Americans are feeling embarassed to be American

[westsan]

These days it is embarassing to say "I'm from New York" in an international environment.
Even mentioning it to Japanese has lost its stature within the last 2 years.

Is anybody else experiencing this?

[Glenski]

no. Where did you get your claim?

[Anonymous]

Why should we be embarrassed? Because of self-esteems so low that our self-confidence needs to be boosted by the approval of others?

I am proud to be from San Diego even if the Padres and Chargers suck badly:-)

I am also glad to be a "clone".

I'm out.

[Anonymous]

Nobody likes Americans.

[Anonymous]

I like Americans. I especially like baseball players!

[Anonymous]

Frankly, I had given up a LONG TIME on caring whether anyone else likes Americans or not. Too many things in life to enjoy than to worry whether someone approves of my country of origin or not.

Now, TAKE ME OUT TO THE BALLGAME!

[Anonymous]

To be safe, I always say "I'm from Canada" now.

[Anonymous]

"canadians"-intelligent americans.

[Bugboy]

no wonder...

[Anonymous]

Westsan,

I hope that you aren't embarrassed. I know that Glenski won't be.

Have you tried telling people that you are from LA?

I think that it is harder for overseas Americans to keep up their spirits because they aren't being inundated with the positive aspects of the US on a daily basis. Usually it is only the problems that get the coverage. As I've said before on other threads, people gravitate toward negativity.

Therefore, all of you closet overseas Americans out there, take heart! You are strong. Hang in there! There are people like myself Stateside who are behind you.

I'm out.

[sosa]

I'm a Canadian and I have a lot of American friends and I don't care that they are American. I know of very few people who actually dislike Americans, most people seem to just dislike the US government, which is different. If everyone knew Canadian politicians they'd probably dislike them too, but because the US is big and powerful and goes around with a somewhat flippant attitude invading countries and wotnot, US politicians tend to get the most press and thus ____ off a greater number of people.

[Anonymous]

Sosa,

Regarding Canadian politics, I've seen Canadians go off on each other regarding politics in Ottawa. People with strong political feelings anywhere tend to display those tendencies (I realize this is not an earth-shattering statement).

And I'll say that I'm also an Anaheim Mighty Ducks fan. They don't suck, and I am certainly proud of them:-)

Quack! Quack!

GO DUCKS!!! Win the Stanley Cup this year!!!!!!

[Raceace]

Sosa you got my vote on that.

Americans as a whole are a great bunch of people, it just that America`s
elected leaders have a habit of pissing on any other country they feel
warrants it. So naturally your average rational American cops the brunt
of international opinion. Not really fair is it?
Lets face it politicians dont always reflect public opinion.

No one is ever perfectly happy with their government let alone proud of them. But it certaintly says a lot if some Americans are too embarrased to
mention their nationality for some fear of being antagonized about
their countries foreign policy. By the same token, non Americans should be
logical enough to know that the average American is not responsible for
their country`s international gaffes.

I admit I give some Americans a hard time but only in trying to work out
the American mindset or political motivation. I certainly dont assign blame.

If America was perfectly entitled to an international action, you can be sure
that the vast majority of American would steadfastly defend themselves and that of their country. In recent times some Americans dont feel they
should defend America so denying their lineage is way out.

Maybe saying "I am only one America of many" is good way to avoid
a lecture. Americans should be proud to be Americans.

Regards The Raceace

[westsan]

Actually, that is from a friend of mime, a New Yorker. I am not embarassed myself, but I have noticed a difference in the reactions of others when I tell them I am from America.
--Disclaimer: Typically I dont say "America" because it sounds stupid, I say the US.

Nonetheless, I do feel silly announcing Bush as my president.

[monika]

I like Americans, they are nice, tho some are vain. Tho some of my european and Aussie friends hate them, but that doesnt change the fact that I like them n think they r attractive ;-)

[CM]

you're still all "Septics" to me. Well the canadians are actually "french Septics"..... : )

[westsan]

ignoring the vanity issue...

I think you all may not understand is America has been sick for a long time.
What you are seeing now has been just domestic until late.

Texas has been killing people w/o due process and in cold blood without punishment for decades. Now Bush Jr. has dispersed the Texas plague unto the world.

but maybe that is another thread.

[daving]

Bla,

Lucky you are not in Singapore bro, you would certainly get the cane from there and then you might learn.

[westsan]

It is un-intelligible but quite funny.

I wonder what his motivation is? And he hides his domain too.

[Glenski]

One reason I'm embarrassed to be an American is when I consider that westsan is, too.

Generally, though, I'm not embarrassed.

[westsan]

That is the most retarded un-American comment.

[westsan]

You ought to be ashamed of yourself, making such statements.

[Васи]

Westsan, I know an American basketball player who plays in a team outside the USA and his team had to go to a basketball competition in Serbia. That American was so scared and ashamed of going to Serbia!!! The reasons is that USA bombed that country several years ago (hospitals, TV, factories and bridges) and he was afraid people will dislike him and he was embarassed too. I think soon there would be no countries left where Americans could travel without being ashamed or embarassed.

[Васи]

Glenski, I think we have to respect each other on this board. Westsan offers some good discussions and opinions, it does not matter whether we agree with his analysis and statements or not, we can exchange views and maybe opposite views can become closer through these discussions.

[westsan]

Васи,

I just hope that terrorism doesnt link up with the international anti-American movement.


I used to do this freaky deal with telephone companies where the arrangement was that if I could get lots of Japanese to call this island in the middle, called Diego Garcia, of nowhere where the international dialing rates would be extremely high then we would get a kickback of 15 cents a minute.

Long after that I found out that the sleazy american phone company execs that made tons of money of our calls to this island had an exclusive contract with the military for all telecom/data traffic to this island that served as an American base to bomb Arab/Asian countries.

What's the connection?
I am embarassed to have just recently discovered that the US govenment is forcing the natives of this island to live in poverty in other countries. Link: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/jul2000/isla-j18.shtml

[Васи]

Westsan,

Thank you very much for the link. It confirms one more time that the USA do not think about the suffering of other nations when they pursue their own interests. I have many American friends whom I like and who are very kind, very intelligent. But some of them do not have an idea what their government is doing in other areas of the world or if they have an idea, they honestly believe as patriots that the USA actions are based on noble and just causes and cannot see these actions with the eyes of the people who suffer from these actions.

About the war with Iraq is embarassing, Bush said that Saddam is a threat to international security because of the posession of weapons for mass destruction. Bush said that Saddam is "a deadly and imminent threat". He justified his war with the words that "the USA cannot stay without action in the face of this threat against humanity, USA has to defend the rights and hopes of the humanity and the international security". And now 5 months after occupation of Iraq we see not a single evidence of weapons of mass destructions and threats to the international security by Iraq.

[Dennis]

Perhaps this will be of some interest to readers of this thread. It is one man's account of his experience at the recent FTAA meetings in Quebec. It is a very different story from that which has been told by the US media . Check it out at:

smirkingchimp.com/print.php?sid=12989

[westsan]

----------------------------------------------------------------
And now 5
months after occupation of Iraq we see not a single evidence of weapons of
mass destructions and threats to the international security by Iraq.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Uhhhh Yeah... embarissing !!

[sosa]

One thing I've noticed about American politicians who acknowledge that America has an image problem is that they never admit that its in any way related to the actions of the US government, its just a public relations problem. Like with the middle east where they have invaded countries without provocation, bombed cities full of civilians, overthrown governments and given weapons to dictators who use them on their own people, they just can't figure out why America isn't more popular. Must be that they are somehow misunderstanding American culture and love of freedom or something. So instead of NOT dropping bombs on these people, they continue to do that, but they also are now spending millions of dollars on "Hey muslims, America is COOL!" propoganda and hoping that will somehow change America's image. It seems absolutely insane to me.

[Васи]

I think that it is embarassing, unhuman that USA "fight" against the weapons of mass destruction and then use depleted uranium spreading radioation and illnesses, both in Serbia and Iraq. I read in the newspaper today that on Friday again they made a nuclear test in Nevada. If they can make tests like this, then why North Korea and Iran should not. Do not get it really.

[Anonymous]

Easy. Because North Korea has a history that indicates a WMD would be a very bad thing for them to own.

[sosa]

And the US doesn't have a history that indicates WMD are a bad thing for it to own? The US is the only country to ever use nuclear weapons, and against civilians at that. Like Bach said they also have dumped depleted Uranium all over Serbia and Iraq, which will kill god only knows how many people in the coming years. They dumped Agent Orange in Vietnam over 30 years ago and children are still being born with birth defects.

[Васи]

EW
Countries like North Korea and Iran are developing such weapons as defence to the threats of USA, if they do not have such weapons, some day USA will bomb and destruct them too. Iraq, Yugoslavia did not have nuclear weapons and see what happened to them.

[Riktam de Voil]

Why are Americans surprised how unpopular their nation is? Most of us are only too polite to tell them directly how much we hate the abuse and violence and interference that their government has stood for time and time over again. How would your average american feel if there were Japanese military bases and personnel walking around all over their nation?

Your average American is still clearly brain washed about the nature of their government's intentions and track record for instigating war, not peace and economic oppression, not a helping hand.

Fact is that if you vote for criminals, then you share some responsibility for their actions. I always say to US military that unless they get out of my or anyone else's nation, then what do they expect if some radical wants to kick them out?

Everyone has a responsibility in this world to protest and to act- even small gestures help in times of conflict. if you do nothing but talk, then you let the world sink into acquisence with criminal intentions of people like Bush and Blair who will lie until as Goebbels said, the lie feels like a truth.

God help you if you were born an American, I truly feel sorry for you but you have all the more responsibility to keep an eye out to not let these bastards get into power in the first place.

[sculler]

Bach, it was NATO that intervened in the former Yugoslavia, with a very clear legal and moral mandate. Dont bother mentioning it in the same breath as Iraq, there is no equivalence.

That you consider Milosovichs` regime a victim of american aggression speaks volumes about your motivation and your ____ poor critique.

[Unky B]

Idiots on parade!!

Where do I sign up?

[Bugboy]

Here Unky B, SIGN HERE (https://www.fbijobs.com/) to join the force.

[kurogane]

There is an ancient Northern American Folk Belief (specifically, amongst the Naidanac Tribe) that Americans are the Ant-Christ, and this is why all God-Fearin' people from more advanced countries Fear, Loathe, and Ridicule them.

Not that a lot of them aren't perfectly nice folk, though. It's the gun thing, guys. Get rid of the guns. It's not Normal.

[Ney]

Go to www.copvcia.com

The truth is out there...........

[millie-ann]

Some wars are justified...especially in defence of an act of military aggression...problem is that the US has a history of INVADING countries..themselves perpetrating an act of aggression.
However, sometimes it is necessary to attack..

...therefore I believe the war in YUGOSLAVIA was entirely justified...when you see what is happenning now in Serbia it is quite terrifying...seems that Europe could be going down the road of another lethal Balkans adventure...

Problem is that the US is not consistent in it's policies...they murdered the elected socialist Allende in Chile yet they would not help the Cambodians and embraced Pol Pot who was a genocidal maniac. They invaded Iraq.. but sit at tables with the North Koreans...insane..

I think many people had symapthy for the war in Afghanistan...but the invasion of Iraq just doesn't make any sense whatsoever...and this kind of pure aggression for economic benefit just grates people.
Americans suddennly feel the pain of terrorism..but it is nothing new for many millions of people live with it every day in many other countries...it is the hypocrisy that stinks and unfortunately the Bush Govt has little credibility with many foriegners...(except some total fascists I had the misfortune to meet)

But of course we all shouldn't forget that 50% of Americans didn't vote for Bush...and there are many Americans who are not right-wing, fundamentalist Christians intent on saving the world from eternal damnation!!

[Dr.Drew]

The bottom line is, everyone supposedly hates Americans, but at the same times loves what America represents in terms of style, culture, power and influence. This is an ongoing dichotomy, probably left over from formerly powerful nations in Europe looking on with geopolitical _____ envy on their young boy who grew up to be a big giant...lol!!

Don't hate Uncle Sam, baby, hate the game...

[Васи]

Dr. Drew, the american 'culture' - blyaaah!

[japannewbie]

I'm proud to be American. Yes, I do have an Ignorant Buffoon as a President, but I didn't vote for him. Only the people that voted for him should be embarrassed.

I don't believe the rest of the world hates the US either. Last time I looked, the US still has more immigrates annually than any other country. It is a land of opportunity and most of those immigrants will say they are proud to be Americans too.

[sophie-chan]

Васи - Are you American bashing you stupid ruskie ho?! Go back to pitching vodka to the lazy Russian construction workers and hmmmm.... maybe suck (I'm sure you know what)!

[Anonymous]

I know tons of cool Americans, more cool than **** actually. And I know a lot of **** ENglish people and cool people too. ANyone with a brain knows that it is Bush and the war-addicts that bring the word American into disrepute.
Saying stuff like "All AMericans are thick" is right up there in the stupid tree with "All Japanese girls are dirty and up for sex". Does anyone really subscribe to such stupid pigeon- holing ?

[Васи]

I was in the USA these days for a short visit. I think the Amerikoses are very kind people in general but I cannot understand why they have to fingerprint everybody who comes to their country? I was fingerpinted by an Amerikos of Chinese origin who could not even speak proper English, isnt it ironic? The whole procedure is very funny, they fingeprint both your hands and take your picture. When I was fingerprinted in Japan, the clerk bowed 10 times to me to say sorry for doing that but the Amerikos who fingerprinted me did not say sorry...

[japannewbie]

The finger printing is a result of 9/11. It's not the answer to the problem, but it's a step in the right direction. America has a huge problem with illegal immigration. People will come and never leave. So after realizing that most of the 19 hijackers that attacked were also here illegally on student visas and other types of visas that had expired, the government decided that they had better get a grip on the problem. Hopefully there will be a better solution in the future.

The airport security jobs use to be low paying jobs until they all became Federal jobs after 9/11. The Chinese or Chinese-American guy that took your finger prints may have been a transfer from the old system. A lot of people working for the US Federal government are rude and lazy because they have excellent job security. There is a adage in the US, "It takes an act of God (Congress) to fire a federal employee." Meaning it's almost impossible to get rid of a poor performing Fed.

I think it speaks to the greatness of a country when someone that barely speaks English can become an American, get a decent job in the US, and be rude to the other immigrants that just get to the country. LOL. No but really, that Chinese guy probably made a fraction of what he makes now back in his home country and had less benefits and poor working conditions. Now he has been given an equal opportunity to succeed in life and his children and grandchildren will benefit from it. That's why hundreds of thousands of people come to America every year.



Post Edited (04-23-04 02:37)

[StinkyGaijin]

My humble opinion is that we're embarrassed because of two things: falling to some degree for the pressure of the administration to keep our mouths shut while they pursue their murderous profiteering and personal vendettas and the fat, lazy, stupid country that America has become.

Even those of us who didn't vote for Bush mostly aren't taking to the streets and using words like 'fascist' because we'll be called unpatriotic and accused of undermining the troops (the US is still very sensitive about the open disregard with which Vietnam vets were treated, so they overcompensate by "supporting the troops" even if they're bombing the crap out of civilians or shooting cars full of reporters.)

And as for fat, stupid, and lazy... we're #1!

We've pretty good reason to feel a little ashamed of our nationality.

[japannewbie]

StinkyGaijin, speak for yourself. If you're ashamed to be American, then say "I" not "we" (we're) because you are definately in the minority. I didn't vote for Bush and I don't support this war either. I do support our troops and it has nothing to do with Vietnam. I wasn't even born then. I support them because they didn't ask to go over there and they are just doing what they are told. I take responsibility for my actions, not someone elses. And since I'm not the commander-in-chief, I'm not responsible for this war. When the next election comes around I will vote against Bush and that's how I voice my opinion.

I'm proud to be American because this country has a lot to offer. This is the land of opportunity. This is a free country and has the longest standing democratic constitution. People are treated equal here regardless of race, gender, sex, or religion. Does this country have problems? Of course it does, nothing is perfect. Every country has problems. Don't be an imbecile, realize what you have and how good you have it. There are 260 million people in this country and you are ashamed to be American because of the hundred or so in Washington D.C.

If you're ashamed of your nationality, then denounce your citizenship. I'm sure there are a few million people that would love to have your spot.



Post Edited (04-23-04 05:38)

[StinkyGaijin]

You couldn't have made my point better than that. "Denounce" my citizenship, indeed.

That's the myth. The longest standing democratic constitution? I don't think so. Seems to me it's Iceland by about 800 years. And lest ye forget, we also had to amend that wonderful document to abolish slavery and allow women to vote. Couldn't quite get them equal pay for equal work, though.

And people are treated equal here? You think so? I take it you're a heterosexual white male? Just guessing. Tell me I'm wrong.

And as for the troops doing what they're told... Since you were born after Vietnam ended (I wasn't) you, of course, have no need to read about it. You certainly don't need to read about the nazi war tribunals. In short, that was the favorite excuse for killing innocent people. We did what we were told.

Yeah, it's the 100 in Washington. They rest of us have clean hands-- especially if we went all the way to the polls and voted against Bush. I mean, really, what more could we do?

[japannewbie]

I'm an African American, heterosexual, male, 28 years old, served in the Army for 4 years as an officer. So no, I'm not a white male. Do I believe I am treated equal, "yes I do." Do I believe there is racism in America, "yes I do." Like I said in my earlier post, there are 260 million people in the US so I don't walk around and blame everyone for the racist views of a few.

Icelands has had freedom for hundreds of years, but they do not have the longest standing democratic constitution. There current constitution has been effective since 17 June 1944. Look it up I posted a link for you.

http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:TgXbV34_noUJ:www.iceland.is/embassy/icelandis.nsf/form/content.html%3FopenForm%26wt%3D4B0130332E30322E303 42E3032004C01454E4700+Iceland+constitution+1944&hl =en

http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:ndcH5hYQ_-MJ:www.worldstats.org/world/iceland.shtml+longest+standing+constitution+icelan d&hl=en

Our constitution was not perfect in the beginning and it's not perfect now. It is much better now and it will get better in the future, but it will never be perfect. Nothing is, but it is still great.

And as for your comparison of my words, "the troops are just doing what they are told." You can't be serious. Do you really believe that America is committing a comparable act to what the nazis did in the 30s and 40s. Our soldiers aren't committing genocide and are not intentionally killing civilians. Yes some civilians do get killed in war, but US forces have went to great lengths to ensure that doesn't happen.

Denounce your citizenship. You're an extremist and probably shouldn't be voting anyway. You're probably the same Nader supporter that put Bush in office. I think the country will do better without you.



Post Edited (04-23-04 06:37)

[StinkyGaijin]

Don't believe you on the African American thing, but that's neither here nor there. My point is that all Americans are not treated equally. That's a naive proposition if ever there was one. Never had a woman President. Never had a Black President. Gay people can't get married. Arab Americans are currently on the shitlist. Not too many years back, it was the Japanese Americans. African Americans in my neighborhood live in the projects and will continue to do so since their educational opportunities are, let's say, limited in the inner city public schools.

You were in the Army? So, you're not exactly neutral on the subject are you? And, I'm not comparing what America's doing to what the nazis did in any other way than how I did explicitly. I'm saying that the worst of crimes can be excused with a simple "I was following orders." Again, try Vietnam on for size. How many villages were torched or civilians murdered in Cambodia because Kissinger thought it was a good idea? Everyone's clean, right? He didn't kill anyone directly, the troops were just doing as they were told, and Joe 6pack voted against Nixon. Phew. No one did anything wrong.

You sound pretty comfortable with the idea that some civilians get killed in war. How many is OK? How many mothers and babies are an acceptable level of collateral damage to pursue someone's personal vendetta or profiteering scheme? Do you have children? How would you feel about a country accidentally killing your child to pursue their own political ends? Some civilians. People. Just exactly like you and me.

And the word that you're after is "renounce." Next time try shouting "love it or leave it!" At least you'll get the words right. I'm an extremist, eh? Again, you've made my point better than I could have. I critized the United States, and I'm some kind of wacko.

This is boring. You win. I shall indeed leave these United States in a few short weeks. And when I do, I shall tell anyone in Japan who asks that I am American and embarrassed about it.

[japannewbie]

Why don't you believe me on the African American thing? You don't believe that an African American can have a different view point then Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton?

I grew up in Mesa, Arizona (a phoenix suburb) in a middle class neighborhood. I went to public schools which was about 90% white, 9% mexican-american, and 1% other. Me and my black friends were treated as equals. Our parents had grown up in poor neighborhoods in the South and had moved to the west for better opportunities. My father was a Captain (O-6) in the Navy and my mother was a High School counselor. I went on to graduate from college, got a commission, and after the military I got a 85K loan and started a retail business inside a major region mall. My two closes friends from college (both are black) went on to become a Medical Doctor and an Engineer. I think I'm doing quite well, because I didn't walk around on a daily basis saying the white man has his foot on my neck. I've experienced racism before and I dealt with it on the spot. If it came from a company or the police, I wrote letters to the Manager or the Mayor. I've done both. I know a lot of other blacks from college that use to walk around blaming other people when they weren't even trying. They haven't been as successful as me or the two friends that I mentioned before.

The majority of middle class blacks are just like me. They work hard, are politically left leaning moderates, and don't walk around thinking everyone is descriminating against them.

Yes I was in the military and your right I'm not neutral. I don't think we should have went to war. But the guys are over there now, what the hell do you want them to do, "Stand in place and die." BS, they need to get some order and fix what is broken. You can't go to another country and break something and just leave, if that's what you are suggesting.

Am I comfortable with women, children, or any other civilian killed in the war. "NO, I'M NOT." But we don't live in candyland, we live in the real world where people die. It's going to happen. The soldiers over there are not intentionally killing civilians.

I stand corrected on the word "denounce". I should have used the word "renounce" and you should have also in your second posts before you looked up the word. Now, you stand corrected on trying to correct me and tell me that Iceland had the longest standing constitution. When you're wrong your wrong, just admit it.

By the way, what's your ethnicity, sexual orientation, and gender? I told you mine.



Post Edited (04-23-04 08:06)

[StinkyGaijin]

Sorry, I should have made myself more clear. I don't really believe that you're Black, but it doesn't matter one iota. Nor does my particular demographic.

I'm trying to make a point about the principles that lead an American to be embarrassed about the actions of his country. Your identity issues are not my concern. If you can say that all Americans are treated equally as a Black man in this country, that says volumes about your opinions.

You've got the classic America's #1 issue. America is a country living off the fat of newly, relatively speaking, conquered ground that was LOADED with resources. We stole the whole place... we, as in, the United States of America. That's all. We're no smarter. We're no more ordained by God. Our political system leaves a WHOLE lot to be desired. We're not the only country on earth with free speech. Etc.

What we are is an economic and military monstrosity whose citizens refuse to acknowledge their collective guilt for its actions. Instead we drive around with flag bumper stickers and "these color's don't run" t-shirts when we should be asking if we could spend some of that military budget winning friends rather than bombing the hell out of everyone who hasn't developed nukes yet.

Our medical system lags but we don't reform it, our schools aren't working but we don't fund them, and our people don't question any of it or act to change it. That was the basic issue. That's why I'm embarrassed, presently, to be an American. Not because I was born on this particular patch of dirt.

[japannewbie]

Well as long as you use the word "I" and not "we."

I don't have any identity issues. I know exactly who I am and I'm proud of it. Having confidence in yourself is not something to be ashamed of.

This country does have it's problems just as every country does. There is no perfect country and no perfect system. You have to take the good with the bad. I believe this country has a lot to offer and I can see that.

StinkyGaijin, I truly believe that we are probably on the same side of many issues. Just maybe you are more extreme than I am. I too will be leaving this country for another. I'm going to Japan. But I'm not leaving because I hate my country, I'm leaving because I would like to explore another country and understand its culture. I hope after you leave you will be able to see some good things in our country.

By the way, you still didn't acknowledge your Iceland mistake. If you can point out my mistake, then acknowledge your mistakes.

[japannewbie]

Stinkygaijin, view my post on japantoday.com and you will see my views on the war are probably similar to yours. This particular post written two weeks ago was about my concerns of racism toward African Americans in Japan. I only point this out because you can't seem to believe that I am African American and I don't walk around thinking every is a racist.

http://forum.japantoday.com/m_119130/mpage_1/key_//tm.htm#119988

[StinkyGaijin]

You're new to this? Conciliatory language is not part of the forum posting process.

I say that I'm ashamed of America.
You say I'm a radical nut and America ROOLZ!
I say you're an Oreo with identity issues,
You say I'm a cracker apologist.
I correct your spelling.
You tell me I'm anal retentive and probably a huge homo.
Etc...

You don't come out and say "we're on the same side of a lot of issues..." even if it's true. It's just not done. Don't you mean something like "why not go to France if you hate it so much here?" And then I say "at least I've never killed anyone's mommy with a shell lobbed from offshore, you fascist _______."

C'mon man.

Yes, I think that you are correct that the US Constitution is the oldest written blah blah blah...

Happy now?

See ya in Tokyo!

[westsan]

-- I find it amazing that Af-Am people insist on debating Af-Am issues on white owned sites with white people...

more power to you... loners

[Riktam de Voil]

A) ...And what are those so called cherished values of 'freedom and opportunity'? Blind greed to make everyone else into consumers of your unfeasible mad economic dream. It can't last forever and it will destroy us all from the inside or from the outside. Lets hope greed and power destroy America from the inside first and not last as otherwise there will be no ecology to speak of.

japannewbie wrote:


> A) The finger printing is a result of 9/11. It's not the answer to the
> problem, but it's a step in the right direction. America has a huge
> problem with illegal immigration. People will come and never leave.

EDITED...
>
> I think it speaks to the greatness of a country when someone that barely
> speaks English can become an American, get a decent job in the US, and be
> rude to the other immigrants that just get to the country. LOL. No but
> really, that Chinese guy probably made a fraction of what he makes now
> back in his home country and had less benefits and poor working
> conditions. Now he has been given an equal opportunity to succeed in life
> and his children and grandchildren will benefit from it. That's why
> hundreds of thousands of people come to America every year.
>

[Riktam de Voil]

But based on what, eh? To bully, rape and make any violent assumption to brutalise, steal and effect whatever polices and crimes, your government ( and thus your people too) judges acceptable to continuing the 'American way of life' or presrve so called "American national security"

...god help us all before it is already too late.

japannewbie wrote:


> StinkyGaijin, speak for yourself. If you're ashamed to be American, then
> say "I" not "we're" because you are definately in the minority. I didn't
> vote for Bush and I don't support this war either. I do support our
> troops and it has nothing to do with Vietnam. I wasn't even born then. I
> support them because they didn't ask to go over there and they are just
> doing what they are told. I take responsibility for my actions, not
> someone elses. And since I'm not the commander-in-chief, I'm not
> responsible for this war. When the next election comes around I will vote
> against Bush and that's how I voice my opinion.
>
> I'm proud to be American because this country has a lot to offer. This is
> the land of opportunity. This is a free country and has the longest
> standing democratic constitution. People are treated equal here
> regardless of race, gender, sex, or religion. Does this country have
> problems? Of course it does, nothing is perfect. Every country has
> problems. Don't be an imbecile, realize what you have and how good you
> have it. There are 260 million people in this country and you are ashamed
> to be American because of the hundred or so in Washington D.C.
>
> If you're ashamed of your nationality, then denounce your citizenship.
> I'm sure there are a few million people that would love to have your spot.
>

[Riktam de Voil]

it is people, like you, my friend, cos your average American is so brain -washed about the state of his nation's place in the world.

Anyway, what do you have against Nader anway? Don't you se that your average politician won't change **** cos your system and so calld democratic values and beloved constitution counts for nothing solid and reliable anyway. It is not what you have on paper- but what you practise around the world ( and as stinky gaijin points out not just within your own national boundaries!!)


Whatever can be said about American goverments, eventually I'd say it is not the crucial issue- it is the blind stupidity of so many American people to actually be capable to choose for themselves ( and god help us, the rest of the world too cos of USA's destructive influence) a semi decent leader.

That is why, we in the rest of the world scorn at your godforsaken country. thanks good ness, I am not an American. If I were, I would hardly be able to live out one day without being furious at the idiocy of America' corruption and moral bankruptcy- wake up and smell the stink of America the beautiful. And please note you can start by removing your moron soldiesr from our nations first before those less wise and more angry than I am decide to remove them permanently too.


Newbie wrote:


>
> I'm an African American, heterosexual, male, 28 years old, served in the
> Army for 4 years as an officer. So no, I'm not a white male. Do I
> believe I am treated equal, "yes I do." Do I believe there is racism in
> America, "yes I do." Like I said in my earlier post, there are 260
> million people in the US so I don't walk around and blame everyone for the
> racist views of a few.
>
> Icelands has had freedom for hundreds of years, but they do not have the
> longest standing democratic constitution. There current constitution has
> been effective since 17 June 1944. Look it up I posted a link for you.
>
> http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:ndcH5hYQ_-MJ:www.worldstats.org/world/ice
> land.shtml+longest+standing+constitution+iceland&h l=en
>
> Our constitution was not perfect in the beginning and it's not perfect
> now. It is much better now and it will get better in the future, but it
> will never be perfect. Nothing is, but it is still great.
>
> And as for your comparison of my words, "the troops are just doing what
> they are told." You can't be serious. Do you really believe that America
> is committing a comparable act to what the nazis did in the 30s and 40s.
> Our soldiers aren't committing genocide and are not intentionally killing
> civilians. Yes some civilians do get killed in war, but US forces have
> when to great lengths to ensure that doesn't happen.
>
> Denounce your citizenship. You're an extremist and probably shouldn't be
> voting anyway. You're probably the same Nader supporter that put Bush in
> office. I think the country will do better without you.

[japannewbie]

I don't have anything against Nader, just the idiots that voted for him. Now they are the biggest protesters and not understanding that their vote for Nader helped Bush get in office. In a two party system (no system is perfect) sometimes you have to vote for the lesser of two evils and Nader supporters didn't understand that and now we all suffer.

As far as the constitution issues. What are you referring to when you say that America doesn't practice what is written?

No country is perfect, but the US is still a great country for the reasons I mentioned above. I'm sure you are not ashamed of the country you live in, but your country has it's problems too. America is still the most desirable place to live in the world. You might not agree, but our immigration says otherwise. And of course there are people in the world that hate the US. Can't make everyone happy.

[Steamboat]

Yes, the bombing of Serbia was a Bill Clinton legacy. And now, people are blaming Bush and painting him as a warmonger. Most foreigners loved Clinton because he let America bend over and take it up the A** many times--a warped version of turning the other cheek (pun intended).



Post Edited (05-30-04 12:34)

[Mikey]

QUOTE: America is still the most desirable place to live in the world.

A bunch a Mexicans sneaking into the US desert doesnt constitute America as 'the most desirable place to live in the world.'

And I think it's Melbourne (Australia) that has been voted 'world's most liveable city' a few years in a row, isn't it?

[japannewbie]

Melbourne, are you kidding me. I don't care what some newpaper poll says about that, look at the numbers and you will get real answer. Australia has only 5 million visitors annually, that's less then Hawaii (one of the smallest states). Now I'm only talking about visitors, not immigration but I think it safe to say that the US has more visa applications and more legal and illegal immigration then Australia.

[Mahou]

Hawaii is Hawaii.

When people go to Hawaii, they do not say "I am going to America".

[japannewbie]

Well look up the numbers then. I'm sure you will find that the US has more permanent visa, citizenship, and visitor applications then Australia. There are surveys that I see all the time that say things like the most desirable place to live in America is Poedunk, Iowa with a population of 6 people. But when you look at the numbers a few hundred thousand people move to Las Vegas every year. I would say Las Vegas is the place to be since the numbers prove it. Look up the numbers and you will see.

[Mikey]

Look at the numbers?

I just need to look at the TV news to know which is not the most desirable place to live.

Now, now......let's not get into a 'my city is better than your city' _____ fight.......guilty as charged.

Let's just say b o t h places are very nice and comfortable and we can have a lovely life in either and have you seen Bowling For Columbine?

[thickmick]

Mahou ,I agree with you ,hawaaii was robbed from the islanders by thieving conniving businessmen whom ___.newbie seems to support .Hawaaii is a special place and Britain respected this and this is why they did not claim it.and that is why the british flag is on the hawaiian flag .Because they love us more than the yanks who robbed them blind and now ,the original inhabitants live in poverty why the Yanks suck it dry ..

I say give Hawaii back to its true onweers ,one of whom is rotting in an American Gaol

Down with American imperialism ,they are truly evil.

[japannewbie]

I wasn't trying to say other countries suck. I was making a point to say how desirable the US is since so many people want to come here. People on this forum are always bitching about the US and never point out the good things. So I pointed out the good things. Unfornately, you had the impression that there can only be one great nation and that's not what I was trying to say. There is many great places to live, but the fact still remains that the US has the highest immigration numbers that I know of and people want to come here from all over the world, and I interpret that to mean that the USA is desirable.

I'm sure Australia is great too. I hope to go there in the next couple years.

thickmick, what country are you from?

Yes I've seen Bowling for Columbine. I thought it was entertaining, but not news.

[thickmick]

DEar Jn , the main resaon that people want to come to the U.S. is financial and driven by what they see on broadcasts and in glossy magazines manother resaon is that the sytem they are leaving is totally shite i.e. Africa south america eastern europe ..

Like stinky pointed out ,Amrica has some bad problems ,he is only speaking the truth and hiw views are not welcome in most of America because of their ignorance .

I am from England and I don`t see myself going back there .

As MM pointed out most Americans aim for this hollywood dream of making it rich instead of making comfortable and good for the majority like in Japan ,Denmark or Norway ..

I read in your previous post about how you dealt with racism ,good for you .Fortunately you had a good start in life and you made something of your self and also took a big chance with the business I hope it does well for you sincerely.Unfortunately for most blacks they don`t have the same start and it maybe the only chance they have is sport ,music or the forces .

Living in Japan I do get a slight inkling of what it is like to be black ,being called smelly dirty stupid on a daily basis ( and thats before I leave the house ) .If only all people could get this feeling of discrimination and then we might be able to put a stop to it ..


If I were to settle in America it would be Hawaii as there seems to be a good mix of peoples and they seem to get along well ,let me know if I am wrong
aloha

[paulh]

Melbourne is a 20 hour plane ride from Los Angeles and about 24 hours from London. The only reason people dont go there is its so far away from anywhere. The ones who do go rave about the place. People say the same about New Zealand and thats why they choose to make movies like Lord of the Rings and Last samurai there.

Give me Melbourne over tacky Disneyland and Universal Studios anyday.

[japannewbie]

thickmick, have you ever lived in the US before?

It sounds like all of your information comes from Moore and the media, but not actual experience in America. In Bowling for Columbine, Moore pointed out how the media portrays the Black man as a poor criminal. I agree with Moore. If all you know about Black people is what you see on TV, you would think that all black people are poor, uneducated, criminals, entertainers, and atheletes. This is not the case at all. If you have lived in the US you would know that Blacks and Hispanics are at the bottom of the income level. 24% of blacks are in poverty compared to 8% of whites. Those numbers are terrible and the people living in the inter-city have it tough. But Moore exaggerates the issue. I grew up mostly in Arizona and have several cousins that grew up poor. Some went to college, some learned a trade, and some still live in the ghetto. But I mention this because none of them were trapped in the ghetto. Now you will probably say that is Arizona, but I also saw the same thing when I lived in New Orleans (where I went to High School). New Orleans is about as bad as it gets when it comes to urban ghettos. This was 1990 - 1992, when New Orleans was number 2 in the nation in murders per capita. Over 400 homocides in a city of 500,000, 60% black, and most of the murders were Blacks. New Orleans also has a caste system where it is easier to succeed based on what your parents do for a living, the color of your skin, and a lot of other dumb things the people in the south think are important. But the people I went to public school with (mostly black), went onto college, some got a trade and job, and some stayed in the ghetto.

I say all of this because the media makes people think blacks are at the bottom with no possible way up. You believe that most blacks in America don't have a good start because you watch TV. That is definately WRONG! It isn't true. The majority of blacks in America are in the middle class. They go to schools with white people, they learn the same subjects, and they don't experience racism on a daily basis (at least not open blatant). Do some research on Atlanta, which is about 60% black and you will see that there is a huge upper middle class black population there. Doctors, Professors, Lawyers, Teachers, Military Officers, and other professionals. But if you watch TV, you will only see MTV Cribs showing Evander Holyfield's 10 million dollar house, or Usher's new music studio.

I'm not sure which countries have a higher precentage of emmigration to America. But I know America has a high immigration from westernized countries also. Also, the legal immigrants in this country are more educated then Americans in general. I think 20% of Americans have college degrees and the immigrant population is much higher, don't remember off hand. I say that because the immigrants in America probably had it good in their own country, but they chose to leave it behind and come to America.

I didn't hear Moore say that most Americans want the hollywood dream of making it rich, but if you say he said it then I believe you. Moore is just full of **** if he said that. Most of America is middle class. A small percentage of rich and a small percentage of poor. Most Americas pursue the American Dream not the Hollywood Dream. The American Dream is owning a nice house, in a nice neighborhood, with a wife, 2 kids, and a dog. And the majority Americans get that dream over time. Life is pretty good for most of America, working 40 to 50 hours a week, taking family vacations, and enjoying their free time. Most Americans are content, whether they are white collar $70,000 per year businessmen, or $25,000 blue collar grocery store clerks.

If you really believe Moore that Americans are too busy to make it comfortable for the majority, look up the salaries per capita, or some quality of life numbers and I think you'll find Americans do quite well in terms of quality of life.



Post Edited (06-09-04 11:13)

[japannewbie]

I found some immigration numbers. According to the Center for Immigration studies the US has 33 million legal and illegal immigrants living in the US. It is estimated that 9-11 million are illegal, possibly more. 33 million immigrants is larger than the entire population of Canada. If you subtract the illegal immigrants you would still have more people then the entire population of Australia.

So I think it is safe to say that the US is desirable.

http://216.109.117.135/search/cache?p=legal+immigrants+per+year&ei=UTF-8&n=20&fl=0&u=www.cairco.org/data/quick_facts.html&w=legal+immigrants+per+year&d=FED A737FD9&c=482&yc=19120&icp=1

http://www.cis.org/

This link has a break down of the immigration in the US. But it also includes illegal immigration so the numbers for education level, income level and everything else are thrown off from the illegal immigration from mexico. 30% of all immigrants in the US are from Mexico.
http://www.cis.org/articles/2002/back1302.html



Post Edited (06-09-04 11:05)

[thickmick]

JN
I have stayed in America several times the longest being 5 weeks .I alos drove across it in 1989 .I have worked with worked for and lived with Americans in japan most of my friends are Americans .I will have to get some of those glasses you have got .

It is easy to ignore what you don`t care about .

for example in England in the 80`s there was rampant unemployment in the north of England

things wer T` bleak as they say up T` north.

however in the south it might as well have been a different country .And the southerners did not vare a toss what was happening up north .Itc called the I`m allright Jcak syndrome ,it never hits homweuntil they lose their job.

You masy be doing okay in Hawaii ,but most of the people I spoke to were doing 2 or 3 jobs to try and make a nice life . I work for myself as well and recieve the appropiate rewards.
However I think it is wrong to expect someone to work their bals for no real reward at the end of the day $5.95 is not a real reward if you have to put in 70 hour weeks to make a living ..

Regards

[Mahou]

Practically everyone in America, except the native Indians are immigrants.

If you really wanted to crunch some data, get one that compares the number of actual immigration per year, per country.

[trip_hop]

Didn't the "native Americans" originally migrate across the landbridge from Mongolia? Before the development of geography and measurement, borders hardly existed, nation states did not exist, and the passport (passe partout) was not even on the horizon. Freedom of movement was real, and Arabs, Jews and Christians even lived together peacefully, though not always harmoniously.

The grass is not always greener on the other side!

[japannewbie]

Actual immigration per year is over 800,000 legal plus an estimated 400,000 illegal. How's that for numbers. Go to the link I posted and the annual numbers are there also.

thickmick, I'm not ignoring the problems. I know they are there, but what I am telling you is that it is not as big as you might think. It is a small percentage of people. I've lived 2 years in Baton Rouge, 2 years New Orleans, 2 years LA, 4 years Tucson, 6 months Virginia, 5 years Hawaii, over 10 years in Phoenix, and have been to practically ever state in the west coast, south, and east coast. I'm telling you that what you see on TV is hyped up. It has created sterotypes in your head that you can't see past. Your boy Moore even says it. The media has you thinking that most blacks don't have a good start like I did. But they do. The numbers say they do.

Also, what was your contact with blacks when you were in the US? Was your job working with intercity youth, maybe that would give you a different impression. Also, I would think that most of the Americans that you come in contact with in Japan are from similar demographics. After all, Japan makes it difficult to get a visa without a degree right? So maybe you are hearing many opinions from the same type of person.

Anyway, your impression of blacks being held at the bottom in the US is just wrong. Maybe in the 60s and 70s it was that way. But not today. There is still racism and discrimination, but usually not blantant. That is why programs like affirmative action that promote equal treatment of minorities and women are still necessary. And blacks are not the biggest benifactor of Affirmative Action, White Women are, but the media makes people think blacks are.

What was the last major civil rights issue you heard that happened in the US? Not a lot of noise these days, and it's not because we don't have civil rights leader that don't get press coverage.

[Bluedog]

"Before the development of geography and measurement, borders hardly existed, nation states did not exist,"

But I would imagine it was a pretty ballsy thing to just up and move into another area, even though they didn:t technically have borders, wasn:t it kind of like "my turf" and "your turf" and who had the biggest _______ had the most turf? Actually, not much has changed come to think of it.

[trip_hop]

bluedog - for a more detailed account, I recommend Bernard Lewis's book, "What went wrong?" Although its primary focus is Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response, it does give excellent accounts of mobility, travel, immigration, acquisition of foreign languages, social and cultural barriers, secularism and society, and aspects of modernity.

Even today, the wandering Bedu of the Arabian Peninsula engage in transmigration with the herds between 3-4 countries, with no papers. The last remnants of a world without borders?

[Frungy]

Please don't call affirmative action a "program to help minorities." It doesn't help most asians at all... some might argue that asians get the shaft when it comes to applying to competitive universities.

Affirmative action shouldn't even exist to help "underrepresenteted minorites" either... it should help anyone who is underprivaleged. There are whites in poor inner city schools as well, just as there are blacks in wealthy suburbs.

[japannewbie]

Frungy, Affirmative Action is just one of many programs that is targeted at helping "underrepresented" minorities and "underrepresented" women. You wouldn't see Affirmative Action in use in a place that already has over representation for minorities and women. Affrimative Action is the program you here most about because minorities and women still face discrimination more than the majority and men. Asians do fall into Affrimative Action programs if they are underrepresented.

Also, there are plentry of other programs out there to help underprivaleged. You mentioned college in your example, do some reading and I'm sure you will find that most colleges do look at underprivaleged very heavily. When Bush came out and spoke against University of Michigan's undergraduate and Law School's admission policy, (both schools are very competitive) the media focused on their admission policy that helped blacks. But the University also gave applicants exra points for going from poor neighborhoods, rural neighborhoods, legacy students, and a host of other things.

Affirmative Action is still necessary to prevent racial and gender discrimination. At least until discrimination is gone or until there is a better method to prevent discrimination.



Post Edited (06-10-04 02:22)

[japannewbie]

Frungy, read this study titled, "Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination" and then tell me that Affirmative Action shouldn't be used for minorities.

The entire study can be download here: http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:IrBpJk3odSIJ:ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/9873.html+%22Are+Emily+and+Greg+More+Employable+th an+Lakisha+and+Jamal%3F%22&hl=en


Here is an Abstract:
We perform a field experiment to measure racial discrimination in the labor market. We respond with fictitious resumes to help-wanted ads in Boston and Chicago newspapers. To manipulate perception of race, each resume is assigned either a very African American sounding name or a very White sounding name. The results show significant discrimination against African-American names: White names receive 50 percent more callbacks for interviews. We also find that race affects the benefits of a better resume. For White names, a higher quality resume elicits 30 percent more callbacks whereas for African Americans, it elicits a far smaller increase. Applicants living in better neighborhoods receive more callbacks but, interestingly, this effect does not differ by race. The amount of discrimination is uniform across occupations and industries. Federal contractors and employers who list Equal Opportunity Employer' in their ad discriminate as much as other employers. We find little evidence that our results are driven by employers inferring something other than race, such as social class, from the names. These results suggest that racial discrimination is still a prominent feature of the labor market.



Post Edited (06-10-04 02:42)

[thickmick]

JN Iwas talking to an american friend ans a south african guy who lived in the U.S and they said that if a Afam wanted to make it he could . However ,looking at your last post it seems you are agreeing the discrimination still exists .

[japannewbie]

Of course discrimination still exist. It will always exist everywhere. But discrimination is usually not institutionalized. I believe discrimination is now present because of subconscious stereotypes people have that derive from things like the media. I think most people have perceptions about other people and that is normal. But when the perceptions become negative it will lead to unintentional discrimination. That's why those applicants didn't get interviews. That is why people believe most blacks come from poverty and their only chance to make it out of the ghetto is with a basketball. That is why people believe most criminals are black or most welfare recipients are black. None of these things are true.

Institutionalized discrimination exist on a smaller level that is more difficult to prove. Like racial profiling from particular police departments. Everyone knows it's happening, but no one can prove it. But these two types of discrimination are not prevailent enough to stop middle class or poor blacks from becoming successful.

Another thing about blacks in poverty. People like Moore think that the government should bend over backward to get blacks out of poverty. There are programs out there that can help when used properly. And the blacks that use these programs do make it out to become productive middle class citizens. However, not everyone can be helped and it is not the governments fault. Have you ever heard the saying, "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." Well this happens often in black and other poor communities. Last month, Bill Cosby (which has made huge contributions to the black community) made a speech at Howard University (A historically black university) for an NAACP gala honoring the 50th anniversary of Brown vs. Board of Education decision at the supreme court. Cosby said, in a serious speech, that blacks need to take more responsibility for their success, instead of blaming society for failure. He was right and this is what most middle class blacks (which is the majority) believe. But when the media goes and asked black people what is going on, they will interview someone like Al Sharpton who makes his money by blaming the government. Sharpton will never admit that Cosby is right, because Sharpton would be out of a job.

Read this acticle, you will be surprised. It was very controversial because of the polically incorrect way he said it. But he was still right. If you are still not satified do a search on the internet for Cosby controversy and you will see that most black jornalist are agreeing with him.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1317&ncid=742&e=11&u=/ucas/20040525/cm_ucas/billcosbyspointedremarksmaysparkmuchneededdebate

This link is a column by Clarence Paige, agreeing with Cosby.
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0604/page.html



Post Edited (06-10-04 14:03)

[japannewbie]

Here is all of the excerpts that I could find about Cosby's speech:

"Ladies and gentlemen, the lower economic people are not holding up their end in this deal," he declared. "These people are not parenting. They are buying things for kids -- $500 sneakers for what? And won't spend $200 for 'Hooked on Phonics.' . . .

"They're standing on the corner and they can't speak English," he exclaimed. "I can't even talk the way these people talk: 'Why you ain't,' 'Where you is' . . . And I blamed the kid until I heard the mother talk. And then I heard the father talk. . . . Everybody knows it's important to speak English except these knuckleheads. . . . You can't be a doctor with that kind of crap coming out of your mouth!"

The Post's Hamil Harris reports that Cosby also turned his wrath to "the incarcerated," saying: "These are not political criminals. These are people going around stealing Coca-Cola. People getting shot in the back of the head over a piece of pound cake and then we run out and we are outraged, [saying] 'The cops shouldn't have shot him.' What the hell was he doing with the pound cake in his hand?"

When Cosby finally concluded, Howard University President H. Patrick Swygert, NAACP President Kweisi Mfume and NAACP legal defense fund head Theodore Shaw came to the podium looking stone-faced. Shaw told the crowd that most people on welfare are not African American, and many of the problems his organization has addressed in the black community were not self-inflicted.

[Frungy]

So affirmative action exists to help underprivaleged people, or to help underprivaleged minorities? And what does underprivaleged mean? Should a black teen living in Greenwich, CT benefit from affirmative action to enter Harvard? Or because his family is already obviously well-off, he shouldn't? Should a white teen living in a poor area of the Bronx benefit from affirmative action? What if he has worked hard to overcome the troubles of the neighborhood and become a star student?

To me, there seems to be two arguements for affirmative action- on one side, people say that because blacks or native americans were blatantly treated unequally a few decades ago and beyond due to slavery and exile, they should be allowed to "catch up" in today's society. On another side, people say that due to current discrimination, companies/colleges are hesitant to recruiting blacks, women, or other minorities. I don't know the American judicial system very well, but I thought there were laws in place to prevent the latter from happening (whether they're enforced or not is another matter.)

In my opinion, affirmative action shouldn't help ANYONE who is living well-off already, and should help ANYONE who is living in a depressed neighborhood. If many depressed neighborhoods are populated by a certain ethnicity, so be it, they get the most help. But it should be color-blind.

[japannewbie]

Frungy did you read that study I posted about the job applicants?

That is why affirmative action is necessary, because it didn't matter what the income status of the applicants was, the black sounding names were 50% less likely to even get an interview. Affirmative Action doesn't have anything to do with slavery, it has to do with equal treatment. Equal Opportunity laws were put into effect, but that doesn't mean they are followed. So laws like affirmative action were put into effect to try to eliminate discrimination based on a number of things. But typically people are not being discriminated against if they have overrepresentation. So Affirmative Action will kick in when people are underrepresented.

Look at Japan. They have equal opportunity laws also, but they are not enforced. So what you end up having is job announcements that require a specific age and gender, and native level japanese (which means NO GAIJIN). You have to enforce the laws or the laws are useless.

Also, I think Affirmative Action gets a bad reputation from it's opponents. But Affirmative Action varies depending on what it is being applied to. So most of the time, people criticizing it don't even know the specifics and think it just gives blacks an advantage, reverse discrimination they will say. But again, blacks are not the biggest benifactor. Sometimes the program doesn't even require the company to hire anyone, but it requires them to track the race of who they interview. To make sure that everyone is at least getting fair treatment in terms of call backs.

What you are talking about is a college admissions policy. It doesn't have anything to do with affirmative action. Harvard is a private university and they want to diversify their campus so that the students get a well rounded education and so they also get a cultural experience. That is the same reason they recruit foreigners. But their admissions policy also let's in people with subpar grades that are children and grandchildren of alumni. Do you think that is fair? Those people don't add anything to the learning experience.

Lastly, the supreme court ruled that it was ok for the University to consider Race when recruiting students. They just need to change their points system to factor in race in another way.



Post Edited (06-10-04 15:10)

[Steamboat]

ThickMick,

You really have a lot of chutzpah to post the total crap that I've read from you in this and in other threads. "You said about Hawaii and Hawaiians, "...they love us more than the yanks who robbed them blind and now, the original inhabitants live in poverty why [while] the Yanks suck it dry." [and] "Hawaaii is a special place and Britain respected this and this is why they did not claim it." Ohhhh Pleeeeeeeeeease!!!!!

I guess India wasn't a special place, nor was Rhodesia, nor Malaysia, et cetera. I guess, in your worldview, they were just ordinary places. That's why the crown had to be pressured into leaving. What about Hong Kong? Just another non-special place? Were the Brits exploiting it? Actually, I think not, nor does the US exploit Hawaii at the expense of Native Hawaiians.

I'm not saying that it was right for the US to just take Hawaii for itself, but there are two main things to consider: First, the US occupation happened a long time ago. It's not practical to just "give it back" so-to-speak, anymore than it would be practical to give the Western part of Poland back to Germany (as it was taken from Germany by the Allied powers as a punishment for WWII). Also, there has been a movement in Hawaii for independence for some time now, and it never musters much support, just a lot of loudness on the part of the vocal minority pushing for independence. They've had more than one chance to choose their future, so learn the facts before you start shooting off your knee-jerk, anti-American rhetoric!

You've probably never heard of the Bishop's Estate Trustees. In brief, they are in charge of a trust that was established to better native Hawaiians both economically and educationally. Instead, they each get paid 1 million (US) and don't do much to help improve the lot of Hawaiian's. On the intellectual scale, these three trustees are average at best and an embarrassment. Maybe they dont' get that cool million anymore. I'll offer anyone living in Hawaii who has more current and detailed information than I to elaborate on the Bishop's Estate Trustees.

Don't blame the poverty of native Hawaiians on the "Yanks." People can sit and play the blame game until the next ice age comes again, or they can get off their A**es and do what it takes to better themselves.

You, Rectum de Voil, and Michael Moore need to get together and spew your anti-American venom with your other Marxist friends since it's obvious that you guys live in your own fantasy paradigm: The truth and facts just bounce off of you.

Steamboat

[Steamboat]

Post Edited (06-10-04 16:22)

[Steamboat]

Jpnnewbie,

Regarding Bill Cosby:
Thanks for posting that. I heard some other choice quotes from that.

The keep-em-on-the-Democrat-plantation crowd was livid at Cosby's remarks. I can only imagine, had Rush Limbaugh, or some other White conservative, uttered the same remarks how much explosive press it would have gotten for weeks.



Post Edited (06-10-04 16:35)

[thickmick]

Thats Mr .Thickmick to you Steamboat ______..

We gave the chinese lots of Opium to get Hong kong and we gave it them back fair and square and if three generations live together they can afford the rent ..of a 2 bedroom flat

I have heard of the Bishops estate Trust ,until you explained eloquentlyI had know what it was though。I go to Oahu on a regular basis and see first hand what rich fat whitey does to these poor Islanders
(not to mention gettin the bastards bombed 60 years ago .

Also the American Gov. in Guam just gave back land , consficated 60 years ago ,to the poor _______ Islanders ,you yanks are just evil..

I have to rush off for 1$ beers at murasaki . toodle pip old boy .

[japannewbie]

The Bishop Estate Trustees that were paying each other $1 million got caught about 4 years ago and were fired. I think some of them may have went to jail, can't remember though cause that was the same year that two local politicians went to jail for different reasons. Bishop Estate is massive, up until a couple years ago, they were the largest shareholder in Goldman Sacks. They sold off $800 million in shares and that is only a small slice of their portfolio. If you have ever been to Hawaii and been down the main strip, then you probably saw a 3 block mall called Royal Hawaiian Village sitting on the most espensive real estate in the world. The estate owns that also.

But they are most famous for their K-12 Private school called Kamehameha Schools. It's suppose to educated native Hawaiians. But in the last couple of years, a couple of white kids have taken their case to federal courts to challenge their racist admissions policy. I think it even made it to the supreme court and their policy was upheld. Doesn't matter anyway, the school sucks.

[japannewbie]

thickmick, here is another link to the Tavis Smiley (black journalist) interviewing Cosby about his statements. He does a good job explaining what he said. But I'm telling you what he said is what a lot of middle class blacks feel. But the media isn't putting these opinions out.

Click the 2 Cosby links or you will be listening to the entire program.
http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/archive/200405/20040526.html#

[thickmick]

Jn I did see the uproar that Bing`s son caused ,while I can agree with some things ,no one deserves to get shot in the head for stealing a piece of food .Is it Minnesota were theere haas been a spate of white officers shooting a load of unarmwed black kids ?

And recently the kids have been firing at the cops ..


I am wiling to bet that if the offender was white ,the cops would think more about shooting the suspect .

[japannewbie]

And I agree with you that no one should be shot for food and that the cops are probably more likely to shoot the black thief over the white theif. But Cosby was trying to make a point that people should be outraged over the crime that caused the shooting.

[japannewbie]

thickmick, you are talking about Bill Cosby right, not Bing Crosby? Just haven't heard anyone refer to Bill Cosby as Bing before, just checking.

[thickmick]

My sense of humour or lack of it ....

[jackson99]

lemme go back to immigration a sec.... the fact that the u.s. has some of the most liberal immigration policies of anywhere might have more to do with it than people's desire to live here, like maybe some people would rather live in norway but america is the only place that will take them so they settle for that. i really dont think the rest of the world looks to us as a beacon of freedom the way we were taught in school(im an american), which kind of assumes that political freedom is the only standard to measure with. the world contains a lot of people who would go to war over their right to practice religion, for example, but would regard the right to vote as about as useful as a pair of sequined chaps. also, the reason america can maintain such a high standard of living is because it uses its clout to turn places like mexico into exploited factory wastelands to crank out our consumer goods, so it seems kind of unfair to just say,"well, mexicans just happen to live in a crappy country, so of course they prefer america", because we've fixed it so huge sections of the population either have to settle for a dollar an hour at the ford plant on the border or sneak into the only country that pays a living wage by mexico standards. whew, sorry to any mexicans reading this, i didnt mean to slag your country like that. i know it has nice bits too.

[japannewbie]

Well you can look at it however you like, but the fact still remains that Americans have the right to vote, Americans have freedom of religion, and Americans have the largest immigration of any democracy in the world. You can come up with as many reasons you want to say why America has the largest immigration, but it doesn't change the facts. I think America has the largest immigration because people in Blah country are expecting UFOs to land in there country and the US will be a safe place. Get real, facts are facts. Interpret them the way you like.

In terms of America exploiting other countries for their own interest, yes you are right. But guess what, every country looks out for their own interest and if they have to exploit another country to get the advantage, they will. Maybe in Candyland everyone lives in perfect harmony, but this is the real world and that happens. Every powerful country does a good job of exploiting other countries.

Some people would like to think that every third world country is broke because some powerful country has put them there. That's BS. These countries have other problems that are more serious then being given a cheap labor job from some foriegn country or having to sell goods below market value. But some people want to blame the US and other powerful countries for everything. They wake up in the morning saying "the world if messed up" and always think the grass is greener on the other side of the fence. It's not, powerful countries are the same. Exploitation has happened since the beginning of time and it will continue forever.

[dango]

I`m embarrassed for anyone who stakes more than 20% of his outlook or pride on the country from which he comes.... I have not had one person in Japan look down on or avoid me because I`m from America. Most of our interactions are human ones.

[thickmick]

Well said , go dango go . Americans who travel , say the are Canadian, hey .

[kurogane]

Which is one of the things that really pisses off the real First Worlders. Bad enough to be mistaken for a greedy materialist imperialist racist fascist agent of doom and destruction, but to have one of Them claim to be one of Us??!!!

It is abomination!

I want all Pocky are Mine for now.

[Steamboat]

Japannewbie,

I have to agree with your 6/16/04 post.

The responses to you by the usual festerers from the far left reveal their true colors: They typically get very loony when they don't agree with you, especially when you take the time to explain the logic behind your reasoning. It just doesn't compute with their warped paradigm of reality. When they're faced with it, they get upset, become vitriolic, and go into their own little meltdown.

To the usual venters,
In a way I pity you little Communists out there: The Soviet Union and its iron curtain clones have gone the way of the rotary telephone, and even Red China is tripping over itself to go full-tilt Capitalist, economically, though not politically. I'm sure this just makes you livid.

The one quaint little enclave of the Marxist illusion of utopia is Castro's Cuba. Move your American-bashing, capitalist-hating a*sses over to Castro's little island and sample that "utopia." But you won't because you'd get chicken scratch to teach there (or whatever you do for a living).

You'll just stay in Japan, whine about the Japanese, whine about the "evil" America, and wallow in your own cesspool of hate and failure. You are PATHETIC.

All your Pokey are made by capitalists, "comrad."

Steamboat

[jackson99]

the right to vote and freedom of religion are also available in france, canada, japan, etc, etc. what does america have that these places dont? incredibly lax standards of immigration, thats what. people come here because they know they can get in. its also true that not every problem mexico has can be blamed on america, but killer bees and corrupt traffic cops arent driving people to risk their lives on the border, its the economic situation in mexico that is directly caused by NAFTA and preceeding agreements. im also well aware that exploitation is a driving force in the world we live, and since i was basically saying exploitative relationships explain the state of things much better than sour wet dreams like "freedom" and "democracy", im not sure why you felt you had to school me on that.

[Code Rot]

One of the big disasters for America (sorry, the United States') public image this year was the publication of those photos of the prisoners being abused by American soldiers in Iraqi jails. I think many Americans have failed to appreciate the damage this did to the reputation of the US. Until then the US had always had the reputation of being the good guy, the upholder of freedom and justice. But those Abu Ghraib photos were sick, and showed the kind the kind of behavior you would expect in Nazi Germany, or Stalinist Russia. I think Bush could have relieved some of the damage by sacking Donald Rumsfield, for example -- but because of pride, he refused to do that.
I can understand how Americans were enraged after September 11, but invading Iraq as a form of revenge was entirely the wrong thing to do. If the US had listened to its friends better, it would have been persuaded that attacking Iraq was just dumb. Now you will be forced to base the majority of your army there for years and years on end, for no practical result. And I am sure that Osama bin Laden must be laughing himself silly, seeing the strategic mess that the US has got itself into.

[thickmick]

Obviously you have not been watching Fox news ,America is the greatest countryin the world full of great americans and the current in____bent Dubya is the best example of an American, smart, educated ,articulate a little brash and most important of all white and rich.

God bless America ,you will soon kill all the muslims jail all the blacks ,I am feeling safer already ,good job America .

[kurogane]

Steamboater,
Love it or Leave it???????????????????? Natsukase!!!!!!!!!!!

How can you use that against those of us who aren't even from the states????

Good point about the Pocky, though.

Peace be unto you, my greedy materialist imperialist racist fascist agent of doom and destruction Friend.

"Workers of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your Pocky"

[Code Rot]

I have heard that within a few decades, there will be 400 milllion poeple living in the USA. So while the population of Japan, Korea, Italy, Germany, and other countries, will be going down, the USA's population will be going up. That's why I don't totally subscribe to the anti-American bandwaggon, even though I would love to. You can't disregard such a huge population. But still, I wish the US would come down off its high horse. A lot of people would be happy if the US did this.

[thickmick]

At that time ( 400 mil.pop ) 250 mil will be hispanic then it will be okay to disregard them .

[Tako Yaki]

I was kinda amused by the contradiction that came along in this thread. It was something along the lines of how the US is the worlds greatest democracy but oh by the way, if you don't vote for 1 of 2 parties then you are some sort of idiot who is trying to spoil the demoratic process!!

In my view the whole reason that Nader and the other non-aligned candidates recieved this much support is that an increasing number of americans are getting p****d off with the democrats or repubicans who stand for president.

It will be interesting to see if this percentage increases again in the coming elections, as neither of the main parties are offering any new ideas or solutions to the basic problems faced by the average amercian.

[japannewbie]

Tako Yaki,

What do you mean "recieved this much support?" Do you think 2% is a lot of support?

[Tako Yaki]

In terms of the "swing voters", which generally decide the elections these days and amount to less than 10% of the voting population, then I would consider 2% a lot.

[japannewbie]

Swing votes are more then 10%. Probably around 20 to 25%. Nader didn't have a huge appeal as a 3rd party candidate because he wasn't attracting swing votes. He was attracting far left votes that would of usually voted for Democrats. He also only received 2% of the vote which is not even large for a 3rd party candidate. If you were talking about Ross Perot then maybe your argument would have more validity. But Nader was way to far left to pull swing votes.

[Manuel]

I'm definitely proud to be an American. Like a lot of you, Bush sucks badly and I can't wait to kick his rear out of office. America is a great country and so is the food and travel.

I am a Dodger fan. I hope the Dodger's make it into the play-offs. It sure feels different great to be here, where I don't hear anything in "drive-by's" and police chases. I can sure go for a Taco Bell, Pink's, or a Weinershnitzel Hot Dog around here.

[Manuel]

P.S. I'm from California, so my governor can beat up your governor!

[wulong]

But Nader was way to far left to pull swing votes. He pulled more than 5% last election. Many democrats blame him for their loss, and I sort of agree. This is why the spend a lot of time trying to keep him from getting on the ballot in a lot of states.

He's totally looney in this election though. He has no party to back him up (the green party dumped him), and now he's taking money from an organization that only supports Nader because they want to attract the far left vote away from Kerry so that Bush will win. Yes, that's right, he's taking money from a Republican organization (http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Citizens_for_a_Sound_Economy#CSE_ backs_Nader's_2004_ballot_bid).

Anyway, Nader is still a factor in the US election, why else would so many words be wasted on him (http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&c2coff=1&client=firefox-a&tab=nn&q=nader&btnG=Search+News)?

[ShitagiDorobo]

With the electoral votes in Florida being decided by a difference of a few hundred people, it's pretty safe to say that if Nader had not been on the ballot, Gore would have won the presidency. I don't think it's bad in general to vote for a third party candidate, but in this situation, Bush is soooooo terrible that I can't see why anyone would throw their vote away voting for someone who has 0 chance of defeating Bush. I would vote for Bozo the clown if I thought he had the best chance of beating Bush (assuming I lived in a state where I thought my vote might make a difference). I think it is a pity that our electoral system is set up the way it is. Ideally there would be run-offs so that everyone could vote their conscience. Of course with two parties currently in power, and those two parties wanting to maintain power, I see little chance of this changing in the near future.

Here is why I am embarassed to be an American:
1. I am a citizen of a country where approximately 50% of the country thinks that George Dubya Bush is the man best suited to lead our country. I have to interact with these people. Luckily the americans who live in Japan tend to come from the other 50%.
2. I agree that life in America is probably better than that in most countries around the world. However, the high standard of living in America is in some part due to the exploitation of less fortunate people from other countries. Most Americans seem either ignorant of this fact, or don't really care.
3. Why is it that I can't buy alcohol after 2am, or on Sunday in many states? Why is it that a woman having an abortion is even an issue in the US? Why is it that so many people think that a partnership of two men or two women don't deserve the same privileges available to a man and a woman? It's because there are so many right-wing fundamentalist christians who founded the country, are in power, or put people in power, and they think that they have a right to tell everyone else what's "morally right and wrong". I don't have a problem with christians. I have a many good christian friends. But I have a serious problem with people making policies and laws largely based on religious beliefs.
4. Also, the wars and killing and whatnot, but this is sort of a direct result of items 1 through 3.

[person]

I don't have time to read this thread - however, based on the title, here's my opinion -

I am NOT feeling anything - pride or embarrassment - at being an American. Why? Because "person" is not her passport. "Person" is "person". Well, maybe she's more than that, but...

I had this discussion just the other day...with someone intent on knocking all American girls/women. The fact is, just like I can't help what color my skin is, who my parents were (fortunately, I got lucky on this one), etc., I had no control over where I was born. Hence, the fact that I am an American - and always will be - has less to do with good/bad luck, planning or strategizing (as some really gung-ho Japanese people seem to think) and more to do with chance and circumstance.

The fact is, America - just like any other country - isn't so bad...particularly when it's your home. I can't complain - I've lacked for very little in my life (food, clothing, shelter, love, opportunity, safety, etc.).

So, for the record - THIS American is NOT feeling embarrassed or anything else for that matter. I am me. Period.

[person]

An addendum if you will -

I'm giving a speech on Saturday so I was talking to my mother this morning about how my ancestors came to be Americans, etc. I knew parts of the saga, but not everything I heard today. I'm sure everyone's family history is interesting. However, since this is my family's history, I was particularly interested. It's amazing to me to hear what my ancestors did just to get to America. Certainly, I'm sure money and opportunity were great motivators. However, the fact remains, what they did was pretty incredible (in my humble opinion).

Here's a little tidbit of info. for you guys - I don't want to turn this into a "war" discussion. However, I was amazed to learn that, by enlisting in the US Army during WWI, my ancestors became US citizens. Now, I'm sure some of you will find it necessary to make some rude, crude comment about fighting Americans, whatever. Be that as it may, it amazes me that they were willing to fight - and die - for a country that really wasn't even theirs. I guess they wanted to be Americans that much...

Kind of sad then that I don't feel greater pride. However, I guess times...they are a changin'...

At any rate, I stand by what I wrote before - I am not - and hopefully never will be - embarrassed to be an American. I would hate to discount all that my ancestors "fought" for (literally and figuratively).

[wulong]

At any rate, I stand by what I wrote before - I am not - and hopefully never will be - embarrassed to be an American. I would hate to discount all that my ancestors "fought" for (literally and figuratively). What your ancestors (and mine as well) fought for seems to have changed. You can't really stand up for something that was and no longer is. I believe my ancestors fought for something they believed in, and I'm sure at the time, I too, put in their place would have fought the same way they did, but I no longer believe in the American leadership. I'm not embarassed to be an American, but at the same time I don't agree with a lot of the policies the leadership espouses. I'd like to believe that if my ancestors were living today, they'd feel the same way I do. Any person who thinks clearly (without clouding their mind with what their ancestors fought for) can see that the US has made some very terrible mistakes. Mistakes that you can't dress up and hide. Mistakes that you cannot be proud of. This is the reason, I think, that many Americans are embarassed to be Americans.

[madmaxxam]

Not embarassed to be an American... but damn proud to be a New Yorker. Whenever anyone asks me where I'm from it's always 'New York' and not 'USA'. And whenever I say that I'm from New York, people here tend to think that's really cool. Anyway, our state govt. is actually quite messed up, and New York really gets the shaft from the national govt. (we get about $0.60 back from every $1.00 we give to the national govt., one of the lowest values in the country). And I really dislike the national govt., but that's different than being embarrased to be an American. I'm just ranting now. Carry on.

[stillnosheep]

To the usual venters,
Red China is tripping over itself to go full-tilt Capitalist, economically, though not politically. I'm sure this just makes you livid.

The one quaint little enclave of the Marxist illusion of utopia is Castro's Cuba. You are PATHETIC.

All your Pokey are made by capitalists, "comrad."

Steamboat
Hey you! Dreamboat!
No not you Shipwreck.
sns

[person]

What your ancestors (and mine as well) fought for seems to have changed. You can't really stand up for something that was and no longer is. I believe my ancestors fought for something they believed in, and I'm sure at the time, I too, put in their place would have fought the same way they did, but I no longer believe in the American leadership. I'm not embarassed to be an American, but at the same time I don't agree with a lot of the policies the leadership espouses. I'd like to believe that if my ancestors were living today, they'd feel the same way I do. Any person who thinks clearly (without clouding their mind with what their ancestors fought for) can see that the US has made some very terrible mistakes. Mistakes that you can't dress up and hide. Mistakes that you cannot be proud of. This is the reason, I think, that many Americans are embarassed to be Americans.

Wulong - Since you can write English, I will assume you can read it as well. My friend, I am thinking clearly...no clouded judgment here. Did you miss the part about "times a changin'"? I think that speaks to what you wrote above.

The fact is, EVERY country - or rather their countrymen and women...often in the form of leaders - has done things that they are not proud of, made mistakes, etc. Whether you agree with me or not, do not suppose my thinking is clouded. That rubs me very much the wrong way.

Again, just in case you didn't quite get it, I'm not embarrassed to be an American...because before and after anything else, I am me. I don't represent every American out there...nor does any/every American represent me. Are you clear now?

[wulong]

Again, just in case you didn't quite get it, I'm not embarrassed to be an American...because before and after anything else, I am me. I don't represent every American out there...nor does any/every American represent me. Are you clear now? No, you're right. I never said you were embarassed to be an American. You're also right that you don't represent every American out there. But, my statements were not really directed at you. They were directed at the 50% of Americans who still believe George Bush is fit to run the white house. To me, I cannot see how they still agree with him without having clouded judgement.

I realize this isn't the best forum to address these kinds of people, but I have to let off steam somewhere.

[gentleman quality]

i am ashamed of this stupid-___ song! (and the fact that i cant get the damn twangy thing out of my head!)




Have You Forgotten
Darryl Worley
Written by Darryl Worley and Wynn Varble
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I hear people saying we don't need this war
I say there's some things worth fighting for
What about our freedom and this piece of ground?
We didn't get to keep 'em by backing down
They say we don't realize the mess we're getting in
Before you start preaching
Let me ask you this my friend

CHORUS 1
Have you forgotten how it felt that day
To see your homeland under fire
And her people blown away?
Have you forgotten when those towers fell?
We had neighbors still inside
Going through a living hell
And you say we shouldn't worry 'bout Bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

They took all the footage off my T.V.
Said it's too disturbing for you and me
It'll just breed anger that's what the experts say
If it was up to me I'd show it every day
Some say this country's just out looking for a fight
After 9/11 man I'd have to say that's right

CHORUS 1
Have you forgotten how it felt that day
To see your homeland under fire
And her people blown away?
Have you forgotten when those towers fell?
We had neighbors still inside
Going through a living hell
And we vowed to get the ones behind Bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

I've been there with the soldiers
Who've gone away to war
And you can bet that they remember
Just what they're fighting for

CHORUS 2
Have you forgotten all the people killed?
Yes, some went down like heroes in that Pennsylvania field
Have you forgotten about our Pentagon?
All the loved ones that we lost
And those left to carry on
Don't you tell me not to worry 'bout Bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

Have you forgotten?
Have you forgotten?

[stillnosheep]

A government concerned about the threat posed by al-Qaeda would have attempted to cut off the organisation's sources of funding, to isolate the moderates from the activists and to go after bin Laden and the rest of the the organisation's leadership.

After 9/11 the Bush aministration cosied-up to bin Laden's backers, declared war on his enemies, laid waste to Iraq and acted as the most effective recruiting sergeant that al-Qaedea could ever have dreamed of.

One has to be wilfully blind to ignore the fact that the Bush administration has no concern for the safety of the American people, the defeat of al-Qaeda or the apprehension of bin Laden but is only concerned about a pipedream of a New American Empire and securing yet more revenues for big oil. Even when judged by its own cynical criteria it turns out to have been a miserable failure.

[ShitagiDorobo]

I don't represent every American out there...nor does any/every American represent me.

I beg to differ. I think it's fair to say that when one american goes to a foreign country and does some retarded and disrespectful there, the people in that country who saw what he did will probably lose a little respect for all americans. There are certainly people that see past this, but sterotypes usually get started because of a few bad apples. Perhaps I want to rent some appartment in Japan, and the landlord trusted an American once, got burned, and now I have to pay for what he did. If one American works at a company and comes in late everyday (I was this american...), the Japanese people at the company may start to think this is normal of Americans (it is normal, right). The American military stationed here seems to have a pretty bad reputation. I think in a lot of people's eyes, the trouble that they cause reflects badly on Americans in general.

[person]

Well, see, in my world, I judge people based on their own merit...not what their neighbors - who happen to carry the same passport - do, not what their family members do, not what their elected officials do, etc. Again, in my world, I judge a person based on what he/she does. So, I would have to beg to differ with you. Yes, I see your point. However, if someone wants to lump me together with millions of other people, well then, quite frankly, I probably don't want to have anything to do with him/her. First and foremost, I'm me...then comes everything else (ethnicity, citizenship, job title, etc.). So...that's all.

[madmaxxam]

Person, you might not say that you care about people who would group you based on your passport, etc., but the problem is that mob mentality is very strong humans. If there are enough people who will judge based on passport, more people will tend to jump on the prejudice bandwagon, and less people will be likely to go against it. As an American I would love trying to go to Iraq and telling the average Iraqi there, "I may carry an American passport, but I'm different than other Americans, blah blah blah." If a lynch mob started, even those who are sympathetic would know it's not worth it to stand up for me.

People who are in a foreign country should try to represent their homeland with some degree of dignity. A few bad examples is all it takes for some people.

[kurogane]

Person,

Yea. We get to disagree again. Oh Joy. Madmaxx has a point. Furthermore, that "I'm ME first, then labels second" is a bit too Talk Show Self-Absorbed Freudian Middle Class White Bourgeois Navel Gazing for my taste. Not that I'm not sympathetic to anyone getting unfairly labelled and slagged (like all us Poor Pathetic White Guys in Japan, eh?). Nonetheless, humans everywhere categorise, label, typologise, and stereotype to greater or lesser degrees. It is probably how our basic cognitive mechanisms operate. To suggest that one can ignore such basic social processes is an excellent example of Possessive Individualism, the greatest plague to sweep the US since its inception.
I feel so much better now. Gotta smoke?
;)

[person]

Well, get out the pack, Kurogane -

I don't recall saying "mob mentality" or whatever it is you're calling it (jumping on the bandwagon, whatever) is not real or that I disagree with such a notion. Yes, it happens...maybe that's why I conduct myself in a certain way in the "real world". Before representing my country, I'm representing myself; hence, I want to do so in a favorable way.

Again, I don't recall saying that doesn't happen. I trust there are many people who may/not like me because of my skin color, ethnicity, passport, etc. My point was (and still is) that, if that is how some people behave (and we know it is), I don't care to associate/know such individuals. I expect people to use similar criteria to that which I use to evaluate people - basing it on them (personality, "character", etc.).

Madmaxxam wrote:

"People who are in a foreign country should try to represent their homeland with some degree of dignity. A few bad examples is all it takes for some people."

Yet again, I don't recall disagreeing with this. My point really wasn't even in relation to such things. However, it applies here - If someone is going to judge me in a such a way, what can I do? Try to convince them I'm different? Well, maybe if I were in Iraq getting ready to be killed I would; however, here in Japan (and perhaps elsewhere as well), I tend to think such people really aren't worth my time. Period. My actions should speak louder than my words...that's what they should be judging. If they are judging Susie and applying her actions to me, well, what's the point of trying to convince him/her otherwise? There was a time in my life when I might have wasted the energy. Now? I would be more inclined to say, See Ya!

C U ;)

[person]

Another thought - yes, stereotypes are shortcuts to understanding...often necessary in the initial stages of "getting to know someone". However, beyond just initially giving someone some (perhaps) helpful information, he/she is supposed to GO BEYOND that...to confirm or refute. Maybe the initial information was wrong, etc.

Right now, I'm EXCEPTIONALLY tired. However, suffice it to say, I understand what SOME people do...lumping all "types" of people into different groups. While you may think my thinking is...middle class is sticking out in my mind (hmm....), it works for me...and many other people not interested in being so...narrow-minded (but perhaps human?).

Must sleep now.

[stillnosheep]

I understand what SOME people do...lumping all "types" of people into different groups. While you may think my thinking is...middle class is sticking out in my mind (hmm....), it works for me...and many other people not interested in being so...narrow-minded .
Me thinks it would be ever so narrow minded of me to imagine that , just because I have reached that higher state of consciousness where I am no no longer affected by any of my subconscious memories of past experiences and observations of others of the same sex, gender, race, planet, nationality or dress-code when meeting a new person then I have the right to expect everybody else to be the same.

But hey. Maybe you're right.

Next step: Never to allow my subconscious memories of past experiences and observations of any person have any influence over me when I encounter that person again.

Luv'n'peace

sns

[person]

Gee, me thinks I don't recall saying I EXPECT any/everyone to think/act/etc. the same as I do...In fact, I'm pretty sure I never did...so, I guess that rules out my narrow mindedness, eh?

-------EDIT
"I expect people to use similar criteria to that which I use to evaluate people - basing it on them (personality, "character", etc.)."

If you are referencing my use of "expect" above, I take back what I wrote above...sort of. As below, if someone doesn't do as I mention above, then I don't bother with them. I can't change their behavior. With something of this nature, I don't want my friends to be narrow-minded (at least in regards to this). Therefore, it is my hope people don't judge based on these things...THERFORE, I "expect" this of my friends...NOT everyone.
--------

That said, if someone chooses to do as I said (judge me and/or others based on color, passport, etc.), then I don't bother with him/her since I can't/don't want to/am not able to control other people's behavior. People I choose to associate with/befriend need not be exactly like me...in fact, I would prefer knowing/socializing/learning from all kinds of people. However, with something as important as this, I think being a little more...open-minded would be better.

I'm not arguing judgments aren't made...and, quite frankly, I'm not saying the way I think is better than anyone else's (I'm not above anything as you may wish to imply). What this started out as was a discussion as to why I'm NOT embarrassed to be an American. Why am I not embarrassed to be an American? It goes right back to what I've said - my behavior as "person" has been nothing but...respectable (well, usually...depends on who's sitting in "judgment"). I can only be responsible for my actions. If someone wants to "blame" or judge me for other people's actions, that's too bad.

[stillnosheep]

Dear person.

It isn't the possibility of others "blaming" or judging you for actions of others that seems bothering your (many) respondents. It is the certainty that others will "blame" or judge other people for your actions.

You may think that that is "too bad"; you are not the one who will suffer the consequences.

Not all have reached such an exalted state of consciousness that we are entirely unaffected by any and all past experience. I believe that it the state is known as Nirvana. Congratulations on its achievement.

[person]

It's amazing how you seem intent to dub me O' Holy One with an exalted state of consciousness...all for simply stating how I see things. In so far as I use the word, exalted implies that I think I am higher and/or better than others. Just because I choose to interact with people who aren't narrow-minded? I've never argued the fact that SOME people will rely on stereotypes, etc. to judge others. Have you read any disagreement with that? That said, what do you suppose we do about it? If it's going to happen regardless of what a person does, what is your answer O' EXALTED ONE (mind you, I'm not writing to myself)? I don't know who the many respondents are so I will ask you, Stillnosheep - What are all the horrible things that have happened to you as a result of misplaced prejudices/stereotyping? I guess since I am an Exalted One I have had a much different experience. I trust at some point I have unknowingly experienced some form of discrimination. However, in terms of OVERT negative consequences of being a foreigner here in Japan, nothing could be further from the truth. Perhaps I've been treated better than normal? More likely. Perhaps people choose to judge me by my Exalted personality/exterior. I haven't a clue. Maybe I'm just damn lucky. What I guess I'm wondering is what the point of this is? I can only be responsible for myself. Shall we tell everyone to behave nice and act like grown ups? OK, let's do that. Do you think everyone will? Doubtful. So, in my Exalted world, I choose to deal with things I have some control over. As always, I can't control other people - too bad, eh?

Have a pleasant evening, be nice, and please behave accordingly - Love, Person...still wondering what in the hell this has to do with my original post...

[stillnosheep]

Ah, but since your original post you have posted many times in debate with (inter alia) Madmaxxam, Kurowotsit, he of the difficult to remember moniker (Shitagidorito?) and myself of how you only associate with those who, when meeting anybody at all, remain unaffected by any and all previous experiences of others of similar backgrounds (by which i mean gender, style of dress, race, nationality, planetary origin, whatever).

This I believe to be impossible without (at least) having reached an extremely high level of spiritual enligtenment, and even then...

Back to your Original Post.

There is much to be proud of in American history: The union-building tradition of the Kentucky coal miners in the face of unbelievably determined and violent opposition; the Wobblies; shorts such as "Rosie the Riveter"; the Stop the War movement of the 60s and 70s; investigative journalism at the time of Watergate. The list is long.

It's a tradition to be proud of. Long may it continue.

And now I'm off down the pub for a drink.

[person]

Please drink a pint for me...you've exhausted me. Now, I must hit the hay. Have fun and remember - my reputation is at stake. Please behave appropriately...

Sorry...had to say it.

[ShitagiDorobo]

It's fine to say you "choose not to associate" with narrow minded people when you're talking about friends and casual contacts, but the problem is that there are many situations when either people have power over you, or you are forced to interact with certain people. For example, if you want a particular job or appartment, you're going to be vastly limiting your options if you decide not to try for certain options because the interviewer/landlord is closed minded and racist. If you need something from immigration, you can't really help it if the immigration officer doesn't like Americans for some reason. If the cops get a tip that you're smuggling drugs into the country, try feeding them that non-discrimination crap. I guess that, despite a few recent mishaps, Americans are still fairly respected in with regards to how foreigners are viewed in general in Japan, so more often than we may be getting less shafted than other foreigners. But the fact remains that in many cases, you have no choice but to be affected by racism and stereotypes. I guess you could argue that this is not a matter of "embarassment" per se. I guess the cases of just "embarassment" are perhaps limited to the cases when you can just walk away from close minded people.

[kurogane]

and the pervy lingerie lecher makes my point for me, and does it in plain English (by which I mean suitably but not overly complex). Damm. I gots to learn how to write. Re-learn how to write?

Anyways, Max Pocky and Cold Beer on me, Gonch Boy! :)

[Basil Brush]

Even mentioning it to Japanese has lost its stature within the last 2 years.

Maybe that is where the problem lies. Why should telling someone where you come from have any, 'stature'. People will accept you for what you are, not where you come from. If they don't, then they aren't worth the time of day anyway.

[madmaxxam]

Maybe that is where the problem lies. Why should telling someone where you come from have any, 'stature'. People will accept you for what you are, not where you come from. If they don't, then they aren't worth the time of day anyway.

Personally, I don't tell anyone where I'm from until I trust them at least a bit, except maybe other gaijin. I'm very good at leading conversations, so if someone is obviously trying to find out where I hail from, and I don't quite trust them, I lead them in another direction. If someone already likes you, where you're from shouldn't change their opion about you. I don't tell any native where I'm from until I think they've already formed an opinion about my person.

[Code Rot]

Do you want my prediction --

Mr Bush will end up winning the 2004 election. To the left this might seem a blow, but in a way, it is the best thing that could happen to them. It will just strengthen their lead in the 2008 elections. If Bush wins next month, what's he going to do? He is bogged down in Iraq -- there is no chance he could launch another war, even though the Iraq invasion was meant to be just the beginning of a long series of wars -- Iran, Nortth Korea, Cuba, Peru and Palestine were all scheduled for invasion -- but recently all of these countries have faded from the political map. America has a hard enough time administering Iraq, it can't afford to conquer new countries. There simply isn't enough money and American troops to go around. Which shows you how weak this new "American Empire" actually is. So, let Bush win this 2004 election. What will he have to show for himself in 2008? Let him keep digging his own hole deeper and deeper.

[mdbusa]

Living in thailand and can say that being an american has not changed a bit. The thais have always respected us. We get quite a bit of flak from Brits and Euros though.

[Morning Star]

MadMaxx;

dokokara desuka? ... okuniha? How do you steer your interrogators away from your country of origin long enough for you to be able to trust them? If some foreigner tried to do that to me in America, I'd be like, wtf?! Just tell me where you're from, azzhole.

Crotch Rot;

You're pry right, it won't make much difference to us who wins the election. But look at America as a big company. Workers usually don't notice who the top man is, but the direction that he sets the company in determines whether it performs excellently or poorly, meeting market demands and maintaining customer satisfaction.

[kurogane]

People actually admit to being American when they are out of the country? I thought that was the reason that the market for those litle goofy maple leaf symbols people sew on their backpacks has gone through the roof. And to think I could have invested in a sweat shop and made a fortune. D(&mn

[swordfishtrombone]

those are all canadians with the flags on their backpacks. in fact, i've never met anyone from any other country other than oh canada that does that sh*t. too paranoid/afraid of being confused for a u.s. citizen. canadian propaganda, i suspect.

and what's with all the paranoia in these posts? so someone asks you where you're from. you tell them, and then ask them where they're from. it's called conversation. getting to know each other.

[madmaxxam]

I've lied about my country of origin a couple of times... usually to drunken belligerent folks when they try to initiate unwanted conversation and I can't escape easily. Sometimes it's fun to make stuff up.

[swordfishtrombone]

ok tough guy.

[kurogane]

Those are all Canadians??????????????????????

AACCCKKKK!!! i HAVE BEEN DUPED. :p
It really is kind of a lame custom, isn't it? Sorry about that one. That's aboot, eh?

I actually have met a few 'Mericans in the UK who had them on their packs as camouflage. I thought it was kinda funny. And, just for the record, I am on the side of anyone who is the victim of blanket nationalist stereotyping, regardless of how many brown people their government is currently oppressing. :p

Now, Maxxxiee, you and me gots to talk. Vat are you doing, going around like a Putz, claiming to be someone else? Who are you today, Duddy Kravitz? Seriously man, don't give hostages to fortune. I am with you on the little Walter Mitty episodes, where you make up a story in certain situations, often merely from sheer boredom at having to trot out that tired self-introduction again. It frequently comes back to bite you in the ___. I used to tell peole that I speak Japanese like I do because I was born here. When that was found out to be utter BS, the fallout bit off a large part of my ___, and a nasty piece of my heart as well. Anyways, Be Careful out there. Don't go falling for some Shiksa. You are such a good boy. :p

[swordfishtrombone]

oy! i think i tore a kishka there, kuroganeberg. you're such a mensch! you get an extra helping of shmutz on your latkas next pesach.

your bubbeh,
swordfishtrombonestein

[kurogane]

Oh Vey! You make me laugh so hard I think I tore a phiska.
:)

[madmaxxam]

Oy Vey! What's with the yiddish? All you mensche's don't know what you're talking about. I think I'm gonna go kerplotz now.

[donpaulo]

many people CLAIM they are from NY but they hail from somewhere else. They are not NYers.

Being American and embarassed ? Hey everyone is entitled to their own opinion (even if they are wrong) I suppose they can always change their nationality... not.

[madmaxxam]

many people CLAIM they are from NY but they hail from somewhere else. They are not NYers.

Really? Do you mean in general, or in Japan? I think if someone tried to tell a New Yorker that he was from New York, and he really wasn't, he'd be found out. What with the difference in accent being just one of the giveaways. Telling people in Japan though... they really aren't quite capable of distinguishing between English accents at all, and would probably miss all the other differences.

[Manuel]

Hey guys! I just voted absentee and just kicked that "f*rt-he*d" back to Texas. I just hope there is no mix up in Florida like the last election. If Bush wins again, then I'll weep for the future of the U.S. Definitely hands up for Kerry, but 1 finger up for Bush.

[madmaxxam]

Hey guys! I just voted absentee and just kicked that "f*rt-he*d" back to Texas. I just hope there is no mix up in Florida like the last election. If Bush wins again, then I'll weep for the future of the U.S. Definitely hands up for Kerry, but 1 finger up for Bush.

I will vote absentee as soon as my ballot gets here, but the truth is that since I'm a New Yorker my vote doesn't matter. Damn electoral college. Not gonna say who I'm voting for, but if people know me, I think they know who I'll vote for.

[donpaulo]

yeah I shoulda been more specific. In Japan I reckon you can say your from almost anywhere and how would they know otherwise ? I met a guy who claimed he was from London but didn't have an english accent, turns out he was from Hong Kong. :)
anyway I meant was that in American many people claim they are from NY but aren't. Its not a such a big place (manhattan anyway)
I have found being from NY is a major selling point and am proud to be from there.

Regarding the election its going to boil down to a few swing states and the undecided voters.

My hunch is that Bush will win because of the forces of history...

name that last Democratic President who wasn't from the South ?
Clinton Arkansas
Carter Georgia
Johnson Texas
JFK was the last democrat from the north... Kerry has long odds

at least this is how Las Vegas would write the odds up.

[Manuel]

You're right about the Electoral College. I second that, too! Damn, the electoral college. Do we really need them? My money is still on Kerry. Good for Bush regarding the forces in history. But, back in the states, the economy still sucks. It's even worse than after Clinton and his johnson left office.

[stillnosheep]

My hunch is that Bush will win because of the forces of history...

name that last Democratic President who wasn't from the South ?
Clinton Arkansas
Carter Georgia
Johnson Texas
JFK was the last democrat from the north... Kerry has long odds

Ever since the Civil War, the South has tended to vote Republican in Presidential elections. A Southern Democrat will ptich themselves as the 'local' candidate in an attempt to overcome this tendency. Historical precedent can be called to back up Don Paulo's position although 'forces of history' is a bit of a big term to use here. Nonetheless his hunch may be correct. Especially if it all comes down to Florida....

[kurogane]

Let us hope and pray that The Bush Curse is alive and well, and will kick in just in time. Remember, Clinton took him, but it wasn't a sure thing until the Fat Lady sang. I remember being in Phoenix at the time, hanging on tenterhooks, until the Forces of Good and Fellatio triumphed.

[Novitas]

ignoring the vanity issue...

I think you all may not understand is America has been sick for a long time.
What you are seeing now has been just domestic until late.

Texas has been killing people w/o due process and in cold blood without punishment for decades. Now Bush Jr. has dispersed the Texas plague unto the world.

but maybe that is another thread.

Westsan, it might help if you could identify a single person who has been put to death in Texas by the state without due process. Contrary to popular belief, Texas has one of the lowest rates of assigning the death penalty among death penalty states in the entire United States. The national average is around 5% of all capital cases nationwide. In Texas, the figure is 3%.

The seemingly large number of executions in Texas owes to two facts: (1) Texas is a large state and so would have a larger number of executions on that basis alone; and (2) Texas has a lower rate of sentence reversals than average. This later fact strongly suggests that Texas juries take their responsibility more seriously up front than their peers elsewhere. Weak cases do not get past them very easily.

Westsan, I find your remarks only marginally informed and unnecessarily offensive.

When I travel overseas (something that admittedly I have not had the occasion to do as of late), I make absolutely no effort to hide my nationality or the fact that I reside in Texas, and while I will generally not bring up politics with those I meet, I do not shy away from a discussion thereof if they bring up the topic instead.

Which brings me to my final points.

I am one of those Americans who generally supports our current foreign policy. Like it or not, right or wrong, the fact remains that there is a huge and growing world-wide demand for oil and parts of the Midddle East have vast quantities of it meaning that enormous quantities of money will flow to the middle east one way or another. Simultaneously, it is also true that the Middle East is vastly unadvanced politically and socially, meaning that the world is faced with a combustible mix of wealth hence power and a backward primitiveness that forms a perfect social swamp for terrorism with international reach and involving at some point increadibly deadly weapons and agents.

The Bush Doctrine calls for us to drain the swamp. To topple as we can the worst of the autocratic governments and try to accelerate (or perhaps begin would be a better word) the process of democratization in that part of the world. The task is neither easy, nor without risk, nor without cost, nor without setbacks. But the payoffs could be huge and failure is just too terrible to contemplate. World opinion is too far divided and fickle to seriously grasp much less deal with this developing problem.

There is another developing probem that ought to be closer to the minds of Japanese. Japan now faces a nuclear armed neighbor that is not exactly an icon of responsible behavior. One of the U.S. presidential candidates promises to abandon the 6-way framework and ignore China, South Korea, Russia, and Japan in order to pursue direct talks with Jong Il. We know from experience that Jong Il is in no hurry to divest himself of nuclear arms or the program to develop them. Any deal made under such circumstances with him will likely leave those options in place as the previous deal negogiated that way did. How many Japanese know which U.S. candidate takes this position I wonder?

Be careful what you ask for (you may just get it).

[Novitas]

Ever since the Civil War, the South has tended to vote Republican in Presidential elections. A Southern Democrat will ptich themselves as the 'local' candidate in an attempt to overcome this tendency. Historical precedent can be called to back up Don Paulo's position although 'forces of history' is a bit of a big term to use here. Nonetheless his hunch may be correct. Especially if it all comes down to Florida....

Actually, the South voted Republican only briefly after the Civil War and did so then only because many adults of voting age were disqualified because of their participation in that war on the side of the South.

Except for that, the South voted Democratic overwealmingly until about 30 years ago when a discernable shift in voting patterns began.

Roosevelt in fact put together a coaliation of big labor and Southern segregationists that maintained Democratic dominance from the Great Depression in the 1930's through the Great Society of LBJ in the 1960's.

I think that Bush has the inside track on this election though it may be close.

[Code Rot]

Americans are of course free to do what they want to do, and if they feel that George Bush Jnr is the best choice, they should vote for him at the coming election. But nonetheless, Americans don't live in a vacuum, and I have noticed recently a tremendous tide of anti-Americanism in the world. Americans have to be prepared for the consequences if they decide to reelect Bush. They have to be prepared to become "the bad guys" of the world -- detested wherever they go. A lot of this is related to the war in Iraq, and most of it is releated to President Bush 2. Maybe in the US people know where he is coming from, but in the outside world, most people don't get him. He just comes across as a war-mongering fool. It would be better to cut him clean -- and start again. Make him your sacraficial lamb, and cut him loose. America would still be able to keep Iraq, because John Kerry is determined to maintain the occupation there. But without Bush America would be able to regain a lot of lost respect. So, Americans out there reading this, get rid of the fool! You can still keep Iraq, and all its oil. Just eject that baboon at your head, and start again with a new leader. Is Bush worth so much to you, that will you sacrafice your reputation. He is just a man. Kerry could do a better job. Give him a try.

[stillnosheep]

[T]here is a huge and growing world-wide demand for oil and parts of the Midddle East have vast quantities of it meaning that enormous quantities of money will flow to the middle east one way or another. [...T]he Middle East is vastly unadvanced politically and socially, meaning that the world is faced with a combustible mix of wealth hence power and a backward primitiveness that forms a perfect social swamp for terrorism with international reach and involving at some point increadibly deadly weapons and agents.

The Middle East was a region of complex civilisations when your ancestors were still back in Europe living in hovels and painting themselves with woad .

But on two points you are so so right.


But the payoffs could be huge.You've only just realised? Haliburton have known this for decades.

Japan now faces a nuclear armed neighbor that is not exactly an icon of responsible behavior.' We know. Luckily we have most of the Pacific between us but the USA is still far too damned close for my liking. And led by a born-again imbecile who believes that Jesus cannot return until the earth is engulfed by a huge conflagration; and that this is God's will; and that he is an agent of the Lord placed on this earth for the purpose of carrying out God's will - with incredibly deadly weapons

[madmaxxam]

We know. Luckily we have most of the Pacific between us but the USA is still far too damned close for my liking. And led by a born-again imbecile who believes that Jesus cannot return until the earth is engulfed by a huge conflagration; and that this is God's will; and that he is an agent of the Lord placed on this earth for the purpose of carrying out God's will - with incredibly deadly weapons

Don't worry about Bush going to war with N. Korea, even if he's re-elected. There's no oil in N. Korea. I'm sure that if there was we would have gone there instead of Iraq. Evidence that they have WMD is just a tad stronger than it was in Iraq after all.

[stillnosheep]

What's North Korea got to do with it?!

[madmaxxam]

What's North Korea got to do with it?!

So who is Japan's Nuclear armed neighbor that's across the Pacific from the US? N. Korea. I'm just following the line of discussion.

[Hal Sidewinder]

I will vote absentee as soon as my ballot gets here, but the truth is that since I'm a New Yorker my vote doesn't matter. Damn electoral college. Not gonna say who I'm voting for, but if people know me, I think they know who I'll vote for.


Rocket From The Tombs says "Why did you not lie about your last address if you wanted to make a difference? A little strategic thinking goes a long way in elections"

End of transmission.

[donpaulo]

Sadly I feel this Texan suffers from acute myopia. Its a disease just like any other, but it can be cured with a healthy dose of truth, altruism, use of the scientific method and perhaps a smack upside the head.
Novitas, For the record nobody is saying you aren't entitled to your own opinion (even if it is wrong) nor is anyone saying that the world isn't threatened by various groups (most of whom aren't muslim). So when you draw the conclusion that anyone who disagrees with you and who isn't threatened by muslims or dependent on oil it exposes you as a neophyte in world affairs.

Your truth is simply folly, and I think you couldn't be farther from the truth than you are now. (sadly)

Here are the facts
Most terrorists are not muslim, repeat NOT MUSLIM. Don't give in to bigotry and mass hysteria.
Saudi Arabia is the only country capable of producing the oil necessary to meet world demands. Its not a representative government but a monarchy that has in the past harbored terrorists and sponsored terrorism against places like Israel. Osama Bin Laden was a saudi citizen and so were most of the 9-11 terrorists, thus Saudi meets the Iraq invasion criteria too.
Iraq was not an immediate threat to America nor American interests any more than Algeria, Sudan, Liberia, Yemen, Chechnya... (insert the country of your choice here ) are. Claiming that invading Iraq somewhat results in lessening international terrorism is purely folly. There are more terrorists in Iraq today than before the invasion. There is less oil flowing from Iraqi pipelines than from before the war. There are 1000 dead americans and counting as a result of the decision to invade, at this rate in another 2 years the dead from the Iraqi war will outnumber the dead from 9-11. I would then ask you which is a greater tragedy ? One was a dastardly sneak attack upon innocent US civilians by a criminal group, the other was a premeditated attack by neocons (supported by people like you, in a stolen election by a state run by the current presidents brother and placed into power by an unelected supreme court) whom are directly responsible for tens of thousands of injured, missing or dead Iraqis.
You claim that Mr Bush will drain the "swamp" but the swamp extends from the horn of africa to the far east. Its a swamp larger than the entire united states... I doubt he can do that despite record budget defecits and 8 years in office. Thats not even discussing the current secret drug wars going on in south and central america.
The fact that Kim Jong Il is likely in possession of weapons of mass destruction simply exposes the Bush adminstration as incompetent, since clearly Iraq didn't have these weapons but was invaded because they allegedly did.
The fact that Mr Bush has spent more money on a missile "defense" system that simply doesn't work, than the total spent on the coast guard, immigration and national port defense again exposes him as a myopic bonehead. Read this weeks New Yorker magazine for a wonderful discussion on how much US taxpayer money has been spent on this "program".
Finally you cannot "begin" a process of democratization simply by arming yourself and imposing it. Remember Vietnam ? hello ? the people have to want democracy for themselves it cannot be imposed. Remember that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
If the US is paving the road to democracy I suggest they start in Russia or Saudi Arabia since in both places it is in a dire situation.
Therefore I repeat, I am not saying you are entitled to your own opinion.
What I am saying is that you don't know what you are talking about. However you sound like a pretty well educated person, so perhaps there is hope that you can cure yourself of a bad case of myopia. I wish you well in this effort.

[stillnosheep]

So who is Japan's Nuclear armed neighbor that's across the Pacific from the US? N. Korea. I'm just following the line of discussion.

]There is another developing probem that ought to be closer to the minds of Japanese. Japan now faces a nuclear armed neighbor that is not exactly an icon of responsible behavior.
Novitas is clearly refers to a "nuclear armed neighbor [of Japan] that is not exactly an icon of responsible behavior". He obviously means the US. Nobody except you mentioned any neighbours of the US, armed, nuclear, dangerous or otherwise.

[madmaxxam]

Novitas is clearly refers to a "nuclear armed neighbor [of Japan] that is not exactly an icon of responsible behavior". He obviously means the US. Nobody except you mentioned any neighbours of the US, armed, nuclear, dangerous or otherwise.

Yes, because obviously [Japan] has a lot to fear from the US. Bush may be a war mongerer, but I don't think he's ready to show aggression towards Japan. and the U.S. is NOT a neighbor of Japan, N. Korea is. Neighbor tends to imply proximity, not thousands of miles of ocean.

[donpaulo]

the ICBM makes us all neighbors... However I believe NK has at best a limited medium range missile capability and would thus be able to target Alaskan Islands. This of course is assuming they can actually launch a missile with a warhead that can hit the desired target which is at best a dubious conclusion.

More likely they put a warhead into a ship and sail it into Long Beach. So much for Mr Bush's missile defense system eh ?

[stillnosheep]

Oh No! My nuclear umbrella appears to be a pig in a poke that has sprung a leak ...

[Code Rot]

Even if he wins the next election, Bush is categorically f#$ked. Actually, both he and America were f#$ked on the tragic day of September 11, 2001, and they both have yet to realize how badly damaged they are because of that attack. America is quagmired in Iraq. A high percentage of its troops will be stuck there for years to come, being picked off one by one by the Iraqi resistance. Maybe it is not as bad as Vietnam in terms of American casualities, but it is still early days yet. I can imagine American troops being in Iraq for at least another 20/30 years. So, at the moment the Iraq War does not seem as bad as the Vietnam War for America, but because it will last longer, in the end it will be just as deadly. And for now, there is no chance that America can engage in new wars (North Korea, Iran, etc), because there are no spare troops. America is stuck with Iraq -- Iraq is stuck with the United States -- maybe these two countries deserve each other! Maybe they make the perfect couple!

[Gaijin de Moscu]

I have gone through the period of being ashamed to be a Russian. Now this period is over, and I am not ashamed any more.

I am back to the obvious basics of not judging someone's nationality, or allowing to be judged by my own.

But than again, after living in 5 or 6 countries, I am a rootless cosmopolite more than anything else.

[Gaijin de Moscu]

Phew!!!
after readin two or three o these posts I was relieved a find that people are not afraid ta post content reflecting their appallingly low IQ's.
Keep it up!

That is not a very nice post though, mon cher ami. Pure inflamation and no substance.

Just giving some on-the-spot-feedback for the betterment of our community, never mind. :p

[madmaxxam]

Phew!!!
after readin two or three o these posts I was relieved a find that people are not afraid ta post content reflecting their appallingly low IQ's.
Keep it up!

Same thought as Moscu. At least make some point. Don't just yell "You're all idiots, and that's my story." If people are idots, thell them WHY. Shed some light on your opinions.

[Novitas]

Americans are of course free to do what they want to do, and if they feel that George Bush Jnr is the best choice, they should vote for him at the coming election.

I agree with the sentiment of your comment, though not its actual statement. I for one do not "feel" that George W. Bush would make a better president than John Kerry ever could. Instead I THINK that he would. The difference is between yielding to the activity of one's brain stem or of one's cerebral cortex. Even lizards have the former while the later appears to be more developed or at least more deferred to among Republicans these days.


But nonetheless, Americans don't live in a vacuum, and I have noticed recently a tremendous tide of anti-Americanism in the world. Americans have to be prepared for the consequences if they decide to reelect Bush.

I can see why you hope Kerry would win, you have managed his style of flip-flop perfectly and have I suppose confused it with sophistication. You should have stuck with your first point and left it at that.

Only America can elect its president. Only Japan, France, Germany, Great Britain, and Australia can choose their respective leaders. Australia has just reelected a leader who strongly supports Bush's foreign policy. So much for your second point.

When these nations choose their leaders, I doubt they care what America or "the rest of the world" thinks about their choice. This is as it should be. And these nations do not live in a vacuum either.


They have to be prepared to become "the bad guys" of the world -- detested wherever they go.

Anti-Americanism, like Anti-Semitism, has been something I have seen for my entire 46 (soon to be 47) years of life. It waxes and wanes like the tides.

Japan Bashing has also been around for a long time. It too waxes and wanes. Except in China and North Korea where those respective governments have kept the negative passions toward Japan alive largely to buttress their own regimes (questionably legitimate in the case of China and outrightly illegitimate in the case of North Korea). You did notice how those soccer fans in China recently treated the visiting Japanese team. That had nothing to do with America or George W. Bush.


A lot of this is related to the war in Iraq, and most of it is releated to President Bush 2.
Maybe in the US people know where he is coming from, but in the outside world, most people don't get him. He just comes across as a war-mongering fool.

And a lot of people in America simply "don't get" people like you either. (Either that or we are too polite to say what we really think.) You might change that negative perception by coming up with smarter arguments and making them clearly instead of issuing sophomoric rants. (though to your credit, yours was less banal than several others in this thread). Or have you been laboring under the assumption that it is only the perceptions of people like you about America and its president that matter?


It would be better to cut him clean -- and start again. Make him your sacraficial lamb, and cut him loose. America would still be able to keep Iraq, because John Kerry is determined to maintain the occupation there. But without Bush America would be able to regain a lot of lost respect.

If the cost of your respect is for us to act irrationally, irresponsibly, and dishonorably; then your respect is a luxury we can ill afford and would be well advised not to crave. No thanks.


So, Americans out there reading this, get rid of the fool! You can still keep Iraq, and all its oil.

You still don't get it do you? We didn't go into Iraq because we "wanted it." We went in there because we could no longer afford to have it behaving as it was. Saddam Hussein was simply waiting us out. Saddam Hussein had under-the-table deals with France, Germany, and Russia who were funneling money to him in the so-called Oil-for-Food scandal. He could afford to bide his time. He could afford to wait us out before reactivating his mothballed plans.

We know that he had developed chemical weapons because he used them on his own people. We know that he was trying to develop biological weapons. We know he was trying to acquire uranium. We didn't know -- and may never know -- exactly how far he got or how much progress toward that goal he would have made in 6 months or 6 years for that matter had things been allowed to continue as they were going. I can stand not knowing because I know now that those designs are permanently scuttled.

We knew at the time that Al-Quida had lost its base in Afghanistan and was seeking other state sponsored bases of operation. We knew at the time that Al-Quida had contacts with the Hussein government though we had little detailed information about the nature or depths of those contacts. Everybody knew that Hussein had effectively ejected weapons inspectors four years earlier and had never accounted for the stocks of weapons he was known to have had. This was in direct violation of the terms of the armistice that suspended hostilities of the first Gulf War. We all knew at the time that Hussein's government had not cooperated with weapons inspectors when they were there the first time including even holding them at gunpoint to prevent them from carrying out their duties.

These facts are not disputable. To conclude from this behavior that Hussein posed no threat is to engage in fantasy of the most implausible order.

We do not want to "keep" Iraq and its oil. What we want is for a legitimate and peacefully inclined government to govern Iraq and for Oil to flow freely at market prices. This would be to the mutual benefit of all parties concerned. In the past, the U.S. and the rest of the world has sought to do this by supporting regimes in that region that we (incorrectly as it turned out) believed would provide political stability in that region. In fact these regimes -- dictatorial and tyrannical all) have been a breeding ground for agents of the worst of human instincts and have become paragons of instability and violence. A change of thinking and paradigm was (and still is) called for.

Money will flow into the Middle East no matter what U.S. policy there is. Along with that money will come enormous power -- power to transform those societies into modern, pluralistic, tolerant, and affluent societies that make possible meaningful and dignified lives for its inhabitants; or the power to further drive its inhabitants into both physical and moral destitution and to launch ever more lethal terrorist attacks against those nations who have made better social choices.

The Bush doctrine does represent a radical departure from the previous practice (not just of the U.S. by the way) of sponsoring or otherwise supporting tyrannical regimes and only replacing them with different tyrannical regimes when they become too dangerous or dysfunctional. The Bush doctrine calls for the active promotion of self government in that part of the world beginning with the places that pose the greatest threat.

Iraq was an obvious place to start after Afghanistan. Afghanistan has held its first election in several decades. Women turned out and cast their ballots in large numbers even in the more traditional rural areas where they were banned from all public activity by the Talliban regime. Iraq will soon hold its own elections. This is a remarkable and positive development in such a brief period of time. It would not have been possible with Kerry's approach.

The U.S. did not need to displace Hussein and promote democracy simply to secure oil for American consumption. An occupation and seizure of the oil fields would have accomplished that nicely as the local population and "the world" looked on helplessly. (This is after all exactly what Japan did in Southeast Asia in the early 1940's.) But such a move would have done nothing to arrest the forces of Islamofacism. It would have done nothing to promote stability. And it would have done nothing to make the U.S. less vulnerable to future massive terrorist acts.

Democracies do not make war on each other. Democracies do not tolerate groups within their borders that seek to overthrow governments and make war. Democracies do not make social policy without regard to what the people want. The autocratic governments of the Middle East do all of these things and therein lies the root of the problem. Bush would try to change that dynamic, Kerry wouldn't.

[Novitas]

Just eject that baboon at your head, and start again with a new leader. Is Bush worth so much to you, that will you sacrafice your reputation. He is just a man. Kerry could do a better job. Give him a try.

Kerry has a remarkably undistinguished career in the Senate where in 20 years he has not a single notable achievement. Kerry's principal political posture is to posture in the moment and avidly avoid adherence to any principle at all.

Therefore, he votes for it before he votes against it; he claims on the one hand that he would never subordinate U.S. security to a global test and then claims that he would act only in concert with the world's approval; he stresses multilateralism and then he claims he would enter bilateral negotiations with North Korea that would shut out two border nations and two other nations with vital interests; he claims that he would only raise taxes on "the rich" and then commits to programs that would require raising taxes on everybody; he praises the legacy of Ronald Reagan after opposing every initiative -- both domestic and foreign -- Reagan pursued while he was president; he stresses the importance of allies and then denigrates those allies that have stood closest to the U.S.; he claims that he has had one consistent position on Iraq while in fact holding one inconsistent (and ever-growing) set of positions on Iraq; he commits to seeing through the effort in Iraq and then stresses the importance of getting nations like France and Germany to send troops there in place of Americans (something that each nation has said it would never do). In short, Kerry says whatever he has to say to please the audience he is addressing at the moment. Either Kerry has memory impairment or he thinks the majority of Americans do.

Kerry is as unserious a candidate for office as I have ever seen. I would certainly never vote for such a person, and I doubt the nation will choose him either.

If you think he would make such a good leader, then choose him to lead your country instead!

[Novitas]

The Middle East was a region of complex civilisations when your ancestors were still back in Europe living in hovels and painting themselves with woad .

Fallacy of Irrelevant Thesis.
That the Middle East was once a region of complex civilisations that I will even grant were far in advance of anything else in the world at the time does not in any way inform the current debate.

It is not what the Middle East once was we have to deal with, it is what it has become that is relevant. The present-day Middle East is a politically backward area of the world awash in oil money forming a noxious and combustible froth. For some reason it is not politically correct to point out this obvious truth. I think I know why. Acknowledging this would be to acknowledge that something must be done about it and that would mean abandoning certain shilobeths still widely and feverently held in many parts of the world.

That the Middle East -- Iraq in particular -- was the cradle of human civilization only adds a large dimension of tragedy to what it is today. Its former greatness does not translate into present greatness.


But on two points you are so so right.

And you are so wrong...


You've only just realised? Haliburton have known this for decades.

Au Contraire. Haliburton is considering divesting itself of the business unit that does the work in Iraq because:

1) It shows a 3% ROI (return on investment) compared to a 15% return on other Haliburton enterprises, and

2) Haliburton, its management, employees, and stockholders are frankly tired of all the grief -- largely underserved -- they are getting over Iraq.

Maybe Haliburton should have made itself part of the U.N. oil for food scandal. Then it could have had the approval of Kofi Annan (whose son was deeply into it) and of France, Germany, and Russia... and you?

The point I was making was a much larger, more sweeping, and eminently more relevant one than the crude distraction you are offering. It was also crystal clear: Money -- hence power -- will flow into the Middle East no matter what. What does matter is what kind of society benefits from that largesse and what kind of government decides how to dispose of that wealth.

A great civil society could be created, or terrorism such as the world has never witnessed could be promoted. We all have an interest in that decision. And it would be helpful if peoples of the world had a more adult discussion of this issue on its merits than the banal tripe you are pushing.


We know. Luckily we have most of the Pacific between us but the USA is still far too damned close for my liking.

Maybe we could pull out our military bases as well. (After all, isn't that what you should be complaining about instead, or did you not realize that places like Okinawa are closer to you than places like Hawaii or Alaska or the U.S. mainland.) Then you could deal with China on China's terms. (BTW, they have not forgotton nor forgiven Japan's actrocities of over a half century ago even if you have.)


And led by a born-again imbecile who believes that Jesus cannot return until the earth is engulfed by a huge conflagration; and that this is God's will; and that he is an agent of the Lord placed on this earth for the purpose of carrying out God's will - with incredibly deadly weapons

This verbage says nothing factual about George W. Bush. On the other hand, it says a great deal about you.

[Novitas]

Novitas is clearly refers to a "nuclear armed neighbor [of Japan] that is not exactly an icon of responsible behavior". He obviously means the US. Nobody except you mentioned any neighbours of the US, armed, nuclear, dangerous or otherwise.

Your map reading skills are as deficient as your ability at deductive reasoning and as faulty as your knowledge of history.

Thought Experiment:
You wake up tomorrow to learn that a major city in Japan is under a mushroom cloud, that hundreds of thousands are dead, more are dying, and that Japan has once again been the target of a nuclear attack, but this time while at peace.

All nonsense aside, who is the most obvious suspect? Before trotting out the smarmy answer, consider that Japan is one of the strongest research partners with the U.S. on stragetic missile defense.

[Novitas]

Yes, because obviously [Japan] has a lot to fear from the US. Bush may be a war mongerer, but I don't think he's ready to show aggression towards Japan. and the U.S. is NOT a neighbor of Japan, N. Korea is. Neighbor tends to imply proximity, not thousands of miles of ocean.

The biggest thing Japan has to fear from the U.S. is that we would unilaterally remove our military bases leaving Japan's undersized military (bearing the circumlocution "self-defense force") to fend for itself. China would simultaneously see this as a concern as Japan would have to beef up its military, and as an opprotunity to bully Japan over memories of a half century ago.

[Gaijin de Moscu]

All nonsense aside, who is the most obvious suspect?

Russia?

Sorry, could not resist a cheap pun. But we still haven't signed our peace agreement, after all.

One of the most frequent conversations the Japanese people had with me back in Japan was about the islands...

[Novitas]

donpaulo,

Reading your essay reminded me of Bellamy Brooks and T.S. Elliot. Bellamy Brooks once said that "Egotism is the anesthetic given by a kindly nature to relieve the pain of being a damned fool." T.S. Elliot's The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock is famous for its refrain:

In the room the women come and go
Talking of Michelangelo.

In short, your missive came off as a stuffy, pretentious piece that is far too full of itself and fails to deliver a compelling or even coherent rebuttal. It is a nihilist’s delight that with a lot of fire and thunder manages to say absolutely nothing about practically anything at all and in doing so has a less favorable signal to noise ratio than anything I generally bother dealing with.

Despite that, let's "deconstruct" it shall we...


Sadly I feel this Texan suffers from acute myopia. Its a disease just like any other, but it can be cured with a healthy dose of truth, altruism, use of the scientific method and perhaps a smack upside the head.

Myopia -- nearsightedness -- is not a disease but a condition of the eye that is not treated or cured by any of the therapies you suggest (glasses, contact lenses, or refractive surgery are generally recommended) and is not a condition I suffer from (I have mild presbyopia though). I doubt that you are licensed to practice medicine as a real doctor since a real doctor never attempts a diagnosis without a physical examination.

Yes, I know you were using "myopia" as a crude (and ineffective) metaphor. But since you apparently can't properly characterize physical myopia, it is doubtful you understand your own attempt at metaphor.

As for smacking anyone upside the head, you are certainly welcome to try. But I fail to see how your receiving a humiliating injury in the attempt helps your argument. ;)


Novitas, For the record nobody is saying you aren't entitled to your own opinion (even if it is wrong)

donpaulo, for the record, I never claimed anybody ever said I wasn’t entitled
to my own opinion. You dispute what I do not assert. You are wasting time with this statement.


nor is anyone saying that the world isn't threatened by various groups (most of whom aren't muslim).

I never said that either. Where are you getting these ideas?


So when you draw the conclusion that anyone who disagrees with you and who isn't threatened by muslims or dependent on oil it exposes you as a neophyte in world affairs.

Wow! 0 for 3. Impressive.

My position is that anyone who is dependent on oil or who lives in a part of the world threatened by Muslim terrorism (which is just about any place in the world) has a vital interest in this issue and an urgent reason to think clearly and argue seriously about this matter.

I am having to assume that you meant to say that I draw the conclusion that anyone who disagrees with me isn't threatened by Muslims or dependent on oil from the Middle East. That is not what you said in the quote above. Your prose, taken literally, makes no grammatical sense.

If English is not your native language, let me know. I'll try to make allowances for that. In any event, English as a non-primary language does not explain your gaffes in citing the facts or your lapses of logic.


Your truth is simply folly, and I think you couldn't be farther from the truth than you are now. (sadly)

To begin with, there is no such thing as "my truth" or "your truth." We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. Truth is ultimately based on facts. And it is there that you run into trouble.


Here are the facts

Of the statements you proceed to make are two varieties:

1. Statements of fact which are in fact wrong.

2. Statements of opinion which are at the very least debatable.

You never exercised the rigor in presenting facts that you should have.


Most terrorists are not muslim, repeat NOT MUSLIM.

When talking about terrorists who belong to terrorist organizations with global or
broad transnational reach (the principal subject of the war on terror), most
terrorists are, repeat ARE Muslim and more specifically are Arab Muslim.

Or to paraphrase Groucho Marx: What am I to believe, you or my own eyes?


Don't give in to bigotry and mass hysteria.

This is a strange argument. However, Your dispute is not with me. Your dispute is with Abdulrahman al-Rashed, general manager of Al-Arabiya television. In the wake of the attack and subsequent carnage at the Russian school in Beslan, Al-Awsat wrote a
brutally frank critique of Muslim Arab society and polity in his daily column
published in the pan-Arab Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper. It ran under the headline, "The Painful Truth: All the World Terrorists are Muslims!"

In his column, Mr. al-Rashed wrote:

"Most perpetrators of suicide operations in buses, schools and residential buildings around the world for the past 10 years have been Muslims."

"we [Muslims] will be unable to cleanse our image ... unless we admit the scandalous facts, ... rather than offer condemnations or justifications."

"The picture is humiliating, painful, and harsh for all of us [Muslims]."

You may also want to argue with Ahmed Bahgat, an Egyptian Islamist who wrote in his column in Egypt’s leading pro-government newspaper, Al-Ahram, that hostage-takers in Russia as well as in Iraq are only harming Islam.

"If all the enemies of Islam united together and decided to harm it ... they wouldn’t have ruined and harmed its image as much as the sons of Islam have done by their stupidity, miscalculations, and misunderstanding of the nature of this age."

Mr. al-Rashed and Mr. Bahgat are, given the known violent tendencies of the groups they criticized, displaying remarkable courage. Not only physical courage but also the type of courage portrayed in John F. Kennedy's Profiles in Courage: Political Courage. They are staking out vitally important positions that will be unpopular or unwelcome but eminently necessary among many of their readers.

The necessary ingredients for political courage are two:

1) The willingness to examine things critically and see what you see, and

2) The fortitude to act on what you see.

Your own denial of the obvious, donpaulo, is a soft bigotry that if it carries the day will result in many more tragic unnecessary deaths and an impoverished and dire future for those people who ostensibly you would champion.

I urge you to reexamine the facts and your own reasoning and motives.

[Novitas]

Saudi Arabia is the only country capable of producing the oil necessary to meet world demands.

No country on its own, including Saudi Arabia, can produce the oil necessary to meet world demand. In fact it is quite possible that Siberia may some day exceed Saudi Oil production on its own.

As time goes on and as demand from China and India (each 1 billion plus populations) inevitably increases, the price of oil will rise and the percentage of it provided by Saudi Arabria to meet world demand will inevitably decline.


Its not a representative government but a monarchy that has in the past harbored terrorists and sponsored terrorism against places like Israel.

It is always autocracies that harbor terrorists and sponsor terrorism. Bona-fide representative governments never do.

That said, the Saudi government is too weak to have any meaningful terrorism policy at all. Various members of the royal family and (more likely) their associates have various links to terrorist groups, but for the most part the Saudi royal family is an upper class that pampers itself as its nation deteriorates.

Given that Saudi Arabia is too weak militarily to be a threat to anyone and given that we have no place to begin the process of nation building there and that the regime will collapse anyway (maybe sooner than we are prepared to deal with), and that we presently have leverage with the royal family anyway, it is not a logical place to begin.

Iraq was a different story in all these respects.


Osama Bin Laden was a saudi citizen and so were most of the 9-11 terrorists,
thus Saudi meets the Iraq invasion criteria too.

Osama bin Laden choose the terrorists who carried out the 9/11 attacks precisely because so many of them were Saudi. Bin Laden would have liked nothing more than to have the U.S. remove the Saudi royal family from power. The problem is that Saudi Arabia has no class of people -- except terrorists -- who might then take over the role of governance. Bin Laden knows this.

Are you suggesting we should do as bin Laden would have us do in Saudi Arabia?

You are also forgetting that one of the major irritants to bin Laden was the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia. Average Saudi citizens (and those whom bin Laden would recruit) have seen U.S. soldiers depart their country and while they are surely not happy about U.S. troops being in Iraq they would be even less happy about their continued presence in Saudi Arabia.

Strategically, it made more sense to get rid of a known aggressor in Saddam Hussein, and work with those both recently repatriated leaders and with those of groups outside Hussein's ruling circle like the Kurds that have not made an international problem of themselves. Iraq has a greater polity foundation than Saudi Arabia. If oil was the only concern, then surely it would have made more sense to seize and secure the Saudi oil fields directly. That the administration did not do this speaks to its and the U.S.'s intentions.


Iraq was not an immediate threat to America nor American interests any more than Algeria, Sudan, Liberia, Yemen, Chechnya... (insert the country of your choice here ) are.

The whole point of the Bush Doctrine is that the U.S. will not wait for a threat to be immediate before acting. Therefore arguing that Iraq was not an immediate threat is pointless. Even if true, it's irrelevant.

The Bush Doctrine is Wilsonian in its scope. It posits that bona fide democratic governments rarely if ever make war on each other or permit violent groups to do so by proxy. There is plenty of historical evidence for this proposition that spans continents, religions, cultures, and eras. The only war I can think of that occurred between two well-established bona fide democratic nations was the War of 1812 between Great Britain and the United States. That war -- unfinished business from the earlier colonial relationship between the two countries -- was brief, relatively bloodless, and resulted in no long-term animosity between the nations and their peoples.

By contrast the conflicts of the Middle East have been endless, viscous, and a significant factor in the Middle East's lack of modernity.


Claiming that invading Iraq somewhat results in lessening international terrorism is purely folly.

More to the point, the claim is that removing the regime of Saddam Hussein in turn removes a terrorist-friendly government from existence and thereby results in a lessening of international terrorism by denying international terrorists a safe harbor. That claim is undeniably true.


There are more terrorists in Iraq today than before the invasion.

You seem to miss the (presumably unintended) contradiction in your two comments above. Increasing the number of terrorists in Iraq by drawing them there from surrounding territories necessarily reduces the availability of these terrorists to engage in other violent acts elsewhere in the world thereby reducing international terrorism.

It is the unproven, unsupported, and unbelievable claim that fighting terrorists always produces more terrorists that is folly (as though there were an infinite supply of replacements available or that terrorists were an alien life form that regenerate into two living beings whenever a single one were killed).

[Novitas]

There is less oil flowing from Iraqi pipelines than from before the war.

To whatever extent this may be true (I have not seen the most recent production and export figures yet) it is temporary.

Increasing the flow of Iraqi oil was not the objective of the Iraqi invasion as I pointed out. Eliminating Iraq as a terrorist haven and the removing the availability of Iraqi oil proceeds for purposes of terrorism and development or procurement of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons and materials was the immediate objective. That objective has been achieved. Replacing a tyrannical and dangerous regime and replacing it with one that is peacefully inclined and in accordance with the freely expressed will of the Iraqi people was the long-term objective. That objective is being achieved as we argue.


There are 1000 dead americans and counting as a result of the decision to invade,

There were almost 3000 dead Americans and foreign visitors in a single day as a result of a decision to let danger gather. You will have to find another argument.
That dog won't hunt.


at this rate in another 2 years the dead from the Iraqi war will outnumber the dead from 9-11.

The logic of your argument is flawed. If one observes a rising tide, one might well conclude that "at that rate" all of the land mass of Earth would be submerged in "another 2 years." This is the same logic you have just applied.

It has been forgotten that for the first two or three years, the U.S. experienced similar losses in occupied Germany. Our troops are still stationed there today.


I would then ask you which is a greater tragedy ?

Wrong question. The right question is: what would be the greatest tragedy. The right answer is that the greatest tragedy would be to continue the previous policy of swatting flies, of treating the burgeoning terrorist threat as a law enforcement problem and for one our cities to have experienced a chemical, biological, or nuclear attack dwarfing the death toll of 9/11.

Recall, that in 1993 terrorists attacked the World Trade Center. The response consisted of subpoenas and charges. This accomplished nothing. The terrorists simply built their strength, honed their methods, and returned with a better plan to finish the job.


One was a dastardly sneak attack upon innocent US civilians by a criminal group,

No, it was an act of war by a terrorist organization that enjoyed state sponsorship and that had an international reach.


the other was a premeditated attack by neocons (supported by people like you,

Wrong again. It was the resumption of hostilities pursuant to an already existing state of war caused by repeated violation of the armistice which suspended hostilities but did not end the state of war. (Only a peace treaty does that.)


in a stolen election by a state run by the current presidents brother and placed into power by an unelected supreme court)

Wrong yet again. The initial counts in Florida showed a narrow Bush win. The recount mandated by Florida law when the margin of victory is so close also showed a Bush win. Subsequent recounts sought by Democrats in the heavily Democratic counties of Broward, Palm Beach, and Miami-Dade (and run by Democratic officials) also did not affect the election result. Unofficial but supervised recounts sponsored by several newspapers also showed a Bush win in Florida. There is simply no factual basis for saying the election was stolen. It was Bush's all along. It was the Democrats who were trying to steal the election.

Florida governor Jeb Bush recused himself from involvement in the recounts. (As governor, Jeb Bush was an ex-officio member of a committee that supervises local officials in election controversies.) In the next state election, Jeb Bush was easily re-elected governor despite heavy spending by national Democrats against him. Kathrine Harris, the Florida Secretary of State who was so vilified by Democrats, ran for Congress and was handily elected. I don't know why you bring up Jeb in this context because he had no involvement in the recounts and the people of Florida elected and re-elected Republican officials most vilified by Democrats. I doubt that would be the case if they were guilty of the chicanery you imply.

The Supreme Court of the United States became involved only after the Florida Supreme Court issued an astonishing ruling not based on any statute law or judicial precedent, that was clearly a political decision meant to favor Democrats (the Florida high court at the time consisted of 6 Democrats and 1 Independent at the time), and let the Chief Justice of that court -- Charles T. Wells, a Democrat -- to declare:

"I believe that the majority's decision cannot withstand the scrutiny which will certainly immediately follow under the United States Constitution.

"The majority's decision to return this case to the circuit court for a for a count of the undervotes from either Miami-Dade County or all counties, has no foundation in the law of Florida as it existed on November 7, 2000 or at any time until the issuance of this opinion."

...

"The prolonging of judicial process in this counting contest propels this country and this state into an unprecedented and unnecessary constitutional crisis. I have to conclude that there is a real and present likelihood that this constitutional crisis will do substantial damage to our country, to our state, and to this court as an institution."

Therefore the "unelected supreme court" you should be criticizing is the Florida Supreme Court that ignored the law, the precedents, and its lower courts and decided to make up new law on the spot that conveniently favored Democrats. And your argument is not with me but with Charles T. Wells. Good luck in that endeavor. I think he is more qualified than you to speak about the law.

By the way, don't even bother bringing up the Felon purge canard. It is easily debunked. Ditto for the disenfranchisement nonsense.

[Novitas]

whom are directly responsible for tens of thousands of injured, missing or dead Iraqis.

No, terrorists are directly responsible for tens of thousands of injured, missing, or dead Iraqis. The death tolls due to American operations are paltry by comparison. This does not even count the much larger number of deaths due to Hussein's regime and that can by extension be the indirect responsibility of those who continued to support continuance of his government even after it became obvious that he was an insatiable butcher.


You claim that Mr Bush will drain the "swamp" but the swamp extends from the horn of africa to the far east. Its a swamp larger than the entire united states... I doubt he can do that despite record budget defecits and 8 years in office.

This argument is a fallacy wrapped in a misconception embedded in a falsehood.

In order to drain the swamp it is necessary to plug the source of the water and provide a drain, the remainder of the swamp will naturally empty into this area and out to sea. The source of international terrorism is Islamofacism of Arab pedigree. A simple survey of terrorist strikes and activity around the world strongly indicates this.

Its extensions in the horn of Africa and the Far East simply do not have the ideological fanaticism or political support required to maintain them as viable movements absent Arab support. Cut off the head and the body will die.

Bring modernity – all of modernity – to the Arab world and the rest of the world will be very different and vastly improved. The old approaches of supporting dictators and “strong men” to keep the Arab locals in check is immoral and has proven to be a recipe for disaster.


Thats not even discussing the current secret drug wars going on in south and central america.

Secret? You've got to be kidding. If so, then it is the worst kept secret in history. The merit of the "drug wars" is certainly debatable. But those policies predated George W. Bush's administration by decades and have included Bush's political opposition. Also they are not relevant to the present discussion except to the extent that financial support derives from there. What is your point here?


The fact that Kim Jong Il is likely in possession of weapons of mass
destruction simply exposes the Bush adminstration as incompetent, since clearly Iraq didn't have these weapons but was invaded because they allegedly did.

The fact that Kim Jong Il is in likely possession of atomic bombs can be attributed to the ineffective framework negogiated by the Clinton administration. Bush's administration caught North Korea cheating and called them on it.

I suppose you would prefer that the administration maintain the fiction of a working agreement. Is that so? Do you subscribe to the notion that dangers we do not acknowledge cannot harm us?

The differences between North Korea and Iraq are numerous. And no, availability of oil is not the most significant of these.


The fact that Mr Bush has spent more money on a missile "defense" system that simply doesn't work, than the total spent on the coast guard, immigration and national port defense again exposes him as a myopic bonehead. Read this weeks New Yorker magazine for a wonderful discussion on how much US taxpayer money has been spent on
this "program".

We spent even more money on a space program that "didn't work." That is, it didn't work until it did. And then it worked brilliantly.

It is doubtful that a missile shield could ever be developed that would eliminate the risk of an all-out attack by a superpower. Developing a credible defense against a much less capable nuclear armed adversary is a real possibility though.

As for the New Yorker, I almost automatically discount arguments from left leaning sources that object to something based on its cost. They never object to even more costly programs they like. Cost is never the real objection. You will not find an informed or thorough analysis of the technical merits and barriers to missile defense.


Finally you cannot "begin" a process of democratization simply by arming yourself and imposing it.

Oh really?


Remember Vietnam ? hello ?

Remember Germany? Japan? hello?

It was argued that Democracy would not work in Germany because it had failed there before, being rejected by the people when they "elected" Hitler (and he subsequently dissolved the Weimer Republic). It was argued that Democracy was unknown to Japan and alien to Japanese and Asian values and cultures.

That Democracy is firmly rooted in both countries after having been "imposed" following an armed conflict refutes your point. That Democracy has taken firm root in other Asian cultures and in several African cultures as well further debunks your assertion.

The reason the Vietnam War failed is that we had fickle leadership in the White House from a party that wants to lead us again. With any luck at all, that won't happen.


the people have to want democracy for themselves it cannot be imposed.

What evidence do you have that the people of Iraq do not want democracy for themselves? How were they supposed to express such a social choice under the regime of Saddam Hussein? Do you mean to argue that the terrorists there are a manifestation of popular choice of the Iraqi people? Did you miss the cheering crowds when Hussein was deposed?


Remember that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

And resurfaced with inaction.


If the US is paving the road to democracy I suggest they start in Russia or Saudi Arabia since in both places it is in a dire situation.

Nothing in your comments implies that your suggestions on foreign policy have much merit.


Therefore I repeat, I am not saying you are entitled to your own opinion.

Are you saying that I am not entitled to my own opinion or that I am entitled to my own opinion? Your grammatical construction is awkward at best. I’ll assume you meant to say the later, ergo:

And I repeat (again) that I never claimed that you did. You can drop this line of argument, it's getting you nowhere.


What I am saying is that you don't know what you are talking about.

And what I have shown is that I know precisely what I am talking about. I have matched you point-by-point and shown errors both of fact and in logic in your analysis. I have shown your viewpoint to be little more than your own prejudices and biases. It is now you who must show that you know what you are talking about. Repeating popular, widely held shibboleths does not constitute sophistication. Repeating canards with precision does not constitute wisdom or even knowledge. Repeating falshoods only makes them increasingly threadbare.


However you sound like a pretty well educated person,

Educated, informed, and aware of the world and human nature as it actually exists. Thanks for asking.


so perhaps there is hope that you can cure yourself of a bad case of myopia. I wish you well in this effort.

And In the room the women come and go
Talking of Michelangelo.

[kurogane]

Nice thoughts, Novitas the New. Don't think I agree with all of what you are saying, but, anyway, Good Thinking of you.

BTW, parsimony is a virtue. Remember Occam's Razor?
;)

[Kitty]

I have no issues with Americans...with Japanese people, Canadians, South Africans, Brazilians, the French etc etc.... I just have issues will idiots regardless of what nationality they belong to..... You get any group of people and I am sure you can find at least one who will ____ you off....
The only thing I don't like is everyone assuming I am American because I am obviously not Japanese.

[Code Rot]

Novitas:
You have your beliefs, and good luck to you. But I think in the end, you will realise that what you embarked on doing, is not practical, and is not going to work. You have to remember that Arab nations like Iraq have been running their own affairs for literally thousands of years, they have their own way of doing things. Just because Americans turn up in their land one day and say: "You're free!" doesn't mean they are going to change their ways, and suddenly become capitalists with a McDonalds or KFC restaurant on every block. it is not going to happen that way. I know enough about the Arab world, to know that this Iraqi "liberation"is going to be a disaster for America. If I was the President of the United States, I would be pulling out troops straight away. Iraq is going to be the Black Hole of American power. It is going to suck the life out of America. It has already sucked out of the USA hundreds of billions of dollars, and more than 1000 American lives.

[madmaxxam]

If I was the President of the United States, I would be pulling out troops straight away. Iraq is going to be the Black Hole of American power. It is going to suck the life out of America. It has already sucked out of the USA hundreds of billions of dollars, and more than 1000 American lives.

The problem is, and I definately didn't agree with the choice of going into Iraq, with 'pulling out troops straight away' is that you do need a good exit strategy. You can't just pack up one day and say goodbye. The power vacuum that would leave would be far more disasterous, especially with all the 'foreign religious extremists' there right now. Iraq would most likely turn into another Iran, which is the last thing we want. The most important thing is to make sure that an Iraqi military/political structure is established as soon as possible, so that we can then get the hell out.

[kurogane]

On a brighter note, you guys sell beer in grocery stores, and have some really funky scenery.

"Don't worry, Be happy now".

At any rate, Canada is getting set to invade the US, mainly to free you from the weight of your leaders' idiocy (and more than a few of the citizens, for that matter), but also becasue we want to obtain and erase all copies and mastertapes of Friends. Now that would be a crime FOR humanity.

[Code Rot]

"The most important thing is to make sure that an Iraqi military/political structure is established as soon as possible, so that we can then get the hell ou
Madmaxxum -- "I was kind of playing the Devil's Advocate in that last post. I know the US can't leave Iraq. They can't leave, but they can't stay -- that's the dilemma they face. But the first step is recognising that invading Iraq was a mistake, and letting a few heads roll -- for example George Bush's head in the coming election. If Kerry was elected President, I reckon you would suddenly find a lot of countries would be willing to commit troops, like France and Germany and India and so on. Maybe Kerry could be able to orchestrate some kind of phased withdrawal, and pass Iraq over to the UN. Then it would really be: Mission Accomplished. I think a lot of the anti-Americanism in the world today is really anti-Bushism. Most people in the world can see through this guy in an instant.

[donpaulo]

I want to know how much of your free time (ample as it appears to be) was spent posting that right wing fiction novitas ? There are so many holes in your argument you can steer a liberty ship sporting a nuclear device into an american port through it.
Simply stated going into Iraq when they did was folly. Afghanistan was not finished business, therefore to split your forces in the face of the enemy is not only folly but criminal given the ample instances of such decisions from history. If as you pointed out that Saddam was playing a waiting game, then he would have very clearly been there "waiting" when Afghanistan was finished business. Perhaps mr bush was more concerned with doing something on his watch, rather than doing the proper thing which was seeing the afghan job through to its proper conclusion and then turning to the next job at hand. Of course while taking care of afghan issues the US military could have spent the time better preparing for the extended tour of peacekeeping in Iraq. My best reckoning would say it will be in the neighborhood of a decade or two to do the job right. (ARVN precedent not withstanding)
Imposing democracy in a place with no history of such is a risky enterprise, but it sure makes for some great campaign speech rhetoric.
As to IF iraq was the right place to go is a question best left alone since in doing so this thread will quickly take on the length of a barbara tuchman book. For anyone reading this far I highly recommend her book entitled "the march of folly" from Troy to Vietnam. For any further debate on this issue simply read her book, she says it in a brilliant manner.
I feel very confident in saying that mr Bush is not going to solve the international terrorist problems in office, but he is quite likely going to go down in history as the guy who spent more money than ronnie did with less results.
Finally, most terrorists are not muslims (many are, but not most) the fact you seem to think so simply makes this bit of logic impossible for you to comprehend.
have a good one

[Novitas]

Novitas:
You have your beliefs, and good luck to you. But I think in the end, you will realise that what you embarked on doing, is not practical, and is not going to work.

As with any bold and somewhat untried venture, there is no guarantee of success. But we know the old way of supporting local strong men to keep the locals in line and oil flowing and the terrorists in check is no good. Technology has upped the ante. The ideologies that are taking ever greater root in the Arab world are toxic to us all, and the increasingly deadly fruits of what would otherwise be progress permit no further delay.

It is doing nothing, or rather continuing the same failed approach that is folly.


You have to remember that Arab nations like Iraq have been running their own affairs for literally thousands of years, they have their own way of doing things.

Of all the counter-arguments one might marshal, this has to be the least impressive.

To begin with "Arab Nations" as such have not existed until very recently and even then they were the product -- for better or worse -- or European statecraft, conflict, and colonization. The lines drawn by Europeans in the Middle East served European purposes and not the interests of the indigenous populations. Iraq itself is a prime example of crude, self-serving European gerrymandering that did little to promote political stability after Europeans departed the scene.

Furthermore, Arabs running their affairs for thousands of years did nothing to prevent this European domination in the first place, and did not equip Arabs to operate a modern political state sans Europeans in the second. The polity and cultural wisdom accumulated by Arabs over the millennia simply did not apply to the modern world. Arabs have effectively had to start from scratch.

The results have not been impressive.


Just because Americans turn up in their land one day and say: "You're free!" doesn't mean they are going to change their ways, and suddenly become capitalists with a McDonalds or KFC restaurant on every block. it is not going to happen that way.

Nor is that simplistic caricature our expectation. Consensual government and consensual societies can take many forms. The U.S., Great Britain, France, Japan, and Israel just to mention a few do it differently. The nations of the Middle East (except maybe Turkey if you consider them part of the Middle East -- they are after all trying to join the E.U.) do not practice any form of consensual government, do not have any way for its inhabitants to peacefully agitate for redress of grievances, and do not have any mechanism for public debate and peaceful of resolutions of tensions within the societies themselves. We have seen the result of that.

Arab nations must eventually create consensual governments and consensual societies consistent with their own values and desires. But that will never happen as long as the tyrants remain around promoting the most corrupt and vile violence against outsiders and each other and destroying any nascent movement toward consensual governance.

I remind you that we were also told that Germany and Japan were not suitable hosts for the infusion of democratic ideas and polity -- Germany having tried and rejected it, and Japan having never experienced it. Those critics were wrong then. You have not provided a single reason why you should be right now.


I know enough about the Arab world, to know that this Iraqi "liberation"is going to be a disaster for America.

For someone who knows of the Arab world, you have missed some key dynamics that are in play.


If I was the President of the United States, I would be pulling out troops straight away.

And in doing so you would create an explosive political vacuum that would place us all in greater danger than ever before. One does not walk away from a transplant operation midway through the procedure.


Iraq is going to be the Black Hole of American power.

I rather think that this is your hope instead.


It is going to suck the life out of America. It has already sucked out of the USA hundreds of billions of dollars, and more than 1000 American lives.

We lost almost 3,000 in a single day. The nation is not nearly as allergic to taking war losses as you seem to think.

[Novitas]

I want to know how much of your free time (ample as it appears to be) was spent posting that right wing fiction novitas ?

It takes me very little time to turn even a large slab of baloney into mincemeat.


There are so many holes in your argument you can steer a liberty ship sporting a nuclear device into an american port through it.

Then by all means exploit at least one of those holes. It should be easy for you since you say there are so many of them and since you say they are so large.

That you did not identify these "holes" in my argument much less exploit them is curious indeed.


Simply stated going into Iraq when they did was folly. Afghanistan was not finished business, therefore to split your forces in the face of the enemy is not only folly but criminal given the ample instances of such decisions from history.

Oh, you mean like in World War II, where we "split" our forces between two major theaters of operation (the Pacific and Europe and Northern Africa)? Even within these theaters our forces were split further still. Or like in the Cold War when our forces were deployed world-wide?

Terrorists do not conveniently congregate in one place awaiting their own annihilation. Nor do you adequately define what you mean by finishing the "business" in Afghanistan. Should we also have pulled our troops out of Germany, Japan, South Korea, and other places so that they could be solely concentrated in Afghanistan? This did after all allow us to remove our troops from Saudi Arabia.

Split front wars have been the rule, not the exception, for the last centruy or so.


If as you pointed out that Saddam was playing a waiting game, then he would have very clearly been there "waiting" when Afghanistan was finished business. Perhaps mr bush was more concerned with doing something on his watch, rather than doing the proper thing which was seeing the afghan job through to its proper conclusion and then turning to the next job at hand.

You still have not stipulated what a "proper conclusion" would be for Afghanistan.

The rest of this is not a coherent argument but idle speculation.


Of course while taking care of afghan issues the US military could have spent the time better preparing for the extended tour of peacekeeping in Iraq.

Again, which issues?

And exactly what would the U.S. military do in Afghanistan to "better" prepare for peacekeeping in Iraq. Not to mention, what would Hussein be up to in the meantime given that he had the cooperation of agents in France and Germany to subvert U.N. sanctions.


My best reckoning would say it will be in the neighborhood of a decade or two to do the job right. (ARVN precedent not withstanding)

To do what job specifically? And why is the ARVN precedent notwithstanding?


Imposing democracy in a place with no history of such is a risky enterprise, but it sure makes for some great campaign speech rhetoric.

It makes for better national polities. If you are reading this while within Japan, just compare what you see around you to what preceded World War II. The U.S. "imposed" democracy there too.


As to IF iraq was the right place to go is a question best left alone since in doing so this thread will quickly take on the length of a barbara tuchman book.

Even if true, this is no reason not to debate the question.

Perhaps you and I come at this discussion not only with different political orientations and hence points of view, but also with different expectations as to what the discussion should be.

I believe that this discussion should be not only an exposition of our views but a substantive and grown-up debate about the relative merits of those views. So far, I see only evidence of the former in your approach to this discussion. You have repeated (and go on to repeat) earlier assertions that you've made without either acknowledging that those assertions have been substantively challenged or even better engaging the challenge with your own response.

This is a sign of someone who is not all that confident in his positions.


For anyone reading this far I highly recommend her book entitled "the march of folly" from Troy to Vietnam. For any further debate on this issue simply read her book, she says it in a brilliant manner.

As it happens, I read the book in its entirety in 1984 when it was first published. In it Barbara W. Tuchman is very specific in defining what she means by folly or at least circumscribes what kind of folly she is willing to consider. Her three criteria for folly are:

1. The policy in question must be perceived as counter-productive in its own time, not merely in hindsight;

2. A feasible alternative or course of action must have been readily available; and

3. The policy in question must be that of a group and not an individual ruler.

Since Ms. Tuchman also is very specific about the folly she describes as a very specific type of mismanagement, I will add the following criteria consistent with what she describes:

0. The policy in question must actually be contrary to the self-interest of the nation that adopts it.

I also take exception to criteria #2. I think the alternative course of action must not only be feasible but also effective, and it must be reasonable to believe it would be effective at the time the policy was undertaken.

The applicability of her descriptions of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, of the fall or Troy, of the loss by Britain of the American colonies, and of the American experience in Vietnam especially given her criteria above to the matter presently under discussion is debatable at best.

In particular, it is not given that criteria #0 and criteria #2b (feasible and effective) and criteria #3 are met.

More to the point, you apparently missed the fact that the prior policy of supporting tyrannical regimes meets all of her criteria. I’m not sure what you were trying to accomplish with your introduction of this book in to the discussion, as it is a more effective rebuttal of your position than a support for it


I feel very confident in saying that mr Bush is not going to solve the international terrorist problems in office,

Nor do I, and Mr. Bush's comments seem to suggest that also. World War II was not "solved" with FDR still in office, neither was the Cold War "solved" with Truman still in office. Still both men undertook policies with great risk that led to those successful conclusions.


but he is quite likely going to go down in history as the guy who spent more money than ronnie did with less results.

Even Reagan's policy produced results because they were faithful both with the realities of human nature and the prior Truman Doctrine. You have given no coherent reasons why your conclusion would be true. You again are offering opinions with little to back them up.

[Novitas]

Finally, most terrorists are not muslims (many are, but not most) the fact you seem to think so simply makes this bit of logic impossible for you to comprehend.
have a good one

Argumentum Ad-Nauseum

You keep saying that most terrorists are not Muslims. Based on what? By what criteria are you categorizing someone as a terrorist? I made a very specific rebuttal to this point when you raised it earlier (in nearly identical fashion):


Posted by Novitas:
When talking about terrorists who belong to terrorist organizations with global or broad transnational reach (the principal subject of the war on terror), most terrorists are, repeat ARE Muslim and more specifically are Arab Muslim.

Or to paraphrase Groucho Marx: What am I to believe, you or my own eyes?

...

This is a strange argument. However, Your dispute is not with me. Your dispute is with Abdulrahman al-Rashed, general manager of Al-Arabiya television. In the wake of the attack and subsequent carnage at the Russian school in Beslan, Al-Awsat wrote a brutally frank critique of Muslim Arab society and polity in his daily column published in the pan-Arab Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper. It ran under the headline, "The Painful Truth: All the World Terrorists are Muslims!"

In his column, Mr. al-Rashed wrote:

"Most perpetrators of suicide operations in buses, schools and residential buildings around the world for the past 10 years have been Muslims."

"we [Muslims] will be unable to cleanse our image ... unless we admit the scandalous facts, ... rather than offer condemnations or justifications."

"The picture is humiliating, painful, and harsh for all of us [Muslims]."

You may also want to argue with Ahmed Bahgat, an Egyptian Islamist who wrote in his column in Egypt’s leading pro-government newspaper, Al-Ahram, that hostage-takers in Russia as well as in Iraq are only harming Islam.

"If all the enemies of Islam united together and decided to harm it ... they wouldn’t have ruined and harmed its image as much as the sons of Islam have done by their stupidity, miscalculations, and misunderstanding of the nature of this age."

Mr. al-Rashed and Mr. Bahgat are, given the known violent tendencies of the groups they criticized, displaying remarkable courage. Not only physical courage but also the type of courage portrayed in John F. Kennedy's Profiles in Courage: Political Courage. They are staking out vitally important positions that will be unpopular or unwelcome but eminently necessary among many of their readers.

The necessary ingredients for political courage are two:

1) The willingness to examine things critically and see what you see, and

2) The fortitude to act on what you see.

Your own denial of the obvious, donpaulo, is a soft bigotry that if it carries the day will result in many more tragic unnecessary deaths and an impoverished and dire future for those people who ostensibly you would champion.

I urge you to reexamine the facts and your own reasoning and motives.


Not only do you make no apparent attempt to reexamine the facts and your own reasoning and motives, you do not even acknowledge the rebuttal or provide a counter-rebuttal.

Either you have decided that you cannot be bothered, or more likely you strongly believe what you believe but you have absolutely no idea why you believe what you believe and would prefer not to confront the possibility of being wrong.

In any case you are now deprived of the illusion that your beliefs are without plausible rebuttal. You are denied the comfort of ecclesiastical certainty in your viewpoint. And indeed you may ignore contrary arguments or simply repeat what you have already said louder and more frequently, but you can not un-know the existence of the other side of the argument anymore or be unaware of its reliance.

It is always better for those who argue most earnestly to simultaneously open their own eyes and allow their mind to see what their eyes see.

[Novitas]

"If Kerry was elected President, I reckon you would suddenly find a lot of countries would be willing to commit troops, like France and Germany and India and so on.

Maybe you missed the news.

France (http://www.vnagency.com.vn/NewsA.asp?LANGUAGE_ID=2&CATEGORY_ID=34&NEWS_ID=119294), Germany (http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=31140), and India (http://www.spacewar.com/2003/030912055635.1h49ponq.html) have explicitly ruled out commiting troops to Iraq, as has China (http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/webnews/wed/bu/Qiraq-china.RwvK_DOS.html). These nations have made no exception with regard to who is President of the U.S. come the end of January 2005. Even Kerry has been forced to recognize this (http://washingtontimes.com/national/20041006-011859-5099r.htm) reality.

[stillnosheep]

At any rate, Canada is getting set to invade the US, mainly to free you from the weight of your leaders' idiocy .

Invade the good ole U S of A?! and there was I settin' sail to surround the damn Fre chi s!

"Hard abast, full to starboard, take on WMDs and set sail for Amerikay me shipmates!! ...

and don't spare the horses!"

errrr....

[donpaulo]

Perhaps if I were unemployed, retired or with enough time to waste in an endless debate I would take up the sword, but frankly it isn't worth it.

I am glad you, or anyone for that matter has read tuchman's book, its an excellent read. I would highly recommend reading all of her books for an entertaining and enlightening experience.

As far as the title of the thread I not embarrassed to be an American living in Japan. Quite the contrary actually.

[Novitas]

Perhaps if I were unemployed, retired or with enough time to waste in an endless debate I would take up the sword, but frankly it isn't worth it.

I'll accept your statement above as a sort of back door concession. I do not believe however that it is a lack of time or your perception that the debate is "endless" is what is really motivating you to exit this debate.

I am a self-employed consultant with severe time constraints and financial obligations to meet. I multitask a great deal. I am not some pampered retiree living on accumulated wealth (despite presently residing in Texas). Therefore my time constraints are at least as substantial as yours.

It is worth recalling what led to this exchange. You began with a mix of arrogance and condescension, determined to put this "Texan" in his place. You apparently and incorrectly assumed that your views were more reasonable, more rational, more scientific, and beyond serious dispute. You learned otherwise.

Maybe you've never been exposed to a competent debater with substantially different views from your own -- at least on these issues. Maybe you have never had your world-view seriously challenged. I don't know. What I do know is that I responded to your remarks not only with my opinion but with an analysis backed up by facts. It has not escaped my attention that you have responded only by rehashing your original comments, not with any substantial analysis of your own backed up by any facts.


I am glad you, or anyone for that matter has read tuchman's book, its an excellent read. I would highly recommend reading all of her books for an entertaining and enlightening experience.

Generally speaking, I agree. Even with its flaws, it is a good book and a worthwhile read. But it should be viewed as descriptive of the past not prescriptive for the present or future. That is, it informs, but its implications are certainly debatable, in part for reasons I outlined in my previous missive.


As far as the title of the thread I not embarrassed to be an American living in Japan. Quite the contrary actually.

Good for you! And I agree on both points.

[Bluedog]

"I'll accept your statement above as a sort of back door concession"

You have to be careful not to give those back door concessions away too easily. Make 'em pay to play. If they wanna dance, they gotta pay tha band and all that.

Nice sig by the way, although I thought that it was originally a quote about quantum mechanics. Maybe it got plagurised in the one I'm thinking of.

[Code Rot]

The leading astrologers in India have predicted that Kerry will win the election.
Only four days to go to see whether they are right or not.
But I just try to imagine what it would be like, with Kerry as President. Unlike Bush, he seems to be a man who appreciates the complexity of life, and he has an intelligence which has been embarrassingly absent in Bush (who jokes about the fact that he never reads newspapers or watches the news.)
This is what could happen:
1) An end to the Iraq War. Most American troops can go home, and control of Iraq passes over to the UN.
2) An end to anti-Americanism. From Spain to Greenland to South Korea, people rejoice at the end of the Bush reign. The bitterness of the past four years is forgiven. Kerry promises to begin a new era of international cooperation.
3) An end to the Middle East conflict. Kerry pressures Ariel Sharon to withdraw from the Occupied Territories, and allow a Palestinian state to be created there. With Yasser Arafat fading from the scene due to poor health, the time is perfect for America to seize control of this volatile problem. For example, Kerry could pour billions of American dollars into building a new democractic, secure Palestinian state. This would be a big leap forward in the War Against Terror, and show that America was commited to helping the Arabian world. It would deprive Osama bin Laden of one of his favourite lines: that America is biased towards Israel in the Arab-Israeli dispute. Bush definitely IS biased towards Israel, but I think Kerry would be more balanced and sensible in his approach.
4) Kerry could recognise that the Earth's climate is changing, resulting in record typhoons in Japan this summer, more hurricanes in Florida, crippling droughts in Australia, etc. Bush could never say there was a problem because he is an oilman, and oil is one of the big causes of the problem. Under Kerry, perhaps American would sign the Kyoto Protocol. and start taxing the big SUV oil guzzlers off the roads. It might be a naive hope, but the astrologers of India can't be wrong -- they say Bush's days are almost over!

[Song2]

As a non-American, may I ask what the vibe is amongst y'all towards Kerry's war record?

There seem to be so many sites, like this one...
http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/
...all undermining his Vietnam record.

Yes, I know 'at least he went', unlike Bush, but is there great trust at grassroots level in a career politician that seems to have ducked and dived for many years, the way they do?

Yes, nobody is perfect (present company excepted), but is it a case of the lesser of two evils, prey tell?

[stillnosheep]

Kerry's war record!:

Two Purple hearts for god's sake - while the poor little rich boy from Houston couldn't even muster up the common decency to turn up for the Texas national guard sodding air force where daddies influence had him well protected.

The websites are republican stunts. Bush's goons in the white house and their friends are capable of anything.

Let's get rid of the weasel while there is still time - before he get's the US into even more debt and carnage.

[Song2]

Two Purple hearts for god's sake
Deserved?
I'm not heavily into politics or have an axe to grind, but found several pages on this site fascinating reading:
http://www.swiftvets.com/index.php?topic=KerryinVietnam

[madmaxxam]

Mostly Republican propoganda. Let's face it, if you have a political motives you'll lie to achieve your goals. The fact is that all of this happened during the Vietnam War, so most of the evidence will be heresay. The fact that it's even an issue just shows that Republicans will go to any length to try to undermine the other candidate.

[godzillagaijin]

The leading astrologers in India have predicted that Kerry will win the election.
Only four days to go to see whether they are right or not.

Screw the Gallup Poll...or AP...or Newsweek...what we should use to predict events are the "leading" astrologers of India...I mean, 3000, levitating, **** smeared knuckleheads cant be wrong!



This is what could happen:
1) An end to the Iraq War. Most American troops can go home, and control of Iraq passes over to the UN..

And do we all get Sno-cones too? YAY! I like Sno-cones! France, germany and Russia have already said they will NOT involved themselves even if Kerry wins the election. Who do you think this guy is? Hes a liar and traitor...he will turn his back on his promises (if he has even MADE any during the run up to the election) just as he turned his back on his vote FOR the invasion of IRaq and just like he turned his back on his fellow soldiers in Vietnam.

The goal of Iraq is that it is stable. Not that Americans can go home. The UN has failed in supporting regime change EVERYWHERE it has tried. YOur rosecolored view is misplaced and assanine.


2) An end to anti-Americanism. From Spain to Greenland to South Korea, people rejoice at the end of the Bush reign. The bitterness of the past four years is forgiven. Kerry promises to begin a new era of international cooperation..

Who gives a crap really? Only insecure jack offs who try to impress every one and win friends and influence people care about what Zimbabwe, Greenland and Spain thinks...And Greenland isnt even a country. AMERICANS elect AMERICAN presidents. Not the members of the UN...or the lefties in France...or the Eskimos in Greenland. But I guess if you elect Jean Kerre as President youll get as close to a Frenchman in the office as possible.


3) An end to the Middle East conflict. Kerry pressures Ariel Sharon to withdraw from the Occupied Territories, and allow a Palestinian state to be created there. With Yasser Arafat fading from the scene due to poor health, the time is perfect for America to seize control of this volatile problem. For example, Kerry could pour billions of American dollars into building a new democractic, secure Palestinian state. This would be a big leap forward in the War Against Terror, and show that America was commited to helping the Arabian world. It would deprive Osama bin Laden of one of his favourite lines: that America is biased towards Israel in the Arab-Israeli dispute. Bush definitely IS biased towards Israel, but I think Kerry would be more balanced and sensible in his approach..

You think Bush hasnt been pressuring Sharon? YOu think Sharon hasnt offered it before? Sharon offered everything to Arrafat when CLINTON was in office and Arrafat turned it down. Now he wants the SAME plan as before, but its too late. You cant declare an intifada and expect to get the same gift twice. Arrafat is to blame. When he dies, things will change.

And I love how you think "America should seize control and build a democratic state in Palestine." You HATE Bush when he liberates Iraq from a tyrant, and then blame him because he cant free the Palestinians from a tyrant. Make up your mind. Stop whining and educate yourself. And please, the rhetoric on this site is deafining...can someone please turn it down a notch?

And SInce when did the poor little put upon citizens of Ramallah start getting all the sympathy? They strap C4 to their chests and buy bus passes....But I guess to you this is their way of showing how angry and put off they are. Better than holding your breath till you turn blue huh?


4) Kerry could recognise that the Earth's climate is changing, resulting in record typhoons in Japan this summer, more hurricanes in Florida, crippling droughts in Australia, etc. Bush could never say there was a problem because he is an oilman, and oil is one of the big causes of the problem. Under Kerry, perhaps American would sign the Kyoto Protocol. and start taxing the big SUV oil guzzlers off the roads. It might be a naive hope, but the astrologers of India can't be wrong -- they say Bush's days are almost over!

The only country in the world the Kyoto protocol affects is the United STates. It cripples our industry. Without industry we cant pump the "billions of dollars" into the new and democratic Palestine we should apparently build.

You and the rest of the liberal whiners need to make up your minds. Is it really Bushs policies you hate or are you just riding this international bandwagon of listless, power need? You think Kerry is going to be any different? Hes not. If he has a brain in his head (and I think he does) he will be met with the same problems Bush has. ANd if he is reasonable (which I hope he is) he will deal with them in the same fashion Bush has. Bush has acted rationally, and in the only way he could have. For you not to recognize that is negligent.

[Song2]

The fact is that all of this happened during the Vietnam War, so most of the evidence will be heresay. The fact that it's even an issue just shows that Republicans will go to any length to try to undermine the other candidate.

'Heresay', I think you need to read some of the facts told by the Vets...by the guys who were on the same boats as him, by his entire command line of officers, infact...even from the Doctor who examined his 'wounds'...before you can make a judgement about his character. They all agree that he was a waste of space.
Then add to that their feelings of being 'abused/insulted' by his activities after he returned home, with his unsubstanciated accusations...and then there's his various meetings with Vietnamese leaders in Paris (another subject he lies about) of which it is widely reported that he was but their pawn in anti-war meetings etc.

Taking all the above plus what the Vets are saying (check out the vid clips adverts/ Swift Boat Veterans for Truth Press Conference on http://swift1.he.net/~swiftvet/index.php?topic=Ads ), and his refusal to sign the release of his Military records...plus his various dates of his leaving the Navy...probably stating 'Dishonourably' at the very least...plus his attempteing to cover up his Military record in '78 etc...he comes across as being one slimey piece of work, who could soon be the US Commander in chief with his finger on the button.

I hate it when folk lie and try and change factual history...hate it.

Four months that happened 35 years ago are now coming back to haunt both the man, a country and a new generation.

So, is he the better/worse of the two evils?

[donpaulo]

for those seeking information on the two candidates I suggest a visit to PBS frontline

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/choice2004/view/

it isn't perfect but its a fairly balanced version

[madmaxxam]

I don't really care about the election in terms of foreign policy as much as I do domestic policy. Especially with our supreme court justices ready to kick the can. As far as I'm concerned I don't want to be in a country where abortion is once again illegal in 10 years. It should be no big surprise that one of Bush's agendas is the overturning of Roe V. Wade, and given a couple of Supreme court vacancies he could accomplish that. Other rights are at stake too. I don't want to return to a right-wing, Christian state.

[kurogane]

Maxxie,
I'm with you, big guy. A truly right wing Supreme Court would be scary, and I'm only an observer, and lately, not a very interested one.

Kuso GG,
Put me down for a Sno-Cone. I love Sno-Cones. Preferably Lemon or Watermelon. We could have, like, a Sno-Cone detente. How cool would that be?

[godzillagaijin]

Id like to make one point, now that I think it is safe to (knock on wood). Bush has kept Americans at home safe since September 11th. That alone is a reason to put the man in office for another 4 years.

[madmaxxam]

Id like to make one point, now that I think it is safe to (knock on wood). Bush has kept Americans at home safe since September 11th. That alone is a reason to put the man in office for another 4 years.

Well, many in the US have been safe, for a few years. It's been known that certain terrorist groups (Al Qaeda) plan attacks for years before carrying them out. Since new attacks were probably being planned starting after 9/11, I'd say it's probable that they will be carried out in 2-3 years. And how many in Iraq have been far less than safe. To take out a leader who had no connection to Al Qaeda, no WMD's, and lots of oil, which doesn't seem to be flowing anywhere right now. Yes he was a bad man, but there are many bad dictators in the world that the US doesn't give a damn about. Let's face it, Sadam was on Bush's hit list before 9/11, and by going into Iraq he messed things up pretty badly. And don't think of saying Iraq is better off, because it's impossible to tell yet, and estimates are that 100,000 civilians in Iraq have died since the beginning of the war. In addition, foreign terrorists have been pouring into the country, and making things far worse for not just the US troops, but for the locals. You go Bush!!!

Either way, domestic policy is very important for me, and that's a reason to kick Bush's A$$ out the door as hard as I can.

[godzillagaijin]

Maxxie,
I'm with you, big guy. A truly right wing Supreme Court would be scary, and I'm only an observer, and lately, not a very interested one.

Kuso GG,
Put me down for a Sno-Cone. I love Sno-Cones. Preferably Lemon or Watermelon. We could have, like, a Sno-Cone detente. How cool would that be?

Detente? Is that French? I had the part of my Brain that recognizes anything French removed some years ago. Has freed up alot of my time that I spent giving a sh*t about what those yellow bastards are doing or saying.

A right wing Supreme Court? Alot more people would be in danger of dying if a left wing SC were there....Ya know, all those third trimester children being Hoovered out of uteri at rates only parrelled by Saddams death squads....You remember the death squads right? Yeah, they dont exist anymore. Just like the liberals hopes for pushing their twisted platform forward on the world stage.

Well, it looks like Bush has won reelection. What a great, glorious and fantastic day for Americans. Hoorah for us and our right to vote. Hoorah for not listening to meddling foreigners. Hoorah for us not giving a flying f*ck about what you or your creme brule eating asses think or do. Hoorah for Bush, the Great Defender. Hoorah for the concerned citizens of the Great state of Ohio.

And Boo to Kerry for pulling some of the same cryin-in-my-pile-of-chads bullsh*t his predecesor did. When are these whining, hypocritical c*nts going to realize that the office of the president, and the welfare of the people is more important than their own greedy, underhanded, selfish means to gain noteriety in life.

The f*ckin pussy didnt even have the balls to come out and say it himself. He had to send the receiving half of The Ambiguously Gay Duo out to do it for him. At least have the balls to stand up and say you are a p*ssy.

If anyone wants to say anything, Ill be over hear basking in my warm, electric blanket of renewed national security...Powered by the collective tears of bleeding hearts everywhere.

[Bluedog]

Spurting a little prematurely there aren't you? Bush may pull it off, he's certainly got the skillz as a tugger, but it's not over yet.

"At least have the balls to stand up and say you are a p*ssy"

People have had the balls to stand up and say whatever they like, that's why this argument continues. People have been saying the same thing about Bush for years too. Only one of the presidential candidates actually went to war. Who is the pussy, and who is the pussiest then?

[godzillagaijin]

Spurting a little prematurely there aren't you? Bush may pull it off, he's certainly got the skillz as a tugger, but it's not over yet.

"At least have the balls to stand up and say you are a p*ssy"

People have had the balls to stand up and say whatever they like, that's why this argument continues. People have been saying the same thing about Bush for years too. Only one of the presidential candidates actually went to war. Who is the pussy, and who is the pussiest then?

Reminds me of a great joke I heard from a lefty friend of mine...

Whats the difference between Iraq and Vietnam?

Bush had a plan to get out of Vietnam.


I will say one thing about you libbys...you sure do have a sense of humor.

[Maki`s Mum]

What A Twatt You Are ! Godzilla Gaijin.
You Just Lost All Your Credibility If You Had Any Left At All.
It Is People Like You That Make America The Subject Of International
Derision And Contempt, With Your Ill-thought Out Ideas, Comparing
Innocent Children Being Murdered In Iraq To Legal Abortion In The States.
Please Explain The Logic In Your Argument Here.
The War In Iraq Was Illegal. There Are No Wmds. The Us Flouted The Un.
France Did Not Want To Fight An Illegal War
Kids Are Now Dying Daily Of Cancer From Depleted Uranium. People Of Iraq, Go Home And Die.
Soldiers On The Front Line Are Being Killed For Oil And To Secure The Interests Of The Iniquitous Legacy Being Enacted By Cheney, Bush And The Other Spineless Cowards In The Us.
The Us Causes International Terrorism And Has Done For Years
The Newest And Brashest, Uncompromising Country That Exists Continues Its Big Stick Policy And To Serve Itself With No Regard For The Rest Of The World.
Bush Flouted The Kyoto Protocol And Signed A Death Warrant For Our Planet.
Us Hegemony Will Know Now End And Hate Against The Us Will Continute To Grow.
Do The Millions Of Decent People In Your Country A Favour And Keep Your Ill-informed, Poorly Thought Out And Downright Ignorant Opinions Off This Board.
Your Ignorance Beggars Beilief. This Is A Thought Process I Have Come To Observe Among Petulant Teenagers Randomly Theorizing About The World.
You Are Wrong And You Know It.

[Maki`s Mum]

Keyboard Funny Today

[godzillagaijin]

What A Twatt You Are ! Godzilla Gaijin.
You Just Lost All Your Credibility If You Had Any Left At All.
It Is People Like You That Make America The Subject Of International
Derision And Contempt, With Your Ill-thought Out Ideas, Comparing
Innocent Children Being Murdered In Iraq To Legal Abortion In The States.
Please Explain The Logic In Your Argument Here.
The War In Iraq Was Illegal. There Are No Wmds. The Us Flouted The Un.
France Did Not Want To Fight An Illegal War
Kids Are Now Dying Daily Of Cancer From Depleted Uranium. People Of Iraq, Go Home And Die.
Soldiers On The Front Line Are Being Killed For Oil And To Secure The Interests Of The Iniquitous Legacy Being Enacted By Cheney, Bush And The Other Spineless Cowards In The Us.
The Us Causes International Terrorism And Has Done For Years
The Newest And Brashest, Uncompromising Country That Exists Continues Its Big Stick Policy And To Serve Itself With No Regard For The Rest Of The World.
Bush Flouted The Kyoto Protocol And Signed A Death Warrant For Our Planet.
Us Hegemony Will Know Now End And Hate Against The Us Will Continute To Grow.
Do The Millions Of Decent People In Your Country A Favour And Keep Your Ill-informed, Poorly Thought Out And Downright Ignorant Opinions Off This Board.
Your Ignorance Beggars Beilief. This Is A Thought Process I Have Come To Observe Among Petulant Teenagers Randomly Theorizing About The World.
You Are Wrong And You Know It.

Doesnt really matter if Im wrong does it? Cause I am in the majority of Americans that think this way. Infact, 51% of Americans think EXACTLY the same way I do. More importantly, the HNIC in the BMFWH (that means Big Mutha Fuqin White House to you heathenistic ,socialist hordes) thinks the same as me.

So the time for argument is done. No more arguing over whether Bush should go, or whether he should stay. The good he has done or the bad that he has done. No reason to even argue about the direction we are going as a country and what it means to all the other countries in the world. Cause it comes down to this:

Bush in a 2nd term...with a Republican controlled Congress...and a Republican controlled Senate...and a new Republican selected Judge on the Supreme Court....Oh baby, heads is gonna roll! HEADS IS GONNA ROLL!!

That is...if we decide to roll them or not.

All of you back woods, third world, socialist lepers are gonna have to sit by and watch now. Watch what this country does. Watch what we say. Watch how much we dont give a fuq about your opinions. Watch the war we wage. Watch the regimes we topple. Watch the people we liberate. Watch the ___ we kick.

Just you watch.

[Song2]

I wonder if his victory is gonna now go to his head?
I, for one, can mentally picture him wearing all-white suits, shirts and ties from now on, and carrying a Bible wherever he goes...quoting from it when answering any awkward questions.

I think I may have had one too many cups of tea today.

[madmaxxam]

I wonder if his victory is gonna now go to his head?
I, for one, can mentally picture him wearing all-white suits, shirts and ties from now on, and carrying a Bible wherever he goes...quoting from it when answering any awkward questions.

Anyone else laugh when he said something about "Bringing America together, and satisfying the portion of the electorate that didn't vote for him?" I'm sure that all he's going to do with his second term in office is polarize the country even farther. I can just be thankful for a few of the statistics from the exit polls of the election. Younger and well educated people tended to vote against Bush. And of course it tells me a lot that the largest voting block that Bush had was Evangelical Christians, some of the people I hate most in the world.

[godzillagaijin]

Speaking of throwing bones...Bush did just that to the liberal electorate...He didnt REALLY say he is going to try and get you guys to his side...or bridge any gaps...or care...what he really said that you are either with him, or against him. And he is gonna go out and do what he thinks is right. Because now, your inept, ignorant, uneducated voices dont matter any more. America has spoken, and frankly, if he WANTS to make you happy, he will. But he doesnt have to. Not with the power the right is holding right now in Washington.

You do realize, this may be the most power a politician from ANY country in the world has held in more than 50 years. More than Kruschev...more than Reagan...More than Stalin...****, if it wasnt for Hitler I would say in the last 200.. He is in a position to change this world permanently. If he wishes to invade, he may very well be able to do it at will. Ending abortion? With Renquists replacement, probably....Invading France? Why not...Social Security? Privatized by the end of his term...Health Care reform? Guaranteed. You libbys better make this man happy, cause he could just stop giving a **** about your uppity whining at any moment. And then what will you have? Nothing. So put on some lipstick boys, and start practicing your ___ kissing...cause you are gonna have to do alot of it in the next four years.

Hey has anyone seen Michael Moore around recently?

Speaking of ignorance...when is Kurogane going to give his Grand Master Pot concession speech? And will someone please buy that man a new stick of lipgloss!

[madmaxxam]

Well, let's pick this discussion up in four years when we see how the country is, because quite frankly, I'm not impressed with the way it is now. If America is in great shape in four years, well, hurray for us. However, I somehow feel myself doubting that it will be. Oh, and I'd love to see an American invasion of France. Bush can't invade Jack **** right now. America is running low on troops in Iraq. If we tried to split our army any further, that would mean a draft, which would mean massive dissertion from the US army, and a brain drain as everyone in the US that didn't want to get drafted would just move to Europe and Canada. Yes, invade somewhere else.

[stillnosheep]

Bush inherited a prosperous America at peace and in four years has managed to destabilise the middle east, vastly increase global support for al Qaeda and impoverish America. In short he has bequethed himself a massively indepted country trapped in a middle eatern quagmire amid a vastly more dangerous world.

At the current rate of increase of US army desertions in four years time Canada will have the biggest army in North America.

[Guy Ginpot]

What A Twatt You Are ! Godzilla Gaijin.
You Just Lost All Your Credibility If You Had Any Left At All.
It Is People Like You That Make America The Subject Of International
Derision And Contempt, With Your Ill-thought Out Ideas, Comparing
Innocent Children Being Murdered In Iraq To Legal Abortion In The States.
Please Explain The Logic In Your Argument Here.
The War In Iraq Was Illegal. There Are No Wmds. The Us Flouted The Un.
France Did Not Want To Fight An Illegal War
Kids Are Now Dying Daily Of Cancer From Depleted Uranium. People Of Iraq, Go Home And Die.
Soldiers On The Front Line Are Being Killed For Oil And To Secure The Interests Of The Iniquitous Legacy Being Enacted By Cheney, Bush And The Other Spineless Cowards In The Us.
The Us Causes International Terrorism And Has Done For Years
The Newest And Brashest, Uncompromising Country That Exists Continues Its Big Stick Policy And To Serve Itself With No Regard For The Rest Of The World.
Bush Flouted The Kyoto Protocol And Signed A Death Warrant For Our Planet.
Us Hegemony Will Know Now End And Hate Against The Us Will Continute To Grow.
Do The Millions Of Decent People In Your Country A Favour And Keep Your Ill-informed, Poorly Thought Out And Downright Ignorant Opinions Off This Board.
Your Ignorance Beggars Beilief. This Is A Thought Process I Have Come To Observe Among Petulant Teenagers Randomly Theorizing About The World.
You Are Wrong And You Know It.

Maki’s Mum!!!

I know it’s just a simple keyboard thing, and I see that your keyboard was acting funny that day, though nothing the matter with your mind, but please note the difference in signatures…

GG = gloating psychotic buffoon

gg = moi, lalalalala… call me what you want


Bush inherited a prosperous America at peace and in four years has managed to destabilise the middle east, vastly increase global support for al Qaeda and impoverish America. In short he has bequethed himself a massively indepted country trapped in a middle eatern quagmire amid a vastly more dangerous world.

At the current rate of increase of US army desertions in four years time Canada will have the biggest army in North America.


So, yes indeed, 4 more years of dubya, and what can one do but wish him the best? However, if the next 4 years are anything like the last 4 years, we will be bowing to our new Chinese masters a lot sooner than any of the creationists surely realise.

I would like to now express my intense gratitude to my grandparents, none of whom I ever met. About 100 years ago, young as they were, they made the wise decision to leave the Motherland and settle in the vast empty space located north of the USA. It must have been a hard life for them but more like a guilty pleasure for me. It is cool, to be sure, but that goes for more than just the weather. Thanks to my grannies! Thanks to my gramps! You’re the best!

I am reminded of a speech in the early '70's given by our then Prime Minister, the late great Pierre Trudeau, entitled ‘’Sleeping with the Elephant’. In this speech, Trudeau spoke of our relationship with our giant friend and neighbour, and the difficult decisions that must be made when said friend and neighbour decides to go off on a bender that we don’t quite agree with. He was speaking about Vietnam and the draft, and the decision to allow draft dodgers into Canada, despite the possible repercussions.

Should the draft be re-instituted, more likely to help solve the US unemployment crisis than anything else, I will certainly add my voice to those encouraging the acceptance of American draft dodgers. Health care, hockey, and handgun free [almost]; and when you travel you don’t have to pretend any more. And hell, you don’t have to like hockey, and if you feel like joining the army, go ahead..

That’s your business.

gg

[Basil Brush]

Well, it looks like Bush has won reelection. What a great, glorious and fantastic day for Americans. Hoorah for us and our right to vote. Hoorah for not listening to meddling foreigners.

What, this time they rigged the election so that only Native Americans could vote?

[Bluedog]

"What a great, glorious and fantastic day for Americans. Hoorah for us and our right to vote. Hoorah for not listening to meddling foreigners...Hoorah for Bush, the Great Defender"

This was the guy wondering why liberals and atheists have overlap. This quote sounds right out of an militant tape. If it's a joke, it's not funny enough.

Allah be praised, what a great, glorious and fantastic day for the country. Hoorah for not listening to meddling infidels. Hoorah for Bin Laden, the Great Defender.

[Guy Ginpot]

Well, it looks like Bush has won reelection. What a great, glorious and fantastic day for Americans. Hoorah for us and our right to vote. Hoorah for not listening to meddling foreigners.

What, this time they rigged the election so that only Native Americans could vote?

Allahu Akbar!!!

Yeah, those meddling foreigners; I'm with you there man. Here's a small example.

http://www.aegis.com/news/wsj/2003/WJ030402.html

gg

[godzillagaijin]

Well, it looks like Bush has won reelection. What a great, glorious and fantastic day for Americans. Hoorah for us and our right to vote. Hoorah for not listening to meddling foreigners.

What, this time they rigged the election so that only Native Americans could vote?

Actually numb nuts, "Native" Americans came over here from Asia. The only natives in this world are in Africa.

And about the whole comparison to barbaric Islamo-fascist chants? That point is moo...cause our American coqs are bigger than their middle eastern coqs.

[Bluedog]

"Native" Americans came over here from Asia"

But they stayed long enough to get a tan.

[stillnosheep]

hmmm, by the look of things the favour is about to be reciprocated

[Theacehimself]

I do not understand Americans who tell people they are Canadian. Are they really worried about thier saftey? Or are they so insecure that they are afraid peple might look down on them. I never lied about my nationality in Vietnam and with only one exception people reacted with plesant suprise. Because of this reception I have never felt the need to lie about my nationality. If anything try to show people that there is another side to America aside from what people see on the news.

[kurogane]

Seriously, though. As a Not Quite American myself, I can only sympathise with those who feel the need to drape themselves under the cover of a flag that is not theirs. Those of us forced to live beside you idiots know fully well that you are no more idiotic than we are, it is simply that you tend to be better armed idiots. Maybe that is why we are always so nice to you?

[Nanbanjin]

Seriously, though. As a Not Quite American myself, I can only sympathise with those who feel the need to drape themselves under the cover of a flag that is not theirs. Those of us forced to live beside you idiots know fully well that you are no more idiotic than we are, it is simply that you tend to be better armed idiots. Maybe that is why we are always so nice to you?
After the toing and froing on the "this site is racist" thread, this Australian is feeling embarrassed to be an Australian. And we've got crappy weapons, so I don't know why anyone bothers being nice to us at all. Maybe it's 'cause of our big brother?

[kuro_kitty]

Don't question why anyone is nice to us.That's not a very patriotic attitude. John Howard has worked his guts off to make his country more patriotic...it's worked for me. I love Australia and Australians.

[Nanbanjin]

Don't question why anyone is nice to us.That's not a very patriotic attitude. John Howard has worked his guts off to make his country more patriotic...it's worked for me. I love Australia and Australians.

Nice use of irony. I agree, Australia is becomming the old South Africa of the new world order.

[kurogane]

You know, Goat Boy, I am not always sure she is kidding when she writes crap like that. John Howard? Isn't that your George Bush? Like, a right wing Yobbo politician that agreed to invade a country of unarmed brown people even though those F'witted terrorists don't even know where Australia is, or, keep confusing it with Austria.
Set us straight, KK,. Pleez tell us you are just F'in around.

[Code Rot]

Morning Star (notice, I am Man Enough to call you by your real online name, and I do not denigrate into childish name-calling like Crotch Rot!)

"You're pry right, it won't make much difference to us who wins the election. But look at America as a big company. Workers usually don't notice who the top man is, but the direction that he sets the company in determines whether it performs excellently or poorly, meeting market demands and maintaining customer satisfaction."

What exactly, is the direction that Bush-tachi is leading the US and the rest of the world? All the US jobs are going to India and places like that. I have to give Bush 2 some credit though, he is a lot smarter and more charismatic and more ruthless than many people gave him credit for. But Hitler was charismatic -- and have you heard about the business connections that once existed between the Bush family and the Nazi's? Apparently the older Bushes helped Adolf Hitler into power, because they knew he would be good for business. If you want to talk about the Axis of Evil, the real Axis of Evil is that linking Adolf Hitler with the Bush family, and the Bush family with Osama bin Laden. This is not just a conspiracy theory, it is established fact.

Anyway, regardless of GW Bush, I reckon that Americans, through the November election result, are only delaying the day of their Iraqi defeat. Sooner or later it will become painfully obvious that America lost the war in Iraq -- they lost it a long time ago. And when that day comes, the shock will be so great, it will be a like another September 11 has happened. I just wish that Americans would switch off their TV's, and start using the Internet to find out what it really happening in Iraq and the rest of the world.

[godzillagaijin]

Apparently the older Bushes helped Adolf Hitler into power, because they knew he would be good for business. If you want to talk about the Axis of Evil, the real Axis of Evil is that linking Adolf Hitler with the Bush family, and the Bush family with Osama bin Laden. This is not just a conspiracy theory, it is established fact.

I just wish that Americans would switch off their TV's, and start using the Internet to find out what it really happening in Iraq and the rest of the world.

ha............ha ha........................................hahahaha ...........................HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. ....HAHAHA..............................HA.......h aha........hahaha................................. .................................HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


haha....

I cant believe this is the mind frame of the people that have a beef with Bush and Americans....its unreal, but Crotch Rot sure does proves the point to a T...

I love it...the words "established fact" being thrown around so daintily like that....and Americans should use the Internet to find the truth? I mean, am I the only one who finds this to be incredibley UPROARIOUS?

The large and obese Ghost of Micheal Moore still haunts us, doesnt it...but the election excercised all those demons for me...how about y'all?

[Minderbinder]

Don't question why anyone is nice to us.That's not a very patriotic attitude. John Howard has worked his guts off to make his country more patriotic...it's worked for me. I love Australia and Australians.

Do you define patriotic = arse-kissing sycophant? I fail to see how Howard has served Australian interests in any way.

Great, so now the Americans like us as long as we do exactly what they tell us to do, all the time. Oh, and it's vital that we reassure the American people that it doesn't matter about the whole "Weapons of Mass Destruction" thing. I'd rather have a leader with a social conscience, even if it does make the (US) Americans hate us.

Australia used to be a country that valued highly the concept of social fairness. We had free public education and free public healthcare systems among the best in the world. Howard, enamored as he is with all things American, has turned these into user-pays systems, where the thickness of your wallet determines the quality of service received.

Selfish Australians voted for Howard because they believe it will provide them a few extra dollars a week, which they will proceed to spend on petrol for their large, ugly, polluting 4WDs (SUVs), and/or an extra packet of cigarettes (seriously - cigarettes would be taxed higher under Labour) - harming themselves, the environment and putting extra pressure on the healthcare system when they inevitably develop lung cancer.

Not to mention that Howard's government has been shown time and again to be a bunch of stinking liars, encouraging a culture of "plausible deniability". Oh, but now the American people like us a bit better... well that's all right then.

[kuro_kitty]

Drop the nasty tone. I was using sarcasm and tend to agree with you on most points.

[Code Rot]

It is pretty funny, as some of the Canadians on this board have pointed out, that record numbers of Americans are looking to emigrate to countries like Canada and New Zealand, instead of remaining in the richest and most powerful country in the world. It is unusual in history for such a thing to happen -- and it is probably the first time in American history that a lot of Americans have decided it is better to get out, rather than continue living in their own country. From my point of view, it seems like the USA is experiencing a kind of civil war. This is not unprecedented in American history -- there have been other civil wars in America. There was the great Civil War of the 1860s, then the Vietnam social Civil War of the 1960s. I guess you could say that we have entered the 3rd American Civil War -- the Iraqi American Civil War. And it is only in its early days here folks.

But there is one solution to this problem -- the Liberal states and regions like New York and California and Chicago and Washington DC could secede from the USA, and join their liberal brothers and sisters up north of the border in Canada. The Bible Belt states of the interior and the South would then be free to form a new country -- a new Gay-free Abortion-free Black-free Communist-free nation dedicated to Christianity and Big Business and War. And then Bible Belt America would be free to fight all the wars it wanted to -- and the Liberal United States of Canada would be free to enjoy the fruits of its liberalism -- free rights for all -- unedited Janet Jackson breasts on TV -- gay marriages -- internationalism. I know which of the two North Americas I would find it most appetizing to live in.

[godzillagaijin]

Hey! Hey Crotch Rot! Remember when Bush won the election? Remember?

Yeahhhh....that was great.


Guess what buddy, your opinion means nothing. You come from a Spectator nation with nothing invested in the future of the free world (Though we do appreciate you refueling and waxing our planes in Afghanistan).

And as for the "record numbers of americans fleeing to Canada" (another established fact Im sure) you can have em. Hell bu, take the whole state of California while your at it. Who needs citizens who only participate in a democracy when they get their way. Whining liberal filth. "Im taking my ball home. Im not playing any more."

So you and your new expat American friends can all get together and have a big Socialized-pot smoking-baby killing-___ fuqing-French speaking Party in honor of your amazing ability to be neutral. Have a Labatts for me!

[liamoko]

GG,
Canadians burned down your White House in 1812. When you guys get us back for that then we'll talk about who is better.

[godzillagaijin]

GG,
Canadians burned down your White House in 1812. When you guys get us back for that then we'll talk about who is better.

Canadians huh? As I recall, you guys were waxing and refueling British Horses back then too. Once again, spectators with no stake.

And the only people who argue about which is better, canadians or Americans, are the canadians...nothin left to prove on this side of the border.

[Code Rot]

This is a real excerpt of a message which was passed to George Bush 2 after his election win, and explains a lot about the Christian dictatorship which is taking shape in that country:

Rev. BOB JONES, III sent this greeting to Bush on November 3.

"The media tells us that you have received the largest number of popular votes of any president in America's history. Congratulations!

In your re-election, God has graciously granted America-though she doesn't deserve it-a reprieve from the agenda of paganism. You have been given a mandate.

We the people expect your voice to be like the clear and certain sound of a trumpet. Because you seek the Lord daily, we who know the Lord will follow that kind of voice eagerly.

Don't equivocate. Put your agenda on the front burner and let it boil. You owe the liberals nothing. They despise you because they despise your Christ. Honor the Lord, and He will honor you.

Undoubtedly, you will have opportunity to appoint many conservative judges and exercise forceful leadership with the Congress in passing legislation that is defined by biblical norm regarding the family, sexuality, sanctity of life, religious freedom, freedom of speech, and limited government.

You have four years-a brief time only-to leave an imprint for righteousness upon this nation that brings with it the blessings of Almighty God.

Pull out all the stops and make a difference. If you have weaklings around you who do not share your biblical values, shed yourself of them.

Conservative Americans would love to see one president who doesn't care whether he is liked, but cares infinitely that he does right. [Bob Jones 'University'] "

All hail to the Bush! May he live forever more, and exterminate the infidels and gays who inhabit this holy planet.
(By the way -- Jewish gays will be spared, because Israel is our friend, and nobody wants to look like they are anti-Semitic, in this day and age, right!)

[Morning Star]

Morning Star (notice, I am Man Enough to call you by your real online name, and I do not denigrate into childish name-calling like Crotch Rot!)
Crotchy, thanks for using my real online name; but I don't deserve even that much consideration.
KusoGG covered the Bush Hitler connection, it sounds like wildly inflated Internet conspiracy propaganda. The great thing about this Internet thingy is that you can say anything you want, develop any wild theories that you like to support your point. But that kind of trash talk should be saved for Thanksgiving dinner with the family after a few glasses of wine. Oh sweet Jesus, then daddy pulls off his belt and starts swinging.

The Bob Jones letter isn't shocking, but you're right, it is sad and a step in the wrong direction for our(my) country. The President's constituency consists of a lot of goofballs, but look at how Enron was handled several years back. Even though they had Bush's ear, the company imploded and was taken to the cleaners, despite their influence.