 |
|  |
 |
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
Ned:
"As the your status, HO, as an Austrian and your raising the issue of Nazi Germany, if it wasn't for America and her foolish, brain-dead ideals, you today would be living in the Third Reich."
Ah yes, you entered the war enthusiastically, based on your heroic ideals, as soon as Nazi germany annexed Austria. I guess it's the missing war of 1938-41, suppressed by the vast leftwing conspiracy, but soon to be recovered by Fox.
If you want America's foolish, brain-dead ideals to some extent, you have to go back to 1917. Without them, a certain party would have most likely not even been founded.
"It is almost offensive for someone in your country to snicker at American patriotism."
Sure, sweety. But I have no problem with american patriotism. I just have a problem with your braindead american jingoism.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
gunkulator
|
|
quote: Originally posted by GePap
The US only imposed an embargo on japan after their moes into french Indochina in 1941, not when they were invading China, and we only went to war when the happened to bomb US installations and invade overseas US holdings. One did not hear many cries in the US to stop the rampaging Japanese before dec 7. |
Because we were behaving in exactly the manner that you insist upon today: we were staying out of other countries' business. That's what you want, right? The US took a long time to act against Japan due to the US's isolationism.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
gunkulator
|
|
Ya know, weeks after the start of this thing, I for one, still don't know what this so-called Operation Iraqi Freedom was supposed to be about. WMD? Get Saddam? Liberate Iraq? what? The admistration has changed its story so many times that I can't keep up.
All I know is we've spent 80+ BILLION dollars, managed to kill thousards of Iraqis and a hundred+ of our people while simultaneously p1ssing off the entire Arab world and completely alienating the French. How anyone could call this thing "a victory" is beyond me.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
gunkulator
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Master Zen
Act against Japan? Who the hell acted against the US when it rampaged across the continent in the name of "manifest destiny"? |
Ah, the ol' change the subject trick... Shall I bring up Aztec and Incan expansionist policies?
quote: It is so hipocritical that you say the US should have acted sooner against Japan since it is very ironic that one of history's greatest imperialists and land-grabbers suddenly wants Japan to cease its own expansion. |
What is hypocritical about it? Must the US always behaveGreat nations will always conflict eventually. National interests can not be ignored forever and the most the US could stomach in 1941 was an emargo. Big whoop. Remember this was pre-GATT/WTO so nations were free to trade with whomever they wished without international reprecussions. Even you must admit that 1941 America was extremely isolationist.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:28
|
|
A stupid person is stupid whether the biggest patriot in the world or an anti-nationalism protestor. Ignorance, stereotypes and plain stupidity exists on each side. There are also some pretty bright cookies on each side of almost every contentious issue.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999 time: 21:28
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Pekka
Ming, you are very correct.. so me not mentioning it was bad. And saying American patriots, it's not 100% true. There are different kind of patriots, they all consider them true patriots and still are very different, yet most likely they all are patriots by its definition. I didn't mean it to come out like that, sorry.
Ned, I don't know about that. Maybe, maybe not..I just wanted to say, that I think that wasn't a solid argument. |
Hey Pekka, thanks for the help. Of course, you know, I am pressing an extreme view in order to "liberal" bash the folks here on Apolyton. It's fun!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999 time: 21:28
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Arrian
If you're arguing for more principled foreign policy, good for you, just don't even try to insinuate that our past or current policies have been/are principled.
I think principled American foreign policy (beacon of democracy, freedom and lots of other wonderful things, etc) is probably a pipe dream, so I think I'd settle for a "realistic" foreign policy + dropping the silly rhetoric/flag waving.
-Arrian |
Actually, I am arguing somewhat for Jimmy Carter's foreign policy of being anti-dictator reqardless of whether they were friendly. The pragmatist, e.g., Kissinger, would argue the opposite.
But yes, of course, I am arguing for a principled foreign policy except where our national security concerns are overwhelming. Thus our support of Stalin was justified becuase it helped shorten the war and saved American lives.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28. Apolyton Time is 00:28. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|