Do you like the US?

[Phlegmak]

i think in more formal social settings or meeting someone for the first time americans dont like to talk politics becuase they think its kind of a personal topic. its different with friends who you are comfortable with and you can agree/disagree and argue with. i was always under the impression that its was rude to bring up politics as a guest in somebody's home.

Yeah, could be. Politics have a tendency to make people hot. Especially if you say anything proCastro to my grandfather.

 

[Mirc]

US? I'm not sure if I like it or not.

 

[Heffalump]

America's great.

And despite some recent backsliding it's arguably done more "good" for humanity than any nation out there ... if such a thing can be measured (which of course it cannot!)

 

[Grisu]

yes, I like america. I may not agree with a lot of it's current policies, but I really like the country and its people.

 

[Marmoset]

I'm amazed at the number of people here who seem to care so much about politics. A constant reply is "love the country, hate Bush!," which I find absolutely rediculous. I mean, no offence, but if you were to ask me or any of my personal friends here in the states what we thought of our country, mentioning politics would just get to weird, disaproving looks. Maybe that's the main difference between the U.S. and other countries - few people here really give a crap about politics, as opposed to almost everybody in Europe.

Seriously, when travelling in Europe and Canada, the first question almost everyone asked me after finding out I that I live in America is "so, what do you think about Bush? It's always very strange for me, that's a question that simply wouldn't be asked even in polite circles here, nevermind by some stranger walking down the street.

In Canada, lots of people talk about politics lots of the time. I'll end up discussing politics with family, friends, people at work, professors - it can come up just about anywhere. Sure, I have lots of friends who don't care at all, but I have lots who do too.

However, I would never ask an American basically at random, "What do you think of Bush?" That just going to make for an awkward conversation, and I can completely understand how you'd feel because there's an undertone to it where you're almost expected to denounce him and call him an idiot. I'm surprised so many people have come out and asked you that point blank.

I don't see what's wrong with "Love the country, hate Bush" though. There are millions of Americans who feel that way, let alone non-Americans!

 

[Grisu]

I'm amazed at the number of people here who seem to care so much about politics. A constant reply is "love the country, hate Bush!," which I find absolutely rediculous. I mean, no offence, but if you were to ask me or any of my personal friends here in the states what we thought of our country, mentioning politics would just get to weird, disaproving looks. Maybe that's the main difference between the U.S. and other countries - few people here really give a crap about politics, as opposed to almost everybody in Europe.

It wasn't always this way, in fact I'm pretty sure it started with Bush getting elected (or not ). Before Bush I don't think anybody here would have every asked you anything about whether you like Clinton, Bush Sr., or Reagan. It's just the fact that in Europe Bush is by far the most controversial (or least liked, if you wish) president of the US in history.

 

[Sidhe]

It wasn't always this way, in fact I'm pretty sure it started with Bush getting elected (or not ). Before Bush I don't think anybody here would have every asked you anything about whether you like Clinton, Bush Sr., or Reagan. It's just the fact that in Europe Bush is by far the most controversial (or least liked, if you wish) president of the US in history.

This is true, alot of Europeans flat out hate him.

I think if you put up a pole of who you would want running your country with the choice of.

A) George W. Bush
B) Ming the Merciless

Emepror Ming would win hands down

 

[CenturionV]

America's great.

And despite some recent backsliding it's arguably done more "good" for humanity than any nation out there ... if such a thing can be measured (which of course it cannot!)

Agreed, america modernized democracy, america basically won WWII, america stopped the soviets from overunning the world, and invinsibly are saving many many peoples lives through counter-terrorism, Not to mention humanitarian, economic, and scientific progress worldwide.

Yes there have been problems, there have been issues, some presidents have been better or worse than others, and there have been mistakes, just like ALL human governments, however in the long run grand scheme americans have been good for humanity as a whole, and I'm proud to be in an allied country.

 

[Sidhe]

Agreed, america modernized democracy, america basically won WWII, america stopped the soviets from overunning the world, and invinsibly are saving many many peoples lives through counter-terrorism, Not to mention humanitarian, economic, and scientific progress worldwide.

Yes there have been problems, there have been issues, some presidents have been better or worse than others, and there have been mistakes, just like ALL human governments, however in the long run grand scheme americans have been good for humanity as a whole, and I'm proud to be in an allied country.

Contrary to popular belief the allies outnumbered the US by a considerable margin, saying the US won the war is extremely insulting to the other people who fough and died across the globe. I really do wish people would stop talking rubbish. the US was an important part in World War II but the result would have been the same whether they were there or not it would have simply taken longer. Please stop saying the US won the war it is not just wrong it is also extremely inconsiderate.

 

[anarres]

Agreed, america modernized democracy, america basically won WWII, america stopped the soviets from overunning the world, and invinsibly are saving many many peoples lives through counter-terrorism, Not to mention humanitarian, economic, and scientific progress worldwide.

Yes there have been problems, there have been issues, some presidents have been better or worse than others, and there have been mistakes, just like ALL human governments, however in the long run grand scheme americans have been good for humanity as a whole, and I'm proud to be in an allied country.

Well, if you really want to hold up the USA's foreign record as an example....

A timeline of CIA atrocities

Please, just read a few entries...

...but knowing you won't, how about you just respond to these examples?

1945
Operation PAPERCLIP - While other American agencies are hunting down Nazi war criminals for arrest, the U.S. intelligence community is smuggling them into America, unpunished, for their use against the Soviets. The most important of these is Reinhard Gehlen, Hitler’s master spy who had built up an intelligence network in the Soviet Union. With full U.S. blessing, he creates the “Gehlen Organization,” a band of refugee Nazi spies who reactivate their networks in Russia. These include SS intelligence officers Alfred Six and Emil Augsburg (who massacred Jews in the Holocaust), Klaus Barbie (the “Butcher of Lyon&#8221, Otto von Bolschwing (the Holocaust mastermind who worked with Eichmann. The Gehlen Organization supplies the U.S. with its only intelligence on the Soviet Union for the next ten years, serving as a bridge between the abolishment of the OSS and the creation of the CIA. However, much of the “intelligence” the former Nazis provide is bogus. Gehlen inflates Soviet military capabilities at a time when Russia is still rebuilding its devastated society, in order to inflate his own importance to the Americans (who might otherwise punish him). In 1948, Gehlen almost convinces the Americans that war is imminent, and the West should make a preemptive strike. In the 50s he produces a fictitious “missile gap.” To make matters worse, the Russians have thoroughly penetrated the Gehlen Organization with double agents, undermining the very American security that Gehlen was supposed to protect.

1948
Covert-action wing created - The CIA recreates a covert action wing, innocuously called the Office of Policy Coordination, led by Wall Street lawyer Frank Wisner. According to its secret charter, its responsibilities include “propaganda, economic warfare, preventive direct action, including sabotage, antisabotage, demolition and evacuation procedures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of indigenous anti-communist elements in threatened countries of the free world.” Italy - The CIA corrupts democratic elections in Italy, where Italian communists threaten to win the elections. The CIA buys votes, broadcasts propaganda, threatens and beats up opposition leaders, and infiltrates and disrupts their organizations. It works—the communists are defeated.

1949
Radio Free Europe - The CIA creates its first major propaganda outlet, Radio Free Europe. Over the next several decades, its broadcasts are so blatantly false that for a time it is considered illegal to publish transcripts of them in the U.S.

1953
Iran - CIA overthrows the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh in a military coup, after he threatened to nationalize British oil. The CIA replaces him with a dictator, the Shah of Iran, whose secret police, SAVAK, is as brutal as the Gestapo.

Operation MK-ULTRA - Inspired by North Korea’s brainwashing program, the CIA begins experiments on mind control. The most notorious part of this project involves giving LSD and other drugs to American subjects without their knowledge or against their will, causing several to commit suicide. However, the operation involves far more than this. Funded in part by the Rockefeller and Ford foundations, research includes propaganda, brainwashing, public relations, advertising, hypnosis, and other forms of suggestion.

1954
Guatemala - CIA overthrows the democratically elected Jacob Arbenz in a military coup. Arbenz has threatened to nationalize the Rockefeller-owned United Fruit Company, in which CIA Director Allen Dulles also owns stock. Arbenz is replaced with a series of right-wing dictators whose bloodthirsty policies will kill over 100,000 Guatemalans in the next 40 years.

1954-58
North Vietnam - CIA officer Edward Lansdale spends four years trying to overthrow the communist government of North Vietnam, using all the usual dirty tricks. The CIA also attempts to legitimize a tyrannical puppet regime in South Vietnam, headed by Ngo Dinh Diem. These efforts fail to win the hearts and minds of the South Vietnamese because the Diem government is opposed to true democracy, land reform and poverty reduction measures. The CIA’s continuing failure results in escalating American intervention, culminating in the Vietnam War.

1957-73
Laos - The CIA carries out approximately one coup per year trying to nullify Laos’ democratic elections. The problem is the Pathet Lao, a leftist group with enough popular support to be a member of any coalition government. In the late 50s, the CIA even creates an “Armee Clandestine” of Asian mercenaries to attack the Pathet Lao. After the CIA’s army suffers numerous defeats, the U.S. starts bombing, dropping more bombs on Laos than all the U.S. bombs dropped in World War II. A quarter of all Laotians will eventually become refugees, many living in caves.

1959
Haiti - The U.S. military helps “Papa Doc” Duvalier become dictator of Haiti. He creates his own private police force, the “Tonton Macoutes,” who terrorize the population with machetes. They will kill over 100,000 during the Duvalier family reign. The U.S. does not protest their dismal human rights record.

1961
The Bay of Pigs - The CIA sends 1,500 Cuban exiles to invade Castro’s Cuba. But “Operation Mongoose” fails, due to poor planning, security and backing. The planners had imagined that the invasion will spark a popular uprising against Castro-which never happens. A promised American air strike also never occurs. This is the CIA’s first public setback, causing President Kennedy to fire CIA Director Allen Dulles.

Dominican Republic - The CIA assassinates Rafael Trujillo, a murderous dictator Washington has supported since 1930. Trujillo’s business interests have grown so large (about 60 percent of the economy) that they have begun competing with American business interests.

Ecuador - The CIA-backed military forces the democratically elected President Jose Velasco to resign. Vice President Carlos Arosemana replaces him; the CIA fills the now vacant vice presidency with its own man.

Congo (Zaire) - The CIA assassinates the democratically elected Patrice Lumumba. However, public support for Lumumba’s politics runs so high that the CIA cannot clearly install his opponents in power. Four years of political turmoil follow.

As you can see, I got bored and only included some, and not the recent stuff (for one you only find out about it later on....).

I wonder sometimes if people who spout on about the USA's greatness are just ignorant of history, or if the USA's own propaganda is simply so good it fools enough people enough of the time.

I actually refuse to believe people are sooooo stupid they can't understand things.... instead I think they rationalise away the bad saying it was a "few rotten apples" or that it was individuals and not the country, etc.

But lets face it - you judge a person by their actions, it's only fair to judge a country the same way. At least you can judge an action, it's much harder to judge intent.

Suffice to say the USA is guilty of many crimes over the years, especially the last 70 or so.

And a final jab. The only thing the USA has going for it: science. Do you honestly think it was something "American" about the inventors, etc who moved science forward? IMO at this stage in evolution science will evolve wherever there is funding and resources. And in this the USA is falling behind again, thanks to Bush et al. And lets face it - you only got NASA going because you took a load of jew-killing nazi's and gave them nice homes and labs.

/rant.

P.S. This is kind of a "devil's advocate" rant - I don't really care about this stuff much (any more). I decided a long time ago that you can choose to be ignorant or you can open your eyes, but it's no business of mine if somone is blind and claims to be 20/20.

 

[CenturionV]

Contrary to popular belief the allies outnumbered the US by a considerable margin, saying the US won the war is extremely insulting to the other people who fough and died across the globe. I really do wish people would stop talking rubbish. the US was an important part in World War II but the result would have been the same whether they were there or not it would have simply taken longer. Please stop saying the US won the war it is not just wrong it is also extremely inconsiderate.

Thats speculation, if the americans would have just stayed neutral, the pacific theatar would have been a disaster for allied forces, not to mention supplies that america supplied to britain, the UK was dead meat without the americans support, dead meat, and after that hitler would have made peace with any remaining overseas nations fighting alongside, then focused entirely on destroying the russians..... also all just speculation, however I think its fair to say that the US DID win the war literally, the japanese surrendered to them, because of them. You cannot deny that, its history.

As to the CIA, yes its true they do things that would be considered unacceptable by the general populace, so what? whatever it takes to survive, you don't get to the top by playing by the rules.....

Your problem is that your view is limited by the fact that you believe there ARE crimes..... come on, get with reality, nations don't follow law, law is here to govern individuals in a set area, applying it to nations is at best mildly amusing. Fools believe in such nonsense, an amusing fantasy erected by weak individuals uncapable of dealing with harsh reality. Hilariously it has actually translated into real orginizations like the UN, anyone intelligent of course knows these groups have a big fat zero when it comes to real control, they are simply the sum of the money/support they recieve from the governments within, if at any time it benefits those nations to leave/withdraw there support, they will, it claims moral basis but such claims mean nothing in reality, propoganda, its only REAL control stems from the power it wields at the leasure of others. Most high-level politicians realize this. A law is just a piece of paper. A crime just a judges opinion of that law.

You may judge people by there actions, I generally just judge them by there results. The US gets results.

 

[Sidhe]

Thats speculation, if the americans would have just stayed neutral, the pacific theatar would have been a disaster for allied forces, not to mention supplies that america supplied to britain, the UK was dead meat without the americans support, dead meat, and after that hitler would have made peace with any remaining overseas nations fighting alongside, then focused entirely on destroying the russians..... also all just speculation, however I think its fair to say that the US DID win the war literally, the japanese surrendered to them, because of them. You cannot deny that, its history.

Of course it's speculation but then the people who said it were noted historians not me which is why I said it, most historians agree that Americans support during the war shortened it by four or 5 years at least. And as for saying the US won the war they didn't join till the end of 1941 and the allied troops outnumbered the US troops by a considerable margin, what your talking is total nonsense, the US was important but the way you talk about it it's almost like you won it single handed? What do you think the other 100 or so countries fighting Hitler at the time were doing, making daisy chains?

 

[Phlegmak]

America's great.

And despite some recent backsliding it's arguably done more "good" for humanity than any nation out there ... if such a thing can be measured (which of course it cannot!)

You're the first European that I've ever read say that. Personally, I'm not certain that the US did more good than bad. If it did more good than bad, then it's like 51% good, 49% bad.

As far as WW2 goes, I think it needs no rehashing. The US was an important part of the allies during WW2 and its help was tremendous, before and after the war. The US was not instrumental for the European theater, but its help was, well, helpful. Very helpful.

 

[Sidhe]

You're the first European that I've ever read say that. Personally, I'm not certain that the US did more good than bad. If it did more good than bad, then it's like 51% good, 49% bad.

As far as WW2 goes, I think it needs no rehashing. The US was an important part of the allies during WW2 and its help was tremendous, before and after the war. The US was not instrumental for the European theater, but its help was, well, helpful. Very helpful.

That I can agree with thanks for that

 

[Hundegesicht]

In Canada, lots of people talk about politics lots of the time. I'll end up discussing politics with family, friends, people at work, professors - it can come up just about anywhere. Sure, I have lots of friends who don't care at all, but I have lots who do too.

However, I would never ask an American basically at random, "What do you think of Bush?" That just going to make for an awkward conversation, and I can completely understand how you'd feel because there's an undertone to it where you're almost expected to denounce him and call him an idiot. I'm surprised so many people have come out and asked you that point blank.

So was I, actually. I asked a Canadian friend of mine about this, and he said the reason this happens so much to me is probably because whenever non-Americans hear about the U.S. in the news, 90% of the time it's President Bush did this, or President Bush did that" and so they just subconciously associate Americans with Bush, not realizing just what little a role Bush plays in the lives of average Americans.* Kind of like a American would think about donuts or hockey when he talks to a Canadian, or eating dogs when talking to a Chinese, or tacos when talking about Mexico, so to them it's just a polike conversational peice. (Like you'd bring up a band on someone's T-shirt to start a convo, for example, or ask "what's the weather like there?")

*I recently once had a fellow American ask me if Bush was a Republican or a Democrat - he had never bothered asking before.

I don't see what's wrong with "Love the country, hate Bush" though. There are millions of Americans who feel that way, let alone non-Americans!

Not the liking/disliking. Just the importance it's placed on it. As opposed to say, love the country/hate the food! or love the country/hate the fat people! or love the country/hate NYC! OR love the country/hate the movies! All of which hold more universal relevance than a single politician.

 

[lutzj]

5.66% of the people in this room are traitors...

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

I think it's perfectly reasonable to say "like the people hate Bush". There are certain sections of my own country that I can't stand for the life of me and I'd hate them too if they got in power. Why am I not given the right to say that about another country? Like the US, hate their breakfasts. (too much sugar in the morning )

Thats speculation, if the americans would have just stayed neutral, the pacific theatar would have been a disaster for allied forces, not to mention supplies that america supplied to britain, the UK was dead meat without the americans support, dead meat, and after that hitler would have made peace with any remaining overseas nations fighting alongside, then focused entirely on destroying the russians..... also all just speculation,

I don't want to get dragged into this argument again and I agree with Sidhe's position above anyway . What I would ask Centurion however is this. If Hilter had taken Europe, Britiain, Russia, and North Africa, do you think that would have been beneficial or detrimental to the US in the long run? My point being that staying neutral was never an option for the US.

however I think its fair to say that the US DID win the war literally, the japanese surrendered to them, because of them. You cannot deny that, its history.

Blissful ignorance of the Allies fighting the Japanese in Burma, South Asia ect.

I think if you put up a pole of who you would want running your country...
Emepror Ming would win hands down

Vote Lib Dem, it could happen!

 

[anarres]

As to the CIA, yes its true they do things that would be considered unacceptable by the general populace, so what? whatever it takes to survive, you don't get to the top by playing by the rules.....

Wow... talk about moving goalposts!!

Can I remind you of what you said?

Agreed, america modernized democracy, america basically won WWII, america stopped the soviets from overunning the world, and invinsibly are saving many many peoples lives through counter-terrorism, Not to mention humanitarian, economic, and scientific progress worldwide.

Yes there have been problems, there have been issues, some presidents have been better or worse than others, and there have been mistakes, just like ALL human governments, however in the long run grand scheme americans have been good for humanity as a whole, and I'm proud to be in an allied country.

As the bolded part shows, you claimed the USA was saving "many many peoples lives through counter-terrorism". I clearly showed that over the years the USA has in fact funded, organised and supported terrorist movements all over the world, costing millions of lives and causing the suffering of millions more.

Your response? "You don't get to the top by playing by the rules"????

Are you a jingoistic fool or just too young to have independant thoughts? IMO we were arguing about the USA as a force for good or bad in the world... not to see which country has the biggest cock.

 

[Sidhe]

Wow... talk about moving goalposts!!

Can I remind you of what you said?
As the bolded part shows, you claimed the USA was saving "many many peoples lives through counter-terrorism". I clearly showed that over the years the USA has in fact funded, organised and supported terrorist movements all over the world, costing millions of lives and causing the suffering of millions more.

Your response? "You don't get to the top by playing by the rules"????

Are you a jingoistic fool or just too young to have independant thoughts? IMO we were arguing about the USA as a force for good or bad in the world... not to see which country has the biggest cock.

England has the biggest cock by several inches by the way

If people knew what the American government gets up to all the time they'd be impeched in about 3 days probably, that's true of most countries it's simply a matter of how long before they would get impeached, in the UK maybe 2 months tops

 

[anarres]

I agree with you Sidhe, and I'm more than willing to accept that my country sucks bigtime.

I would say however, that to claim that the USA is a force of "good" rather than "bad" in the world is assinine, blinkered, juvenile and somewhat ********.

To then acually claim the USA has "freed many many lives through counter-terrorism" is factually incorrect to the point of absurdity, since it has in fact been the driving force of terrorism in South America and much of Asia/Middle East for the last 50 years.