Hey ** Aldebaran **, you may want to read this article:
and see if it explains anything about the US or Americans before you go off on another fevered rant.
Only a fool believes anyone who says what their values are. Hardly anyone who tells you what their values are is telling the truth.
Your values are where you spend your money and your time.
Not in North America. 
Not in North America.
Cite? And, not in North America.
And we have nifty tools you just can’t make out of wood, flint & bone.
But, not in North America.
Total hoo-hah. Given Europe’s rapidly developing sailing & navigation tech, finding North America was inevitable.
If war was how the US was built, then the same is true for the rest of Mankind, Native Americans included. And the Indians practiced slavery, too. And engaged in ritual torture of prisoners of war, as a religious ritual. Not much of an improvement over the Inquisition.
Also, cities are centers of art, literature, skilled trades, & learning.
As is true of the rest of the world, too.
Nobody said I did.
HA! Tell that to the Mohawk. Or any of the other Native American Warrior cultures that venerated death & violence.
Too late for what?
And my, aren’t we a Cheerful Charlie?
A reference link.
LINK
The Spanish spread the blinkity-blank smallpox, not us!
An “F” in grade school geography for you. North America includes Mesoamerica. The United States of America is just a portion of North America.
While “finding North America was inevitable,” conquering it was not. Destroying cities and libraries was not. Genocide was not. And now you use your beliefs about Native peoples to scapegoat slavery and the Inquisition?
You cite “ritual torture of prisoners of war, as a religious ritual.” I would like to know your source, though I suspect it is a belief you hold not based on any real evidence. What religion is it you refer to? Please provide your sources.
You cite “Native American Warrior cultures that venerated death & violence.” Again, please provide reliable sources, if you can.
Humankind was not built by war. But coercive state empires certainly are. You say “If war was how the US was built, then the same is true for the rest of Mankind …” Are you saying that if the USA was built on conquest and war, it logically follows that all else must have been built the same way? Please explain this logic.
Spanish conquest of Mexico, or English conquest of the area north of Spanish Florida, its the same thing, Europeans invading Native nations, stealing their lands, enslaving and genocidally exterminating the people, and spreading diseases. It wasn’t the Spanish spreading small pox in the Dakotas.
The cultural divide, with regard to the origins of US preoccupation with war, does not lie somewhere between Spain and England. The point I am trying to make is the deep, Old World cultural roots of the problem. The history of contact is very illustrative of the disposition to conquer. The Spanish had laws to justify enslaving “pagans” and dispossessing any non-Catholic of their lands and possessions. We write laws to invade other nations too, and use them to justify bombing cities and killing multitudes of innocents. What has changed? Okay, oil is the new gold, granted.
Dude, invest in an atlas.
First link on Google. :rolleyes:
http://www.tolatsga.org/iro.html
Scroll down.
And my posts refererred to the parts of North America comprising the United States. As is clear from the OP.
archaeogeo --you sound like a historical revisionist. The “loose leaf textbook” school of history is guilty of a hellava lot of crimes. Ignoring that Native Americans were as Human as anybody else, putting them on some kind of a superior moral plane, & blaming every darn thing that happens on the money/power structure, is a crock.
Native Americans are people. And that’s the nastiest thing you can say about anybody. Like the Caucasians, they had liars, thieves & killers.
Clearly they did, because early missionaries recorded tribal legal codes, & penalties for these crimes were clearly laid out. You don’t write laws without lawbreakers doing the crimes first.
Native American overhunting, & intensive hunting of certain species, led to extinctions & population losses.
And the Indians of Mexico are culturally closer to the peoples further south than they are to the northern tribes, anyway.
Well, I’m no revisionist geographer, I’m not “blaming every darn thing that happens on the money/power structure” and I’m only trying to revise your errors, not history.
Discussing the truth of Spanish, English, and Anglo-American extermination of native populations is not revisionism. I cite, without revision, the discourse from Las Casas’ (1542) “Brief Account of the Devastation of the Indies” to illustrate:
“…forty-nine years have passed since the first settlers penetrated the land, the first so claimed being the large and most happy isle called Hispaniola, … This large island was perhaps the most densely populated place in the world … all the land so far discovered is a beehive of people; it is as though God had crowded into these lands the great majority of mankind.”
“And of all the infinite universe of humanity, these people are the most guileless, the most devoid of wickedness and duplicity, the most obedient and faithful to their native masters and to the Spanish Christians whom they serve. They are by nature the most humble, patient, and peaceable, holding no grudges, free from embroilments, neither excitable nor quarrelsome. These people are the most devoid of rancors, hatreds, or desire for vengeance of any people in the world … they not only possess little but have no desire to possess worldly goods. For this reason they are not arrogant, embittered, or greedy.… They are very clean in their persons, with alert, intelligent minds, docile and open to doctrine, very apt to receive our holy Catholic faith, to be endowed with virtuous customs, and to behave in a godly fashion.”
His guileless, peaceable people are not recognizable as the “liars, thieves & killers” you see. Of course, you weren’t there. Las Casas continues:
“…into this land of meek … came some Spaniards who immediately behaved like ravening wild beasts, wolves, tigers, or lions that had been starved for many days. And Spaniards have behaved in no other way during the past forty years, down to the present time, for they are still acting like ravening beasts, killing, terrorizing, afflicting, torturing, and destroying the native peoples, doing all this with the strangest and most varied new methods of cruelty, never seen or heard of before, and to such a degree that this Island of Hispaniola once so populous (having a population that I estimated to be more than three million), has now a population of barely two hundred persons.”
“The island of Cuba is… now almost completely depopulated. San Juan [Puerto Rico] and Jamaica are two of the largest, most productive and attractive islands; both are now deserted and devastated. On the northern side of Cuba and Hispaniola the neighboring Lucayos comprising more than sixty islands … have the healthiest lands in the world, where lived more than five hundred thousand souls; they are now deserted, inhabited by not a single living creature. All the people were slain or died after being taken into captivity and brought to the Island of Hispaniola to be sold as slaves. When the Spaniards saw that some of these had escaped, they sent a ship to find them, and it voyaged for three years among the islands searching for those who had escaped being slaughtered…”
“More than thirty other islands in the vicinity of San Juan are for the most part and for the same reason depopulated…”
“As for the vast mainland, which is ten times larger than all Spain, … we are sure that our Spaniards, with their cruel and abominable acts, have devastated the land and exterminated the rational people who fully inhabited it. We can estimate very surely and truthfully that in the forty years that have passed, with the infernal actions of the Christians, there have been unjustly slain more than twelve million men, women, and children. In truth, I believe without trying to deceive myself that the number of the slain is more like fifteen million.”
“Their reason for killing and destroying such an infinite number of souls is that the Christians have an ultimate aim, which is to acquire gold, and to swell themselves with riches in a very brief time…”
“… the Indians began to seek ways to throw the Christians out of their lands.… And the Christians, with their horses and swords and pikes began to carry out massacres and strange cruelties against them. They attacked the towns and spared neither the children nor the aged nor pregnant women nor women in childbed, not only stabbing them and dismembering them but cutting them to pieces as if dealing with sheep in the slaughter house. They laid bets as to who, with one stroke of the sword, could split a man in two or could cut off his head or spill out his entrails with a single stroke of the pike. They took infants from their mothers’ breasts, snatching them by the legs and pitching them headfirst against the crags or snatched them by the arms and threw them into the rivers, roaring with laughter and saying as the babies fell into the water, ‘Boil there, you offspring of the devil!’ Other infants they put to the sword along with their mothers and anyone else who happened to be nearby. They made some low wide gallows on which they hanged victim’s feet almost touched the ground, stringing up their victims in lots of thirteen, in memory of Our Redeemer and His twelve Apostles, then set burning wood at their feet and thus burned them alive. To others they attached straw or wrapped their whole bodies in straw and set them afire. With still others, all those they wanted to capture alive, they cut off their hands and hung them round the victim’s neck, saying, ‘Go now, carry the message,’ meaning, Take the news to the Indians who have fled to the mountains. … survivors were distributed among the Christians to be slaves.”
As you can see, the problem you mention, “Ignoring that Native Americans were as Human as anybody else,” is the inverse of your belief. They were treated (and arguably still are) as sub-human by the Anglo invaders.
Multiple sources are always useful. On Sept. 18, 1589, the last survivior of the original conquerers of Peru, Don Mancio Serra de Leguisamo, wrote in the preamble of his will the following in parts:
"[W]e found these kingdoms in such good order, and the said Incas governed them in such wise that throughout them there was not a thief, nor a vicious man, nor an adulteress, nor was a bad woman admitted among them, nor were there immoral people. The men had honest and useful occupations. The lands, forests, mines, pastures, houses and all kinds of products were regulated and distributed in such sort that each one knew his property without any other person seizing it or occupying it, nor were there law suits respecting it… "
“…the motive which obliges me to make this statement is the discharge of my conscience, as I find myself guilty. For we have destroyed by our evil example, the people who had such a government as was enjoyed by these natives. They were so free from the committal of crimes or excesses, as well men as women, that the Indian who had 100,000 pesos worth of gold or silver in his house, left it open merely placing a small stick against the door, as a sign that its master was out. With that, according to their custom, no one could enter or take anything that was there. When they saw that we put locks and keys on our doors, they supposed that it was from fear of them, that they might not kill us, but not because they believed that anyone would steal the property of another. So that when they found that we had thieves among us, and men who sought to make their daughters commit sin, they despised us.”
This is what I mean by providing citations. It seems you were correct in part by saying the there were commonalities between North and South American populations, albeit not that they were “thieves & killers” as you claim.
Which United States, the United States of Mexico or the United States of America? Both are in North America.
Pardon me, but I’m not sure that the topic of conversation of Americans is a worthy debate topic. However I’ll take the bait, and tell you that there is just as much conversation about NOT waging war, as the war we’re currently waging, proving once again, that blanket generalizations are the tools of the uninformed.
The beautiful part about this “example” is that we are allowed free speech, which means we can be as for, or against war as we choose to be. What information you’re culling as ‘examples’ of US websites (which you do not link, by the way) that are pro-war in general are simply one persons’ or one groups’ beliefs. Surely people have differing opinions of things in your part of the world.
Who says ‘we’ don’t find this disturbing? Is this another generalization? I personally do not deem as “normal” the tinkering by our CIA in the affairs of sovereign nations. I know, of course that it happens, and I know that there are interests of the US that must be monitored and protected, but I’m against the CIA tinkering in the affairs of stable, sovereign nations, only for the benefit of a few.
(and if you opine that Iraq was stable and sovereign, perhaps you’d best revisit your criteria)
That said, I think you can correctly point to the US as THE example of democracy world wide. We’ve managed to accomplish in 300 years what some parts of the world could not do in 3000, and some have not yet done to date. Sure, we’re not perfect, but ask an American, (now I’ll generalize) where else in the world he or she would like to live, and you’d likely hear ‘nowhere’ as a reply a LOT.
You can’t point to any one of these as a ‘reason’ for your OP, and you’re being completely disengenous, saying that America is the only culture in the world that focuses on war. The middle east has been a hotbed for wars and battles for hundreds of years.
But if we’re addressing the questions
It’s not the education system.
It’s partly the way the children are raised.
It’s partly because of ‘rampant’ patriotism
No more, or less so than in whatever country YOU are from. Tell me that where you live Aldebaran that all members of society live, and thrive in a thought vacuum. That there is not fervent nationalism, or worse, assuming you live in the Middle East, violent fundamentalism.
I think you’re making rash, generic statements about the US, and that you haven’t the slightest damned idea about this country and her people, other than what you read on ‘websites’ and on TV, and isn’t that, sort of, what you’re condemning us for in the first place?
Name one that has worked in the past consistently.
The only nation I can think of that has come into the fold of humanity after sanctions has been Libya, and in that instance the sanctions were in place for a LONG time.
archaeogeo – my geography was wrong, my basic ideas were not.
US settlers did not kill the Aztecs, nor did they burn libraries.
There were no roads created in US territory, nor were there cities of stone, or at least none occupied as living communities during the colonial era. Not in the US.
Smallpox, as my second link clealy showed, was loose in North America decades before the English colonists arrived. As was influenza.
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a4_100.html
Perhaps 90% of North America’s population was destroyed.
But nobody could have prevented the spread of that disease, even if they had wanted to. No germ theory of disease. 
And you continually conflate people living in bark huts with civilized societies. Why? 
The Native Americans living in what is today the US did live in bark huts. They did not have stone cities. They did not have writing. They did not have metal working (BTW–where is your cite for your silly claim that the Andes peoples had the finest metalworkking skills of their day? I would suggest that you examine Greek, Egyptian & especially Chinese artifacts of that era before you make wild & unsubstantiated claims).
The Aztecs, the Incas, the Mayas–all had genuine civilizations. But they never lived near me.
And HERE is a link of general intrest.
Wrong again. If you could just get your facts right, I wouldn’t need to reply.
The Chaco System of about 100 sites in an area of 100,000 km2 with multistory stone structures included roads estimated at 2400 km.+ Puebloan Indians had
architecture of unprecedented and unequaled massive size and planning, up to 5 stories high, advanced regional architectural planning, with large scale and grand designs. The Pueblo Indians today continue to live in some of the ancient stone structures, including the longest continuously inhabited towns in the United States.
Puebloan roads were carefully engineered and flanked by berms of adobe, stone or earth, often connecting great houses communities. They run in straight lines between communities 50 miles apart. Roads did not deviate for cliffs, where stairs were cut into the rock. There were also roads in other regions.
One Chacoan structure, Pueblo Bonito, had 600 rooms, and ranked as the largest apartment building in North America for 800 years. It was not surpassed until the 1800s. It was built entirely of dry laid masonry, so carefully crafted it did not use mortar, and rose to 5 stories. Anasazi rooms up to 20 meters in width were roofed with earth.
Chacoan architecture rooms average 44 tons of sandstone. One building, Chetro Ketl, has 50 million pieces. To construct the great houses along Chaco Wash, 200,000 trees were carried from 50 miles away.
This does not count any of the other 100 Chacoan great house sites, or other Puebloan eras to follow with larger populations and towns, or the numerous historic pueblos still occupied today.
I’m not going to reply again. This is too tiresome. Check your facts.
Yak-yak-yak.
The tiresome one is you, you screwloose turkey.
Chaco was abandoned, long before Colombus arrive, you revisionist freak.
And as I said–when the first Colonists arrived, there were no cites of stone, no roads, etc. Chaco was a ruin, not a city, when they arrived.
I wish to apologize to the Mods for the above post!
I’ve been doing two parallel threads, one here & one in the BBQ Pit.
I’ve gotten them mixed up.
I deeply apologise for any Forum violations.
My language was inappropriate for GD, & my only excuse is trying to cover a GD & a Pit thread simultaneously.
Again, I apologise to all the Mods.
I speak the truth by the poor and glittering light God gives me to see it.
I recently reread some of Taylor’s WWI stuff and amazed again at how close the European attempt at mutual suicide came to success. Two fresh, fully-manned American armies, over twenty double-sized divisions, came in at the nick of time to bring victory.
(Really, what the heck did you people think you were doing? Did you think this whole WWI thing through before you began?)
Moderator’s Note: Bosda Di’Chi of Tricor: Apology noted, thanks. Please try to be more careful of which forum you’re in in the future.
None of this really addresses the main point, however: the OP itself begs the following questions:
To what degree is the US militaristic (which itself demands we define militarism in a measurable way)
Once the previous questions are answered, it becomes: is the US particularly militaristic compared to other world governments and the threats, military and any other threat which may be arrayed against it, recently past and reasonably possible or even probable future.
These questions are not definitively answerable, thus the question, while possibly useful in a vaguely phsilosophical sense.
Thank you. I was going to mention the Scots-Irish culture and it’s importance in the US military tradition.