What gives the US special status?

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by Frankidealist35

 

What international law did we violate? THere was a UN resolution allwoing Saddam to be toppled, And the Taliban would not give up Bin Laden so he attacked us.... and were supposed to sit back and take it/? get a life

I'm not talking just about Bin Laden. This goes way back before 9-11. I recommend you read about our military interventions throughout history. I've gotten over ranting and raving about Iraq being an imperial war. I've read about our true history... and it looks like we've done more harm than good. IT wouldn't be so bad if we were only doing it for humanitarian reasons or to fight the communists but the real reasons for fighting the wars are really far more sinister than we can imagine.

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by Frankidealist35

 

I find it strange that you come up with all of these questions, claim not to be anti-american because you are a US citizen, but have yet to make an attempt to answer your own questions.

You ask so many questions that it would be impossible to have a reasonable debate covering every single one in one thread. Each question is pretty much a thread itself.

How do you view these questions you ask?

Ah. Well that's simple. I think that we should solve our problems at home first. My principle is that we should intervene less in the affairs of others. That's what our founding fathers would have wanted. I mean I understand that we did some bad stuff during the cold war but my opinion on this matter is that it wouldn't be so bad if it were just that we were fighting the communists... but what really woke me up to how much we've interfered with the affairs of others, and, our imperialist attitudes was studying the interventions we've made in Latin America a bit. (www.zompist.com...). That's what really opened my eyes up. So my view is simply that we should work to solve our problems at home here first before we do it abroad.

Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by Frankidealist35

 

If you think were the only country that meddles in other nations affairs your sadly mistaken.Just about every country in the world has spies and will try to manipulate other nations.So there is no right to do this only accepted protocol if your not worried about what other countries are doing guaranteed your being manipulated by someone.

There is no doubt that other countries do it too. It's just that the US does it a lot more than other countries. It's also that we typically tend to form pacts with other countries and we also help them do it. I think this whole idea of empire building via the Un and the US through peace keeping missions should be abandoned. Mankind as a whole needs to be far less aggressive. It will end up being our undoing if we don't (if we don't act less aggressively towards each other).

reply to post by SLAYER69


the europeans have a somewhat cautious attitude to war right now, they have schooled the world in the art of war for a thousand years, after ww2 the germans and french both decided to use a more civilised approach, soft power as opposed to the states' hard power.2 world wars will do that to you i suppose!
Can you blame them for just wanting to get by on the bare minimum in defence means? but still look at the french and german armies they have top class kit, a lot of men, but not the means and will to deploy aggressivley.
Apart from the u.k which has the means and the will, we just choose the wrong wars as of late to fight.
It may be that the good old u.s is really comparitively young compared to europe and doesnt really have much collective guilt to deal with.

reply to post by hans kammler




The UK so far has proven to be our only true Allie.
Funny that our only true adversary now turns out to be our only true Allie while France apposes us.! Make no mistake the UK will be defended at all costs. Defending Israel will be debated!

I'm also a US citizen, born and raised in Upstate NY (cow country lol) when i speak negatively about america and americans its often a generalization and i am very aware there are many americans who are awake, clued in and who realize their country isnt as brilliant as over the top patriots claim it to be, but that isnt to say that at one time in the distant past America wasnt a wonderful country, it was.. but it has quickly and steadily gone downhill from then.. the arrogance of the majority there is unbelievable, as you say, what gives them the right??? And from travelling and living over seas in Europe i can safely say that Americans arent overly liked, and the attitudes other countries citizens have towards America/ns is far from friendly these days.. and its understandable why..they are the bully of the world, clueless macho type crap bully at that.. their mindset itself needs a complete makeover before anything there can improve.

Originally posted by Full_Vision
I'm also a US citizen, born and raised in Upstate NY (cow country lol) when i speak negatively about america and americans its often a generalization and i am very aware there are many americans who are awake, clued in and who realize their country isnt as brilliant as over the top patriots claim it to be, but that isnt to say that at one time in the distant past America wasnt a wonderful country, it was.. but it has quickly and steadily gone downhill from then.. the arrogance of the majority there is unbelievable, as you say, what gives them the right??? And from travelling and living over seas in Europe i can safely say that Americans arent overly liked, and the attitudes other countries citizens have towards America/ns is far from friendly these days.. and its understandable why..they are the bully of the world, clueless macho type crap bully at that.. their mindset itself needs a complete makeover before anything there can improve.

I applaud your sense of balance, however is there is no real difference between what the media tells the world about America (or any other country) and reality. I think so.

I think we are very easily moved by orchestrated and controlled dissemination of news. That news is often produced. I would venture to say that much of what the world thinks it knows about each other nation and her general 'mood' is not to be confused with reality.

This thread needs to calm down a bit. We are, after all, all here on a common quest to understand the world and one another. Launching aggressive attacks at one another is not productive.

Make no mistake the UK will be defended at all costs.

that comment is typical of the reason why you yanks are unpopular in general rather than despised like your top politicians/policy makers.

did you ever think to ask whether we want or even need your defences.

in short its your sheer arrogance as a nation.

reply to post by Full_Vision


With respect, speaking in generalizations only fuels the fire, and yet again is symptomatic of a rant, nothing more. Generalizations do nothing to identify an issue and they do nothing to work towards solving an issue. Generalizations serve the purpose of reinforcing an "attitude" without any legitimate weight behind it.

I'm curious "why" you switched from (I am an American citizen) to using "they" as opposed to "I" when addressing the American people and/or government. I really don't quite know what to make of that inference...

[edit on 10-10-2009 by LadySkadi]

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
I'm a US citizen myself so don't accuse me of being anti-American. I'm wondering what gives us special status. What gives us the right to topple foreign governments in continuous violations of international law. What gives us the right to interfere in the Democracy of other nations? What gives us the right to tell other nations who can or cannot be extradited? Why are we so well liked when the citizens of our nation are so far in debt that many can barely afford to make a living? What gives us the right to dominate the world when we barely have a hold on our own nation?

we do, as in everyone who is not within the government, we allow this to happen.

[edit on 10-10-2009 by hautmess]

reply to post by manxman2

You appear to be overly sensitive on this matter of defending Britain.

It's just that we got dragged into two European world wars when you couldn't do it alone.

In 1940, Britain ran ads in American newspapers, pleading with Americans to donate any caliber rifle, pistol, or shotgun.

It seems that your populace was unarmed, and the German Army was just across the way. Much of British war material was left on the beach at Dunkirk.

Since the war, it seems your people are unarmed yet again.

When your navy sailed south to the Falklands, I was in Charleston, SC at the time, and I know for a fact that a significant number of more advanced munitions were flown into Charleston from around the country, loaded onto ships, and those ships met the British Navy at sea. Where they presumably unloaded this particular cargo.

The M1A1 Abrams unique shape is determined by British Chobham armor. The P-51 was a mediocre plane until the Merlin engine was shoehorned into the narrow airframe, and only then became the premier fighter of WWII.

No one here in the US means any disrespect when they state that Britain will be defended.

Just the opposite. We love our cousins, although we may argue a bit from time to time.

So if you can, get your ass off your shoulders and quit snapping at opportunity.

reply to post by dragonridr


People in Britain were NOT starving. In fact it was found people, especially children were healthier from having rations than they were before the war.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by hans kammler

 

The UK so far has proven to be our only true Allie.
Funny that our only true adversary now turns out to be our only true Allie while France apposes us.! Make no mistake the UK will be defended at all costs.

Perhaps inadvertently, this post actually sums up why a lot of British, UK, what-have-you posters shake their head at what's perceived as American posturing and even arrogance. "Our only true adversary"? You do realise this was over 225 years ago? Yes, I can understand it's the 'birth of your nation' and so on but, metaphorically, you're still dining out on a story that was old a long time ago.

To put this into perspective, and it's genuinely not a case of sour grapes or anything before anyone suggests that, I'm fairly sure that there's at least a generation of children in Britain/UK that are barely aware of the history between these Isles and the United States of America. It just doesn't figure on our cultural or historical radar as it does with you. To underline the point that it's not sour grapes or sweeping a possibly embarrassing episode under the carpet, our history and culture places a lot of emphasis on Roman Invasions, Anglo-Saxon incursions, Norman conquest and so on: our history isn't all Spanish Armadas and Trafalgas.

I've thought this countless times when I've come across Americans online - here and elsewhere - that the War of Independence is almost like a tic or some weird patriotic Tourette's where it's almost bursting to come out and informs so much of what they say. "Paul Revere! Yorktown! Red coats! King George!" As countries, we've fought in two World Wars together since then - one was almost a 100 years ago and almost a half way point between the War of Independence and now. And yet you, and so many Americans still think in terms of "our only true adversary"!

Originally posted by Kram09
reply to post by dragonridr

 

People in Britain were NOT starving. In fact it was found people, especially children were healthier from having rations than they were before the war.

People got a ration book full of coupons which allowed them to buy just a limited amount. Petrol was rationed after September 1939. Butter, sugar, bacon, paper and meat were rationed from early 1940. By the end of the war, half Britain's food was rationed. You needed ration coupons to buy clothes after June 1941.The rations were greatly increased after America entered the war as millions of pounds of food began shipping to Britain through the lend lease program.Prior to the food shipments in 1941 things were looking very bleak for the British people.

However one of the effect of rationing and price control was that - by the end of the war - the poor people of Britain had never been so healthy! There was much less, but it had been shared out far more fairly. This was one of the key facts that led to the creation of the Welfare State after the war.Just think an entire country on food stamps just that alone continues to amaze me that the population could endure this.

Oh and in case you were curious here was there weekly food rations:

per person per week:

Butter or lard: 4 ounces (113.4 grammes)

Sugar: 12 ounces (340.2 grammes)

Raw bacon or Ham: 4 ounces (113.4 grammes)

Eggs x2

Cooked bacon or Ham: 3.5 ounces (99.3 grammes)


[edit on 10/10/09 by dragonridr]

reply to post by dragonridr


I don't think you meant to be condescending in your post, but i am aware of the rationing. I didn't need it explaining.

Even so people weren't starving.

Originally posted by dragonridr

Originally posted by Kram09
reply to post by dragonridr

 

People in Britain were NOT starving. In fact it was found people, especially children were healthier from having rations than they were before the war.

People got a ration book full of coupons which allowed them to buy just a limited amount. Petrol was rationed after September 1939. Butter, sugar, bacon, paper and meat were rationed from early 1940. By the end of the war, half Britain's food was rationed. You needed ration coupons to buy clothes after June 1941.The rations were greatly increased after America entered the war as millions of pounds of food began shipping to Britain through the lend lease program.Prior to the food shipments in 1941 things were looking very bleak for the British people.

However one of the effect of rationing and price control was that - by the end of the war - the poor people of Britain had never been so healthy! There was much less, but it had been shared out far more fairly. This was one of the key facts that led to the creation of the Welfare State after the war.Just think an entire country on food stamps just that alone continues to amaze me that the population could endure this.

Are you from Britain? If not, I should explain that most adults here are actually aware of rationing!

I'm curious about your point about there being much less, but it being "shared out far more fairly". I've seen various explanations as to why rationing actually benefited the health of most people but I've never seen 'shared more fairly' as an excuse before. Can you point me to where this has actually come from?

Also, I'm not so sure about your point about Lend Lease. Perhaps it's not intentional but it gives the suggestion that American aid alleviated what was happening. The reality is that after Lend Lease came into effect, rationing actually got worse and became stricter, not easier. Staples such as bread and potatoes only began to be rationed after the war: potatoes famously weren't rationed due to the 'Fish and Chips' ethic during the war itself.

reply to post by Merriman Weir


Star for you

Great perspective.
I have already known that.

they have no idea relying on books painting them a story.

even going as far as sounding humanitarian about the lend lease agreements which enchained the brits in debt for years.

YOU gave us nothing .. you sold us lots until the gold ran out .. then you protected your investments.

and as for churchill withholding intel from you to get you into the war is pretty ironic considering your administration delibrately let pearl harbour happen so as to get public support to protect the administrations investment in the british war effort.

all you really did was hold all the fighting parties coats and steal from the pockets whilst they were otherwise engaged.

[edit on 10-10-2009 by manxman2]

Originally posted by manxman2

SNIP

and as for churchill withholding intel from you to get you into the war is pretty ironic considering your administration delibrately let pearl harbour happen so as to get public support to protect the administrations investment in the british war effort.

Really? how interesting. I've heard some conspiracy theory on this, but nobody seems to have any real, tangible proof... If you do, care to share?

its no conspiracy its documented history.

and no doubt been linked and discussed here multiple times.

heres another example of the same trick.

en.wikipedia.org...

your own president personally oversaw this debacle of americans dying by american complicity.

the rest of the world get taught true history not a moms apple pie version.

[edit on 10-10-2009 by manxman2]

Originally posted by manxman2
its no conspiracy its documented history.

and no doubt been linked and discussed here multiple times.

I'm not denying that it may have been the case, just looking for some documentation, that's all... lots of information, accusations and assumptions get thrown around in threads like this and every now and again, it would be nice to see something linked...