<b>I</b> do not put forth such a face to the world. There is nothing that <b>I</b> or any other individual US citizen can do about what is happening.
<b>You</b> are wrong in your overgeneralizing. <b>I</b> have never claimed to be greater than others. <b>I</b> believe that there is very little chance of the existance of a god by the common definition that may be prayed to.
<b>I</b> did not ask why everyone "hates us." <b>I</b> simply cautioned against the fallacy, ignorance, and yes, arrogance of slapping some wholly innaccurate label on us and representing it as fact simply because we happen to inhabit this country.
Okay, so after that is cleared up, let's move on. I am now more curious than ever to know the real reasons why this sentiment exists. So all of you non-Americans, please enlighten us. The argument of 'American hubris' is an invalid one. Why? Because on the whole, Americans <b>do not</b> subscribe to the catchall "can't understand why everyone else dosen't want to be Americans as well" principle. Americans on the whole don't care if other people are Americans or not, or whether they have the same ideals, goals, or belief systems. To say that they do believe this is <b>FALSE</b>. There is no other way around it. If people from other countries choose to believe this to be our stance, then it is they who are ignorant of reality. I don't care what 'image is projected to the world'. If you have a functioning brain, you cannot honestly believe that any conflict that the US has been involved with, directly or indirectly, has been because America is pushing its own set of values on other cultures. There are many reasons for each and every involvement outside US borders, but chief among them has always been to preserve America's own interests. I do not argue that this is 'right' or justified, but it is the irrefutable truth. If the US had absolutely no vested interest in oil extracted from the middle east, there would be no threat of war, or any other significant action. If you truly believe that we push other countries around because of pride or some imagined moral superiority, why then has the US never threatened China with military action, since it's treatment of Tibet and its own citizenry has been so heinous? Do you think the US would ever have been involved in the Serbian affair had not other interests been at stake? Sure, members of our own government are guilty of spamming the globe with propaganda to have others <i>believe</i> that US involvement is out of 'the goodness of the kind American heart', but if you, the non-American accept this as the truth, then you are just as guilty for not using your own common sense and awareness.
Now, the bottom line is that America IS a huge economic, military, and political force in the world today. This cannot be argued by the sane, no matter where one originates. Because of this, or as a result of it, America has interests spread all over the globe. This country relies on many other countries, but it is a two way street. Other countries do rely on the US. Not all, but the vast majority do in one form or another.
I am no longer interested in reading about what the perception of "Americans" is. That's quite clear from some posts, as off-base as they may be in their reasoning. What I want to know is, what is the real reason for this incorrect perception of the common American?
Some last loose ends:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Make a third list of all the people to whom you have threatened military action, but did not actually do it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Blank list. <b>I</b> have never threatened military action against anyone, let alone do it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Think of how many people you killed, maimed, and angered by doing so.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Again, blank list. <b>I</b> have never killed or maimed anyone.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->All these people now hate you.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Seems to me this hatred is absolutely unfounded, given the above statements.
The amusing thing about this sparring match is that it could have all been avoided had you simply not used the personal approach of using "you" in all of your statements when describing your perception of Americans as a whole.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Does that answer your question, or are we still at "The US is always right and the rest of the world is always wrong?"<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, it does not. No one ever claimed that the US is always right and the rest of the world is always wrong. That came from you, a member of "the rest of the world."
No, No, No Orcrist, its not partiotism. Its ratings. The media is not going to tell you the 100% real story. That would make people think. They only tell you enough to keep you watching and waiting.
The reason that the majority of journalism is portraying American views is that 1) quite a lot of media corporations are American 2) Most of those that arent are fed some/all of their news from American sources.
Okay, I stopped on Page 2, but I will continue to finish reading the posts later. I am not a leftist American. I am a Christian Youth Minister in South Carolina who votes mostly Replublican. So I'm as conservative as it gets in American culture (at least that's how they judge me). But I do agree with one thing. I think we Americans are so full of ourselves. Take our response to 9/11. The first thing people said were"Who do they think they are". We never stopped to ask why they did it. We never tried to understand their motives or question our own. We just slapped a bumper sticker on our car of an American Flag and the words "Power of Pride" and declared war. I'm not saying that was completely wrong, but we sure haven't tried to change the world's peception of us (at least not for the better).
That's our problem. Pride. It infects Americans. Why? It's taught by our schools, our culture, our families. Yes, we have the most successful nation in the world. Yes, we stand for (certain) freedom. We think America is the ideal for the world to follow. Rome thought that too. And when we're gone, another group of people will claim the same. Just because we may have a great country in many respects doesn't give us a right to act the way we do. America needs a large dose of humility.
This is a little different, but as an example. I was watching Princess Monoke the other night and the boars reminded me of something. They wanted to destroy their enemy so much (the humans) they blindly ran into battle, some even knowing it to be a trap. They all died, and even unto the end, the boar god used his hate and pride to fuel his anger until he became a demon. The monologue given by the wolf god fits us so well. That's our problem. We are allowing our hate and pride blind us to who we are becoming. Remember, vanity (pride) is the devil's favorite sin.
::steps off his soapbox::
Addition: I just read a post by Relic and i agree, many Americans, including myself, don't have this "The US is always right" syndrome, but I do see where other nations get the idea of that. It is in the post on the first page, it's in the rhetoric of many Americans. For that, I apologize... sincerely.
Relic25, I agree with you fully. I apologize for my "blanket statements", I'm afraid I don't have much time to write them out like you (not your country or the US government, just you <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> ) do. You basically summed it up very nicely. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--@gentOrange+Mar 14 2003, 12:40 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (@gentOrange @ Mar 14 2003, 12:40 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--Onuma+Mar 14 2003, 12:23 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Onuma @ Mar 14 2003, 12:23 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If they don't like us, they can go to hell...because we're still the most powerful, richest, and we've got the bombs. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> This is why noone likes you...cocky people like this, this guy just answered your question by acting like the definitive ignorant american. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> You can go to hell too. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
The time will one day come when America either does not possess hegemony over much of the free world, or just does not exist at all. France, England, China have all had theirs, and may have them again one day...but we might as well enjoy it while we can.
Seriously though, I think your country is great, it's just that _some_ Americans *really* have an attitude problem. Take Bush for example: "Either you're with us or without us!"
And one single nation shouldn't decide the fate of the world.
Everybody stop and base all their opinions of Americans off of 'Onuma', because his role as 1/250,000,000 millionth (litterally) of the US population can be used to completely describe current American attitudes and beliefs. This is the same argument people have used so far when they patronizingly mention that 'they have American friends you know, and they are all like this. All three of them. So all Americans must be'. One would think that a conglomeration of different nations packed together so closely on their 'continent' would have learned that there can be vast diffrerences in people's beliefs and attitudes even by walking a few miles... So much for that idea.
Errrrr, I've visited the U.S. several times and it's not just a few people who think like that. I guess the problem is that most Americans have never actually BEEN in another country (no Canada doesn't count <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> ) and have a view of the rest of the world based entirely on what the US media tells them.
Concerning European US-Bashing: Errrrr, I've visited the U.S. several times and MOST Americans are friendly, civilized people. I guess the problem is that most Europeans have never actually BEEN there (no Canada doesn't count <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> ) and have a view of the U.S. based entirely on what the media tells them.
<!--QuoteBegin--Bo Selecta+Mar 14 2003, 08:21 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bo Selecta @ Mar 14 2003, 08:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> And one single nation shouldn't decide the fate of the world. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> THAT is what im thinking of. This is perhaps the most important reason for people hating America. And we can have several examples from history:
Ancient Egypt, Rome, England(among few other European countries), Germany, Russia(USSR) and now USA has all been in leading position in the world. Its quite natural reaction for other countries to be afraid and hate that one country, since basicly one leader(Bush, anyone?) could cause endless destruction and mayhem among other nations.
Second reason is because Americans are so self-satisfied. You do what ever you want because you have bigger military. You ignore other world countries and you are such a big hypocrists. You refuse to do anything that don't fit your purposes; "Hey, what do we care if we produce fourth of the world pollution, as long as we are happy! Screw those nature-protection conventions. WE are the world, so WE can decide whether WE destroy it or not. You don't have a vote on this. And democracy r0x0rZ!"
Ok, thats slightly exaggerated, but thats the basic image I get, when I think of USA. In modern world where man can gather his own images from USA from impartial sources, I believe my image of US is rather accurate.
<!--QuoteBegin--Bo Selecta+Mar 14 2003, 10:53 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bo Selecta @ Mar 14 2003, 10:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I guess the problem is that most Europeans have never actually BEEN there (no Canada doesn't count <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> ) and have a view of the U.S. based entirely on what the media tells them. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Lol! Guilty! As accused. The nearest I've been to America is Mont Saint Michel near Bretagne in France <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
But I have seen real living specimens. They're hear as cruiser line tourists, often looking for the little mermaid statue. Friendly. And talking REALLY LOUD! Do americans TALK REALLY LOUD in america too, or is it just when they go abroad?
My girlfriend however have been to Mexico, USA and Canada. Soz guys, she likes Canada the most <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
AsranielJoin Date: 2002-06-03Member: 724Members, Playtest Lead, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow, Subnautica Playtester, Retired Community Developer
ATM many americans have one problem... they think that all europeans (and other countrys) think that all americans are like "Onuma". But thats simply not true. Most of the european people realy like the USA, but also most of the european dont like or hate the US Governement. And thats simply because with bush ignorance he will not only hurt his own country, but also us the europeans. Because of that i always beliefe in the good in the american people and that they will something against bush.
For starters, I would like to apologize for loud-talking American tourists... they don't speak your language AND... WOULD.... LIKE... TO.... KNOW.... WHERE.... THIS.... RESTAURANT..... IS?
*bonks irritating tourists on head*
What we have here is a failure to communicate. ( <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> for anyone who's seen Cool Hand Luke) Intelligent Americans would love to have less pollution, they want their corporations broken up into smaller, less monopolistic entities, they think Bush is an idiot and they realize that the election was a joke. Those are the smart Americans, unfortunately they are also the quiet Americans.
The loud Americans are the ones like Onuma, the ones that **** off everyone (including the quiet Americans) because they are arrogant, self centered, rude, brash, and a variety of other negatively charged words. I would like them to be quiet too, trust me. These loud Americans are the ones that everyone hates, and I think every country in the world has it's "loud" class of people, the ones who you just want to GO AWAY because they are making you look bad.
Let me make this clear.......brace your selves, BUSH IS A FIGURE HEAD! He does not represent the american people, he has no real power. Think of him as an uber queen of England. As for his ability, he is not a dumb man, he is much smarter then anyone who posts here like it or not, im sure he is, calling him a moron cowboy is just another example of sterotypeing people. He may have a strange choice of words sometimes, and to many he may seem cocky and seem like hes forceing American intreists on the world "your with us or agianst us". There is a very real senceable reason for this, on 9/11 America was wounded by a cheap shot from some people in caves most have never heard of in a country many never knew existed.
Us Americans do have alot of pride, pride in our country or pride in our lives and how peacefully they are lived. That pride was severely damaged on 9/11. Bush acts the way he dose because he is trying to restore that pride. How does the biggest kid at school react when hes hit with a brick on the back of the head, tactfully and diplomactly, I think not.
The current administration, is not stupid, trigger happy maybe, but calling them anything that would degrade their intelligence is just wrong and would show how little you know. Lets look at some of the biggies
Donald "Rummy" as the media likes to call him, has had ALOT of experience in politics, he has done wonders for our army with his new way of thinking, smaller lighter faster, and its working it not only saves time and money, but also and hopefully with Iraq well save lives, with a do not get bogged down in long firefights keep moveing , use the airforce, its a great plan. On the bad side he dose come off as a war monger.
Colin Powell this man should be president IMO, he is a great speaker, and a very smart man, nothing bad I can say about him.
**** Cheney he seems to hide on the side lines he dosn't speak out in public much, you never see him on the news, but hes there, helping to keep bush in check. I would think of him as the voice of reason, but I don't hear to much about him. Aside from his heart problems, he has had some bussiness "misunderstandings"
<!--QuoteBegin--reasa+Mar 14 2003, 08:27 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (reasa @ Mar 14 2003, 08:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> As for his ability, he is not a dumb man, he is much smarter then anyone who posts here like it or not, im sure he is, calling him a moron cowboy is just another example of sterotypeing people. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Now you take that back. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
George W. is one of two things: either not very intelligent, or not very well-educated. Judging from his upbringing and financial status I would say that attempts were made, or at least opportunity was there, for a good education. That leaves me to suspect he is afflicted with the first condition.
I don't think he is within a mile of my intelligence, nor of any of the other hundreds of people I know that I consider intelligent, even people who often disagree with me completely. His ability to formulate and express ideas on the fly is about on par with a college undergrad who is still relying on B.S. He has a poor command of the English language, and a pathetic lack of familiarity with history, geography, and culture.
Cheney and Rumsfeld, they qualify as being very intelligent. I may not agree with them on everything, but the way they respond to questions reflects sophisticated and disciplined approaches to thinking.
G.W. is so out of his league that at least I think he doesn't even really try to run the show on his own. He wouldn't know where to start. I think he relies on Cheney on Rumsfeld, which means Rumsfeld, because Cheney looks up to Rumsfeld, not the other way around. And Rumsfeld is very aggressive, which probably helps explain why G.W. feels comfortable acting as such.
Hating a COuntry doesnt mean you hate the population. It means you hate their foreign policy/attitude.
Lets say you are a Human living in a Country named A. You got some other Countries next to you named B,C,D and E. I come from Country Z, its somewhat on the other Side of the PLanet. I got some interests, so I give C weapons to kill B. Then I come myself and kill C while E is gotten doublecrossed by me and occupied by a friend of mine named Y. I then start bombing you at A. I kill your mother, your sister, your brother, your girlfriend and your best friend. I then ask myself why you hate me.
I ll tell you something. Laugh now if you want and while you can, cause all empires fall one day. Freedom is not what so many US Guys yell as "the Freedom in US". Freedom is to decide yourself on your life. The US is intervening everywhere they see fit with force. And if the US rules all over the world, men will stand up and say "NO NEVER AGAIN" and the empire will fall. Those men will be US citizens.
Most people seem to be pointing to US actions abroad and how unfair they are, how be bully other nations, etc.
I'm failing to see the logic there.
South America- The US was put in a situation of Communism vs Non-Communist Dictatorship. A democratic captialist country simply wasn't an option, as neither side wanted it. The US had to take a stand, and the stand was Anti-Communism, rather than the prefered, but unavailable Pro-Democratic Capitalism. I'm of course simplify a very big issue, but thats the basics.
Vietnam- Again... same situation. The key difference here is America became personally invested in a no win situation. Many have tried to conquer Vietnam unity, and many have failed. A lesson in nationalism.
Pollution- We produce the most, yes. But we also do the most to try to stop it from a logical stance. We may not want to damage our economy by helping the environment, but we are willing to help both at the same time be leading the world in technological innovation? And kyoto, which I'm sensing is the ammo for this attack, was a flawed treaty. It was designed to restrict US economic strength in the same way that the International Criminal Court was designed to hinder the American Military.
Military- yeah, we can do anything we want. Whats even more striking is that <b>WE DON'T</b>. Bush could have justified a massive steamroller campaign in the middle east with nukes. He didn't. We can take on the entire world (assuming no WMDs were used, in which case we'd lose, but everyone else would be dead too <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->). And unlike previous military super powers, what are we seeking to conquer beyond public opinion? Can anyone honestly say that democracy and freedom should not be spread to countries where people have been oppressed?
Electoral System- Everyone here misses the point, you sillies! The electoral vote isn't designed let America be a 100% democracy. It is a representitive democracy. It was put in place to prevent the Tyranny of The Majority (an undereducated majority with bad decesion making) from taking control of the gov. By spreading the power to states, indivudal electorally voted canidates are chosen, and THOSE people vote for the president. When you go to the polls, you don't vote for Bush or Gore but technically a supporter of them. In Ye Olde Days, thats how its worked. Now its more a direct vote.
It is also in place to prevent class warfare by preventing the dominance of population centers. If votes were counted 1 for 1, you would have politicans visiting Philly, Denver, LA, San Fran, Boston, New York, Seattle, and Miami. Only the opinions of cities would matter, as that was the key to victory. Since city populations tend to be either extremly rich or poor, you'd have class warfare in preaching ideas, trying to control the masses against a visible 'enemy', the rich.
<!--QuoteBegin--Jammer+Mar 15 2003, 05:44 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Jammer @ Mar 15 2003, 05:44 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Electoral System- Everyone here misses the point, you sillies! The electoral vote isn't designed let America be a 100% democracy. It is a representitive democracy. It was put in place to prevent the Tyranny of The Majority (an undereducated majority with bad decesion making) from taking control of the gov. By spreading the power to states, indivudal electorally voted canidates are chosen, and THOSE people vote for the president. When you go to the polls, you don't vote for Bush or Gore but technically a supporter of them. In Ye Olde Days, thats how its worked. Now its more a direct vote. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> For electoral systems I think USA system is not good. Overly dependent on donations from rich people. Two party system cannot adequately represent the multitude of opinions present in the citizenship (and that is created due to the way all votes are WASTED on the candidate who didnt win). A few techincal tweaks would do it very good.
Seriously though, I think your country is great, it's just that _some_ Americans *really* have an attitude problem. Take Bush for example: "Either you're with us or without us!"
And one single nation shouldn't decide the fate of the world. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Well maybe we know some stuff that requires us to guide the fate of the world, but we can't let the others know for whatever reasons.
Freedom Fries are the winner. Freedom Toast is equally the winner.
SpoogeThunderbolt missile in your cheeriosJoin Date: 2002-01-25Member: 67Members
<!--QuoteBegin--Immacolata+Mar 15 2003, 05:52 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Immacolata @ Mar 15 2003, 05:52 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> For electoral systems I think USA system is not good. Overly dependent on donations from rich people. Two party system cannot adequately represent the multitude of opinions present in the citizenship (and that is created due to the way all votes are WASTED on the candidate who didnt win). A few techincal tweaks would do it very good. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Just for measure, as this is way off topic, the Electoral College system has nothing to do with "donations from rich people".
As for the two party system, in any other elected position other than President, I would agree. More than agree. The difference with the President is that position has to represent the entire population. Now, recently it's been noted that the U.S. population has begun to split almost 50/50 down party lines. In my opinion, this is exaggerated. After the primary elections and there are only 2 people to choose from, a few factors start to show up other than Ideology and party affiliation. Their backgrounds are looked into, people start to look at their personalities, do they have leadership qualities, have they made statements crontrary to previous statements? These among other things get widdled down and people decide who they want to lead the country.
There have been discussions around here about the Electoral College system so I'll just say that I believe it's a good system.
I think most of you here are taking my words wrongly, or just taking them too strongly. When I say "go to hell" I just mean go away and don't bother us. It's like any other thing...if you don't like steak do you eat it? No. Don't push your beliefs onto others because you are so righteous.
For those of you who mock President Bush, or just dislike him, think of the alternative. <i>AL GORE</i> would be president if Bush were not - he's more of a goshdarn than "Dubya" could ever be. Whether or not the elections were rigged, it really doesn't matter anymore.
To any Anti-Americans: "Stop being arrogant/cocky/egotistical" - great argument. That's like telling a Frenchman to stay and fight. Does a winning sports team get cocky? Yes they do. That doesn't mean that their ego will one day be broken; but for the time being they have earned their bragging rights. Take a look, there isn't much difference between a game and politics (since politics is a game in itself). *flips the bird* that's all I have left to say here.
<!--QuoteBegin--bubbleblower+Mar 14 2003, 08:19 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (bubbleblower @ Mar 14 2003, 08:19 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> [...go back and read his/her/its post, its that good...] <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Oh wow, thanks for that post bubbleblower. Being a person who is on one of the bottom rungs here in Canada ($6000 in debt student loan, no job, no money for rent, bills, or food), but not as low as one can go thanks to people who love me, I feel you summed up the plight of many people the world over incredibly well.
Its almost like the whole thing begs the questions "Is bringing the inner city to the "backwards" country side really progress?"
Resea- You can't seriously beleive that. If thats the case, then: Bush planned 9/11. This war is for Oil. The CIA killed Kennedy We never landed on the moon.
Since you obviously know so much more than the rest of us, you probably have sources that overlook the facts. Bush is stubborn and impartial to influence. He heres his advisors, than decides. Its near pointless to try to convince him otherwise. But I'm sure your source for facts had numerous example to prove otherwise.
END SARCASM
I'm all for Freedom Fries and Toast. After all, we sacrafice our boys to save your sorry Frog **** in not 1, but 2 Wars and THEN proceeded to push for our invovlement in a civil war which you caused (Vietnam), and NOW you exhibit a foreign policy that seeks to thwart US interests at every turn. Thanks. Really, I'm sure the couple hundred thousands boys we lost in your interest feel happy about their sacrafice. I know I am.
you ( P ) Pronunciation Key (y"ooo") pron. 1. Used to refer to the one or ones being addressed: I'll lend you the book. You shouldn't work so hard. See Regional Note at you-all. See Regional Note at you-uns. 2. Used to refer to an indefinitely specified person; one: You can't win them all. 3. Nonstandard. Used reflexively as the indirect object of a verb: You might want to get you another pair of shoes. See note at me.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Middle English, from Old English ow, dative and accusative of g, ye, you. See yu- in Indo-European Roots.]
<!--QuoteBegin--Relic25+Mar 14 2003, 01:19 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Relic25 @ Mar 14 2003, 01:19 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <b>I</b> do not put forth such a face to the world. There is nothing that <b>I</b> or any other individual US citizen can do about what is happening. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Check out the definition for "you". Don't take it so personally, take a chill pill. Oh, and did you vote or not vote? You can do something about what it is happening, its called elections. Get involved in your own political system, rather than low voter turn outs, before you start spouting off about "There is nothing that <b>I</b> or any other individual US citizen can do about what is happening."
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <b>You</b> are wrong in your overgeneralizing. <b>I</b> have never claimed to be greater than others. <b>I</b> believe that there is very little chance of the existance of a god by the common definition that may be prayed to. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Huh? Again, check the definition of "you". The existence of god(s) is a personal decision for everyone, so I'm glad you shared your stance, but how does that have anything to do with over generalizing? If you were to over generalize, from internationally publicly declared stances of groups representing individuals, I would have to generalize that God does in fact exist. Check yourself.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <b>I</b> did not ask why everyone "hates us." <b>I</b> simply cautioned against the fallacy, ignorance, and yes, arrogance of slapping some wholly innaccurate label on us and representing it as fact simply because we happen to inhabit this country. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're right, you didn't ask, the thread starter, Jammer, did. But that's what this thread is about, so how is that relevant and constructive towards the debate? The fallacy, ignorance, and arrogance of the "label" (see: you definition) maybe not that it is placed on you, but rather that you deny its existence based on the grounds that it is not personally tailored to each and every stance that a particular US citizen takes. Good grief, don't be ridiculous, you inhabit the country and are a citizen of the country, so you do take some responsibility for what it does. It can be that simple, its not like you don't label others in the world, as is demonstrated later in your post, US politicians, and US media sources (which report what the US politicians say).
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Okay, so after that is cleared up, let's move on. I am now more curious than ever to know the real reasons why this sentiment exists. So all of you non-Americans, please enlighten us. The argument of 'American hubris' is an invalid one. Why? Because on the whole, Americans <b>do not</b> subscribe to the catchall "can't understand why everyone else dosen't want to be Americans as well" principle. Americans on the whole don't care if other people are Americans or not, or whether they have the same ideals, goals, or belief systems. To say that they do believe this is <b>FALSE</b>. There is no other way around it. If people from other countries choose to believe this to be our stance, then it is they who are ignorant of reality. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Speaking of arogance... Yes, I can see you've cleared it right up, ignoring the reality that people from other countries (not just their politicians, which we get to notice thanks to freedom of speech) perceive that you Americans are really an arrogant, self serving, and ignorant lot that control a good portion of economic, cultural, and military power. That said, my personal opinion that you guys are far more benevolent, kind, generous, understanding, intelligent, industrious, and forgiving lot when compared to what the world has and is offering with the fundamentalist muslim view point and examples, China, the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Facist Italy, the empire of Japan, the various European colony empires, the Napolean Empire, and and and... Well, you get the idea. Notice I didn't say polite, that's Canadian territory, we love to be overly apologetic and acknowledge other folks accomplishments long before our own, which might make us decent slaves if we don't get our military together to defend our sovereignty. Oh well, I'm sorry I said that, NOT.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I don't care what 'image is projected to the world'. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, that's all good and dandy, but you just helped perpetuate that image you don't care about by not doing anything to fight it. This also shows you are willing to remain ignorant as to how others view you. Nice, that really supports your argument.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If you have a functioning brain, you cannot honestly believe that any conflict that the US has been involved with, directly or indirectly, has been because America is pushing its own set of values on other cultures. There are many reasons for each and every involvement outside US borders, but chief among them has always been to preserve America's own interests. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm sorry to have to point this out (there I go being Canadian again), but not only do you insult the intelligence of others outside your country, you insult your own intelligence. Carefully read those two sentences, they stand in complete contrast to each other. Okay, I paraphrasing here, its "Don't believe America is pushing its values" then "outside US borders its main to preserve America's own interests". What the... ?!?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I do not argue that this is 'right' or justified, but it is the irrefutable truth. If the US had absolutely no vested interest in oil extracted from the middle east, there would be no threat of war, or any other significant action. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Truth is such a fickle thing, since it happens in real time and is based upon who views it, and so perception comes into play, I put forward that that is only your version of "irrefutable truth". Ever tried viewing a 2D picture on a sphere with a group of people from many different directions, and then have everyone describe in as many details as possible what the picture was they saw? You get many differing versions, but they are all the truth. But I have a big problem with your "blood for oil" logic, it seems that if that was the only reason for a war with Iraq, then all those UN resolutions passed and presented over the past 12 years regarding Iraq and subsequently ignored by Iraq, mean nothing. It seems odd that in trying to support the UN's diplomacy with action, that the USA is catching flak from the UN. Something is just out of whack with that, but that is already being discussed at length and greater detail in more appropriately titled threads, so I leave that there.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> [...snipped some stuff to try to shorten my post...] I am no longer interested in reading about what the perception of "Americans" is. That's quite clear from some posts, as off-base as they may be in their reasoning. What I want to know is, what is the real reason for this incorrect perception of the common American? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yet again, I refer you to the definition for "you". It can be used to describe "the common American" and yourself individually as a poster, and by your own admission, an american. Since you are apparently "no longer interested in reading about what the perception of "Americans" is", why do you bother asking "What I want to know is, what is the real reason for this incorrect perception of the common American?" when you just said you don't want to know.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Some last loose ends: [...snipped some more to try to shorten my post...] The amusing thing about this sparring match is that it could have all been avoided had you simply not used the personal approach of using "you" in all of your statements when describing your perception of Americans as a whole. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Check the "you" definition, then check yourself, this thread isn't about you as an individual, though your own post does say something to that affect.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Does that answer your question, or are we still at "The US is always right and the rest of the world is always wrong?" <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, it does not. No one ever claimed that the US is always right and the rest of the world is always wrong. That came from you, a member of "the rest of the world." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And from yourself with your "irrefutable" truths. Truth implies that itself is right and everything contrary to the truth is wrong or false.
Let me put forward that you are just venting against how the USA is percieved and unwilling to accept that which you are presented with, furthering those preceptions that you are rallying against by showing ignorance and arrogance, which I have outlined most of in my post with examples you presented.
<!--QuoteBegin--Bo Selecta+Mar 14 2003, 04:53 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bo Selecta @ Mar 14 2003, 04:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I guess the problem is that most Americans have never actually BEEN in another country (no Canada doesn't count ) and have a view of the rest of the world based entirely on what the US media tells them. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Grr... Canada does count, trust me on this. I hear it from American tourists all the time when they comment on my accent that I wasn't aware was there, how they don't understand why there isn't beer in the grocery store, why they always start laughing when I start apologizing, when they say that they think poutine (fries, gravy and cheese) is such a novelty, and so on and so on. Please don't count out my countries social diversity, you <large amount of nasty cussing and cursing proceeds>, okay?
And being from the west coast of Canada, I have to say I like the pronoun "Freedom" instead of "French" in front of fries and toast alot more. Heck, I'm alot more used to hearing Mandarin Chinese, Japanese, and/or South Korean than Quebec French and/or France French.
Noone can win against generations of people who try to free themselves from occupation. When the US arrogance sees itself against the rest of the world, it cant win. You say your military can destroy us all. So what? Is the only solution you got your nukes? Is the only diplomacy you can give war? Thats why US will fail. Without military Power Us got nothing else.
I believe all of you (and by "you" I mean non-US residents) are making one simple, easy, and yet critical error in each and every one of your posts.
The US is not the Bush Administration. The US is the United States Constitution, which provides for the free and fair election of a new administration every four years without fail. The Bush Administration is arrogant, unilateral, and warmongering; the Clinton Administration was not, and the next administration may not be if the citizens of the US realize what they have done.
Please, do not address your posts to the US but rather to Bush and his administration, because they are who you are actually talking about.
Anti-Americanism (if I may remind you all of the title), is NOT used in general discussions to refer to hatred of the U.S. Constitution, or of large U.S. companies, or even dislike of SUV-driving obese people.
It is opposition to U.S. foreign policy and government. Sure, the media will tell you that those Arab fundamentalists hate U.S. freedoms and prosperity. What they hate more is completely <i>unnecessary</i> almost unconditional support of Israel.
Someone said before that there were democracies that have existed longer and more purer than the U.S.; I challenge anyone to find any other countries that has even had a republic in an unbroken line for longer than the U.S.
Comments
<b>You</b> are wrong in your overgeneralizing. <b>I</b> have never claimed to be greater than others. <b>I</b> believe that there is very little chance of the existance of a god by the common definition that may be prayed to.
<b>I</b> did not ask why everyone "hates us." <b>I</b> simply cautioned against the fallacy, ignorance, and yes, arrogance of slapping some wholly innaccurate label on us and representing it as fact simply because we happen to inhabit this country.
Okay, so after that is cleared up, let's move on. I am now more curious than ever to know the real reasons why this sentiment exists. So all of you non-Americans, please enlighten us. The argument of 'American hubris' is an invalid one. Why? Because on the whole, Americans <b>do not</b> subscribe to the catchall "can't understand why everyone else dosen't want to be Americans as well" principle. Americans on the whole don't care if other people are Americans or not, or whether they have the same ideals, goals, or belief systems. To say that they do believe this is <b>FALSE</b>. There is no other way around it. If people from other countries choose to believe this to be our stance, then it is they who are ignorant of reality. I don't care what 'image is projected to the world'. If you have a functioning brain, you cannot honestly believe that any conflict that the US has been involved with, directly or indirectly, has been because America is pushing its own set of values on other cultures. There are many reasons for each and every involvement outside US borders, but chief among them has always been to preserve America's own interests. I do not argue that this is 'right' or justified, but it is the irrefutable truth. If the US had absolutely no vested interest in oil extracted from the middle east, there would be no threat of war, or any other significant action. If you truly believe that we push other countries around because of pride or some imagined moral superiority, why then has the US never threatened China with military action, since it's treatment of Tibet and its own citizenry has been so heinous? Do you think the US would ever have been involved in the Serbian affair had not other interests been at stake? Sure, members of our own government are guilty of spamming the globe with propaganda to have others <i>believe</i> that US involvement is out of 'the goodness of the kind American heart', but if you, the non-American accept this as the truth, then you are just as guilty for not using your own common sense and awareness.
Now, the bottom line is that America IS a huge economic, military, and political force in the world today. This cannot be argued by the sane, no matter where one originates. Because of this, or as a result of it, America has interests spread all over the globe. This country relies on many other countries, but it is a two way street. Other countries do rely on the US. Not all, but the vast majority do in one form or another.
I am no longer interested in reading about what the perception of "Americans" is. That's quite clear from some posts, as off-base as they may be in their reasoning. What I want to know is, what is the real reason for this incorrect perception of the common American?
Some last loose ends:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Make a third list of all the people to whom you have threatened military action, but did not actually do it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Blank list. <b>I</b> have never threatened military action against anyone, let alone do it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Think of how many people you killed, maimed, and angered by doing so.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, blank list. <b>I</b> have never killed or maimed anyone.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->All these people now hate you.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Seems to me this hatred is absolutely unfounded, given the above statements.
The amusing thing about this sparring match is that it could have all been avoided had you simply not used the personal approach of using "you" in all of your statements when describing your perception of Americans as a whole.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Does that answer your question, or are we still at "The US is always right and the rest of the world is always wrong?"<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, it does not. No one ever claimed that the US is always right and the rest of the world is always wrong. That came from you, a member of "the rest of the world."
The reason that the majority of journalism is portraying American views is that 1) quite a lot of media corporations are American 2) Most of those that arent are fed some/all of their news from American sources.
Cronos, sadly all so very true.
That's our problem. Pride. It infects Americans. Why? It's taught by our schools, our culture, our families. Yes, we have the most successful nation in the world. Yes, we stand for (certain) freedom. We think America is the ideal for the world to follow. Rome thought that too. And when we're gone, another group of people will claim the same. Just because we may have a great country in many respects doesn't give us a right to act the way we do. America needs a large dose of humility.
This is a little different, but as an example. I was watching Princess Monoke the other night and the boars reminded me of something. They wanted to destroy their enemy so much (the humans) they blindly ran into battle, some even knowing it to be a trap. They all died, and even unto the end, the boar god used his hate and pride to fuel his anger until he became a demon. The monologue given by the wolf god fits us so well. That's our problem. We are allowing our hate and pride blind us to who we are becoming. Remember, vanity (pride) is the devil's favorite sin.
::steps off his soapbox::
Addition: I just read a post by Relic and i agree, many Americans, including myself, don't have this "The US is always right" syndrome, but I do see where other nations get the idea of that. It is in the post on the first page, it's in the rhetoric of many Americans. For that, I apologize... sincerely.
..tim..
This is why noone likes you...cocky people like this, this guy just answered your question by acting like the definitive ignorant american. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
You can go to hell too. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
The time will one day come when America either does not possess hegemony over much of the free world, or just does not exist at all. France, England, China have all had theirs, and may have them again one day...but we might as well enjoy it while we can.
......
"freedom fries" <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
Seriously though, I think your country is great, it's just that _some_ Americans *really* have an attitude problem. Take Bush for example: "Either you're with us or without us!"
And one single nation shouldn't decide the fate of the world.
Everybody stop and base all their opinions of Americans off of 'Onuma', because his role as 1/250,000,000 millionth (litterally) of the US population can be used to completely describe current American attitudes and beliefs. This is the same argument people have used so far when they patronizingly mention that 'they have American friends you know, and they are all like this. All three of them. So all Americans must be'. One would think that a conglomeration of different nations packed together so closely on their 'continent' would have learned that there can be vast diffrerences in people's beliefs and attitudes even by walking a few miles... So much for that idea.
Statistically right on the ball... ^_^
I guess the problem is that most Americans have never actually BEEN in another country (no Canada doesn't count <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> ) and have a view of the rest of the world based entirely on what the US media tells them.
Concerning European US-Bashing:
Errrrr, I've visited the U.S. several times and MOST Americans are friendly, civilized people.
I guess the problem is that most Europeans have never actually BEEN there (no Canada doesn't count <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> ) and have a view of the U.S. based entirely on what the media tells them.
THAT is what im thinking of. This is perhaps the most important reason for people hating America. And we can have several examples from history:
Ancient Egypt, Rome, England(among few other European countries), Germany, Russia(USSR) and now USA has all been in leading position in the world. Its quite natural reaction for other countries to be afraid and hate that one country, since basicly one leader(Bush, anyone?) could cause endless destruction and mayhem among other nations.
Second reason is because Americans are so self-satisfied. You do what ever you want because you have bigger military. You ignore other world countries and you are such a big hypocrists. You refuse to do anything that don't fit your purposes; "Hey, what do we care if we produce fourth of the world pollution, as long as we are happy! Screw those nature-protection conventions. WE are the world, so WE can decide whether WE destroy it or not. You don't have a vote on this. And democracy r0x0rZ!"
Ok, thats slightly exaggerated, but thats the basic image I get, when I think of USA. In modern world where man can gather his own images from USA from impartial sources, I believe my image of US is rather accurate.
I guess the problem is that most Europeans have never actually BEEN there (no Canada doesn't count <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> ) and have a view of the U.S. based entirely on what the media tells them. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Lol! Guilty! As accused. The nearest I've been to America is Mont Saint Michel near Bretagne in France <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
But I have seen real living specimens. They're hear as cruiser line tourists, often looking for the little mermaid statue. Friendly. And talking REALLY LOUD! Do americans TALK REALLY LOUD in america too, or is it just when they go abroad?
My girlfriend however have been to Mexico, USA and Canada. Soz guys, she likes Canada the most <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Most of the european people realy like the USA, but also most of the european dont like or hate the US Governement. And thats simply because with bush ignorance he will not only hurt his own country, but also us the europeans.
Because of that i always beliefe in the good in the american people and that they will something against bush.
*bonks irritating tourists on head*
What we have here is a failure to communicate. ( <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> for anyone who's seen Cool Hand Luke) Intelligent Americans would love to have less pollution, they want their corporations broken up into smaller, less monopolistic entities, they think Bush is an idiot and they realize that the election was a joke. Those are the smart Americans, unfortunately they are also the quiet Americans.
The loud Americans are the ones like Onuma, the ones that **** off everyone (including the quiet Americans) because they are arrogant, self centered, rude, brash, and a variety of other negatively charged words. I would like them to be quiet too, trust me. These loud Americans are the ones that everyone hates, and I think every country in the world has it's "loud" class of people, the ones who you just want to GO AWAY because they are making you look bad.
Us Americans do have alot of pride, pride in our country or pride in our lives and how peacefully they are lived. That pride was severely damaged on 9/11. Bush acts the way he dose because he is trying to restore that pride. How does the biggest kid at school react when hes hit with a brick on the back of the head, tactfully and diplomactly, I think not.
The current administration, is not stupid, trigger happy maybe, but calling them anything that would degrade their intelligence is just wrong and would show how little you know. Lets look at some of the biggies
Donald "Rummy" as the media likes to call him, has had ALOT of experience in politics, he has done wonders for our army with his new way of thinking, smaller lighter faster, and its working it not only saves time and money, but also and hopefully with Iraq well save lives, with a do not get bogged down in long firefights keep moveing , use the airforce, its a great plan. On the bad side he dose come off as a war monger.
Colin Powell this man should be president IMO, he is a great speaker, and a very smart man, nothing bad I can say about him.
**** Cheney he seems to hide on the side lines he dosn't speak out in public much, you never see him on the news, but hes there, helping to keep bush in check. I would think of him as the voice of reason, but I don't hear to much about him. Aside from his heart problems, he has had some bussiness "misunderstandings"
bah im tired, theres my 2 cents
Now you take that back. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
George W. is one of two things: either not very intelligent, or not very well-educated. Judging from his upbringing and financial status I would say that attempts were made, or at least opportunity was there, for a good education. That leaves me to suspect he is afflicted with the first condition.
I don't think he is within a mile of my intelligence, nor of any of the other hundreds of people I know that I consider intelligent, even people who often disagree with me completely. His ability to formulate and express ideas on the fly is about on par with a college undergrad who is still relying on B.S. He has a poor command of the English language, and a pathetic lack of familiarity with history, geography, and culture.
Cheney and Rumsfeld, they qualify as being very intelligent. I may not agree with them on everything, but the way they respond to questions reflects sophisticated and disciplined approaches to thinking.
G.W. is so out of his league that at least I think he doesn't even really try to run the show on his own. He wouldn't know where to start. I think he relies on Cheney on Rumsfeld, which means Rumsfeld, because Cheney looks up to Rumsfeld, not the other way around. And Rumsfeld is very aggressive, which probably helps explain why G.W. feels comfortable acting as such.
Lets say you are a Human living in a Country named A.
You got some other Countries next to you named B,C,D and E.
I come from Country Z, its somewhat on the other Side of the PLanet.
I got some interests, so I give C weapons to kill B.
Then I come myself and kill C while E is gotten doublecrossed by me
and occupied by a friend of mine named Y.
I then start bombing you at A. I kill your mother, your sister, your brother, your girlfriend and your best friend.
I then ask myself why you hate me.
I ll tell you something. Laugh now if you want and while you can, cause all empires fall one day.
Freedom is not what so many US Guys yell as "the Freedom in US".
Freedom is to decide yourself on your life. The US is intervening everywhere they see fit with force.
And if the US rules all over the world, men will stand up and say "NO NEVER AGAIN" and the empire will fall.
Those men will be US citizens.
I'm failing to see the logic there.
South America- The US was put in a situation of Communism vs Non-Communist Dictatorship. A democratic captialist country simply wasn't an option, as neither side wanted it. The US had to take a stand, and the stand was Anti-Communism, rather than the prefered, but unavailable Pro-Democratic Capitalism. I'm of course simplify a very big issue, but thats the basics.
Vietnam- Again... same situation. The key difference here is America became personally invested in a no win situation. Many have tried to conquer Vietnam unity, and many have failed. A lesson in nationalism.
Pollution- We produce the most, yes. But we also do the most to try to stop it from a logical stance. We may not want to damage our economy by helping the environment, but we are willing to help both at the same time be leading the world in technological innovation? And kyoto, which I'm sensing is the ammo for this attack, was a flawed treaty. It was designed to restrict US economic strength in the same way that the International Criminal Court was designed to hinder the American Military.
Military- yeah, we can do anything we want. Whats even more striking is that <b>WE DON'T</b>. Bush could have justified a massive steamroller campaign in the middle east with nukes. He didn't. We can take on the entire world (assuming no WMDs were used, in which case we'd lose, but everyone else would be dead too <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->). And unlike previous military super powers, what are we seeking to conquer beyond public opinion? Can anyone honestly say that democracy and freedom should not be spread to countries where people have been oppressed?
Electoral System- Everyone here misses the point, you sillies! The electoral vote isn't designed let America be a 100% democracy. It is a representitive democracy. It was put in place to prevent the Tyranny of The Majority (an undereducated majority with bad decesion making) from taking control of the gov. By spreading the power to states, indivudal electorally voted canidates are chosen, and THOSE people vote for the president. When you go to the polls, you don't vote for Bush or Gore but technically a supporter of them. In Ye Olde Days, thats how its worked. Now its more a direct vote.
It is also in place to prevent class warfare by preventing the dominance of population centers. If votes were counted 1 for 1, you would have politicans visiting Philly, Denver, LA, San Fran, Boston, New York, Seattle, and Miami. Only the opinions of cities would matter, as that was the key to victory. Since city populations tend to be either extremly rich or poor, you'd have class warfare in preaching ideas, trying to control the masses against a visible 'enemy', the rich.
Electoral System- Everyone here misses the point, you sillies! The electoral vote isn't designed let America be a 100% democracy. It is a representitive democracy. It was put in place to prevent the Tyranny of The Majority (an undereducated majority with bad decesion making) from taking control of the gov. By spreading the power to states, indivudal electorally voted canidates are chosen, and THOSE people vote for the president. When you go to the polls, you don't vote for Bush or Gore but technically a supporter of them. In Ye Olde Days, thats how its worked. Now its more a direct vote.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
For electoral systems I think USA system is not good. Overly dependent on donations from rich people. Two party system cannot adequately represent the multitude of opinions present in the citizenship (and that is created due to the way all votes are WASTED on the candidate who didnt win). A few techincal tweaks would do it very good.
......
"freedom fries" <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
Seriously though, I think your country is great, it's just that _some_ Americans *really* have an attitude problem. Take Bush for example: "Either you're with us or without us!"
And one single nation shouldn't decide the fate of the world. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well maybe we know some stuff that requires us to guide the fate of the world, but we can't let the others know for whatever reasons.
Freedom Fries are the winner. Freedom Toast is equally the winner.
Just for measure, as this is way off topic, the Electoral College system has nothing to do with "donations from rich people".
As for the two party system, in any other elected position other than President, I would agree. More than agree. The difference with the President is that position has to represent the entire population. Now, recently it's been noted that the U.S. population has begun to split almost 50/50 down party lines. In my opinion, this is exaggerated. After the primary elections and there are only 2 people to choose from, a few factors start to show up other than Ideology and party affiliation. Their backgrounds are looked into, people start to look at their personalities, do they have leadership qualities, have they made statements crontrary to previous statements? These among other things get widdled down and people decide who they want to lead the country.
There have been discussions around here about the Electoral College system so I'll just say that I believe it's a good system.
I think most of you here are taking my words wrongly, or just taking them too strongly. When I say "go to hell" I just mean go away and don't bother us. It's like any other thing...if you don't like steak do you eat it? No. Don't push your beliefs onto others because you are so righteous.
For those of you who mock President Bush, or just dislike him, think of the alternative. <i>AL GORE</i> would be president if Bush were not - he's more of a goshdarn than "Dubya" could ever be. Whether or not the elections were rigged, it really doesn't matter anymore.
To any Anti-Americans:
"Stop being arrogant/cocky/egotistical" - great argument. That's like telling a Frenchman to stay and fight. Does a winning sports team get cocky? Yes they do. That doesn't mean that their ego will one day be broken; but for the time being they have earned their bragging rights. Take a look, there isn't much difference between a game and politics (since politics is a game in itself). *flips the bird* that's all I have left to say here.
Oh wow, thanks for that post bubbleblower. Being a person who is on one of the bottom rungs here in Canada ($6000 in debt student loan, no job, no money for rent, bills, or food), but not as low as one can go thanks to people who love me, I feel you summed up the plight of many people the world over incredibly well.
Its almost like the whole thing begs the questions "Is bringing the inner city to the "backwards" country side really progress?"
Bush planned 9/11.
This war is for Oil.
The CIA killed Kennedy
We never landed on the moon.
Since you obviously know so much more than the rest of us, you probably have sources that overlook the facts. Bush is stubborn and impartial to influence. He heres his advisors, than decides. Its near pointless to try to convince him otherwise. But I'm sure your source for facts had numerous example to prove otherwise.
END SARCASM
I'm all for Freedom Fries and Toast. After all, we sacrafice our boys to save your sorry Frog **** in not 1, but 2 Wars and THEN proceeded to push for our invovlement in a civil war which you caused (Vietnam), and NOW you exhibit a foreign policy that seeks to thwart US interests at every turn. Thanks. Really, I'm sure the couple hundred thousands boys we lost in your interest feel happy about their sacrafice. I know I am.
pron.
1. Used to refer to the one or ones being addressed: I'll lend you the book. You shouldn't work so hard. See Regional Note at you-all. See Regional Note at you-uns.
2. Used to refer to an indefinitely specified person; one: You can't win them all.
3. Nonstandard. Used reflexively as the indirect object of a verb: You might want to get you another pair of shoes. See note at me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Middle English, from Old English ow, dative and accusative of g, ye, you. See yu- in Indo-European Roots.]
<a href='http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=you' target='_blank'>Source</a>
<!--QuoteBegin--Relic25+Mar 14 2003, 01:19 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Relic25 @ Mar 14 2003, 01:19 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <b>I</b> do not put forth such a face to the world. There is nothing that <b>I</b> or any other individual US citizen can do about what is happening.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Check out the definition for "you". Don't take it so personally, take a chill pill. Oh, and did you vote or not vote? You can do something about what it is happening, its called elections. Get involved in your own political system, rather than low voter turn outs, before you start spouting off about "There is nothing that <b>I</b> or any other individual US citizen can do about what is happening."
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
<b>You</b> are wrong in your overgeneralizing. <b>I</b> have never claimed to be greater than others. <b>I</b> believe that there is very little chance of the existance of a god by the common definition that may be prayed to.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Huh? Again, check the definition of "you". The existence of god(s) is a personal decision for everyone, so I'm glad you shared your stance, but how does that have anything to do with over generalizing? If you were to over generalize, from internationally publicly declared stances of groups representing individuals, I would have to generalize that God does in fact exist. Check yourself.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
<b>I</b> did not ask why everyone "hates us." <b>I</b> simply cautioned against the fallacy, ignorance, and yes, arrogance of slapping some wholly innaccurate label on us and representing it as fact simply because we happen to inhabit this country.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're right, you didn't ask, the thread starter, Jammer, did. But that's what this thread is about, so how is that relevant and constructive towards the debate? The fallacy, ignorance, and arrogance of the "label" (see: you definition) maybe not that it is placed on you, but rather that you deny its existence based on the grounds that it is not personally tailored to each and every stance that a particular US citizen takes. Good grief, don't be ridiculous, you inhabit the country and are a citizen of the country, so you do take some responsibility for what it does. It can be that simple, its not like you don't label others in the world, as is demonstrated later in your post, US politicians, and US media sources (which report what the US politicians say).
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Okay, so after that is cleared up, let's move on. I am now more curious than ever to know the real reasons why this sentiment exists. So all of you non-Americans, please enlighten us. The argument of 'American hubris' is an invalid one. Why? Because on the whole, Americans <b>do not</b> subscribe to the catchall "can't understand why everyone else dosen't want to be Americans as well" principle. Americans on the whole don't care if other people are Americans or not, or whether they have the same ideals, goals, or belief systems. To say that they do believe this is <b>FALSE</b>. There is no other way around it. If people from other countries choose to believe this to be our stance, then it is they who are ignorant of reality.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Speaking of arogance... Yes, I can see you've cleared it right up, ignoring the reality that people from other countries (not just their politicians, which we get to notice thanks to freedom of speech) perceive that you Americans are really an arrogant, self serving, and ignorant lot that control a good portion of economic, cultural, and military power. That said, my personal opinion that you guys are far more benevolent, kind, generous, understanding, intelligent, industrious, and forgiving lot when compared to what the world has and is offering with the fundamentalist muslim view point and examples, China, the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Facist Italy, the empire of Japan, the various European colony empires, the Napolean Empire, and and and... Well, you get the idea. Notice I didn't say polite, that's Canadian territory, we love to be overly apologetic and acknowledge other folks accomplishments long before our own, which might make us decent slaves if we don't get our military together to defend our sovereignty. Oh well, I'm sorry I said that, NOT.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
I don't care what 'image is projected to the world'.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, that's all good and dandy, but you just helped perpetuate that image you don't care about by not doing anything to fight it. This also shows you are willing to remain ignorant as to how others view you. Nice, that really supports your argument.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
If you have a functioning brain, you cannot honestly believe that any conflict that the US has been involved with, directly or indirectly, has been because America is pushing its own set of values on other cultures. There are many reasons for each and every involvement outside US borders, but chief among them has always been to preserve America's own interests.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm sorry to have to point this out (there I go being Canadian again), but not only do you insult the intelligence of others outside your country, you insult your own intelligence. Carefully read those two sentences, they stand in complete contrast to each other. Okay, I paraphrasing here, its "Don't believe America is pushing its values" then "outside US borders its main to preserve America's own interests". What the... ?!?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
I do not argue that this is 'right' or justified, but it is the irrefutable truth. If the US had absolutely no vested interest in oil extracted from the middle east, there would be no threat of war, or any other significant action.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Truth is such a fickle thing, since it happens in real time and is based upon who views it, and so perception comes into play, I put forward that that is only your version of "irrefutable truth". Ever tried viewing a 2D picture on a sphere with a group of people from many different directions, and then have everyone describe in as many details as possible what the picture was they saw? You get many differing versions, but they are all the truth. But I have a big problem with your "blood for oil" logic, it seems that if that was the only reason for a war with Iraq, then all those UN resolutions passed and presented over the past 12 years regarding Iraq and subsequently ignored by Iraq, mean nothing. It seems odd that in trying to support the UN's diplomacy with action, that the USA is catching flak from the UN. Something is just out of whack with that, but that is already being discussed at length and greater detail in more appropriately titled threads, so I leave that there.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
[...snipped some stuff to try to shorten my post...]
I am no longer interested in reading about what the perception of "Americans" is. That's quite clear from some posts, as off-base as they may be in their reasoning. What I want to know is, what is the real reason for this incorrect perception of the common American?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yet again, I refer you to the definition for "you". It can be used to describe "the common American" and yourself individually as a poster, and by your own admission, an american. Since you are apparently "no longer interested in reading about what the perception of "Americans" is", why do you bother asking "What I want to know is, what is the real reason for this incorrect perception of the common American?" when you just said you don't want to know.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Some last loose ends:
[...snipped some more to try to shorten my post...]
The amusing thing about this sparring match is that it could have all been avoided had you simply not used the personal approach of using "you" in all of your statements when describing your perception of Americans as a whole.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Check the "you" definition, then check yourself, this thread isn't about you as an individual, though your own post does say something to that affect.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Does that answer your question, or are we still at "The US is always right and the rest of the world is always wrong?"
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, it does not. No one ever claimed that the US is always right and the rest of the world is always wrong. That came from you, a member of "the rest of the world."
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And from yourself with your "irrefutable" truths. Truth implies that itself is right and everything contrary to the truth is wrong or false.
Let me put forward that you are just venting against how the USA is percieved and unwilling to accept that which you are presented with, furthering those preceptions that you are rallying against by showing ignorance and arrogance, which I have outlined most of in my post with examples you presented.
<!--QuoteBegin--Bo Selecta+Mar 14 2003, 04:53 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bo Selecta @ Mar 14 2003, 04:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
I guess the problem is that most Americans have never actually BEEN in another country (no Canada doesn't count ) and have a view of the rest of the world based entirely on what the US media tells them.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Grr... Canada does count, trust me on this. I hear it from American tourists all the time when they comment on my accent that I wasn't aware was there, how they don't understand why there isn't beer in the grocery store, why they always start laughing when I start apologizing, when they say that they think poutine (fries, gravy and cheese) is such a novelty, and so on and so on. Please don't count out my countries social diversity, you <large amount of nasty cussing and cursing proceeds>, okay?
And being from the west coast of Canada, I have to say I like the pronoun "Freedom" instead of "French" in front of fries and toast alot more. Heck, I'm alot more used to hearing Mandarin Chinese, Japanese, and/or South Korean than Quebec French and/or France French.
When the US arrogance sees itself against the rest of the world, it cant win.
You say your military can destroy us all. So what? Is the only solution you got your nukes?
Is the only diplomacy you can give war?
Thats why US will fail. Without military Power Us got nothing else.
The US is not the Bush Administration. The US is the United States Constitution, which provides for the free and fair election of a new administration every four years without fail. The Bush Administration is arrogant, unilateral, and warmongering; the Clinton Administration was not, and the next administration may not be if the citizens of the US realize what they have done.
Please, do not address your posts to the US but rather to Bush and his administration, because they are who you are actually talking about.
It is opposition to U.S. foreign policy and government. Sure, the media will tell you that those Arab fundamentalists hate U.S. freedoms and prosperity. What they hate more is completely <i>unnecessary</i> almost unconditional support of Israel.
Someone said before that there were democracies that have existed longer and more purer than the U.S.; I challenge anyone to find any other countries that has even had a republic in an unbroken line for longer than the U.S.