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.

 

Is the U.S.A. the greatest threat to international harmony?

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   
Just saw this article and thought it was interesting. It's pretty harsh, but I think it speaks a lot of truth regarding the U.S.A.'s political 'prowess'. It really seems as though the U.S. hasn't learned its lesson from the Cold War



When Stalin died in the early Fifties, a new regime in Moscow hinted it was time to call off the dogs and work towards peaceful co-existence with the West. But Washington hawks interpreted this as the Soviets running scared. They piled on pressure to widen the gap, not close it.


Examples of poor foreign policy have plagued the U.S. ever since.




And yet, though Americans don’t really understand the outside world, they think it’s Washington’s role to run it and police it. Imbued with an overweening sense of destiny, Americans believe they must impose their own type of government and economy on everyone else. When that doctrine is backed up with the bombing, say, of Cambodia, the spectacle of people being killed so they can be ‘saved’ would be laughable were it not so tragic. Yet when such intervention produces hostility to Uncle Sam and demonstrators storm its embassies, Americans are baffled by this apparent lack of gratitude. They find it hard to believe they are not welcome as friends and liberators, bringing enlightenment to dark places.


America's Threat to World Peace

And it continues on today, in the War on Terror. If the U.S. hadn't responded so poorly to the rise of the Soviet Union, could the Cold War have been averted? If such fierce competitiveness wasn't so maliciously instigated by the deterioring relationship, perhaps Afghanistan never would have fallen under Communist rule, and perhaps the Taliban would never have seized power. All of the proxy wars fought during the Cold War have had devastating impacts upon nations all over the world which continue today and any true hope of reparation is hindered by the U.S.

Although I don't think the blame lies with the U.S. alone. Many other countries seem afeared of losing the U.S. as an ally, especially in these times of manufactured terror. Global politics needs an overhaul, but does the answer lie within national unification or diversification?




posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 10:30 AM
link   
I agree with the article and I thank you for posting it. Just giving you fair warning though - you are about to be swamped by Americans defending the undefendable.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 10:33 AM
link   
I thought Iran were the greatest threat to international harmony.
Or how about Al Queda?


In all seriousness though I think the greatest threat to mankind is Greed.
For that is what has made the elite do what they have done.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Ignorant sapiens sapiens from ALL the land masses are a threat to international harmony not just the Americanaz



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 10:40 AM
link   
The average American citizen isnt a threat.
BUT The American government and its Zionist puppet masters are the biggest threat to international Harmony.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Are you out of your mind? Of course if we lay down and let the Muslim’s take over or let the communists take over or the liberal hate America crowd take over, then we would all live in harmony. How wonderful. How bout we get the libs, communists, Muslims to all lay down and we take over? Then we would live in peace. My peace.
Too many idiots in the world me thinks.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by TechUnique
 


U.S. political policy isn't the only threat by any means, but because it is a very wealthy and internationally focussed superpower, any poor decision it makes will have dire consequences for other nations involved, far more so than other countries.

I personally think the U.S. government should reconsider their attitudes towards foreign policy drastically in order to prevent any more major uprisings of conflict in the world. It has too many issues within its own borders for a start.

Many other nations have too many of their own problems to deal with before even thinking about participating actively in a globalised world, so naturally they get pissed off. Seems like U.S. is trying to rush the globalisation inevitability, and is rushing it by force.

And before any U.S. people get worked, this isn't attack on the citizens, just the government and its actions.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by D1Useek
Are you out of your mind? Of course if we lay down and let the Muslim’s take over or let the communists take over or the liberal hate America crowd take over, then we would all live in harmony. How wonderful. How bout we get the libs, communists, Muslims to all lay down and we take over? Then we would live in peace. My peace.
Too many idiots in the world me thinks.


What makes you think they after World Domination? Even the Soviets weren't into that idea until the Cold War started to intensify. And perhaps we would live in more peace if the Muslims were allowed free reign in their own countries. Did you even read the article?

Global violence is not the answer, but sadly some decisions made the superpower U.S. don't seem to signify any understanding of what works and what doesn't. Look to history for examples, although I warn you it may become a bit repetitious.

Also, do you understand why some Muslims harbour a great hatred towards the U.S. and its sympathisers? Understanding and diplomacy is what is needed, not more violence and domination.
edit on 29-7-2011 by DeepThoughtCriminal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ophiuchus 13
Ignorant sapiens sapiens from ALL the land masses are a threat to international harmony not just the Americanaz


This is about as honest an answer as you will find. If it's not the U.S., it's going to be some other nation. If nations dissolve it's going to be the strongest tribe. If the tribes disintegrate it will be the largest pack. It's human nature. This piece seems to not understand U.S. Americans either. It negates the fact that all "Westernized" nations are in cahoots and are guilty of the same things. It also negates the fact that the United States was appointed to this position by being forced into a war that the rest of the world was either too spineless or incapable of waging.

WWII has shaped the landscape of our modern woes. The U.S. was vehemently against participating in this conflict. As all the nations of Europe, Asia and Africa fell one by one and Pearl Harbor was attacked, we were forced to build a military force the likes of which the world had never seen. We were begged to build this force. We manufactured and exported more goods for the world to survive and combat the Axis forces than the world has ever given back to us. In the process we became the mightiest and most productive nation in the world.

We learned a valuable lesson. The inability of the rest of the world to contain and extinguish its own conflicts bred this mentality of preemptive action. I would prefer the horrible but SMALL scale conflicts over another World War because of our misplaced trust in other nations' ability to prevent a mass slaughter again. 60-80 million lives extinguished tends to leave a sour taste in humanity's mouth.

To the morons pointing out our aggressiveness towards the USSR, are you historically ignorant. The USSR was a monstrous nation, only surviving WWII because it was an evil necessary in helping us eradicate a greater evil.

I'm not going to sit here and defend the state of things, they are despicable. If you think the blame for these conflicts lies solely on U.S. American shoulders however, you are dreaming.
edit on 29-7-2011 by ateuprto because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by ateuprto
 


I didn't mean to imply that I think the blame lies soley with the U.S. I just meant to say that because it is the current and only superpower, ought it not to cease directing violent foreign policy upon other nations? As I said before, because it is so powerful, perhaps it should withdraw a little and lick its own wounds for a while.

Of course, nations who are in active allegiance to the U.S. are just as bad, only they are the followers rather than the leaders in most cases. I guess I am working on the principle of "cut off the head and the body will die". I mean that if the U.S. government would be content to let other nations live as they will, then their allies will likely follow suit, and there will perhaps be less conflict in the world.

Once again, the only reason I am talking the U.S. is soley because of its status as an influential superpower.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   
I could care less about other countries, their thoughts or attitudes towards America.
Running your life based on other people's opinions is not living your life, it is allowing others to dictate it.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by DeepThoughtCriminal
 


While I would love to see a return to more isolationism, it is not possible given globalization. Many times you have the order of things backwards. Many of the conflicts we enter into because we are asked by other nations. Our strength is used by organizations and allies like NATO to help quell conflicts and act as "peace keepers." However most see a U.S. American F-18 dropping bombs and assume we are doing it for our own purposes.

I'm in allegiance with you though, a return to isolationist ideals would be great, but the neoliberal doctrine adopted by the "Western" world, including China and Russia, prevents us from being able to do so. We've been sold out, along with most of Western Europe. It's going to take a radical change in the way we operate as a species to return to individual nations or nation-states existing independently of each other.

I believe this is keeping in-line with our societal evolution however. We've transitioned from cells, into beings, into packs, clans, tribes, townships, cities, states and nations. Is it not our destiny to eventually dismantle the idea of nations and reach an all-inclusive species-state? I'm not talking the run-of-the-mill "NWO" organization, but a state of being where we are all seen as countrymen and women. This to me is our next logical step, one that has and will likely continue to have growing pains.
edit on 29-7-2011 by ateuprto because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   
the stars and stripes is the new swastika



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 11:07 AM
link   
You can continue to pile on the U.S. hate all you want it doesn't make a difference, history tells a different story. All nations had a shot at the throne. When they ran it they collapsed. Britain,Germany, France, Italy, Russia, after us some speculate China to be running things. The only thing that is gonna change is everyone else is gonna hate whoever is at the top until they fall back down again. Russia was in Afghanistan long before the US so don't act like we started it. Proxy wars are responsible for most of the state of affairs in places like the Koreas, the middle East, and other regions.

How is everyone absolved of their role in the modern world just because they aren't in charge of it anymore. You all get free passes now cause you haven't killed for sometime? France wanted Libya in the cross-hairs not the US. We do dumb stuff all the time, but your nations were just as dumb. You act as if everyone else is unified as nations guess what China and Russia have land issues with each other. India, and Pakistan hate each other. Israel and everyone in the middle East do. Iraq and Iran do.

The US could be wiped off the map tomorrow there will be no peace. There will be a power vacuum China and Russia will be back at odds. Korea will be at war again. China will run roughshod over Tibet. The EU is gonna sit back and watch? What of South America?



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Beavers
 


The U.S./Nazi Germany associations need to stop now. If you are so blind to history that you see parallels between the two I would suggest going to the library for a while.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by ateuprto
reply to post by Beavers
 


The U.S./Nazi Germany associations need to stop now. If you are so blind to history that you see parallels between the two I would suggest going to the library for a while.


Nah, I saw let it flow. It shows people for what they really are.

Never stop a fool from being foolish.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by DeepThoughtCriminal
 


Very interesting post. I've always viewed America as more of a symptom, and less like the disease itself. That disease would be human nature. By our very natures we're greedy, hateful, xenophobic, warlike, and imperialistic. Every man, woman, and child their own aspiring god. America simply has the resources to be better at it than most.

As far as weather or not to diversify or unify... I make no secret of the fact that I think democracy to be a joke. The disinterest and ignorance of the lines share of most nations ensures it ineffectiveness. The fact that countless lobbies and big corporations each have a bloody senator in their pocket is yet another nail in the coffin. As a historian, I look through the ages to try to find a system of government that actually has been proven successful...

Time and again, the only thing that seems to truly work is some form of totalitarianism. (let the ignorant hatred begin............. NOW!) Be it a king, an emperor, a sultan, a pharaoh, or hell... even a fuhrer, regimes with one strong leader with complete power always come out as the most effective. So in that vein of thought, I say we unify further! Eventually we may find ourselves in a system that works, because this whole "by the people, for the people" thing seems to be broken.

Disclaimer to the ignorant (not that this will stop them): No. I'm not a Nazi. Nor am I Illuminati, NWO, or any other such nonsense. Just a man who thinks we live in a hopelessly corrupt system that doesn't work, and has looked to the past to see what does.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Come on people, this "the world" against the "USA" is no different than the Left vs. Right in the USA. It's a false paradigm on a world stage.

The people calling the shots are the bankers, THEY are TBTP. The USA is doing the bidding of the Bankers, so yes, we, the USA, are complicit, but the Bankers are the real threat. The sane 'everyman' in EVERY country on this earth wants the same thing.... 1.) to be proud of their country, 2.) to have opportunity to make a living, 3.) to raise their children in a safe environment and provide for them and 4.) to leave the country better off to the next generation. It's the scumbag TBTP that screw it all up, and have been for our entire history as a race.

Check out this article The World's Biggest Central Bank Has Private Shareholders .

The Bank for International Settlements ("BIS") is the Central Banks Central Bank and handles the transactions amongst all the Central Banks in the world. From the article:


So the private banks own the Fed (and most other central banks), and the central banks - and private shareholders - in turn own BIS, the global bank regulator. It would obviously be very interesting to find out who these private shareholders are. And to find out if the shareholders enjoy any special benefits. As Spiegel notes:

Formally registered as a stock corporation, it is recognized as an international organization and, therefore, is not subject to any jurisdiction other than international law.

It does not need to pay tax, and its members and employees enjoy extensive immunity. No other institution regulates the BIS, despite the fact that it manages about 4 percent of the world's total currency reserves, or €217 trillion ($304 trillion), as well as 120 tons of gold...

Central bankers are not elected by the people but are appointed by their governments. Nevertheless, they wield power that exceeds that of many political leaders. Their decisions affect entire economies, and a single word from their lips is capable of moving financial markets. They set interest rates, thereby determining the cost of borrowing and the speed of global financial currents.

Could that mean that the private shareholders owning 14% of the world's central bank have somehow been "grandfathered in", and are immune from taxes and other national rules? Wouldn't it be interesting to find out?

edit on 7/29/2011 by Finalized because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Beavers
the stars and stripes is the new swastika


So the stars and stripes are a Tibetan good luck charm?



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 11:25 AM
link   
I guess I should've known this would happen. This is having nothing to do with "anti-Americanism", and I'm not directing hate towards the U.S. I'm merely questioning its foreign policy strategies in light of the fact that it is a superpower nation. Of course other countries are involved in this too, but the U.S. is right at the centre of it, this cannot be logically denied.

Is it a crime to think that it should be less militant and more diplomatic? Its militance, and those of the allies it drags along in its wake, has achieved nothing but more global trauma so far.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join