Major tsunami

[groove_04]

There was a big earthquake in Indonesia's island of Sumatra, causing a major tsunami, or tidal wave, to hit Sri Lanka, India, Thailand and Malaysia.
Sri lanka was hit the most, leaving a couple of hundred dead.
It's the worst thing to happen in 40 yrs, and the Sumatran earthquake is reported to ve the 5th strongest in history

[indie]

Very sad news indeed.

[file cabinet]

links to news articles...
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=360616
http://www.swissinfo.org/sen/swissinfo.html?siteSect=143&sid=5430134
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/26/1437228&tid=99
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=644107

[Claverhouse]

It's the worst thing to happen in 40 yrs
Sad, but living under the current Indonesian government is worse.

And the BratPack Genre was pretty bad.



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[jimkopelli]

Wasn't mush else on NPR today that wasn't about this... but hey, what can you do but hope there won't be another one for a while?...

[spirilis]

What happened geologically around that region?
Someone said a plate was raised 10 inches...?

[Edmond Zedo]

Sad, but living under the current Indonesian government is worse.
So it was the best thing to happen in 40 years? Cheers!

[Anacaona]

I hope they will install something under the water (I don't know what it's called) to alert them if one is coming...

[Edmond Zedo]

I hope they will install something under the water (I don't know what it's called) to alert them if one is coming...
Mm, yeah, they use canaries for that. My dad used to work in a seashell mine, so he knows a lot about oceanic seizmography.

[crule81]

I'm getting depressed since everytime I refresh the my yahoo page, the death toll seems to climb by several thousand.

[Robespierre]

I'm getting depressed since everytime I refresh the my yahoo page, the death toll seems to climb by several thousand.

Fucking knock it off then! Geezus, leave those poor people alone!

[joft]

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 30 (Bernama) -- The death toll in Acheh, the region worst hit by last Sunday's tsunami, may exceed 400,000 as many affected areas could still not be reached for search and rescue operations, Indonesia's Ambassador to Malaysia Drs H. Rusdihardjo said Thursday.

[Groty]

I am sooo pissed about this situation.

What is there to talk about? HUH? Just do it! Just go in there and help the people. No Summit's needed. No UN Resolutions. Just get you're damned hypocritical asses in there and help the people.

The US, Britain, France and Australia should have had ships en route immediately. Send in Amphibious Assault (http://www.wasp.navy.mil/general.html)ships with the resources to operate in such situations. Loaded with Helicopters and Landing Craft, these ships could distribute and support aid operations efficiently. The US has 2 huge hospital ships. I doubt they are "in theater", get the damned things moving!!! Get the ships underway, fly the cargo into Australia or Hong Kong and start moving into the remote areas using the aircraft on the ships. Damn! I am frustrated. A fast reaction would cost a fraction of the operations in Iraq. Do it! Just help! Nothing needs to be discussed, period!

Oops! Politics is involved so maneavuring must take place. What a wonderful world we live in today.

I must wonder though. If Sri Lanka and Indonesia were predominately Christian states, would the reaction have been different??? Don't wanna be an ass hole, just proposing the question.

So what is gonna happen? What could happen? China could jump in, dive in, head first and start supplying aid to their neighbors. The Saudi's, Iran and other "Muslim" states could move more efficiently to save people's lives. I'm all for it! Do it! Bushy wouldn't like that though, would he?

The country that saves the people, helps the people the most, wins their hearts and minds. Hmmm... I'm sure Cuba has doctors on the way!!!

[Edmond Zedo]

The country that saves the people, helps the people the most, wins their hearts and minds. Hmmm... I'm sure Cuba has doctors on the way!!!
"Pas de cadeaux!" --The Cannibal

[Groty]

"Pas de cadeaux!" --The Cannibal
Yale? Skull and Bones are ya?

Life is a gift at birth, after that, it is humanities responsibility to sustain it and recognize it for what it is.

[Edmond Zedo]

"A! Small boy. Small boy." --Eddie Quaye

[Shai Gar]

okay windows restarted without telling me when i was almost finished my last post so here goes

[Shai Gar]

UN A.I.D. Ships should have been in place to help after the reports

Ambulance Intrastructure & reDevelopment
not yet created but i am working on designing one so that the UN can have something to work from.

they are adapted US battleships (not sure what type yet) that are fitted out as a major hospital and supply ship. it will be able to put temporary structures in place such as; Field hospitals, housing, soup kitchens, schools, places of worship and supply dumps. the AID engineering staff should set to work immediately to rebuild whatever was destroyed.

that is as far as i got last time and i am currently searching for the original duke nukem warez game for my computer so if anyone else has ideas then shoot

[Edmond Zedo]

i am currently searching for the original duke nukem warez game for my computer so if anyone else has ideas then shoot
"I don't have time to play with my self..."

[garak]

Warning: Please don't misinterpret this as a Bush hating whiner grasping at straws. I don't like Bush, but the people who constantly bitch about him and come up with conspiracy theories annoy me as much as anyone else.

That said..

I wonder if the Bush administration could really make this work in their favor? With the public's opinion of Iraq getting worse and worse, they could really focus on helping out the situation over in the Indian ocean. Although that would require a pretty long-term involvement. But I wonder if that's what will happen anyways? I mean this is not exactly an event that you can clean up in a few weeks or months. Maybe all of the focus on the area will actually cause it to become more developed in the end? Or maybe the opposite. Maybe there will be a lot of people from the area emigrating? I wonder what the long term effects will be.

(hmm, there is a weird alternating sentence pattern in here that reads really oddly. oh well)

[Groty]

Warning: Please don't misinterpret this as a Bush hating whiner grasping at straws. I don't like Bush, but the people who constantly bitch about him and come up with conspiracy theories annoy me as much as anyone else.

That said..

I wonder if the Bush administration could really make this work in their favor? With the public's opinion of Iraq getting worse and worse, they could really focus on helping out the situation over in the Indian ocean. Although that would require a pretty long-term involvement. But I wonder if that's what will happen anyways? I mean this is not exactly an event that you can clean up in a few weeks or months. Maybe all of the focus on the area will actually cause it to become more developed in the end? Or maybe the opposite. Maybe there will be a lot of people from the area emigrating? I wonder what the long term effects will be.

(hmm, there is a weird alternating sentence pattern in here that reads really oddly. oh well)
Well... I don't think Indonesia wants to be Americanized. In fact, I don't know if they want to take any sides politically, be it a stronger tie to the US or a stronger tie to North Korea and China. Indonesia is a "Muslim" state, which is bad according to the ultra-conservatives. They are quite unique and have many different cultures under one nation.

Regardless of the political ramifications, they are humans just like us. They bleed red. Government's need to get past the "what's in it for me" and "how can we spin this" mentality and just help them. Bottom line.

No, that's not going to happen. I also think that most governments don't see much potential when it comes to the "what's in it for me" and "how can we spin this" mentality. The West in not going to help them much. It will come down to the Asian states for significant assistance and Economic Recovery. In 2 weeks, the UN is going to be focused on non-existant Iranian Nukes again.

Sad world....

[Edmond Zedo]

With the public's opinion of Iraq getting worse and worse, they could really focus on helping out the situation over in the Indian ocean.
Believe it or not, there was meaning behind my statement "Pas de cadeaux (No gifts)". It was said by Eddy Merckx, aka The Cannibal, to Lance Armstrong during the 2004 Tour de France. In the past, Armstrong had let his rivals win stages of the Tour as a generosity, because he had already demolished the General Classification. But those he let go were not thankful, and even insulted him, calling him a liar and arrogant. In 2004 he was merciless.

This translates to world politics, as whatever the USA seems to do with perfectly good intentions is taken as Imperialism by the masses of morons, and does us little good as a nation.

[Anacaona]

. Maybe all of the focus on the area will actually cause it to become more developed in the end? Or maybe the opposite. I doubt that it will make the aera more developped... I don't know, tourism was an important part of these countries' economy. But now nobody will want to spend their vacations there...
Maybe the international help will help them but not in the long run... And India refused international help...

[Groty]

And India refused international help...
Of course they did. They are a SuperPower. India asking for help is almost like the US asking for help. India is very independent in every aspect. Hell, there has been talk of adding them to the biggies in the UN Security Council, full veto rights. Just have to figure out who should be number 7 to make it an odd number.

[Shai Gar]

first off, indonesia is not independant they are an american colony in south east asia, they have been ever since a cia backed coup placed surharto in power and they have been backed financially and militarily by the united states and australia once again since 1965. as soon as surharto kicked off in office his first act was genocide and he slaughtered almost a half a million people during his reign and american aid has been sent to indonesian armed forces in bulk immediately following the slaughter of landless peasants.


Well... I don't think Indonesia wants to be Americanized. In fact, I don't know if they want to take any sides politically, be it a stronger tie to the US or a stronger tie to North Korea and China.
believe it or not groty indonesia no longer has much choice whether or not they are americanised, they are an american client state.

[songbird36]

Agree with the above. Amongst other things Indonesia's invasion and annexation of East Timor in 1976 was supported and funded by the US, which then blithely turned a blind eye to human rights atrocities in both Timor, and Aceh (the latter province was struggling for independence since a treaty wrongly conferred it on Indonesia after independence).

But what's the point of acknowledging this? How's it going to help the Indonesians who are suffering right now?

[Shai Gar]

This translates to world politics, as whatever the USA seems to do with perfectly good intentions is taken as Imperialism by the masses of morons, and does us little good as a nation. Zedo because i respect your opinion in other things i might seem a little harsh in this, but it is only because i believe you to be a fairly smart individual who should know better.

what the fuck are you fucking smoking? are you on crack? jesus fucking christ you moron there is very little the american government does with good intentions. america has not said that they are an empire but by imperial definition they fucking well are and thus your nation is imperialistic.

EMPIRE




A political unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations and ruled by a single supreme authority.
The territory included in such a unit.

http://www.cis-ca.org/muzaffar/qnotes/2004/american_client_states.htm
and
http://question-everything.mahost.org/Socio-Politics/American_Empire.html

there is no goddamn excuse for your ignorance in this matter as you "apparently" live in the worlds most free society. after finland, holland, norway, newzealand, denmark and others of course. you have access to many books on the topic that are generally denounced by your nations facist leaders as being leftist apoligists for terrorism and communists and other such blatantly pathetic insults.

what does all democracy good is political dissidence
dissidence

n : disagreement; especially disagreement with the government
n : disagreement, as of opinion or belief; dissent.

and


democracy

n 1: the political orientation of those who favor government by the people or by their elected representatives 2: a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them

in democracy all government is by those who are elected to fulfill the will of the people. so the people are in power via their elected officials, which means dissidence is the rule, if the people disagree with those in power those in power are to bend to the will of the people not the other way around. if it is the people bending to the will of the people in power then that is called a dicatorship.

In all of americas history i cannot find one altruistic act.


And this does not help the indonesian people but nothing much can help the indonesian people. this is simply helping people understand the world so that in the future the world CAN be changed to help all the people in the third world

[Edmond Zedo]

You've misinterpreted what I said as being a stance derived from conscience. I was directly responding to a statement about the perception of the USA by those outside it. I don't think US assistance would help its image.

[Shai Gar]

k

[Claverhouse]

I'm just waiting for the internet to start claiming Wee Georgie Bush set it off, as with the 911 claims...



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[melancholeric]

He didn't? I cant believe that. Who was it then?

[Shai Gar]

no georgie boy did not set the 11-9 event off. osama bin laden set it off to further his finances that george bush's friends control.

you see osama's company in the USA bought billions of war bonds prior to the 11-9-01 event and because of the world trade centre attack his bond price went up a shitload. i would not be in the least bit suprised if he has sold them.

the tsunami is simply a natural disaster that the bush backed regime in indonesia will use to force the indonesians in the area to stay under indonesia's soverignity

[melancholeric]

the tsunami is simply a natural disaster that the bush backed regime in indonesia will use to force the indonesians in the area to stay under indonesia's soverignity
No it isn't. Dubya did it. He's the root of all evil on earth. Mark my words, in a few years we will have all the supporting evidence to convice anyone.

[songbird36]

lol

I don't think my chair's gonna hold me much longer...

[mgb]

Zedo because i respect your opinion in other things i might seem a little harsh in this, but it is only because i believe you to be a fairly smart individual who should know better.

what the fuck are you fucking smoking? are you on crack? jesus fucking christ you moron there is very little the american government does with good intentions. america has not said that they are an empire but by imperial definition they fucking well are and thus your nation is imperialistic.


It goes against almost every fibre of my being to do this but to some extent I have to agree with Zedo. And some of the posts above show why. I think there is a risk of people saying that the US is "after" something when it helps out other countries. I actually tend to think that Bush may actually be somewhat alltruistic here with his support (some of which will be spent searching for the thousands of missing americans, good for the goose and the gander here I guess).

I think the US should give its support but I can see why they might be hesitant to.

It is too bad that things like this get politicized.

[Shai Gar]

It goes against almost every fibre of my being to do this but to some extent I have to agree with Zedo.
it goes against almost every fibre of your being to acknowledge that you actually agree with someone that you agree with?


I think there is a risk of people saying that the US is "after" something when it helps out other countries. there isnt much danger of that, the US leaders dont JUST help out other countries without cause. the US people tend to want to, but not their leaders.


I actually tend to think that Bush may actually be somewhat altruistic here with his support. no, he really doesnt care. i will back that up if forced to.


I think the US should give its support of course you do you are a decent man and believe in helping others


but I can see why they might be hesitant to. yes i can too, after all spending 16 million US a day (5,840,000,000 per year) on isreal so they can keep palestinian territory that they have stolen is one thing, but spending more any more than 35 million dollars on this tragedy would certainly be an inhuman waste of funds

[melancholeric]

To actually contribute something worthwhile to this, here is some (http://www.killsometime.com/video/video.asp?video=Tsunami-Footage-1) video (http://www.killsometime.com/video/video.asp?video=Tsunami-Footage-2) footage (http://www.killsometime.com/video/video.asp?video=Tsunami-Footage-3) of the tsunami, that you may find either disgusting or interesting, depending on your taste.

[Shai Gar]

i am actually masturbating now, thank you you bastard. i opened that in a childrens library. you have fucked up these childrens minds forever. once again thank you

:)







actually ive seen this one before, it is bad, but what is almost incomprehensible are the 3 australians who went a few days later stayed in a hotel there in aceh and spent their time working on their tan instead of helping out the victims. i read in an article yesterday,sunday the 2nd that an american geologist predicted it but didnt think it would be of harm to anyone, i really feel for that poor bastard but i know that this will give him the foreknowledge for next time. at least some good came out of it

[melancholeric]

i am actually masturbating now, thank you you bastard.

That is the most interesting thing I have heard the whole day. No, week, actually.

[Shai Gar]

thank you for your astounding contribution there

[relaxo]

what the * are you * smoking? are you on crack? jesus * christ you moron there is very little the american government does with good intentions.

Of course you are only concerned about intentions, not results. That is poor INTP.


america has not said that they are an empire but by imperial definition they * well are and thus your nation is imperialistic.
EMPIRE

A political unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations and ruled by a single supreme authority.
The territory included in such a unit.

Sounds like any nation really doesn't it.
Of course American doesn't control Indonesia, it influences it. Just like the UN influences, China influences, every nation does.

As for East Timor, better under Indonesia at that time than under the USSR. Portugal gave up the territory because of regime change and it was tired fighting the communists.
And the USA did condemn the violence in Indonesia. Did anyone else, or is America the only nation you need to criticize? You mistake America as being just a government and not a people.

Your opinons and language are barely worthy of being INTP.

[Shai Gar]

i must not be intp because i have researched something and decided to put my fact based opinions down in an undetailed manner hoping that other people might have the brains to look for themselves as opposed to getting all offended and blurting out something to make me seem less of a human to you.

[/sarcasm]

america controled the previous indonesian administrations through "aid packages" that went to the indonesian army and the indonesian army then commited massacres of landless peasants from 1965 through to.. oh right they still do. only thing that has changed is that australia now controls a larger portion of the indonesian administration because of its thousand million dollar aid package. and now australians will have to bear a bigger portion of the blame for the human rights violations that go on in indonesia (for more information see the journal 'indonesia' which is published in australia). and no that definition of empire does not sound like any nation, for instance new zealand, tonga, samoa, myanmar, mongolia, haiti, and so i dont go on forever i will mention one last nation, lichtenstein. If you would dig deeper into international affairs you would see that what i am mentioning has not been intentions but horrific results, much more horrific than this tsunami. certainly the US may have condemned the violence in indonesia, the violence on the part of the rebels certainly but i have it on very good standing that they appauded the widespread use of military violence to put down such leftwing radicalist things as independance and peace. the US government continues to support the indonesian government, one of the current president first acts was to make it legal for high ranking officers in the army to be serving in government while they are still in the army. i believe that this is illegal in the united states, australia and britan (to name a few) so as to prevent military dicatorships.

to address your horrendous statement that my opinions nad language are barely worthy of being an intp i have this question to ask; have you read much of what being an INTP means? it is simply to have a psychological mindset, it does not mean i must bow down to an authoritarian conservative political stance that my values do not allow me to agree with. infact INTP people can be very stubborn with their value systems.

i must also mention that your subversive generalising statements are very much in tune with the facism of the cold war era russian propaganda (and in fact pre world war 2 through to modern day american propaganda).

it is sad.

[Dman]

FYI - From The Wall Street Journal, January 10, 2004:

"The defining moment came early in the crisis, when a weeping man in Aceh, Indonesia's isolated and most militantly Muslim province on the northern tip of Sumatra, sobbed to a CNN interviewer: "Where is America?" Ordinary people often understand underlying patterns of power better than most intellectuals. This grief-stricken Acehnese was not accusing America but offering an object lesson in how the world, especially Asia, really works. For he did not ask "Where is the U.N.?" Still less would it have occurred to him to cry: "Where is Saudi Arabia and the principle of international Islamic solidarity?"

Instead the man understood that when there is real trouble, you look to America, and its allies and friends, especially such fellow democracies as Japan and Australia. The U.S. immediately convened a core group of nations to coordinate the early relief effort. The identity of the core group tells us much -- India, Japan and Australia, three democracies, two of them formal military allies of the U.S. It would surely have been inconceivable to even the most imaginative Pentagon scenario writer to think that U.S. and Australian soldiers would be conducting large-scale joint operations in Aceh, the site of an ongoing, fierce Islamic separatist rebellion in Indonesia. Yet it was U.S. military helicopters which first brought relief to survivors there.

* * *
So lesson No. 1 is that it is the U.S. and its alliance system which counts for most in Asia. China's absence from the core group was notable. There has been much angst in Western foreign policy circles in recent years arising from the view that China is the most powerful force in Asia. The tsunami shows this analysis to be wildly premature at best. China has played a kind of brilliant confidence trick by getting the world to evaluate it today at its own estimation of its potential position in two or three decades. China is an important nation and it has responded to the tsunami constructively, with a modest aid package. But the tsunami shows the limits of China's influence. It doesn't have the money, the allies, the adaptable and deployable military, the confidence of neighbors, the culture of compassion, or the diplomatic clout to lead a relief effort in the way the U.S. has done."

- Mr. Sheridan, foreign editor of The Australian, is a visiting fellow at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington and author of "Cities of the Hot Zone" (Allen & Unwin, 2003).

[glassmoon]

hey, has anyone saw the program about the mega-tsunami? http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2000/mega_tsunami.shtml

[Shai Gar]

im not even going to bother explaining how that post 2 above this one is a load of trot whether or not you quoted mr sheridan

[Dman]

im not even going to bother explaining how that post 2 above this one is a load of trot whether or not you quoted mr sheridan

lol...

I was curious as to your reaction, beings it was written by an Australian...

Would you bother to explain why you believe it is a "load of trot"?

[Shai Gar]

because the man himself didnt explain what he meant. he could have been blaming america for their continued involvment in the supression of the peasants in indonesia and with the arrival of CNN and FOX he sees their media but not their help. it has long been my idea that you should never interpret anyone elses art/words/meaning for them especially if they are still alive and can be questioned on it.

not to mention that while the australian is australia's premier newspaper it is also australias conservative flagship. and Mr Sheridan is a biggoted cunt who supported the timor gap treaty in its revision (hell so is Chris Mitchell). most of the time it can be relied upon for decent and unbiased reporting but in certain stories it toes the government and american government lines

[Dman]

because the man himself didnt explain what he meant. he could have been blaming america for their continued involvment in the supression of the peasants in indonesia and with the arrival of CNN and FOX he sees their media but not their help. it has long been my idea that you should never interpret anyone elses art/words/meaning for them especially if they are still alive and can be questioned on it.

not to mention that while the australian is australia's premier newspaper it is also australias conservative flagship. and Mr Sheridan is a biggoted cunt who supported the timor gap treaty in its revision (hell so is Chris Mitchell). most of the time it can be relied upon for decent and unbiased reporting but in certain stories it toes the government and american government lines

I see.

Regardless of Mr. Sheridan's opinions, however, I believe the point was that as much as these countries love to gain popularity with their own people by bad-mouthing the US all the time, when it comes down to a crisis, when they really need help, who steps up to the plate. Not their so-called "allies", who really could care less because they have nothing to gain from it. No, the US & company steps up, both for reasons of politics (so the gov looks like they really "care") and for the simple reason that most american people truly do care about people regardless of who they are and will jump at the opportunity to help those who have been stricken with tragedy.

The other point was that China, for all it's posturing as the next superpower, could not logistically pull off the relief effort, shining some light on their true state of affairs.

There was more to the article, specifically about Saudi Arabia, in how that gov contributes hundreds of millions of dollars to the anti-west, pro-radical islamic movements in Indonesia and surrounding areas, yet could only muster up a fraction of that to help with this terrible tragedy. Just shows where the priorities lie.

Whether or not anyone believes the intentions of the US goverment are genuine or not, the simple fact is at least they are contributing a huge amount of resources and aid. At the end of the day I think that's more important than the politics behind it anyways, no?

[Claverhouse]

Without in any way depreciating the vast efforts made by the generosity of both the USA and it's people, I find that a major source of annoyance felt by non-Americans is the unfounded belief that America gives more, not only for these events but in 'supporting' the rest of the world financially [ EG: 'If it wasn't for our money and power and selfless support they'd all be Communist, Nazi or Broke without us: we should cut off the supply of 'our' money to these ingrates and let them all sink' Excepting Is-Ray-Al no doubt... ].

In this case, America's giving and help is dwarfed by that of other countries, especially Australia and Germany; they just don't mention it so loudly. And Australia's aid is more dictated by it's Asian neighbourhood than the fact that it is an ally of the USA.

Even per capita, the 02.95 giving of America and the 05.44 giving of GB is less than that of the Islamic states of UAE 07.92, Qatar 23.80, and Kuwait 44.30. Australia's 44.90 & Norway's top with 57.95 [ All in US dollars ].

But according to the cheerleaders like Mr. Sheridan, the whole thing rests on America and those who love the American Way.

I'm not criticising these amounts, particularly as I haven't given much, but the steadfast belief that the US and it's citizens support the rest of the world is untrue. Even back in the '40s this belief ( combined with the complaint that Americans are always being 'screwed' [ which he attributed to the American males' fear of being feminine ] by the lazy and jobless in Welfare, and Foreign Aid abroad, was noted by the anthropologist George Gorer ).


Figures here: Wikipedia Humanitarian Response (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanitarian_response_to_the_2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake)

[ Only just discovered Wikipedia through this board, so I'm not vouching for the figures; it may be an unreliable source generally for all I know. They do say that the data is on-going and subject to change [ rise ]: but not too much as regards the main patterns. Besides which, as time goes on people will start forgetting, so that goes both ways. ]



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Dman]

Yes indeed, it turned out to be a game, which country was "nicest" and could outdo the others. Either way, a nice result for the beneficiaries.

I can see the bristling is justified at american arrogance pulling the old holier-than-thou routine, i.e. we saved Europe during WWII etc. Again though, the main point was that countries that supposedly are on the side of the victim country often do not come to their aid when a crisis strikes, but rather the expectation is that the US come to their aid, regardless of that particular country's opinion and actions towards the US. Of course, the argument could also be made that the US and allies can most AFFORD to provide the most aid. But in Saudi's case, that is not true. They can certainly afford more, but would rather pump money into the anti-west cause.

I would counter that the belief is that the US supports the rest of the world. Rather it's the double standard that the US should stay out of other country's affairs, to not act like the "world police", but when something goes wrong, then the story changes to "where is the US?" The phrase "fair weather friends" comes to mind. I think this is the steadfast belief with many americans - Foreign Country: "Mind your own business! Oh, but wait, I need help, please stick your blood and money in my business! Ok, now mind your own business again".

[songbird36]

In this case, America's giving and help is dwarfed by that of other countries, especially Australia and Germany; they just don't mention it so loudly. And Australia's aid is more dictated by it's Asian neighbourhood than the fact that it is an ally of the USA.

I'm not criticising these amounts, particularly as I haven't given much, but the steadfast belief that the US and it's citizens support the rest of the world is untrue.


Claverhouse :ph34r:

In this case not only untrue, but *patently* untrue. The aid figure being given by the US (which last time I looked was $350 m) is almost insultingly small given the relative wealth of the US versus other contributing nations. The same criticism could of course be levelled at the Arab states such as Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Qatar which have been equally stingy with their oil money, but in the case of the US I can't help feeling there's a strong political element in play.

After all it's not so long since the Australian Embassy bombing in Jakarta, and since a number of Indonesian Al Quaeda operatives were arrested in connection with the 9/11 attacks. Indonesia has long been viewed by the US as giving support to the Al Quaeda movement by allowing terrorist cells to develop and operate without official sanction.

Perhaps this is overly cynical, but as in the case of the US turning a blind eye to the genocide occurring in Darfur, I see this as yet another instance of politicking riding roughshod over humanitarian needs and concerns.

[crule81]

Well, the US did send an aircraft carrier along with supporting ships, which is a very expensive thing to do. Other nations cannot do the same because they do not have real aircraft carriers. I don't think just throwing money at some of the nations that have been affected by the tsunami is the most effective means of aiding those individuals who have been directly affected. I'm sure much of the hundreds of millions of dollars pledged will end up in the pocket of some government officials as tends to happen with aid to 3rd world countries. Direct aid is still the best way to do things.

[Shai Gar]

australia has deployed engineers amongst other regiments to the area. in fact the australian army/navy/airforce is generally the first in the area all the time with help. america does little to help, its government doesnt care. the world is not involved in a giving game of who is nicer than america, my parents gave 750 dollars and not because they want australia to seem nicer, they genuinely care.

direct aid is the best way, which is what the australian army is great at, the australian army, much like the british army, is an army of professionals, not criminals, and everyone learns a trade and uses this trade in the community to help out when relief is needed (blackouts, hurricanes, cyclones, general impovishment) by rebuilding, working in tandem with the ses (special emergency services) to clear up powerlines, and to build houses and infastructure. it was the first on the scene in indonesia and has not left since.

since america has been the biggest contributor of "humanitarian aid" since 1965 in indonesia (a majority, nah ALL*,goes to the military who slaughters the peasants) and the peasants know where it comes from and goes to because they feel the brunt of that military power. that man would not have been asking where is the US they are our friends. nor would he have been saying, where is the US they are the worlds most humanitarian nation (most third worlders burn the us flag because they know the US government is the main source of evil in the world). no we do not know why he is asking for the US but a very astute estimate of his feelings would be cynical grief and anger.

[Dman]

Perhaps this is overly cynical, but as in the case of the US turning a blind eye to the genocide occurring in Darfur, I see this as yet another instance of politicking riding roughshod over humanitarian needs and concerns.

Exactly what I was referring to with the "stay out of our business" then some crisis happens and it's "where are you, US?" The US is expected to solve the world's problems, but the US is not supposed to infringe in anyone's business. Plus, why is it the US's responsibility anyways? Where are all the other countries? Can't they get involved and solve the problem?

The moment the US gets involved in Darfur, we are seen as imperialistic and sticking our nose where it doesn't belong, etc. etc. However if we do nothing, then we're seen as cold, uncaring evil people. That's the reason it turns political, it isn't just the US making it political.

[Dman]

australia has deployed engineers amongst other regiments to the area. in fact the australian army/navy/airforce is generally the first in the area all the time with help. america does little to help, its government doesnt care. the world is not involved in a giving game of who is nicer than america, my parents gave 750 dollars and not because they want australia to seem nicer, they genuinely care.

The "game" I was referring to was the politicking between governments, not between individual citizens of those countries.


direct aid is the best way, which is what the australian army is great at, the australian army, much like the british army, is an army of professionals, not criminals, and everyone learns a trade and uses this trade in the community to help out when relief is needed (blackouts, hurricanes, cyclones, general impovishment) by rebuilding, working in tandem with the ses (special emergency services) to clear up powerlines, and to build houses and infastructure. it was the first on the scene in indonesia and has not left since.

I don't suppose the fact that Australia is right next to Indonesia had anything to do with why they were "first on the scene"?


since america has been the biggest contributor of "humanitarian aid" since 1965 in indonesia (a majority, nah ALL*,goes to the military who slaughters the peasants) and the peasants know where it comes from and goes to because they feel the brunt of that military power. that man would not have been asking where is the US they are our friends. nor would he have been saying, where is the US they are the worlds most humanitarian nation (most third worlders burn the us flag because they know the US government is the main source of evil in the world). no we do not know why he is asking for the US but a very astute estimate of his feelings would be cynical grief and anger.

Right, the corrupt governments in those third world countries have nothing to do with the "evil in the world", it's all the US.

Just like the UN's oil for food program, right? Most of the money for that was from the US, but I believe it was Saddam, not the US, who siphoned off billions (US term billions) to fund his own evil practices. But no, the US was the source of the evil. Wow, why would anyone want to live in the US?

[songbird36]

Darfur certainly isn't just a US responsibility - it's the responsibility of all countries (including the US) which have signed the convention against genocide. A recent update on the situation from a Sudanese news source:

"Jan. 12, 2005 |

Six months after British Prime Minister Tony Blair raised the possibility of British military intervention, the U.N. threatened sanctions and the United States declared that genocide was occurring, the international community is still failing to come to grips with the crisis in Darfur.


A recent U.N. Security Council report makes it clear that the conflict in western Sudan, which has so far cost 70,000 lives, displaced 1.7 million people and left 2.2 million dependent on aid, is far from resolved and may soon grow more acute. "A build-up of arms and intensification of violence, including [government] air attacks, suggest the security situation is deteriorating," U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said last week. Swift international action is required, he said. "

[Shai Gar]

Exactly what I was referring to with the "stay out of our business" then some crisis happens and it's "where are you, US?" The US is expected to solve the world's problems the US is not, noone wants teh US to solve all the worlds problems, the world wants the UN to solve all of the worlds problems, after all this is the reason why we pay UN dues


why is it the US's responsibility anyways? Where are all the other countries? Can't they get involved and solve the problem? it is not the US's responsibility. the only people who say that are morons and US government officials who are after an excuse to impose on a weaker nation


The moment the US gets involved in Darfur, we are seen as imperialistic and sticking our nose where it doesn't belong, etc. etc. However if we do nothing, then we're seen as cold, uncaring evil people. The US government controls Dafur, it could end the genocide with one word "stop". it chooses not to for its own reasons (which i will not go into here, if you ask me i shall go into them) thus it is a cold and uncaring nation. it could help the tsunami victums but why would it work against itself? the US protects its corporations and Nike is one of them, it has many sweatshops in the region and the region wants independance and minimum wage, american policy in these instances has always been to assasinate religious leaders, massacre peasants and stop free elections. this tsunami has killed many peasants who are currently fighting for independance (which will get them minimum wage at the very least. this is unacceptable to the US so it will not help the people on anything more than a token appeasement to the UN)


I don't suppose the fact that Australia is right next to Indonesia had anything to do with why they were "first on the scene"? americas battlegroups and military/naval bases ring the globe. if it wanted to be there it could have been within days


Right, the corrupt governments in those third world countries have nothing to do with the "evil in the world", it's all the US. of course they have something to do with it, they are clients of the united states, they work to keep basic liberties away. look at americas list of allies you will see some of the worlds biggest human rights offenders. also it is not the US people, the US people are generally very liberal and caring, however they are stuck in a political trap, the only two important parties have the same foreign policies


Just like the UN's oil for food program, right? Most of the money for that was from the US, but I believe it was Saddam, not the US, who siphoned off billions (US term billions) to fund his own evil practices. quite right saddam was an evil man, but evil is not always opposed by good, in this case the larger evil (US government) was opposing the smaller evil (saddam and his legitimate government). i believe that there were US sanctions on iraq which stopped his people from buying simple things like refigerators and simple medicine. medicine was a very important thing, without it many people died, but they were able to buy a lot of medicine from the al shifa pharmecutical plant in the sudan untill the US bombed the shit out of it. saddam had also managed, while he was not terrorising his own people, to gas whole villages of kurdish refugees who were living inside his borders. the thing you dont hear that often these days is that the US and Britan continued to be allied to him during all of this and saddam got his chemical weapons from George Bush Sr. but that was okay because he was at war with iran on behalf of the US. Iiran had done a naughty by the US, they had gotten rid of the Shah who had been put in place by a CIA coup after the Iranians had freely elected a good man (Dr. Mosaddeg) who would make their nation great again.

[gypseymothlee]

I was reading about humanitarian aid. Apparently, when natural disasters occur countries pledge the large amounts of money, but usually end up contributing a much smaller portion. I guess this means once the photo opportunities stop, so does the aid.

[Dman]

the US is not, noone wants teh US to solve all the worlds problems, the world wants the UN to solve all of the worlds problems, after all this is the reason why we pay UN dues

Money well spent, eh?


it is not the US's responsibility. the only people who say that are morons and US government officials who are after an excuse to impose on a weaker nation

The US government controls Dafur, it could end the genocide with one word "stop". it chooses not to for its own reasons (which i will not go into here, if you ask me i shall go into them) thus it is a cold and uncaring nation.

Wow, the US gov sure gets a lot of credit! They can barely keep control of Iraq after being there all this time, yet you actually believe the US could end genocide in some country at the snap of their fingers? That's impressive. Almost God-like.


it could help the tsunami victums but why would it work against itself? the US protects its corporations and Nike is one of them, it has many sweatshops in the region and the region wants independance and minimum wage, american policy in these instances has always been to assasinate religious leaders, massacre peasants and stop free elections. this tsunami has killed many peasants who are currently fighting for independance (which will get them minimum wage at the very least. this is unacceptable to the US so it will not help the people on anything more than a token appeasement to the UN)

Who's been filling your head with all that propaganda?! Do you think Addidas (a German company) does not have factories contracted over there as well? Or any other country's corporations/interests? Besides, what do you think their economy looked like before these businesses came about. Probably a utopia.

BTW - Nike does not own those interests over there. Those are all local, independent contractors who supply Nike and other international apparel companies. You need to do a little more studying on the subject. And what is minimum wage over there? The wages those people make in the factories are better than virtually any other job they can get. If they had their own minimum wage, they would be far exceeding it already.


americas battlegroups and military/naval bases ring the globe. if it wanted to be there it could have been within days

Probably too busy controlling other countries with their ubiquitous omnipotence.


of course they have something to do with it, they are clients of the united states, they work to keep basic liberties away. look at americas list of allies you will see some of the worlds biggest human rights offenders. also it is not the US people, the US people are generally very liberal and caring, however they are stuck in a political trap, the only two important parties have the same foreign policies

No argument there


quite right saddam was an evil man, but evil is not always opposed by good, in this case the larger evil (US government) was opposing the smaller evil (saddam and his legitimate government). i believe that there were US sanctions on iraq which stopped his people from buying simple things like refigerators and simple medicine. medicine was a very important thing, without it many people died, but they were able to buy a lot of medicine from the al shifa pharmecutical plant in the sudan untill the US bombed the shit out of it. saddam had also managed, while he was not terrorising his own people, to gas whole villages of kurdish refugees who were living inside his borders. the thing you dont hear that often these days is that the US and Britan continued to be allied to him during all of this and saddam got his chemical weapons from George Bush Sr. but that was okay because he was at war with iran on behalf of the US. Iiran had done a naughty by the US, they had gotten rid of the Shah who had been put in place by a CIA coup after the Iranians had freely elected a good man (Dr. Mosaddeg) who would make their nation great again.

No argument there either

[glassmoon]

Has anyone seen the program about the Mega Tsunami? http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2000/mega_tsunami.shtml

[Dman]

Has anyone seen the program about the Mega Tsunami? http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2000/mega_tsunami.shtml

Yeah, I saw it on the science channel. Pretty wild - half a kilometer high? Mind-boggling.

[Shai Gar]

They can barely keep control of Iraq after being there all this time, yet you actually believe the US could end genocide in some country at the snap of their fingers? That's impressive. Almost God-like. Iraq was invaded and there are people fighting for control of their nation, they will fight for a very long time to come, however they do totally control the interim government and could make it jump through burning hoops should it so ask. and the US controls the government in dafur, yes it could also make it cease the genocide there at the snap of its fingers just as it did in east timor just prior to the australian invasion


Who's been filling your head with all that propaganda?! Do you think Addidas (a German company) does not have factories contracted over there as well? Or any other country's corporations/interests? Besides, what do you think their economy looked like before these businesses came about. Probably a utopia.


BTW - Nike does not own those interests over there. Those are all local, independent contractors who supply Nike and other international apparel companies. You need to do a little more studying on the subject. And what is minimum wage over there? The wages those people make in the factories are better than virtually any other job they can get. If they had their own minimum wage, they would be far exceeding it already.

i was going to reply to these two but your ignorance is wearing me down. i am going to leave it for the moment with these two statements.

"Americans are unable to see why they are hated because of their nations media's self censorship, and their lack of access to reputable foreign news sources."

"If you werent so damned defensive you could learn without taking every goddamned thing so fucking personally. moron."

[Ghosteh]

Last I heard the death toll was mainly comprised of INTPs wallowing on this forum about how lame their life was

Then the tsunami ended their pain

Let us rjeoice

[kuranes]

k
Yes, my son?

k

[Shai Gar]

updated

[Dman]

i was going to reply to these two but your ignorance is wearing me down. i am going to leave it for the moment with these two statements.

"Americans are unable to see why they are hated because of their nations media's self censorship, and their lack of access to reputable foreign news sources."

"If you werent so damned defensive you could learn without taking every goddamned thing so fucking personally. moron."

Now, now! Don't get "so damned defensive"!

Are you leaving it for the moment so that you can take the time to study up on it, because you know I'm right? Me thinks so. If you're going to accuse someone of being a moron, at least have an intelligent statement to back it up. Otherwise, who is the moron? I find it amusing that you call me a moron, yet you can't back up your statements and instead try to change the subject.

I actually enjoy reading headlines from around the world, to get a holistic perspective. You know what? They're doing the same thing as our media. Just as other gov's are pretty much doing the same thing as the rest. Having said that, yes I agree that the US media doesn't do a very good job of being "objective". But the same could be said of other foreign media.

No, I think Americans can't see why we are hated because the majority of the people hold no ill will towards foreigners. You have to make a distinction between american people and the US federal gov't. Many americans DO see why our *government* is disliked, and in fact, at least 49% of americans also dislike the US federal gov!

[s]

America IS imperialistic and perhaps even a bit evil, but better the devil I know than another.

[Shai Gar]

i would prefer the devil i dont know, because this one has too long a track record of evil (going back to 1890, wounded knee) and their record just gets worse.

that is because the media is not free, and which foreign media sources do you read?

the rest of the world does hate america, america has sanctions on 52% of the worlds population in 1998 alone. america has abandoned the kyoto protocol and said it will up its emissions by 33% many nations need that protocol to survive. america copyrights indigeonous cures and plants and makes huge profits on them, generally these cures have been around for a few centuries and the plants as staple food in the natives diet, and the american pharmecutical companies give nothing back. as in the case of US Patent No. 5304718 in 1994 which gave two researchers the exclusive monopoly over the male plants of the traditional bolivian apelawa quinoa variety, and suddenly the andean people could not use a plant that was indigenous to their eco system, bolivian exports of the plant are prevented from US and EU markets, and to those who copyrighted it it is worth over a million US a year. that is just one of the many instances of US bio-piracy.

your media sources are not good enough, you should be watching/reading these for a decent balanced view, not that it would be balanced because american media never questions their government except on trivial things, and the independant free press of the world questions all governments all the time:
http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage
meh cant be arsed looking up more after that long post, will update later

[Shai Gar]

nor is your stance, you partake in no balanced reading for this subject.
Merryl wyn davies, noam chomsky and others are authors you should read if you want an educated view of the world. i read the whitehouse news bits, and cia released documents, also the released national security council documents. i dont think you have the ability to argue coherently without educating yourself, and since you live in the worlds "freest" nation you are free to buy whatever books you want to educate yourself, also the libraries have many books as well

[Dman]

i would prefer the devil i dont know, because this one has too long a track record of evil (going back to 1890, wounded knee) and their record just gets worse.

that is because the media is not free, and which foreign media sources do you read?

the rest of the world does hate america, america has sanctions on 52% of the worlds population in 1998 alone. america has abandoned the kyoto protocol and said it will up its emissions by 33% many nations need that protocol to survive. america copyrights indigeonous cures and plants and makes huge profits on them, generally these cures have been around for a few centuries and the plants as staple food in the natives diet, and the american pharmecutical companies give nothing back. as in the case of US Patent No. 5304718 in 1994 which gave two researchers the exclusive monopoly over the male plants of the traditional bolivian apelawa quinoa variety, and suddenly the andean people could not use a plant that was indigenous to their eco system, bolivian exports of the plant are prevented from US and EU markets, and to those who copyrighted it it is worth over a million US a year. that is just one of the many instances of US bio-piracy.

your media sources are not good enough, you should be watching/reading these for a decent balanced view, not that it would be balanced because american media never questions their government except on trivial things, and the independant free press of the world questions all governments all the time:
http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage
meh cant be arsed looking up more after that long post, will update later

I was primarily arguing your statements about US corporate interests in Indonesia, which you seem to be dodging, but I will let it go as I presume you spoke out of place.

As for the “world’s view” of Americans, again I believe you need to make a distinction between American citizens and Federal gov’t. American citizens don’t always understand why they personally are hated, but do understand in many instances why the fed gov is. And often agree.

Regarding media sources, contrary to what you may believe, there are many, many free sources of media right here within the US that do an excellent job of providing a relatively unbiased reporting of issues, as well as exposés. Typically these are small interests who have nothing to lose. Where you have to be careful is with the huge corporate media conglomerates, which usually have a large presence on the web (whereas the smaller ones don’t) and who typically have vested interests they must protect. I believe this is the case in many other “free” countries as well, and also includes Al Jazeera. I would generally agree that al jazeera typically provides a less biased argument regarding “western” interests, but at the same time are often slanted more towards Islamic interests. Just because they provide a more balanced view on one side does not mean a more balanced view from all standpoints.

Lastly, I would never simply take one or two media sources as the “real, unbiased” truth, even if they claim to question all world governments all the time.

[Sackanaka]

ehh, this is not political or relatively important for discussion purposes, but so as to avoid creating another thread...
http://www.snopes.com/photos/tsunami/tsunami3.asp#photo
(warning: not for necrophobes, if that's the right term for it :/)

[Shai Gar]

im a necrophiliac.

i thank you from the oozing bottom of my heart

[Shai Gar]

I was primarily arguing your statements about US corporate interests in Indonesia, which you seem to be dodging, but I will let it go as I presume you spoke out of place. well i didnt but it wasnt one of the stronger points of my argument.


As for the “world’s view” of Americans, again I believe you need to make a distinction between American citizens and Federal gov’t. American citizens don’t always understand why they personally are hated, but do understand in many instances why the fed gov is. And often agree. I! DO!! NOT!!! HAVE TO MAKE THAT DISTINCTION. i make that distinction as often as i can without appearing repetative, go back over my posts i already made that distinction. i can tell you straight out why the rest of the world hates the citizens of the US. because they are under the mistaken view that since america is a democracy its citizens are responsible for voting in a government that does this to the rest of the world without being stopped by the people. i know that the people have no ability to stop them but according to the definition of a democracy it is easy to see why many people hate the entire US. and that is extraordinarily hard because that involves hating oprah (not too hard for me), and all the other sensitive caring US celebrities. but hatred for the government and the people who elect them is a very strong and almost universal. and universal opinion has NEVER been reached on earth yet, but hatred for america is fast becoming the first.



Regarding media sources, contrary to what you may believe, there are many, many free sources of media right here within the US that do an excellent job of providing a relatively unbiased reporting of issues, as well as exposés. Typically these are small interests who have nothing to lose. Where you have to be careful is with the huge corporate media conglomerates, which usually have a large presence on the web (whereas the smaller ones don’t) and who typically have vested interests they must protect. I believe this is the case in many other “free” countries as well true, and it was at the back of my mind when i was making that statement but seeing as how the rest of the world rarely hears of them and they arent that big in the US i just went for it. i wont apologise but i am apologetic that i gave in to temptation and did it.

aljeezera often attacks islamic governments for their human rights abuses and is hated throughout the islamic world by despotic governments like saudi arabia, iran, eqypt, jordan and turkey, al jeezera is a very powerful source for honesty.

[Dman]

but hatred for the government and the people who elect them is a very strong and almost universal. and universal opinion has NEVER been reached on earth yet, but hatred for america is fast becoming the first.

Jealousy & scapegoating.

[Claverhouse]

Why jealousy ? Are you truly of the opinion that Shai Gar wishes he was an American ?

Or that he wishes Australia stands where America does ?

Or that he does believe that America/her people are well-meaning and the best last hope of the world, but refuses to admit it because of wicked envy ?



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Dman]

Why jealousy ? Are you truly of the opinion that Shai Gar wishes he was an American ?

Or that he wishes Australia stands where America does ?

Or that he does believe that America/her people are well-meaning and the best last hope of the world, but refuses to admit it because of wicked envy ?



Claverhouse :ph34r:

I was being a smart-arse as usual. I am unable to refute reasons why people hate americans.

Part of me believes it is due to the hypocrisy of what America claims to stand for and preach to the world about vs. what America actually does in practice. What agitates me is when people categorically characterize americans as inherently evil. America, and americans, do many good things in this world too. But, alas, the hypocrisy encountered tends to overshadow all else.

[Shai Gar]

it is the hypocracy with which america uses in the world, in other words, what you said.

i do not cast americans and their government in the same boat, i realise that the US is an oligarchy and partially aristocractic. americans are not inherently evil no human is, but the american government chooses evil over good nearly all the time, unless good can help their evil agenda.

i am not jealous of any american who has to live in that police state where dissidency is squashed by the FBI agency that recently got resurected. i am jealous of bush's having all that power, DAMNIT i am just as evil and willing to push a coathanger up my nose until i am as stupid. i prefer my nation, either AUS, NZ or Scandanavia, much nicer and much freer.

[Dman]

there is no goddamn excuse for your ignorance in this matter as you "apparently" live in the worlds most free society. after finland, holland, norway, newzealand, denmark and others of course. you have access to many books on the topic that are generally denounced by your nations facist leaders as being leftist apoligists for terrorism and communists and other such blatantly pathetic insults.

As for freedom, it is my understanding that Australia seems to have some troubles with its freedom of speech laws; in fact Australia does not even have a bill of rights, no? Fortunately your court ruled that freedom of speech was “implied”. Sounds pretty sketchy…I would hate to think of what would happen should the court decide to overturn that. Leaves a lot of gray area in the hands of the courts, for a critical human right, if you ask me.

In addition, the European Convention on Human Rights (which includes those European countries you mentioned) also has more restrictive rules than the US regarding human rights freedoms.



In all of americas history i cannot find one altruistic act.



Can you find one altruistic act of other nations…?

[MacGuffin]

In all of americas history i cannot find one altruistic act.
Can you find one altruistic act of other nations…?

Did we get anything for handing over the Panama Canal?

[Claverhouse]

Did we get anything for handing over the Panama Canal?
Or for stealing it in the first place ?



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[crule81]

Originally Posted by Shai Gar
In all of americas history i cannot find one altruistic act.


One could argue that Somalia was an altruistic act. Look what that got us - a bunch of our soldiers in body bags and a good movie.

[Claverhouse]

Yeah, but Bill still feels their pain.




Claverhouse :ph34r:

[crule81]

Or for stealing it in the first place ?

One could play that game (who stole land from whom) with almost any piece of land on this planet going back thousands of years.

[Claverhouse]

One could play that game (who stole land from whom) with almost any piece of land on this planet going back thousands of years.
Nooo. Confining it to his instance of generosity in giving the Canal to the pretend-nation which was set up solely in order to steal it from the previous owners.


Although too the US still had influence on the pretend-nation after giving it to them, influence amounting to possession, as shown by the fact that the president of that independent nation and sovereign state was arrested by the US from his presidential palace, brought back to face the wrath of his old CIA handler --- that ex-head of the state's secret service then installed as president of the US, Bush the First --- drugged to the eyeballs for his trial in the US, and is still residing in a US jail.

Who knows, possibly the salutary short sharp shock of a 40-yr sentence will eventually enable Manuel to discover that old-time religion. Should he truly repent, I'm sure the the son of the ex-head of the secret service, now president himself, a man who also knows God ( personally ), will renounce any vindictive passions and free a fellow-sinner with a presidential pardon.

It's not like he's the sort of fellow who would hold a grudge against anyone who had given offence to his father ( small capital ).




Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Dman]

My point to Shai Gar was how is this different from any other country. Can any country claim an "altruistic act" in its history? Why single out the US?

[Claverhouse]

My point to Shai Gar was how is this different from any other country. Can any country claim an "altruistic act" in its history? Why single out the US?
I've got to go now so can't think, although I believe there have been some spectacular acts of generosity sometime in history.

However, the reason that the US is singled out, is not merely that it is presently the paramount power, but that it, unlike virtually every other nation, including the French and the Chinese, consciously declares itself to be supremely moral and the possessor of the Only Way. That it's government and most of it's people do sincerely believe this.

It's a bit like one of those Deep-South preachers, only a bit more unctious and dominant, thundering that you shall be but saved only if you follow his lead, for he is truly good, and then finding out that he's the Robert Mitchum preacher.



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Dman]

Hmmm....seems to me that a lot of Islamic nations claim moral supremacy and possession of the only way...and from what I've read, the Chinese are becoming quite nationalistic and believing they are also superior...

The US has also only existed for a couple of centuries, so one would have to find another nation which was acting in "altruistic" ways during its first few centuries to really do a comparison...remember, the US has only been a "superpower" for a brief amount of time, in the grand scheme of things.

But - I see your point. However this was not always the case, just more so since "W" took head office. So to imply that the US has in its entire history been less altruistic while claiming righteousness, more so than other nations, is quite a stretch. Furthermore, Shai Gar was implying that the US' contributions were somehow less altruistic than other nations, although I'm not sure how.

Lastly, of course most US citizens believe its way is the only way, the US is the only superpower on the planet, right? Seems to be working better than the others so far!

[Hawkon]

Ok, I've rewritten my post 5 times now. Hope I'm not accusing you for too much (never meant personal, read "USA" as USA's government/leader/politics)

USA has since the end of WW2 been fighting an idealistic war all over the world. The fundamental reason was never democracy, but capitalism as in new markets to sell their own goods. Democracy was only "needed" for them to be able to back up the idealistic propaganda.

We've all seen examples on both hard power in Vietnam and Korea against the Soviet and soft power through Coca-Cola and GM. The "American" way is the right way. We're all happy and we see no reason to fight because we have everything we need - yet we invade a third world country now and then.

After getting that out, I want to ask one question: Why haven't USA invaded China? They're the strongest (and most dangerous) enemy of USA's ideal we have today. Are they afraid to bring their battle home?

I can see no reason why fundamental muslims wouldn't want to accuse USA for their politics. (Do NOT misunderstand me, I do not support terrorism). I'm just saying USA screwed up in the 20th century. (From helping Taliban to Iraq#2).

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time, as a metaphore, fits nice into this.

[Dman]

Ok, I've rewritten my post 5 times now. Hope I'm not accusing you for too much (never meant personal, read "USA" as USA's government/leader/politics)

USA has since the end of WW2 been fighting an idealistic war all over the world. The fundamental reason was never democracy, but capitalism as in new markets to sell their own goods. Democracy was only "needed" for them to be able to back up the idealistic propaganda.

We've all seen examples on both hard power in Vietnam and Korea against the Soviet and soft power through Coca-Cola and GM. The "American" way is the right way. We're all happy and we see no reason to fight because we have everything we need - yet we invade a third world country now and then.

After getting that out, I want to ask one question: Why haven't USA invaded China? They're the strongest (and most dangerous) enemy of USA's ideal we have today. Are they afraid to bring their battle home?

I can see no reason why fundamental muslims wouldn't want to accuse USA for their politics. (Do NOT misunderstand me, I do not support terrorism). I'm just saying USA screwed up in the 20th century. (From helping Taliban to Iraq#2).

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time, as a metaphore, fits nice into this.

First - don't construe my postings as me being offended, even if I sound aggressive or agitated - I enjoy the intellectual stimulation!

Second - the US hasn’t “invaded” China for the simple reason that it would not be in the US best interests. What is in the best interests is to gradually penetrate the market with the US capitalist system, which is what is happening. US business salivates at the idea of a billion potential customers.

The dollar seems to be the one thing that unifies and motivates people, more so than government dictatorships or religion. So the US wants to share this idea (and thus make more money itself) with the world and get everyone in the action. Obviously not everyone sees it this way, but that’s usually because they aren’t making money themselves yet. The US knows that once capitalism takes hold in China, they will be all over it - they stand to make a ton of money as well as improve their standards of living.

[Hawkon]

First - don't construe my postings as me being offended, even if I sound aggressive or agitated - I enjoy the intellectual stimulation!

Second - the US hasn’t “invaded” China for the simple reason that it would not be in the US best interests. What is in the best interests is to gradually penetrate the market with the US capitalist system, which is what is happening. US business salivates at the idea of a billion potential customers.

The dollar seems to be the one thing that unifies and motivates people, more so than government dictatorships or religion. So the US wants to share this idea (and thus make more money itself) with the world and get everyone in the action. Obviously not everyone sees it this way, but that’s usually because they aren’t making money themselves yet. The US knows that once capitalism takes hold in China, they will be all over it - they stand to make a ton of money as well as improve their standards of living.

Please, I did not attack you.. I was afraid of being looked at as the attacker :)
(I'm in this for the chat, my thoughts and ideas may run too far sometimes; if then, please ignore :D)

USA hasn't invaded China for the simple reason: fear. China is the "last communist", the problem is China's too big for the west (read: USA + its lackeys in europe) to handle. That's why we're seeing more and more soft power "penetrating" into China now, because it's the safe way.

There was a time when China had its borders closed, at least that's not the case any more.

I'm not protecting communism, I'm just criticising the fact that USAs method of promoting capitalism can be far worse than a communistic leader running a country under his iron fist.

For the record; I'd rather keep being a capitalist than a communist ;)

[Shai Gar]

*reserving right to post right here, i am gathering evidence for my post*

[Dman]

USA hasn't invaded China for the simple reason: fear. China is the "last communist", the problem is China's too big for the west (read: USA + its lackeys in europe) to handle. That's why we're seeing more and more soft power "penetrating" into China now, because it's the safe way.

I strongly disagree. There is no reason to fear China, at least right now. The US sees China as an opportunity, not a threat. Why waste the human life and resources on attacking a country when the loot can be had in a much easier, less costly fashion? War is not cheap, but selling Mcburgers and computer chips is.


There was a time when China had its borders closed, at least that's not the case any more.

More evidence of why the US does not fear China. China is not isolating itself and being stand-offish towards the US like, say, North Korea. Now that's a country I would be willing to say the US is afraid of.


I'm not protecting communism, I'm just criticising the fact that USAs method of promoting capitalism can be far worse than a communistic leader running a country under his iron fist.

That's an interesting statement - could you elaborate on that?

[Dman]

*reserving right to post right here, i am gathering evidence for my post*

It better be good if you're making us wait this long

[Shai Gar]

heh, i forgot all about it

[Shai Gar]

here is the situation with my posting at the moment, my computers modem is not working properly as it is dialing me in and then knocking me off not letting me redial. (problem with the modem i need to fix when i find the driver). i have some small access to the libraries computers but i do not have any of my links here and i just cant think with lots of fucking children running around pissing me off. plus dads laptop is out of town at the moment with dad so i cant use it to make myself comfortable in a quiet room pumping out marilyn manson.

i apologise for not posting my arguments in a reasonable manner but i have not the time, the mood or the links.

[Dman]

here is the situation with my posting at the moment, my computers modem is not working properly as it is dialing me in and then knocking me off not letting me redial. (problem with the modem i need to fix when i find the driver). i have some small access to the libraries computers but i do not have any of my links here and i just cant think with lots of fucking children running around pissing me off. plus dads laptop is out of town at the moment with dad so i cant use it to make myself comfortable in a quiet room pumping out marilyn manson.

i apologise for not posting my arguments in a reasonable manner but i have not the time, the mood or the links.

No need to apologize or give explanations. Just say "you are right, I was wrong". Much faster.

[Shai Gar]

even though i am always right, i am humble enough to pretend