It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ANOK
Or could it be that most ppl when they say bush they don't literily mean just the one man...
Originally posted by launchpad
Let the whining liberals and tree huggers go fix the humanitarian problems then when they get killed we'll have that many less to listen to.
Originally posted by Pyros
Originally posted by TheShroudOfMemphis
America needs to change to fit in with the rest of the world instead of trying to control it. Doing this will encourage a lot more global support and appreciation for America and it's efforts. Until then, it's all we can do to avoid getting in your path to self-destruction and trying not to be pulled down with you.
Hmmm. We need to change and try to fit in. Really. Fit in with who? Iran? Cambodia? North Korea? Syria? Libya? Sudan? Bulgaria? China? Venezuela? Cuba? Russia? Angola? If fitting in means becoming more like these places and less like what we are right now, I vote that we don't change a thing, thank you very much....
The world is full of doers and sayers. The US is a country of doers. Our 200 year history makes this fact fairly self-evident. No need to drag out the overly long laundry list.
Sometimes we do the wrong thing. That is the price and risk of being a doer. But our fate is firmly in our own hands, and if we fall to ruin some day, we will at least take comfort in the fact that is was our oun fault, and that we were not victims of another. If Americans are not one thing, we are not a country of victims. Being victimized is the one sole thing that every American finds completely unacceptable. Victimize us and you will feel our wrath. That is not a prideful statement - it is just the way we are constructed, and we talk and act based on this national sense of invulnerability. You are probably right when you say that most Americans feel superior to the rest of the world. That is beause we have seen the rest of the world and we are unconvinced that your alternative ways of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness are superior to ours. We know a good thing when we see it. Ours isn't perfect, but its the best available that we've seen.
I, for one, am not interested in "changing" to make the rest of the world happy. Great leaders do not change to suit the desires and wishes of those they lead. They make bold decisions and those who desire to follow will do so. Leadership by example is a sword that cuts both ways, and we are currently in a period were our leadership is alientating more than it is inspiring. That will have to be dealt with, and our government is design to not allow that type of situation to continue. Soon enough BushCo will be gone and things will change for the better, this we know. But if you really think that we will "change" they way we do things in order to "fit in" with the rest of the world, you are wrong. Our forefathers came here to be rid of the like of "the rest of the world". What we set up and now have here is certainly different then everywhere else - and I wouldn't trade it for the world.
Originally posted by snafu7700
the problem, as i see it, is that nothing the US does will ever be good enough for the rest of the world. let me explain.
in 83, we went into beirut with EMPTY WEAPONS to insure that no soldier accidently started a firefight with either side. we went in for humanitarian reasons because the world was in an outcry over the bloodshed. we ended up with a car bomb killing a huge number of marines and sailors.
then we got blamed for pulling out when the going got rough.
93, somalia. another humanitarian mission due to the world outcry over bloodshed. we had absolutely no other goal than to stop the bloodshed. again, we lost alot of guys over that. again, blamed for pulling out when the going got rough.
95, bosnia. we did stop the bloodshed there. but when we pulled out to take care of our own problems after 9/11, the UN bungled the job. again, we got the blame.
01, afganistan. we had every good reason in the world to be there. we have routed out the radicals and set up a democratic govt. and although we've got a long ways to go, and are still fighting the taliban in spots, we have made definite progress, but its not good enough for the world.
03 - present, iraq. now, as i have said in many other threads, i do not agree with why we went in to begin with. but if we leave now, we will once again be blamed for the bloodshed and civil war that will increase ten-fold. if we stay we get blamed for the present bloodshed.
nothing we ever do will be good enough for the rest of the holier than thou world (who incidently, seems to be content to sit on there backsides and watch the US either fix it or screw it up, and then comment later).
I'll step down off of my soapbox know and take the hits that i now are coming....fire away guys.
edited for typos.
[edit on 13-10-2005 by snafu7700]
[edit on 13-10-2005 by snafu7700]
Originally posted by ANOK
There's nothing good and honest about perpetuating wealth. Sorry but that is a very naive assumption.
For someone to gain wealth, someone else has to lose. That's the way it works whether people want to admit to it or not.
That's why the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
If everyone was wealthy in a capitilist society then the economy would just go to hell.
There is no honesty and fairness in wealth accumilation, just selfish justification for having more than you need while people around you struggle to survive in a World controled by those wealth collectors for the wealth collectors.
The rest of us are just being used to create that wealth for the collecters.
The only reason poor people still won't except the truth is because they are stuck chasing the carrot that isn't there. Chasing money that doesn't exist.
Sorry if "our" use of the bush name upsets you so much. Why do you care so much? Have you ever met him? Do you have some kind of personal reason to make excuses for this SSOS?