Why the world hates the apathetic Americans
-
bryce wrote: erm this belongs in the soapbox "Posting Guideline: The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your kid sister to read then don't post it." I guess you don't want your kid sister to read this. posting police make me X| Later,
JoeSox
www.joeswammi.com
Killing In The Name[^] -
Here are some interesting reads. I've been debating this with colleagues and have run into some staunch Republicans that dismiss it offhand without even bothering to listen. Others, not even Republicans, don't want to think for themselves and so they just refuse to take part. The average American is completely apathetic to world affairs, and our media/press is doing their best to ensure it stays that way. That is the only way with the current American constitution that these corrupt politicians can get into office. This conflict with Iraq and terrorism on American soil is so much deeper than the American public has been led to believe. Fair warning... this is some pretty heavy, serious stuff. http://www.skolnicksreport.com/bushflo.html[^] http://www.skolnicksreport.com/ootar23.html[^] http://www.zmag.org/zmag/articles/chomgulfalb.htm[^] http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=847667885%244087%40atype.com&output=gplain[^] Pass it on. Americans need to stand up and rebuke their corrupt, evil politicians. Thousands of lives have been lost, and thousands if not hundreds of thousands more will surely suffer the same fate if something is not done. Ty
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Albert Einstein
There's a world out there? It's not on TV, must be fake, like the moon landing.
Through 86 years of perpetual motion, if he likes you he'll smile and he'll say, "Some of it's magic, some of it's tragic, but I had a good life all the way"
-
This really belongs in the soapbox, but... TyMatthews wrote: I've been debating this with colleagues and have run into some staunch Republicans that dismiss it offhand without even bothering to listen. Others, not even Republicans, don't want to think for themselves and so they just refuse to take part. Perhaps they just think you are a nut case, and are attempting to humor you while backing to the nearest exit. Most people do a pretty good job of thinking for themselves and putting their own interests first, which is why no one else wants to follow your lead. TyMatthews wrote: Pass it on. Americans need to stand up and rebuke their corrupt, evil politicians. We attempt to do this every election. Sometimes we even have a few minor successes. TyMatthews wrote: Thousands of lives have been lost, Where? Sitting on our hands outside of Iraq? TyMatthews wrote: thousands if not hundreds of thousands more will surely suffer the same fate if something is not done. Or if we just put our heads in the sand and hope the problem stays in someone else's back yard. Oh, wait, we have already tried that, which is partly how we got in this mess in the first place.
Stuart van Weele wrote: which is partly how we got in this mess in the first place. we're mostly in this mess because GWB and Co decided that the US's #1 priority, above all else, is regime change in Iraq; and then they went about it in the manner most likely to alienate and disgust the rest of the world. -c
When history comes, it always takes you by surprise.
-
Stuart van Weele wrote: which is partly how we got in this mess in the first place. we're mostly in this mess because GWB and Co decided that the US's #1 priority, above all else, is regime change in Iraq; and then they went about it in the manner most likely to alienate and disgust the rest of the world. -c
When history comes, it always takes you by surprise.
Yes, but the spark that set it off was 9-11 and our adventures in Afganistan. I know hindsight is 20/20, but a more agressive response after the first WTC bombing, the bombings in Africa, and the USS Cole might have prevented this mess. It's not like this problem snuck up on us.
-
Yes, but the spark that set it off was 9-11 and our adventures in Afganistan. I know hindsight is 20/20, but a more agressive response after the first WTC bombing, the bombings in Africa, and the USS Cole might have prevented this mess. It's not like this problem snuck up on us.
Stuart van Weele wrote: but a more agressive response after the first WTC bombing, the bombings in Africa, and the USS Cole might have prevented this mess Huh? How?
If you go to war, you will destroy a great country a stoned greek chick to the richest man of the world
sighist | Agile Programming | doxygen -
This really belongs in the soapbox, but... TyMatthews wrote: I've been debating this with colleagues and have run into some staunch Republicans that dismiss it offhand without even bothering to listen. Others, not even Republicans, don't want to think for themselves and so they just refuse to take part. Perhaps they just think you are a nut case, and are attempting to humor you while backing to the nearest exit. Most people do a pretty good job of thinking for themselves and putting their own interests first, which is why no one else wants to follow your lead. TyMatthews wrote: Pass it on. Americans need to stand up and rebuke their corrupt, evil politicians. We attempt to do this every election. Sometimes we even have a few minor successes. TyMatthews wrote: Thousands of lives have been lost, Where? Sitting on our hands outside of Iraq? TyMatthews wrote: thousands if not hundreds of thousands more will surely suffer the same fate if something is not done. Or if we just put our heads in the sand and hope the problem stays in someone else's back yard. Oh, wait, we have already tried that, which is partly how we got in this mess in the first place.
Sorry for posting this here, I didn't realize there was a soapbox... Stuart van Weele wrote: Perhaps they just think you are a nut case, I have to admit, I did laugh at reading that. Honestly, I'm not a nutcase, I'm perfectly sane. You, however, are just the type of person who wants to believe their president and their politicians are perfect angels, doing God's work and keeping the evil aggressors of the world at bay. Stuart van Weele wrote: Where? Sitting on our hands outside of Iraq? I've just been trying to understand for the past 18 months why these terrorists wanted to and did kill thousands of innocent Americans in the 9/11 attacks. Which is the thousands of lives that I was referring to... I hope you didn't forget about that. There has to be a reason, something deeply troubling, and it isn't as simple as we've been led to believe. It's not envy. It's not Christianity. It's not the "American Dream." Everyone thinks we're simply reacting to what has happened to us, or what happened to poor little Kuwait a dozen years ago. It's not that simple. It goes much deeper than that. Those are just excuses and reasons for the public to buy into it and support war, and the vast majority of us have done exactly that. Hell, I did back in '91 when I was in High School. I believed it all, that Iraq with Saddam at the helm was the evil aggressor. I've since opened my eyes and realized that the beneath the thin little surface laid before us lies a tremendous amount of information. Stuart van Weele wrote: We attempt to do this every election. Sometimes we even have a few minor successes. The 2000 election was bought by George HW Bush. GW Bush was completely uninvolved with politics until after his father was removed from office in 1992. Same story for Jeb. The two "prodigal sons" were installed as governors for the eventual reclamation of the presidency by GHW Bush. GW Bush is completely incompetent. He is merely a puppet for his father. GHW Bush knew there was no way he could get re-elected after losing in '92. We don't elect presidents. We never have. We elect the electoral college, and as was proven in 2000 and 1876, the popular vote does not matter. Coincidence that Florida, with Jeb Bush at the helm and its key electoral votes, was the focal point in 2000? Or that the Supreme Court, majority Republican, made the final decision? No coincidence at all. Both safeguards were in plac
-
Here are some interesting reads. I've been debating this with colleagues and have run into some staunch Republicans that dismiss it offhand without even bothering to listen. Others, not even Republicans, don't want to think for themselves and so they just refuse to take part. The average American is completely apathetic to world affairs, and our media/press is doing their best to ensure it stays that way. That is the only way with the current American constitution that these corrupt politicians can get into office. This conflict with Iraq and terrorism on American soil is so much deeper than the American public has been led to believe. Fair warning... this is some pretty heavy, serious stuff. http://www.skolnicksreport.com/bushflo.html[^] http://www.skolnicksreport.com/ootar23.html[^] http://www.zmag.org/zmag/articles/chomgulfalb.htm[^] http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=847667885%244087%40atype.com&output=gplain[^] Pass it on. Americans need to stand up and rebuke their corrupt, evil politicians. Thousands of lives have been lost, and thousands if not hundreds of thousands more will surely suffer the same fate if something is not done. Ty
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Albert Einstein
You know, after reading these, I'm left thinking, wow, this is pretty far-fetched. but then again... Something is _really_ fishy in the Bush administration. One of their first acts was to seal the records of the Bush I/Regan years, which were just about to become public. Then we had Cheney's secret energy meetings with a company that soon after turned out to be a complete and total fraud, costing Americans billions of dollars. And then the Bushies' refusal to appoint a commission to investigate the 9/11 disaster (no, appointing Kissinger to head it up does not count.) Something is being covered up. It makes sense to think that the Iraq mess might be a smokescreen.
-
I don't believe so, and I'm not American!!!!!!! There is one for the books. TyMatthews wrote: The average American is completely apathetic to world affairs I've worked with numerous Americans - and all have shown that they are thoughtful and engaging individuals. On numerous occasions I've disagreed with the opinions of those that I've met, but I can't help but admit that they were all nice people. Now I'm not saying that all Americans are nice people, but those that I've met are. I've not read your links. but... TyMatthews wrote: This conflict with Iraq and terrorism on American soil is so much deeper than the American public has been led to believe Is true, but probably for the wrong reasons. I'm going to go off on one. Please bear with me. ........................ The US & Allies are required under UN resolution to defend by what means Saudi Arabia after the Gulf war on the off chance that Saddam attacks Saudi Arabia. Over the past 10 years a slow but increasing unease has been growing there from Islamic fundamentalist groups, which is fuelled by the placement of US bases in Saudi. See the UN resolution. Now the last thing that the US wants is the house of Saudi falling, so it wants to pull out of Saudi, but it can't until that threat of Saddam is removed. So Saddam has to go. How can this be achieved in 2 ways. He (Saddam) goes into exile, or he is removed forcefully. The former is preferable, and still possible, but unlikely, despite the house of Saudi sponsoring the idea at the recent Arab summit. This was put forward over a month ago, and has over the last few days has been growing in popularity among the Arab League. This would never the less be a difficult task. The second option could through the whole world into turmoil. How. Saddam in his defiance, and in self defence upon being attacked could fire at Israel. Now in recent time Sharon has not exactly had a good record in 'appropriate response'. But is Sharon did respond inappropriately, it would be playing into Saddams's hands politically. As a result it would fuel the Islamic fundamentalist cause, leading to the worst fears of the US - the overthrowing of the house of Saudi, which currently is hanging by a thread. From there many things would go down hill. The world would be setting things up for worse to come. Then again, we are meant to be in for a bear market for the next 10 years, so why not sit back and except the ride. ...........................
Giles wrote: That’s why France tried to sponsor the removal of the sanctions 2 years ago after only 6 months previous to that signing the agreements. It could also be because the sanctions didn't have the desired effect, actually quite contrary. The number of unemployed people are ridiculous high, medical equipment and pharmaceuticals are almost non-existant, and when Saddam tells the people that this is the fault of the Western powers, it is indisputable correct... "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus
-
Stuart van Weele wrote: but a more agressive response after the first WTC bombing, the bombings in Africa, and the USS Cole might have prevented this mess Huh? How?
If you go to war, you will destroy a great country a stoned greek chick to the richest man of the world
sighist | Agile Programming | doxygenThe people who commited 9-11 also had a hand in these earlier acts. If we had agressively gone after their leadership and finances then, 9-11 might not have happened.
-
Sorry for posting this here, I didn't realize there was a soapbox... Stuart van Weele wrote: Perhaps they just think you are a nut case, I have to admit, I did laugh at reading that. Honestly, I'm not a nutcase, I'm perfectly sane. You, however, are just the type of person who wants to believe their president and their politicians are perfect angels, doing God's work and keeping the evil aggressors of the world at bay. Stuart van Weele wrote: Where? Sitting on our hands outside of Iraq? I've just been trying to understand for the past 18 months why these terrorists wanted to and did kill thousands of innocent Americans in the 9/11 attacks. Which is the thousands of lives that I was referring to... I hope you didn't forget about that. There has to be a reason, something deeply troubling, and it isn't as simple as we've been led to believe. It's not envy. It's not Christianity. It's not the "American Dream." Everyone thinks we're simply reacting to what has happened to us, or what happened to poor little Kuwait a dozen years ago. It's not that simple. It goes much deeper than that. Those are just excuses and reasons for the public to buy into it and support war, and the vast majority of us have done exactly that. Hell, I did back in '91 when I was in High School. I believed it all, that Iraq with Saddam at the helm was the evil aggressor. I've since opened my eyes and realized that the beneath the thin little surface laid before us lies a tremendous amount of information. Stuart van Weele wrote: We attempt to do this every election. Sometimes we even have a few minor successes. The 2000 election was bought by George HW Bush. GW Bush was completely uninvolved with politics until after his father was removed from office in 1992. Same story for Jeb. The two "prodigal sons" were installed as governors for the eventual reclamation of the presidency by GHW Bush. GW Bush is completely incompetent. He is merely a puppet for his father. GHW Bush knew there was no way he could get re-elected after losing in '92. We don't elect presidents. We never have. We elect the electoral college, and as was proven in 2000 and 1876, the popular vote does not matter. Coincidence that Florida, with Jeb Bush at the helm and its key electoral votes, was the focal point in 2000? Or that the Supreme Court, majority Republican, made the final decision? No coincidence at all. Both safeguards were in plac
TyMatthews wrote: We don't elect presidents. We never have. We elect the electoral college, and as was proven in 2000 and 1876, the popular vote does not matter. This is amazingly ignorant crap which displays a complete misunderstanding of the Constitution and the purposes of America's founding fathers. The canard about Florida is just that. EVERY recount done since the 2000 election has found George W. Bush the winner of Florida's electoral votes. Your other accusations are delusional rantings. For example, there is no mystery as to why the hostages were freed when Reagan was elected and it has nothing to do with payoffs but politics. Largely due to Jimmy Carter's completely innefective foreign policy, Iran lost any political leverage with the hostages after the failure of the first rescue attempt and Carter simply gave up. From that point on, keeping the hostages was simply a matter of saving face. Once Carter was gone, Iran could release the hostages as a sign of good faith to the new president. This is called politics and it's what happens in the real world. TyMatthews wrote: Instead of labelling me a nutcase, refute the arguments. Like all nutcases, you are forcing your critics to argue a negative. No matter what argument or evidence is presented you and your ilk dream up some more imaginary evidence and see connection where there are none. Finally, to attribute 9/11 and other acts of terrorism entirely to the gulf war displays a profound, almost unfathomable ignorance of middle-east and world history. Of course, you will now state "I know the truth" as though it makes up for the lack of brain cells between your ears.
-
The people who commited 9-11 also had a hand in these earlier acts. If we had agressively gone after their leadership and finances then, 9-11 might not have happened.
OK, *this* sounds reasonable (I understood your original post more like "yet another reason to umm bomb a country that well, is like, evil, and really um close to where um other evils hide") However, I agree with ChrisL: The situation has escalated because of the way the US "jumped into" this crisis. And a serious solution needs more approaches besides "drop bombs at the antichrist du jour": building stable communities, rather than changing alliances more often than we should our underwear. Living, and judging oneself by the same ethics as you judge others. The willingness to accept an economical disadvantage for your ideals. But this would require a diplomacy beyond pressure and checkbook - something the US doesn't seem to be able to at the moment.
If you go to war, you will destroy a great country a stoned greek chick to the richest man of the world
sighist | Agile Programming | doxygen -
TyMatthews wrote: We don't elect presidents. We never have. We elect the electoral college, and as was proven in 2000 and 1876, the popular vote does not matter. This is amazingly ignorant crap which displays a complete misunderstanding of the Constitution and the purposes of America's founding fathers. The canard about Florida is just that. EVERY recount done since the 2000 election has found George W. Bush the winner of Florida's electoral votes. Your other accusations are delusional rantings. For example, there is no mystery as to why the hostages were freed when Reagan was elected and it has nothing to do with payoffs but politics. Largely due to Jimmy Carter's completely innefective foreign policy, Iran lost any political leverage with the hostages after the failure of the first rescue attempt and Carter simply gave up. From that point on, keeping the hostages was simply a matter of saving face. Once Carter was gone, Iran could release the hostages as a sign of good faith to the new president. This is called politics and it's what happens in the real world. TyMatthews wrote: Instead of labelling me a nutcase, refute the arguments. Like all nutcases, you are forcing your critics to argue a negative. No matter what argument or evidence is presented you and your ilk dream up some more imaginary evidence and see connection where there are none. Finally, to attribute 9/11 and other acts of terrorism entirely to the gulf war displays a profound, almost unfathomable ignorance of middle-east and world history. Of course, you will now state "I know the truth" as though it makes up for the lack of brain cells between your ears.
Moving to the SoapBox... http://www.codeproject.com/script/comments/forums.asp?forumid=2605#xx436479xx[^] Ty
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Albert Einstein
-
I don't believe so, and I'm not American!!!!!!! There is one for the books. TyMatthews wrote: The average American is completely apathetic to world affairs I've worked with numerous Americans - and all have shown that they are thoughtful and engaging individuals. On numerous occasions I've disagreed with the opinions of those that I've met, but I can't help but admit that they were all nice people. Now I'm not saying that all Americans are nice people, but those that I've met are. I've not read your links. but... TyMatthews wrote: This conflict with Iraq and terrorism on American soil is so much deeper than the American public has been led to believe Is true, but probably for the wrong reasons. I'm going to go off on one. Please bear with me. ........................ The US & Allies are required under UN resolution to defend by what means Saudi Arabia after the Gulf war on the off chance that Saddam attacks Saudi Arabia. Over the past 10 years a slow but increasing unease has been growing there from Islamic fundamentalist groups, which is fuelled by the placement of US bases in Saudi. See the UN resolution. Now the last thing that the US wants is the house of Saudi falling, so it wants to pull out of Saudi, but it can't until that threat of Saddam is removed. So Saddam has to go. How can this be achieved in 2 ways. He (Saddam) goes into exile, or he is removed forcefully. The former is preferable, and still possible, but unlikely, despite the house of Saudi sponsoring the idea at the recent Arab summit. This was put forward over a month ago, and has over the last few days has been growing in popularity among the Arab League. This would never the less be a difficult task. The second option could through the whole world into turmoil. How. Saddam in his defiance, and in self defence upon being attacked could fire at Israel. Now in recent time Sharon has not exactly had a good record in 'appropriate response'. But is Sharon did respond inappropriately, it would be playing into Saddams's hands politically. As a result it would fuel the Islamic fundamentalist cause, leading to the worst fears of the US - the overthrowing of the house of Saudi, which currently is hanging by a thread. From there many things would go down hill. The world would be setting things up for worse to come. Then again, we are meant to be in for a bear market for the next 10 years, so why not sit back and except the ride. ...........................
Giles wrote: Did I mention that 'possibly' one of the reasons that France & Russia are against the 2nd current resolution are the outstanding oil contracts worth up to 50 billion USD, that depend on Saddam staying in power and UN sanctions being removed. That’s why France tried to sponsor the removal of the sanctions 2 years ago after only 6 months previous to that signing the agreements. Germany on the other hand really does appear to be partly sincere, but also as if it is playing along with France to maintain a consistent EU face. Yes, exactly. That is a connection I completely believe. The US has already promised Britain (and Spain) a piece of the action they are sure to get. Giles wrote: Finnaly, and I quickly read one of the links. The US does not contro oil prices and never will. They are control by OPEC and oil is sold largely though the International Oil Exchange based in London down by St. Katherines Docks. A quiet building, as they don't advertise. U.S. (nay the Bush family/oil industry) interests in the Middle East is far more diverse than what the American public currently believes. It's not about removing a horrible dictator. It's not about defending America from terrorism. As I've argued, the terrorist acts in the last 10 years are due to the Bush family's administration policies. Some of it is retribution and a personal war for Bush idiot number two. "He tried to kill my daddy!" Most of it, however, is to further their own agenda and push their own policy. The points that the American public hears and reads about in the tightly-controlled news are those that will win support. Ty
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Albert Einstein