Ok, I see allot of people comparing the US to other countries. How do you base these comparisons? The US, unlike many other countries, is a diverse large country. Comparing the us to a small, homogeneous country, isn't it akin to comparing an apple to a bowl of fruit?

Darcaine

I think it is crazy to compare America to any other Country

We are a peaceful bunch of people unless we are provoked (and i would have to say we WERE REALLY PROVOKED ON 9/11)

We have made some mistakes in our past & want to forget them because some of them are too painful to remember.

We have evolved quite well since the separation from the British Empire

As i have said, we have made some mistakes in our past that we are not proud of.

Isn't it critical for us to remember our mistakes and understand what led us to make them?

I don't think we are trying to forget our mistakes, I think we are trying to rectify our mistakes.

Some take longer to rectify than others - but at least we try.

What country doesn't make mistakes?

All countries make mistakes during their spell in office.
America is no different.
It is, however, important to learn from them.

The question is this...........
How long does it take to learn?.

"Mad King George" learnt it the hard way when he refused to be bothered with "that troublesome little Colony" and concentrated his forces elsewhere.
That troublesome little colony grew up to be the most powerfull nation in history.

Mistakes.
So how many more are going to die due to mistakes?.
How many more Americans, British, Australian etc, before some lessons are learned.

This is a small and diverse World we are camped on and we have little choice but to get along, giving a little and taking a little and most importantly understanding.
America is in a unique position to be able to use its power to create a peacefull World without bloodshed and creating more enemys.
Look to the past and see the enemies others made through force.....learn from it.

My hope..........Alan

HA! Right. Just ask the people of Afghanistan or Kosovo or Rwanda or Panama or Albania or Guinea-Bissau or Haiti or Timor or Peru or Somalia or Libya or El Salvador or Iran or Mexico or Sudan or the Philippines or Grenada or Nicaragua or Laos or Venezuela or Congo or Colombia or Egypt or Serbia or Chile or Eritrea or Liberia or Cuba or Vietnam or - Korea or - Iraq.

I guess we're just easily provoked, huh?

Or, let's see, are the levelling of villages and the bombing of cities and the destruction of crops and the deposition or assassination of heads of state and the massacre of innocents just a few of our "mistakes"?

And what the hell are we doing to "rectify" such "mistakes" - apart from more levelling and bombing and destruction and deposition and assassination and massacre? WHAT exactly are we doing???

Actually Wertz, in Afghanistan right now the people are calling 911 the day of their liberation. But, really how can you learn from another country if that other country is not even close to being like you or having your diversity?

Darcaine

Alan, and the I would counter..Germany, Japan, Italy, Spain...and the list keeps going. The US used force on all these...and we get along now. Sounds like you need to re-think your argument.

Darcaine

wertz....

Albania?
Rwanda?
Eritrea?
Guinea-Bissau?
Mexico?

I've been involved in or closely followed most military conflict over the last 16 years or so, and I don't seem to remember levelling villages and massacring innocents in those countries....unless I missed something.

Sorry, DTOM, I did not mean to imply that we had leveled villages, bombed cities, destroyed crops, deposed or assassinated heads of state, and massacred innocents in each of the thirty-odd countries I mentioned. We have waged (undeclared) war, funded terrorism and/or human rights violations, supported oppressive regimes, and/or engaged in acts of lethal espionage in each of those countries and the destruction I mention has been involved in many of those engagements - like the ones you left off your list of questions?

For the record, I refer to Operations Nomad Vigil and Silver Wake in Albania (Cobra gunship helicopters fired on non-uniformed combatants with "no known casualties"); Operation Support Hope in Rwanda (primarily non-combatant, but JCET and IMET training to Rwanda Patriotic Front and Rwandan Patriotic Army actively engaged in the combat with the FPR) - Operations Guardian Assistance and Phoenix Tusk would also have involved Rwanda (as well as Uganda and Zaire); in Eritrea, our involvement has so far been limited to IMET training for security forces (since accused of human rights abuses) - this would also apply to Ethiopia; I concede Guinea-Bissau since Operation Shepherd Venture was primarily an NEO, but I like the name Guinea-Bissau so I put it on the list anyway; Mexico, apart from covert engagements in the War on Drugs, like Operation Zorro II, would be more historical - starting with the Battles of Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma in May of 1846 and culminating with the Battle of Chapultapec in September of 1847 (with just under 40,000 total fatalities) - which would also mark the beginning of American imperialism.

Perhaps we could come at this from a different direction?

What country do you think you would be feel better about being a part of? (I hate ending sentences with prepositions!)

But, it's not quite fair to select a country like Switzerland - 'cause they couldn't imperialize (like that new word?) if they wanted to. So you need to pick a country with either comparable capabilities or a history of the possibility of empire.

Afghanistan: One chance to prevent Soviet Expanison
Result: Bye Bye USSR

Afghanistan Part II: Cleaning what Clinton didn't bother to finish: Al-Queda
Result: WE CAN LISTEN TO RADIOS AGAIN & FLY KITES & TAKE OFF THE BURQAS!! YAY!!


Cuba: Oust Castro & his commies next door
Result: Blame the Democrat

Somalia (Bush SR.): Send in aid for people
Result: A-OK, all soldiers accounted for

Somalia Part II (Clinton): Take out the warlord that was stealing the aid
Result: Didn't arm troops enough, lost 18 troops, Al-Queda's first victory...THANKS WILLY

Rawanda: We didn't even go to Rawanda!

Kosovo: Get rid of the Genocidal madman
Result: he's now in The Hauge

Vietnam: Stop Communist Expansion
Result: Lost because a depressed LBJ just kept sending in troops, thinking that would scare the V.C.

It is true the United States has a postition in the world which is unlike every other country in the world. This however doesn't mean that we can't be better then we are now. The United States has done a lot of bad things. We have also saved the world from dictatorship and communism. I don't seem to remember the U.S. ever killing more innocent people then the other side in a war, ever.

We try not to kill innocents.

In Iraq, some civilians have been put in bunkers full of ammo

In Afghanistan, it's been like the war in vietnam, where everyone could be the guy that wants to kill you because the Taliban & AL-Queda have no uniforms. Plus, if the civilians would quit shooting in the air at weddings, then F-14's won't see that as hostile fire

Vietnam, the attack against the Taliban? the Gulf War?

Our civilian innocents in all of these theaters were almost all removed from threat while we carried out our activities. Even in theaters where we are trying to do right in war (i.e. Taliban & Gulf War) there are civilian casualties involved.

Gulf War: Saddam stuffs civilians in ammo bunkes...says they will "be safe"

Taliban: Put anti-Aircraft guns near civilian homes

Even if this is so does it make them less innocent?

YES YES YES (Basheva, calm down!)

'Intent' is always taken into account in law - and in the judgement of our fellow humans.

I do not mean to imply our guilt in those situations. I merely intend to point out that in war innocents die.

I have no gripes about our conduct in the Gulf War. The Afghanistan campaign needs a few more years to go by to get more complete information but I have no gripes about our conduct in the theater of war so far.

Now the Guantanamo black hole . . . that is a different matter.

Darcaine.

In the light of recent events I would suggest you remove Germany from the list.
Furthermore, the remaining three have voiced their opinion concerning UN ratification of Americas forthcoming escapade and refused to take part.

Getting along????...........you must be joking.

Yes, but you keep making the statement that we are the Imperialistic monster. Disagreeing on issues is a big difference from what you are stating. Please...make your point you are off topic also. please also note Germany, is a sovoriegn country able to make it's own decisions. Your argument is getting really weak Alan.

Darcaine

[quote=Darcaine,Jan 24 2003, 09:13 AM] In the light of recent events I would suggest you remove Germany from the list.
Furthermore, the remaining three have voiced their opinion concerning UN ratification of Americas forthcoming escapade and refused to take part.

Getting along????...........you must be joking. [/QUOTE]
Yes, but you keep making the statement that we are the Imperialistic monster. Disagreeing on issues is a big difference from what you are stating. Please...make your point you are off topic also. please also note Germany, is a sovoriegn country able to make it's own decisions. Your argument is getting really weak Alan.

Darcaine [/quote]
I was merely replying to your 'getting along' statement.

Could you please clarify these points for me please.
Dissagreeing on issues is a big difference from what you are stating.
I may be wrong but I felt I may just be dissagreeing with you.

Please...make your point you are off topic also.
Again I may be wrong but I was merely pointing out an anomaly in your statement.
I agree the original statement was a little off topic.

They are all soveriegn countries who do not agree with the war hence my remark "you must be joking" regarding getting along.
Germany and France in particular were politically abused by Rumsfeld for making a "soveriegn' decision.

I apologise for asking for clarification on some points but I have not yet reached the level of convolution nessessary for my mind to be clear on them.

Regards.....Alan

Darcaine, I'm with you on this one. Don't get used to it.

India is a large diverse democratic (in a way) nation, but they are also a fraction of our size and have 1 billion people.

The same principle of non-comparison can also help when we are trying to understand problems that other countries face - remembering that what works here might not work there.

I absolutely agree

The way a country conducts itself within it's soveriegn borders is their perogative.
We may not understand, or like their conduct but we must accept it.
Step outside those borders and it becomes a different problem.

Regards....Alan

Playing devil's advocate here...

Does this remain true if a country has a policy of racial apartheid? Or gender apartheid?

The only matter I would feel we are compelled to intervene militarily would be in situations of ethnic cleansing and severe human rights violations. Even then I would expect our leadership to seek approval from the U.N.

There are other struggles that, IMO, should be left to the people involved to do their own uprising and fighting against an oppressive regime. For instance, the treatment of women or even slavery in certain countries. This is something that can be addressed by public condemnation and the refusal to support that country with aid but it is still not enough to take it upon ourselves to attack.

The fact that we went to war with Afgahnistan and won gave us the opportunity to improve the treatment of women in that country but it was not a reason in itself to impose our values on them.

As I said..............The way a country conducts itself within it's soveriegn borders is their perogative.

Is it not true that race apartheid in South Africa eventually ran its course?.
Gender apartheid is rife among various countries we class as friends and, as always, will run its course.
It is for the people to change it, if they want to, not us.

Of course, all of this takes time and it may be uncomfortable to sit on our hands that long.

Regards.....Alan

Still playing devil's advocate....


Danya - may I ask - what is your definition of severe human rights violations? Is this not already occuring in many countries in their treatment of women - genital mutilation - virtual imprisonment - death by stoning - classed as 'non-citizens' - female infanticide?

Having the United Nations together on these issues (they already have a manifesto on it that is honored in the breach) is a worthwhile endeavor. However, in the case of gender apartheid there are so many countries with hopelessly poor records on this - I don't think it would ever be truly and actively addressed. Abuse of women falls under the heading of 'it's our tradition.' And, everyone shuts up.

(or should I be starting another thread - or is there already one?)


uh oh

I agree that the abuse of women in most countries is maddening. But, we can best lead by example and not force in those instances. The practices are best resolved from within their own culture especially when there is a history and ritual we may not understand or are simply insensitive to.

Many of these countries have been practicing their beliefs long before America was born. This is not to say that women's groups or peace organizations could not work to educate and help those in need.

None of the things you listed merit our military intervention. On the other hand escalating violence elsewhere might, with U.N. approval, justify the use of military force as in the case of Israel. The number of people killed since September 2000: 2,148 Palestinians and 687 Israelis.

America IS assisting in the case of Israel

Regards....Alan

No, I am not saying that military action should be taken against countries with civil rights abuses - it would be a world wide war.

We can lead by example in the fight for human rights. But we can also lead by pressure as in the case of South Africa. In the case of women, the US has a fairly good record in regard to women, comparatively speaking (there I stayed on topic )

But I would like to see us raise a huge outcry in the UN about these abuses - a constant and loud outcry. Just as the outcry was finally raised against South Africa and pressure was kept up, and even increased. They were denied even the privilege of being in the Olympics. Are the abuses against women less important than the abuses against Blacks? Where is the outcry?

As for comparing numbers of Palestinians and Israelis killed - I don't do body counts. All deaths are equally deplorable.

As for comparing numbers of Palestinians and Israelis killed - I don't do body counts. All deaths are equally deplorable.

The counts are not a way to give more importance to one and take away from the other. It's simply a way to understand the situation. Our actions (or non actions) in the Israeli conflict color everything we do in that region. We will be paying for our mistakes for a long time to come. Because Israel is killing thousands of people with weapons given to them by us we have blood on our hands as well. Ignoring the helpless cries of civilians being attacked by our 'close' friend Sharon and doing nothing gives us no credibility to point fingers and make demands over something like genital mutilation. When we refuse aid to China because of it's birth control practices we turn our actions into political blackmail and it doesn't go un-noticed.

Only when our own morals are respectible enough and our motives free of conflicted interests would we have any ability or authority to dictate moral policies for others. We have been too selective for too long and we have not been willing to do the things we expect of others.

Getting back on topic..what I'm saying is I see allot of finger pointing to small homogeneous countries. I hear people say, "hey look at so and so, they allow .......". Now, I am no specialist in sociology but, it would seem to reason that the US cannot really learn much from other countries in the ways of our culture and our VERY diverse country.

Darcaine

But, Danya Rome was not built in a day nor will some of these "cultural" things either. We live in a country were we can change things peacefully. I can't believe we live in the 21st century and we still have kings and dictators. But, once again on topic how can we compare ourselves to other countries? I mean really Amerca is pretty much made up from the whole world. I mean wouldn't it suck if you had to wear a shawl to cover your head every day?

Darcaine

Well, I would hesitate to say there isn't any other country from which we couldn't learn something. One can learn what not to do too.

Europe is becoming much more diverse and that includes the UK than it ever was. And they will have to learn to deal with that diversity, and perhaps they can learn something from us.

Learning is never finite.

If America stopped flaunting, and ignoring, UN resolutions perhaps the international communities voice would have some clout.
As it stands America is pushing it's power to the edge of the envelope and already alienating many powerful members of the UN let alone the security council.

Dont expect to be loved by doing it.

Regards.....Alan

We still have things to learn from the larger countries like France and Italy. They have the history and the experience to teach us a thing or two, not that we willingly admit it. In that respect we are like a teenager that thinks it knows more than it's parents. After years of painful lessons the teen realizes that much grief could have been avoided if only he had listened.

I agree although I'm not sure what point you are applying the 'rome in a day' statement to.


I can't believe we live in the 21st century and we still have kings and dictators. But, once again on topic how can we compare ourselves to other countries? I mean really Amerca is pretty much made up from the whole world. I mean wouldn't it suck if you had to wear a shawl to cover your head every day?

If a country loved it's king/dictator and it was free of war and hunger it is not our place to dictate that their choice of governing styles is wrong. They may not want a 'free' country out of fear that the homeless and sick wouldn not be properly taken care of. Even our system has problems. Let people decide for themselves what best suits their needs. As for wearing a shawl it might be a nice fashion statement depending on my culture. If it's meant to make me subservient it would take more than a shawl.

Exactly right

I am British by birth and have lived in OZ for 30 odd years.
I find the same sorta attitude prevelant here, ie....."So who the hell are you 'Poms' to tell us what to do..you made a mess of it anyway"

Missing the learning curve isnt it?.
Or ignoring it.


Regards....Alan

What UN resolutions Alan? Please cite examples and references.

Darcaine

Let's put another another veggie into the soup in this thread.....

If America compares (according to some) so badly with the rest of the world, then how come so many people have voted with their feet to come here?

This diversity didn't get here by accident. An awful lot of people from a terrific variety of cultures/countries/climes and times (for about 300 years or so) have opted to come here. Only the Africans were brought by force. But in modern times lots of them have come too. My neighborhood has a large population of Somalians and Ethiopians. Well, actually my neighborhood has people from just about everywhere.

So, if this country compares so poorly why did these people opt to come here?

Personally I wouldn't be alive if it weren't for this country. And, I bet there are lots of people who can say that.

Love...good word. Would this be your definition, " Love, love of ones dictator is done through the brutal killing of any opposition followed by a gun pointed at you for you obediance."

Fascinating,

Darcaine

Yes Democracy has problems: Even communists & fascists can win the elections

Just look at Venezuala...democratic election & the result is a guy who is drunk in power & is talking about calling North Korea "A model to follow"

The diversity we enjoy was hard earned and not always painless. It is one of the things I am most proud of my country for. But it is a constant battle to keep the majority that have already benefited from trying to take the same opportunity away from the next generation of immigrants. There is a vocal and powerful portion of America that work to stop diversity and will never embrace the differences that make us the country we are. This can be seen in our arguments on things like affirmative action and immigration laws.

I could send you to the site(s) but I am not going to.

I consider it your responsibility to prove me wrong.


Do so.........

Regards.....Alan

It was a hypothetical. The point being that if a people are well taken care of and generally happy you do them no favors by forcing your way of life on them. You may, in fact, cause more chaos. What is this driving need that some American's have to dictate the American way of life on people that may be totally unsuited for it and often to force it against their will?

Speaking of Venezuala what role did we play in it's current problems?



I seem to recall another coup by our government that failed to oust a leader in Chili sometime last year. These are elected leaders that are overthrown and replaced with puppet regimes to further US agendas that are only working in the interest of the U.S. military or economy. We prevent a country from ever being a free to representative it's own interests and people above ours.

We preach government for the people by the people and then prevent it from occuring over and over again all over the world. So, please don't cry when the world isn't as impressed with our system of government and don't care to follow in our footsteps.

Try these for starters..

UN Resolutions 242, 383, 194, 181.

All ignored by America.

Who, besides radical fringe groups, is trying to take opportunity from LEGAL, LAW ABIDING immigrants?


Fine, then lets be consistant and ignore resolutions 660 through 1454 (minus a few that didn't pertain to Iraq.)
And while we're at it Security Council resolutions 713 through 1184, concerning the Balkans.

Maybe a little break from enforcing the will of the UN would put things back in perspective.

Is there anything with which the United States could be credited as being a positive force?

My answer is: many things. So I post again as I did earlier (a post which was ignored):

So this is what thread is supposed to be about?

I'm deleting all off topic posts from here on out. I'm not going to send you a nice little PM with a copy of it.