 |
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
I should explain my 4 vote too.
That was basically a resistance to casual in - vogue antiamericanism. I don't follow the fashion, even if it has lasted for decades and it's by now the law.
I will critizise and throw mud in the US, where it applies but will not engage in a priori condemnations and easy aphorisms or commit the sin of one sided view.
Except if I'm in a taxi cab. There you should never question the taxi driver.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
You said US is called when a dictator takes power in order to free a place.
That sounded weird to me since the US is the one who has installed dictatorships.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lord of the mark
[QUOTE] Originally posted by Spiffor
Voted 2
i think its statements like this
quote:
I because of your consistent bullying over the world ever since you became a superpower, |
that have something to do with reactions like this
quote:
because of an apparent American unability to question its self-righteousness. |
obviously the US has done bad things. How could you be here long without seeing that many Americans criticize the morality of US govt policy on many things? and not just liberals - on some issues, like Kosovo, youd find conservatives who disliked US policy. But when someone says something like "consistent bullying" to charecterize US policy since 1945 - theres naturally a reaction, and often an intensely emotional reaction. |
Some people needed consistent bullying, and some not, but whatever label you put on it, I think it should be obvious that being on the receiving end of US power projection and strategic policy, let alone economic policy, isn't the same as being on the issuing end.
We've been a lot nicer about it than the Romans, Soviets, or other superpowers of their time, but that still doesn't mean that we treat "the little people" as equals with equal sovereignty.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Some people needed consistent bullying, and some not, but whatever label you put on it, I think it should be obvious that being on the receiving end of US power projection and strategic policy, let alone economic policy, isn't the same as being on the issuing end.
We've been a lot nicer about it than the Romans, Soviets, or other superpowers of their time, but that still doesn't mean that we treat "the little people" as equals with equal sovereignty. |
But thats the nature of ALL unequal international power relations. You dont have to go as far back as Rome - or even the USSR - you can look at Russia in the "near abroad" or at France in Africa. Basically stating "country A fits in with the way states behave" says NOTHING about said state.
and i would add that the US has struggled to AVOID super power status - after WW1 the US withdrew into isolation, with tremendous negative effects on the world, and after WW2 there was still reluctance to take on a full international role - and indeed in the '90s one of the things UK policy focused on was keeping the US from withdrawing back into isolation ("dont go wobbly George", Blairs pushing Clinton to act in the Balkans)
(I fully realize that US policy in LATIN AMERICA has been far different, and that said policy is of particular interest to some here - though in that regard Spiffs qualifier - since we became a superpower - is wrong, since we were bullying Latin America long before 1945. In fact our worst behavior in Lat Am predates 1945.)
Last edited by lord of the mark on 15-07-2004 at 00:06
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
14-07-2004 21:49
|