratic socialist governement and its continiously-moaning populace and leave for a study in the United States the second I can.

DTF-McBain

12-29-2005, 07:35 PM

What I like about this thread is Marbleheads idea that just because he agrees with what is wrong, everything raging lahar something wrote doesn't count, as if it never happened in the first place.
These are the very reasons that many people across the globe are annoyed towards the USA.
The nonsense that some "Canadians" (sounded a lot more like trolls to me) were quoted with on the first page don't matter at all. There are retards everywhere, you just shouldn't listen to them and then write off everything else as anti-american nonsense as well just because these inept fools had nothing to contribute.

Except for the WMD part, I agree with everything RL wrote and I'd add a level of patriotism that is dangerously close to nationalism.
When I read some opinions from Americans on the internet, I wonder if Imperialism isn't a far more suiting term for your foreign politics? You're a democracy I thought, if everyone disagreed with what's going on, why is it still going on? Is it that these idiots yelling "number one, we can do what we want" aren't that uncommon?
Or is it that the majority just doesn't care as long as their living standards aren't threatened?

I don't mind the American culture. The movies, music and fast food, as shallow as it may appear, certainly appeal many people in Europe as well. It's definatly not hurting us, but some European culture wouldn't hurt you guys either ;P

Just my thoughts.

Simply because America has no influence at all on my European life.
Theo van Gogh might disagree with you. I guess you have heared of him. Western Europe is full of muslimic people, how our governments react to the USAs' deeds in the middle east has a lot of impact on their attitudes towards their host countries.

Praetorian

12-29-2005, 08:32 PM

True - but that's a pretty indirect influence, and still within the influence of our own governements.

Druid

12-30-2005, 10:20 PM

It's very hard to earn respect in the national comminity. Ya can't just go and completely blow away some random country like ya used to. Now we have the "UN", which really don't do anything anyways...

Roxie

12-31-2005, 12:56 PM

More from www.theonion.com
'Whoooooo!' Shout Legislators
October 6, 1999 | Issue 35•36

WASHINGTON, DC—With Wall Street booming, the U.S. military standing tall, and Mark McGwire kicking ass and taking names, Congress passed the Helms-Bayh "America Is #1" bill by an overwhelming majority Monday.

"My esteemed colleagues, all of us have long known that America is number one," said Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, announcing the bill's 92-7 passage. "But now it is official. USA! USA! USA!"

Lott's statement, which was met with cheering, whistling and foot-stomping, was followed by the playing of Lee Greenwood's "God Bless The USA"—blared over the congressional sound system. As the song played, a group of senators hoisted Lott onto their shoulders and threw him in the air.

The bill, which co-sponsor Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) called "yet another victory for America," received near-unanimous approval in the House before breezing through the Senate with little opposition. It is slated to be signed into law Friday by President Clinton.

"This bill is for all the hard-working people who have made this country what it is today," Clinton said. "Forget the rest, we are the best!"

First drafted in the House Rules Committee, the bill includes clauses establishing that America has the biggest GNP, the coolest cars, and the best professional basketball players in the entire world. Under the terms of the bill, any American citizen not liking the new law can go the hell to Russia.

The dissenting votes in the House were cast by three Republicans and four Democrats, all of whom were driven out of the Capitol Building to chants of "Communist" and "Benedict Arnold."

"Yes, patriotism does play a valuable role in any society," said Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI), one of the bill's opponents. "But let's not lose sight of things: America has a lot of problems that this jingoistic bill makes us less likely to recognize and address. Take, for example, our failing Social Security system. And our falling export—"

Feingold's remarks were quickly drowned out by loud booing and table-banging.

"Who can deny that America is the shit?" asked Sen. Rod Grams (R-MN). "Who's got the world's highest standard of living? Who singlehandedly created the Internet, the first fully accessible world-wide information database? Who's got the best movies? Whose golf team just kicked the Europeans' asses in the Ryder Cup? America, that's who. We rule!"

Grams then engaged Senate Majority Whip Don Nickles and Minority Leader Tom Daschle in a round of "high-fives, up and behind."

Sen. Jesse Helms (R-NC) taunts a group of visiting French dignitaries.
"It was a great feeling to have such consensus between the two parties," said Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH), who organized a pre-vote tailgate barbeque on the Capitol lawn. "Conservatives, liberals, left, right—for just one day, we put all of our differences aside to come together in agreement that we are the best."

Added Voinovich: "We're better than Japan, we're better than England, we're better than China, we're better than Germany, Canada, France, India, Brazil, Egypt... Need I say more?"

Despite enjoying near-universal support in Congress, the bill is not without its detractors.

"Allocating a mere $55 million for flags and face paint, this bill simply does not go far enough," political commentator and possible presidential hopeful Pat Robertson said. "So much more could be done. What about a superfund for ticker-tape and balloons? What about a permanent float committee? What about mandatory sentencing for those who mess with the U.S.? Don't be fooled, America."

Public response to the bill has been overwhelmingly favorable.

"This is exactly what this country needs right now," said Diane Hebets, a Chelsea, MI, legal secretary. "All I hear these days is negativity about the national debt, our health-care system, youth violence—it's about time we heard something about what we're doing right."

"It's been a long time since I agreed so wholeheartedly with those politicians in Washington," said Orlando, FL, carpet salesman Jim LeClair. "We're number one, and nobody better forget it. You hear me, Saddam Hussein? If you want some, come and get it. I'm right here, buddy."

Bob

12-31-2005, 01:28 PM

Let this thread die

DTF-McBain

12-31-2005, 02:49 PM

given your non-existant participation in this thread so far, why do you care?

Bob

12-31-2005, 02:52 PM

given your non-existant participation in this thread so far, why do you care?

Don't question me

DTF-McBain

12-31-2005, 02:56 PM

agreed, highly unlikely that common sense and reason dictates your postings here.

Bob

12-31-2005, 03:02 PM

agreed, highly unlikely that common sense and reason dictates your postings here.

No, i just don't think you'd be able to understand the answers. You're german aren't you?

Praetorian

12-31-2005, 03:07 PM

My opinion of the Netherlands is based completly on the pop band K3. :D

...

K3 is Belgian.

Vic_Rattlehead

12-31-2005, 03:26 PM

...

K3 is Belgian.

The ulitmate offense to a dutchie :P

paul

12-31-2005, 05:53 PM

People live how they live, I've lived in every hemisphere, democratic or not, and there are always happy/sad, rich/poor people. But in all the countries I've been in, none really cared much about "democracy" as much as America.

Thats something that bothers me, American government officials and even normal citizens tote around the words "freedom", "liberty", "democracy", and "evil" like they justify everything that is going on in the world today. It gives off an air of extreme arrogance and ignorance. Besides, labeling a group of people as "not human" and just "evil" is just plain scary. Thats like a certificate for murder.

Would you like it if some rich man came over, busted down your door and started telling you how to live better, or forcing you for that matter? Besides, democracy isn't all that great, just look at the election process and all the driving forces behind it.

Most people live in the present, and have personal problems themselves. Sure, one might say that "liberating" a country may have good effects on it long-term speaking, but who really cares about that? What they care about is not having their environment turned into a warzone, and not having bombs dropping on their roofs.

The opinions of the rest of the world on the subject of America does have something to do with these issues. I personally think that there are good and bad things about every country. America has contributed things that personally appealing to me, like Hollywood movies, computers+internet, major game industries, brilliant scientists.

I think that what needs to be realized is no one likes others meddling in business that does not concern them. But then again, its such a big part of american history, I don't know if it will ever go away. Back in the days of "speak softly but carry a big stick" and the installation of nearby puppet governments. :p

ruaidhri

01-03-2006, 09:18 PM

I am a proud citizen of the United States. I was born in 1941 before Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. All my life I have been told that I live in the greatest country in the world. Most Americans accept that as a fact without question. Every day at school our children recite the pledge of allegiance to our flag. We learn that Americans fought in two world wars and helped rebuild both Europe and Asia following the last world war. We learn that we defeated Communism and again saved Europe. We tell ourselves that the United States is the home of democracy. I’m sure we can all agree that Americans, if nothing else, are very patriotic.

My family background is Irish and German. My mother’s family was turn-of-the-20-Century Socialist and my father’s, Republican. My mother was the stronger willed and my father just stayed out of political discussions. We never really knew how he voted but I believe he accepted my mother’s political philosophy. Today, I consider myself a Liberal with a definite capital “L”.

I’ve always enjoyed history and I recognize that the United States is far from perfect. I know that often we’re nothing more than a bag of hot air pretending to be what we’re not. We hold our head high and condemn others for doing exactly what we’ve done ourselves but so conveniently forgot. Regardless, I love my country and its people. Why? Because it’s my home.

What is special about my home, the Unites States, is that, at least temporarily, it is the sole major power in the world. In a major conflict between armies and armaments it would prevail albeit at everyone loss. That’s a scary power in any country's control. Often, I don’t believe we properly handle that power. Regardless, it’s there and it is exactly what makes America so important to the world.

Do I support George W. Bush? Well, I didn’t vote for him. I recognize him as our President and afford him the honor and respect that goes with that office. However, I don’t agree with most of what he has done while in office.

So, again, in the next election, I will be campaigning for the Democratic candidates in hopes of returning the Democrats to both Congress and the Presidency. If I’m successful will that solve the world’s problems? Will people in other countries suddenly love America? I doubt it. We’re simply too powerful and too dangerous.

MNJetter

01-04-2006, 01:01 AM

I agree with Ruaidhri in spirit; I was born and raised in America, and thus I love my country and its people, even if the government needs a little (or a lot of) help.

The biggest problem with America right now, I think, is that a lot of people feel helpless. Earlier in the thread, DTF-McBain said "You're a democracy I thought, if everyone disagreed with what's going on, why is it still going on?" I think that a lot of Americans tout the word "democracy" not really knowing what it means, or really realizing that we are not even close to being a real democracy.

In a true democracy, everybody has an equal vote in determining the leaders of our nation. You put your vote in on election day, they count the numbers, and the guy with the most votes gets the win. Not true in America. Here, you put in your vote, they count the numbers for the district that you live in, and the side with the most votes elects a representative person who most likely is going to vote the same way his or her district did (but is not obligated to). It's this person, this member of the electoral college, that we vote for, and it is this person and this person alone who has a real voice in every district when it comes to voting for the president.

In ancient Greece, where the idea of Democracy began, not everybody got to be a citizen. I believe it was all adult male land-holders or some such. But at least in Greece, if you were called a "citizen," you didn't vote for representative government. You were PART of the representative government. All citizens sat in on their version of congress. They all voted for laws and policies, and they drew random lots for which one of them was to be the leader. This isn't even close to the American style of government (which, by the way, is technically an oligarchy, not a democracy), but it comes way closer to the original definition of "democracy."......and not just because they invented the word in the first place. :p

Here in America, there are lots of opinions. Everybody tries to be vocal with their opinions - there is no one "vocal minority" that ought to stand out above the others. Unfortunately, a few specific vocal minorities have more money than the rest of the population, and this is why it turns out that a lot of citizens don't agree with the government's actions. By design or by accident, our government is set up so that the ones with the most money have the most influence. "Most people disagree with the government" might be true, or it might not. But it is plausible. We've got a good system, in theory. But theory doesn't always follow through as action, especially when the people in power don't want it to.

ruaidhri

01-04-2006, 04:10 AM

MNJetter
You are correct. The United States is not a democracy. America is a republic, just as we state in our pledge of allegiance. We don’t truly have a one man (or one woman) one vote system. The first thing we have to realize about the United States is that it is the United States, not the United People of America. We are a collection of states and our constitution primarily protects and represents those states.

Our federal legislative branch of government has two houses.

The lower house is the House of Representatives, which currently has 435 members. When congress last adjusted the total number each member represented 210,700 people. Today, each member represents a whopping 684,700 people. Apportionment of the total membership is by state population with each state having a minimum of one member. The states individually establish the congressional districts usually according to the best interest of the current party controlling the state legislature. By manipulating populations within districts, politicians can strengthen or weaken individuals' opportunities to be elected.

The higher house is the Senate, which has two members for each state regardless of population. Our forefathers created the Senate because the smaller states feared the larger states. In response, the framers of our constitution established the Senate to provide equal representation for each state.

Our executive branch of government is elected by the Electoral College which is in turn elected by the states according to the number of members each has in the two houses of Congress.

So today, citizens of states such as Wyoming have far greater per-capita representation in Congress and in our national elections than individuals in more populous states.

Throughout our history the U.S. has disenfranchised members of its citizenry. At one time electors had to own property. At other times they had to pay a poll tax, which effectively eliminated poor people. And, yet another exclusionary method was to require electors to pass a literacy test, which again kept poor people and most notably poor black people from voting. Even today, politicians are attempting to require special identification for citizens that would make registering and voting more difficult for poor and black electors.

When it comes to elections fairness is not necessarily the primary issue. What’s most important to our leaders is winning and if that means disenfranchising certain elements of the population then that’s exactly what they’ll do. Meanwhile they will proudly proclaim the United States to be the world’s greatest democracy.

Despite all this our governments do change. Parties lose and win control. The system works even if not always fairly. True, money speaks loud. Elections cost a lot of money and those that have the money have far more influence on who gets elected and what laws get passed. No, it’s not fair. But, it’s what we’ve got. I believe in working within the system instead of batting my head up against the wall attempting to change what would be next to impossible to change.

Druid

05-06-2007, 03:29 AM

Becasue I just can't get enough of old topics that make me look like a fool.

Hatsumomo

05-06-2007, 06:01 AM

What is with the thread necromancy? Especially those where the last post was over a year ago?

Cherub Rock

05-06-2007, 06:11 AM

Maybe he is a necrophiliac.

Plekto

05-06-2007, 01:44 PM

Back! Back you foul zombie minions!
(grabs his shotgun)

But seriously - let it die.

ruaidhri

05-06-2007, 09:30 PM

No one was more suprised, nor pleased, to see this thread revived. It "almost" makes me believe it God. This thread has offered its readers many well thought out and expressed comments from all sides of the discussion.

Personally, I enjoy this thread because it asks a very general question, "what the rest of the world thinks of America". Considering that OP9 has members from around the world, I believe it offers us American members better insight in how we're viewed around the world. It also offers Americans the opportunity to define, question or express their love or dissapointment in their country.

Now, considering that this thread doesn't really hurt anyone, I've always wondered why some people are so threatened that they propose it be left to die. If you don't enjoy it, don't post in it or read its comments. If not enough people post it will soon be off the first page and out of sight once again.

Radiance

05-07-2007, 12:12 AM

I'm with ruaidhri on this one. Even if necrotic posting can be annoying this is a good thread. I never did finish reading all of it but it has been one of the best and I would say productive in terms of getting to know the way others think and what they think about the place you are from. (without the ability to travel the globe and see for yourself)

Now.... I loathe the electoral college, but if it was removed from the electoral process, most elections would be decided by new york, los angeles, and california simply due to their massive populations. A few other cities would weigh in but they would make up the largest opinion.

Also, while money is still a factor it is becoming less and less of an influence due to the internet and how freely information is spread. Proof of this are the running counts most news stations have added into their coverage "Hillary and Obama have a very large number of supporters on their Myspace and Facebook pages. :O" So maybe we will see a change in electoral function in my own life-time, which could be a pretty nice idea.

Thats one thing I like about America, change isn't something that never comes around. Laws change, we as a people change, we adapt to make life better (hopefully for everyone).... This isn't something that is exclusive to us but we are very good at it. That is something that can always give everyone hope for tomorrow.

Jetsetlemming

05-07-2007, 12:15 AM

You know what I love about America? I can get a giant bag of Harvest Cheddar Sunchips, access to all the books in my state, just about every piece of information in existence online, food, videogames, all manners of fast food and classy sit-down resturants, a department store, a mall, guns, fishing supplies, a thrift store and clothes... all within my house or at most ten minutes away on foot. :D I don't even live in a big or prosperous town. Really, my town sucks. My house is worth a third of what it should be because of the horrible state of the local school district. And yet it's still wicked awesome.

ruaidhri

05-07-2007, 02:46 AM

You know what I especially liked about the last two posts? Both Radiance and Jetsetlemming had real reasons for liking the U.S.

Radiance is correct. The Internet is changing the rules and is making it possible for unlikely and untraditional candidates to have an impact and actually win and effect changes wihout huge sums of money. My God, in the future, third-party candidates might actually have a real chance of winning. That would be a welcome kick in the ass for both major parties. Americans have always thrived on change and we always do look at tomorrow more than yesterday. That is indeed what I also love about my country.

Jetsetlemming's comments put his love for his country at a very personal level. Actually, I don't believe it could have been said better. He touched on what impacts him every day, his life and his environment. That is truly the America we all see when we wake up in the morning and close our eyes to when we go to bed. Much of the rest is what we've read in the papers, heard on television or read in our history books. But, we truly live our daily lives in jetsetemming's America and that's where we have the most impact.

Personally, I'd really like to read what other members love about America.

bubbles

05-07-2007, 03:01 AM

What I love about America is that it's ~12,000 km away.
I don't love how an utter douche of a cokehead can 'win' the presidency, an out-dated bicameral electoral system where the majority (of the minority who bother to vote) don't elect the winner, and where the repetition of "capitalism" is a virtue and "liberal" is considered slander.

It's all well and good for the world system of politics to have a single superpower, apparently to enable stability in the system, leading to prosperity for all. Then there's the backing of juntas, govt. agencies stirring up trouble in South America, mishandling of illegal invasions, spending ludicrous amounts of money on arms in the face of an even more ludicrous decifit... Bah humbug. Not that China will fare any better in the role.

And then there's the spelling. :/

Jetsetlemming

05-07-2007, 03:05 AM

I hope you enjoy your cow flatulence, bubbles. :D

bubbles

05-07-2007, 03:09 AM

Our cows are on the other island.
Better than the mad cows, kthnx. Where's the beef?
(And in all seriousness, the amount of meat consumed in the US boggles the mind. Not to mention the rest of the food. :x)

Jetsetlemming

05-07-2007, 03:17 AM

Plekto

05-07-2007, 04:43 AM

What I love about America is that it's ~12,000 km away.
I don't love how an utter douche of a cokehead can 'win' the presidency, an out-dated bicameral electoral system where the majority (of the minority who bother to vote) don't elect the winner, and where the repetition of "capitalism" is a virtue and "liberal" is considered slander.

Oh, we don't have the only system where you get absolute morons in power. Italy, the U.K., Japan... we all have rubes for leaders from time to time. Just yes, ours is so much more noticeable this time(and we ususally have better than average leaders, so when it's bad, it's also more visible)

It's all well and good for the world system of politics to have a single superpower, apparently to enable stability in the system, leading to prosperity for all.. :/

Except - there are two remaining superpowers. China never ceased to be one - just in the U.S., our press tries hard to make them as invisible and small as possible. I give us about a decade before China decides that it's fed up with us and tanks our economy.

bubbles

05-07-2007, 05:07 AM

The mad cow craze was actually in the UK, not America. Soy based animal feed is cheap and plentiful in the US and animal byproducts in the feed is rare, and as of 1997, almost completely banned. That almost part was taken care of by legislation passed in 2004 (which is on it's way, slowly, to being implimented >_>). The entire number of cases of Mad cow in America: 3. The entire number of people with Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease: 3. The entire number of Mad Cow cases in Britain: 183,823, with 160 cases of CJD. :O Research is fun. Unlike spongy brain diseases, which I'm sure must be horrifying.
Orly? Denny Crane says otherwise. And for the rest of it...
Soy based animal feed IS NO FUCKING GOOD for cows. Don't have the time to do more googling, but all my hippy books definitely back me up here >.>

And also...
In the month and a half since a case of mad cow disease was discovered in Washington State, Americans have been learning more than they wanted to know about what cattle in this country have been eating.

Though consumers may imagine bucolic scenes of nursing calves and cows munching on grass or hay, much of American agriculture no longer works that way. For years, calves have been fed cow's blood instead of milk, and cattle feed has been allowed to contain composted wastes from chicken coops, including feathers, spilled feed and even feces.

Radiance

05-07-2007, 05:31 AM

Except - there are two remaining superpowers. China never ceased to be one - just in the U.S., our press tries hard to make them as invisible and small as possible. I give us about a decade before China decides that it's fed up with us and tanks our economy.

I'll place money that says otherwise. :D Currently china is -really- worried about their import export ratio. We being the largest consumer and one of the largest manufacturers play a very vital role in this. I don't mean physically manufacturing but the companies you deal with are based here. (No not all, but a good deal of them.) They want more American products as it stands, they want to boost the amount of money their citizens spend so they can continue to grow economically. They want it so badly they have some ten government programs now in place just with that in mind. Its not going to change any time soon.

As far as bush bashing, I'm all for it. (I've never voted for him, but I also never voted for "The Lesser of Two Evils"... people like that shouldn't be allowed to vote.) I however, would like to point out... it could be much worse. ;) As outdated as the electoral college is... well lets put it this way, for the most part it is a system in place to protect the ignorant masses from themselves and protect the educated from the uneducated. Those people that vote for the lesser of two evils or those people that just vote because they're supposed to. Generally speaking these are the folks that don't understand what is going on and don't understand the implications of government policy. Your average person has a hard enough time balancing their check book, do you think they have any clue how a national budget works? Hell no they don't, and as far as they know it doesn't effect them so why the hell should they care?

It definitely is an outdated system, but unfortunately change doesn't happen overnight with the exception of a military coup. It takes time, effort, and planning to enact good policy changes. More than that however, it takes public education. If people don't know and understand what the problem is, then as far as they know... is there actually a problem?

Also, I'm curious, what is the problem with the amount of meat consumed in the US? If we didn't have such a heavy meat industry it wouldn't be meat, it would be something else like rice. Its just an ample food source... so... problem? o.O As far as backing juntas, "illegal" invasions (won't even comment on that), and military spending. Yeah.... war is unfortunately a big American export. I mean look at the successful private military companies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_military_company#U.S._companies) that exist. That has to say something. Hell, thats not even mentioning all of the that the US does business with. (Top 100 as of 2005, sorted by country. (http://www.defensenews.com/index.php?S=06top100bycountry))

Now, again having said all of that, I like my home because for every fault you can name, odds are I can name a positive. Also, don't forget... our country is pretty awesome for the sheer fact that we have the potential to completely change every four years. Don't like it? Give it four years. Its not a perfect country, but the only people that think their home is perfect are the top 1% or people too ignorant for their own good. Regardless... its a nice place most of the time.

Jetsetlemming

05-07-2007, 06:30 AM

I find that ADORABLE that you quoted me as "Bunnyboy", bubbles. Also, I trust sourced facts on a scientific wikipedia article more than a vague statement in a NYT article. :O Also, the idea of calves being fed cow's blood instead of milk sounds just REALLY trustworthy. :rofl: It's a shock and awe "Get your motherfucking attention" article, not a scientific study. Journalists tend to use colorful one-tenth truthful statements to grab attention every now and again, in case you haven't noticed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_spongiform_encephalopathy
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_health/content/printable_version/BSEbrochure12-2006.pdf
We do A LOT that isn't good technically for our animals. Ever heard of veal? :O

bubbles

05-07-2007, 06:49 AM

As outdated as the electoral college is... well lets put it this way, for the most part it is a system in place to protect the ignorant masses from themselves and protect the educated from the uneducated.
vs
Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. ... yadda yadda yadda... that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
What with the waging wars for "freedom" and "liberation", the best place to start is at home. Civic culture does need a mixture of parochial, participant, and subject in order to be effective, but when a majority (I think the ideal was ~70% voter participation) isn't involved, the system fails. That does start with getting the population more involved, but it isn't an impossibility. If anything, look at the Australian model of fining registered voters who fail to show up.

If people don't know and understand what the problem is, then as far as they know... is there actually a problem?
The tree falling in the empty woods still makes a sound, solopism aside.

Also, I'm curious, what is the problem with the amount of meat consumed in the US? If we didn't have such a heavy meat industry it wouldn't be meat, it would be something else like rice. Its just an ample food source... so... problem? o.O
(I'm a vegetarian, so of course, this is biased) :hobbes:
Meat isn't really the most energy efficient food source, and leaves quite a large amount of byproduct in its wake. Yes, my country's methane output is dominated by the amount of livestock we have, but there's still the offal, effluent runoff, energy put in to feed, transportation... Even without the ethical standpoint of such practices as battery chickens and what they do to get veal, the level of hormones and antibiotics fed to the animals that become meat is a little worrying. :/
mmmm, meat (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ua129pv-eKE) .

Angelyne

05-07-2007, 08:19 AM

From Cornell University:

U.S. could feed 800 million people with grain that livestock eat (http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Aug97/livestock.hrs.html)

Recently learned in one of my classes that the world's hunger problem would disappear if we (the global community) stopped raising livestock. Meat production is so horribly inefficient.

Jetsetlemming

05-07-2007, 09:27 AM

Bullshit. Having physically enough food on hand to feed the world != Ending world hunger.

xinster

05-07-2007, 12:25 PM

Trump

05-07-2007, 12:35 PM

It isn't about efficiency, it is about luxury. The US can afford to raise livestock and can profitably market it. Why shouldn't we eat meat?

ruaidhri

05-07-2007, 01:09 PM

All threads are moving conversations with records of what was written. The only problem is that most people, myself included, don’t often have the time, energy or even desire to review all past comments especially when their total number exceeds 200.

It’s really up to the authors to restate and restate their positions and supporting facts. There is something I’ve written a number of times in this thread. Like many Americans, especially those to the left of center, I was not pleased that George W. Bush won the presidency in 2000 despite losing the popular vote. But, I do not support changing the system where electors chosen by the states elect our President.

Before I begin, I refer you to post 193 (http://www.outpostnine.com/forum/showpost.php?p=103629&postcount=193) where I pointed out that I live in the United States of America:

MNJetter
You are correct. The United States is not a democracy. America is a republic, just as we state in our pledge of allegiance. We don’t truly have a one man (or one woman) one vote system. The first thing we have to realize about the United States is that it is the United States, not the United People of America. We are a collection of states and our constitution primarily protects and represents those states.

Our federal legislative branch of government has two houses.

The lower house is the House of Representatives, which currently has 435 members. When congress last adjusted the total number each member represented 210,700 people. Today, each member represents a whopping 684,700 people. Apportionment of the total membership is by state population with each state having a minimum of one member. The states individually establish the congressional districts usually according to the best interest of the current party controlling the state legislature. By manipulating populations within districts, politicians can strengthen or weaken individuals' opportunities to be elected.

The higher house is the Senate, which has two members for each state regardless of population. Our forefathers created the Senate because the smaller states feared the larger states. In response, the framers of our constitution established the Senate to provide equal representation for each state.

Our executive branch of government is elected by the Electoral College which is in turn elected by the states according to the number of members each has in the two houses of Congress.

So today, citizens of states such as Wyoming have far greater per-capita representation in Congress and in our national elections than individuals in more populous states.

Throughout our history the U.S. has disenfranchised members of its citizenry. At one time electors had to own property. At other times they had to pay a poll tax, which effectively eliminated poor people. And, yet another exclusionary method was to require electors to pass a literacy test, which again kept poor people and most notably poor black people from voting. Even today, politicians are attempting to require special identification for citizens that would make registering and voting more difficult for poor and black electors.

When it comes to elections fairness is not necessarily the primary issue. What’s most important to our leaders is winning and if that means disenfranchising certain elements of the population then that’s exactly what they’ll do. Meanwhile they will proudly proclaim the United States to be the world’s greatest democracy.

Despite all this our governments do change. Parties lose and win control. The system works even if not always fairly. True, money speaks loud. Elections cost a lot of money and those that have the money have far more influence on who gets elected and what laws get passed. No, it’s not fair. But, it’s what we’ve got. I believe in working within the system instead of batting my head up against the wall attempting to change what would be next to impossible to change.

Each state is a government onto itself. While the federal government has gained more power over the last 50 years, it is the states that control most of what we consider America. Now, could we change this? Yes, we could. Would that be a good idea? I don’t believe so.

Eliminating the Electoral College and electing our President by popular vote, along with changing the other facets of unequal representation present in our government could, and probably would, open the door to many undesired changes. Consider that changes of the order required to make Americans “more equal” would require a constitutional convention, which would open the doors to all forms of changes, including watering down our Bill of Rights. That’s a path far too dangerous for my taste.

Considering the possible alternatives, I much prefer living in the United STATES of America.

Radiance

05-07-2007, 02:00 PM

What was said...

No offense but you completely missed the point of my post. I stated that the electoral college isn't perfect but its what we have. The issue of voter turn-out that you addressed is a completely different one that deals mostly with ignorance, apathy, and indifference. There are multiple ways to solve it, but the best way by far is voter education, which is a hard task regardless of the resources you have.

Another thing you're overlooking here with your quote from the most intelligent Mr. Lincoln is that the united states is most definitely not now the country our founding fathers set out to establish. One major difference is our foreign policy. You see... we actually have one. (Not commenting on the quality because that is all subjective.) Whereas our founding fathers most definitely supported a foreign policy of isolationism. A policy that changed due to wars we didn't start.

As to my comment on voter ignorance, its a bit more rhetorical than you gave it credit for. If a tree falls in the woods it still makes a sound.... but what is a tree? That make it a little clearer?

As much as there is room for improvement in our government there is also room for a lot of negative change. The US will always strive to be a nation that represents its people fairly, because for as many people that go unrepresented or improperly represented, there are ten times as many speaking out within our republic. Someone making damn well sure their voice and opinions are heard. So as difficult as proper representation might be, there will always be change so long as there is change in the opinion of the people, this is because we are indeed a republic of the people, by the people, and for the people.

(P.S. - No offense intended in my post or my following commentary but there is a bit of irony in the particular speech that you quoted. You see, it was a speech carefully crafted to be extremely patriotic and focus the north's attention on ending the civil war as quickly as possible so that the country didn't have to withstand another horrifically bloody battle like Gettysburg.)

Roxie

05-07-2007, 02:00 PM

Jetsetlemming

05-07-2007, 02:39 PM

You forgot the "grandfather clause" which stated that if your grandfather was a slave, you couldn't vote. BTW, literacy tests (where they'd sometimes shove a chinese newspaper in someone's face), math tests (how many bubbles in a bar of soap?) and general terrorism also prevented black populations from voting.

I would like to know about other minorities struggled with it (Asian, Hispanic,etc)

I don't know if making ppl more "equal" would water down our bill of rights, I would think it would require a widening and strengthing of them.
Most likely they all went through pretty much the same sort of hazing and scare tactics and cheating. I know my grandmother experienced her fair share of troubles for being Native American, and my grandfather hid his Jewish heritage from everybody, INCLUDING my grandmother for his entire life until last year to keep out of trouble.
You can make people equal as far as sex, race, and religon and such go, but not much beyond that. Wealth, attractiveness, disability, langauge, they all have a social and living quality effect that either is inherent to the inequality (disability, langauge barrier), or cannot be changed without lowering everyone to the lowest comment denominator (IMO. My opinions on social engineering and class warfare is just a tiny bit dim). Attractiveness is part of our human nature: Sizing our fellow humans up on their looks is a built in mate seeking feature.

ruaidhri

05-07-2007, 03:01 PM

Yes, Roxie, the U.S. has many instances of injustices brought by the powerful against the weak. All it took was being poor and without property. Indentured servitude, on its many scales, was very inclusive and had no regard for race, nationality or religion.

First, I’m sorry, I’m not familiar with the “grandfather clause” you mentioned in your post. Could you offer more particulars?

As regards a Constitutional Convention, you certainly don’t believe that conservatives and religious zealots wouldn’t play a great role in crafting the type of country they’d like? I believe a Constitutional Convention would open the door more widely to the rich and powerful than to the weak. I believe a Constitutional Convention would play on fears to strip down not enhance our freedoms, especially those in the Bill of Rights.

There is certainly no way anyone could totally prevent a Constitutional Convention from heading in any direction. Who would have the greatest power to effect change and smother all protest?

Be careful what you wish for!

Roxie

05-07-2007, 06:37 PM

The original Grandfather clauses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandfather_clause) were contained in the Jim Crow laws used from 1890 to 1910 in much of the Southern United States to prevent blacks, Native Americans and certain whites from voting. Earlier prohibitions on voting in place prior to 1870 were nullified by the Fifteenth Amendment. In response, some states passed laws requiring poll taxes and/or supposed literacy tests from would-be voters. An exemption to these requirements was made for all persons allowed to vote before the American Civil War, and any of their descendants. The term was born from the fact that the law tied the then-current generation's voting rights to those of their grandfathers.

After the U.S. Supreme Court found Jim Crow laws with such exemptions unconstitutional in Guinn v. United States, a strict application of poll taxes and/or literacy tests would have disenfrachised some whites, and sometimes did so in early years. However, as time passed, states with Jim Crow laws chose not to enforce them against any whites.

These laws had the effect of disenfranchising blacks, Native Americans and certain whites, until the ratification of the Twenty-fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and a 1966 Supreme Court ruling that eliminated most legal barriers to black voting.

In spite of its origins, today the term "grandfather clause" does not retain any pejorative sense.

check this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disfranchisement_after_the_Civil_War#Poll_taxes)ou t too.

ruaidhri

05-07-2007, 08:21 PM

Roxie, thank you for the history lesson. That wasn’t taught back when I went to school. Certainly, the extent to which people hate and the extend to which they cheat always amazes me. Winning and only winning is what's important to these people. I don't believe it would be any different in a new Constitutional Convention.

Today's method of disenfranchising blacks and the poor is to prohibit convicted felons from voting. With so many young blacks having spent time in jail that’s a very effective way to limit their voting power. Intimidation? Well they did it here in Milwaukee. Our federal attorney avoided firing by bringing a number of blacks to trial for actually voting in the last Presidential election because they were convicted felons. One even showed the voting registrar her parole card for proof of residence. None were convicted but although initially on the chopping block our federal attorney was not fired.

Beneath the surface we aren’t all that different from the people living 100 years ago.

Soli

05-07-2007, 08:31 PM

zomg, I've actually learned about some of this stuff in history class. o.o! Jim Crow laws and such.

I've never really been able to experience how living in other countries would be, so I'll hold my judgement on America for now. :P

Roxie

05-07-2007, 08:32 PM

to me, it's really illustrated in the math

The U.S.A. is only 230 years old.
Slavery lasted (legally, not all slaves were freed at the same time) 244 years.
For another 100 years segregation/jim crow laws were in effect.

So far, that's 344 years

The Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964..that's only 43 years ago.

My mother will be 54 this year.

And then there are other things that aren't discussed (in Ga) like the
Chinese Exclusion Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act_%28United_States%29)
The 1906 Atlanta Race Riot (http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-3033)
Rosewood Riot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosewood_Massacre)
Tulsa Riot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsa_Race_Riot)
etc..

I'm just really dissastified with our educational system. specifically all the testing and what isn't taught.

Hatsumomo

05-08-2007, 05:44 AM

Knife-Fingered Sue Sanderson

05-08-2007, 06:17 AM

A shitload isn't taught in American schools. I took an AP U.S. History course in 11th grade. You know how long we spent on the Civil Rights Movement? A poster project to do over spring break. And it was focused only on the blacks' struggle. Nothing about the Hispanic movement that was going on at the same time.

Seriously, an AP class. You would think that things would be a bit more comprehensive than that.

It's just high school though. What can you really expect, even if it is an AP class? I took a few AP classes in high school, too, but they only have a limited amount of time to cover everything for the AP test.

Angelyne

05-08-2007, 08:05 AM

Jetsetlemming

05-08-2007, 08:09 AM

Why?

Roxie

05-08-2007, 11:21 AM

It's just high school though. What can you really expect, even if it is an AP class? I took a few AP classes in high school, too, but they only have a limited amount of time to cover everything for the AP test.I expect it to be like a college level course. I took AP U.S. History and when it came to slavery, do you know what our teacher (who doubled as the soccer coach) said?

"It wasn't really that bad"

Then he went on to describe how they all had houses and how the really bad whippings happened in Brazil.

In my HS, we spent 90 minutes in a class, just as I do in Uni and we ran on semesters, just like we do in Uni, so for me, there is no excuse why it could not have been more thorough!

But I want other things taught in school as well. I feel like school, especially the last two years of highschool, are to prepare you for life--college, trade, or job, whatever that might be. I think people could gain alot if things like money management where taught. People often say that it's the parent's responsibility to teach such a thing, but I find that ridiculous. Everyone needs to know it and it could definently help with the math class.

I agree with Rory's idea about trades and apprenticship (sp).

Trump

05-08-2007, 12:19 PM

For the amount of crap teachers have to go through, I think public school does an admirable job preparing people for life. Granted, it could do a much better job as well.

japanat

05-08-2007, 01:37 PM

The entire number of cases of Mad cow in America: 3. The entire number of people with Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease: 3. The entire number of Mad Cow cases in Britain: 183,823, with 160 cases of CJD.Actually, all 3 cases of CJD in the US were traced to England (they were living there at the time of their outbreak).

******************

I'm an American who has lived overseas for the last 16 years, almost 40% of my life, which has forced me to view my country in different ways than when I was younger - perhaps seeing more clearly both what I love and what I don't.

Things I dislike:

1) Foreign Policy - With the exception of a few cases, like Nixon's visit to China and the economic bankruptcy of communism in the USSR (one of the few positive aspects of the Cold War), American foreign policy is like watching a Keystone Cops movie (Wiki it, young'uns!). It honestly appears to be designed to piss off the world. In the first Gulf War, George Sr did a good, respectful job of enlisting the aid of many of the world's powers to end the invasion of Kuwait. Even the other Muslim countries felt that he treated them with honor and respect. Jr and his Neocons, however, just rode roughshod over the world for the 2nd war, and lost any chance of popular backing for the operation. “Coalition of the Willing”? Pphhhpppttt.

The American Beef Boycott was another case in point. Japan said they wouldn’t accept US beef until the US started inspecting all cows before slaughter. The US refused, saying it would be too expensive, and resorted to pressure tactics. [“a U.S. Senate bill calling for retaliatory tariffs over Japan's 22-month-old import ban on U.S. beef” Kyodo News] So the US lost an estimated $2 billion plus per year [“Australian beef now accounts for 52 percent of the total market in Japan and around 90 percent of the country’s imports – worth close to $2.5 billion last year.” (theage.com.au 3/16/06)], rather than simply setting up a system to inspect all cattle to be slaughtered for the Japanese market, which would have added maybe $50-100/head. A system which American organic beef ranchers publicly stated they’d be willing to adhere to. [“Creekstone Farms suing the USDA over voluntary BSE testing (Reuters 3/23/06)”]

2) Insularity. The fact that 80% of Americans will never see another country, and feel no need to do so (which can be OK by itself); yet they'll slam other countries they've never seen, read about, or experienced. How do you compromise or negotiate with what you don't understand?

3) Religious conservatism. A fundamentalist is a fundamentalist, don't matter if they're Muslim or Christian. I honestly don't see any difference between the basic mindset of people like Bin Laden and Sadr, or Pat Falwell and Jim Bakker, or David Koresh for that matter. They all think that their beliefs allow them to attack (figuratively or literally) and kill innocents who do not share said beliefs, even though the Bible and the Koran both expressly say that it is a sin to kill the innocent.

4) The Patriot Act and other such short-sighted reactions to 9-11 which potentially restrict liberties in a real way, without providing any true increase in security.

5) Prejudiced, small-minded crackers!

6) FoxNews

Things I love:

The things we take for granted. In most cases, clean water and sufficient food of an amazing variety. Even the completely destitute and/or homeless have options from which they can get sufficient food, such as food stamps and shelters, the Salvation Army. There really is no reason for someone in the US to starve, even though their food choices may be rather limited (government-surplus cheese, anyone?).

For the rest of us, there are fresh fruits of a bewildering variety year-round. More than 5 vegetables in the winter (I am so fucking tired of onions, carrots, leeks and cucumbers)! Meats, vegetables and dairy products of generally high quality (this is discounting the arguments in favor of or against modern agricultural method and animal husbandry).

Warm houses! Good insulation! Being able to walk around the house in sweats and a shirt. My house now is a freezer in winter, and an oven in the summer. The floor was uninsulated, I had to install it myself. And you couldn’t get double-paned glass here in Kansai back when I built my house without ordering from Hokkaido and paying 3-4 times the value.

The friendliness of the average American (beware the overgeneralizations to follow); be they gentile Southerner, raucous New Yorker, spoiled Valley Girl or White Trash, they pitch in when there is true need. [Now, I’m not saying that other peoples aren’t the same way, mind you; just that Americans are.]

A justice system which, while it has its drawbacks, is 'generally' fair (in the sense that the rules aren't completely arbitrary or non-existent).While it may be different in practice, the law is designed for equal treatment of all.

Reasonably attractive cities! Sure some aren’t, but at least the skylines aren’t all cluttered with electricity and telephone wiring.

And my personal POV, coming from Colorado and moving to Kansai... I hate humidity! Give me a mountain breeze with the feel of ozone before the summer storms run in any day.

Trump

05-08-2007, 02:56 PM

Don't move to the east coast (of the US)... humitidy will get you there!

Personally, I cannot imagine living the lifestyle I do in any other country. I make it a point not to take all my luxuries for granted.

Hatsumomo

05-08-2007, 09:19 PM

Adding to the list of stuff not taught in public schools: the fact that many newly arrived African slaves brought to the the Americas were Muslim (many slaves came from areas that, at the time, had a predominantly Muslim population).

I'm saddened that I didn't actually learn this until my last year of college--I didn't realize US history and Islam went this far back. Given the current political climate, you would think this would be something mentioned at least once in the public school curriculum.

I learned that last semester, though I kind of already knew because I have an ancestor from Algeria who got left behind in America after the Civil War.

I expect it to be like a college level course. I took AP U.S. History and when it came to slavery, do you know what our teacher (who doubled as the soccer coach) said?

"It wasn't really that bad"

Then he went on to describe how they all had houses and how the really bad whippings happened in Brazil.

In my HS, we spent 90 minutes in a class, just as I do in Uni and we ran on semesters, just like we do in Uni, so for me, there is no excuse why it could not have been more thorough!

Agreed. If they're calling it a college-level course, it ought to be as comprehensive as a college course. The class was longer and more frequent than my Global History class I took in college.

You know why they ended up glossing over modern American history in the AP class? Because the teacher decided to spend three months on the Revolution alone, as if we never learned the Revolution in every other history class since 1st grade. We learned little about the Native Americans, little about WWI, little about the Civil Rights Movement, little about Vietnam, nothing about the Korean War, etc.

Jetsetlemming

05-08-2007, 09:41 PM

The korean war seems to be a popular subject to skip over in most history classes. >_>

Roxie

05-08-2007, 09:55 PM

Seriously. To this day I still know NOTHING of Vietnam (other than it was unpopular) nor the Korean War

Jetsetlemming

05-08-2007, 10:52 PM

Digital Masta

05-08-2007, 11:34 PM

Fermented Yeast Paste

05-08-2007, 11:45 PM

Things I dislike:

2) Insularity. The fact that 80% of Americans will never see another country, and feel no need to do so (which can be OK by itself); yet they'll slam other countries they've never seen, read about, or experienced. How do you compromise or negotiate with what you don't understand?

3) Religious conservatism. A fundamentalist is a fundamentalist, don't matter if they're Muslim or Christian. I honestly don't see any difference between the basic mindset of people like Bin Laden and Sadr, or Pat Falwell and Jim Bakker, or David Koresh for that matter. They all think that their beliefs allow them to attack (figuratively or literally) and kill innocents who do not share said beliefs, even though the Bible and the Koran both expressly say that it is a sin to kill the innocent.

I actually agree with most of what you have to say, but I really disagree with these two points. For your second one, I have never seen any statistic that would back up a claim like that (that 80% of Americans never visit a foreign country). Even if that is based off your own experiences, basing off of mine I still disagree with it. For the part about slamming other countries however, you don't have to visit a country to be able to legitimately be critical of it. "Policies of the United Kingdom are invasive (CCTV)" is different from "All British are pompous pussies that drink tea."

Even though the second one is absolute fact.

Religious conservatism... I'll give you that, but it's not as though it's as rampant throughout the United States as you seem to imply.

I've only skimmed this thread but another criticism I see of the USA is its educational "system". I agree that there are problems with it. However, what many of you need to realize is that, aside from having a Department of Education, there is very little federal regulation of education. Standards, test stuff, etc., most of it all is either state or locally (county, district) controlled. A student in one school can use a textbook entirely different from another student in a nearby city. This is one of the reasons I disagree with the AP system (and also, No Child Left Behind Act): it tries to have nationwide standards to be met when it's really quite hard to do.

There benefits and problems to a system like this. I'm not sure which I'd prefer more.

Vietnam was a war mainly between the south vietnamese/Americans (mostly Americans) and the "Viet Cong", the North vietnamese communists. The original goal of the American campaign was to push the North Vietnamese invaders out of South Korea, which they were trying to conquer. They succeeded. Then someone got the brilliant idea to counter-invade North Vietnam and push communism all the way out and reunite the country, they failed spectacularly, congress cancelled the war and South Korea was reinvaded by the North Vietnamese after we left.
Yeah.

I think you're confused. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v218/Ph4t3/Emot/emot-geno.gif

Mechs

05-09-2007, 12:54 AM

Vietnam was a war mainly between the south vietnamese/Americans (mostly Americans) and the "Viet Cong", the North vietnamese communists. The original goal of the American campaign was to push the North Vietnamese invaders out of South Korea, which they were trying to conquer. They succeeded. Then someone got the brilliant idea to counter-invade North Vietnam and push communism all the way out and reunite the country, they failed spectacularly, congress cancelled the war and South Korea was reinvaded by the North Vietnamese after we left.
Yeah.

Actually, the Vietnam war was a war between Norht and South Vietnam with major support from the United States. The "Vietcong" were guerrilla unit that worked with the North Vietnamese. What most people don't understand is that the Vietcong played a minor part in the war, especially after the Tet Offensive in 1968 that nearly wiped the Vietcong out.

And you did mix wars. What you just described was the begining of the Korean War and the end of the Vietnam war.

Radiance

05-09-2007, 01:03 AM

Wow.... so I think I'm actually a little offended. First I was just going to overlook it because frankly it isn't a big issue. However, since someone specifically went and quoted otherwise to point out items they disagreed with, I will go ahead and point it out.

5) Prejudiced, small-minded crackers!

While I would never deny there are a large number of small minded ignorant "crackers", especially in rural America. I will -gladly- point out there are also a large number of prejudiced, small-minded individuals of other skin colors and nationalities. Hell, I would be willing to wager there are just as many well educated and financially well to do prejudiced people (of all skin colors) that you just don't hear about as often. Furthermore, This kind of bigotry isn't exclusive to American "crackers". I don't know what your own personal experiences are, but I would ask that people refrain from such racially charged statements.

Jetsetlemming

05-09-2007, 01:12 AM

Actually, the Vietnam war was a war between Norht and South Vietnam with major support from the United States. The "Vietcong" were guerrilla unit that worked with the North Vietnamese. What most people don't understand is that the Vietcong played a minor part in the war, especially after the Tet Offensive in 1968 that nearly wiped the Vietcong out.

And you did mix wars. What you just described was the begining of the Korean War and the end of the Vietnam war.
>_>; I was going by what I learned in high school history 4 years ago. EXCUUSE ME, PRINCESS(es, since there were three of you who pointed my mistakes out >_>)!
LOL I just reread what I said and I specifically say "South Korea was reinvaded by the North Vietnamese after we left.". :rofl: Yeah, what was your first clue I mixed up the wars?

Mechs

05-09-2007, 02:10 AM

The original goal of the American campaign was to push the North Vietnamese invaders out of South Korea, which they were trying to conquer. They succeeded.

This right here :D.

We never fully succeeded in kicking North Vietnam out of the South. We did in Korea though (With the help of the South Koreans, British, Aussies, and 13 other UN countries.)

Jetsetlemming

05-09-2007, 02:30 AM

I did it twice. :box: Oh my.

japanat

05-09-2007, 06:52 AM

Wow.... so I think I'm actually a little offended.
While I would never deny there are a large number of small minded ignorant "crackers"... ...This kind of bigotry isn't exclusive to American "crackers". I don't know what your own personal experiences are, but I would ask that people refrain from such racially charged statements.Didn't mean to offend you there. I'm not a Southerner, I actually didn't know the true meaning of the word until I reread Roxie's post. In the area where I grew up, 'cracker' was synonymous with 'bigot' or 'small-minded', and we used it no matter what the person's color. 'Honky' was reserved for whites.

The point of my post was small-minded people who over-react about little things. Case in point: Freedom Fries. Please. If the politicians or people are angry with France because they don't support our little war, OK. I don't agree, but I'm cool with that. But changing 'french fries' to 'freedom fries' was the kind of small-minded, unthinking reaction that I was talking about. After all, 'french fries' are an American food, aren't they?

I honestly don't think there is a problem with not liking something about a country, its politics, or its culture. Your likes and dislikes are a product of your own upbringing. But I think people need to address the issue, not start this knee-jerk, cheerleader rah-rah that "We won't eat french fries!" when the only people that affects are the American potato farmers.

Psychochink

05-09-2007, 07:18 AM

Case in point: Freedom Fries. Please. If the politicians or people are angry with France because they don't support our little war, OK. I don't agree, but I'm cool with that....

Actually, this particular issue drove me to coherent rage (you know, as opposed to incoherent rage, I ranted about it) and is a big part of my ongoing criticism of America and a significant proportion of its populace.

America is really, really good when it comes to its international policy at being friendly when it's got some immediate gain at hand, and then promptly forgetting that anything ever happened.

The oft-used modern example of this would be getting all chummy with Afghanistan when it could be used as a tool to irritate the USSR.

Many Americans (right behind the English) are great proponents of French jokes, take smug pride about 'saving their asses in the war' and during the recent Iraq disagreement pretty much began looking at France as the enemy.

But if there's one country that America owes more to than any other, it's France.

Study your own history much? Little thing you're so proud of called the War of Independence? You do realise whose involvement stopped the British from crushing that rebellion? That national symbol in New York harbour that you're so proud of? Who gave it to you as a gift?

Hey, I'm not a huge fan of France - but then my country doesn't owe them it's existence. We did owe the U.S. for helping out against the Japanese threat in our sphere in WWII and hey, whaddaya know, which were the countries that went along with it's 2003 foreign adventure (despite 70% opposition, here)? We remember our friends.

Radiance

05-09-2007, 08:57 AM

Said some stuff.

Thats cool, I can appreciate that. I didn't stop to consider that it could have been treated with different meaning than the one I have always heard here in the south. My offense was under the assumption that you were using the same. Guess thats what happens when you "ASS-U-ME" :D

Now I know, and knowing is half the battle... GI-JOE! :O

ruaidhri

05-13-2007, 11:54 PM

Roxie, I agree, discrimination is about the numbers. Many groups of early American immigrants initially suffered discrimination but lived to prosper and ultimately be assimilated within the great society. However, there are several exceptions, Native Americans, Blacks, Hispanics and Asians. The big reason, I believe, is skin color. It was much easier, for example, for a German to blend into society and, following several generations, to become “one of us”. But skin color doesn’t fade and intermarriage is not as prevalent as between, for example, Germans and Irish. If a person has any noticeable Black, Hispanic or Asian blood they are classified as Black, Hispanic or Asian. I’m just White; the fact that I’m partially German and partially Irish and English doesn’t come into the picture.

I grew up and went to school in the 1940’s and 1950’s. We knew generally about the Jim Crow Laws but did not learn the specifics. We didn’t have any noticeable population of Hispanics or Asians in Milwaukee. We did have an ever increasing number of Blacks moving North for jobs in our factories. With the Northern trade unions these were good jobs with few required skill sets. With hard work these new residents were doing alright for themselves. If everything had continued to work as it should, their children’s children should have been going to our colleges and moving up in society.

But that didn’t happen. The North wasn’t as liberal as they believed themselves to be. It was OK to decry racism in the South so long as Blacks did not move next door to their own houses up North. Those blacks that did move out of the poor neighborhoods were hated and made to feel uncomfortable. The inner cities were becoming more and more crowded and the white exploiters of any race saw an opportunity to make money. The block buster Realtors swarmed lower middle class white neighborhoods. First, they would sell a nice house to a black professional, a Doctor or Lawyer. Then, they would go around to the ignorant and fearful neighbors and say “Blacks are moving into the neighborhood. We’ll buy your house (for a ridiculously low price); if you don’t sell it will be worth less than half in a few months. Many sold. The Realtors would then sell to more Black professionals at high prices. More whites panic sold. Then the Realtors bought houses for even less. Soon, the whites fled the neighborhoods with many homes selling for escape prices. Many were rented out as the affluence of the residents went down.

Eventually, this all boiled over into race riots in the North. In response, the government attempted to correct the ills by forcing integration. That’s when the real exodus happened. Those that could got out of the cities and moved to the suburbs where there children could go to schools untainted by anyone different. The truly wealthy sent their children to very exclusive private schools. Oh, Blacks, Hispanics or Asians could move into the lilly white neighborhoods (and, at least today, they are welcomed) but the culture is different and the just don’t feel comfortable evidenced by the fact that they just don’t stay very long. People that don’t live together and play together don’t really get to know each other.
Then, the world changed again. Americans bought more than they sold to the world. American factories cut back production, moved to third-world countries or shut their doors. In all instances it was the up and coming Black, Hispanic or Asian that suffered the most. Many didn’t have the skills or education to move into new jobs or valued trades. The government no longer even attempts to help other than with words. The only word that’s important is “taxes”. We don’t want to pay for anything, except maybe wars.

So, where am I going with all this? I’ve had my eyes open for the past 50 years. If the Blacks, Hispanics, Asians or any other discriminated against group of Americans wants to move up in the world (s)he must stop worrying about the past and look to the future. They must work to assimilate, not separate. And, they must work to build bridges not fear, resentment or distrust.

While I certainly support government intervention through meaningful programs to educate skilled, degreed workers of all races, I know it’s going to cost a lot of tax dollars. I look at those dollars as money well spent because it would create a better, more equitable America for my children and my children’s children to live. But, I’m also smart enough to know that not enough other Americans share my belief, at least not in the current political environment.