Is America Bad?

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 9:50 am

Bill Sikes wrote: "Charity begins at home". Perhaps you should stop all aid to poor people in

the 'States, as well. If they don't earn the money, obviously you won't want

to help them out, you're unlikely to meet any of them anyway. Perhaps you

could call on the army to go and shoot them.
god forbid you give some thought to what was written. far better to spit out some contempt and vitriol at any opinion that doesn't match your own.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 9:56 am

Heroine wrote: British troops down south in Iraq are talking to the locals, handing out toys and pencils and the likes and not getting shot. But the americans up north in their tight, rambo-esque convoys with big guns held at the ready are getting shot. Now all of a sudden, 650 Black Watch troops are needed to go and relieve 130 000 US soldiers....? Someone please explain that to me...
what a brilliant rhetorical turn. in the tradition of Bill Sikes, my rebuttal:

British "troops" down south in iraq are pretending to talk to the locals (sure, they all speak farsi, you bet!), handing out toys and pencils when the cameras are around, and not getting shot because their cowardly asses aren't within a thousand miles of the real conflict. But the americans up north, who are putting their lives on the line fighting the insurgents - you know, the ones with guns and mortars that are actually shooting back, rather than the cute little toddlers posed in front of the cameras for the gullible british public to see - the americans are the ones getting shot because they're the ones actually fighting, not hanging around behind the lines doing photo ops and having tea at four.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 9:58 am

anastrophe wrote: god forbid you give some thought to what was written. far better to spit out some contempt and vitriol at any opinion that doesn't match your own.

Well, that's another "Whoosh!", then.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 10:01 am

Suresh Gupta wrote: I have been thinking about your post. What you want me to do will require me to give examples of negative aspects of America and its people. I don't want to do this. It is not in my nature. There are many messages posted by other members which are doing the same thing. Will it not be better if you read all such posts and think about them with a positive attitude. I have always held in my life that the right thing is to look at ourselves from standing outside and looking at inside us.

I am sorry but I am unable to act as per your request. Your request is not unreasonable but somehow I am not able to make me do it. I hope you understand me.

And another thing, A am sorry if any any of my post has hurt you.
suresh, at minimum, you could post a link to the article you were paraphrasing from. can you not do that?

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 10:02 am

gmc wrote: One scot=200 americans

(innocence): Oh! Is the Black Watch made up entirely of Jocks, then?

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 10:02 am

gregady wrote: completly agree and none of that nonsense about oppertunity we are still in your debt after world war 2 and the gulf so dont come at us about oppertunity fact is u put urselfs first every time and then have the bare faced cheek to say your doing good in the world, do you honestly think we would have walked into a crazy war against nothing if we werent in your pockets already, we had to follow your leed and then still you say your doing good while blowing up your own allies.........mad as cheese
speaking of 'mad as cheese'....

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 10:04 am

Bill Sikes wrote: Well, that's another "Whoosh!", then.
QED.

A Karenina · Post by **A Karenina** » Tue Oct 26, 2004 12:21 pm

gmc wrote: a karenina what's a CPA? if you'll pardon my curiosity.
Hi gmc. Your curiousity is nice

My apologies for not thinking about the different terms for the same license. It's a Certified Public Accountant. I *think* they are called chartered accountants in the UK.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 1:53 am

(innocence): Oh! Is the Black Watch made up entirely of Jocks, then?

Almost, Yes, although there may be the odd token englishman or welshman.

British "troops" down south in iraq are pretending to talk to the locals (sure, they all speak farsi, you bet!), handing out toys and pencils when the cameras are around, and not getting shot because their cowardly asses aren't within a thousand miles of the real conflict. But the americans up north, who are putting their lives on the line fighting the insurgents - you know, the ones with guns and mortars that are actually shooting back, rather than the cute little toddlers posed in front of the cameras for the gullible british public to see - the americans are the ones getting shot because they're the ones actually fighting, not hanging around behind the lines doing photo ops and having tea at four.

Different approach, when fired at we don't flatten the entire neighbourhood. Most of the UK populace are opposed to the war in Iraq, all it would take would be us politicians to make the kind of inane comment you just made and you will be on your own so fast you will wonder what happened. If the Black Watch start taking heavy casualties and it's perceived to be because of heavy handed american tactics the demands that we pull out and leave you to your own mess will reach epidemic proportions.

Most people don't think americans are bad they do wonder why you don't know what your government does in foreign countries and why you take it personally when anyone criticises US policy. True friends also point things out when they think something is wrong, those who don't appreciate that very soon find themselves on their own convinced averybody hates them. George Bush is probably the most dangerous president you have ever had, he's got you all marching to war and no one is asking why are we fighting and who are we fighting and what happens next, or if they are they seem to get shouted down as unpatriotic and supporting terrorists. You may find it amusing to make snide comments about allies not really fighting but if you feel that way about it then fine do it yourself.

It's ironic isn't it, the Lakud party now running israel started out as a terrorist organisation blowing up british troops in palestine, Nelson Mandela and the ANC were terrorists but now both are political parties. Maybe the only difference between a terrorist and a political party is they manage to get their point across.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 1:55 am

a karenina

Hi gmc. Your curiousity is nice My apologies for not thinking about the different terms for the same license. It's a Certified Public Accountant. I *think* they are called chartered accountants in the UK.
__________________

While we're at it what is homecoming?

A Karenina · Post by **A Karenina** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 7:15 am

Heroine wrote:

Should you expect something of them...yes. You said it yourself...you expect them to become fully-functioning, responsible entities of their own. The key point being "their own". How are they supposed to carve out their place in the international community when they have to come begging back to Papa US because the trade agreements set up don't give them any alternative? How are they supposed to set up their own industries and profit from them themselves when contracts to rebuild are given to US companies? Yeah, they use local staff but any company profits get pumped back to uncle sam. Where's the re-investment then? How does that build a stable economy? It doesn't...it builds one which is dependant on the US.

Add to that the terrifying thought that if they go against any agreement, there's the possiblity they may be invaded by the most technologically advanced army on earth. Read: we can blow up anyone we like without having to get our hands dirty. A remarkable military achievement. But not a very human one.

British troops down south in Iraq are talking to the locals, handing out toys and pencils and the likes and not getting shot. But the americans up north in their tight, rambo-esque convoys with big guns held at the ready are getting shot. Now all of a sudden, 650 Black Watch troops are needed to go and relieve 130 000 US soldiers....? Someone please explain that to me...Heroine,

Your reply seems to be focusing on Iraq, and that is an argument I'm not going to get into. Like the UK, not every citizen here is fully supportive of this war, and yet our governments are doing it anyway. Besides, I wanted to focus on the concepts of charity and aid, not invasions.

Let's pick another example to discuss. Someone mentioned Africa; we could explore the AGOA if you like.

gmc,

I'm confused by your last post. Are you asking what homecoming is? I'm not sure what you're asking. Thanks.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 9:41 am

gmc,

I'm confused by your last post. Are you asking what homecoming is? I'm not sure what you're asking. Thanks.

In american films and tv programmes I hear references to homecoming as in things like homecoming king and queen, I've always wondered what it is and never bothered to find out, I assume it's some quaint american festival like thanksgiving and the fourth of July.

A Karenina · Post by **A Karenina** » Wed Oct 27, 2004 9:23 pm

gmc wrote: In american films and tv programmes I hear references to homecoming as in things like homecoming king and queen, I've always wondered what it is and never bothered to find out, I assume it's some quaint american festival like thanksgiving and the fourth of July.
Oh!

Well, in high school and college the football teams play a series of "away" games. When they come "home" (back to our own school) then it's the big homecoming game. It's more fun if you've just played your big rival, but I'm not sure it's always planned this way (?)

At any rate, Friday night is the big homecoming football game. Saturday night is the big homecoming dance. A king and queen are elected (a popularity contest), and there are different festivities depending on the school. Some schools have a parade or a fair during the day. Some don't. But always the big dance on Saturday night. It's fun because we dressed all fancy, like prom night. A lot of times you get a live band - again, it depends on the school.

I went to my older sister's homecoming in Chicago, and Styx was the band. Obviously this was before they were famous.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 12:40 am

Thanks. I've always wondered, it's like prom night a peculiarly american thing. alien but interesting

A Karenina · Post by **A Karenina** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 7:11 am

Good morning Heroine, thanks for your reply.

Taking the point made in bold, I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with setting specific requirements for African trade, nor do I think there's a problem if it benefits US businesses.

Let's break it down a little. One of the terms is that AGOA countries use US textiles; although some African textiles are permitted, there is a cap on the quantities.

On the surface that might seem very bossy. But the US has the resources and the ability to mass produce textiles far cheaper than Africa currently has. This does benefit US companies; it also secures jobs for US workers - and in all honesty, I do believe most Americans are worried about jobs here first and jobs elsewhere second. That's completely understandable to everyone, so I won't waste time on it.

In return, African countries have the ability to import thousands of items to US markets without tariffs. These imports could potentially harm US businesses as they now face competition from a new market. African countries are able to compete in terms of pricing because of the lack of tariffs.

The expectations and restrictions that we place upon them include:

*establishment of market-based economies;

*development of political pluralism and the rule of law;

*elimination of barriers to U.S. trade and investment;

*protection of intellectual property;

*efforts to combat corruption;

*policies to reduce poverty, increase availability of health care and educational opportunities;

*protection of human rights and worker rights, and elimination of certain practices of child labor."

(quoted from the website address in your post).

I just don't have a problem with any of these. Even the elimination of trade barriers to US trade and investment seems reasonable in light of the fact that we've also eliminated barriers to African trade and investment in the US.

When the US offers aid to dictators, we're bad. (and I agree, that's bad). When the US offers aid to other countries and puts in restrictions trying to guarantee they aren't dictators, then we're still wrong. (and I disagree).

It comes across as if the US is supposed to just give away money, risk losing our own jobs and means of support. Anything less and we're not "charitable". Show me a country that acts this way. I can't think of a single one.

It's important to remember, and I'm sure you've witnessed this during your 5-year stay in the US: everything is a commodity here, from education to clean water to health care. Consequently, our first duty is to support ourselves and our second duty is to provide opportunity to others. This may go against an idealistic grain, but it is still our reality.

We take a pragmatic approach, trying for that win-win situation. It isn't a shining example of altruism. However, we're under no obligation to be altruistic. It can work, it does allow for economic growth in other countries, and it does provide more than they had before.

I've had my say (although I reserve the right to ramble on a bit more later). What would your solution be? Thanks.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 7:57 am

A Karenina wrote: Let's break it down a little. One of the terms is that AGOA countries use US textiles; although some African textiles are permitted, there is a cap on the quantities.

On the surface that might seem very bossy. But the US has the resources and the ability to mass produce textiles far cheaper than Africa currently has. This does benefit US companies; it also secures jobs for US workers - and in all honesty, I do believe most Americans are worried about jobs here first and jobs elsewhere second. That's completely understandable to everyone, so I won't waste time on it.

In return, African countries have the ability to import thousands of items to US markets without tariffs. These imports could potentially harm US businesses as they now face competition from a new market. African countries are able to compete in terms of pricing because of the lack of tariffs.

The expectations and restrictions that we place upon them include:

*establishment of market-based economies;

*development of political pluralism and the rule of law;

*elimination of barriers to U.S. trade and investment;

*protection of intellectual property;

*efforts to combat corruption;

*policies to reduce poverty, increase availability of health care and educational opportunities;

*protection of human rights and worker rights, and elimination of certain practices of child labor."

(quoted from the website address in your post).

I just don't have a problem with any of these. Even the elimination of trade barriers to US trade and investment seems reasonable in light of the fact that we've also eliminated barriers to African trade and investment in the US.

"Looking beyond agriculture, it is difficult to avoid being struck by the discrepancy between the picture of US trade policy painted by [US Trade Representative, Robert] Zoellick and the realities facing developing countries.

To take one example, much has been made of America's generosity towards Africa under the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA). This provides what, on the surface, looks like free market access for a range of textile, garment and footwear products. Scratch the surface and you get a different picture. Under AGOA's so-called rules-of-origin provisions, the yarn and fabric used to make apparel exports must be made either in the United States or an eligible African country. If they are made in Africa, there is a ceiling of 1.5 per cent on the share of the US market that the products in question can account for. Moreover, the AGOA's coverage is less than comprehensive. There are some 900 tariff lines not covered, for which average tariffs exceed 11%.

According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the benefits accruing to Africa from the AGOA would be some $420m, or five times, greater if the US removed the rules-of-origin restrictions. But these restrictions reflect the realities of mercantilist trade policy. The underlying principle is that you can export to America, provided that the export in question uses American products rather than those of competitors. For a country supposedly leading a crusade for open, non-discriminatory global markets, it's a curiously anachronistic approach to trade policy."

-- Kevin Watkins, cheif researcher of Oxfam.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Oct 28, 2004 8:17 am

A Karenina wrote: It comes across as if the US is supposed to just give away money, risk losing our own jobs and means of support. Anything less and we're not "charitable". Show me a country that acts this way. I can't think of a single one.

Erm... over here? Anyway, today, the US gives "tied" aid of around 0.14% of GNP, one of the smallest, if not the smallest givers, in this measure. It needn't worry about "losing it's own jobs and means of support" from this!

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 6:50 am

Heroine wrote: Most of the countries involved in AGOA are exceedingly poor...most kids will never have seen the inside of a school and running water is an amazement second only to a miracle.

I have been to some very poor places, where some people have nothing. It

is absolutely extraordinary, and very sad. Try to imagine yourself in the bum

end of Africa, dressed in tatters. Those tatters are all you have. All you have.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 6:50 am

If you are going to talk about world trade it's not just the US the EEC are just as bad at making these kind of one sided trade deals, You know what we import from Kenya, this from a continent that is having trouble feeding itself? Daffodils, that's why we get them all year round its a cash crop for the farmers the country has to export to earn foreign currency to export to pay their debts. And we give aid to feed the poor while the banks screw the govt to the wall.

The trouble is large corporations are increasingly setting the political agenda to their benefit. When they are critucised or threatened with regulation it is put down by being described as anti free trade. Anti capiltalist is a nice label to stop legitimate criticisms getting a free airing or being listened to objectively.

We have the same thing here-our water has NEVER been in private hands but now it is all in the name of free trade and allowing market forces to work, except like most people around the world we don't happen to believe that anyone should be deprived of basics like water simply because they are unable-whatever the reason-to pay the bill. As a result companies don't disconnect as the political fallout would be phenomenal. Same in Columbia people protest when their now privatised water supply rockets in price but they are described as anti capitalist and therefore worthy of dismissal when they object the WTO insists it is open to foreign companies to buy over the supply contracts. Large companies buy over land for agribusiness displacing thousands in to the cities where they live in squalor.

In this kind if thing the emerican companies are just a few amongst many, therere plenty of swiss french dutch you name they're all at it.

A Karenina · Post by **A Karenina** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 7:11 am

Herione, thanks for your comments. It will take me some time to read through the links you've posted. I also have a huge paper due this weekend, so it may take me a few days to get back to this. I didn't want you to think I was ignoring it. Bill, thanks to you as well.

The one thing I can easily agree on is that business has no conscience. Profit is the single most important motive and purpose. When we compare the AGOA to other events, like Chile, I absolutely prefer the AGOA. Ideally, the world would be a lovely place and everyone would be kind to another - but that's not reality, and it's unworkable.

Extreme poverty is not solved overnight. The fact that millions of people are living with starvation, disease, lack of education, lack of hope does not make me feel good about the state of the world. At the same time, the US is a political entity. I strongly feel that importing teachers, doctors, and so on should be done by non-political organizations. Many Americans do volunteer for programs like Physicians Without Borders, Amnesty International, and even rescue missions for natural disasters.

Why the distinction? Iraq is a prime example.

I'm skipping all the nitty gritty detail parts for the moment...but wanted to address the statement that we don't need to be worried about our jobs. Well, thankyouverymuch, but we are worried anyway. (wry grin). I could give a long lecture about that, but we could also just agree to disagree on whether Americans should be concerned about job security.

I have to run. Talk to you all later.

AK

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 3:25 pm

Heroine wrote: New Scientist

Sorry, couldn't help myself...my personal estimate is that a hundred million billion have died in baghdad alone. this based upon estimates by taking the total number of civilian deaths not reported in iraq and assuming that if i don't know they're dead, then they're dead; multiplying by 7574, then using a factorial of two to the 100th power of nine times the square root of Pi.

has about as much validity as this nonsense.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 3:26 pm

Bill Sikes wrote: I have been to some very poor places, where some people have nothing. It

is absolutely extraordinary, and very sad. Try to imagine yourself in the bum

end of Africa, dressed in tatters. Those tatters are all you have. All you have.
then those bastard americans come in and hand out free food and clothes. the gall.

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 8:49 pm

anastrophe wrote: then those bastard americans come in and hand out free food and clothes. the gall.

My dear sir, you are a very senior member of this forum. Please don't take some members' views about Americans in this manner. America is honestly trying to help people all over the world. Some may acknowledge it and some may not. There is a saying - Help others and forget. Because if you help someone it is your prayer to God. People may choose not to acknowledge the help but God will always remember it.

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 9:10 pm

anastrophe wrote: suresh, at minimum, you could post a link to the article you were paraphrasing from. can you not do that?

It was an editorial in daily Hindustan Times, a leading news paper of India. I am sorry I don't remember the date. I have searched in my house but that edition has been misplaced somewhere. But it contents were given in my message.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:47 am

anastrophe wrote: then those bastard americans come in and hand out free food and clothes. the gall.

*Now* WTF are you on about? You seem to have a large chip on your shoulder,

unfortunately. What I wrote was nothing to do with "bastard americans" (your

words, not mine), and was merely agreeing that it is shocking that there is

such poverty. Get a grip.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:54 am

Suresh Gupta wrote: My dear sir, you are a very senior member of this forum. Please don't take some members' views about Americans in this manner. America is honestly trying to help people all over the world. Some may acknowledge it and some may not. There is a saying - Help others and forget. Because if you help someone it is your prayer to God. People may choose not to acknowledge the help but God will always remember it.

Suresh, please do not infer that I am totally anti-American. Yes, some of these

people are trying to help. Some are trying to do other things. Criticism of the

latter is not intended to reflect on the former; criticism of wrongness there

should be.

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 2:35 am

Bill Sikes wrote: Suresh, please do not infer that I am totally anti-American. Yes, some of these people are trying to help. Some are trying to do other things. Criticism of the latter is not intended to reflect on the former; criticism of wrongness there should be.

I did not have any specific FG member in mind while posting my message. It was only intended to put the discussion on right track. Also when we say American it does not mean entire American nation.

There are always two sides of the coin. I was only trying to look at the positive side. 'Is America Bad?' is a brave topic if put up by an American. It is not easy to take crticism in its right perspective. But if the intention is to honestly know the opinion of others then one has to be willing for all sorts of opinion, and also be cautious to distinguish between honest and dishonest crticism. The world is full of people who will criticise just for the hack of it or to simply negate one's contribution.

You are also right in saying that it should be the crticism of the wrongness and not the person who has done wrong. Afterall who can claim that he has never done wrong. Our beloved leader Mahatma Gandhi had said that hate the sin and not the sinner.

capt_buzzard · Post by **capt_buzzard** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 5:57 am

Irish People love America, your culture,heritage and history. But, we don't like America's foreign policies. That's all I'm saying.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 9:12 am

Bill Sikes wrote: *Now* WTF are you on about? You seem to have a large chip on your shoulder,

unfortunately. What I wrote was nothing to do with "bastard americans" (your

words, not mine), and was merely agreeing that it is shocking that there is

such poverty. Get a grip.
hey bill: "WHOOOSH".

speaking of getting a grip. classic 'can dish it out but can't take it'.

A Karenina · Post by **A Karenina** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 9:42 am

Anastrophe and Bill, you're both wrong. The word is "bastid". :p

Obviously, I'm kidding! Here's hoping you both grin a bit ~ and now back to fray...

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 11:47 am

O.K. how about venezuela, oil rich country democratically elected left wing government, recent attempted coup immediately recognised by the Bush administration,, the first thing they did was privatise the oil industry, coup iverturned popular leader now back in power, oil re-nationalised. How do you claim to be in favour of freedom and democracy when you encourage the overthrow of democratically elected governments. because venezuala is oil rich having it nationalised is not a popular move to the big oil companies, on the other hand it is their oil so they can sell it any way they want or will they now become part of an axis of evil.

Same in nicarugua, how do you justify financing guerrilas to fight against a government just because it happens to be left wing in make up. Same in Chile

http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story ... 51,00.html

Irish People love America, your culture,heritage and history. But, we don't like America's foreign policies. That's all I'm saying.

agree with capn buzzard apart from not being irish.

anastrophe, just out of curiosity do you know any non americans? Incidentally I don't know any americans.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 12:56 pm

gmc wrote: O.K. how about venezuela, oil rich country democratically elected left wing government, recent attempted coup immediately recognised by the Bush administration,, the first thing they did was privatise the oil industry, coup iverturned popular leader now back in power, oil re-nationalised. How do you claim to be in favour of freedom and democracy when you encourage the overthrow of democratically elected governments. small matter of distinction here: overthrowing, and encouraging to overthrow, are rather different things. the US didn't actively participate in the attempted coup. that we may have given words of encouragement to those involved is not the same as a US force invading their country to assist the coup.

never mind that hugo chavez is a despot. never mind that during the recall attempt, soldiers were videotaped tampering with ballot boxes.

because venezuala is oil rich having it nationalised is not a popular move to the big oil companies, on the other hand it is their oil so they can sell it any way they want or will they now become part of an axis of evil.chavez actively supports terrorist regimes. he's buddy buddy with fidel castro. good enough for me.

Same in nicarugua, how do you justify financing guerrilas to fight against a government just because it happens to be left wing in make up. um, come on. let's not blithely ignore huge issues with dissembling terms like "happens to be left wing". the sandinistas were actively funded by the soviets, and there were soviet 'advisors' all over the country. they were armed by the soviets.

so, US financing guerillas to fight soviet financed despots is slightly more accurate. and let's not forget that this was before the cold war ended. the soviets were still practicing 'domino effect'. they wanted a communist foothold in central america.

anastrophe, just out of curiosity do you know any non americans? Incidentally I don't know any americans.many. in my now-45 years here, i've worked with and had friends of the following nationalities (all immigrants to this country, not native born americans):

kurdish iraqi

afghanistani

east indian

somalian

ethiopian

russian

bulgarian

finnish

chinese

irish

probably some that i wasn't aware of their nationality

and of course, all the people i know but have never met personally, all over the world, through this here danged innernet

only the finnish person returned to her home country. the rest had left their countries for a better life here. so perhaps my perspective is influenced by that.

capt_buzzard · Post by **capt_buzzard** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 2:21 pm

We, the Irish were the first country/nation that was stopped and fingerprinted on arrival at your major international airports. That has only happened since August 2004. Many were shocked and said they were strip searched. And many will never return to the United States.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 2:30 pm

chavez actively supports terrorist regimes. he's buddy buddy with fidel castro. good enough for me. Who has castro terrorised recently? The only reason he got in with the russians was fear of a US backed invasion to allow the mafia back in. Given the bay of pigs fiasco it was not such an irrational fear. Sometimes people want left wing governments the US seems to have a completely blinkered approach to socialist type governments. Maybe a hangover from the cold war?

He gives them oil and they send doctors, sounds good to me.

the US didn't actively participate in the attempted coup. that we may have given words of encouragement to those involved is not the same as a US force invading their country to assist the coup.

so it's okay to recognise a military takeover of a democratically elected government so long as those taking over let you get their oil? The US was pretty quick to get in there, so much for supporting democracy and freedom.

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 2:33 am

Are the following good or bad?

a) Interference in other countries internal matters,

b) Attacking other countries under false and fabricated reasons,

c) Forcing one's own country's laws on other countries.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:45 am

Suresh Gupta wrote: Are the following good or bad?

a) Interference in other countries internal matters,it rather depends upon what the internal matters are, and what is at stake.

b) Attacking other countries under false and fabricated reasons,
ah, i presume you're referring to the iraq war. there was a reasonable expectation that saddam had WMD's. before the war, most countries were in agreement that he posed a threat. no WMD's were found. of course, right before the war started, some WMD's were found, missiles that had been modified to reach israel. they were destroyed. that certainly suggested that there could be more.

in any event, most iraqis were and are in favor of the US occupation. they wanted to be out from under saddam's repressive and brutal regime. you hear little of that on the news. we were lucky enough to get a whiff of it when the elections were held, and massive numbers of iraqis voted, with the threat of suicide bombers hanging over them.

c) Forcing one's own country's laws on other countries.
'countries' are often fluid things. pakistan was once part of india. india has repeatedly tried to retake pakistan - isn't that 'one country trying to impose its laws on others'?

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 8:35 pm

anastrophe wrote: it rather depends upon what the internal matters are, and what is at stake.

Internal matters of a country and what is at stake should be decided by that country or another country?

ah, i presume you're referring to the iraq war. there was a reasonable expectation that saddam had WMD's. ..........

Lakhs of innocent people were killed simply on assumption (resonable expectation).

'countries' are often fluid things. pakistan was once part of india. india has repeatedly tried to retake pakistan - isn't that 'one country trying to impose its laws on others'?

India has never tried to retake Pakistan. But if India will ever interfere in the internal affairs of Pakistan, I will oppose it.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 8:55 pm

Suresh Gupta wrote: Internal matters of a country and what is at stake should be decided by that country or another country?

i guess it boils down to the definition of 'internal matters'. when internal matters threaten another country, then things become blurred.

Lakhs of innocent people were killed simply on assumption (resonable expectation).
you are aware that far, far more innocent people were killed by saddam and his thugs, than in both us/iraq wars? no, that does not justify the loss of innocent life. but it falls into the grey area again. loss of life is never good. sometimes loss of some innocent life in the short term leads to less loss of life in the long term. none of these things are pleasant. one would never wish to be one of those sacrificed.

India has never tried to retake Pakistan. But if India will ever interfere in the internal affairs of Pakistan, I will oppose it.
i guess i've misunderstood the several indo-pak wars. perhaps they were not direct attempts to "retake" pakistan (the partition was performed by great britain, just as they participated in the partitioning of the middle east that created the modern day iraq).

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 9:46 pm

anastrophe wrote: i guess it boils down to the definition of 'internal matters'. when internal matters threaten another country, then things become blurred.

UNO was created for this purpose. If one or other country pypass UN and start taking matters in their own hands based on their perception (which in most cases is one-sided) then only the will of the mightiest will prevail and that will be the end of democracy. It will be sad that it will be caused by the democratic countries themselves.

you are aware that far, far more innocent people were killed by saddam and his thugs, than in both us/iraq wars? no, that does not justify the loss of innocent life. but it falls into the grey area again. loss of life is never good. sometimes loss of some innocent life in the short term leads to less loss of life in the long term. none of these things are pleasant. one would never wish to be one of those sacrificed.

I once again submit that such matters are best taken care of by UN. Let us not weaken this organization.

i guess i've misunderstood the several indo-pak wars. perhaps they were not direct attempts to "retake" pakistan (the partition was performed by great britain, just as they participated in the partitioning of the middle east that created the modern day iraq).

India has not started any Indo-Pak war. It only defended itself. India does not believe in having hostile relationship with its neighbours. We are a peace loving country and want strong and peaceful nations as our neighbours.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:15 pm

Suresh Gupta wrote: UNO was created for this purpose. If one or other country pypass UN and start taking matters in their own hands based on their perception (which in most cases is one-sided) then only the will of the mightiest will prevail and that will be the end of democracy. It will be sad that it will be caused by the democratic countries themselves.

the UN passed *seventeen* consecutive resolutions demanding that saddam disarm. he violated each and every one of them. the UN has no teeth.

I once again submit that such matters are best taken care of by UN. Let us not weaken this organization.
as above. the UN was created with noble intentions, but it has failed miserably in its mandate.

India has not started any Indo-Pak war. It only defended itself. India does not believe in having hostile relationship with its neighbours. We are a peace loving country and want strong and peaceful nations as our neighbours.
i could say the same for us. the ends do not justify the means, but the fact is, it appears that freedom and democracy may take hold in the middle east. the ramifications are extremely significant.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:18 pm

i sure wish more people would vote in the (silly) poll that accompanies this thread. there's a lot more than a dozen or so people who are on forumgarden, but you'd never know it from the votes!

koan · Post by **koan** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:31 pm

anastrophe wrote: i sure wish more people would vote in the (silly) poll that accompanies this thread. there's a lot more than a dozen or so people who are on forumgarden, but you'd never know it from the votes!

I laughed so hard at the poll choices but couldn't find anything that truly summed up you warmongering but lovely people.

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:35 pm

koan wrote: I laughed so hard at the poll choices but couldn't find anything that truly summed up you warmongering but lovely people.
:yh_rotfl

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:59 pm

anastrophe wrote: the UN passed *seventeen* consecutive resolutions demanding that saddam disarm. he violated each and every one of them. the UN has no teeth. As above. the UN was created with noble intentions, but it has failed miserably in its mandate.

UN is an institution. No institution is strong and weak. It is the members who make it strong or weak. If UN has failed miserably in its mandate then its members are only to blame. And it does not give any right to any member to bypass UN and start acting on its own as though UN is not existing.

i could say the same for us. the ends do not justify the means, but the fact is, it appears that freedom and democracy may take hold in the middle east. the ramifications are extremely significant.

I agree that every country of the world should work for democracy but again no country can have double standards. US talks of restoration of democracy in middle east. It is now talking of restoration of democracy in Nepal. But what about Pakistan? US not only supports dictatorship in Pakistan but also considers it its strong and most favoured nation partner. I am unable to understand all this.

Raven · Post by **Raven** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 5:19 am

anastrophe wrote: i sure wish more people would vote in the (silly) poll that accompanies this thread. there's a lot more than a dozen or so people who are on forumgarden, but you'd never know it from the votes!
I voted. :yh_bigsmi GOD BLESS SUSAN B. ANTHONY! :yh_peace

Raven · Post by **Raven** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 5:36 am

Suresh Gupta wrote: UN is an institution. No institution is strong and weak. It is the members who make it strong or weak. If UN has failed miserably in its mandate then its members are only to blame. And it does not give any right to any member to bypass UN and start acting on its own as though UN is not existing.

I agree that every country of the world should work for democracy but again no country can have double standards. US talks of restoration of democracy in middle east. It is now talking of restoration of democracy in Nepal. But what about Pakistan? US not only supports dictatorship in Pakistan but also considers it its strong and most favoured nation partner. I am unable to understand all this.
Nor will you ever be able to understand. But I highly suggest that if you WANT to, then go and TRY to get a visa, (we dont let just ANYBODY in) and book a hotel. At your hotel, inquire to the owner of it, (I promise you he'll be indian) as to what they think of america. The answer might upset you, as it seems half of India has migrated to the US. and bought all the hotel/motel chains, and seem to be living quite comfortably. The other half of India has migrated to Britain, where they seem to like the off-license shops better than the hotels. But they will give you the same answer. I for one, am sick to death of all the american bashing going on. Pakistan at least helps us LOOK for the al-quieda ba$tard that blew up all the innocent lives you keep going on about! India doesnt do jack shite for america. What the hell are you going on about? WE'RE NOT THE ONES WHO COLONISED YOU!! But where do you think you got all that nuclear power from? Yeah, yeah, keep sending your kids to the US for education. If it wasnt for american industry, you'ld still be a back-water rice swamp, selling salt for a living!

And OH! BTW.........America is at peace with HER neighbors as well! Just ask Canada, Mexico AND RUSSIA! Dont tell me you forgot America is only 28 miles from Russia!

Suresh Gupta · Post by **Suresh Gupta** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 7:50 am

Raven wrote: Nor will you ever be able to understand. But I highly suggest that if you WANT to, then go and TRY to get a visa, (we dont let just ANYBODY in) and book a hotel. At your hotel, inquire to the owner of it, (I promise you he'll be indian) as to what they think of america. The answer might upset you, as it seems half of India has migrated to the US. and bought all the hotel/motel chains, and seem to be living quite comfortably. The other half of India has migrated to Britain, where they seem to like the off-license shops better than the hotels. But they will give you the same answer. I for one, am sick to death of all the american bashing going on. Pakistan at least helps us LOOK for the al-quieda ba$tard that blew up all the innocent lives you keep going on about! India doesnt do jack shite for america. What the hell are you going on about? WE'RE NOT THE ONES WHO COLONISED YOU!! But where do you think you got all that nuclear power from? Yeah, yeah, keep sending your kids to the US for education. If it wasnt for american industry, you'ld still be a back-water rice swamp, selling salt for a living!

And OH! BTW.........America is at peace with HER neighbors as well! Just ask Canada, Mexico AND RUSSIA! Dont tell me you forgot America is only 28 miles from Russia!

My post was regarding undermining the strength of UNO. But you reply by a highly offensive message totally unconnected with the issue. I do not represent my country and other Indians on this forum. I am an individual and posting my personal views. You need not abuse other Indians and my country. Please direct your abuses on me as it is I who have hurt your national pride by talking of double standards being adopted by US administration.

Do you represent America and American people and are abusing on their behalf, or it is your personal opinion?