|
On April 02 2010 03:41 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 03:37 Louder wrote:On April 02 2010 03:26 Underwhelmed wrote:
Without getting into ethical/moral arguments, the US' defense budget is large because the US has global commitments that no other nation has - this includes keeping sea lanes free, making sure friendly countries don't get invaded, etc. Essentially, if the US stopped shouldering the burden, then other countries would have to take up the slack. Based on what would be ideal for keeping our commitments, the US military is actually undersized. Nonsense and assumptions. Who are we protecting Japan and Germany from with 100,000 troops between the two, for example? The notion that if we don't occupy the entire world nobody is safe is fallacy Japan isn't allowed an army in their constitution. If you didn't garrison it I'd invade it in a shot. To be honest I feel safer knowing Japan is defended by American soldiers rather than Japanese. American soldiers may have a stereotypically bad reputation but Japanese have a rather worse one historically. As for Germany, Cold War legacy, it takes forever for the army to catch up.
You're assuming either country is actually in need of the vast amounts of defense we provide. If military might were the sole deterrent to war, then indeed our spending would be justified - but amongst first world nations, it's far more complex than that. I would argue that military might is one of the least important factors, if not the least, in international politics amongst first world nations.
|
On April 02 2010 04:08 MuscLe wrote:
Stop crying about it and do something about it. Everyone cries about this and that but has no balls to do something about it. Then you get some nerd like yourself who will post some bullshit on a gaming website. It takes a real person to try to stand up rather then crying and posting on a starcraft website. Do something with your life then cry and play starcraft. Your over 25+ years old, time to move on. But it'll be hard since you have no friends in real life, only SC. Thats why maybe you haven't left yet. Useless sperm egg that made it. Awesome. Dont even care if this is April fools, you should still get a life.
Why are you even here?
|
On April 02 2010 04:25 mahnini wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 04:11 cursor wrote:
Lastly, I will state that the US is the worlds leading terrorist state, being responsible for more civilian deaths in each period of the last 10, 20, 30 and 40 years than any other nation or group. [citation needed]
http://www.monthlyreview.org/1101chomsky.htm
Granted, it's Chomsky. So... that might color your opinion a bit. =)
Most people who make these terrorist statements fall back on the US support of Israel and Israel's 'terrorist' actions. School of the Americas in Fort Benning (sp?), GA would be another good example. There's plenty of bad marks on the US history if you want to go looking for em.
Certainly no different than any other government for the most part.
|
Tv / Guns / Wars
America YEEEEE THATS WHATS UP!!!!
|
On April 02 2010 04:13 sctechie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 03:56 nAi.PrOtOsS wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 02 2010 03:14 sctechie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 03:09 Boblion wrote:On April 02 2010 02:59 BlackJack wrote:
I'm no history buff but I would wager that the last 100 years have been some of the most peaceful years of all of mankind's existence. Spot on bro. Someone else who doesn't know what they're talking about. http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/006259.htmlIt's a shame I had to stop lurking at TL after all these years to post in some stupid 'blog' forum post with a bunch of uneducated fools. I don't really think you can come to a conclusion that the last 100 years have been more peaceful then any other 100 year time span throughout history. In the article you linked the author for the most part only talks about a decrease in violence in regards to capital punishment, he mentions Darfur and Iraq but fails to mention WW1, WW2, the Holocaust, the genocies commited by the Ottoman Empire/Turkey, and many many many other violent events. All this article concludes is that there is a decrease in violence with regards to capital punishment. Not that there has been a decrease in violence in the last 100 years. Edit: Also learn some fucking respect, if you don't like blogs or conversing with people who post on blogs dont fucking read it. Here, I did your work for you. Another piece that has an opposing viewpoint. http://mises.org/resources/2674BTW, I wasn't drawing any conclusions. I was responding to some guy that posted a couple of inflammatory pictures as evidence of some larger point that we live in the most violent time in the history of the world. What I was trying to point out, is that the issue is a lot more nuanced than a bunch of pictures from 60 (yes SIXTY) years ago.
Unlike you I can come up with my own opinions and I don't need to just link an article that shares the same viewpoint as me.
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
I'm a capitalist that is embarking on his own path to join the mega wealthy. Do you hate me too?
|
United States22883 Posts
On April 02 2010 04:11 cursor wrote:
Lastly, I will state that the US is the worlds leading terrorist state, being responsible for more civilian deaths in each period of the last 10, 20, 30 and 40 years than any other nation or group. You're going to need to define terrorist, because no standard definition of it (although it has become an ambiguous term) agrees with you. Terror is a specific tactic used in the theater of war, emphasis on theater. America has done some horrific things, but I don't find there to be much merit in calling it a terrorist state, besides the obvious shocked reaction you're trying to garner.
I also don't think that's true (and arguably not a very useful number either.) Perhaps in the last 10 or 20 years, or if you want to use indirect means to implicate the US.
|
On April 02 2010 04:25 mahnini wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 04:11 cursor wrote:
Lastly, I will state that the US is the worlds leading terrorist state, being responsible for more civilian deaths in each period of the last 10, 20, 30 and 40 years than any other nation or group. [citation needed]
I think it's simple to make a case that the US is the world's leading INCITER of terrorism, particularly in the middle east. Calling it a terrorist state is a stretch, but we certainly do have a history of supporting terrorist groups when it suits our government's agenda.
Of course, on the note of terrorism, I always think back to this image:
Ask any American what scares them more - major illness leading to financial hardship and possibly death due to lack of health insurance, or a terrorist attack.
|
On April 02 2010 04:13 sctechie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 03:56 nAi.PrOtOsS wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 02 2010 03:14 sctechie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 03:09 Boblion wrote:On April 02 2010 02:59 BlackJack wrote:
I'm no history buff but I would wager that the last 100 years have been some of the most peaceful years of all of mankind's existence. Spot on bro. Someone else who doesn't know what they're talking about. http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/006259.htmlIt's a shame I had to stop lurking at TL after all these years to post in some stupid 'blog' forum post with a bunch of uneducated fools. I don't really think you can come to a conclusion that the last 100 years have been more peaceful then any other 100 year time span throughout history. In the article you linked the author for the most part only talks about a decrease in violence in regards to capital punishment, he mentions Darfur and Iraq but fails to mention WW1, WW2, the Holocaust, the genocies commited by the Ottoman Empire/Turkey, and many many many other violent events. All this article concludes is that there is a decrease in violence with regards to capital punishment. Not that there has been a decrease in violence in the last 100 years. Edit: Also learn some fucking respect, if you don't like blogs or conversing with people who post on blogs dont fucking read it. Here, I did your work for you. Another piece that has an opposing viewpoint. http://mises.org/resources/2674BTW, I wasn't drawing any conclusions. I was responding to some guy that posted a couple of inflammatory pictures as evidence of some larger point that we live in the most violent time in the history of the world. What I was trying to point out, is that the issue is a lot more nuanced than a bunch of pictures from 60 (yes SIXTY) years ago.
You want a list + pics of the genocides and wars in the last 15 years ?
|
United States22883 Posts
On April 02 2010 04:31 Louder wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 03:41 KwarK wrote:On April 02 2010 03:37 Louder wrote:On April 02 2010 03:26 Underwhelmed wrote:
Without getting into ethical/moral arguments, the US' defense budget is large because the US has global commitments that no other nation has - this includes keeping sea lanes free, making sure friendly countries don't get invaded, etc. Essentially, if the US stopped shouldering the burden, then other countries would have to take up the slack. Based on what would be ideal for keeping our commitments, the US military is actually undersized. Nonsense and assumptions. Who are we protecting Japan and Germany from with 100,000 troops between the two, for example? The notion that if we don't occupy the entire world nobody is safe is fallacy Japan isn't allowed an army in their constitution. If you didn't garrison it I'd invade it in a shot. To be honest I feel safer knowing Japan is defended by American soldiers rather than Japanese. American soldiers may have a stereotypically bad reputation but Japanese have a rather worse one historically. As for Germany, Cold War legacy, it takes forever for the army to catch up. You're assuming either country is actually in need of the vast amounts of defense we provide. If military might were the sole deterrent to war, then indeed our spending would be justified - but amongst first world nations, it's far more complex than that. I would argue that military might is one of the least important factors, if not the least, in international politics amongst first world nations. I completely disagree, especially in East Asia and Eastern Europe.
I agree that we're spending too much and in some cases frivolously, but military might is still very important. Also, let's not forget some of the ways in which the military has been ahead of the country, not just in terms of leading technology but social issues as well. "Don't ask, don't tell" is an awful policy, but the military was also the first major public body to integrate, long before schools were willing to.
Also of note, and relevant to your OP, public schools in America are actually more segregated today than they were before Brown v. Board of Education. There's no policy for it, but there's also no policy to keep integration working, and as a result of the hands off approach, we have more divided schools than before.
|
On April 02 2010 04:31 sctechie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 04:25 mahnini wrote:On April 02 2010 04:11 cursor wrote:
Lastly, I will state that the US is the worlds leading terrorist state, being responsible for more civilian deaths in each period of the last 10, 20, 30 and 40 years than any other nation or group. [citation needed] http://www.monthlyreview.org/1101chomsky.htmGranted, it's Chomsky. So... that might color your opinion a bit. =) Most people who make these terrorist statements fall back on the US support of Israel and Israel's 'terrorist' actions. School of the Americas in Fort Benning (sp?), GA would be another good example. There's plenty of bad marks on the US history if you want to go looking for em. Certainly no different than any other government for the most part.
i skimmed that very long interview that talks about foreign political policies that i don't fully understand but saying the US is responsible for more civilian deaths than any other group within the last 50 years is simply not true.
for example
Pol Pot became leader of Cambodia in mid-1975.[2] During his time in power, Pol Pot imposed a version of agrarian collectivization, forcing city dwellers to relocate to the countryside to work in collective farms and forced labor projects, toward a goal of "restarting civilization" in a "Year Zero". The combined effects of slave labor, malnutrition, poor medical care, and executions resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1.7 to 2.5 million people, approximately 21% of the Cambodian population.[8]
|
OP listed all the reasons America kicks ass. AMERICA BECAUSE WE CAN
|
i would also like to say even though military spending may seem overindulgent it is still necessary. the US government buys freedom for many countries with its military might whereas if we were not as powerful militarily our opinion on certain matters would be more easily ignored. for example, if china wants to start shit over taiwan all the US has to do is park a carrier there and it's instantly without deliberation a sign saying "fuck off china".
|
United States22883 Posts
|
I like it, and this might just be inbreed bias but isn't a substantial part of our world stability held in place by a firm belief in the might of American arms? Like the tenuous peace between North and South Korea exists because we're there to counter balance China and to a lesser extent the thing with Japan. And because we're here Israel isn't like "fuck this" and stomping through Palestine. And the North Korea's and Iran's and other shaky militaristic powers of the world aren't shitting on everything? Nothing we do is prefect but I'm glad it's the US in the drivers seat instead of retreating back into itself and saying fuck the world like we did pre WW1 and 2.
|
On April 02 2010 04:32 nAi.PrOtOsS wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 04:13 sctechie wrote:On April 02 2010 03:56 nAi.PrOtOsS wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 02 2010 03:14 sctechie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 03:09 Boblion wrote:On April 02 2010 02:59 BlackJack wrote:
I'm no history buff but I would wager that the last 100 years have been some of the most peaceful years of all of mankind's existence. Spot on bro. Someone else who doesn't know what they're talking about. http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/006259.htmlIt's a shame I had to stop lurking at TL after all these years to post in some stupid 'blog' forum post with a bunch of uneducated fools. I don't really think you can come to a conclusion that the last 100 years have been more peaceful then any other 100 year time span throughout history. In the article you linked the author for the most part only talks about a decrease in violence in regards to capital punishment, he mentions Darfur and Iraq but fails to mention WW1, WW2, the Holocaust, the genocies commited by the Ottoman Empire/Turkey, and many many many other violent events. All this article concludes is that there is a decrease in violence with regards to capital punishment. Not that there has been a decrease in violence in the last 100 years. Edit: Also learn some fucking respect, if you don't like blogs or conversing with people who post on blogs dont fucking read it. Here, I did your work for you. Another piece that has an opposing viewpoint. http://mises.org/resources/2674BTW, I wasn't drawing any conclusions. I was responding to some guy that posted a couple of inflammatory pictures as evidence of some larger point that we live in the most violent time in the history of the world. What I was trying to point out, is that the issue is a lot more nuanced than a bunch of pictures from 60 (yes SIXTY) years ago. Unlike you I can come up with my own opinions and I don't need to just link an article that shares the same viewpoint as me.
No. I can pull opinions out of my ass too. However, I prefer to to defer to people obviously more knowledgeable than me in certain areas. Your opinions are only worth the evidence they are backed up by. I also don't agree with the link I posted for you, nor do I agree with the Chomsky link I posted. But, at least others can go educate themselves on these issues rather than listening to internet 'tough guy' give his opinion.
|
On April 02 2010 04:47 DeathSpank wrote:
OP listed all the reasons America kicks ass. AMERICA BECAUSE WE CAN
YEEEE This guy knows whats up!!
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
can I be an internet tough guy? Plz?
|
On April 02 2010 04:29 Louder wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 03:53 agorist wrote:On April 02 2010 03:05 Louder wrote:On April 02 2010 02:02 michael. wrote:
LOL. Thanks for generalizing all of us Americans in such an incorrect fashion. All I ever hear from people in the US is that we suck and that we should be more like Europe. Maybe you just happen to be around a lot of blind super nationalists but I find that unlikely. I live in Texas. So yeah, it's pretty likely. At softball games for my daughter I hear the other parents talking about arranging a local 'tea party' chapter. Not that a one of them have any idea what the actual Boston Tea Party was about, or how absurd the current 'Tea Party' movement actually is. Did you know that in America, people who don't believe in God are considered, by the general population, to be even less trustworthy than Blacks and Homosexuals? For a country well known for racism and homophobia, that's quite a thing. I'm particularly thrilled you've identified issues with our society -- however, I've always been rather disappointed with you proposed solutions. There's nothing wrong about the tea-party movement; it represents a rather large swathe of government dissent -- some good, some bad. It's a very "American" movement, which, I think you'd agree with. And as a segment of popular culture, sure, it's going to be filled with many buffoons. You don't like wealth disparity -- sure, nobody likes unnatural wealth disparity. It doesn't help that our government is actively funneling money into the hands of the ultra-rich, but there was always an alternative. Ask yourself why as governments grow larger and more powerful we keep ending up with (as a world economy) an ultra rich demographic that is accruing more and more wealth. First, in their favor -- their wealth just doesn't sit and rot in some castle. They make money by investing and placing their money in places where it will provide some return. This is only possible by offering some service or product that society deems wanted. The problem with is that in many ways their earned wealth comes from involuntary means -- government subsidy, government bailout, and/or government monopoly. You're right about one thing -- these lucky individuals maintain their status quo by utilizing government to their advantage. But, the knee-jerk reaction to utilize government to chastise these individuals and impose some form of egalitarianism is just as flawed and immoral as their reign of manipulation and will only end up serving their benefit, or, leave us all in a less fortunate situation. Reducing military spending (which I'm all for) should not be pursued in order to spend money elsewhere. It is time we stop spoonfeeding the parasitic class and their lackeys. I do think cutting military spending and shifting money elsewhere is a legitimate part of a larger solution. My original blog post is more about the American mindset and why it makes America suck. The Tea Party movement is certainly American in it's ignorance - any number of polls taken at events across the country demonstrate that they didn't even know what the proposed health care legislation was going to do - they just opposed it. The Reaganites and their "any government is bad government" line are clearly people so far detached from reality that there is simply no validity to their opinions. The notion that the wealthy re-invest in society is not entirely true. Capitalism at large relies on the idealistic assumption that there is a fair balance of power between the provider and the purchaser of a good or service, between the employer and the job holder. I don't think I need to provide evidence that this assumption is false - but if I do, look at worker conditions in the industrial revolution in this country. It's a perfect example of wage slavery. Building on that, you have the wealthy class spreading wealth amongst itself, accumulating wealth, and not allowing wealth to trickle down in any way. They re-invest to the extent it directly benefits them, and only them - often in ways that directly harm the lower classes. Current mortgage derivative and credit default swap induced economic crisis is a case in point. Better yet, let's talk about privatization of government functions for the sole benefit of the wealthy. Privatizing the prison system, for example, has been demonstrated to raise cost, and also raise the incarceration rates. It's no coincidence that when the drug war really heated up in the early 90s, privatization was just getting rolling. Defense, health care, penal system, corporate welfare (bank bailouts? omfg) - it's an endless pattern of misuse and abuse of public wealth for the benefit of the upper class. And poor people everywhere are convinced these things are good, simply because they are convinced government is bad, therefore privatization is automatically good. Same for regulations and so forth. But as long as Americans have their TV, their assault rifles, their wars to cheer with blind patriotism, and their superstitious religion, and the carrot on a stick showing them that "yes you too can be rich and powerful", there will always be a status quo that is owned entirely by the wealthy.
To be accurate, most of everyone doesn't know what the healthcare bill does. It's blatant fascism that the "anti-fascist" party pushed and the "fascist" party vehemently opposed.
The industrial revolution was just that -- a revolution. It was a time of experimentation, learning, and evolution -- especially that of employer/worker relationships. As expected, workers fought for representation, and, earned it.
"Building on that, you have the wealthy class spreading wealth amongst itself, accumulating wealth, and not allowing wealth to trickle down in any way. They re-invest to the extent it directly benefits them, and only them - often in ways that directly harm the lower classes. Current mortgage derivative and credit default swap induced economic crisis is a case in point." Haha, what exactly is your point? I thought the motto "every american deserves a home" was a core mantra to the housing GSE that fueled the CDS fervor.
Take a guess where all that money came from. Take a guess which "company" made the most profit in 2009. If you want to talk about slavery and servitude, we are purely at the whim of our economic overlords.
Privatization of the prison system does not put people into jail. Law does that. Who makes law? Oh right, government.
Once again, I adore how you see problems... I just wish you wouldn't fall to the same poor logic as those you criticize do.
|
On April 02 2010 04:58 Lz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 04:47 DeathSpank wrote:
OP listed all the reasons America kicks ass. AMERICA BECAUSE WE CAN YEEEE This guy knows whats up!!
lololol <3
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://blog.core-ed.net/aliarchives/napalm%20girl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.outofbox.in/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/death-camp.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.lesmanantsduroi.com/Images7/tranchee-mort.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://images.fastcompany.com/upload/skulls3.jpg)
