From heros to zeros!

[kbilik]

Originally posted by SaintNuclear
I won\'t bother keeping arguing with you, you just keep not reading what I\'m saying and what you do read you twist.

I answered you directly, no twisting involved. Sorry if it seemed that I kept \"not reading and twisting what I do read\".

So basically the gist of your argument is:

1. Locating bases, and attack every base at the same time.
Counterpoint : Won\'t work. Because there are too many bases and they are mobile (ie don\'t stay in the same location so current intel is outdated).  

2. Don\'t bomb, send in the grunts. Less damage and less caualties; enemy won\'t know what hit them.
Counterpoint : This is an incorrect assumption because it doesn\'t always hold true. A raid on a base caused the death of 3,000 Somolians and 19 US troops in Mogadishu. A bomb on the same base may have left far less destruction.

3. The US invasion caused \"mayhem and let the terrorists run for cover\" thus they escaped.
Counterpoint : If you mean Afghanistan, the US sent in paratroopers to all the bases and sorrounded the Tora Bora region to try and quickly kill the terrorists. Instead of being a quick and clean operation as predicted, there were far too many escape routes for the mobile enemy forces. After that they decided to send in a larger invasion force because the element of surprise had been lost. This \"mayhem\" is basically the result of what you suggested going wrong and resulting in having to mop up.

[derwoodly]

Kbilik,
I agree with you, it seems we are damned either way.  I am baffled by how a group of wackos who were kicked out of their native countries and consider all human life but their own to be expendable became the \"good guys\".   Has the whole world lost their mind? or is it just the medias effort to get ratings by making it look this way.

If anyone can explain how the USA is evil and Islamic fundamentalist who don\'t even have a country to call there own can be good, please explain it to me.  And use small words so I will understand.

[TheTaintedSoul]

Originally posted by derwoodly
I am baffled by how a group of wackos who were kicked out of their native countries and consider all human life but their own to be expendable became the \"good guys\".   Has the whole world lost their mind? or is it just the medias effort to get ratings by making it look this way.

First id like to ask you why you believe the world is against the usa and pro terrorists. Since i\'ve seen no reasons to believe people in general to uphold those ideas.

Secondly, if you do believe thats true nonetheless, ask yourself the same question, why do people dislike america so much? Maybe it is an indication there is something wrong with the foreign policy of the usa.

Third, thinking in good and bad is simplifying the problem greatly. The usa isn\'t bad or good neither are most terrorists.

I look at terrorists the way i look at the nazis in wwii, they were not evil. They had a reason to be frustrated as well there was grouppressure and other factors as well that made from a average day citizen a ruthless killer.
The same holds for the american soldiers torturing iraqis, i dont think they are evil but actually think most of us would act the same way in the same conditions.


The terrorists come from a region that is often poor, uneducated, oppressed (saudi arabia), where already there is a general negative view to the west (with the usa as representant) and strong islamic believes. Thats why they can get fundamentalistic pretty easy.
Its not like they don\'t have values of right and wrong but those are very different then ours.

Not that im saying you shouldn\'t do anything about terrorism and leave them alone, of course not.

About negative opinions on the usa:
When i was a child i was quite positive of the usa. I saw them as the heros in wwii and as one of the greater countries in the world carrying the idea of democracy and freedom.
But when i learnt more from history and about the usa i had to adapt my opinion. I still see the usa as the ones who can bring democracy freedom and welfare better then any other country. However i also see many problems in the usa, while it seems many americans think they are living in the greatest nation where everything is better then in the rest of the world.

Also the way the west in the cold war behaved surprised me. While stating to uphold freedom and democracy for the world we supported dictators and terrible regimes. In fact we still are.

Its not that i hate america, but i have grown to dislike it, especially since 9/11. The attitude of the usa seems to me like an arrogant one.
Something like this: We don\'t need anyone and we do whatever we like no matter how much criticism there is. If there is criticism its just because youre antiamerican. Oh and btw europe is naive and cowardly.

In general i think the reasons for people to dislike the usa are:
1: The usa is the most powerfull nation, this gives great responsobility. No matter what you do you\'ll always be criticised (and please listen to that criticism, there could be a good point in it)
2: The usa represents the west, in the past and present the west has supported dictators and betrayed people in the middle east countless times.
3: Yealousy can be a reason for some people as well of course.
4: The \"with us or against us\" attitude that is uphold in the usa. Criticism is cast aside without even looking into it. Its like the usa thinks to know what is best for the world and that the rest of the world doesn\'t know that.
5: In extension to 4, the way the usa deals with international matters, like the kyoto treatment, un, international court of justice and so on.
6: The way the war on iraq was started was done in a suspicous manner, it seemed like the usa was eager to attack no matter what the reason. Whether that is true or not, the usa should have acted more honestly.
7: The way the iraq war was dealt with, cnn looked alot like a war propaganda media at the start. Why were most reporters not allowed to go in Iraq? Why do american soldiers kill more easily then british troops? Why if a wedding ceremony is attacked don\'t they just admit that? Why was a hospital attacked to release a prisoner with much show while there was already an agreement to release her?
I can go on and on on this point...

More points can be named probably, but i do believe the american really believe they are doing the right thing, only i think its not the best way of dealing with matters.

And i really sincerely don\'t hate america, its just that the usa is hard to dislike sometimes.

[kbilik]

Originally posted by TheTaintedSoul
1: The usa is the most powerfull nation, this gives great responsobility. No matter what you do you\'ll always be criticised (and please listen to that criticism, there could be a good point in it)

True. As I said, the USA is a big target. People like finding scapegoats to blame all their problems instead of trying to think of solutions. Furthermore, if the solutions don\'t work, they can always blame US policies to escape culpability.

2: The usa represents the west, in the past and present the west has supported dictators and betrayed people in the middle east countless times.

Well, let\'s look at it in terms of the time and setting. Is it better to fight the cold war up front and possibly have a nuclear war between NATO and the Warsaw pact? Or is it better to fund your enemy\'s enemies (Even if they are dictatorships or repressive regimes). Sometimes the answers aren\'t easy.

3: Jealousy can be a reason for some people as well of course.

Yep, relates to the 1st point,

4: The \"with us or against us\" attitude that is uphold in the usa. Criticism is cast aside without even looking into it. Its like the usa thinks to know what is best for the world and that the rest of the world doesn\'t know that.

I don\'t like that attitude either. The world isn\'t black and white - there are plenty of greys. It\'s a very complex situation.

5: In extension to 4, the way the usa deals with international matters, like the kyoto treatment, un, international court of justice and so on.

That\'s the problem of being a world power and having others try to level the playing field.

6: The way the war on iraq was started was done in a suspicous manner, it seemed like the usa was eager to attack no matter what the reason. Whether that is true or not, the usa should have acted more honestly.

 

Well we can argue about that forever. The simple fact is that the UN failed in its duty for 12 years. Had the UN found conclusive evidence either of WMD or records that all were destroyed, the US would have no excuses to go to war.

7: The way the iraq war was dealt with, cnn looked alot like a war propaganda media at the start. Why were most reporters not allowed to go in Iraq? Why do american soldiers kill more easily then british troops? Why if a wedding ceremony is attacked don\'t they just admit that? Why was a hospital attacked to release a prisoner with much show while there was already an agreement to release her?
I can go on and on on this point...

The US, European, and Arab news channels all have their biases and spread propaganda. The truth lays somewhere in the middle. It always helps to be open and look at many sources then base your conclusions on how the facts add up.

[Monketh]

This is OT right now, but I\'d like to add that islamic terrorism is due to the snowball effect of the great depression.

Great Depression->WWII->Cold War->Backing of far off, questionable regimes, creating a lose-lose situation for both countries, small regional wars->Poor public opinion of the West, especially US o\'A->Easy fundamentalist recruitment.

[TheTaintedSoul]

I might not respond soon again since im busy with exams and an essay so it might take a while if i post again.

Originally posted by kbilik
True. As I said, the USA is a big target. People like finding scapegoats to blame all their problems instead of trying to think of solutions.

I\'d like to add to this that its not the only reason for criticism. And that it doesn\'t mean criticism isn\'t valid.

Well, let\'s look at it in terms of the time and setting. Is it better to fight the cold war up front and possibly have a nuclear war between NATO and the Warsaw pact?

If it is a right decision or not is a whole other discussion, i myself have not thought/discussed enough about it to have a well formed opinion about it.
However it doesn\'t matter if you look at the POV of the inhabitants in such countries. Can you blame them for not understanding the reason why they have to suffer because of the politics of other nations?
That they like in Iran dislike the west because and in their eyes seemingly double morality?

I don\'t like that attitude either. The world isn\'t black and white - there are plenty of greys. It\'s a very complex situation.

Im glad to hear that .
If the Bush as president announces statements like that and worldwide the usa acts accordingly it does reflect negative on the usa and its government.

That\'s the problem of being a world power and having others try to level the playing field.

Im not sure what you mean. So i just state my opinion here, i think the usa should instead of trying to lead the world and act on its own work together with the rest of the world.
If you act alone you\'ll stand alone. If you ignore the rest of the world don\'t be surprised they are not to positive about you.

Well we can argue about that forever. The simple fact is that the UN failed in its duty for 12 years.

I think you misunderstand me. I find it difficult to write down what i mean clear here. Im talking about the way the iraq war was started in a pr sense. In that sense many mistakes were made.

The US, European, and Arab news channels all have their biases and spread propaganda. The truth lays somewhere in the middle. It always helps to be open and look at many sources then base your conclusions on how the facts add up.

Unfortunately true. And the media tends to unfortunately ignore good news giving a distorted view on matters. Its too bad that we can\'t really view each others media more closely .
Only, and im saying this with great hesitation, maybe just maybe the media in europe has the least problems with this. Since in general Europe stands between the arab an usa opinion. Just maybe.

-------------------------------------------
Monketh,
I partly agree and partly disagree. Its true that the great depression caused the events you named. But its not the only cause for terrorism and laying a relationship between an event decades ago and the world today is pretty bold. And its not a matter of cause and effect, humans are involved and can make choices that affect the situation. Like in the cuba crisis we might have had a wwIII if the wrong decisions had been made, then terrorism wouldn\'t be a problem.
The event WWII also had more reasons besides the depression like the versailles treaty.

[kbilik]

Originally posted by TheTaintedSoul
I might not respond soon again since im busy with exams and an essay so it might take a while if i post again.

It\'s alright, take your time. Good luck on the exams.

I\'d like to add to this that its not the only reason for criticism. And that it doesn\'t mean criticism isn\'t valid.

 

Of course criticism is valid. But sometimes it\'s hard to discern helpful criticism from a sea of complaints sometimes inspired by jealousy or steroetypes.

If it is a right decision or not is a whole other discussion, i myself have not thought/discussed enough about it to have a well formed opinion about it.
However it doesn\'t matter if you look at the POV of the inhabitants in such countries. Can you blame them for not understanding the reason why they have to suffer because of the politics of other nations?
That they like in Iran dislike the west because and in their eyes seemingly double morality?

You can\'t blame them. But we know (not them perhaps) that sometimes the lesser \"evil\" is chosen over the worse option. During the cold war, the US and USSR each had 30,000 nuclear devices (enough to destroy the world 100 times over). Maybe them choosing to sponsor regimes instead of spiraling into a nuclear war was the right decision. Maybe there were other, better ways. Can\'t know for sure now.

As for exchanging views and trying to explain this reasoning to them - the arguments end with allegations of conspiracy from both sides. This lack of communications and unwillingness on both sides to agree is a major problem.

Im not sure what you mean. So i just state my opinion here, i think the usa should instead of trying to lead the world and act on its own work together with the rest of the world.
If you act alone you\'ll stand alone. If you ignore the rest of the world don\'t be surprised they are not to positive about you.

I understand what you mean. However, the US also has certain rights over its own sovereignty. The fact that other nations try to influence the US too much (not sure what exactly counts as \"too much\" ) through these policies can sometimes be viewed as trespassing. Same thing that other nations feel when the US uses its superpower status to interfere with the policies of other nations. Its mutual I guess.

I think you misunderstand me. I find it difficult to write down what i mean clear here. Im talking about the way the iraq war was started in a pr sense. In that sense many mistakes were made.

 

Yes, many mistakes were made on both sides. Had certain things been made more clear, the chances of war would have been less.

Unfortunately true. And the media tends to unfortunately ignore good news giving a distorted view on matters. Its too bad that we can\'t really view each others media more closely .
Only, and im saying this with great hesitation, maybe just maybe the media in europe has the least problems with this. Since in general Europe stands between the arab an usa opinion. Just maybe.

The European news media is just as biased on certain things. It is true that they try to be fair and look at it differently, but they are still influenced by ratings, critics, personal opinions of the reporters, and other such things.

[Ineluke]

Its not that i hate america, but i have grown to dislike it, especially since 9/11. The attitude of the usa seems to me like an arrogant one.
Something like this: We don\'t need anyone and we do whatever we like no matter how much criticism there is. If there is criticism its just because youre antiamerican. Oh and btw europe is naive and cowardly.
 

You cannot possibly know the attutude of america without living here and being exposed to it everyday. Because we are a democratic country we have many conflicting views within our country. The thing I can see you basing that opinion on is reperts from your media, who by the way are against this war and are not unbiased. It is unfair to america and americans to make blanket statements about the attitude of america. If you are just talking about our foriegn affairs actions you need to find an unbiased news source.

Oh and saintnuclear you cannot use the omega agency as a basis for any argument without proof. You dont even have proof that this agency exists let alone that it had some impact on the US going into iraq.
ps sorry for the hiatus should post more regularly now...

[DepthBlade]

Ok here is alittle update on the War in Iraq

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraq\'s interim prime minister said Tuesday the fledgling government \"is currently negotiating\" with coalition authorities for the handover of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to its custody.

They want Saddam back in a month once the country is handed back to Iraq? Now this seems to be a bad thing...you go in take down the man you wanted taken down now you hand him back to a country that is anarchy! Most likely will be freed before ever executed in that country! Once US leaves back to the good ole days for IraQ!

[derwoodly]

[/QUOTE]

First id like to ask you why you believe the world is against the usa and pro terrorists. Since i\'ve seen no reasons to believe people in general to uphold those ideas.

[/QUOTE]

Oye vie, you must not have read the title of this post!

I have read much of this post and I am still confused. What is it exactly that we were saposed to do before we attacked Iraq?  Yes, I know all the standard answers to this question. It is exactly these answers and the commentary in this post that upsets me.  

I personally do think that the USA is the best nation out there.  But, that is because I live here.  I hope that you think the country that you live in is also the best.

[TheTaintedSoul]

Just a short response for now, ill respond later to the others as well when ive got the time.

Originally posted by derwoodly
Oye vie, you must not have read the title of this post!

The title is the opinion of one individual not that of the whole world. I really don\'t know anyone who hates america. Only people who do have criticism on the usa.

I have read much of this post and I am still confused. What is it exactly that we were saposed to do before we attacked Iraq?  Yes, I know all the standard answers to this question. It is exactly these answers and the commentary in this post that upsets me.  

Why does it upset you? Its only my opinion on the matters, and i even tried to balance things by also naming reasons that are not the fault of the usa.

If you want answers you haven\'t heard before, im the wrong guy probably. If you\'ve heard all things before and still wonder why then i doubt i can explain what others couldn\'t.

Only thing i can say is that the main reason why i disagree with politics of the usa is that they act too self-centered according to what they think is right without cooperating with other nations.
Another reason why there is criticism is because the usa started (continoud technically) a war against another country. Its pretty logical that the world doesn\'t respond well to a country beginning a war. What would you think if China invaded Taiwan or if Belgium invaded Holland since we have wmds (nuclear missiles of the usa).
To conclude you say: before we attacked iraq, this suggests the decision was already made and you ask how people should have been influenced to agree with a already made decision.

Darn now i still tried to give answers to your question , well do with it what you want

I personally do think that the USA is the best nation out there.  But, that is because I live here.  I hope that you think the country that you live in is also the best.

I disagree on both statements. Why is it a good thing to believe your country to be better then all the others? Im sure holland is NOT the best country. Maybe in some aspects were more advanced, in other aspects we\'ll still have some work to do.
To like and identify with your country is a good thing, i do that too, but being so patriottic only makes you blind to the weaknesses, problems and faults made by your nation.

[TheTaintedSoul]

Since im on it anyway , first i\'d like to point out that the comments made by Bush on the G8 conferention were somewhat like my comment about raising welfare and education in nations. Yes for once i agree with him .

Originally posted by Ineluke
You cannot possibly know the attutude of america without living here and being exposed to it everyday. If you are just talking about our foriegn affairs actions you need to find an unbiased news source.

Yes i am talking about foreign affairs mostly. But i do think i can state that the attitude of america in foreign affairs is an arrogant one. If i would need a completely unbiased, meaning objectively source it means none of us can have opinions on any matter. Since no newsmedia is completely unbiased and certainly not that of the us.
So then you also can\'t be pro war against in iraq because of the inhuman situation since you don\'t know if it is all western propaganda.
To get to my point, no my view on the foreign policy is not completely correct (none of us is), but i don\'t have to live in the usa to know what it is. Even with biased news you do get enough of a accurate picture even if its not 100 % correct. And that picture is not a pretty one.

Also i don\'t just take things the media tell me for granted. Criticism is a healthy thing.

[TheTaintedSoul]

Originally posted by kbilik
It\'s alright, take your time. Good luck on the exams.

Thank you . Today is the last exam and then only the essay still has to be made .

Of course criticism is valid. But sometimes it\'s hard to discern helpful criticism from a sea of complaints sometimes inspired by jealousy or steroetypes.

That can be problematic i understand, though if someone only repeats easy arguments of others without thinking first, it usually shows.
And the opposite is also true, that in some cases people have too little criticism since they are too pattriotic.

Maybe there were other, better ways. Can\'t know for sure now.

I don\'t know either, it would be interesting to think about it since there is still support of dictatorial regimes like saudi arabia.

As for exchanging views and trying to explain this reasoning to them - the arguments end with allegations of conspiracy from both sides. This lack of communications and unwillingness on both sides to agree is a major problem.

Im not sure what to make of this. Exchanging views and try to reason seems pretty difficult to me. What are you going to say to them? \"We believe in democracy and freedom for the whole world however you had to pay with your freedom so ours and that of the world was safe.\"
No i don\'t think they\'ll understand or want to.

I understand what you mean. However, the US also has certain rights over its own sovereignty. The fact that other nations try to influence the US too much (not sure what exactly counts as \"too much\" ) through these policies can sometimes be viewed as trespassing. Same thing that other nations feel when the US uses its superpower status to interfere with the policies of other nations. Its mutual I guess.

Inner policy of the usa should be a matter of the us, as long as no human rights are violated. There is a lot i disagree with (like the death penalties) and i would discuss such things but its up to you what to do.
Foreign policy is a whole other matter, it concerns the world and has much less to do with sovereignty. Therefore the usa should work together with the other nations in foreign matters and not do whatever it thinks is right in these cases because it concerns us all.

BTW the usa has much influence on nations as well and is not the only one being criticised or influenced. Holland gets criticism for its liberal drugs policy. As an example of the usa having influence in the sovereignty of other nations the iraq issue is a nice one.

Yes, many mistakes were made on both sides. Had certain things been made more clear, the chances of war would have been less.

Though interesting im not talking about how the war could have been prevented, in fact its my believe it had been decided before the un inspections started.

I mean if the usa had made the reasons for the war more clear and accurate people would search less for other reasons like oil. That the threat of wmds was exegerated was not a good move. PR speaking that is.

The European news media is just as biased on certain things. It is true that they try to be fair and look at it differently, but they are still influenced by ratings, critics, personal opinions of the reporters, and other such things.

Yes thats all true, the media is not unbiased. Only it might be we hear more facts from all sides pro and against the war then in the usa or arabic nations.
Anyway even with good media one still hears more information supporting their opinion then opposing them.

[kbilik]

Originally posted by TheTaintedSoul
Inner policy of the usa should be a matter of the us, as long as no human rights are violated. There is a lot i disagree with (like the death penalties) and i would discuss such things but its up to you what to do.
Foreign policy is a whole other matter, it concerns the world and has much less to do with sovereignty. Therefore the usa should work together with the other nations in foreign matters and not do whatever it thinks is right in these cases because it concerns us all.

BTW the usa has much influence on nations as well and is not the only one being criticised or influenced. Holland gets criticism for its liberal drugs policy. As an example of the usa having influence in the sovereignty of other nations the iraq issue is a nice one.

This is the main problem. The US government feels that certain UN rules or global treaties (Kyoto being one) that deal with \"foreign matters\" interfere with domestic policy. Kyoto for example will force US industry to cut back on production in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This is considered a threat to the economy by some people from a treaty that many say has little or no proof that it can scientifically or practically work. So in certain cases, the US feels that the UN can be used by other countries to influence its policy.

Then again, it is hypocritical for the US to have that view and want regime change or influence other countries. I can see why some people hate US policies because they seem hypocritical. But the line must be drawn somewhere on how much influence global and often biased (or used as tools by the majority) organizations like the UN have. This is where the argument arises between people who are isolationist (or unilateralists) and those that want more global dialogue.

So basically three viewpoints:
1. The unilateralists see the UN as a bloated, biased, bureaucracy which takes too long to get anything done or is too biased to do it correctly.

2. The moderates, who want some dialogue but want to draw the line somewhere.

3. The pro-UN people who see unilateralism as foolish, misguided, dangerous, and rash.

[Davis]

Originally posted by kbilik
 Kyoto for example will force US industry to cut back on production in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

And ban teeth whitening. Is that really what we want? It sure as hell isn\'t what I want.