George Bush presides over (and engineers) the end of the American empire

[GW in Ohio]

From Germany’s Der Spiegel:

George W. Bush has grown old, erratic and rosy in the eight years of his presidency. Little remains of his combativeness or his enthusiasm for physical fitness. On this sunny Tuesday morning in New York, even his hair seemed messy and unkempt, his blue suit a little baggy around the shoulders, as Bush stepped onto the stage, for the eighth time, at the United Nations General Assembly.

"Absurd, absurd, absurd," said one German diplomat. A French woman called him "yesterday's man" over coffee on the East River. There is another way to put it, too: Bush was a laughing stock in the gray corridors of the UN. But the ridicule was a new thing. It marked the end of respect.

Is it only President George W. Bush, the lame duck president, whom the rest of the world is no longer taking seriously, or are the remaining 191 UN member states already setting their sights on the United States, the giant brought to its knees? UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon referred to a "new reality" and "new centers of power and leadership in Asia, Latin America and across the newly developed world." Are they surprised, in these new centers, at the fall of America, of the system of the Western-style market economy?

This is no longer the muscular and arrogant United States the world knows, the superpower that sets the rules for everyone else and that considers its way of thinking and doing business to be the only road to success.
A new America is on display, a country that no longer trusts its old values and its elites even less: the politicians, who failed to see the problems on the horizon, and the economic leaders, who tried to sell a fictitious world of prosperity to Americans.

Also on display is the end of arrogance. The Americans are now paying the price for their pride. Of course, it is not solely the result of undesirable economic developments that the United States is in the process of forfeiting its unique position in the world and that the world is moving toward what Fareed Zakaria, editor of Newsweek International, calls a "post-American age." Washington has also lost much of its political ability to impose its will on other countries.

The failed leadership of President Bush, whose departure most of his counterparts from other countries are now looking forward to more and more openly, is not solely to blame. Nor are his two risky wars: the one in Iraq, which he launched frivolously in the vain hope of converting the entire region to the American way of life, and the other in Afghanistan, in which Bush now risks the world's most powerful defense alliance, NATO, suffering its first defeat.

But it's hard to forget how this president's mentors celebrated the power to shape world affairs the United States acquired in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the East-West conflict. There was talk of a "unipolar moment," of "America's moment," even of an "end of history," now that all other countries apparently had no other choice but to become smaller versions of America: liberal, democratic and buoyed by an unshakeable confidence in the free market economy.

The Bush administration wanted to cement forever this unique moment in history, in which the United States was undoubtedly the strongest power on earth. It wanted to use it to clean house in chronic crisis zones around the world, especially the Middle East. Far from relying on the classic, cumbersome and often unsuccessful tools of multilateral diplomacy, the Bush warriors were always quick to threaten military intervention -- just as quick as they were to make good on this threat.

The strategists of this immoderately self-confident administration formulated these principles in the "Bush doctrine" and claimed, for themselves and their actions, the right to "preemptive" military intervention -- with little concern for the rules of alliances or international organizations.

The superpower even claimed privileges over its allies, even offending some of its best friends during Bush's first term. Bush withdrew the American signature from a treaty to establish the International Criminal Court, he refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol to combat climate change and he withdrew from an agreement with the Russians to limit the number of missile defense systems.
Washington sought to divide the world into good and evil -- and did so as it saw fit.

Now, in the wake of the crash on Wall Street, the debate in the UN reveals that the long-humiliated have lost their fear of the giant in world politics. Even a political dwarf like Bolivian President Evo Morales is now talking big. "There is an uprising against an economic model, a capitalistic system that is the worst enemy of humanity," Morales told the UN General Assembly.
The financial crisis has uncovered the world power's true weakness. The more the highly indebted United States has to spend to stabilize its own economic system, the more trouble it has performing its self-imposed duties as the world's policeman.

The new US president will only have been in office for a short time when a document titled "Global Trends 2025" appears on his desk. The report is being prepared by analysts at the National Intelligence Council. Its chairman, Thomas Fingar, has already released a preview, and reading it will not exactly be enjoyable for proud American. "Although the United States will remain the most important power, American dominance will be sharply reduced," says Fingar.
According to the preview of the report, the erosion of American supremacy will "accelerate in the areas of politics and economics, and possibly culture."

The century that just began is unlikely to be declared the American century again. Instead, "Asia will shape the fate of the world, with or without the United States," says Parag Khanna, a young Indian-American political scientist whose book "The Second World: Empires and Influence in the New Global Order" has attracted a great deal of attention in the United States.

You can read more…much more….in this lengthy article from Der Spiegel. http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,581502,00.html

Knee-jerk American “patriots” will of course dismiss all this as America-bashing from abroad. But perceptive Americans will recognize the truth that is becoming apparent in every corner of the world. The US is no longer the world’s dominant power…..politically, economically, or socially. All we have left, in the wake of the disastrous Bush administration, is military power. And how much longer can we afford to spend those $billions being the world’s policeman in the wake of the collapse of our financial structure?

[stephanie]

derspeigal...:laugh2:

der should look at what they have become before they start casting stones...

and gw is only too happy to post something that would put down his own country..

[GW in Ohio]

derspeigal...:laugh2:

der should look at what they have become before they start casting stones...

and gw is only too happy to post something that would put down his own country..

stephanie: With brain-dead "patriots" like you who will not accept anything critical of this country, we have no need of enemies.

You're very much like that stupid sonofabitch George Bush who, until just a couple of weeks ago, was assuring us that the American economy was sound.

That idiot McCain was saying the same thing until his handlers wiped the drool off his chin and cautioned, "You shouldn't be saying that, John. Here, have a cookie."

[Sitarro]

If I was President Bush I would have quit years ago and told the assholes of this country and the rest of the world to go fuck themselves, I have never seen such a ridiculous level of hate for any one person except for now with Sarah Palin. Now that the truth about the moderator of the VP debate has been revealed, Palin should also tell them to go fuck themselves.

You asshole "progressives" are the exact opposite of that and if any of you have any intelligence what so ever, you will have a severe moment of "Oh Shit, what did I do?" if you are successful at getting these lowlifes into power. You will realize that you don't get an obama prize, just as the imbecile blacks who supported the murdering dimwit OJ....... as Chris Rock said, "Where's my OJ prize?".

You clowns actually think you are winning something, that is the joke.

[GW in Ohio]

If I was President Bush I would have quit years ago and told the assholes of this country and the rest of the world to go fuck themselves, I have never seen such a ridiculous level of hate for any one person except for now with Sarah Palin. Now that the truth about the moderator of the VP debate has been revealed, Palin should also tell them to go fuck themselves.

You asshole "progressives" are the exact opposite of that and if any of you have any intelligence what so ever, you will have a severe moment of "Oh Shit, what did I do?" if you are successful at getting these lowlifes into power. You will realize that you don't get an obama prize, just as the imbecile blacks who supported the murdering dimwit OJ....... as Chris Rock said, "Where's my OJ prize?".

You clowns actually think you are winning something, that is the joke.

If I were President Obama, I would not be thrilled at having to clean up the messes George Bush has left.

[namvet]

If I were President Obama, I would not be thrilled at having to clean up the messes George Bush has left.

he won't come anywhere it. i was wrong. Ohio is Germany. Sieg Heil

[namvet]

From Germany’s Der Spiegel:

George W. Bush has grown old, erratic and rosy in the eight years of his presidency. Little remains of his combativeness or his enthusiasm for physical fitness. On this sunny Tuesday morning in New York, even his hair seemed messy and unkempt, his blue suit a little baggy around the shoulders, as Bush stepped onto the stage, for the eighth time, at the United Nations General Assembly.

"Absurd, absurd, absurd," said one German diplomat. A French woman called him "yesterday's man" over coffee on the East River. There is another way to put it, too: Bush was a laughing stock in the gray corridors of the UN. But the ridicule was a new thing. It marked the end of respect.

Is it only President George W. Bush, the lame duck president, whom the rest of the world is no longer taking seriously, or are the remaining 191 UN member states already setting their sights on the United States, the giant brought to its knees? UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon referred to a "new reality" and "new centers of power and leadership in Asia, Latin America and across the newly developed world." Are they surprised, in these new centers, at the fall of America, of the system of the Western-style market economy?

This is no longer the muscular and arrogant United States the world knows, the superpower that sets the rules for everyone else and that considers its way of thinking and doing business to be the only road to success.
A new America is on display, a country that no longer trusts its old values and its elites even less: the politicians, who failed to see the problems on the horizon, and the economic leaders, who tried to sell a fictitious world of prosperity to Americans.

Also on display is the end of arrogance. The Americans are now paying the price for their pride. Of course, it is not solely the result of undesirable economic developments that the United States is in the process of forfeiting its unique position in the world and that the world is moving toward what Fareed Zakaria, editor of Newsweek International, calls a "post-American age." Washington has also lost much of its political ability to impose its will on other countries.

The failed leadership of President Bush, whose departure most of his counterparts from other countries are now looking forward to more and more openly, is not solely to blame. Nor are his two risky wars: the one in Iraq, which he launched frivolously in the vain hope of converting the entire region to the American way of life, and the other in Afghanistan, in which Bush now risks the world's most powerful defense alliance, NATO, suffering its first defeat.

But it's hard to forget how this president's mentors celebrated the power to shape world affairs the United States acquired in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the East-West conflict. There was talk of a "unipolar moment," of "America's moment," even of an "end of history," now that all other countries apparently had no other choice but to become smaller versions of America: liberal, democratic and buoyed by an unshakeable confidence in the free market economy.

The Bush administration wanted to cement forever this unique moment in history, in which the United States was undoubtedly the strongest power on earth. It wanted to use it to clean house in chronic crisis zones around the world, especially the Middle East. Far from relying on the classic, cumbersome and often unsuccessful tools of multilateral diplomacy, the Bush warriors were always quick to threaten military intervention -- just as quick as they were to make good on this threat.

The strategists of this immoderately self-confident administration formulated these principles in the "Bush doctrine" and claimed, for themselves and their actions, the right to "preemptive" military intervention -- with little concern for the rules of alliances or international organizations.

The superpower even claimed privileges over its allies, even offending some of its best friends during Bush's first term. Bush withdrew the American signature from a treaty to establish the International Criminal Court, he refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol to combat climate change and he withdrew from an agreement with the Russians to limit the number of missile defense systems.
Washington sought to divide the world into good and evil -- and did so as it saw fit.

Now, in the wake of the crash on Wall Street, the debate in the UN reveals that the long-humiliated have lost their fear of the giant in world politics. Even a political dwarf like Bolivian President Evo Morales is now talking big. "There is an uprising against an economic model, a capitalistic system that is the worst enemy of humanity," Morales told the UN General Assembly.
The financial crisis has uncovered the world power's true weakness. The more the highly indebted United States has to spend to stabilize its own economic system, the more trouble it has performing its self-imposed duties as the world's policeman.

The new US president will only have been in office for a short time when a document titled "Global Trends 2025" appears on his desk. The report is being prepared by analysts at the National Intelligence Council. Its chairman, Thomas Fingar, has already released a preview, and reading it will not exactly be enjoyable for proud American. "Although the United States will remain the most important power, American dominance will be sharply reduced," says Fingar.
According to the preview of the report, the erosion of American supremacy will "accelerate in the areas of politics and economics, and possibly culture."

The century that just began is unlikely to be declared the American century again. Instead, "Asia will shape the fate of the world, with or without the United States," says Parag Khanna, a young Indian-American political scientist whose book "The Second World: Empires and Influence in the New Global Order" has attracted a great deal of attention in the United States.

You can read more…much more….in this lengthy article from Der Spiegel. http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,581502,00.html

Knee-jerk American “patriots” will of course dismiss all this as America-bashing from abroad. But perceptive Americans will recognize the truth that is becoming apparent in every corner of the world. The US is no longer the world’s dominant power…..politically, economically, or socially. All we have left, in the wake of the disastrous Bush administration, is military power. And how much longer can we afford to spend those $billions being the world’s policeman in the wake of the collapse of our financial structure?

thank you Hitler !!!!!

[manu1959]

stephanie: With brain-dead "patriots" like you who will not accept anything critical of this country, we have no need of enemies.

You're very much like that stupid sonofabitch George Bush who, until just a couple of weeks ago, was assuring us that the American economy was sound.

That idiot McCain was saying the same thing until his handlers wiped the drool off his chin and cautioned, "You shouldn't be saying that, John. Here, have a cookie."

funny the economy is surviving this hit.....if it was fundementally unsound would it not collapse.....

[Sitarro]

If I were President Obama, I would not be thrilled at having to clean up the messes George Bush has left.

Already coming up with excuses for the incompetent twat before he is even close to the steps of the White House.

It's Senator Osama, a job he has severely neglected just as he will every job he has. He is nothing but a front man, a puppet of the far left and that garbage George Soros. He has no original ideas, no plan on how to implement anything. He is a basketball bouncing idiot who doesn't ask any questions, he just does what he's told while the handlers keep him interested by dangling shiny objects in front of him. The only reason he is interested in the job is that he thinks he can be the next Clinton, sit in the Oval Office, let the people around him run things while he gets hummers from young interns......... but most of all, he gets to spend a lot of time away from that awful mistake he made years ago, that bitch Michelle.

Can you explain something Dimwits? Why has he spent 100s of millions of dollars of other people's money to try to get elected to a job that pays so little and ages those that have it immediately. Even after receiving those hundreds of million dollars, he still never fails to ask for more.

It is pretty funny to watch the giddiness of you idiots, you actually think you have this election in the bag....... I guess you don't remember how you have had the same feelings the last 2 Presidential elections, how did they turn out for you?

[theHawk]

What a crock of shit.


A new America is on display, a country that no longer trusts its old values and its elites even less: the politicians, who failed to see the problems on the horizon, and the economic leaders, who tried to sell a fictitious world of prosperity to Americans.
Many politicians did see the problem - Republicans. There wasn't a failure to see the problem, the problem is Democrats didn't care and they wanted the crysis to happen so the people would run to the government for help.





Also on display is the end of arrogance. The Americans are now paying the price for their pride.
No, we're paying for the policies of Democrats. Marxists assholes who have engineered the distruction of our capitalist economy via goverment intervention.

[namvet]

stephanie: With brain-dead "patriots" like you who will not accept anything critical of this country, we have no need of enemies.

You're very much like that stupid sonofabitch George Bush who, until just a couple of weeks ago, was assuring us that the American economy was sound.

That idiot McCain was saying the same thing until his handlers wiped the drool off his chin and cautioned, "You shouldn't be saying that, John. Here, have a cookie."

and with brain dead Nazi's like you who needs enemies. here. have a moldy cookie.

[stephanie]

stephanie: With brain-dead "patriots" like you who will not accept anything critical of this country, we have no need of enemies.

You're very much like that stupid sonofabitch George Bush who, until just a couple of weeks ago, was assuring us that the American economy was sound.

That idiot McCain was saying the same thing until his handlers wiped the drool off his chin and cautioned, "You shouldn't be saying that, John. Here, have a cookie."


you my son, who doesn't have a brain cell to split to even say you have an IQ..

No matter what wrongs my country has done, she has done many more rights, and you damn right I will protect her, and even the snotty nosed kids like you who don't deserve it...

now I think I hear your mommy calling ya..time to wipe your nose..or change your diaper..it's once again full of shit..

[GW in Ohio]

funny the economy is surviving this hit.....if it was fundementally unsound would it not collapse.....

Why don't you go tell that to people who've lost their jobs, orlost their homes, or whose retirement money has been reduced by half?

That moron George Bush was saying it was fundamentally sound also, wasn't he?

And that other moron McCain was saying the same thing before his handlers wiped the drool off his chin and said, "Shut up, John."

To a Republican, a "fundamentally sound economy" means "I got mine. If you're out of work or homeless it's because of your moral failings."

[manu1959]

Why don't you go tell that to people who've lost their jobs, orlost their homes, or whose retirement money has been reduced by half?

That moron George Bush was saying it was fundamentally sound also, wasn't he?

And that other moron McCain was saying the same thing before his handlers wiped the drool off his chin and said, "Shut up, John."

To a Republican, a "fundamentally sound economy" means "I got mine. If you're out of work or homeless it's because of your moral failings."

the foundation of the economy is sound......tell me ....

why do people lose their jobs...

why do people lose their homes.....

why do people invest in high risk ventures for their retierment.....

why is any of this the federal govt's and in particular the executive branches responsibility....

and further.....which federal policies are directly responsible for any of these....

[stephanie]

Why don't you go tell that to people who've lost their jobs, or lost their homes, or whose retirement money has been reduced by half?

That moron George Bush was saying it was fundamentally sound also, wasn't he?

And that other moron McCain was saying the same thing before his handlers wiped the drool off his chin and said, "Shut up, John."

To a Republican, a "fundamentally sound economy" means "I got mine. If you're out of work or homeless it's because of your moral failings."


gawd, I hope you grow up some day and learn how the REAL WORLD works..so you stop embarrassing yourself..

but for some reason, I don't hold out much hope...

[namvet]

gawd, I hope you grow up some day and learn how the REAL WORLD works..so you stop embarrassing yourself..

but for some reason, I don't hold out much hope...

he has me on ignore cause he know's ill clean his plow. what a pussy

[stephanie]

the foundation of the economy is sound......tell me ....

why do people lose their jobs...

why do people lose their homes.....

why do people invest in high risk ventures for their retirement.....

why is any of this the federal govt's and in particular the executive branches responsibility....

and further.....which federal policies are directly responsible for any of these....

he had to go running to DuUnderground or Kos to ask them if they can come up with some sort of response to your questions..

don't hold out too long for a reply...or at least an intelligent one..:coffee:

[mundame]

you will have a severe moment of "Oh Shit, what did I do?" if you are successful at getting these lowlifes into power.


I have sure had a lot of those moments since voting for George Bush in 2000, more fool me.

So that's it. No more. Let one of these idiots PROVE he's a good president (clue: the job description is Peace and Prosperity! NOT several failed wars, more wars brewing, the economy going into recession and the entire world banking system melting down) ---- then I'll vote for him.

No more pigs in pokes for me, with or without lipstick.

[Sitarro]

Why don't you go tell that to people who've lost their jobs, orlost their homes, or whose retirement money has been reduced by half?

That moron George Bush was saying it was fundamentally sound also, wasn't he?

And that other moron McCain was saying the same thing before his handlers wiped the drool off his chin and said, "Shut up, John."

To a Republican, a "fundamentally sound economy" means "I got mine. If you're out of work or homeless it's because of your moral failings."


The "drool off his chin" line was weak the first time you said it, now it's just pathetic.

[stephanie]

The "drool off his chin" line was weak the first time you said it, now it's just pathetic.

he probably read it in a comic book and thought it was...way cool..:laugh2:

[mundame]

you actually think you have this election in the bag.......



DUH, the RealClearPolitics average of polls today is 4.9% Obama! (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/)

Their Electoral College map is now 249 Obama and McCain 163, (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/) not including states that are still tossups ------- quite a lead considering they are not including the Big Three ---

Florida, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, the states that every elected prez has to get two of.

All three are now going for Obama. The map with states apportioned by their current polls show 348 Electoral College votes (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10)for Obama ---- he only needs 270!


http://bestsmileys.com/hello/1.gif McCain just lost the race with his very peculiar behavior since he called off the first day of his convention. It just went downhill from there. Bizarre, erratic behavior. Low-level personal attacks that don't respond to any existing reality aren't going to do you any good, ultra-rightwingers.


However much you say "Ooooooo! Oooooooooooo!! Liberals are going to lose because I don't like anyone to the left of Attilla the Hun!!!" that won't help you on Election Day.

[stephanie]

:lol:yeah yeah...we've seemed to hear similar shit right before the last two elections, if I recall...

we won't know until Nov...but I have faith in the American people, they won't elect some radical Marxist to be our President...

[mundame]

I have faith in the American people, they won't elect some radical Marxist to be our President...


You better hope Obama isn't a radical Marxist, then.

Because the polls show him way ahead and when people are AHEAD in the polls, that normally means they win. Behind is, you know, not as good.



(Is there such a thing as a non-radical Marxist? Isn't "Marxist" radical by definition?)

[namvet]

You better hope Obama isn't a radical Marxist, then.

Because the polls show him way ahead and when people are AHEAD in the polls, that normally means they win. Behind is, you know, not as good.



(Is there such a thing as a non-radical Marxist? Isn't "Marxist" radical by definition?)

you mean like when Kerry was ahead of Bush????

[mundame]

you mean like when Kerry was ahead of Bush????


And when was that, for a day or two after his convention bounce?

Because at this time --- one month --- before the election, I recall Kerry was behind Bush. And stayed behind till the election, which Bush won.

If you can show otherwise, with a link, please do.

[namvet]

the pollsters magic tool

http://www.graveaddiction.com/antouija.jpg :laugh2:

[GW in Ohio]

Dear right-wing wackos:

It really pisses you off that I quoted a German source that dared to express critical comments about the good ol' US of A, doesn't it?

Actually, I've found that often times foreign sources like Der Spiegel can provide a more insightful analysis of what's going on here than American sources can, because they can take a more objective view. The current financial crisis has everybody here a little bit off kilter.

But in any case, the level of your invective and hostility tells me that, as partisan Republicans, you feel threatened.

And you should. The president you support has done more damage to this country than al Qaeda ever dreamed of doing.

And the idiot you support for president promises to give us more of what we've endured for the last 8 years, yet you support him.

But you only have to look at McCain and Obama when they participate in these debates. On the one side you've got this desperate old man who has nothing to offer but fear and personal attacks. And on the other side you've got a bright, articulate young man who doesn't engage in personal attacks; he only offers hopeful solutions to the messes created by Mr. Bush.

I think the voters will be able to sort it out and tell who will make the best president.

[Yurt]

Dear right-wing wackos:

It really pisses you off that I quoted a German source that dared to express critical comments about the good ol' US of A, doesn't it?

Actually, I've found that often times foreign sources like Der Spiegel can provide a more insightful analysis of what's going on here than American sources can, because they can take a more objective view. The current financial crisis has everybody here a little bit off kilter.

But in any case, the level of your invective and hostility tells me that, as partisan Republicans, you feel threatened.

And you should. The president you support has done more damage to this country than al Qaeda ever dreamed of doing.

And the idiot you support for president promises to give us more of what we've endured for the last 8 years, yet you support him.

But you only have to look at McCain and Obama when they participate in these debates. On the one side you've got this desperate old man who has nothing to offer but fear and personal attacks. And on the other side you've got a bright, articulate young man who doesn't engage in personal attacks; he only offers hopeful solutions to the messes created by Mr. Bush.

I think the voters will be able to sort it out and tell who will make the best president.

that is a flat out lie

[Immanuel]

And the idiot you support for president promises to give us more of what we've endured for the last 8 years, yet you support him.

But you only have to look at McCain and Obama when they participate in these debates. On the one side you've got this desperate old man who has nothing to offer but fear and personal attacks. And on the other side you've got a bright, articulate young man who doesn't engage in personal attacks; he only offers hopeful solutions to the messes created by Mr. Bush.

I think the voters will be able to sort it out and tell who will make the best president.

Do you want to know how I feel about this post? No, I'm sure none of you care, but you are going to hear it anyway.

First, I don't have a problem with the der spiegel column. I agree that a foreigner may have a slightly less biased view point and that it may be worth looking at it from someone else's perspective once in a while.

As for the political ad for Obama in the post, here is how I view your comments:

You probably know that I am no fan of George Bush any longer. However, I prefer the known quantity of John McCain to the entirely unknown entity of Barack Obama. Obama's affiliations are disturbing to me. His socialistic tendencies worry me. He is a completely unknown interloper.

I would rather not take further steps to Socialism... thank you very much. i don't want to live in a nanny state... thank you very much.

What he offers is change and change is not always for the better.

I'm not planning on voting for John McCain, but if I feel that my vote may make the difference in keeping Barack Obama out of the White House, that may very well change.

Immie

[namvet]

Dear right-wing wackos:

It really pisses you off that I quoted a German source that dared to express critical comments about the good ol' US of A, doesn't it?

Actually, I've found that often times foreign sources like Der Spiegel can provide a more insightful analysis of what's going on here than American sources can, because they can take a more objective view. The current financial crisis has everybody here a little bit off kilter.

But in any case, the level of your invective and hostility tells me that, as partisan Republicans, you feel threatened.

And you should. The president you support has done more damage to this country than al Qaeda ever dreamed of doing.

And the idiot you support for president promises to give us more of what we've endured for the last 8 years, yet you support him.

But you only have to look at McCain and Obama when they participate in these debates. On the one side you've got this desperate old man who has nothing to offer but fear and personal attacks. And on the other side you've got a bright, articulate young man who doesn't engage in personal attacks; he only offers hopeful solutions to the messes created by Mr. Bush.

I think the voters will be able to sort it out and tell who will make the best president.

your not even voting for Osama asshat

[manu1959]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7637321.stm

now this is an interesting article.......

why does everyone care so much what the us does or how it does it.....

afterall we are a failed empire.......:laugh2:

[namvet]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7637321.stm

now this is an interesting article.......

why does everyone care so much what the us does or how it does it.....

afterall we are a failed empire.......:laugh2:

in other words they want to go back to pre 9-11 why's that????

[GW in Ohio]

Do you want to know how I feel about this post? No, I'm sure none of you care, but you are going to hear it anyway.

First, I don't have a problem with the der spiegel column. I agree that a foreigner may have a slightly less biased view point and that it may be worth looking at it from someone else's perspective once in a while.

As for the political ad for Obama in the post, here is how I view your comments:

You probably know that I am no fan of George Bush any longer. However, I prefer the known quantity of John McCain to the entirely unknown entity of Barack Obama. Obama's affiliations are disturbing to me. His socialistic tendencies worry me. He is a completely unknown interloper.

I would rather not take further steps to Socialism... thank you very much. i don't want to live in a nanny state... thank you very much.

What he offers is change and change is not always for the better.

I'm not planning on voting for John McCain, but if I feel that my vote may make the difference in keeping Barack Obama out of the White House, that may very well change.

Immie

Immanuel: Fair enough.

Thanks for not engaging in the kind of nasty hostility that a lot of right wingers here indulge in.

I don't agree that Obama is an unknown quantity, though. He's been going through this presidential campaign business for 2 years now, and his views have been thoroughly vetted and discussed.

And I don't think he will take the country in a socialist direction. Everything he's said indicates that he's a centrist and a pragmatist. If you liked President Jack Kennedy, you'll probably like President Obama.

[mundame]

GW, you need to stop believing in so much. It just sets you up.

Somebody told me a slogan years ago, "Everything you know is wrong."

I've come to realize in the years since that it's far worse than that -----


Everything we know is lies.

[manu1959]

Immanuel: Fair enough.

Thanks for not engaging in the kind of nasty hostility that a lot of right wingers here indulge in.

I don't agree that Obama is an unknown quantity, though. He's been going through this presidential campaign business for 2 years now, and his views have been thoroughly vetted and discussed.

And I don't think he will take the country in a socialist direction. Everything he's said indicates that he's a centrist and a pragmatist. If you liked President Jack Kennedy, you'll probably like President Obama.

If you liked President Jack Kennedy, you'll probably like President Obama.


really....please describe how their posistions on foregin policy....domestic policy....economic policy.....and social polices are similar....

[stephanie]

Dear right-wing wackos:

It really pisses you off that I quoted a German source that dared to express critical comments about the good ol' US of A, doesn't it?

Actually, I've found that often times foreign sources like Der Spiegel can provide a more insightful analysis of what's going on here than American sources can, because they can take a more objective view. The current financial crisis has everybody here a little bit off kilter.

But in any case, the level of your invective and hostility tells me that, as partisan Republicans, you feel threatened.

And you should. The president you support has done more damage to this country than al Qaeda ever dreamed of doing.

And the idiot you support for president promises to give us more of what we've endured for the last 8 years, yet you support him.

But you only have to look at McCain and Obama when they participate in these debates. On the one side you've got this desperate old man who has nothing to offer but fear and personal attacks. And on the other side you've got a bright, articulate young man who doesn't engage in personal attacks; he only offers hopeful solutions to the messes created by Mr. Bush.

I think the voters will be able to sort it out and tell who will make the best president.

you posting from a foreign source and accepting it as gospel, just show you are a traitor to your country...NOTHING MORE..and nothing you say is to be taken seriously, ever..

[namvet]

:lol:

Natalia Narochnitskaya, head of the Paris branch of Russia's Institute of Democracy and Co-operation.

The US needs to stop acting like a teacher to the rest of the world. Its foreign policy is so full of ideology, it's like a relic of the Khrushchev era. "All countries must follow the shining beacon of democracy." And if they don't, America gives them a shove, by force.

The next president should abandon the double standard, whereby the US closes its eyes to all sorts of faults in countries it likes, and declares them fully democratic when they clearly aren't.

He should try to get the US to manufacture more and buy less. The country's economy is deformed.

He should break with America's ideological clichés - its call to moral values, in which it identifies its own interests with the ethical and moral canon of the universe. The division of the world into good and evil is patronising and humiliating for others.

He should stop inventing conflicts every couple of years.

The US can try to exclude Russia from the G8 if it wants, it's just a VIP soiree. On the other hand, the soiree only serves any purpose because it brings together countries that play a big role in international life. So actually the G8 needs to expand. It will soon be necessary to invite China and India, which have developed much faster than America envisaged 10 years ago, when it launched its project for a unipolar world.

The next president should understand that Russia will take steps to compensate for the damage to its security brought about by deploying missile defence systems in Europe.

In the light of the recent crisis in the Black Sea region, I think it would be sensible to drop plans for Nato's expansion - to have a rest for a while.


---------------------------------------------------------

Russia Sends Warships to Caribbean, a First Since Cold War link (link)

Venezuela, Russia Cut Nuke Deal
link (link) another Iran???? should we mention extermination in Georgia????

[namvet]

you posting from a foreign source and accepting it as gospel, just show you are a traitor to your country...NOTHING MORE..and nothing you say is to be taken seriously, ever..

I think your catching on. he's useless

[namvet]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7637321.stm

now this is an interesting article.......

why does everyone care so much what the us does or how it does it.....

afterall we are a failed empire.......:laugh2:

forgot to tell you Osama's foreign policy will be run by foreigners.

[manu1959]

forgot to tell you Osama's foreign policy will be run by foreigners.

if he wins....who he picks for his cabinet will be interesting.....

[stephanie]

good gawd gag me..

the Obambam is like John Kennedy...

gw was probably still in diapers and talking gibberish when JfK was President...:laugh2:

[namvet]

if he wins....who he picks for his cabinet will be interesting.....

one is hiding in a cave in Afghanistan

[namvet]

good gawd gag me..

the Obambam is like John Kennedy...

gw was probably still in diapers and talking gibberish when JfK was President...:laugh2:

no he was the little brown spot left on the sheet between his moma's legs

[manu1959]

If you liked President Jack Kennedy, you'll probably like President Obama.


really....please describe how their posistions on foregin policy....domestic policy....economic policy.....and social polices are similar....

bump....

how about this......will obama rasie taxes like jfk did or cut them like jfk did.....

[stephanie]

bump....

how about this......will obama rasie taxes like jfk did or cut them like jfk did.....

still waiting?????

google must be down where he lives:laugh2:

[GW in Ohio]

The only real leadership in the world has always been moral leadership. The United States became the preeminent world power because everyone else admired our ideals of freedom and fairness and equality, and they wanted to be like us.

Under George Bush, we've relinquished the mantle of world leader in the moral sphere. We've shocked and outraged the rest of the world by our invasion of Iraq and our continued occupation of that country.

We've relinquished moral leadership by illegally detaining and torturing some suspects and by curtailing some civil liberties in this country.

And now, we've messed up the economies of many countries (the economies of all nations are intertwined these days in this global economy) because we allowed greed and stupidity to run many of our financial institutions.

Military superiority will carry you for a while, but when the rest of the world despises you, your days as a world power are numbered.

Ask the Romans.

Ask the Brits.

[stephanie]

Man are we the big ole bad United States..

that's why more people risk their lives to come here than any other country..
what have you done for your country, but sit in your ivory tower and bitch...

I don't give a shit what other countries think of us, we were sure there whenever they needed a hand...what have they done for us lately???

exactly..

you are so ashamed of your country, you can leave..there are many more who will and want to take your place..see ya...:bye1:

[Immanuel]

Immanuel: Fair enough.

Thanks for not engaging in the kind of nasty hostility that a lot of right wingers here indulge in.

I don't agree that Obama is an unknown quantity, though. He's been going through this presidential campaign business for 2 years now, and his views have been thoroughly vetted and discussed.

And I don't think he will take the country in a socialist direction. Everything he's said indicates that he's a centrist and a pragmatist. If you liked President Jack Kennedy, you'll probably like President Obama.

I was 1 and a half when President Kennedy was assassinated. I only like him because I was told I had to like him everyday in school. :D Love that "Ask not what your country can do for you... ask what you can do for your country", sound bite. Don't we all?

I am extremely concerned about Senator Obama. I have not seen anything that tells me that he is not in league with the extremist that he has been known to associate with. Nor do I trust politicians on the campaign trail.

Immie

[manu1959]

The only real leadership in the world has always been moral leadership. The United States became the preeminent world power because everyone else admired our ideals of freedom and fairness and equality, and they wanted to be like us.

Under George Bush, we've relinquished the mantle of world leader in the moral sphere. We've shocked and outraged the rest of the world by our invasion of Iraq and our continued occupation of that country.

We've relinquished moral leadership by illegally detaining and torturing some suspects and by curtailing some civil liberties in this country.

And now, we've messed up the economies of many countries (the economies of all nations are intertwined these days in this global economy) because we allowed greed and stupidity to run many of our financial institutions.

Military superiority will carry you for a while, but when the rest of the world despises you, your days as a world power are numbered.

Ask the Romans.

Ask the Brits.

how old are you.....we have been at war directly or by proxy with the middle east since the 70's ..... (hell possible since the 40's given which side they were on in wwii..... in any event we were attacked no less than 6 times, once domestically, under clinton .... and we had war declared on us during that same period....and you act like this all started the day bush got elected....

[stephanie]

how old are you.....we have been at war directly or by proxy with the middle east since the 70's ..... (hell possible since the 40's given which side they were on in wwii..... in any event we were attacked no less than 6 times, once domestically, under clinton .... and we had war declared on us during that same period....and you act like this all started the day bush got elected....

he reminds me of a lot of Democrats..

walking talking parrots..the same talking points, day in and day out..

[manu1959]

he reminds me of a lot of Democrats..

walking talking parrots..the same talking points, day in and day out..

i have to believe that they are all under 30....quite likely under 25.....they only know the last 8 years and the "stories" of the golden age then the dark ages before that.....

[Immanuel]

I was 1 and a half when President Kennedy was assassinated. I only like him because I was told I had to like him everyday in school. :D Love that "Ask not what your country can do for you... ask what you can do for your country", sound bite. Don't we all?

I am extremely concerned about Senator Obama. I have not seen anything that tells me that he is not in league with the extremist that he has been known to associate with. Nor do I trust politicians on the campaign trail.

Immie

Correction, I was two and a half.

Hey what can I say, I am an accountant. I add not subtract! :D

No really, I was thinking it was 62 when he was killed when in fact it was 63.

Immie

[mundame]

Military superiority will carry you for a while, but when the rest of the world despises you, your days as a world power are numbered.

Ask the Romans.

Ask the Brits.


Soft power, right. As well as hard power. Sure, that eventually gets lost.

Countries all over the world are realizing our superpower status is over and we'll go back to a multipower world system.

It has been obvious for a couple years that the U.S. is in decline, pretty much started up by George Bush and his hapless governance. All these bumbling wars and economic crises are simply what decline LOOKS like.

After this comes the split up of the country into smaller units. If you look at a blue and red Electoral College map it becomes obvious where the units that split off will be. New England will go; the whole Michigan/Illinois northern area separately; the West Coast, perhaps in two units because it's so large. The midsection it's own country. Four separate "countries," at least, I would guess.

[diuretic]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7637321.stm

now this is an interesting article.......

why does everyone care so much what the us does or how it does it.....

afterall we are a failed empire.......:laugh2:

You know something? Most of us don't want the US to fail. You know why?

Check out the alternatives.

But you know what? Bush and Cheney are the reason that the world sees the US as arrogant. We've always known you were a bit full of yourselves but we put that down to youthful exuberance and the fact that the US had never really known privation as it was known in other countries. In WWII your military forces made sacrifices but WWII never really affected you at home. You were insulated. Don't bring up Pearl Harbor, with all due respect it was a minor incident in comparison to other WWII events and I'm not being rude, I've been to the memorial.

I don't like McCain at all (wait, I haven't finished yet) but I'm not that keen on Obama either. But I think you're going to be better off with Obama. But I fully acknowledge I have absolutely no right to be listened to. My opinion is worth diddly squat (I like that Americanism, it's got just the right amount of dismissiveness in it and it has a tiny edge of humour in it which is good).

I know Americans don't regard humility with great regard, it's probably anathema to the national character but in the wake of the towering disastrous failure of the BushCheney administration you may want to give it just a tiny go. It might be good for the collective soul.

[diuretic]

you posting from a foreign source and accepting it as gospel, just show you are a traitor to your country...NOTHING MORE..and nothing you say is to be taken seriously, ever..

stephanie, der Spiegel in English means, "the mirror".*

Ironical I would have thought. A mirror, der spiegel, has been held up for you (the collective "you") to look at but you refuse to accept the image you see. Think of it as feedback.


*Google translation, my German is limited to, "hello I would like to buy as much beer as I can drink and then be allowed to fall over."

[diuretic]

Correction, I was two and a half.

Hey what can I say, I am an accountant. I add not subtract! :D

No really, I was thinking it was 62 when he was killed when in fact it was 63.

Immie

Indeed it was. I remember the exact moment I found out.

[Immanuel]

You know something? Most of us don't want the US to fail. You know why?

Check out the alternatives.

But you know what? Bush and Cheney are the reason that the world sees the US as arrogant. We've always known you were a bit full of yourselves but we put that down to youthful exuberance and the fact that the US had never really known privation as it was known in other countries. In WWII your military forces made sacrifices but WWII never really affected you at home. You were insulated. Don't bring up Pearl Harbor, with all due respect it was a minor incident in comparison to other WWII events and I'm not being rude, I've been to the memorial.

I don't like McCain at all (wait, I haven't finished yet) but I'm not that keen on Obama either. But I think you're going to be better off with Obama. But I fully acknowledge I have absolutely no right to be listened to. My opinion is worth diddly squat (I like that Americanism, it's got just the right amount of dismissiveness in it and it has a tiny edge of humour in it which is good).

I know Americans don't regard humility with great regard, it's probably anathema to the national character but in the wake of the towering disastrous failure of the BushCheney administration you may want to give it just a tiny go. It might be good for the collective soul.

Bush/Cheney arrogant? Okay... okay... maybe I can give that to you, but the 2004 alternative was a heck of a lot worse. Talk about an elitist SOB!

I"m afraid that McCain will be just as arrogant as Bush, but I'm even more afraid of what a man like Barack Obama can do. I don't believe he loves the same America, that I do. I'm afraid of what America will look like after an Obama Presidency. Now, I have no way of predicting what America will be like, but I am concerned. Of course, I am sure that there are liberal counterparts of mine who said the same thing about George Bush and are saying the same about John McCain.

I can only pray that America makes the right decision this time around.

Immie

[Sitarro]

You know something? Most of us don't want the US to fail. You know why?

Check out the alternatives.

But you know what? Bush and Cheney are the reason that the world sees the US as arrogant. We've always known you were a bit full of yourselves but we put that down to youthful exuberance and the fact that the US had never really known privation as it was known in other countries. In WWII your military forces made sacrifices but WWII never really affected you at home. You were insulated. Don't bring up Pearl Harbor, with all due respect it was a minor incident in comparison to other WWII events and I'm not being rude, I've been to the memorial.

I don't like McCain at all (wait, I haven't finished yet) but I'm not that keen on Obama either. But I think you're going to be better off with Obama. But I fully acknowledge I have absolutely no right to be listened to. My opinion is worth diddly squat (I like that Americanism, it's got just the right amount of dismissiveness in it and it has a tiny edge of humour in it which is good).

I know Americans don't regard humility with great regard, it's probably anathema to the national character but in the wake of the towering disastrous failure of the BushCheney administration you may want to give it just a tiny go. It might be good for the collective soul.

Since you and the rest of the world, who are so very superior to us neophytes, know so much more about everything and hold the real truths in your hands............. could you explain why the U.S. economy was soaring, unemployment was at record lows, gasoline was priced below $2.60 before the elections of 2006? The Democ-rats, led by those imbeciles Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, promised to lower unemployment even more, gas prices even more and fix the economy which was breaking records within 100 days of getting majorities in both houses of Congress......... that was 2 years ago.

Please, oh great humble one, explain it to us arrogant fools from the United States.




Oh, by the way, I guess you guys from around the world don't understand how very arrogant and condescending you sound when criticizing the citizens of the United States, do you.

[namvet]

You know something? Most of us don't want the US to fail. You know why?

Check out the alternatives.

But you know what? Bush and Cheney are the reason that the world sees the US as arrogant. We've always known you were a bit full of yourselves but we put that down to youthful exuberance and the fact that the US had never really known privation as it was known in other countries. In WWII your military forces made sacrifices but WWII never really affected you at home. You were insulated. Don't bring up Pearl Harbor, with all due respect it was a minor incident in comparison to other WWII events and I'm not being rude, I've been to the memorial.

I don't like McCain at all (wait, I haven't finished yet) but I'm not that keen on Obama either. But I think you're going to be better off with Obama. But I fully acknowledge I have absolutely no right to be listened to. My opinion is worth diddly squat (I like that Americanism, it's got just the right amount of dismissiveness in it and it has a tiny edge of humour in it which is good).

I know Americans don't regard humility with great regard, it's probably anathema to the national character but in the wake of the towering disastrous failure of the BushCheney administration you may want to give it just a tiny go. It might be good for the collective soul.

Bush and Cheney broke up the arms deals with Iraq. mainly the EU. and the oil for food scam that Iraq skimmed off. losing those trillions under the table in 90's really pissed em off. if Osama gets in its back to business as usual. damned 9-11 attack !!!!
and WTF does WW11 have to do with the price of tomatoes?????

[April15]

From Germany’s Der Spiegel:

George W. Bush has grown old, erratic and rosy in the eight years of his presidency. Little remains of his combativeness or his enthusiasm for physical fitness. On this sunny Tuesday morning in New York, even his hair seemed messy and unkempt, his blue suit a little baggy around the shoulders, as Bush stepped onto the stage, for the eighth time, at the United Nations General Assembly.

"Absurd, absurd, absurd," said one German diplomat. A French woman called him "yesterday's man" over coffee on the East River. There is another way to put it, too: Bush was a laughing stock in the gray corridors of the UN. But the ridicule was a new thing. It marked the end of respect.

Is it only President George W. Bush, the lame duck president, whom the rest of the world is no longer taking seriously, or are the remaining 191 UN member states already setting their sights on the United States, the giant brought to its knees? UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon referred to a "new reality" and "new centers of power and leadership in Asia, Latin America and across the newly developed world." Are they surprised, in these new centers, at the fall of America, of the system of the Western-style market economy?

This is no longer the muscular and arrogant United States the world knows, the superpower that sets the rules for everyone else and that considers its way of thinking and doing business to be the only road to success.
A new America is on display, a country that no longer trusts its old values and its elites even less: the politicians, who failed to see the problems on the horizon, and the economic leaders, who tried to sell a fictitious world of prosperity to Americans.

Also on display is the end of arrogance. The Americans are now paying the price for their pride. Of course, it is not solely the result of undesirable economic developments that the United States is in the process of forfeiting its unique position in the world and that the world is moving toward what Fareed Zakaria, editor of Newsweek International, calls a "post-American age." Washington has also lost much of its political ability to impose its will on other countries.

The failed leadership of President Bush, whose departure most of his counterparts from other countries are now looking forward to more and more openly, is not solely to blame. Nor are his two risky wars: the one in Iraq, which he launched frivolously in the vain hope of converting the entire region to the American way of life, and the other in Afghanistan, in which Bush now risks the world's most powerful defense alliance, NATO, suffering its first defeat.

But it's hard to forget how this president's mentors celebrated the power to shape world affairs the United States acquired in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the East-West conflict. There was talk of a "unipolar moment," of "America's moment," even of an "end of history," now that all other countries apparently had no other choice but to become smaller versions of America: liberal, democratic and buoyed by an unshakeable confidence in the free market economy.

The Bush administration wanted to cement forever this unique moment in history, in which the United States was undoubtedly the strongest power on earth. It wanted to use it to clean house in chronic crisis zones around the world, especially the Middle East. Far from relying on the classic, cumbersome and often unsuccessful tools of multilateral diplomacy, the Bush warriors were always quick to threaten military intervention -- just as quick as they were to make good on this threat.

The strategists of this immoderately self-confident administration formulated these principles in the "Bush doctrine" and claimed, for themselves and their actions, the right to "preemptive" military intervention -- with little concern for the rules of alliances or international organizations.

The superpower even claimed privileges over its allies, even offending some of its best friends during Bush's first term. Bush withdrew the American signature from a treaty to establish the International Criminal Court, he refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol to combat climate change and he withdrew from an agreement with the Russians to limit the number of missile defense systems.
Washington sought to divide the world into good and evil -- and did so as it saw fit.

Now, in the wake of the crash on Wall Street, the debate in the UN reveals that the long-humiliated have lost their fear of the giant in world politics. Even a political dwarf like Bolivian President Evo Morales is now talking big. "There is an uprising against an economic model, a capitalistic system that is the worst enemy of humanity," Morales told the UN General Assembly.
The financial crisis has uncovered the world power's true weakness. The more the highly indebted United States has to spend to stabilize its own economic system, the more trouble it has performing its self-imposed duties as the world's policeman.

The new US president will only have been in office for a short time when a document titled "Global Trends 2025" appears on his desk. The report is being prepared by analysts at the National Intelligence Council. Its chairman, Thomas Fingar, has already released a preview, and reading it will not exactly be enjoyable for proud American. "Although the United States will remain the most important power, American dominance will be sharply reduced," says Fingar.
According to the preview of the report, the erosion of American supremacy will "accelerate in the areas of politics and economics, and possibly culture."

The century that just began is unlikely to be declared the American century again. Instead, "Asia will shape the fate of the world, with or without the United States," says Parag Khanna, a young Indian-American political scientist whose book "The Second World: Empires and Influence in the New Global Order" has attracted a great deal of attention in the United States.

You can read more…much more….in this lengthy article from Der Spiegel. http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,581502,00.html

Knee-jerk American “patriots” will of course dismiss all this as America-bashing from abroad. But perceptive Americans will recognize the truth that is becoming apparent in every corner of the world. The US is no longer the world’s dominant power…..politically, economically, or socially. All we have left, in the wake of the disastrous Bush administration, is military power. And how much longer can we afford to spend those $billions being the world’s policeman in the wake of the collapse of our financial structure?

America No. 1?

America by the numbers

by Michael Ventura

02/03/05 "ICH" - - No concept lies more firmly embedded in our national character than the notion that the USA is "No. 1," "the greatest." Our broadcast media are, in essence, continuous advertisements for the brand name "America Is No. 1." Any office seeker saying otherwise would be committing political suicide. In fact, anyone saying otherwise will be labeled "un-American." We're an "empire," ain't we? Sure we are. An empire without a manufacturing base. An empire that must borrow $2 billion a day from its competitors in order to function. Yet the delusion is ineradicable. We're No. 1. Well...this is the country you really live in:

* The United States is 49th in the world in literacy (the New York Times, Dec. 12, 2004).
* The United States ranked 28th out of 40 countries in mathematical literacy (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004).
* Twenty percent of Americans think the sun orbits the earth. Seventeen percent believe the earth revolves around the sun once a day (The Week, Jan. 7, 2005).
* "The International Adult Literacy Survey...found that Americans with less than nine years of education 'score worse than virtually all of the other countries'" (Jeremy Rifkin's superbly documented book The European Dream: How Europe's Vision of the Future Is Quietly Eclipsing the American Dream, p.78).
* Our workers are so ignorant and lack so many basic skills that American businesses spend $30 billion a year on remedial training (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004). No wonder they relocate elsewhere!
* "The European Union leads the U.S. in...the number of science and engineering graduates; public research and development (R&D) expenditures; and new capital raised" (The European Dream, p.70).
* "Europe surpassed the United States in the mid-1990s as the largest producer of scientific literature" (The European Dream, p.70).
* Nevertheless, Congress cut funds to the National Science Foundation. The agency will issue 1,000 fewer research grants this year (NYT, Dec. 21, 2004).
* Foreign applications to U.S. grad schools declined 28 percent last year. Foreign student enrollment on all levels fell for the first time in three decades, but increased greatly in Europe and China. Last year Chinese grad-school graduates in the U.S. dropped 56 percent, Indians 51 percent, South Koreans 28 percent (NYT, Dec. 21, 2004). We're not the place to be anymore.
* The World Health Organization "ranked the countries of the world in terms of overall health performance, and the U.S. [was]...37th." In the fairness of health care, we're 54th. "The irony is that the United States spends more per capita for health care than any other nation in the world" (The European Dream, pp.79-80). Pay more, get lots, lots less.
* "The U.S. and South Africa are the only two developed countries in the world that do not provide health care for all their citizens" (The European Dream, p.80). Excuse me, but since when is South Africa a "developed" country? Anyway, that's the company we're keeping.
* Lack of health insurance coverage causes 18,000 unnecessary American deaths a year. (That's six times the number of people killed on 9/11.) (NYT, Jan. 12, 2005.)
* "U.S. childhood poverty now ranks 22nd, or second to last, among the developed nations. Only Mexico scores lower" (The European Dream, p.81). Been to Mexico lately? Does it look "developed" to you? Yet it's the only "developed" country to score lower in childhood poverty.
* Twelve million American families--more than 10 percent of all U.S. households--"continue to struggle, and not always successfully, to feed themselves." Families that "had members who actually went hungry at some point last year" numbered 3.9 million (NYT, Nov. 22, 2004).
* The United States is 41st in the world in infant mortality. Cuba scores higher (NYT, Jan. 12, 2005).
* Women are 70 percent more likely to die in childbirth in America than in Europe (NYT, Jan. 12, 2005).
* The leading cause of death of pregnant women in this country is murder (CNN, Dec. 14, 2004).
* "Of the 20 most developed countries in the world, the U.S. was dead last in the growth rate of total compensation to its workforce in the 1980s.... In the 1990s, the U.S. average compensation growth rate grew only slightly, at an annual rate of about 0.1 percent" (The European Dream, p.39). Yet Americans work longer hours per year than any other industrialized country, and get less vacation time.
* "Sixty-one of the 140 biggest companies on the Global Fortune 500 rankings are European, while only 50 are U.S. companies" (The European Dream, p.66). "In a recent survey of the world's 50 best companies, conducted by Global Finance, all but one were European" (The European Dream, p.69).
* "Fourteen of the 20 largest commercial banks in the world today are European.... In the chemical industry, the European company BASF is the world's leader, and three of the top six players are European. In engineering and construction, three of the top five companies are European.... The two others are Japanese. Not a single American engineering and construction company is included among the world's top nine competitors. In food and consumer products, Nestlé and Unilever, two European giants, rank first and second, respectively, in the world. In the food and drugstore retail trade, two European companies...are first and second, and European companies make up five of the top ten. Only four U.S. companies are on the list" (The European Dream, p.68).
* The United States has lost 1.3 million jobs to China in the last decade (CNN, Jan. 12, 2005).
* U.S. employers eliminated 1 million jobs in 2004 (The Week, Jan. 14, 2005).
* Three million six hundred thousand Americans ran out of unemployment insurance last year; 1.8 million--one in five--unemployed workers are jobless for more than six months (NYT, Jan. 9, 2005).
* Japan, China, Taiwan, and South Korea hold 40 percent of our government debt. (That's why we talk nice to them.) "By helping keep mortgage rates from rising, China has come to play an enormous and little-noticed role in sustaining the American housing boom" (NYT, Dec. 4, 2004). Read that twice. We owe our housing boom to China, because they want us to keep buying all that stuff they manufacture.
* Sometime in the next 10 years Brazil will probably pass the U.S. as the world's largest agricultural producer. Brazil is now the world's largest exporter of chickens, orange juice, sugar, coffee, and tobacco. Last year, Brazil passed the U.S. as the world's largest beef producer. (Hear that, you poor deluded cowboys?) As a result, while we bear record trade deficits, Brazil boasts a $30 billion trade surplus (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004).
* As of last June, the U.S. imported more food than it exported (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004).
* Bush: 62,027,582 votes. Kerry: 59,026,003 votes. Number of eligible voters who didn't show up: 79,279,000 (NYT, Dec. 26, 2004). That's more than a third. Way more. If more than a third of Iraqis don't show for their election, no country in the world will think that election legitimate.
* One-third of all U.S. children are born out of wedlock. One-half of all U.S. children will live in a one-parent house (CNN, Dec. 10, 2004).
* "Americans are now spending more money on gambling than on movies, videos, DVDs, music, and books combined" (The European Dream, p.28).
* "Nearly one out of four Americans [believe] that using violence to get what they want is acceptable" (The European Dream, p.32).
* Forty-three percent of Americans think torture is sometimes justified, according to a PEW Poll (Associated Press, Aug. 19, 2004).
* "Nearly 900,000 children were abused or neglected in 2002, the last year for which such data are available" (USA Today, Dec. 21, 2004).
* "The International Association of Chiefs of Police said that cuts by the [Bush] administration in federal aid to local police agencies have left the nation more vulnerable than ever" (USA Today, Nov. 17, 2004).

No. 1? In most important categories we're not even in the Top 10 anymore. Not even close.

The USA is "No. 1" in nothing but weaponry, consumer spending, debt, and delusion.

Reprinted from the Austin Chronicle. www.citypages.com/databank/26/1264/article12985.asp

[manu1959]

The USA is "No. 1" in nothing but weaponry, consumer spending, debt, and delusion.

Reprinted from the Austin Chronicle. www.citypages.com/databank/26/1264/article12985.asp

and what will obama do about this exactly......wait i know....he hopes it will change.....

[AFbombloader]

and what will obama do about this exactly......wait i know....he hopes it will change.....

He already stated he will gut military spending, so we will not be #1 there either, that should make April even happier!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1981500/posts

[namvet]

America No. 1?

America by the numbers

by Michael Ventura

02/03/05 "ICH" - - No concept lies more firmly embedded in our national character than the notion that the USA is "No. 1," "the greatest." Our broadcast media are, in essence, continuous advertisements for the brand name "America Is No. 1." Any office seeker saying otherwise would be committing political suicide. In fact, anyone saying otherwise will be labeled "un-American." We're an "empire," ain't we? Sure we are. An empire without a manufacturing base. An empire that must borrow $2 billion a day from its competitors in order to function. Yet the delusion is ineradicable. We're No. 1. Well...this is the country you really live in:

* The United States is 49th in the world in literacy (the New York Times, Dec. 12, 2004).
* The United States ranked 28th out of 40 countries in mathematical literacy (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004).
* Twenty percent of Americans think the sun orbits the earth. Seventeen percent believe the earth revolves around the sun once a day (The Week, Jan. 7, 2005).
* "The International Adult Literacy Survey...found that Americans with less than nine years of education 'score worse than virtually all of the other countries'" (Jeremy Rifkin's superbly documented book The European Dream: How Europe's Vision of the Future Is Quietly Eclipsing the American Dream, p.78).
* Our workers are so ignorant and lack so many basic skills that American businesses spend $30 billion a year on remedial training (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004). No wonder they relocate elsewhere!
* "The European Union leads the U.S. in...the number of science and engineering graduates; public research and development (R&D) expenditures; and new capital raised" (The European Dream, p.70).
* "Europe surpassed the United States in the mid-1990s as the largest producer of scientific literature" (The European Dream, p.70).
* Nevertheless, Congress cut funds to the National Science Foundation. The agency will issue 1,000 fewer research grants this year (NYT, Dec. 21, 2004).
* Foreign applications to U.S. grad schools declined 28 percent last year. Foreign student enrollment on all levels fell for the first time in three decades, but increased greatly in Europe and China. Last year Chinese grad-school graduates in the U.S. dropped 56 percent, Indians 51 percent, South Koreans 28 percent (NYT, Dec. 21, 2004). We're not the place to be anymore.
* The World Health Organization "ranked the countries of the world in terms of overall health performance, and the U.S. [was]...37th." In the fairness of health care, we're 54th. "The irony is that the United States spends more per capita for health care than any other nation in the world" (The European Dream, pp.79-80). Pay more, get lots, lots less.
* "The U.S. and South Africa are the only two developed countries in the world that do not provide health care for all their citizens" (The European Dream, p.80). Excuse me, but since when is South Africa a "developed" country? Anyway, that's the company we're keeping.
* Lack of health insurance coverage causes 18,000 unnecessary American deaths a year. (That's six times the number of people killed on 9/11.) (NYT, Jan. 12, 2005.)
* "U.S. childhood poverty now ranks 22nd, or second to last, among the developed nations. Only Mexico scores lower" (The European Dream, p.81). Been to Mexico lately? Does it look "developed" to you? Yet it's the only "developed" country to score lower in childhood poverty.
* Twelve million American families--more than 10 percent of all U.S. households--"continue to struggle, and not always successfully, to feed themselves." Families that "had members who actually went hungry at some point last year" numbered 3.9 million (NYT, Nov. 22, 2004).
* The United States is 41st in the world in infant mortality. Cuba scores higher (NYT, Jan. 12, 2005).
* Women are 70 percent more likely to die in childbirth in America than in Europe (NYT, Jan. 12, 2005).
* The leading cause of death of pregnant women in this country is murder (CNN, Dec. 14, 2004).
* "Of the 20 most developed countries in the world, the U.S. was dead last in the growth rate of total compensation to its workforce in the 1980s.... In the 1990s, the U.S. average compensation growth rate grew only slightly, at an annual rate of about 0.1 percent" (The European Dream, p.39). Yet Americans work longer hours per year than any other industrialized country, and get less vacation time.
* "Sixty-one of the 140 biggest companies on the Global Fortune 500 rankings are European, while only 50 are U.S. companies" (The European Dream, p.66). "In a recent survey of the world's 50 best companies, conducted by Global Finance, all but one were European" (The European Dream, p.69).
* "Fourteen of the 20 largest commercial banks in the world today are European.... In the chemical industry, the European company BASF is the world's leader, and three of the top six players are European. In engineering and construction, three of the top five companies are European.... The two others are Japanese. Not a single American engineering and construction company is included among the world's top nine competitors. In food and consumer products, Nestlé and Unilever, two European giants, rank first and second, respectively, in the world. In the food and drugstore retail trade, two European companies...are first and second, and European companies make up five of the top ten. Only four U.S. companies are on the list" (The European Dream, p.68).
* The United States has lost 1.3 million jobs to China in the last decade (CNN, Jan. 12, 2005).
* U.S. employers eliminated 1 million jobs in 2004 (The Week, Jan. 14, 2005).
* Three million six hundred thousand Americans ran out of unemployment insurance last year; 1.8 million--one in five--unemployed workers are jobless for more than six months (NYT, Jan. 9, 2005).
* Japan, China, Taiwan, and South Korea hold 40 percent of our government debt. (That's why we talk nice to them.) "By helping keep mortgage rates from rising, China has come to play an enormous and little-noticed role in sustaining the American housing boom" (NYT, Dec. 4, 2004). Read that twice. We owe our housing boom to China, because they want us to keep buying all that stuff they manufacture.
* Sometime in the next 10 years Brazil will probably pass the U.S. as the world's largest agricultural producer. Brazil is now the world's largest exporter of chickens, orange juice, sugar, coffee, and tobacco. Last year, Brazil passed the U.S. as the world's largest beef producer. (Hear that, you poor deluded cowboys?) As a result, while we bear record trade deficits, Brazil boasts a $30 billion trade surplus (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004).
* As of last June, the U.S. imported more food than it exported (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004).
* Bush: 62,027,582 votes. Kerry: 59,026,003 votes. Number of eligible voters who didn't show up: 79,279,000 (NYT, Dec. 26, 2004). That's more than a third. Way more. If more than a third of Iraqis don't show for their election, no country in the world will think that election legitimate.
* One-third of all U.S. children are born out of wedlock. One-half of all U.S. children will live in a one-parent house (CNN, Dec. 10, 2004).
* "Americans are now spending more money on gambling than on movies, videos, DVDs, music, and books combined" (The European Dream, p.28).
* "Nearly one out of four Americans [believe] that using violence to get what they want is acceptable" (The European Dream, p.32).
* Forty-three percent of Americans think torture is sometimes justified, according to a PEW Poll (Associated Press, Aug. 19, 2004).
* "Nearly 900,000 children were abused or neglected in 2002, the last year for which such data are available" (USA Today, Dec. 21, 2004).
* "The International Association of Chiefs of Police said that cuts by the [Bush] administration in federal aid to local police agencies have left the nation more vulnerable than ever" (USA Today, Nov. 17, 2004).

No. 1? In most important categories we're not even in the Top 10 anymore. Not even close.

The USA is "No. 1" in nothing but weaponry, consumer spending, debt, and delusion.

Reprinted from the Austin Chronicle. www.citypages.com/databank/26/1264/article12985.asp

you forgot to tell us Michael Ventura is a liberal.

letters at 3 AM (letters at 3 AM)

[Immanuel]

The USA is "No. 1" in nothing but weaponry, consumer spending, debt, and delusion.

Reprinted from the Austin Chronicle. www.citypages.com/databank/26/1264/article12985.asp



and what will obama do about this exactly......wait i know....he hopes it will change.....

Yes, Obama wants to remove weaponry from that statement and add Taxation and Social Spending.

We can't lose with that formula.

Immie

[Yurt]

The USA is "No. 1" in nothing but weaponry, consumer spending, debt, and delusion.

Reprinted from the Austin Chronicle. www.citypages.com/databank/26/1264/article12985.asp

you might want to ask yourself what the percentage ratio compared to overall gdp is....without, you do not have 'real' numbers...for example...i make $100 a year and spend $20 a year on guns...you make $10 and spend $7 a year on guns. looks like i spend way more than you on guns, but, considering our budget, in reality, you spend more on guns that i do....

i did a quick google search and if wiki is wrong, so be it, but provide links:


List of countries by military expenditure as a percentage of GDP

Rank Country Military expenditures as % of GDP Date of information
1 North Korea 22.90 2003 est.
2 Georgia 15.90 2007 est.
3 Oman 11.40 2005 est.
4 Qatar 10.00 2005 est.
5 Saudi Arabia 10.00 2005 est.
6 Iraq 8.60 2006
7 Jordan 8.60 2006
8 Israel 7.30 2006
9 Yemen 6.60 2006
10 Armenia 6.50 2001
11 Eritrea 6.30 2006 est.
12 Burundi 5.90 2006 est.
13 Syria 5.90 2005 est.
14 Colombia 5.70 2008 est.[39]
15 Angola 5.70 2006
16 Mauritania 5.50 2006
17 Maldives 5.50 2005 est

notice the US did not even make the list

[diuretic]

Bush/Cheney arrogant? Okay... okay... maybe I can give that to you, but the 2004 alternative was a heck of a lot worse. Talk about an elitist SOB!

I"m afraid that McCain will be just as arrogant as Bush, but I'm even more afraid of what a man like Barack Obama can do. I don't believe he loves the same America, that I do. I'm afraid of what America will look like after an Obama Presidency. Now, I have no way of predicting what America will be like, but I am concerned. Of course, I am sure that there are liberal counterparts of mine who said the same thing about George Bush and are saying the same about John McCain.

I can only pray that America makes the right decision this time around.

Immie

Kerry was a bad choice. Too much of a Boston brahmin. But even then his defeat wasn't possible without the Diebold assist. Anyway, that's history now.

Obama won't do anything radical. He's no socialist, just a capitalist with a conscience.

[diuretic]

Since you and the rest of the world, who are so very superior to us neophytes, know so much more about everything and hold the real truths in your hands............. could you explain why the U.S. economy was soaring, unemployment was at record lows, gasoline was priced below $2.60 before the elections of 2006? The Democ-rats, led by those imbeciles Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, promised to lower unemployment even more, gas prices even more and fix the economy which was breaking records within 100 days of getting majorities in both houses of Congress......... that was 2 years ago.

Please, oh great humble one, explain it to us arrogant fools from the United States.




Oh, by the way, I guess you guys from around the world don't understand how very arrogant and condescending you sound when criticizing the citizens of the United States, do you.

If I sound condescending then I'm not expressing myself properly. But then you could be a bit thin-skinned about criticism too. I don't know, maybe the anwer lies between the two.

Given that possibility I won't take up your invitation, don't want more bad blood.

[diuretic]

Bush and Cheney broke up the arms deals with Iraq. mainly the EU. and the oil for food scam that Iraq skimmed off. losing those trillions under the table in 90's really pissed em off. if Osama gets in its back to business as usual. damned 9-11 attack !!!!
and WTF does WW11 have to do with the price of tomatoes?????

Firstly, you're all over the place with BushCheney but I'm not going to pursue it.

WWII - you weren't paying attention were you?

[Sitarro]

If I sound condescending then I'm not expressing myself properly. But then you could be a bit thin-skinned about criticism too. I don't know, maybe the anwer lies between the two.

Given that possibility I won't take up your invitation, don't want more bad blood.

There is a constant criticism of Americans from citizens of other countries for not knowing the truth that everyone around the world does, that our press never gives us the information that the international press gives you........ as if we don't have the same access to the same press they do..... the internet is pretty international. The problem is that the international press has their bias too. Who really gets the truth?

Yes, we do have a large group of idiot, illiterate, dumb asses in our country(300 million people after all), how do you think an empty suit like Osamabama could be in this election at all? They spend all of their time in front of television watching sports and vote for whomever their favorite Hollywood jerk or recording industry dimwit tells them to vote for......... they are too lazy to go for a better education and refuse responsibility by saying politics is boring. The thing is, those same people exist across the world. How else do you explain the people killed every year at soccer matches stampeding each other?

The fact is, our country put men on the moon, what other country has done that?:salute::laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

[Immanuel]

Kerry was a bad choice. Too much of a Boston brahmin. But even then his defeat wasn't possible without the Diebold assist. Anyway, that's history now.

Obama won't do anything radical. He's no socialist, just a capitalist with a conscience.

Kerry was a bad choice... agreed and I'll go further than that... McCain was a terrible choice. Not much we can do about it.

As for Senator Obama? Well, redistribution of wealth is a key tenet of socialism (and even though Senator Biden wants to call it "Fairness", we must call a spade, a spade) and that is what Senator Obama has been bragging about for two years now. I don't see how you can say he is not a socialist. As for him being a capatalist with a conscience, are you saying he is a "compassionate conservative"? That was the same kind of crap George Bush convinced me he was... I don't believe Senator Obama comes close to that. Also, when I think of Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers consciences, it concerns me that Senator Obama has that same conscience. That is just plain NOT GOOD!

Immie

[Classact]

Obama won't do anything radical. He's no socialist, just a capitalist with a conscience.When Obama was in the state senate he sent money to Rezko to fix up his district... Maybe he'll give Rezko a pardon, establish him as Secretary of Treasury and then Rezko could assign Rev. Wright to manage the $700 billion housing assets the government will own under this bailout... someone needs to cut the grass and replace burnt out light bulbs ... maybe they will just fill these properties with "bottom up" folks to do that job... free homes for those in the hood willing to cut grass and change light bulbs????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???//

[namvet]

Firstly, you're all over the place with BushCheney but I'm not going to pursue it.

WWII - you weren't paying attention were you?


WWII - you weren't paying attention were you?

more than you. your lack of what happened is glaring. but, once again, you have a bigger problem than us. your about to be over run by terrorists. we're taking bets on when Britain falls. and we're not saving your ass again. your lack of "pursuit" is the reason your in this mess. so sit on your throne and keep grunting

im finished with you.

[April15]

you might want to ask yourself what the percentage ratio compared to overall gdp is....without, you do not have 'real' numbers...for example...i make $100 a year and spend $20 a year on guns...you make $10 and spend $7 a year on guns. looks like i spend way more than you on guns, but, considering our budget, in reality, you spend more on guns that i do....

i did a quick google search and if wiki is wrong, so be it, but provide links:



notice the US did not even make the list

We make the weapons these countries but. That is what helps make us #1 in weaponry.

[diuretic]

There is a constant criticism of Americans from citizens of other countries for not knowing the truth that everyone around the world does, that our press never gives us the information that the international press gives you........ as if we don't have the same access to the same press they do..... the internet is pretty international. The problem is that the international press has their bias too. Who really gets the truth?

Yes, we do have a large group of idiot, illiterate, dumb asses in our country(300 million people after all), how do you think an empty suit like Osamabama could be in this election at all? They spend all of their time in front of television watching sports and vote for whomever their favorite Hollywood jerk or recording industry dimwit tells them to vote for......... they are too lazy to go for a better education and refuse responsibility by saying politics is boring. The thing is, those same people exist across the world. How else do you explain the people killed every year at soccer matches stampeding each other?

The fact is, our country put men on the moon, what other country has done that?:salute::laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Well we sent men to the moon before you. What NASA didn't tell you was that Neil Amstrong tripped over a beer can one of our our pisspot astronauts left behind :laugh2:

[diuretic]

Kerry was a bad choice... agreed and I'll go further than that... McCain was a terrible choice. Not much we can do about it.

As for Senator Obama? Well, redistribution of wealth is a key tenet of socialism (and even though Senator Biden wants to call it "Fairness", we must call a spade, a spade) and that is what Senator Obama has been bragging about for two years now. I don't see how you can say he is not a socialist. As for him being a capatalist with a conscience, are you saying he is a "compassionate conservative"? That was the same kind of crap George Bush convinced me he was... I don't believe Senator Obama comes close to that. Also, when I think of Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers consciences, it concerns me that Senator Obama has that same conscience. That is just plain NOT GOOD!

Immie

I don't see Obama as being a socialist at all. I think he's probably a pragmatist. This is just a huge guess by me but I think he may try to ameliorate some of the latter day problems of capitalism in the US, he won't try to change it radically though - that's why I think he's pragmatic, he doesn't want to find himself impeached.

I don't know if redistribtion of wealth is socialist. Might be socialistic yes, but a socialist economy is about fair distribution. However I am probably splitting hairs again.

I think Obama, if he becomes president, will be his own man. I simply can't see him acting in anything but a sane, sensible and gradual manner if he seeks to change anything. Yes, I am being completely hypothetical, I'm taking so many guesses you'd think I was on a quiz show.

[diuretic]

more than you. your lack of what happened is glaring. but, once again, you have a bigger problem than us. your about to be over run by terrorists. we're taking bets on when Britain falls. and we're not saving your ass again. your lack of "pursuit" is the reason your in this mess. so sit on your throne and keep grunting

im finished with you.

Attempting to dismiss me is childish. Now pay attention.

I'm not in Britain. But that doesn't matter because regardless of my location my mission is to fight ignorance everywhere, one forum at a time :laugh2:

Britain isn't about to fall to an Islamic invasion. That's the sort of garbage frightened Americans like to spread. Frightened Americans think that there are armies of Islamic militants ready to invade and take over America. The whole idea is totally laughable. But that's the sort of bullshit frightened Americans believe because their government told them to be frightened.

Just as well the majority of Americans aren't frightened Americans and know the smell of bullshit from their despised administration.

As for the US "saving" Britain. That is such a trite and simplistic statement that I don't know where to begin the rebuttal. I'll ask this though. Did the US join WWII out of altruism or out of self-interest?

[mundame]

As for the US "saving" Britain. That is such a trite and simplistic statement that I don't know where to begin the rebuttal. I'll ask this though. Did the US join WWII out of altruism or out of self-interest?


We joined WWII because Japan attacked us and Hitler declared war on us, all in one interesting week.

This after Churchill begged Roosevelt to save Britain yet, yet again; that we saved Britain and the allies generally in World War I is obvious to all who still know anything about that crucial war.

We could hardly stay out of WWII considering the Axis was attacking us directly. However, that we saved Britain and France by joining the war is obvious.

We have occupied Germany for 50 years because frankly, we got tired of fighting to save Britain over and over again; it seemed best to stop up the problem with Europe where it undeniably originated: Germany.

[Kathianne]

Attempting to dismiss me is childish. Now pay attention.

I'm not in Britain. But that doesn't matter because regardless of my location my mission is to fight ignorance everywhere, one forum at a time :laugh2:

Britain isn't about to fall to an Islamic invasion. That's the sort of garbage frightened Americans like to spread. Frightened Americans think that there are armies of Islamic militants ready to invade and take over America. The whole idea is totally laughable. But that's the sort of bullshit frightened Americans believe because their government told them to be frightened.

Just as well the majority of Americans aren't frightened Americans and know the smell of bullshit from their despised administration.

As for the US "saving" Britain. That is such a trite and simplistic statement that I don't know where to begin the rebuttal. I'll ask this though. Did the US join WWII out of altruism or out of self-interest?
You know what? I don't really give a fig anymore. My father, who left a bit of his hand, leg, and back over in France all those years ago, is now dead. So are most of those Americans, who were so 'frightened' that they did what the government forced them to do.

Well, the government isn't forcing much nowadays, other than paying too much in taxes. For me, I think it's time to find 'humility' and stop the bailouts for any not American. Time to stop worrying about other countries energy suppliers. Time to take care of us, just us. If others wish to trade with us, fine. Same rules though for both sides, whether UK or Bangladesh.

High time to say 'end of empire' and 'me first.'

[Yurt]

Attempting to dismiss me is childish.

you're dismissed

:laugh2:

[diuretic]

you're dismissed

:laugh2:

Yay I get to go home early! (Again) :cheers2:

[diuretic]

We joined WWII because Japan attacked us and Hitler declared war on us, all in one interesting week.

This after Churchill begged Roosevelt to save Britain yet, yet again; that we saved Britain and the allies generally in World War I is obvious to all who still know anything about that crucial war.

We could hardly stay out of WWII considering the Axis was attacking us directly. However, that we saved Britain and France by joining the war is obvious.

We have occupied Germany for 50 years because frankly, we got tired of fighting to save Britain over and over again; it seemed best to stop up the problem with Europe where it undeniably originated: Germany.

No, there are too many hypotheses in there. I don't mean to sound like a condescending prick (and I know I'm going to sound like it so I may as well get that out of the way).

You do have the advantage in that it is a fact that the US joined the Allies and it is therefore easier to argue that if it weren't for the US then the Allies sans the US would have lost the war. But that's a hypothesis which we can't test. Nor is my hypothesis able to be tested, that the Allies sans the US would have been able to defeat the Germans and then dealt with Japan without the US being involved. But I can produce some support for it.

Britain defended itself from Germany and did it alone. The effort to invade Britain was thwarted by the British, in particular the RAF. There was no help from the US but it is noted that American pilots joined the Eagle Squadrons. When the attempted invasion failed Hitler fell back on Blitzkrieg against Britain. That ended in 1941 when Hitler realised he wasn't going to be successful in his invasion. So, the argument that anyone saved Britain except Britain itself is patent nonsense.

As for France being saved by the US? An empty claim. Offensive almost. You forgot the British, the Canadians, the British Commonwealth and other forces that landed on the Normany beaches.

[diuretic]

You know what? I don't really give a fig anymore. My father, who left a bit of his hand, leg, and back over in France all those years ago, is now dead. So are most of those Americans, who were so 'frightened' that they did what the government forced them to do.

Well, the government isn't forcing much nowadays, other than paying too much in taxes. For me, I think it's time to find 'humility' and stop the bailouts for any not American. Time to stop worrying about other countries energy suppliers. Time to take care of us, just us. If others wish to trade with us, fine. Same rules though for both sides, whether UK or Bangladesh.

High time to say 'end of empire' and 'me first.'

If you realise that what drives the US - and any other nation - is self-interest and not altruism then it's easier to get events into perspective. The US entered WWII when its interests were attacked. The British entered WWII when its allies interests were attacked. Now, the British might look more altruistic than the Americans, after all Roosevelt declared the US to be neutral in 1939, but it was about adhering to the terms of an alliance. If the Brits hadn't honoured the terms of their alliance treaties then they would have been totally distrusted by any other nation with whom they had any dealings.

The end of WWII saw the end of the British Empire, until then the only world superpower at that time. The US saw the potential power of the Soviets and knew that this was the new threat. The US set about spreading itself influence over as much of the rest of the world as it could. It wasn't altruism, it was about self-interest.

Frankly if the US withdraws from the world in all but trade it won't make much of a difference. The EU is a powerful trade and political bloc. Russia is busy expanding its interests for economic reasons into its former Soviet republics but it will find itself up against the EU and both sides will have to reach an accommodation. The US is irrelevant to that situation now, so withdrawal doesn't matter.

China appears to be satisfied with financial hegemony and probably has figured it can get what it wants without war. No need for involvement from the US there either.

So yes, it's probably a good idea for the US to close its military bases around the world and pull back to look after itself. And I wouldn't blame the US for making that decision.

It's always about self-interest for all of us.

[Kathianne]

If you realise that what drives the US - and any other nation - is self-interest and not altruism then it's easier to get events into perspective. The US entered WWII when its interests were attacked. The British entered WWII when its allies interests were attacked. Now, the British might look more altruistic than the Americans, after all Roosevelt declared the US to be neutral in 1939, but it was about adhering to the terms of an alliance. If the Brits hadn't honoured the terms of their alliance treaties then they would have been totally distrusted by any other nation with whom they had any dealings.

The end of WWII saw the end of the British Empire, until then the only world superpower at that time. The US saw the potential power of the Soviets and knew that this was the new threat. The US set about spreading itself influence over as much of the rest of the world as it could. It wasn't altruism, it was about self-interest.

Frankly if the US withdraws from the world in all but trade it won't make much of a difference. The EU is a powerful trade and political bloc. Russia is busy expanding its interests for economic reasons into its former Soviet republics but it will find itself up against the EU and both sides will have to reach an accommodation. The US is irrelevant to that situation now, so withdrawal doesn't matter.

China appears to be satisfied with financial hegemony and probably has figured it can get what it wants without war. No need for involvement from the US there either.

So yes, it's probably a good idea for the US to close its military bases around the world and pull back to look after itself. And I wouldn't blame the US for making that decision.

It's always about self-interest for all of us.
For one of the few times in months, I'm going to agree. It's past time to close the bases that are anything other than defensive to our interests. For too long we have been considering our 'allies' interests our own; if they couldn't or wouldn't defend their interests, we did. Gotta stop that habit.

[diuretic]

For one of the few times in months, I'm going to agree. It's past time to close the bases that are anything other than defensive to our interests. For too long we have been considering our 'allies' interests our own; if they couldn't or wouldn't defend their interests, we did. Gotta stop that habit.

I would think it reflects the reality of global politics. If I may indulge in a bit of imagination.

The US has shown the limits of capitalism, there is a painful realisation that it does indeed have limits and they have been - painfully - explored. Don't get me wrong, this isn't schadenfreude on my part. I might be a socialist but I don't want to see people suffer because of the greed of a few.

I am assuming that the US (meaning gummint) will understand what has happened and will move away from the ideological foolishness of believing market economy shouldn't be regulated.

The USSR is no more. The Russian Federation isn't much better though. Instead of state capitalism it has oligarchic rule. But in many ways Russia reflects the US. As long as things are okay for the ordinary person they're not going to beef too much, let the ruling class do their thing as long as there's enough to eat, money to buy stuff and to live with creature comforts.

China. Well, China is busy making money. Yes they're totalitarian bastards who savagely oppress their own folks but they're not going to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike any day soon.

Europe is strong and confident. The Russians won't take on Europe and vice versa. No need for the US there.

Japan is stable and Asia is working stuff out with the rest of the world and China.

Pull your troops out. Go home Yanqui! Trust me it won't alter a damn thing and you can save lots of money and your military folks get to go home.

But your politicians will baulk. That really will signal the end of empire for the US. But don't worry about it, it had to happen sometime.

The world is changing, time to roll with it.

As for us, we don't give a toss as long as the beer's cold :laugh2:

Sometimes it's good being a minnow :)

[Kathianne]

I would think it reflects the reality of global politics. If I may indulge in a bit of imagination.

The US has shown the limits of capitalism, there is a painful realisation that it does indeed have limits and they have been - painfully - explored. Don't get me wrong, this isn't schadenfreude on my part. I might be a socialist but I don't want to see people suffer because of the greed of a few.

I am assuming that the US (meaning gummint) will understand what has happened and will move away from the ideological foolishness of believing market economy shouldn't be regulated.

The USSR is no more. The Russian Federation isn't much better though. Instead of state capitalism it has oligarchic rule. But in many ways Russia reflects the US. As long as things are okay for the ordinary person they're not going to beef too much, let the ruling class do their thing as long as there's enough to eat, money to buy stuff and to live with creature comforts.

China. Well, China is busy making money. Yes they're totalitarian bastards who savagely oppress their own folks but they're not going to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike any day soon.

Europe is strong and confident. The Russians won't take on Europe and vice versa. No need for the US there.

Japan is stable and Asia is working stuff out with the rest of the world and China.

Pull your troops out. Go home Yanqui! Trust me it won't alter a damn thing and you can save lots of money and your military folks get to go home.

But your politicians will baulk. That really will signal the end of empire for the US. But don't worry about it, it had to happen sometime.

The world is changing, time to roll with it.

As for us, we don't give a toss as long as the beer's cold :laugh2:

Sometimes it's good being a minnow :)

I think you may be surprised at how our politicians are often more motivated by power than greed. If they wish to stay in Washington, they need to follow where the people lead. It really is up to the people, who are seriously angry at the 'ruling class' right now. I wonder whether Obama or McCain actually recognize what they are walking into?

[diuretic]

I think you may be surprised at how our politicians are often more motivated by power than greed. If they wish to stay in Washington, they need to follow where the people lead. It really is up to the people, who are seriously angry at the 'ruling class' right now. I wonder whether Obama or McCain actually recognize what they are walking into?

I want that anger to spread and I want it to be directed. Government is oppression K. The oppression needs to be removed. We think we elect reps, we don't, we choose our rulers. I want them gone. For me governments are transitional. I want to move to a society where there is no government.

I know it's nuts but someone has to start it. I'm not enamoured of the Norquist approach, that just replaces government with rule by corporation. I want an end to any ruler.

[Kathianne]

I want that anger to spread and I want it to be directed. Government is oppression K. The oppression needs to be removed. We think we elect reps, we don't, we choose our rulers. I want them gone. For me governments are transitional. I want to move to a society where there is no government.

I know it's nuts but someone has to start it. I'm not enamoured of the Norquist approach, that just replaces government with rule by corporation. I want an end to any ruler.

While I'm all in favor of Locke, I'm more a Hobbesian when it comes to throwing out government, tyvm.

[diuretic]

While I'm all in favor of Locke, I'm more a Hobbesian when it comes to throwing out government, tyvm.

I'll go straight to Marx and Engels when it comes to government being dried up. Locke, the little I've read of him, was great and moved us out of that rotten divine right of Kings rubbish. Hobbes, I know very little of him aside from the well quoted bits about life and his idea of submission to the authorities in return for security and given when he lived that makes sense. But I think that Marx and Engels pointed the way in terms of human development. Dear old Adam Smith was a genius in getting us out from under feudalism and mercantilism and proposing how human potential could be unleashed but I really do think we've reached the beginning of the end of corporatism and it's time to think of putting society first. Time to gradually reform in that direction I think.

[Kathianne]

I'll go straight to Marx and Engels when it comes to government being dried up. Locke, the little I've read of him, was great and moved us out of that rotten divine right of Kings rubbish. Hobbes, I know very little of him aside from the well quoted bits about life and his idea of submission to the authorities in return for security and given when he lived that makes sense. But I think that Marx and Engels pointed the way in terms of human development. Dear old Adam Smith was a genius in getting us out from under feudalism and mercantilism and proposing how human potential could be unleashed but I really do think we've reached the beginning of the end of corporatism and it's time to think of putting society first. Time to gradually reform in that direction I think.
Well with those revelations we certainly agree to disagree. :laugh2:

[diuretic]

Well with those revelations we certainly agree to disagree. :laugh2:

It was the cat! Now I know why she insisted on that red and gold collar with the hammer and sickle address tag!

I need to password protect this computer.

I know, I'll use a password.

товарищ

She'll never think of that one....:laugh2:

[namvet]

It was the cat! Now I know why she insisted on that red and gold collar with the hammer and sickle address tag!

I need to password protect this computer.

I know, I'll use a password.

товарищ

She'll never think of that one....:laugh2:

Linux plus товарищ = Trojan Horses and Viruses :laugh2: