[MRRiley]

Exactly. I was thinking of one gift from the US to the world: GPS. We put it up there and everyone gets to use it for free. The other side of the coin is that we put GPS up there so we could put a cruise missile wherever we wanted in the world. If you forget about the cruise missile bit, it's a generous act that has made the world better. Hey, can we interest you in a missile defense system?

FYI... GPS is indeed a "targeting aid system," but rather than concentrating on the negative aspect of "targeting" consider the number of civilian casualties that have been avoided because of accurate targeting of genuine bad guys. Discounting the arguments about the legitimacy of killing the "enemy", what's better, carpet bombing an entire town to take out a single terrorist or blowing up just his house with a surgical strike?

Mike

---

Last edited by MRRiley; 12-16-2011 at 03:00 PM.

[joe.penn]

We put it up there and everyone gets to use it for free.

That's not all either - our military created the TCP/IP protocol and that was gifted to humanity by America (wonder how that impacted the world globally), and I don't recall seeing any thanks for that...

[séamuis]

FYI... GPS is indeed a "targeting aid system," but if you consider the number of civilian casualties that have been avoided because of accurate targeting of genuine bad guys. What's better, carpet bombing an entire town to take out a single terrorist or blowing up just his house with a surgical strike?

Mike

well certainly the latter, since we already did the former in Viet Nam and Laos, and still haven't formally apologized or even properly admitted to dumping millions of tons of antipersonnel munitions onto innocent civilians, that still kill to this day.

[stevewig]

Mike, there are actually a crap ton of people living in our country; people that call our country home that match this 100% so I think this is not just for people abroad.

-----------------------

Haha I can only imagine what will be posted next after posting that (not from you though Mike)...

One of the most valuable democratic rights that you have is the right to criticize your Government when you think it is doing wrong or when you think it has done wrong. This is so for obvious reasons - I think!

If you cannot express yourself clearly and negatively about your Government then you are not living within a Democracy, which currently is the best form of government yet devised.

The person who criticizes those who exercise this right, for using this right (even if the particular opinion in question is factually incorrect) is to a greater or lesser extent an extremist and thus to be ignored by most rational people.

[eddie1960]

The person who criticizes those who exercise this right, for using this right (even if the particular opinion in question is factually incorrect) is to a greater or lesser extent an extremist and thus to be ignored by most rational people.

and is then voted into office by the illiterati

[séamuis]

One of the most valuable democratic rights that you have is the right to criticize your Government when you think it is doing wrong or when you think it has done wrong. This is so for obvious reasons - I think!

If you cannot express yourself clearly and negatively about your Government then you are not living within a Democracy, which currently is the best form of government yet devised.

The person who criticizes those who exercise this right, for using this right (even if the particular opinion in question is factually incorrect) is to a greater or lesser extent an extremist and thus to be ignored by most rational people.

its nice to see that at least some people understand this, and can tell the difference between exercising that right for the betterment of the nation (being patriotic in one of the highest possible ways) and just being an anti-american lazy hippie who wants to hate america while living here and taking advantage of what it offers (at least whats left of what it offers) I get so tired of being painted as anti-american simply because I am critical of the direction we are heading and want to make a change for the better. the one statement that always irks me to the core is the standard 'if you don't like it then leave.' that so many americans who are simply unwilling to accept anything other than their personal twisted idea of 'america' and think its perfectly acceptable to continue on the path we are as a nation headed, use as a viable answer to any criticism. its just sickening beyond all reason. :ugh:

[les3547]

From the earliest human civilizations until the present, a great many nations have become powerful and had an effect on other cultures. Which of them didn't step on others rights, yet which of them didn't also contribute something we value now? The human race today without Greek, Arab, German, Chinese, Indian, Jewish, French, English, Spanish, etc. contributions would be diminished. America happens to have been in the spotlight for awhile (power-wise), and like all nations that have become very powerful, America has made many mistakes. But would we want a world that didn't include what America has contributed?

So while I think it is a good thing to be constructively critical of what America is doing wrong, I also think it is mindless, emotional venting to rant about ONLY the wrongs of the US (as some members here do), just as it is historically myopic to imagine that what America has gone/goes through trying to deal with power abuse issues is the slightest bit different than the power abuse issues all powerful nations throughout history have struggled with.

---

Last edited by les3547; 12-16-2011 at 06:15 PM.

[bossa]

And what actual business except for vengeance, does America even have being in Pakistan? Almost all American intervention is done to make an area stable enough for American investment. The 1% who control most of the wealth benefit, while the 99% share most of the cost. Americans continue to believe that they have the right to make the world safe for Americans, anywhere in the world. Well technically, they have the right to make the world safe for Americans anywhere on American soil. In world affairs, you cannot effectively have over lapping jurisdictions. Essentially America is still fighting a war with several competing jurisdictions, China and to a lesser extent Russia. Opportunity for one system means a lack of opportunity for the other. There is competition. To deny that most of American foreign policy, many relief and missionary efforts included, are an effort to expand the influence of the American economic system, and in that sense not altruistic at all, would be naive.

The Pakistani's have become very adept at playing both sides against the middle. The question is not, why doesn't Pakistan give more credit to the US, the question is, why does the US give any money to the Pakistani military, at all. And the answer is, they believe the Pakistani military may be able to pacify Pakistan and make it safe for American investment. They are making a huge gamble with money they don't have. And make no mistake, military aid is the worst way to help anyone. Yet this is what you're calling "aid". It's not aid. It's funding a foreign army with the expectation that they will become mercenaries in support of your cause. That is not aid, that is hegemonic self interest.

Don't get me wrong here, I don't hate Americans... or America, and majority of people accused of being "america haters" aren't, just as the majority of Americans accused of being communists weren't. This is a term coined by the right wing to target anyone critical of their right wing agenda, which includes an oppressed and impotent middle class and continuous military expansion. Seeing America for what it is is not hating. Although some on the right might try and tell you it is. In their view, you're either a cheer leader for all things American, if you are critical of anything they are not critical of, then you are un-American. And that's where the hypocrisy comes in. There is no benefit to independent thought in a right wing system. The righties will tell you you're un-American for not loving America, then rail against welfare, the graduated income tax, the "lefties" who wouldn't let them use Atomic weapons in Vietnam, unions, and the minimum wage, and tell you Canada is a communist country because they have universal health care. In other words, their complaint is not people who hate America, it's people who don't hate the things about America that they hate. Now, that's blind hypocrisy.

Brilliantly stated Norm... As was your earlier post.

[séamuis]

So while I think it is a good thing to be constructively critical of what America is doing wrong, I also think it is mindless, emotional venting to rant about ONLY the wrongs of the US (as some members here do)

I don't think thats the case, at least not in this thread. there is a difference between only citing the wrong, and being critical of what you know is wrong and being against what (and ill borrow wheatfields term here) amounts to 'chest thumping' while knowing that we are currently doing more harm than good. I don't think anyone here has said anything that would directly oppose your opinion, and we all understand exactly the notions you talk about, both in regards to the US and all the other nations of history who have had supreme influence. so I'm not sure how you have come to the opinion you have in regards to the thread topic. everyone I think is supremely aware of 'both sides of the coin'. in my defense though, I just felt in necessary to offer a voice of opposition, because while I highly doubt Mike is any sort of over-patriotic citizen that dimly ignores the wrongdoings, etc. the whole vibe of his post made it seem as though it didn't matter about things like the illegal and unjust war we only just ended and the millions of lives lost because of it and everything else the US has done in recent years to warrant hatred, because we have also done good things for the world. suffice to say that the world should be more thankful for our sacrifices. if you re-read my original post I made it clear that there are valid reasons to be critical instead of overly patriotic and there are valid reasons why those who have benefitted from our help, have no sound reason to actually be any more thankful, or thankful at all. as it has all come with a very high price.

[joe.penn]

One of the most valuable democratic rights that you have is the right to criticize your Government when you think it is doing wrong or when you think it has done wrong. This is so for obvious reasons - I think!

If you cannot express yourself clearly and negatively about your Government then you are not living within a Democracy, which currently is the best form of government yet devised.

The person who criticizes those who exercise this right, for using this right (even if the particular opinion in question is factually incorrect) is to a greater or lesser extent an extremist and thus to be ignored by most rational people.

It most certainly is - just as I do, I express myself all of the time both from the comfort of my home to up close and personal.

the one statement that always irks me to the core is the standard 'if you don't like it then leave.' that so many americans who are simply unwilling to accept anything other than their personal twisted idea of 'america' and think its perfectly acceptable to continue on the path we are as a nation headed, use as a viable answer to any criticism. its just sickening beyond all reason.

Actually, for me it is "If you don't like it than GTFO" because I can speak what I want to speak. What is sickening is the candy ass crybabies who do nothing but:

- Bitch, Cry and Complain that our country doesn't do enough for them
- File false claims and contribute to the Social Security crisis
- Live a life of crime and expect to be treated as if they were a gift to society
- Steal from our welfare system while the needy suffers
And there certainly is a lot more...

Democracy? That is a joke, these worthless roaches, as well as the POS's that support them; well, can, GTFO of our country...

Steve - I can say all of that because that is freedom of speech, correct?






.

[bossa]

The US killed over 3 million Vietnamese and over 1 million Iraqi's in the name of freedom. Ironic don't you think? How do you think you'd feel, as an American, if they had been Americans on American soil? And what would you have done about it?

But the real question from here is, I think, where will the next American war will be? The US needs to expend it's weapons to keep the production lines going and the constant development of newer ones. With the US owing trillions of dollars to China that, most likely, it will never pay back, I would expect there to be some major military conflict with them, if not Iran. That would be a world wide conflict and a nuclear one for sure.

You also have to wonder why the US is willing to spend 800 billion on the war in Iraq and yet rails against Universal Heath Care. What's the pay off?

[MRRiley]

its nice to see that at least some people understand this, and can tell the difference between exercising that right for the betterment of the nation (being patriotic in one of the highest possible ways) and just being an anti-american lazy hippie who wants to hate america while living here and taking advantage of what it offers (at least whats left of what it offers) I get so tired of being painted as anti-american simply because I am critical of the direction we are heading and want to make a change for the better. the one statement that always irks me to the core is the standard 'if you don't like it then leave.' that so many americans who are simply unwilling to accept anything other than their personal twisted idea of 'america' and think its perfectly acceptable to continue on the path we are as a nation headed, use as a viable answer to any criticism. its just sickening beyond all reason. :ugh:

Seamuis, I for one don't think I called you or even implied that you were an America Hater. I think I know as well as you do, that our country has made terrible mistakes and it does seem to have gotten worse lately. The only intent of my post was to point out that there are certain people around the world that hate us regardless of and often in spite of the good things we have done over the last couple of hundred years.

From the earliest human civilizations until the present, a great many nations have become powerful and had an affect on other cultures. Which of them didn't step on others rights, yet which of them didn't also contribute something we value now? The human race today without Greek, Arab, German, Chinese, Indian, Jewish, French, English, Spanish, etc. contributions would be diminished. America happens to have been in the spotlight for awhile (power-wise), and like all nations that have become very powerful, America has made many mistakes. But would we want a world that didn't include what America has contributed?

So while I think it is a good thing to be constructively critical of what America is doing wrong, I also think it is mindless, emotional venting to rant about ONLY the wrongs of the US (as some members here do), just as it is historically myopic to imagine that what America has gone/goes through trying to deal with power abuse issues is the slightest bit different than the power abuse issues all powerful nations throughout history have struggled with.

1. The territory not occupied by the current United States would likely be comprised of at least 4 or 5 countries.
2. Most of western Europe could be speaking either German or Russian today. Israel would not exist because the jewish people would have been totally exterminated. Same with the Pols and the Gypsies.
3. Most of the western seaboard of north and south America as well as all of Oceana, including Australia, could be speaking Japanese today.
4. Japan's antiquated manufacturing infrastructure would not have been rebuilt at American expense, putting them into the position to dominate the electronic industry and sell us Pentax cameras and lenses.
5. China could haveconquered most of easter Asia and rather than buying Japanese cameras, and Japanese and South Korean cars, the world could be buying Chinese ones.
6. Countless millions, maybe billions of people could be dead in countries where we have sent medical or financial aid.

I don't think thats the case, at least not in this thread. there is a difference between only citing the wrong, and being critical of what you know is wrong and being against what (and ill borrow wheatfields term here) amounts to 'chest thumping' while knowing that we are currently doing more harm than good. I don't think anyone here has said anything that would directly oppose your opinion, and we all understand exactly the notions you talk about, both in regards to the US and all the other nations of history who have had supreme influence. so I'm not sure how you have come to the opinion you have in regards to the thread topic. everyone I think is supremely aware of 'both sides of the coin'. in my defense though, I just felt in necessary to offer a voice of opposition, because while I highly doubt Mike is any sort of over-patriotic citizen that dimly ignores the wrongdoings, etc. the whole vibe of his post made it seem as though it didn't matter about things like the illegal and unjust war we only just ended and the millions of lives lost because of it and everything else the US has done in recent years to warrant hatred, because we have also done good things for the world. suffice to say that the world should be more thankful for our sacrifices. if you re-read my original post I made it clear that there are valid reasons to be critical instead of overly patriotic and there are valid reasons why those who have benefitted from our help, have no sound reason to actually be any more thankful, or thankful at all. as it has all come with a very high price.

I don't think my opening post implied that at all. It was very straight forward in stating that my beef was just that the "America Haters" around the world damn us with their mouths, while holding their hands out for our money or other forms of aid. Just seems hypocritical to me.

Mike

[séamuis]

I don't think my opening post implied that at all. It was very straight forward in stating that my beef was just that the "America Haters" around the world damn us with their mouths, while holding their hands out for our money or other forms of aid. Just seems hypocritical to me.

I know you weren't implying it mike, and I didn't mean to make it seem like you were, what I was saying is that it came across that way, so I offered a voice of opposition for anyone who might have read it that way. I apologize if it seemed like I was in a way attacking you or making assumptions on your personal character as that wasn't my intent at all. you will also have to excuse my journalistic nature of being very finicky about making sure both sides of the story are told. its a habit I sometimes have trouble leaving at work. what seems hypocritical to me though (again offering an opposing opinion) is that, and I believe this was already mentioned we give so much, but often who we give to we have also done great harm to. I just think its important to give thought to all the possible reasons why there are people out there that hate us. should those who get aid relief from the US be thankful to us, even if it was our military actions that destroyed their home or killed their family providers? its all a bit more complicated than just 'people take what we offer, but still hate us.'

Actually, for me it is "If you don't like it than GTFO" because I can speak what I want to speak. What is sickening is the candy ass crybabies who do nothing but:

- Bitch, Cry and Complain that our country doesn't do enough for them
- File false claims and contribute to the Social Security crisis
- Live a life of crime and expect to be treated as if they were a gift to society
- Steal from our welfare system while the needy suffers
And there certainly is a lot more...

Democracy? That is a joke, these worthless roaches, as well as the POS's that support them; well, can, GTFO of our country...

nobody said you couldn't speak how you wanted, and I know I have certainly never made any attempt to say you can't. however I think your opinion is extremely self-centered, egotistical and downright disgusting. you seem to equate the people in your neat little list there as being the majority of people who would criticize the country they live in, or somehow represent all thats wrong with america. I for one do not represent anything on that little list, yet I am extremely critical of just about everything this nation is currently doing and the direction its heading. should I as you say 'GTFO'? I don't meet your criteria, but I certainly don't agree or care for your idea of america at all. maybe its you that should 'GTFO' of my america? (see how ridiculous that is?) no, you probably wouldn't. I won't apologize for saying that your way of thinking and your attitude above all else is in my opinion a far better example of whats wrong with a lot of the country than your little list is. so feel free to say 'GTFO' or call me whatever, but your america is not my america and I think (thankfully) its not the america the youth of this nation want, and as we all know, they will define america in the coming years, and if you don't like it, well... you know where the door is.

[MRRiley]

The US killed over 3 million Vietnamese and over 1 million Iraqi's in the name of freedom. Ironic don't you think? How do you think you'd feel, as an American, if they had been Americans on American soil? And what would you have done about it?

But the real question from here is, I think, where will the next American war will be? The US needs to expend it's weapons to keep the production lines going and the constant development of newer ones. With the US owing trillions of dollars to China that, most likely, it will never pay back, I would expect there to be some major military conflict with them, if not Iran. That would be a world wide conflict and a nuclear one for sure.

You also have to wonder why the US is willing to spend 800 billion on the war in Iraq and yet rails against Universal Heath Care. What's the pay off?

How many Vietnamese would have died if the U.S. had not entered the war after the French bailed out? There is frankly no way of knowing. I suspect it would have simply been a different 3 million. It could also have ended up being far more since the war would have likely widened far beyond the borders of both North and South Vietman. Also, where is your condemnation for China who was interfering as much or more than the U.S. was.

Please back your 1 million Iraqi's killed with evidence and widely internationally accepted figures. Perhaps you are mistaking the figures of the recently ended conflict with the Iran/Iraq war which did indeed kill nearly a million... all without our direct involvement.

Mike

[séamuis]

How many Vietnamese would have died if the U.S. had not entered the war after the French bailed out?

I think it would have been far less. it would seem obvious that South Viet Nam wouldn't have put up near the fight that they did without our backing. it was us that trained and equipped the VietCong (formerly VietMinh) it was us that funded them. it was us that installed the puppet government in the south, it was us that funded, equipped and trained the ARVN. it was us that escalated the war. there were not mass killings in the south after we left, like there were in Cambodia when the Khmer Rouge took over, in fact it was the communist Vietnamese government that stopped the Khmer Rouge in 1979. so if you delete the involvement of the US in Viet Nam it likely would be that the south would have fallen many years sooner, saving millions of lives being lost in the process and Viet Nam would essentially be the same as it is today. a communist country. possibly better off in some ways due to the lack of destruction to national infrastructure (much like Iraq right now). it should also mean that the estimated (I believe) 3.3 million cambodians killed by the Khmer Rouge may not have died, as the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam may have been able to stop the Khmer Rouge before they came to power. something they wanted to do, as the two ideas of communism didn't mix well and the Vietnamese were afraid of the spread of their PCF backed form of communism. the idea that Viet Nam's communism would have spread beyond the borders to the rest of southeast asia was I believe a fear that had no real basis in fact. indeed, time has shown that to be just the case, since the communist government overthrew the republic in the south and stopped the genocidal regime in Cambodia, it hasn't spread any further. the threat of communist spread was far greater a threat from china than it ever was for Viet Nam and Nguyen That Thanh.