watch CBC The National tonight

[BVS]

Is America somehow so perfect as to be above reproach?

Fizzing, where have you been, or course it is.

It's Ok to hate the Germans they didn't support us in the war, it's ok to ignore the Canadians they only support us half the time, and the French...well we all know it's OK to hate them. But if you're questioning America's perfection than you may just be a terrorist and we'll have to detain you without arrest and without a lawyer...if you're found innocent we'll see you in about 20 years.

 

[Lilly]

ooooooooookay

point 1: i believe ouizy was using sarcasm when he said:

America should definitely pull its military out of all the countries we are in policing and keeping the peace.

note that right after he said:

We should see what happens.

It could be fun.

It could also be a massacre.

so, i think it's safe to assume that he was pointing out that taking our military out of foreign countries is far easier said than done and could potentially do more damage than good. (correct me if i'm wrong ouizy)


bama ~ you know that this -->

Seriously, I have decided that I find threads of this subject matter to be "offensive" and "insensitive," so I therefer think they should be banned or ruled "taboo" or whatever.

will never happen. open creative criticism is kinda the point here, so we can't just rule out talking to one of the most powerful nations on earth.

basstrap never put that this would have negative views on the States ~ and even put several times that it didn't have harsh reviews of the US and that the sample size was questionable.

we can't be arguing over people in this survey ripping on the US when most of them didn't.

the point is moot.

 

[TylerDurden]

It wasn't critical of the US, or 'deliberitely' critical of the US (Of course some parts were).

I missed the first half hour or so, but basically for those who didn't see it, they would open up a topic, be it US economic power, military might, recent events (Iraq) etc and they'd throw it to the panel in the studio. The panels were a mix of left/right, west/3rd world, community/politicians/media etc etc and they'd get asked questions and discuss for a while. They'd throw to people all over the world and other panels in other studios. Then they'd show the results of the poll on that topic. The results came from around 10-15 countries I think and with just about every question Israel were most supportive of the US, followed by UK, Australia then slide through misc Europe, Sth America, Asia to Jordan at the bottom.

But I don't think it was set up to be anti American in any way. The Australian panel for example was fairly even. 2 guys, 2 girls. One guy was the Premier of the state I live in (Premier is like a US State Governor). He's left wing but is well known as a huge 'fan' of the US. Is considered some genius on US history etc, so he's no anti-American. The other guy was the former top advisor to the Prime Minister, kind of in Condi Rice's position, except he retired about a year ago. So he's right wing, pro-Bush/Howard/Iraq etc. One of the women was a novelist/journalist who has lived in NY for the past 10yrs, and then the other woman was the 'Young Australian of the Year' last year, can't remember what for. So going around that panel you can see you'd get fairly balanced opinions overall.

Bama, if the poll on 'is america arrogant' came back with a huge 'yes' result, we are not allowed to post that?
Are we only allowed to discuss America as long as it's positive? Maybe we could open a seperate forum for travel/tourism and we can tell stories about the great places we've been to in the US and the great American people we've met, but in here it's mostly US Foreign Policy so you'll have to accept that criticism is going to be a big part of that.

 

[U2Bama]

"Seriously," I was not being serious, just merely hoping to illustrate a point about the double standards which I still believe exist in this forum. Thank you for helping me prove it. Someone posted that the overwhelming opinio was that "America is arrogant." If FOX News had a similar show with a poll amongst Americans answering questions about the Arab world (for example) and the majority response was that "Arab culture is ignorant," people in this forum would be expressing outrage at the offensive nature of the program. There are many opinions expressed in this forum that are time and time again ruled off limits when someone finds another person's opinion or assessment to be "offensive," "insensitive," or whatever.

As for this whole America bashing topic, I zeroed in on this thread because I am repeatedly reminded that the rest of you do not like us or at least our Presidential administration and its foreign policy (or any other aspect of its policy). I have heard it a lot. I have heard it so many times that it reminds me of a personal incident with a stereo tape deck back in the late 1980s. My brother had given his cassette deck which I hooked up to my stereo and I was just learning how to use it. I was listening to the Smithereens GREEN THOUGHTS cassette and hit rewind to the beginning of side 2. it didn't rewind, and I looked and realized I had hit another button, so this time I properly hit "rewind," which began the rewind process. The song "Something New" was the first song to play, with the line "It is time for something new" recurring several times throughout the song. I was working on something in another room down the hall. After about 20 minutes, I realized "Something New" seemed to be a very long, repetitive song, and I thought it was truly time for something new. I went down to the tape deck and realized that the first time I tried to hit "rewind," I had actually hit "repeat." So the track "Something New" kept on repeating itself again and again and again. Today, I am reminded again and again and again how the international community ciews us. And yes, I do consider your opinions. I even know what you want us to do about it: change our leadership. Excepting an impeachment process, there is nothing we can do to change the current administration unitl the 2004 elections. Personally, the things about the current administration that I disagree with are probably not significant enough for me to vote for any of his potential rivals. The only one who I would consider voting for under any circumstances would be Joseph Lieberman (Democratic Senator from Connecticut), but I would imagine many of you are troubled by his foreign policy as well.

Basically, Americans like ouizy and I know what the rest of the world thinks of us; I do wish we could resolve some of our differences with the international community, but just because we are not willing to yield our perspective to popular opinion does not necessarily mean he and I are arrogant as individuals; it just means that we might possibly have a different perspective than you. I dont agree with every action the administration has taken, and ouizy probably agrees with even fewer of their actions, for what that's worth.

I don't want any topics of discussion banned or taboo'ed in here. I'm 30 years old and I can handle it, no matter how personal it gets. Posts about America, the South, Protestant Christianity - bring 'em on! Honestly, I look forward to the debate! But I think the freedom to express should exist on both sides. I do this occasionally just to remind everyone of the double standards that exist, and so that I can remind everyone that "double standards are a double edged sword."

And also, I don't think that this "double standard" is a product of the moderators or the administrators of this forum; but it seems that some people go and complain when debates turn in a certain critical direction. I agree name calling, personal attacks, racist statements, etc. should not be tolerated. But I sure as hell don't see how ouizy's response to this thread was "irritating," and if it was, I could probably offer that he has gotten irritated by yet another report on international opinion on America. Visine and other over the counter products are available to suppress irritation.

~U2Alabama

 

[U2Bama]

Oh, and another vivid example of the double standard: a few months ago, I recall an outcry over the "France bashing" and such, complaints about the restaurants that began serving freedom fries, and complaints about threads critical of the lack of French support for the war in Iraq.

So I surmise...France-bashing = bad. U.S. bashing = good.

I heard something on the news recently about the French government cracking down on some Iranian immigrants who were staging a protest against Iran's theocrats and in support of democratic reforms. I would like to criticize the the French government for that, but I don't want to be a France basher!

~U2Alabama

 

[Michael Griffiths]

LOL!! Criticizing the French government for those reasons would not be akin to criticizing people who call french fries "freedom fries". Way too funny.

 

[TylerDurden]

Oh, and another vivid example of the double standard: a few months ago, I recall an outcry over the "France bashing" and such, complaints about the restaurants that began serving freedom fries, and complaints about threads critical of the lack of French support for the war in Iraq.

So I surmise...France-bashing = bad. U.S. bashing = good.

I heard something on the news recently about the French government cracking down on some Iranian immigrants who were staging a protest against Iran's theocrats and in support of democratic reforms. I would like to criticize the the French government for that, but I don't want to be a France basher!

~U2Alabama

The difference is whether you are 'bashing' the government of a country and that governments actions, or the people of the country and their culture.

The France bashing that people were complaining about went beyond their government and was attacking the people and the culture. All you had to do was watch the opening monolgues of any Jay Leno/David Letterman type show leading up to the Iraq war to see that. I was in NYC in Jan/Feb and it was incredible. I swear an alien would have thought the US' enemy was France not Iraq. At the same time any amount of complaining/bashing about the French government and that governments actions are fine. So your statement above about the French government cracking down on Iranian protesters makes you a 'French Government Basher' but not a 'France Basher'. And I agree with your French Government Bashing for that.

In the same way, any amount of of complaining/bashing of the US government is fine, but bashing of the US people/culture/country in general would/should be regarded as offensive. I don't think that goes on here (well I'm sure it does, but it's not common), I think a few people get too jumpy about 'US Government/Foreign Policy Bashing', when it's not 'US Bashing' at all. It fills the most space and time here because Americans make up the majority of the board, and American Foreign Policy is clearly the dominant topic in the world at the moment. Maybe in 5yrs everything will be different and we'll all be in here bashing the Tanzanian Government or something.

But in summary, if you have a beef, go for your life with the Government or Foreign Policy of the US, France, Australia, North Korea, South Korea, UK, Mars wherever, that's ok. It's attacking the people/culture thats not. "The French are cheese eating surrender monkeys" = Bad. "French Government sucks arse because..." = Ok.
"Americans are arrogant and stupid" = Bad. "The US Government sucks arse because..." = Ok.

(I think people also have to be more careful with just refering to 'the Americans' when they mean the American Govt, or 'the French' when they mean the French Govt etc)

And you can't see how petty and stupid the whole Freedom Fries thing was?

 

[STING2]

TylerDurden,

I think the reason you might feel there is a lot of bashing of French citizens in the USA is because you might infer that the majority of critical things said of France means the French people.

Lets take two terms you claimed were bashing French Citizens and not the French Government.

"The French are cheese eating surrender monkeys"

"Freedom Fries"

These are terms that came about because of French Government policy and are most likely directed against the French Government and not the French people.

Of course it is very general in nature, but because the phrases came about as a result of French Government policy, it should be assumed that they are directed against the French Government and not the French People.

I'm not necessarily endorsing any of those phrases but simply attempting to point out that most Americans have a problem with the French Governments recent actions, but not the French people.

 

[U2Bama]

Tyler Durden:

I agree with most of what you say about what is and isn't offensive.

What is your assessment of the following statement which was apparently made in the program and then posted in this thread?

two areas in which the whole world seemed to agree was:
-That America in arrogant.

I suppose they are referring the the U.S. as "America." It doesn't only reference President Bush and his adminsitration; it only referenced "America," which, when referring to the U.S., America is me, Lilly, ouizy, Sting2, melon, 80sU2IsBest, deep, Diamondbruno_9, Screaming Flower, Lemonite, Spike Lee, Lindsey Buckingham, Alex Van Halen, Henry Winkler, the Reverend Al Sharpton, Mandy Moore, John Smoltz, Magic Johnson, Billy Ray Cyrus, a whole, diverse hodgepodge of characters. Once again, I'm not truly offended by it personally. But does the above-characterization apply to me? I'm just trying to illustrate a personal observation.

~U2Alabama

 

[pax]

I always thought Lindsey Buckingham was Canadian. No joke.

He's really American?

 

[U2Bama]

Lindsey was born in 1949 in Palo Alto, California. California became the thirty-first state of the United States of America on September 9, 1850.

~U2Alabama

 

[pax]

California used to be part of Canada?!

 

[U2Bama]

No, and when Lindsey Buckingham was born there, it had been a United State for 99 years.

~U2Alabama

 

[pax]

Wow.

 

[TylerDurden]

Tyler Durden:
What is your assessment of the following statement which was apparently made in the program and then posted in this thread?
~U2Alabama

I think it's safe to say that the statement made in that program was in reference to American Foreign Policy/Recent Actions and everyone watching would have understood that. During the whole show (as with all news/current affair shows) it just refers to Governments by their country name. Or sometimes just the city they are based in. Think if you had an internal domestic poll in the US about your government, the resulting statement may just be "Washington......". Not referring to the millions of citizens of Washington obviously.

I'm betting you would have heard the statement "Iraq is evil" dozens of times a day during the lead up to the war and would have known that they were not referring to the average dude working in the markets in Baghdad, but the regime.

Yes, it would be better if it read:
"X % agree that the foreign policy and recent actions of the Federal Government of the United States of America displays a high level of arrogance and disregard for the opinions and objectives of other nations."
So it therefore ruled out any chance of including and offending any of the average citizenary, but that never happens for any poll on any country.

In this case, I don't think it counts as any sort of personal attack on the US as a whole because of the context it was in. It's "America is..." not "Americans are..." Any statement declaring "Americans are arrogant" would obviously just be plain stupidity and you would have every right do be angry.

And I will never hear a bad word spoken of Mandy Moore by anyone.

 

[Screaming Flower]

bama you make fym a much more interesting place.

 

[zonelistener]

Lilly, ouizy, Sting2, melon, 80sU2IsBest, deep, Diamondbruno_9, Screaming Flower, Lemonite, Spike Lee, Lindsey Buckingham, Alex Van Halen, Henry Winkler, the Reverend Al Sharpton, Mandy Moore, John Smoltz, Magic Johnson, Billy Ray Cyrus, a whole, diverse hodgepodge of characters

Arrogant...the whole lot of them! Especially the first nine.

*hands in certificate of citizenshipery...moves to Canada.

 

[ouizy]

Basically, Americans like ouizy and I know what the rest of the world thinks of us; I do wish we could resolve some of our differences with the international community, but just because we are not willing to yield our perspective to popular opinion does not necessarily mean he and I are arrogant as individuals; it just means that we might possibly have a different perspective than you. I dont agree with every action the administration has taken, and ouizy probably agrees with even fewer of their actions, for what that's worth.

I have to say that although I differ in political views, I do agree with almost everything Bama has said.

My point about us policing and keeping the peace is as follows:

Countries around the world complain that the US is heavy-handed and we stick our nose in where is should not be stuck. They think that we come in and try to influence the region with our ways of life and want people to think how we do.

That is mostly untrue.

What bothers me most is that in many cases nations do not take action when agregious things are happening all over the world. When we do, they ususally complain about us being arrogant and trying to influence the specific region. It is only months, sometimes years later when we often realize (through war crimes tribunals, mass grave findings, evidence of genocide, or any other after the fact examples) that the US and its intelligence may be right and not just arrogant.

In the past five or so years alone the US has been deployed in:

Peru+Ecuador (Operation Safe Border)
Kuwait (Intrinsic Action I-III)
Bosnia (Operation Joint Guard)
Former Yugoslavia (Operation Determined Guard)
Guam (Operation Pacific Haven)
Liberia (Operation Quick Response and Operation Assured Response)
Northern Iraq (Operation Northern Watch)
Liberia (Operation Assured Lift)
Albania (Operation Silver Wake)
Albania + Macedonia (Operation Determined Flacon)
Former Yugoslavia (Operation Deliberate Forge + Operation Determine Forge)
Eritria (Operation Safe Departure)
Guinea-Bissau (Operation Shepard Venture)
Kosovo (Operation Balkan Calm)
Democratic Republic of Congo (Operation Autumn Shelter)
Tanzania + Kenya (Operation Resolute Response)
Sudan + Afghanistan (Operation Infinite Reach)
Serbia (Operation Eagle Eye)
Central America (Operation Strong Support)
Kosovo + Serbia (Operation Allied Force)
Kosovo (Operation Allied Harbour)
Kosovo (Operation Joint Guardian)
Turkey (Operation Avid Response)
East Timor (Operation Stabilise)
Venezuela (Operation Fundamental Response)
Mozambique (operation Altas Response)
Kuwait (Operation Desert Spring)
Kuwait (Operation Desert Falcon)
Kuwait (Operation Desert Focus)

Now my point is this: If you were to review the names and purposes of these operations, most of them have nothing to do with war, but are rather policing, rescuing, transporting, or aiding people abroad.

I fully admit the rest of the world should be able to criticize the US, but I have to say it really does not interest me if those that are doing the criticism have no part in world affairs.

When was the last time Brazil sent a peacekeeping force anywhere?

So my original comment was based on the number of deployments we have around the world, the purpose for these deployments, and what would happen if we were not there.

It seems to me the US is ready and willing to take on many challenges (a la East Timor) for the sake of others, but when we commit to an operation that may satisfy some of our own agendas, we get criticized. As I said the criticism is fair, but please do not be surprised if many of us choose to ignore it.

 

[U2Bama]

That was an informative post, ouizy. So many places around the globe, so many soldiers deployed on request of others. Most of those missions are overlooked by the mass public.

Tyler_Durden:

If it was such a huge, offensive violation fo the human rights of French people for restaurants and Jay Leno and other entities to make humor of France's political decisions, then it should also be a travesty when it is determined and/or expressed that "America is arrogant." I agree with much of what you said in pronciple, but I believe we sometimes need to conced double standards.

~U2Alabama

 

[deep]

Tyler Durden:

I agree with most of what you say about what is and isn't offensive.

What is your assessment of the following statement which was apparently made in the program and then posted in this thread?



I suppose they are referring the the U.S. as "America." It doesn't only reference President Bush and his adminsitration; it only referenced "America," which, when referring to the U.S., America is me, Lilly, ouizy, Sting2, melon, 80sU2IsBest, deep, Diamondbruno_9, Screaming Flower, Lemonite, Spike Lee, Lindsey Buckingham, Alex Van Halen, Henry Winkler, the Reverend Al Sharpton, Mandy Moore, John Smoltz, Magic Johnson, Billy Ray Cyrus, a whole, diverse hodgepodge of characters. Once again, I'm not truly offended by it personally. But does the above-characterization apply to me? I'm just trying to illustrate a personal observation.

~U2Alabama

i am arrogant

i am bias, too

 

[U2Bama]

Aren't you High Bias?

~U2Alabama

 

[Atticus Finch]

I'm new here. I do not wish to create controversy.
I've traveled the world.
Throughout the world the States seem to get an unfair representation.

Atticus.