Anti anti-Americanism

McGentrix wrote:

There is very little to the opinion leading this thread that does not have truth behind it.

After noting that i am no more, nor any less likely to read cut-and-paste jobs by Mr. Mountie than by thee, Captain America . . .

. . . this, of course, is merely your opinion.

0 Replies

Oh, c'mon! Even you gotta admit Cap'n is a nice touch!

0 Replies

No, i don't . . . i find it amusing, however . . .

0 Replies

There wasn't a single post from anyone to disprove what Mc.G posted. I love the way they attacked you instead of responding to the article.

They on the left want to talk about cut and paste jobs, well they should look at their buddies before making such comments. Most if not all threads on this board start with a cut and paste job and decline from there.

0 Replies

Baldimo, it's hard to disprove an opinion.

What does the article tell us at all, in your opinion? McG refused to answer, so I don't even know to which purpose he posted it....

0 Replies

Baldimon wrote:

There wasn't a single post from anyone to disprove what Mc.G posted.

This, of course, is an absurdity--those who make a claim are obliged to prove the claim, if they expect it to be seriously considered. Others are not obliged to disprove it.

Quote:

I love the way they attacked you instead of responding to the article.

You loved it? What's the matter, don't you like Captain America? I question your reading comprehension skills--Intrepid immediately asked for McG's opinion on the validity of the claim in the article. This was followed by a blanket slur upon those with whom he/she disagrees by Rayban--no one had "attacked" McG by that point. Candidone then quoted a portion of the article, and asked McG if he were kidding. I then pointed out that McG takes his cut and paste jobs very seriously. Old Europe then posted twice with appropriate reference to the article in the first post. Parados then responded to the substance of the article. Atkins then responded to Parados. This was followed by a snide remark from Rayban about people "in poverty."

So the first page went by, and makes a liar out you--no one attacked McG, and several people responded to the substance of the article, even going so far as to quote it.

So, as one would not wish to characterize you as a willful liar in the statement of yours which i have quoted, one can only assume that you lack reading comprehension skills.

Quote:

They on the left want to talk about cut and paste jobs, well they should look at their buddies before making such comments. Most if not all threads on this board start with a cut and paste job and decline from there.

This statement is so far from a realistic statement of what goes on at this site as to make your reason suspect. However, rather than advance such a contention, i'll simply assume that you mistake this site for Free Republic, only look at the political forum in the hope of finding an occassion to pounce on those with whom you disagree, and then make a very bad judgement about how the majorithy of threads at this site are begun. You need to get out more, Boss, take a stroll around the non-political portions of this site, its quite a large and interesting place.

Of course, if you do treat this as though it were a monomaniacal obsession board, such as Free Republic, then such advice is wasted. In such a case as that, your only purpose in coming here is to find cause to attack, condemn or laugh at others.

Finally, it does not occur to you, obviously, that no response is considered necessary when the thesis is nonsense.

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

Baldimo, it's hard to disprove an opinion.

What does the article tell us at all, in your opinion? McG refused to answer, so I don't even know to which purpose he posted it....

Are you going to tell me that the tons of articles posted by people by Paul Krugman are packed full of facts? They are nothing more opinion pieces but some post them like fact. I don't know why people haven't complained about that. Could it be because they agree with him so therefore take his word as gold?

It isn't opinion that there are elections going on in places that didn't have them prior to 9/11 when the US woke up and started to take action. It isn't opinion that China has started to become a money power house in which we know all Communist countries turn into military might. So indeed Japan which has started the process of removing a defense force only military into one in which it can do more then just defend it's self. Taiwan is learning that being in the shadow of a communist govt isn't such a good idea and would like to remove itself but China being the type of govt in which it is has threatened all out war on the country.

0 Replies

Setanta, You and I got off on the wrong foot with our fundamental understanding of the workings of the war of 1812. We are, however, in solid agreement on the contents of this discussion.

I have yet to see a post from Baldimo where he was not attacking someone or putting words out of context. I support everyones entitlement to state their opinions, but it is not necessary to attack others to do it. Especially by accussing them of doing just that. I find his signature line intriguing to say the least.

I smiled at the Captain America remark because I had exactly the same thought earlier.

Perhaps both Mr. McG and Mr. Baldimo would like to present their opinions on this topic so that discussion could take place in a gentlemanly manner with opinions rather than slander.

0 Replies

Okay, that at least something.... Now let's see:

Baldimo wrote:

Are you going to tell me that the tons of articles posted by people by Paul Krugman are packed full of facts?

No.

Baldimo wrote:

They are nothing more opinion pieces but some post them like fact. I don't know why people haven't complained about that.

Feel free to complain about it.

Baldimo wrote:

Could it be because they agree with him so therefore take his word as gold?

No.

Baldimo wrote:

It isn't opinion that there are elections going on in places that didn't have them prior to 9/11

True.

Baldimo wrote:

... when the US woke up and started to take action.

There's not necessarily a connection, but yes.

Baldimo wrote:

It isn't opinion that China has started to become a money power house in which we know all Communist countries turn into military might.

"all Communist countries turn into military might"? I don't understand.

Baldimo wrote:

So indeed Japan which has started the process of removing a defense force only military into one in which it can do more then just defend it's self. Taiwan is learning that being in the shadow of a communist govt isn't such a good idea and would like to remove itself but China being the type of govt in which it is has threatened all out war on the country.

Whatever.

So, why exactly do you think (if you do think so) that Bush has done so much to end anti-Americanism? Because I can't see any logical connection between the facts you mentioned and the conclusion you draw (if you did so). Care to elaborate? For example, how exactly does China becoming more and more powerful show that Bush has done so much to end anti-Americanism? I just want to understand your logic.

0 Replies

Intrepid, I posted the article because I agreed with it. It reflects my opinion, yet does so in such a way I do not have to type it all in.

It is my opinion.

Perhaps you need to read more of Setanta's posts. you will find him to be a leading candidate in having posts that are nothing more than thinly veiled attacks. If it wasn't for the one lucid post he made in between the 15 attacks, I would skip every post he made.

So please, do not buddy up with Setanta as though he is an innocent. It's most definitely not reflective of his true nature.

0 Replies

I resent that statement--i make out-right attacks, i don't veil them, thinly or otherwise.

0 Replies

That's true, Setanta.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Intrepid, I posted the article because I agreed with it. It reflects my opinion, yet does so in such a way I do not have to type it all in.

It is my opinion.

Perhaps you need to read more of Setanta's posts. you will find him to be a leading candidate in having posts that are nothing more than thinly veiled attacks. If it wasn't for the one lucid post he made in between the 15 attacks, I would skip every post he made.

So please, do not buddy up with Setanta as though he is an innocent. It's most definitely not reflective of his true nature.

Thank you for stating your opinion as requested. I HAVE read several of Setanta's posts. I did not say I agreed with every one. Most, I have a difference of opinion with, some I agree with, some I dismiss. In this instance, I totally agreed with him.

I am not buddying up with Setanta, I am agreeing with him. As though he is innocent of what? Is he guilty of something in this instance? I think not. I am sure he and I will but heads again, but that is for another time and thread.

0 Replies

old europe:

Quote:

There's not necessarily a connection, but yes.

There is a connection. Before 9/11 there were no talks of Syria leaving Lebanon, there were no elections in Afghanistan or Iraq. I know there is a direct connection between Iraq and Afghanistan but Syria didn't have any plans to leave Lebanon until Bush started applying pressure.

Quote:

"all Communist countries turn into military might"? I don't understand.

Russia, China when it first became communist (Tibet), North Vietnam (South Vietnam), Cuba being involved in Grenada, North Korea (South Korea) and just about any other South American country that turned Communist.

Quote:

So, why exactly do you think (if you do think so) that Bush has done so much to end anti-Americanism?

See above for some examples.

It won't be seen right away but it will be realized. Reagan wasn't given the credit at the time for the fall of the USSR and ending the biggest threat to democracy there ever was. It might take about 10 or 15 years but Bush will be remembered for making moves that changed the ME in a positive light.

Quote:

Because I can't see any logical connection between the facts you mentioned and the conclusion you draw (if you did so).

See above. No president had requested the removal of Syria from Lebanon, Bush made that move and it has taken place. Clinton wasn't willing to commit troops to remove Saddam or hunt down terrorists let alone destroy their networks or make it difficult for them to conduct business. Bush has done this.

Quote:

For example, how exactly does China becoming more and more powerful show that Bush has done so much to end anti-Americanism? I just want to understand your logic.

Bush is showing support for nations in that area to intercept China if they try to make more power grabs like they did in the past. A show of support for Japan to increase their military past a defense force is the most prominent that I can think of. They already have one of the most advanced Navies in the world and it won't be long before they have one of the most advanced land and air militaries in the world as well. President Bush supports this because he knows China as well as North Korea could be threats in the near future and we will need help.

0 Replies

What is the difference between when Clinton was in and when Bush was in.... except for the thousands of lifes lost, that is? Perhaps Clinton saw the futility! Is anyone more free than they were before? How many billions are you putting into a good offence?

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

What is the difference between when Clinton was in and when Bush was in.... except for the thousands of lifes lost, that is? Perhaps Clinton saw the futility! Is anyone more free than they were before? How many billions are you putting into a good offence?

To prepare for peace you must prepare for war!

Any other points you wish to make or is that the extent?

0 Replies

Preparing for war and starting one are a bit different, wouldn't you say?

Yes, that is the extent since I haven't seen any answers worthy of further discussion.

0 Replies

Are you sure Hanson wasn't a bit tongue-in-cheek with this article? I mean it reeks of that segment from the Life of Brian where the Judean People's Liberation Front or whatever they called themselves were going on about the Romans - you know the bit where they discussed the acqueducts and so on. I must admit it crossed my mind when I read his article.

The other thing that crossed my mind about the article is "why"? Why did he write it? I do thank you for the link though, I shall read up about political correctness destroying the LAPD, I have a professional interest in knowing as much about that as I can. But I digress.

Anti-Americanism. Speaking as a ferriner I think I'm in a position to put my opinion. I can never remember being "Anti-American". Mind you I have never felt a need for slavish imitation or uncritical adoration but for as long as I remember I have been instead fascinated by America. It's trite to observe that there is no "America" instead there are hundreds and hundreds of "Americas". People in my country who have never spent any time in the States believe it's just as it appears on television and film. Some of the more snobbish look down on what they think is American culture without realising there are many cultures.

Anti-Americanism is simplistic - as is Anti-Anti-Americanism. Hanson is making a virtue out of a vice with some of his points. US military withdrawn from Germany. Well they weren't there to boost the German economy were they? Were they? I think not. The Bushii is in Red Square for crying out loud, if you needed a clue about the end of the Cold War there it is. Of course the military is being withdrawn from Germany. Poland isn't a sort of autobahn for T80s from the Soviet Union any longer.

I admit to being less than enamoured with some aspects of America - but not Americans. The religiosity, the rap/gangsta culture, the acquisition of the almightly dollar as the moral compass for all things, people who give me the finger on the 405, Republicans...just kidding on the Republicans!

As a good friend of mind in California told me as he was driving me around Rancho Mirage (where he had one of his homes) in his golf cart - "you might not like America but you've never met an American you didn't like". Pretty accurate.

But I haven't met Hanson or the Bushii yet and I suspect I'd get on with the Bushii rather than the Hanson, at least the Bushii has a sense of humour Very Happy

Don't forget that in the wake of 9/11 the world declared itself to be American - go back and read the articles. What happened? Ask the Bushii, ask Cheney (now him I would definitely not get on with, even if we drank buckets of beer together), ask Rumsfeld. It's political baby, not personal. We love youse all, we just don't like your gummint.

0 Replies

Since McG isn't defending himself, or his initial position...I will add this to the argument to redirect the thread for perhaps some more constructive responses (and I never jump to side with McG, but nevertheless, he may be right on this one)

Quote:

Anti-Americanism and Responses to American Power
by Helle C. Dale
Heritage Lecture #870

April 7, 2005 | |

Few nations spend as much time worrying about how the world perceives them as America does. In the history of superpowers, great powers, or imperial powers, the American concern with likeability is unmatched. Did the Romans, the Ottoman Turks, or the Soviets worry about popularity ratings? Does it bother the Chinese that their system of government is widely regarded as repressive? Certainly not to the extent that it really bothers Americans to be unpopular in the world.

Americans are highly vulnerable when it comes to public perceptions in other countries, in part because they like their foreign policy to have a moral dimension. Perhaps it is also one of the consequences of a democracy, founded by men with "decent respect for the opinions of mankind."

Clearly, the Bush Administration has woken up to the fact that anti-Americanism represents a problem. This awakening took place during the last years of President George W. Bush's first term. Unfortunately, the Administration seemed somewhat unconcerned about the wider effects of anti-Americanism in the first stages of the global war on terrorism.

However, in the course of her January confirmation hearings, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stated, "This is the time for diplomacy." Her first international trip, which took her throughout Europe, suggests a determination to put that sentiment into practice. As the chief diplomat of the United States, she did exactly what diplomacy requires, reaching out, consulting, and explaining to European media and government leaders. In that, she set a new tone for the second Bush Administration.

One caveat: Caring about how one is globally perceived and actually making amends to truly improve one's condition are two different things.
I personally would argue that I became anti-American because of the Bush administration, in spite of their false motions to evoke contrary sentiments.

0 Replies

There is nothing that angers me more than the claim that Reagan brought the Soviet Union down.

0 Replies

Anti anti-Americanism

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know