So Philly Style, you don’t see anything in terms of national party policies and politics, strategic alliances, motivations and ambitions, the non-separation of power as between corporations and foreign policy, the new, post-Cold War unipower flexing its muscle, etc. It’s all about “Them” and “Us” and “Saudi” and Egypt”.
And in all of this, it would seem “the US” is wholly innocent and it’s all someone’s else’s fault, all “the US” wants to do is give people aid … thanks for clearing that up for us.
You have no idea how we struggled until you came along !
You are right, stating the obvious can be boring. I will, however, say it again. These countries that despise us still seem willing to take our cash.
Everyone wants to do everything to support their beliefs except suffer for them
As far as needing a better understanding, are you suggesting that it is only in the US that goverments and corporations are aligned, or that corporations excert influence on policy making?
Is a strategic alliance when France and China sell weapons to Iraq and then try to block milatary operations? Is it when Russia, fearful of default on the 10bb they are owed, oppose an overthrow of Sadamm?
What does who is and isn’t innocent have to do with anything?
I agree with you, we should allow Syria and company to determine our policy for us, after all, they have always had our best interest at heart.
Relax, ”Countries” don’t despise you. Heck, they hardly know you – If you mean, say, some people in some countries currently take a position that opposes the main thrust of US foreign policy as it has impacted on them for the past 50 years, then we have something to talk about but, as it is, I have no idea what you actually mean.
Well, it’s only in the US that businessmen running corporations fund businessmen standing for president so directly - as businessmen bent on increrasing their company’s position, you think they do that funding for kicks ?
Dude, who gave Saddam the cultures to grow WMD in the first place, who supported him and sold him weapons for 20 years … ? Again, I can’t grasp your point …
No idea. You’re the one telling us the US did not one thing wrong.
What ? Yes, no. What ?
You’re not putting together a coherent argument. All you seem to be doing is sharing with us your world view. Which is, of course, lovely. But it ain’t exactly challenging and original … or making sense.
So much for the United States being a nation of honor, or a nation that abides by laws, or a nation of peace, then. “We can do whatever the hell we want because we’re the biggest, baddest dude on the globe! MIGHT MAKES RIGHT!” :rolleyes:
Arrogance plain and simple arrogance. U.S.A has been the “world only superwower” for almost 15 years and yet I have never seen till this administration the urgency to antagonize your friends and unite your enemies.
The attitudes of americans (at this point I can no longer argue that it is only the administration and not the common people that is acting like jerks) will surely have consequences. You can surely defeat any country that dare to face you but you can not defeat terrorism without the ** cooperation ** of other countries.
So are you saying America has to disarm in order to ensure fair and worthy communication between me and Estilicon? I guess we’re doomed.
I was objecting to his characterization of Americans as “jerks” because many of us do not agree with him.
If Estilicon wants to object to America’s actions, that’s fine.
I can just as easily call him (and anti-war folks for that matter) jerks for disagreeing with me. But if we insist on doing that, we’re not doing anything to fight ignorance, and we’re definitely not debating.
FTR, I believe the vast majority of anti-war people - especially those on the SDMB - are not jerks and seem like good people, even if I disagree with them.
That’s not what I wrote. I said that the baddies don’t do what we don’t want because our might deters them.
Estilicon, you have a point, but maybe American leadership, which you call “arrogance,” will encourage other coutnries to cooperate, rather than the reverse. I certainly agree with you that we can not defeat terrorism without the cooperation of other countries.
BTW while you’re here, Estilicon, there was a statistic on another thread which showed that the number of terrorist attacks in Latin America dropped dramatically between 2001 and 2002. Do you know anything about that?
Of course december the number of terrorist attack in Argentina in 2001 was 0.
I believe the only place in Latin America where there are terrorist attacks is Colombia, wait a minute, Cuba has recently been compared with Irak, considering that according to your administration Irak supported terrorism someone could argue that Cuba supports terrorism.
Latin America has other kind of problems.
** Goheels ** I din’t want to call all americans jerks, sorry. What I meant is that at this point one can no longer argue that this jingonistic self masturbatory thing going on that you call your foreign policy is Bush fault. I wonder if you realize what this “we don’t care policy” means to an inhabitant of a small, underveloped and very, very weak country like me?
If you profess to be the leader of the world, you need to act as an adult. Set an example. Be able to hold on to the moral high ground, not lose it (like the US has just done).
If you are not a rogue nation, might-makes-right should not be the only authority you have over other nations. In fact, iuf you’re not a rogue nation, you shouldn’t even have authority over other nations, you should co-exist with them.
If you continue to behave the way you have, you will become a rogue nation, and then might makes right is the only thing you’ll be able to hold over the rest of the world, as they will seek to discipline you the way you have been doing it, yourself.
And as one wise man put it, once: in the nuclear age, the only true enemy is war itself.
I notice that you have no idea about the state of the world economy, or the relevance -or lack thereof- of US foreign aid in the big picture.
The rest of the world wants what you have? How come it is the Europeans who pose half the world trade, while the US simply gobbles up resources?
Foreign aid packages? To whom? Maybe you should take a look where most of the money of US foreign aid goes, and how much that is in relation to others.
Though I’m sure this was meant to mock U.S. aid, maybe there’s some merit in that statement. We might as well hoard all our money for ourselves, since it’s just being wasted on those damn ungrateful ferriners.
Putting aside your “astute” observation :rolleyes:, and getting back to the “we don’t care” policy (I still like “strategic separation” myself) wouldn’t you, OliverH, as a proud German, be extremely happy to see the imperialist American troops leave in droves off your precious German soil? Is this not a win-win?
Estilicon:
Estilicon, I appreciate your clarification. For my part, I hope I didn’t come off sounding like a jerk myself - and if I did, I extend you a sincere apology.
What I hope (hope being the operative word) “we don’t care” really means is that we will respond to anti-American political and diplomatic obstacles by:
Severely curtailing our security umbrella and military presence in Western Europe (I’m mostly thinking Germany here) and pursue bilateral relationships with European countries closer to the Middle East (Bulgaria, Romania come to mind). I imagine this will appeal to Europeans who seem to be resentful of the presence of American forces and the immoral imperialist power they represent.
As the French have requested, lessen our role in NATO. Though there are 19 countries, we pay 25 percent of the dues. Therefore, if we take a lesser role, we may now only pay 5 percent of the dues.
Move troops out of Saudi Arabia (already accomplished)
As for how it might affect South American countries such as yours, to be honest, I have no idea. I know this - I certainly hope we get the hell out of fighting our silent, pointless war in cocaine-producing countries (as well as rethink the wisdom of the Drug War in general, although I doubt that will happen any time soon).
To sum up, what I hope “strategic separation” or “we don’t care” means is hoisting world public opinion on its own rhetorical petard. If the world wants to see and hear less of America, then it can live with the benefits - and consequences.
Sorry to break it to you, but the fundamental principle of the UN is sovereign equality, and the only thing you demonstrate here is an overinflated ego.
Look, just because you claim it is so doesn’t make it so. Not to mention that when all is said and done, the US has no intention to have spent its own billions, but rather those of the Iraqi. And right now, the track record of the US doing the world a favor on its own is so abysmal it reaches to the other side of the planet. Rather, the US has a track record of leaving a bigger mess than when it entered a theatre in just about any theatre it entered on its own volition.
You obviously have no idea about a)the effect of foreign aid and b)the extent. So, for your benefit and education, the primary goal of foreign aid is not to induce gratefulness, because only an ahole full of himself takes gratefulness for granted. Foreign aid isn’t altruistic, but meant to create stability, which is good for the economy, and create new markets, which is also good for the economy. It can also save human life, which makes for good PR AND increases the size of the potential market. IF it induces gratefulness, it also increases the willingness to buy one’s products. A beneficial side effect, but one that produces a backlash if taken for granted. Arrogant aholes are not usually supported by buying their product. As such, claiming it was wasted if no gratefulness comes back is a testimony of considerable ignorance.
I would suggest you improve your reading a bit. I said nothing to that extent, and it would hardly make a win-win, since US foreign and security policy is 100% dependent on bases in Germany. Afghanistan and Iraq would be impossible in the form they were done without the airbases in Germany and the US hospital in Landstuhl. On the other side, jobs depend on their presence in many areas in Germany. But it is telling that all you can bring as arguments is accusations unsupported by any evidence.
Too bad that’ll never happen. Bulgaria and Romania are rather meaningless when it comes to the Middle East. While they can be of use for air transport there, they lack the supportive infrastructure and are keen to join the EU.
I guess you haven’t heard that the largest military hospital outside the US is located in Germany?
Errrm…sorry, but I think now you are truly getting ridiculous. The US is the chief user of NATO facilities outside of its own country. You wanna use it, you pay for it.
Too bad that you have no idea what the consequences are, most of all for the US itself. But I guess getting four times as many body bags sent home is a goal that appeals greatly to you. After all, it lets you boast more about how many lives the US has sacrificed in order to create another Afghanistan.
OliverH, my humor-impaired friend, the smiley-face icon at the end of my sentence was supposed to convey that my sentence was not meant to be taken seriously.
FTR, I do not advocate the U.S. blindly pulling away all foreign aid out of sheer spite and thereby hurting those people who need the aid. However, I do hope my government conducts an honest cost-benefit analysis of the aid packages to see whether or not the aid actually does, as you say, create stability and new markets as well as help those who need it. As an American taxpayer and citizen, I think I’m entitled to expect a little ROI. If I’m an arrogant asshole for saying so, that’s the way it goes.
Considering that I’m just an ignorant American yokel, would you please provide a credible cite for this rather eye-opening assertion? Thank you.
And, if you do provide a credible cite that “US foreign and security policy is 100% dependent on bases in Germany,” can you answer this question for me: Why, considering that our foreign and security policy is 100% dependent on Germany, didn’t Germany stop the immoral imperialist war in Iraq? If we’re 100% dependent on the Germans, why didn’t Germany forbid the U.S. from using the bases and Landstuhl the way Turkey prohibited the use of Incirclik?
What accusation did I make? Please quote me directly. I did mock your assertion that “the US simply gobbles up resources?” by sarcastically saying what an “astute” observation it was, but nowhere did I make an accusation.
For that matter, what argument did I make? All I did was pose the question, “wouldn’t you, OliverH, as a proud German, be extremely happy to see the imperialist American troops leave in droves off your precious German soil? Is this not a win-win?”
Oliver, if you had bothered to read an earlier post of mine on this same thread, you would have read:
Putting aside the mistake I made that Spiny Norman corrected (Poland and Hungary are already NATO members), I know quite well that Bulgaria and Romania want EU membership. OK?
OliverH, my humor-impaired friend, there’s really no need to get snippy. The smiley-face icon at the end of my sentence “We might as well hoard all our money for ourselves, since it’s just being wasted on those damn ungrateful ferriners :D” was supposed to convey that my sentence was not meant to be taken seriously. Relax, man.
FTR, I do not advocate the U.S. blindly pulling away all foreign aid out of sheer spite and thereby hurting those people who need the aid. Nevertheless, I hope we conduct an honest cost-benefit analysis of the aid packages to see whether or not the aid actually does, as you say, create stability and new markets as well as help those who need it. After all, we could use the money stateside for any number of worthwhile reasons. As an American taxpayer, I think I’m entitled to expect a little ROI. If I’m an arrogant asshole for saying so, that’s the way it goes.
Considering that I’m just another ignorant American, would you please provide a credible cite for this rather eye-opening assertion? Thank you.
And, assuming you’re correct when you say “US foreign and security policy is 100% dependent on bases in Germany,” can you answer this question for me:
Why, considering that US foreign and security policy is 100% dependent on bases in Germany, didn’t Germany stop the immoral imperialist war in Iraq? If we’re 100% dependent on the Germans, why didn’t Germany use its enormous leverage and forbid the U.S. from using the bases and Landstuhl the way Turkey prohibited the use of Incirclik?
What accusation did I make? Please quote me directly. I did mock your assertion that “the US simply gobbles up resources” by sarcastically remarking what an “astute” observation it was, but nowhere did I make any accusation.
For that matter, what argument did I make? All I did was pose the question, “wouldn’t you, OliverH, as a proud German, be extremely happy to see the imperialist American troops leave in droves off your precious German soil? Is this not a win-win?”
Oliver, perhaps you overlooked an earlier post of mine on this same thread, which read:
Putting aside the mistake I made that Spiny Norman was nice enough to correct (Poland and Hungary are already NATO members), I know quite well that Bulgaria and Romania want EU membership. OK?
Yes, OliverH, I do know about Landstuhl, and I’m grateful to the Germans for allowing the U.S. to have this hospital here. It’s a godsend.
Again, all I’m saying is that we might seriously think about diminishing our role in NATO so that it is more equal with other NATO members (a specific French request made a few years back), and therefore pay dues that are commensurate with our lesser influence. In other words, we look for ways to operate outside of the NATO framework.
Of course, whether or not this is feasible, I suppose time will tell. I do think in the future, we will favor bilateral, flexible relationships over multilateral alliances that operate on consensus.
Putting aside your sarcastic (and rather offensive) remarks regarding body bags and boasts…
I certainly hope we don’t embark on too many more military adventures in the future – you and I are definitely in agreement there. I do hope that we severely curtail our presence and influence in European matters (such as: let Turkey and the EU worry about whether or not Turkey joins the EU, let the EU worry about how to deal with unrest in Northern Africa, Cyprus, and Belarus). These are European problems, not ours. You handle it.
Again, I thought this was what most Europeans wanted - America having a much lower profile in the world.
