Australians Losing Faith In the United States.

You know, it just occurred to me, we keep talking about colonizing the moon or Mars... why not Australia? Seems reasonable to me. Apparently sending all the prisoners there allowed their wives to take over the government and pussify it.

A2K's OZ membership certainly bears out that assumption.

0 Replies

I think that you don't really believe that the U.S. helped during the second world war. You have the same attitude as many european countries who say they didn't need the U.S. there because they could have won the war without us. It seems to be the thing to do now attacking the people who gave up so much during the war. Some of us made large sums of money. Most of us didn't and also lost many loved ones. Attack the government as much as you want to because I agree the present government as it is today isn't worth a dam but why attack the U.S. citizens.

0 Replies

dlowan wrote:

dadpad wrote:
dlowan wrote:
dadpad wrote:
We already flogged the welsh.

We did?
When?
How?
Where?

Rugby union world cup pool matche in cardiff about a week ago. Catch up wabbit thats an important cultural victory.

Aaaah, is that all?

We shoulda let them win.....look at who they have for a prince, poor bastards.

That idiot prince is gunna be our king, soon enough! Unless we get rid of him - I'm not too fussy which way!

0 Replies

margo wrote:

dlowan wrote:
dadpad wrote:
dlowan wrote:
dadpad wrote:
We already flogged the welsh.

We did?
When?
How?
Where?

Rugby union world cup pool matche in cardiff about a week ago. Catch up wabbit thats an important cultural victory.

Aaaah, is that all?

We shoulda let them win.....look at who they have for a prince, poor bastards.

That idiot prince is gunna be our king, soon enough! Unless we get rid of him - I'm not too fussy which way!

Yes...but he's a long way away...and he doesn't have our name after him.

0 Replies

Rabel22

Quote:

I think that you don't really believe that the U.S. helped during the second world war.

You need to clarify who you are talking about.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Quote:

Finn dAbuzz
Recognition of the exceptional nature of America doesn't require uncritical support. It doesn't require support of any kind, just an honest and intelligent perception of history.

Interestingthis statement contradicts so much of what you have said in the rest of your postthe rest of the post appears to say that you want people to show gratitude, and it appears aimed squarely at those that have criticised the US.

The above quote contradicts this :

Quote:

if one lives in a land kept free by American involvement, it is only civil to express some measure of gratitude.

and this :

Quote:

The accurate comment made that without US involvement in WWII, Australia would have fallen to the Japanese is an understandable expression of displeasure with perceived ingratitude.

and this :

Quote:

A very large number of Americans died in fighting a war that took place on foreign soil. Whether or not one is able to acknowledge the altruistic nature of America's involvement,

And this :

Quote:

It is customary for critics of America to totally ignore the most distinquishing aspect of it's actions relative to WWII:

In relation to this :
just an honest and intelligent perception of history

In the last century, the US has engaged in many foreign policy actions that deserve criticism. And Any ?'honest, and intelligent perception of history' would show that America's involvement was not entirely altruistic as you describe itI'm sure that it had many good and benevolent motives and altruism isn't one of them or it would have entered the war much, much earlier. The US only declared war on Japan only after Japan attacked the US at Pearl Harbor.

..

As another side of the gratitude argument, tell me, do you like someone blaming you for something your country did before you were even born? say, murdering 1.4 Million Philipino's in the aforementioned American invasion of the Philipines 1899-1902? If not, then why do you insist on claiming the gratitude earned by your forebears during WW2? Do you only claim the positive things, and not the negative things?

.

Personally, I am thankful to the Australian, American, New Zealand, Canadian, Indian, British and any other troops that at any stage took part in the defense against the Japanese.

For the Americans - they shed a lot of blood that benefited my country, other countries, and also the US, and I am thankful that their actions benefited my country. Most people I know, myself included, are thankful that American might helped turn the tide of the War and keep Australia from being invaded. This does not, and should not stop Australians (or anyone) from expressing their concern over things they disagree with.

By the way, to say anything other than Americans helped win the war is to lessen the lives of every other soldier from every other nation that took part in the war. Very few Americans seem to understand this.

0 Replies

And yet another thought on a sustained gratitude.

It seems that I hold no ill will towards the Japanese at all, yet they attempted to invade my country 60 years ago.

Now...considering some Americans still ask for gratitude from the same event (WW2) which occurred 60 years ago, should I also still show ill will towards the Japanese? Or should the said gratitude be treated like said feelings towards the Japanese? Or should another path be followed?

0 Replies

Vikorr
I don't want gratitude. Just honesty. If you want to point out the injustices of various countries why don't you concentrate on your own country and point out the attempt to eradicate the people who were in your country before you got there as the U. S . europeans did the the American Indian. Before you point out the injustice of other countries admit to your own first.

0 Replies

I have a question for those that are criticizing the US.
But before I ask,I will stipulate that some of the citicism is valid.

Now for my question...

Why is it that the US, which has been in existence less then 240 years,has gotten so powerful?
Are we so different then the rest of the planet?
Countries in Europe that have been around for hundreds of years have not accomplished as much as the US.
Neither have the asian countries like China or Japan.

What makes the US so different that we can put a man on the moon, be considered the "arsenal of Democracy" and play a large part in saving the world during WW2?

Along with all of our other accomplishments, what makes the US so different that this country,one just barely out of its infancy compared to other countries, can lead the world in so many different areas?

0 Replies

Very funny, mysterman.

You actually seem to be saying that no other country in history has achieved as much as the United States have.

That's really cute.

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

Very funny, mysterman.

You actually seem to be saying that no other country in history has achieved as much as the United States have.

That's really cute.

How many other countries put a man on the moon?
How many other countries developed the cures to so many diseases?
How many other countries had a constitution like ours before us?
How many other countries have accomplished what the US has?

What I mean is,why didnt a country like England, one which has been around for several hundred years,create as much,build as much,or accomplish as much as the US?

I am not saying that other countries havent accomplished anything, but in many ways it seems that the US has lead the world.

Why is that when we are still a young country,compared to the countries of Europe or China?

Shouldnt those countries have done as much or more?

0 Replies

If you actually took the time to look outside your own borders (there is a world out there you know) - maybe poke your head into the Australia forum, you will find Australians expressing disgust at many of it's country's policies, both past and present.

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

How many other countries put a man on the moon?
How many other countries developed the cures to so many diseases?

Mhm sure.

And all of that was achieved by the good people of the United States, without building on the research done by people or countries elsewhere in the world, right?

Gas fuelled engines, space rockets, computers - all invented by Americans, right?

mysteryman wrote:

How many other countries had a constitution like ours before us?

Well, the idea of having a written document that declares the rights of the citizens of a country or territory appears to be a couple of thousands of years old...

mysteryman wrote:

How many other countries have accomplished what the US has?

None.

Same goes for the Roman Empire, right?

mysteryman wrote:

What I mean is,why didnt a country like England, one which has been around for several hundred years,create as much,build as much,or accomplish as much as the US?

I guess it can be said that in the days of the British Empire, it accomplished at least as much as the United States have done in the last couple of decades.

Yes, they did not come up with a lunar vehicle before the steam engine existed. You can blame them for that.

mysteryman wrote:

I am not saying that other countries havent accomplished anything, but in many ways it seems that the US has lead the world.

Sure. You're a powerful nation now.

So was Spain, or Portugal, or France, or the Netherlands, or Britain. Just take a world map and look at the languages spoken throughout all those countries: lots of European languages there, eh?

mysteryman wrote:

Why is that when we are still a young country,compared to the countries of Europe or China?

Just like French cheese, you'll age as a nation, too.

mysteryman wrote:

Shouldnt those countries have done as much or more?

They have.

0 Replies

I had spent a lot of time in Australia.( sydney)
Australians are as intellectual as Americans if not more..
Am i wrong?
I stand for your corrective civil response

0 Replies

Ramafuchs wrote:

I had spent a lot of time in Australia.( sydney)
Australians are as intellectual as Americans if not more..
Am i wrong?
I stand for your corrective civil response

From an Australian point of view, I haven't spent any time in America or enough time around Americans to be able to draw such a comparison. Though I suspect if you spent any time at my workplace, you wouldn't have come to that conclusion

0 Replies

I think Australians are at least as intellectual as Americans. And the corollary is true as well I believe.

0 Replies

Quote:

Vikorr
I don't want gratitude. Just honesty.

Hello Rabbel
Why then do you have a problem with any of my posts?

Quote:

If you want to point out the injustices of various countries why don't you concentrate on your own country and point out the attempt to eradicate the people who were in your country before you got there as the U. S . europeans did the the American Indian. Before you point out the injustice of other countries admit to your own first.

Oh I don't just restrict criticism where it is deserved to the US.for we here in Australia have much that can be criticized, both in the past, and in the present, including the almost eradication of the Aboriginal population (In Tasmania they succeeded). There was also the disgraceful abandonment of some of our closest neighbours, including the East Timorese people (who sacrificed 60,000 native lives during WW2, arguably in the defence of Australia) when Indonesia invaded in 75, and the same for the West Papuan people whom Indonesia also invaded, and who are still an invaded and subjugated country today, but Australia refuses to acknowledge such. In the last 1980's, one of our Prime Ministers Paul Keating called Suharto (an ex president of Indonesia) an Elder StatesmenSuharto butchered 500,000 of his own people on his rise to power.

If you go back to look at how my posts started as a ?'criticism' of the US, you will find that many people were making misleading or false statements (probably unintentionally), and I was simply trying to correct such. That of necessity involved stating things in US history that would be construed as criticism, which appears to have upset a number of people.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

I think Australians are at least as intellectual as Americans. And the corollary is true as well I believe.

I heard that.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

I think Australians are at least as intellectual as Americans. And the corollary is true as well I believe.

Did you mean "converse"?

0 Replies

vikorr wrote:

Rabel22

Quote:
I think that you don't really believe that the U.S. helped during the second world war.

You need to clarify who you are talking about.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Finn dAbuzz
Recognition of the exceptional nature of America doesn't require uncritical support. It doesn't require support of any kind, just an honest and intelligent perception of history.

Interestingthis statement contradicts so much of what you have said in the rest of your postthe rest of the post appears to say that you want people to show gratitude, and it appears aimed squarely at those that have criticised the US.

How so? Critcal support does not preclude some measure of gratitude.
Gratitude is not synonomous with support.

The above quote contradicts this :

Quote:
if one lives in a land kept free by American involvement, it is only civil to express some measure of gratitude.

and this :

Quote:
The accurate comment made that without US involvement in WWII, Australia would have fallen to the Japanese is an understandable expression of displeasure with perceived ingratitude.

and this :

Quote:
A very large number of Americans died in fighting a war that took place on foreign soil. Whether or not one is able to acknowledge the altruistic nature of America's involvement,

And this :

Quote:
It is customary for critics of America to totally ignore the most distinquishing aspect of it's actions relative to WWII:

In relation to this :
just an honest and intelligent perception of history

In the last century, the US has engaged in many foreign policy actions that deserve criticism. And Any ?'honest, and intelligent perception of history' would show that America's involvement was not entirely altruistic as you describe itI'm sure that it had many good and benevolent motives and altruism isn't one of them or it would have entered the war much, much earlier. The US only declared war on Japan only after Japan attacked the US at Pearl Harbor.

You are struggling here to maintain some postion I'm not even aware you ever took. I've not described America's involvement in any conflict as entirely altruistic. In fact I have specifically conceded that America's motive have not been entirely altruistic.

I'm not sure what you think altruism means but it's hard to imagine that the US had good and benevolent reasons for entering WWII that were not in some way based on altruism.

Altruism is throwing yourself in front of a bus to push aside a young woman who would otherwise have been killed.

Unless you can mount a credible argument that America throwing itself in front of the WWII bus was a act of pure self-interest, altruism existed.

..

As another side of the gratitude argument, tell me, do you like someone blaming you for something your country did before you were even born? say, murdering 1.4 Million Philipino's in the aforementioned American invasion of the Philipines 1899-1902? If not, then why do you insist on claiming the gratitude earned by your forebears during WW2? Do you only claim the positive things, and not the negative things?

I don't want your gratitude. I never earned it. Those who died or suffered, like my uncle, deserve your gratitude even if you were not born during the days of their heroics. If you wish to dodge what is merely a civil obligation by citing America's past sins, go for it. Your ingratitude speaks far more loudly of your character than of America's.

.

Personally, I am thankful to the Australian, American, New Zealand, Canadian, Indian, British and any other troops that at any stage took part in the defense against the Japanese.

Good for you!

For the Americans - they shed a lot of blood that benefited my country, other countries, and also the US, and I am thankful that their actions benefited my country. Most people I know, myself included, are thankful that American might helped turn the tide of the War and keep Australia from being invaded. This does not, and should not stop Australians (or anyone) from expressing their concern over things they disagree with.

Of course not - who has argued that it should?

By the way, to say anything other than Americans helped win the war is to lessen the lives of every other soldier from every other nation that took part in the war. Very few Americans seem to understand this.

Nonsense. Americans do not believe that they alone won WWII or, more importantly, that they alone suffered losses.

The point you seem unable to recognize is that of the major allies, only America was spending blood and treasure in a war in which it's homeland was not directly under attack. There were scores of British, Australian, New Zealander, Phillipino, Chinese, Burmese, and Nepalese heros during WWII, but they were fighting for something different that what the Yanks were.

This is not at all to denigrate the contribution of the Canadians, and the Brazilians who also spent blood and treasure in a war in which they were not directly threatened, and deserve the gratitude of the citizens of nations under direct threat.

My basic point is that not only did America spend blood and treasure in a war in which it was not directly threatened, when it it was all over and it was on top of the world, not only did it not attempt to own that world, it spent additional treasure on restoring its enemies. If this is not exceptional within the context of history, I don't know what is.

0 Replies

Quote:

Recognition of the exceptional nature of America doesn't require uncritical support

You believe in the exceptional nature of the US. I believe it's economy and power are exceptional, that it's geographic position is exceptional, that it's geography is exceptional, but that it's government (in terms of foreign policy) is not. And lastly relating to this, that it's people are just like any other Anglo Saxon peoples, with the added problem that it's people in general appear less aware of the surrounding world than other anglo-saxon countries, and more vociferous of it's righteousness and greatness than is healthy (for the amount of power that it has)

Quote:

It doesn't require support of any kind, just an honest and intelligent perception of history.

Yet that seems to be what has caused your objection here.

Quote:

Critcal support does not preclude some measure of gratitude.

I expressed it on page 11. Apparently that doesn't satisfy you, for your post shows you read it.

Quote:

You are struggling here to maintain some postion I'm not even aware you ever took. I've not described America's involvement in any conflict as entirely altruistic

Page 6 you admitted that, page 7 you added a ?'but', Page 10 you stated outright that Americas motives were altruistic.

Quote:

Page 6
This is not to suggest that the US is fully motivated by altruism (although I am a firm believer that the American Empire has been the most altruistic in history

Page 7
Of course this doesn't mean that the intervention was born solely of altruism, but it should be hard to impugn the motives of a nation that could easily have ruled the world post WWII and not only did not, but sunk tons of treasure into rebuilding the defeated wolves that started the whole mess.

Page 10
A very large number of Americans died in fighting a war that took place on foreign soil. Whether or not one is able to acknowledge the altruistic nature of America's involvement

http://www.askoxford.com/results/?view=dict&freesearch=altruism&branch=13842570&textsearchtype=exact

altruism
/altroo-iz'm/
noun 1 unselfish concern for others. 2 Zoology behaviour of an animal that benefits another at its own expense.

Quote:

I'm not sure what you think altruism means but it's hard to imagine that the US had good and benevolent reasons for entering WWII that were not in some way based on altruism.

See above. You must have misread my posts. I said that I had no doubt that there were many motives for the US entering WWII.

Quote:

I don't want your gratitude. I never earned it. Those who died or suffered, like my uncle, deserve your gratitude even if you were not born during the days of their heroics. If you wish to dodge what is merely a civil obligation by citing America's past sins, go for it. Your ingratitude speaks far more loudly of your character than of America's.

So you've finally come out and said it outright. You believe it's an obligation. I find that to be both saddening and arrogant. For all your denials about not wanting gratitude, you now admit it's a demand. For all your statements about the altruism of your WW2 govt, you denigrate any such claim through your demand that this ?'obligation' be met.

Gratitude is never demanded, nor is it ever an obligation - it is only ever freely given.

I am thankful to those people who fought wars on Australia's behalf that have contributed to the way it is today, including among others, Americans. I have also expressed that in this forum. That you can't accept that is your problem.

I'm also curious - if you don't want my gratitude because you've never earned it, then why does your perception that I am ungrateful bother you so much? Personally it seems to me that you are just dodging the issue (that you actually do want gratitude) over and over again while shooting yourself in the foot each time.

Quote:

The point you seem unable to recognize is that of the major allies, only America was spending blood and treasure in a war in which it's homeland was not directly under attack.

Where on earth did I say that? You are reading way more into my posts that I've ever said.

Quote:

My basic point is that not only did America spend blood and treasure in a war in which it was not directly threatened, when it it was all over and it was on top of the world, not only did it not attempt to own that world, it spent additional treasure on restoring its enemies. If this is not exceptional within the context of history, I don't know what is.

Common sense? It's what I would have done if my country needed trading partners for it's goods, and needed Europe not to fall under the sway of communism, of which the western half did.

You wish to believe in the exceptionalness of the US, extending it to it's people. I say that you, that there are many things exceptional about the US, often not including it's foreign policy, and that you and your fellow countrymen, are like me and my countrymen, except with a great deal more power, and a little less awareness of the world.

As far as I can see, the above, and that it appears you take any criticism, no matter how accurate, as a display of ingratitude, appears to personally offend you. It is the only explanation I can find for this silliness that has been going on for the last few pages.

0 Replies

Australians Losing Faith In the United States.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know