Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What "arrogance?"
Arrogance would more fit Japan and Germany in the '30s and '40s with their attempting to conquer the world.
America is actually the opposite of "arrogance," we liberate countries. Even at the cost of hundreds of thousands of our soldiers' lives.
yep. we liberate countries at gunpoint. as i said before in this thread, all the war we have been in the last hundred years can't all be innocent self defense and captain justice business.
and also like i said before, we aren't just some innocent and neutral bystander scratching our heads about world events.
to a certain extent i can see us helping the world, but to another extent we do plenty of firing our 6 shooters in the air and thumping our chest for no reason other than seeing who's is bigger.
Can you think of another method? I don't think a reasonable conversation would be very effective with the oppressors being discussed. People are oppressed at gunpoint.
Oh, back to the ridiculous "oil" claim. Just when do we "take" Iraq's oil? That has been the claim since the 1991 Gulf War and I'm still waiting for it to happen! And we don't want to liberate Iran; we just don't want them to have nuclear weapons.
Where would the world have been in the 1940s if America didn't exist?
Terrorists are not entitled to "due process." A war means you defeat the enemy, not worry about garbage like "due process!"
i don't know about oil, but i do know that of all the countries in the world the US is the only nation that has ever used a nuke on anyone. in that other countries have plenty of reason to fear us. it is the innocent bystander thing i was talking about. i can understand that it is unsettling to think iran would have nukes, but what does that say when we tell them that only we can have nukes. other countries have nasty weapons also, countries that don't like the US any more than iran does.
i will say that in the 40's WWII was necessary, that was about the only war i can see as reasonable in the last century.
and the due process is being denied to people that haven't been convicted of anything, only suspected. the people on a little prison in cuba that were denied flamboyant lawyers. that issue alone is such a blatant atrocity that words cannot describe it.
How about Korea? You'd have no problem with every Korean eating roots and doing cartwheels for Kim Bad Hair?
I found this poll interesting.
Seoul (AsiaNews) – If Washington decides to attack North Korea's nuclear plants without the go-ahead from the South Korean government, Seoul should ally itself with Pyongyang. This is the opinion of 47.7% of South Korean youth as revealed in a survey conducted by the Korea Times.
The survey was carried out from 16 to 19 February on a cohort of 1000 youth who will go to the polls to vote for the first time in the 2007 presidential elections.
Out of those interviewed, 40.7% said Seoul should remain neutral in case of war, while 11.6% said they were in favour of an alliance with the USA.
I say we take a year off in terms of foreign aid, investment, military assistance, etc. If there is a major disaster somewhere outside the US, well, we should give some money of course, but not to the extent we did in Indonesia (boy did people love our military then didn't they?). Anyway, now that we reduced our foreign influence I can guarantee you that many of these countries that b.itch about us will be crying for us to help. Now, I also know that there will be some things they'll cheer about and rightly so, but for the most part, American "interference" will be sorely missed. Maybe Iraq will take care of itself. If so, terrific! Carry on. If not, well, hey, we'll come back in a year or we can come back now but we want a huge discount on oil.
An added bonus of this "year off" would be we can take the money that would normally allocated to foreign assistance/investment, etc. and put it back into our own economy.
well i for one have never said that america doesn't help countries, i have said a few times in here that they do. but as i have also said before, we do plenty of chest thumping firing our 6 shooters and pretending a major world force such as ours will only change the world for the better when it is ran by politicians that are funded by well to do corporations. you cannot tell me that of all the influence the US has on the world, that none of it has gone to ignoble, corrupt, greedy agendas.
america, like any nation is built on people, people are fallible and governments are made of these fallible people. we can't look at things with the comic book syndrome (all good or all evil), we have to realize that good people make bad decisions, and vice versa and that no cause and no nation can be totally good at all times. but to deny that and stuff it under a rug isn't very conducive to the good side of anything, it only presses ignorance which creates more problems.
Understand?! I don't give a rat's be-hind what the "rest of the world" or Commie China or the "European street" or the "Arab street" thinks of us.
Nations don't have feelings; nations have interests. It is in our national interest to be strong, so that we can remain safe and free. If other countries have problems with that...well too stinkin' bad!
I'd rather the United States be feared by our enemies than loved, anyway.
'Nuff of this "one world" kumbaya crap!
funny, it is difficult to have hate without fear, maybe that's where the enemies come from?
you cannot honestly tell me that being strong safe and free is our only interest.
Can you think of another method? I don't think a reasonable conversation would be very effective with the oppressors being discussed. People are oppressed at gunpoint.
that says enough in its own.
liberating people, and bringing them democracy is akin to killing an idea. We can kill all the "terrorists" we want but no one can ever, ever kill an idea.
liberating people, and bringing them democracy is akin to killing an idea. We can kill all the "terrorists" we want but no one can ever, ever kill an idea.
It seemed to work in Germany even though the ideas of Nazi's still exist. The goal is to defeat them to the point where you are able to put in a different idea. Many ideas exist, but that does not mean that they are allowed to take over a society.
Seoul (AsiaNews) – If Washington decides to attack North Korea's nuclear plants without the go-ahead from the South Korean government, Seoul should ally itself with Pyongyang. This is the opinion of 47.7% of South Korean youth as revealed in a survey conducted by the Korea Times.
The survey was carried out from 16 to 19 February on a cohort of 1000 youth who will go to the polls to vote for the first time in the 2007 presidential elections.
Out of those interviewed, 40.7% said Seoul should remain neutral in case of war, while 11.6% said they were in favour of an alliance with the USA.
Irrelevant speculation with a proviso as big as all outdoors "...without the go-ahead from the South Korean government...").
You like Kim the movie star, bily4? Wouldn't want to see a regime change there?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
