IS AMERICA A BULLY?

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
Not sure why some of you think this to be an inappropriate comparison...but I think it is entirely appropriate...and reasonable.

And I think if King George had dealt with the American rebels with the same 'restraint' shown by US troops in Iraq or Afghanistan, history would remember George Washington as a guy with a black hood on his head.

But I understand that you might disagree with that... Fine!

Yeah, I do.

But...if the Revolution had been a failure...Washington, and many others of the Founding Fathers, would have been hanged as traitors.

John Harrington noted, "Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? Why if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

By the same token...if it prosper...what one side would call a traitor is almost always know by the winning side as a great hero.

In my opinion, England, during the 17th, 18th, and 10th centuries, wielded its power with much less restraint than the US does with its.

I understand and acknowledge that reasonable, well-intentioned, intelligent people can disagree with me on that. I also understand and acknowledge that unreasonable, poorly-intentioned, not-especially-intelligent people can disagree with me also.

5 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
Not sure why some of you think this to be an inappropriate comparison...but I think it is entirely appropriate...and reasonable.

And I think if King George had dealt with the American rebels with the same 'restraint' shown by US troops in Iraq or Afghanistan, history would remember George Washington as a guy with a black hood on his head.

But I understand that you might disagree with that... Fine!

Frank Apisa wrote:

Yeah, I do.

But...if the Revolution had been a failure...Washington, and many others of the Founding Fathers, would have been hanged as traitors.

John Harrington noted, "Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? Why if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

By the same token...if it prosper...what one side would call a traitor is almost always know by the winning side as a great hero.

In my opinion, England, during the 17th, 18th, and 10th centuries, wielded its power with much less restraint than the US does with its.

I understand and acknowledge that reasonable, well-intentioned, intelligent people can disagree with me on that. I also understand and acknowledge that unreasonable, poorly-intentioned, not-especially-intelligent people can disagree with me also.

Can ANYone agree with u ???

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
Not sure why some of you think this to be an inappropriate comparison...but I think it is entirely appropriate...and reasonable.

And I think if King George had dealt with the American rebels with the same 'restraint' shown by US troops in Iraq or Afghanistan, history would remember George Washington as a guy with a black hood on his head.

But I understand that you might disagree with that... Fine!

Frank Apisa wrote:
Yeah, I do.

But...if the Revolution had been a failure...Washington, and many others of the Founding Fathers, would have been hanged as traitors.

John Harrington noted, "Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? Why if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

By the same token...if it prosper...what one side would call a traitor is almost always know by the winning side as a great hero.

In my opinion, England, during the 17th, 18th, and 10th centuries, wielded its power with much less restraint than the US does with its.

I understand and acknowledge that reasonable, well-intentioned, intelligent people can disagree with me on that. I also understand and acknowledge that unreasonable, poorly-intentioned, not-especially-intelligent people can disagree with me also.
Can ANYone agree with u ???

Sure!

And every once in a while, someone does!

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

In my opinion, England, during the 17th, 18th, and 10th centuries, wielded its power with much less restraint than the US does with its.

Finally. The debate is defined

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

OK. That proves it.

0 Replies

@panzade,

panzade wrote:

Quote:
In my opinion, England, during the 17th, 18th, and 10th centuries, wielded its power with much less restraint than the US does with its.

Finally. The debate is defined

HAVE at it !

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

But...if the Revolution had been a failure...Washington, and many others of the Founding Fathers, would have been hanged as traitors.

I don't know about that. Did they threaten it? The Brits did not hang Napoleon. Under certain aspects, those were more civilized times, at least when dealing with leaders. Other times, other ways.

I just think the whole comparison is sort of slanted heavily by a sea change in the importance of world opinion. Caesar did not lose sleep about the 'Arab street', though he might have about Rome streets... Today's expectations on democratically elected leaders are far higher than in antiquity or the Middle Ages.

However, even that rise of mass media and world opinion, is historical in nature and hence fragile or 'transient' as Fresco would say. Recent history has presided over a grand fall of the 4th power in the US, with media enlisted by corporations, instrumentalised by politicians and commercialised by networks, churning up low-cost, low-IQ, biased BS as 'news'. History has proven that the US public opinion and elites can be manipulated at will. Which is why I think we're back to torture and stuff: because it doesn't matter to the public anymore.

4 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

But...if the Revolution had been a failure...Washington,
and many others of the Founding Fathers, would have been hanged as traitors.

Olivier5 wrote:

I don't know about that. Did they threaten it?
The Brits did not hang Napoleon.

Did thay accuse him of treason against the King of England??

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

good points

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Quote:
But...if the Revolution had been a failure...Washington,
and many others of the Founding Fathers, would have been hanged as traitors.
Olivier5 wrote:
I don't know about that. Did they threaten it?
The Brits did not hang Napoleon.
Did thay accuse him of treason against the King of England??

Thank you, David!

There is that difference!

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

I don't know about that. Did they threaten it? The Brits did not hang Napoleon. Under certain aspects, those were more civilized times, at least when dealing with leaders. Other times, other ways.

I just think the whole comparison is sort of slanted heavily by
a sea change in the importance of world opinion.

What 's a SEA CHANGE ??

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:

I just think the whole comparison is sort of slanted heavily by a sea change in the importance of world opinion.

Well, I will give you this, Olivier:

This particular thread IS slanted...because I just feel the animosity directed toward the US is way overboard...and some Americans have to at least make an attempt to stand for our country.

The opinion IS SLANTED...I am not claiming to be impartial.

But that does not mean that the argument I am presenting ought to be dismissed out-of-hand...that it ought not to be given reasonable consideration.

Having a country with as much power as the US has right now...in hands other than the government of the US...

...could be a scenario of much worse proportions.

That's how I feel.

Disagree if you have to...or if you just want to.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:

I just think the whole comparison is sort of slanted heavily by a sea change in the importance of world opinion.

Frank Apisa wrote:

Well, I will give you this, Olivier:

This particular thread IS slanted...because I just feel
the animosity directed toward the US is way overboard...

I 'M AN AMERICAN,
born & bred in New York, and I don t mind, IN THE LEAST.

The aliens count for nothing.

David

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

The opinion IS SLANTED...I am not claiming to be impartial.

Nobody can claim impartiality, not even you Frank. I can discuss history with a slanted guy but spare me the platitudes. My point was that expectations vested on leaders change over time. Today's world leader cannot throw a decent orgy in the White House without impeachment threats! Where are the Borgias or Nero of yester-eon?

Quote:

Having a country with as much power as the US has right now...in hands other than the government of the US...

Let's hope you're right. My history tells me that world powers play it nice when they are on the rise, and nasty when in retreat.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

The aliens count for nothing.

You shouldn't bad-mouth them . They left you on this planet

0 Replies

@panzade,

Thanks

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_change_(transformation)

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
The opinion IS SLANTED...I am not claiming to be impartial.

Nobody can claim impartiality, not even you Frank. I can discuss history with a slanted guy but spare me the platitudes. My point was that expectations vested on leaders change over time. Today's world leader cannot throw a decent orgy in the White House without impeachment threats! Where are the Borgias or Nero of yester-eon?

Quote:
Having a country with as much power as the US has right now...in hands other than the government of the US...

Let's hope you're right. My history tells me that world powers play it nice when they are on the rise, and nasty when in retreat.

Good point once again, Olivier.

The Soviet Union managed the fall with more grace than I expected. But there was the power of the US to keep them from going far over the line.

I hope we are able to make a graceful exit also.

I expect that China will be the power that will keep us from stepping over the line...although it may be ourselves. Our fall will almost certain come as the result of splitting of the country. My guess: Texas, Alaska and California will start it...and the confederate states other than Texas will follow. Then the western states and the prairie states will leave the northeast.

Could happen sooner than anyone thinks.

But all that aside...it still is my opinion that we have acted reasonably for a world power...and certainly with more restrain than others have shown.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:

I just think the whole comparison is sort of slanted heavily by a sea change in the importance of world opinion.

Frank Apisa wrote:
Well, I will give you this, Olivier:

This particular thread IS slanted...because I just feel
the animosity directed toward the US is way overboard...
I 'M AN AMERICAN,
born & bred in New York, and I don t mind, IN THE LEAST.

Thank you, David.

Quote:

The aliens count for nothing.

David

I do not sign on to this last part.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Our fall will almost certain come as the result of splitting of the country. My guess: Texas, Alaska and California will start it...and the confederate states other than Texas will follow. Then the western states and the prairie states will leave the northeast.

Your fall is happening as we speak, as the result of Washington DC' recent decadence. What used to be a pragmatic, venerable democratic system has morphed under our sorry eyes in an unpredictable, unmanageable, Kafkaesque (sp?) machinery mixing political and private interests.

Quote:

But all that aside...it still is my opinion that we have acted reasonably for a world power...and certainly with more restrain than others have shown.

That used to be true but the corner's been turned a long time ago. While the great generation displayed great (and politically very effective) benevolence after WW2, the Vietnam war cannot be described as "benevolent". Nor does it strike me as a display of restrain from the US army. So your statement is outdated by a few decades.

Funnily enough, it is ALSO outdated as a political or ideological stance, or slogan. Long after the Vietnam war, the US kept PRETENDING to be benevolent, and your 'defense' of the US is very similar to that line of self-serving propaganda. But even this is outdated: as David told you, Americans do not care anymore about what non-US 'foreigners' think. In modern-day America, only a sissy would care if other nations called the US a bully. E.g. the US public doesn't care about Gitmo anymore, or about the bad press associated with it, hence it remains 'open'. And nobody ever bothers to give the 'benevolent' line anymore. Sooo passé.

3 Replies

IS AMERICA A BULLY?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know