It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What gives the US special status?

page: 15
11
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 12:51 PM
link   
I realise that some of my post might be offending and I apologise if they were. It can be slightly frustrating sometimes when a discussion isn't going anywhere usefull and gets too far off topic. That was the case on multiple occasions in this thread.

Like I said before I am not a hater... I don't hate anyone and I will never claim that I am better than anyone, or that others are less / worse. Let's put it down to a lack of mutual understanding


I respect everyone's point of view.




posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


I never said enemies were made. I said the fear tactic was used to convince countries to participate. If with hindsight it appeared just an empty statement than that's just good fortune on the side of the ones who chose not to join in (although I have no idea if there are still consequences that we are not aware of, for the countries who refused)



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mokoman

Like I said before I am not a hater... I don't hate anyone and I will never claim that I am better than anyone, or that others are less / worse.

I respect everyone's point of view.


So do I.

Here's the deal. I never stated we were better than anybody else. It does show however that when Americans talk about "our" contribution to the world all of a sudden we are braggers or we think that we are better than everybody else etc. Now why is that?

If a Japanese came on and started to talk about all the wonderful contributions they have made to the world since the end of WWII I don't think people would be upset or if a Russian came on here talking about their awesome contribution to space exploration etc.

Funny that.


[edit on 17-10-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Mokoman
 


Appreciate you clarifying that.


(although I have no idea if there are still consequences that we are not aware of, for the countries who refused)


It's possible, but under the current administration I don't see it being an issue.

I just think the words were used due to what happened. Hollow for the most part.

Otherwise, Saudi Arabia would have had us breathing down their neck from day one.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Constructive criticism done right, should allow differing perspectives to be heard and understood... done wrong, it loses its very definition of no longer constructive and the message is lost, no perspective is heard and understood. Words have a power and how they are framed will make all the difference, in many cases.



Ed: took out quote

[edit on 17-10-2009 by LadySkadi]



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by LadySkadi
 




Constructive criticism done right, should allow differing perspectives to be heard and understood... done wrong, it loses its very definition of no longer constructive and the message is lost, no perspective is heard and understood. Words have a power and how they are framed will make all the difference, in many cases.

You are so right. Which is exactly why I apologised for the way I expressed myself on a few occasions. After reading through the thread again it became apparent to me why our standpoints (mostly Slayer and I) actually grew further apart, while my intention was to promote understanding...

For me, a discussion is not about convincing others of my belief. I use them in an attempt to learn new insights.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Threads evolve just like people (hopefully) and that the ending pages of this thread are very different then the beginning pages is a good example. Pretty typical course; when emotions are high and accusations get flung, those they get flung at are going to fight back or deflect (normal, I think.) Eventually, if ya hang in there and don't drop out too early, maybe it works out that everybody gets a chance to express their point of view... if we're lucky (if it works the way it should) maybe we all learn something in addition to validating something...








[edit on 17-10-2009 by LadySkadi]



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by Amagnon
 


Let me get this straight its the United States fault because the plans they stole i might add had errors and the CIA didn't give them valid copies of the plans. And weren't there scientists smart enough to spot these errors boy they weren't that stupid. You make it sound like they were back engineering alien technology!


I just posted a link - I didn't comment on it more than to say there is a reasonable chance that there is some truth in it?

I don't quite understand your point actually? The US were involved in espionage against the USSR - I don't think anyone is disputing that.

The CIA claimed responsibility for a major gas line explosion - but they never claimed any responsibility for Chernobyl - although the meltdown looks like it was probably espionage as well.

They are my statements, I never mentioned back engineering alien technology - what are you actually trying to say?



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Amagnon
 


Its simple the Soviet union had scientists these scientists would be able to replicate any technology they stole from the United States.Even if the CIA tried to give them a defective copy of the plans don't you think there scientists would have noticed.This story is BS the problem was the soviet scientists developed this on there own there science was sound. However soviet scientists were not concerned with safety so they didn't build in redundant systems etc.You see this in there Space program as well NASA had primary and secondary systems.The soviets didn't when there tech failed people died.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Here's the deal. I never stated we were better than anybody else. It does show however that when Americans talk about "our" contribution to the world all of a sudden we are braggers or we think that we are better than everybody else etc. Now why is that?


With respect, Slayer, perhaps you personally haven't said that, but you seriously can't deny that this site - and this site really isn't too different than a lot of supposedly 'international' communities - has sometimes been awash with that precise sentiment.

At times, this site has been like some peculiar running joke: no army in the world is better than America's, no army in the world has better toys than America, no army in the world is better trained than America's, no country in the world makes better cars or goods generally than America, no country offers better opportunities and way of life than America, no country in the world has better health care than America, no country has as much to offer culturally as America, no country 'gives' like America, no country is as 'free' as America: all these and many more are things I've repeatedly seen on these boards.


If a Japanese came on and started to talk about all the wonderful contributions they have made to the world since the end of WWII I don't think people would be upset or if a Russian came on here talking about their awesome contribution to space exploration etc.

Funny that.


[edit on 17-10-2009 by SLAYER69]


It's not really that funny to be honest. What's actually interesting here is that you've used a hypothetical scenario to illustrate your point. The reality is that the frequency of this kind of thing happening isn't all that high. The rest of the (Western) world just doesn't do it in the way or with the frequency that Americans do.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


Believe me I cringe when I see those types of threads and posts. I find it funny when everybody takes them seriously though.

But isn't that based on different perspectives?

I and many here see a constant avalanche of Anti-US rhetoric but that's OK. After all it's the US we are talking about here. I only get involved when the information that is being spewed are based on fallacies or known falsehoods.




posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


Believe me I cringe when I see those types of threads and posts. I find it funny when everybody takes them seriously though.


You might cringe but we're either rolling our eyes or biting our lips. The trouble is, it's hard not to take them seriously. It's hardly the case that these posters are all being satirical, the sentiment behind them is genuine and, if you see enough of it - and from this side of the fence you do see enough of it - it's hard not to take it seriously as this is the face that much of America presents to the world. What's worse is generally, whilst there's some 'fringe personalities' on here, I'd like to think that this site is at least 'Above Average', if not not Above Top Secret. That the posters who come here tend to either 'smarter/informed' or are at least more 'curious' about the world around them. Now can you imagine that, if this is what non-American posters can face on here, what they have also had to face elsewhere on the sites that are 'Distinctly Average' rather than 'Above Average'?


But isn't that based on different perspectives?

I and many here see a constant avalanche of Anti-US rhetoric but that's OK. After all it's the US we are talking about here. I only get involved when the information that is being spewed are based on fallacies or known falsehoods.



I think a lot of the "Anti-US rhetoric" you see is also based on different perspectives from Americans. There is no constant avalanche from non-Americans though simply because, as vocal as some of us might be, there just isn't the numbers to create an avalanche. Whereas when Americans can get on a roll, then numbers do become substantial. A fair few non-Americans have made the point that there can be 'swamping' when it comes to debate.

Trying to look at this objectively, what I think has happened is that over the last year, there has been less blindly pro-American cheer-leading due to a couple of reasons: the election and the recession/meltdown. During and following the election, there was all the madness, which is sadly on-going, about how "ZOMFG!!!1 Obamara is socialistic! We will become a 3rd whirled country like London where they leave babies to die in the streeet and they have to call the eldest child Lennon after the Russian leader!!!1" Understandably, a lot of Europeans are going to get riled-up by this kind of talk.

Also, a lot of Europeans felt that the election was relevant to them too because American foreign policy tends to involve other countries too, thanks to things like this #ty 'special relationship'. That's on top of the 'you can't be a real patriot, you must hate America' type arguing that seemed to come from both Republicans and Democrats at times.

A similar thing occurred with the meltdown, it was something that's divided a lot of Americans and has brought forth a lot of 'anti-American' sentiment from Americans as well as perpetuating the "ZOMFG! Socialisticisms!!1" arguments. Also, a lot of Europeans feel that America has to take a lot of the responsibility for the meltdown which is bound to result in a lot of angry vocalisation.

Here's a classic difference of perspective for you. Many Americans are genuinely under the impression that they've 'protected' the world and made the world feel safe since WW2. My perception of this, my reality if you will, is that at 41-years-old I grew up throughout the 1980s thinking exactly the opposite. Rather than an American presence making us feel safer or actually being safer, that the UK were more of a target from the East simply because we were being used as a runway for the American Air Force.

That belief, that our association with America isn't unique to me by any means, most of the people my age that I know - from various parts of the political spectrum - feel similar. I know the rest of the world marks us out because of our relationship to America too, whether it's the 'Little Satan' image that exists in the Middle-East or it's the resentment some of Europe feels because we've (badly) tried to straddle the two stools of American and Europe rather than choose one or the other.

[edit on 18-10-2009 by Merriman Weir]

[edit on 18-10-2009 by Merriman Weir]

[edit on 18-10-2009 by Merriman Weir]



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 06:54 AM
link   
nice post merriman.

starred.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr

Bottom line is apparently they dont teach history in your country do they. I suggest you do some research maybe this will help, but again this is very general and i suggest take the time to research what im telling you!




Says he who lives in a glass house and is the same person who delusionally & annoyingly claimed in a thread that Austria belonged to the German Empire just before WW1 & WW2





Bottom line is apparently they dont teach history in your country do they





Meanwhile somewhere in the real world:

A wise and very intellectual person of the world community recently said;

"One of Americans biggest problem right now is their Corporated Propaganda Machine - it has come to a point where most American people now believe in their own propaganda!"

Therefore are most American Corporated School Textbooks and history now written from an American point of view and with the self serving perspective and interests, where often the same Corporations are defending the actions & policies made of other American Corporations and the American Military Industrial Complex who has influenced the American foreign policy since the early 1900.

Now! that's a very interesting "history" for you to research - I'm telling ya!



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Chevalerous
 


I debated if i should correct you or not since Austria was indeed part of the German Empire you have to understand the History of Germany. The Holy Roman Empire, dating from the 8th century AD until 1806, was the first German Reich, or empire, a term sometimes used to describe the German historical epochs. At its largest extent, the territory of the empire included what is now Germany, Austria, the Czech Republic, Switzerland, eastern France, the Low Countries, and parts of northern and central Italy. After the mid 15th century, it was known as the "Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation". The German Empire of 1871–1918 was often known as the second Reich to indicate its descent from the medieval empire. By the same reasoning, Adolf Hitler referred to Nazi Germany (1933–1945) as the Third Reich.

So want to argue some more about history youll loose i assure you.


And to some extent your point of history being made by the victor is valid if Japan had won the war the bombing of Hiroshima would have been a war crime.Or Germany won there wouldnt have been the Nuremberg trials.

PS where you aware Hitler was Austrian??




[edit on 10/18/09 by dragonridr]



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by Chevalerous
 


I debated if i should correct you or not since Austria was indeed part of the German Empire you have to understand the History of Germany. The Holy Roman Empire, dating from the 8th century AD until 1806, was the first German Reich, or empire, a term sometimes used to describe the German historical epochs. At its largest extent, the territory of the empire included what is now Germany, Austria, the Czech Republic, Switzerland, eastern France, the Low Countries, and parts of northern and central Italy. After the mid 15th century, it was known as the "Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation". The German Empire of 1871–1918 was often known as the second Reich to indicate its descent from the medieval empire. By the same reasoning, Adolf Hitler referred to Nazi Germany (1933–1945) as the Third Reich.

So want to argue some more about history youll loose i assure you.


And to some extent your point of history being made by the victor is valid if Japan had one the war the bombing of Hiroshima would have been a war crime.Or Germany one there wouldnt have been the Nuremberg trials.

PS where you aware Hitler was Austrian??

[edit on 10/18/09 by dragonridr]




Please don't make a fool of yourself and try to be quick and Mr. Smartypants with me regarding European history & my own family's history - because you'll loose I assure you that!

First! I'm European and I live in Europe and part of my family is from Germany and we have a distant connection with relatives of the Hapsburg family.

You claimed that Austria until WW1 belonged and was a part of the German Empire which it was not! and I only point that out for the readers that you were wrong then and now!


Austria by that time was ruled by the House of Habsburg, Franz Joseph I of Austria reigned as Emperor of Austria and King of Bohemia from 1848 until 1916 and as King of Hungary from 1848 until 1916.

Charles I of Austria was the last ruler of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. He was the last Emperor of Austria, the last King of Hungary - Emperor of Austria between 1916-18.

And to help you with keeping these two Empires apart you could see these well illustrated maps from here:

Here you can learn about the German Empire even if it's from Wiki - it's correct regarding this
en.wikipedia.org...

And here you can see the Austro-Hungarian Empire:
en.wikipedia.org...


The Second Reich, also known as The German Empire, ruled by the Hohenzollern dinasty, in the areas known as Prussia and Brandenburg, from 1871 to 1919 had nothing do do with Austria by that time as you falsely and delusionally claimed in that thread, because it's a fact of history that Austria by that time was not a part of the German Empire territory.

the Austrian Empire and the Kingdom of Prussia did have a loose confederation that failed and was dissolved in 1866 after the Austro-Prussian War And was 'succeeded' in 1866 by the Prussian-dominated North German Confederation but excluded Austria and the southern German states.

Prussia's influence was widened by the Franco-Prussian War resulting in the proclamation of the German Empire at Versailles 1871 which united the North German Federation with the southern German states. All the constituent states of the former German Confederation became part of the Kaiserreich in 1871, except Austria, Luxembourg, and Liechtenstein.


And the readers can now here clearly see my point with the dangers of simplified & skewed history education and American history revision and its implementation of this in a real life example with a member here who keeps on insisting that Austria was a part of the German Empire just before WW1.

As an European I am often astonished about all the American history revisionist that are allowed to roam around freely here without interference and elucidation of the truth from other well educated members who should step in to support the common sense and to honor their classical education, regardless of nationality.

But maybe they are afraid of the "American Ant Swarm Mentality" that the member "Kryties" so cleverly named it - so they chose to lay low instead of getting into conflict with all these ants!


And for the member who certainly most be a young delusional man to finish his post by asking me if I knew that Hitler was from Austria! - that is an absurd question to ask any educated European!

Regarding this I don't even know if I should laugh or cry about it!

I am a 43 year old University educated European male with family both in Germany, Austria and Switzerland - and this person asks me if I knew if Hitler was Austrian!


Do you really seriously think that I don't know my own European history and know that Hitler was born in Braunau am Inn 20 April 1889 during the Austro–Hungarian Empire?

Well! take an educated guess and please stop insulting my intelligence!

Don't even embarrass yourself any further by answering this post because I'm not going to answer you any further regarding this topic - sorry!

And sorry to the rest of you fine people here - I'm just so damn tired of all history revisionists and their false propaganda!



[edit on 18-10-2009 by Chevalerous]



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:37 PM
link   
it works tho.

they really believe.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


Star for you. Very good perspective.

Thanks



posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


no the US wont attack those countries because they can actually fight back, and it would be a bloodbath for both sides, america only picks on the weak just like a bully does...



posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by LadySkadi
 


watch war on democracy and you'll find out wich countries the us has toppled, they have interfered with almost every country in south america, this is what the cia does, they have secret wars, and most of their efforts are for porpaganda in the US so that you'll think ole america can do no wrong..




top topics



 
11
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join