Is this kind of thing surprising anymore?

[Guest]

@dezrtfish:

Don’t you realize the stereotype of Euro’s you are propagating? Why is it that when you disagree with an American it always comes down to where he/she lives?

Well, i will get to this when i handle "guest"s other post.

Maybe the guy deserves to be in a syrian prison. I have a hard time believing that the guy got deported for no reason. Anythings possible, but even though we “USies” may be self centered we’re realy not complete idiots.

The problem is that the US jurisdiction claims to be responsible for more cases than the US gov’t would other countries’ jurisdictions allow. (As soon as any USie is somehow related to a case, the US jurisdiction “grabs” the case … i could look up the actual reasons).
I agree with you, dzrt, that there must be quite some people in the US who are not complete idiots, but you have to admit that there is a whole bunch of complete idiots around in the US (both is just a matter of statistics somehow). One thing of course is how other countries perceive the US: you call it self-centered. Then problem then is: If others behaved like that, would you call them self-centered or use a more aggressive term (like i usually do ;) )?
Even if the guy deserves to be in a syrian prison… let’s just for a moment assume this… what would that mean:
As the US jurisdiciton decides to send him there and not back home to Canada, you have to come to the conclusion, that the relations between Syria and the US are pretty good, at least there must be some treaty/contract about extradition of suspects/convicts. This just sounds a bit unbelievable to me.
Now look at the other hand: Assume that Canada extradites an US citizen to … let’s say … Iran, just because that person was born there and fled to the US…
Just imagine: a country extraditing an US citizen to a third, “close-to-be-rogue”-country. How would the media, gov’t, public in the US react?
From what i remember about the International Court, and the following legislation of the US, you would claim the right to use military means to “free” that citizen!

Could you please explain to me, why i should not be upset by these differences, these two measures that are used by the US concerning other nations citizens and their own??

As for the african thing, it sounded to me like in that article the government of Malawi handed them over to the CIA, and the whole Muslim charitable organsisation thing sounds a bit suspect to me.

The (executive part of the) gov’t handed them over, while the (juridictional part of the) gov’t said they could not be extradited.
Do you really think that the Malawi executive gov’t did that without outside pressure/promises? If yes, then why did the US have to charter that plane?
You suspect the “muslim charitable organisation” (i do also), but seem not to allow suspecting your US gov’t ? Why couldn’t the US just say: “See, their laws forbid this extradition, we then can’t take them, even though we want to.” These prisoners were kind of stolen (and btw, they were neither Malawian nor USies…).

@‘‘guest’’:

falk, i dont care if the rest of the world hates the us. in fact, i think it should. and we should embrace it. my biggest problem with the entire us govt is it is too hung up on the world’s opinion of it. it should give up caring, and leave the world to itself. i guarantee, if the us became isolationist, pretty soon, somebody would be begging us for aid. you wait and see (ha, i say that as though it would ever happen)

So …why does it always come down to where someone lives…
because it seems that the socio-cultural background, schooling, socialization, etc. etc. seem to have a major influence of the opinions of people. Of course there always are people who disagree with the “majority” of one of those people, but …as implied by the definition… they are a minority.
As soon as there are no clear majorities/minorities, it comes down to (a) the positions these sides have and how much they agree/disagree with your/your peoples own (this is a factor in the degree of media coverage an overseas event gets), (b) how “loud” one or both sides are when defending their opinion (also a factor), and © how much the media think they can make a headline out of it (self-explainingly a third factor).
From that, the other peoples public gets to see a biased picture of the first peoples opinion (usually this leads to not seeing the conflict/discussion there).
Now, we have the internet, and thus the possibility to talk to other cultures people directly…
and you can only wonder, how good the “grenade” is working…
(see http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame65.html :) )…
This is kind of empirical evidence that my prejudices work, as i can use some topics to easily provoke personal attacks against me :)…
just as you can against us “Euros”.
So, some of my prejudices are “proven right” here, at least to a degree. I also -of course and as you mentioned- noticed that there are some people of your people who are not complete idiots… you can easily see that (metaphorical) after the reactions and reasoning of the people once the first dust of the grenade has settled…

So much for my mentioning “the stereotypical USie”, notice that i weakened the statement by including the word stereotypical. If you claimed that the stereotypical german wore shorts, drinks beer and eats weisswurst all the time, well … that’s the stereotype, what can i say…

Now to what our “guest” said:
Guest, you are one of complete idiots dzrt mentioned. The worlds economy would surely suffer if the US became total isolationistic. But, the US’ economy would collapse and not recover, the financial sector would collapse and not recover. The US research would collapse and not recover… etc. etc. etc.
You have no idea of the numbers, you just swallow what some second class media tell you. You may be the greatest and richest country on earth… but you are definitely not able to survive without the others. The others are able to survive without you (we have done that quiet some time, remember), so don’t take such a mouthful that you can’t chew properly.

[Janus]

you misunderstand me falk, (i was the last guest that posted) perhaps a bad choice of words to say isolationist. i simply mean do exactly what so many people seem to want, and leave the rest of the world alone, that is, stay out of the problems of other nations. so many people in so many countries seem to think the US has no position to interfere with the affairs of other nations, so let them have their way, the US will stop interfering, and i guarantee people would not be happy. obviously falk, we could not survive completely isolationist, we get so many raw materials and products from other nations, that of course we would collapse without them. and whether or not other nations would collapse without US trade is debatable, but at any rate, so many people in so many nations like so much americana, i would not be surprised to see rioting if US products (including entertainment) were no longer available.

[Guest]

@Janus:

so many people in so many countries seem to think the US has no position to interfere with the affairs of other nations, so let them have their way, the US will stop interfering, and i guarantee people would not be happy.

Look….
How does the US react to any “interference” to their inner problems?
They either “ignore” it out of their position of power, or -when it is touching a nerve- go to the extremes in their answers.
Just assume there was a country such more powerful than the US as the US are more powerful than the other countries of the world…
I guarantee you, the people of the US would not be happy if that other country presses its issues and interests in the US. And: you could do nothing about it!
Well you can: if you are friendly/civilized, you complain. If you are unfriendly/uncivilized … and remember, if your complaints are ignored long enough, many people become so!.. well, then you might consider something else, something that “hurts” the dominant power.

Noone objects if the US “leads”, as they are the superpower of the moment. But, leading does not mean you have to put the others on a leash and punish them once they dare to disagree.

obviously falk, we could not survive completely isolationist, we get so many raw materials and products from other nations, that of course we would collapse without them.

You forget one thing: MONEY!!… The US is living on foreign money!
Your economy kind of survive with the natural ressources (once the citizens notice that some things actually cost something and have a worth), but a complete “shutdown” caused by this lack of money is a different story.

and whether or not other nations would collapse without US trade is debatable, but at any rate, so many people in so many nations like so much americana, i would not be surprised to see rioting if US products (including entertainment) were no longer available.

We would suffer severly, especially the neighbors (Mexico, Canada) and major exporting countries (e.g. Germany)… but i don’t think these countries would collapse.
For the “americana”, well, people like action movies maybe… but it’s not like they would kill because they will never see Bruce Willis on the screen again. They would be upset if there was no “Hamburger” anymore, but then … we have Tacos, Kebabs, Bratwurst and a lot of other fast food…

USies have this tendency to totally over-estimate their position, and be over-confident that they are right in what they think and do. This is why they over-react once they are proven wrong. 9/11 is just one example, Vietnam is another of another kind, Pearl Harbor is a third.

[dezrtfish]

In regard to the Canadian Citizen, I agree that it sounds odd that we would be cooperating so closely with our good friends the Syrians, but even if there are people who suspect otherwise, our real friends/allies interests are looked to in this country. People here will demand an explanation.

One guy didn’t make the decision to deport this guy. Every part of our government has checks and balances, it’s a part of our founding principals. So I have to assume there was some reason for what happened. That doesn’t mean I don’t want to hear it, of course I require accountability, but we are governed my officials of our own choosing and we can’t criticize every decision they make without first knowing the facts.

If you know all of those facts then by all means fire away. But in general figures of authority are slow to show cause for action even when they are justified. What is the US government response to this action?

If the people in Malawi don’t like the way their government handles foreign policy they should do something about their government. If a murderer from the US flees to France and they won’t extradite him because of a death penalty issue for instance, are we (the US) not justified in trying to work out a deal with the French government to secure the extradition? It is up to the French government, in this example, to support it’s own interests, just as it is for us.

On the side topic, American self centeredness or ignorance or what ever term you choose to apply, I think its important to realize that many of the people that chime in with ignorant comments like “the US should institute a policy of isolationism” are either nuts in cabins in the woods or thirteen year old kids with no grasp of world economics. Not to degrade teenage kids, there are some out there with a better grasp on world events than this thirty something genXer.

[EmuGod]

@F_alk:

Look….
How does the US react to any “interference” to their inner problems?
They either “ignore” it out of their position of power, or -when it is touching a nerve- go to the extremes in their answers.
Just assume there was a country such more powerful than the US as the US are more powerful than the other countries of the world…
I guarantee you, the people of the US would not be happy if that other country presses its issues and interests in the US. And: you could do nothing about it!
Well you can: if you are friendly/civilized, you complain. If you are unfriendly/uncivilized … and remember, if your complaints are ignored long enough, many people become so!.. well, then you might consider something else, something that “hurts” the dominant power.

Noone objects if the US “leads”, as they are the superpower of the moment. But, leading does not mean you have to put the others on a leash and punish them once they dare to disagree.

You forget one thing: MONEY!!.. The US is living on foreign money!
Your economy kind of survive with the natural ressources (once the citizens notice that some things actually cost something and have a worth), but a complete “shutdown” caused by this lack of money is a different story.

We would suffer severly, especially the neighbors (Mexico, Canada) and major exporting countries (e.g. Germany)… but i don’t think these countries would collapse.
For the “americana”, well, people like action movies maybe… but it’s not like they would kill because they will never see Bruce Willis on the screen again. They would be upset if there was no “Hamburger” anymore, but then … we have Tacos, Kebabs, Bratwurst and a lot of other fast food…

USies have this tendency to totally over-estimate their position, and be over-confident that they are right in what they think and do. This is why they over-react once they are proven wrong. 9/11 is just one example, Vietnam is another of another kind, Pearl Harbor is a third.

F_alk, as a European and especially as a German you don’t much of a right to criticize the Americans for their policies. It was European imperialism and belief in racial superiority that led to most of the problems in the third world today. Was it not Germany that believed in the 30s that by alienating parts of its population and forcing other countries (Austria, Denmark, France, Holland, Poland, Czechoslovakia etc.) to accept its racial hatred that it could make the world a better place? Was it not the Europeans that carved up the world and exploited its peoples for natural resources?

[dezrtfish]

@F_alk:

USies have this tendency to totally over-estimate their position, and be over-confident that they are right in what they think and do. This is why they over-react once they are proven wrong. 9/11 is just one example, Vietnam is another of another kind, Pearl Harbor is a third.

This is a kind of silly statement. No offence F_alk but I am fairly certain that no country go’s to war thinking “I’m not sure if we can pull this one off, but letts give it a go anyway!” :roll:

The only reason this seams to have any relavance is that in the present it is the US that has the power to make these decisions as opposed to the hundreds of years in the past that they were made by Euros. for Example: The Franco-Prussian War, The war of 1812, World War I, World War II, the French occupation of Vietnam etc. In other words for every example you have given there are example throughout history of the same situation.

[cystic crypt]

@EmuGod:

@F_alk:

Look….
How does the US react to any “interference” to their inner problems?
They either “ignore” it out of their position of power, or -when it is touching a nerve- go to the extremes in their answers.
Just assume there was a country such more powerful than the US as the US are more powerful than the other countries of the world…
I guarantee you, the people of the US would not be happy if that other country presses its issues and interests in the US. And: you could do nothing about it!
Well you can: if you are friendly/civilized, you complain. If you are unfriendly/uncivilized … and remember, if your complaints are ignored long enough, many people become so!.. well, then you might consider something else, something that “hurts” the dominant power.

Noone objects if the US “leads”, as they are the superpower of the moment. But, leading does not mean you have to put the others on a leash and punish them once they dare to disagree.

You forget one thing: MONEY!!.. The US is living on foreign money!
Your economy kind of survive with the natural ressources (once the citizens notice that some things actually cost something and have a worth), but a complete “shutdown” caused by this lack of money is a different story.

We would suffer severly, especially the neighbors (Mexico, Canada) and major exporting countries (e.g. Germany)… but i don’t think these countries would collapse.
For the “americana”, well, people like action movies maybe… but it’s not like they would kill because they will never see Bruce Willis on the screen again. They would be upset if there was no “Hamburger” anymore, but then … we have Tacos, Kebabs, Bratwurst and a lot of other fast food…

USies have this tendency to totally over-estimate their position, and be over-confident that they are right in what they think and do. This is why they over-react once they are proven wrong. 9/11 is just one example, Vietnam is another of another kind, Pearl Harbor is a third.

F_alk, as a European and especially as a German you don’t much of a right to criticize the Americans for their policies. It was European imperialism and belief in racial superiority that led to most of the problems in the third world today. Was it not Germany that believed in the 30s that by alienating parts of its population and forcing other countries (Austria, Denmark, France, Holland, Poland, Czechoslovakia etc.) to accept its racial hatred that it could make the world a better place? Was it not the Europeans that carved up the world and exploited its peoples for natural resources?

i disagree (as a fellow Canuck). F_alk can see first hand the devestation that these 70 years-old actions resulted in. I hardly believe that Germany has the ideals still that you refer to . . . .

[dezrtfish]

I have to agree with CC on that one, unless F_alk is nearing 100 years old and is a hardline facist. :P

[EmuGod]

@cystic:

i disagree (as a fellow Canuck). F_alk can see first hand the devestation that these 70 years-old actions resulted in. I hardly believe that Germany has the ideals still that you refer to . . . .

Actually, since 9/11 anti-semitism in Europe has been very much on the rise, especially in France. There has been some also in Germany, and in Greece. I have more specific information just not right here with me at the moment. Don’t forget about the fascists in Austria, how they almost took control of the country. Europe will simply never learn I’m afraid.

[Guest]

first falk, i resent you stereotyping me as a “USie”. i am absolutely not one. second, i am not saying that the other nations should like what the US does (because frankly i dont care at all if they despise us). i am mainly talking about the friggin protesters in the US arguing with the government, saying we have no position being involved with other nations affairs. going back to the “USie” thing, i would like you to explain what your point regarding 9-11, Vietnam, and Pearl Harbor is.
and you underestimate Americana in other nations. There are American clubs in places like Russia where teens go, put on levis, eat “American cusine” (hamburgers, fries, etc.) dance to american music, watch american movies, etc. also, all things american have become crazes in some places, even in the middle east, such as Kuwait (part of the reason Saddam invaded them back in the 90s) and in other places, like Japan, Americana has begun invading the nation, in certain areas (namely music) have you ever been to Japan? they are practically obsessed with American music, primarily oldies. especially the Beatles, which has been a massive craze over there for years. far beyond Bruce Willis Movies and hamburgers. and riot is not the same as kill, though rioting may involve killing

[Janus]

that was me again, i forgot to log in

[cystic crypt]

@EmuGod:

@cystic:

i disagree (as a fellow Canuck). F_alk can see first hand the devestation that these 70 years-old actions resulted in. I hardly believe that Germany has the ideals still that you refer to . . . .

Actually, since 9/11 anti-semitism in Europe has been very much on the rise, especially in France. There has been some also in Germany, and in Greece. I have more specific information just not right here with me at the moment. Don’t forget about the fascists in Austria, how they almost took control of the country. Europe will simply never learn I’m afraid.

there’s antisemetism in Canada - see Alberta (police chief in Calgary, i believe) Montreal, and Winnipeg to begin. And don’t get me started on the US.
My point is that to hold a country accountable and its citizens without opinion because of the actions made by others living in the same region many years ago would be to call America a racist nation because of its dealings with the Afro-American population (up until MUCH more recently than the events in Germany) and rendering their voices null and void on all opinions involving race. In fact given our treatment of Canadian citizens of Japanese descent, i would hardly call Canada an eternal bastion of tolerance.
I think that as long as the criticism is valid, coming from a person not known to be a liar or guilty of the same thing, then the geographical habitation of the source is something that may be ignored as a qualifier.

[cystic crypt]

@Anonymous:

first falk, i resent you stereotyping me as a “USie”. i am absolutely not one.

1. Did F_alk call you a “USie”?
2. Are you not one? I thought that you were from America?

second, i am not saying that the other nations should like what the US does (because frankly i dont care at all if they despise us).

so far many nations do not . . . yet. You obviously have not considered the implications of a dispised US. Where would they get their energy/water etc. from? Where would they ship their crappy cars and pop-culture to? How would they enforce American opinion around the world? The US still only makes up 1/30th or so of the world’s pop . . . and the world is shrinking daily. Imagine your citizens being treated in other countries the way that the US treats others. It is people like you that perpetuates the stereotype of the “stupid, arrogant, ignorant American”. You do your countrymen a disservice.

i am mainly talking about the friggin protesters in the US arguing with the government, saying we have no position being involved with other nations affairs. going back to the “USie” thing, i would like you to explain what your point regarding 9-11, Vietnam, and Pearl Harbor is.

not enough time . . . :)

and you underestimate Americana in other nations. There are American clubs in places like Russia where teens go, put on levis, eat “American cusine” (hamburgers, fries, etc.) dance to american music, watch american movies, etc. also, all things american have become crazes in some places, even in the middle east, such as Kuwait (part of the reason Saddam invaded them back in the 90s) and in other places, like Japan, Americana has begun invading the nation, in certain areas (namely music) have you ever been to Japan? they are practically obsessed with American music, primarily oldies. especially the Beatles, which has been a massive craze over there for years. far beyond Bruce Willis Movies and hamburgers. and riot is not the same as kill, though rioting may involve killing

Far too much stupidity.
“American cuisine” is crap. Hamburgers etc. . . . its all crap. The fact is that i HAVE been overseas, and true - they listen to American music (as much as Canadian all things considered) but if this vanished, then “oh dear - they would have to be more involved and develop more their OWN culture”. You seem to think that exporting American culture all over the world is a good thing. It is not. It is unfortunate that the youth of other countries embrace it because they forsake a heritage that is MUCH richer than the fly-by-night crap that is American (and sadly increasingly Canadian) culture.
The Beatles are British. They have a massive craze over a BRITISH group. So obviously they must crave old Brit culture than American? And you could not get hamburgers in other countries? And people would riot if they had to eat a non-McDonalds hamburger? (incidently the McDonalds in Russia is a Canadian one AFAIK) Or could not watch Bruce Willis run around, instead tolerating Mel Gibson or Russel Crowe, or Remmington Steele guy?

[EmuGod]

@cystic:

there’s antisemetism in Canada - see Alberta (police chief in Calgary, i believe) Montreal, and Winnipeg to begin. And don’t get me started on the US.
My point is that to hold a country accountable and its citizens without opinion because of the actions made by others living in the same region many years ago would be to call America a racist nation because of its dealings with the Afro-American population (up until MUCH more recently than the events in Germany) and rendering their voices null and void on all opinions involving race. In fact given our treatment of Canadian citizens of Japanese descent, i would hardly call Canada an eternal bastion of tolerance.
I think that as long as the criticism is valid, coming from a person not known to be a liar or guilty of the same thing, then the geographical habitation of the source is something that may be ignored as a qualifier.

I’m talking about the current generation. You’re right that there has been an increase in anti-semitism since 9/11 here in Canada as well, but it’s nothing compared to the increase in Europe. F_alk was criticizing all Americans for the foreign policy and the point of my post was to splash some cold water on his face so to speak - if he can hold all Americans accountable for these things then why can I not hold all Europeans accountable for these other things?

[Guest]

@EmuGod:

F_alk, as a European and especially as a German you don’t much of a right to criticize the Americans for their policies.

Then only the australian aborigines have a right to critize any policies, right?

@dezrtfish:

@F_alk:

9/11 is just one example, Vietnam is another of another kind, Pearl Harbor is a third.

No offence F_alk but I am fairly certain that no country go’s to war thinking “I’m not sure if we can pull this one off, but letts give it a go anyway!”

…In other words for every example you have given there are example throughout history of the same situation.

No, you totally misunderstood the point of the examples.

@Janus:

… second, i am not saying that the other nations should like what the US does (because frankly i dont care at all if they despise us).

That is one part of the problem, that you don’t care about the rest of the world… well at least not what they think.

going back to the “USie” thing, i would like you to explain what your point regarding 9-11, Vietnam, and Pearl Harbor is.

Next posting will cover that.

…. especially the Beatles, which has been a massive craze over there for years.

CC already made that point. And it is fitting to the “ignorant” stereotype.

@EmuGod:

…but it’s nothing compared to the increase in Europe. F_alk was criticizing all Americans for the foreign policy and the point of my post was to splash some cold water on his face so to speak - if he can hold all Americans accountable for these things then why can I not hold all Europeans accountable for these other things?

First, i can’t compare possible increases in anti-semitism between europe and most other continents.
Second, i didn’t blame “Americans” but “USies”. And yes, i blame all of them a priori, and in special cases (when the one i talk to shows he voted against GWB for example, or shows he/she does not agree), then i change and exclude that person.
And sure, you can hold the Euros accountable, but it is funny that you forget the most striking point: that we “fathered” the US, and our child is now running wild without paying any respect to the “elders”. WE have failed as parents. That is something you can blame Europe for…
(i guess that is another nice “grenade”)…

[Guest]

@F_alk:

USies have this tendency to totally over-estimate their position, and be over-confident that they are right in what they think and do. This is why they over-react once they are proven wrong. 9/11 is just one example, Vietnam is another of another kind, Pearl Harbor is a third.

you know u are the most Arrogent person on these forums. and u seem like your inlove with yourself

[Guest]

"That is one part of the problem, that you don’t care about the rest of the world… well at least not what they think. "

coming from a guy like you who praises individuality and self expression that statement seems hypocritical

[Guest]

To my examples and the point i wanted to make with them:
(1) 9/11 and pearl harbor showed the US that they are not “untouchable”, that they can’t sit and do whatever they want to the world, and expect that nothing comes back. It was a sign of “vulnerability”, which kind of contradicts being the greatest and mightiest nation on earth. (It is this “how could they”, “how dare they” reaction of the US public that can be used as evidence.)
They happened, because some nations/people could not stand the way they were treated by the US, and didn’t see that talking/diplomacy could help.
(2) Vietnam is another kind of example. It is the only “police action with used B 52 heavy bombers and chemical agents” that was lost by the US.
Notice the term “police action”, something i learnt here. Why does it seem so hard for the US to admit that they have lost a war?

So, the over-reaction to Vietnam is clear IMHO: the psychological effect of twisting the truth until you like it again, turning the facts until you haven’t lost a war, but just a “police action”.
The over-reaction to Pearl Harbor and 9/11 is more complex and probably there will be more discussion. My statement: The US frequently humiliates other nations (by blackmailing them by using military force or economical threats). Sometimes this doesn’t work…. (or which are these -promised by GWB and Rumsfeld- bitter bitter consequences that Germany, France and Russia have to deal and live with now? Nothing!) … and sometimes it does. When it does, this humiliation of course makes people in that country angry, and provokes resistance. This to me seems like a logical conclusion. Now, then how can the US be surprised if it back-lashes? (Ok, maybe Pearl harbor is not such a good example for that, as many historians follow the thesis that US gov’t needed an excuse to join into WWII).
And what is the reaction to this surprise? It is revenge. The “enemy must pay more than he did to us”, which will then lead to further humiliation.
The only thing that can stop this circle is the total defeat of one of the sides. …
And i personally don’t want the victor be the one who didn’t decide to step back out of a position of power, but who (out of the same position) put more oil into the fire.

(From my german point of view:
Germany lost WWI and some parts of society twisted and turned the facts until it seemed that it wasn’t really lost but just a premature surrender. Then the bitter pill of Versaille (humiliation) came to add, and we cried for “correction” (or better: revenge).
To contemplate about our failings (e.g. why WWI started at all, wether we could have had a peace in between, wether we as winner would have been more fair to the defeated) was extremely ill-seen… unpatriotic, treachery etc.
This lead to WWII, and only the total defeat allowed us and gave us the time to see what we did wrong.)

That’s what i call over-reacting: a misinterpretation of the world, facts, opinions and feelings around. You can say i am wrong and the one who misinterpretes… but this objection usually comes from USies, while the vast majority outside the US sees the USies having a strnage way to see things.

…

Now to the Guest, i assume it’s Janus, am i right?
(1) self-expression and individuality does not mean that i have to spit into everyones face. It doesn’t mean at all that i should not think about others. It rather means that i see differences between the people, that i take their positions into account.
It looks like for you “seeing differences” leads without error to a situation where one has to give in to the other to make these differences go…
I can accept specialities of every culture as long as they don’t interfere with mine. Should they interfere, then we (both sides) have to find a way to make the situation acceptable for both.
(2) arrogant and in love with myself…
yes, you can call me arrogant concerning some things. There are things i strongly despise, where i have made up my mind and don’t think that i am open to discussion there. That is pretty human i guess, and everyone who says he is open to anything should start a thread about the good sides of molesting little children for example. There are some things i just can’t tolerate, some things were i can be brought to discussion (though i will be extremely biased) and some things that i discuss freely and enjoy to discuss.

In love with myself…
Sure, sometimes i am very happy with myself. Sometimes i am not. Most of the time i try to take actions that are not hurting anyone else, this actually is one of the principles i try to follow. I know i am not perfect, but: i hate people who are convinced they are perfect. (this may be an explanation of why i despise the US as a whole: not its citizens, but the concept of the “best country in the world”)

[Guest]

Some more non-surprising news:

See
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/06/30/icc.military.aid/index.html
and explain to me why this is not bullying and/or blackmailing.

[dezrtfish]

First, I can’t compare possible increases in anti-semitism between europe and most other continents.
Second, i didn’t blame “Americans” but “USies”. And yes, i blame all of them a priori, and in special cases (when the one i talk to shows he voted against GWB for example, or shows he/she does not agree), then i change and exclude that person.
And sure, you can hold the Euros accountable, but it is funny that you forget the most striking point: that we “fathered” the US, and our child is now running wild without paying any respect to the “elders”. WE have failed as parents. That is something you can blame Europe for…
(i guess that is another nice “grenade”)…

First off, I voted For President Bush. If that makes me what you call a USie, well what can I say? I have the freedom to use my brain to decide for myself who I want to be running my country. I am DAMN proud of what my President has accomplished and I am 100% confident that he will continue to make me proud.

Sometimes parents get old and can’t understand what is going on around them anymore, then their caring children must make the decision to lock them up in a home for confused elderly people who are trying to live in another century. For their own protection. (We need an Emoticon to represent a grenade 8) )

To my examples and the point i wanted to make with them:
(1) 9/11 and pearl harbor showed the US that they are not “untouchable”, that they can’t sit and do whatever they want to the world, and expect that nothing comes back. It was a sign of “vulnerability”, which kind of contradicts being the greatest and mightiest nation on earth. (It is this “how could they”, “how dare they” reaction of the US public that can be used as evidence.)
They happened, because some nations/people could not stand the way they were treated by the US, and didn’t see that talking/diplomacy could help.

This makes no since at all. You are saying that our actions prior to 1941 were deserving of being declared war on and being attacked with out warning by another nation?

Well then I guess the French deserved to be attacked as well for being too dumb to pay attention to their border with Holland. Not to mention their arrogance at the treaty of Versailles. Witch I might add was warned against by whom? Oh yeah the American President, who refused to sign the rag.

2. Vietnam is another kind of example. It is the only “police action with used B 52 heavy bombers and chemical agents” that was lost by the US.
   Notice the term “police action”, something i learnt here. Why does it seem so hard for the US to admit that they have lost a war?

The reason it was a police action was because we did not and could not declare war on a soviet protectorate. Our troops were not officially allowed to enter North Vietnam. We were trying to prevent NV from forcefully incorporating another independent nation. The problem is we realized too late that with out risking a world war by attacking NV we were trying to cup our hands around an anthill to prevent the ant from spreading. It is a doomed task. If we had been able to actually go to war with NV there would be no Republic of Vietnam now. I am not saying that we didn’t loose, because we did technically. We failed in our goals just like France did. But it was not because we couldn’t handle it, it was because it was a stupid untenable concept and when we learned this the hard way we abandon the idea.

The over-reaction to Pearl Harbor and 9/11 is more complex and probably there will be more discussion.

What! :o You must be joking!

I guess it was an over reaction for The British to declare war on Germany over such a trifling thing as the conquest of Poland as well.

(From my german point of view:
Germany lost WWI and some parts of society twisted and turned the facts until it seemed that it wasn’t really lost but just a premature surrender. Then the bitter pill of Versaille (humiliation) came to add, and we cried for “correction” (or better: revenge).
To contemplate about our failings (e.g. why WWI started at all, wether we could have had a peace in between, wether we as winner would have been more fair to the defeated) was extremely ill-seen…… unpatriotic, treachery etc.
This lead to WWII, and only the total defeat allowed us and gave us the time to see what we did wrong.)

That’s what i call over-reacting: a misinterpretation of the world, facts, opinions and feelings around. You can say i am wrong and the one who misinterpretes… but this objection usually comes from USies, while the vast majority outside the US sees the USies having a strnage way to see things.

I agree completely with your examination of the reasons for WWII, However I think the Germans were justified in being pissed. They just reacted too strongly too soon. I don’t see the connection to the US though. By the way I sure wish you could come up with a term that didn’t sound so gay. It wouldn’t bother me so much to be labeled if it was a label that was a bit manlier. :P How about Redneck, I like that much more. :D