quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

From a long line of farmers…. Imagine that….lol…. There was no way we could get enough local labor at picking time. I’m 60 and as long as I can remember we had migrate workers… They were all hard working industrious people… We did not pay much… but neither did we make much… but we lived and raised families… so did they… it worked well. By the way I picked for nothing… but I’ll admit I was out of there as soon as I could. I don’t know about everywhere but there were never enough local hands and backs.
You and I are both about the same age.  I have picked oranges,avocados,tomatoes,beans,strawberries and a lot of other crops and I have worked next to white people,black people,yellow people and brown people...it never crossed my mind to inquire about their citizenship status but then I was a teenager and pussy and dope were higher priorities than xenophobia. 

Where I live now may not be representative of the nation as a hole but we have many Bosnian, Vietnamese, and Mexicans immigrant or illegal workers in my area.
How do you know that they are illegal?

There or no longer any landscape…roofing…janitorial…construction labors…restaurant worker jobs available to name a very few of the jobs lost.  We now have local boys and girls that used to fill those positions either un-employed or at low wage service jobs like fast-food.
Could it be that those local boys and girls are not qualified by training or temperament to fill a job requiring more skill than fast food?

Unions workers are loosing jobs left and right. Employers now refuse to pay medical insurance… or contribute to pension plans… or employee full time. Kids now must work two part time jobs just to live.
Why is this so?  Is it because people flock to wally world to get the latest plastic crap from China made by slave labor.

My local Wal-Mart and Target employees more Mexican workers then people from the surrounding neighborhoods and our town is more than 1500 miles from Mexico.
Is it possible that they are actually American citizens who are willing to work for slave wages.  If you can prove that they are illegal aliens why don't you report them to the authorities?

At least in my part of the world illegal workers are taking local employment and forcing low wages… It has to stop or there will be a massive backlash… I don’t want that.
Again I ask you ...how do you know that they are illegal aliens?  If you can prove it then why do you not report them to the authorities?

Butch 

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Hi Thompson

You must not have read the immigrant or illegal part of my post.

Maybe you heard the news story about the town in my area that made a law requiring perspective renters to show green cards or proof of citizenship before renting housing. The City officials, housing authority and local police Department were well aware of the illegal workers and had worked together to reduce the problem. Sounded reasonable to me but the ACLU and some local business has managed to put the law on hold thru the court system. The City fathers were called racist in the national media. The numbers of illegal workers were documented but they are still there taking the jobs.

Our local Wal-Mart was raided and a group of aliens were taken into custody. I do not know what happened to the workers it was hushed up.  But the next week they or others were happily back on the job.

I will guarantee you that our children are better educated then their replacements for those construction and janitorial jobs… education is not the problem it is cheap…lower then minimum wage workers.

When I say Union workers I’m talking hod carriers…brick layers….operating engineers… grocery workers….industry workers… good jobs that used to pay good money. These jobs are going to people who, illegal or not, are not Citizens…will not join unions and will work for a fifth the going wage. This is slowly lowering the standard of living in our area.

The bottom line… I’ve said it before … I have no beef with the illegal workers, they would not be here if there was work in there own country. I admire a man or woman that would travel thousands of miles to support their families.  BUT those that hire them knowingly to save a buck are the real culprits. They don’t care or understand the damage they are doing to the local economies. The only way to stop it is with steep penalties to these employers.
Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
You and I do not disagree in substance on this question.  The biggest sticking point, I see, is how does one substantiate or prove that they are a citizen?  Or conversely how does one prove that someone is not a citizen.
I freely admit I have no solution to the verification problem.  But if we address our efforts to the solution of the problem and not waste time on the polemics of bigotry there is a greater chance of a solution being worked out.
As I have mentioned before....raise the minimum wage to the point where American citizens will take the job and apply the RICO  asset forfeiture statutes to those who employ illegal aliens.
thompson

quote:

ORIGINAL: EPGAH
Well, if they act like a citizen OF AMERICA, then that is perhaps the best "proof"...
Perhaps you might tell us all just how one acts like a citizen of America?  How would this lead to being able to tell real citizens from illegal aliens?  Are you saying that if an illegal alien came to America and spoke english with no accent and were perhaps a bit lighter skinned than their less melanin challenged brethren that you would accept them as citizens?  Or would they have to spew the same bigoted vituperative verbiage that you do to qualify as a good American citizen?


Sadly, all attempts to create a national ID (which is different from a national identity, which we HAVE, but it's being eroded quite fast, and/or sacrificed at the shrine of "multiculturalism"...If all cultures were equal, they'd have no reason to invade us, right?),
You seem to forget the historical fact that we invaded them and not the other way around.

have either failed, or been bypassed as "too inconvenient" for the businesses(!), or been forged too easily (Anyone can make one--Adobe PhotoShop 7 ad).
Mexico created a "national (FAKE) ID" program with their Matricula Consulat cards, but an AMERICAN TV news reporter was able to get 5 different Matricula Consulat cards, under 5 different names, thereby proving that it was neither secure nor uniquely identifying, and rather just the Mexican government's way of providing fake IDs for the illegals they wish America to pay for.
As to the polemics of bigotry, if someone identifies themselves as belonging to/loyal to another country ABOVE AMERICA, then they are at best foreign agents, and at worst, enemy agents, but either way, working to weaken America(ns) from within
So all foreign tourist are now foreign agents? What a bizarre leap of intellectual gymnastics.

Whining about the fate of their children (If you can't feed'em, don't breed'em), or claiming they're only here for "The Jobs Americans Won't Do"(TM) are exceedingly effective psy-ops!
And as to RICO, I have ICE on my speed-dial, I report every suspicious individual who isn't speaking English and is receiving cash on a job, but it seems to have had zero or lower effect (Negative numbers indicate that rather than having these individuals deported, there are more of them, and/or the existing ones breed so they can't be deported due to "humanitarian reasons"--the definition of anchor baby!)
Which agency is in charge of RICO as it applies to illegals, and how do I contact them?
Try the Department of Justice...I am sure you have heard of them.
 
btw:  Why is it that you can charge what you choose for your goods and services but you feel that OPEC should not and that is a good enough reason for us to go steal their oil?

quote:

ORIGINAL: EPGAH

Again, I challenge you: What's bigoted about wanting "guests" to come in using the front door and/or wait to be INVITED in, rather than just break through the window or break down the door at THEIR convenience?
It seems that your command of the english language is somewhat limited.  I have stated over and over again that I am not in favor of illegal immigration....while at the same time pointing out that you never seem to tire of using the most vile and bigoted language to describe illegal aliens.  Is that more clear?  Did you somehow miss the point I have made on numerous occasions about how I feel about illegal immigration to my country and how to solve the problem.


And once they're in, regardless of how, why should they be allowed to cause trouble on behalf of their original "culture"--if their culture was better, their country would be better too, by definition, so Americans would be sneaking in there instead.
Or are they immune to our laws by dint of NOT being citizens here? If so, then American tourists would be granted the same neo-anarchist freedom, right?
And again,
I cannot charge what I choose, I have competition
So it appears that you can set your prices.  You can charge more if you are exceptionally good and perhaps not so much if you are not.
OPEC does the same thing.  The U.S. has more oil than the arabs.  We could put the price of oil at two dollars a barrel and no one would buy the arabs oil.  You know that as well as anyone else but you seek to cling to the myth that they are the "bad guy" because they want to maximize profits just as you do.  But then they are not "white amerikans" so they have to take what you feel is fair for their product...Is that pretty much the just of it?
Your fatuous position that they are gouging you when in fact they are only doing what you do...you like they charge "what the traffic will bear"  but it is good for you to do it and bad for them to do it.


OPEC squelches competition, by accident or design.  
How does OPEC squelch competition? 
They have a product for sale and you have a choice of buying it or not.  Ride a bicycle,walk or work closer to home.  Stop being a crybaby about not getting to fuck everyone you want to.
 
 

And as always, if you raise prices just to "punish" people, that's called price-gouging, and will be punished in turn. For better or worse, America is the "only" (Yeah, right) world superpower, and have chosen to use this power as a sort of worldwide Sheriff, in addition to being the world's CEO and HMO!
Then perhaps the U.S. should get out of the Sheriff business as well as the CEO and HMO business.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: EPGAH
Again, I challenge you: What's bigoted about wanting "guests" to come in using the front door and/or wait to be INVITED in, rather than just break through the window or break down the door at THEIR convenience?
It seems that your command of the english language is somewhat limited.  I have stated over and over again that I am not in favor of illegal immigration....while at the same time pointing out that you never seem to tire of using the most vile and bigoted language to describe illegal aliens.  Is that more clear?  Did you somehow miss the point I have made on numerous occasions about how I feel about illegal immigration to my country and how to solve the problem.
What vile language have I used? Calling them scum/parasites? They have come over AGAINST the laws, and AGAINST the American will, to "make their lives better"...No matter what it does to ours! What language WOULD you use to describe them? Burglars? "Undocumented Guests"?
Why softpedal? To avoid hurting their feelings? They seem to have no compunction of hurting our economy/our citizens, both figuratively, and literally...So why not use vile words for vile things?

And once they're in, regardless of how, why should they be allowed to cause trouble on behalf of their original "culture"--if their culture was better, their country would be better too, by definition, so Americans would be sneaking in there instead.
Or are they immune to our laws by dint of NOT being citizens here? If so, then American tourists would be granted the same neo-anarchist freedom, right?
And again,
I cannot charge what I choose, I have competition
So it appears that you can set your prices.  You can charge more if you are exceptionally good and perhaps not so much if you are not.
OPEC does the same thing.  The U.S. has more oil than the arabs.  We could put the price of oil at two dollars a barrel and no one would buy the arabs oil.  You know that as well as anyone else but you seek to cling to the myth that they are the "bad guy" because they want to maximize profits just as you do.  But then they are not "white amerikans" so they have to take what you feel is fair for their product...Is that pretty much the just of it?
Your fatuous position that they are gouging you when in fact they are only doing what you do...you like they charge "what the traffic will bear"  but it is good for you to do it and bad for them to do it.
I am not a big business, I am competing with Best Buy and their GeekSquad and Staples and their EasyButton service. As such, I don't get to set my own prices, even based on quality. When I've dared to raise my prices, they've taken their business to Best Buy, or simply "suffer" a non-working computer...but then I get a repuation suddenly for gouging (It's sad, of course, that my business is at this out-of-the-way location, but even here, I have to pay rent, I have to pay for the house...Property taxes...Income taxes...Sales taxes...And of course, food, water, electricity...those annoying necessities--oddly, MY customers don't care about MY bills any more than I care about the "plight" of the oil-companies or illegals!)

OPEC squelches competition, by accident or design.  
How does OPEC squelch competition? 
They have a product for sale and you have a choice of buying it or not.  Ride a bicycle,walk or work closer to home.  Stop being a crybaby about not getting to fuck everyone you want to.
OPEC=Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. Almost by definition a price-fixing cartel. A group of countries getting together and saying, "Look, competition's bad, let's set all our prices higher, and agree NOT to undercut each other, and we can screw over the First World!" Or is price-fixing only bad in the First World?

And as always, if you raise prices just to "punish" people, that's called price-gouging, and will be punished in turn. For better or worse, America is the "only" (Yeah, right) world superpower, and have chosen to use this power as a sort of worldwide Sheriff, in addition to being the world's CEO and HMO!
Then perhaps the U.S. should get out of the Sheriff business as well as the CEO and HMO business.
We've tried that, but then the foreigns whine, "Why isn't America helping us? ISOLATIONISTS!" Apparently, it's become an entitlement not only for foreigns to invade America, but our medical technology is "supposed" to go to countries that won't bother helping themselves...If Africa believes that AIDS is a product of the white peoples' imaginations, how is it killing so many of them? And why should Mexico reformat their social/economic policies, if our land is so conveniently nearby for them to dump their criminals into? And if we refuse to help other countries, we're being selfish/racist/bigoted/Nazis...and that's just what our OWN people call us, what will the "neighbors" think?

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Thompson…I sort of hate it when we agree…it’s a lot more fun when we don’t.
When I am right (something that is quite common) it is OK for you to agree with me.


To prove you are a citizen it is very easy… show a drivers license or birth certificate. I have to do it every time I get my license renewed.
As I mentioned before your birth certificate does not prove very much.  It will have some writing on it and perhaps a tiny little foot print. So having one does not necessarily prove that you are an American citizen.  Since the birth certificate is what is most often used to get a drivers license it would follow that a drivers license is also not proof of citizenship. 
Now if you happen to have a "Top Secret" security clearance then that would be pretty good evidence because to get a TS you submit a background history and current pictures which a team of investigators track back and interview school teachers employers and neighbors to track you the person back to the writing on the birth certificate.
 

I don’t mind and don’t feel discriminated against with the requirement. If I rented I would be glad to show my proof of citizenship.
Which, as I have just pointed out, you most likely cannot do.

There is nothing bigoted in asking for proof.
It would not be bigoted if it were applied across the board to everyone.

As a renter I would want a law-abiding citizen or legal worker on a work permit.Minimum wage should be raised but that would not solve the problem…
Sure it would...make the minimum wage $15 @ hour and you will see American citizens showing up for all those previously low wage jobs that illegal aliens take.

The employers do not pay the current minimum wage if it were higher what makes you think that would make a difference?
They get away with it now because of the questionable legal status of illegal aliens and of course their lack of knowledge of the proper channels to follow to report this sort of abuse.

If you were going to stiffen minimum wage penalties why not just stiffen the penalties on hiring illegal workers in the first place. As I’ve said a 20 year no parole jail sentence would stop illegal hiring over night…. Then address minimum wage.
By addressing the minimum wage problem first you create a huge pool of legal workers willing to work...as opposed to having a huge pool of legal workers who stand to be better economically with welfare, Medicare and food stamps as opposed to trying to raise their families on sub minimum wages.
As for punishment for those who hire illegal aliens the RICO act is currently in place and needs only to be applied by prosecutors who do not look to bush&co for the OK to prosecute one of their benefactors.

quote:

Wikipedia
The Mexican-American War[1] was an armed military conflict between the United States and Mexico from 1846 to 1848 in the wake of the 1845 U.S. annexation of Texas. Mexico did not recognize the secession of Texas in 1836; it considered Texas a rebel province.
In the United States, the war was a partisan issue with most Whigs opposing it and most southern Democrats, animated by a popular belief in the Manifest Destiny, supporting it. In Mexico, the war was considered a matter of national pride.
The most important consequence of the war for the United States was the Mexican Cession, in which the Mexican territories of Alta California and Santa Fé de Nuevo México were ceded to the United States under the terms of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. In Mexico, the enormous loss of territory following the war encouraged its government to enact policies to colonize its northern territories as a hedge against further losses.
On April 21, 1836, the Texans decisively defeated Santa Anna's forces in the Battle of San Jacinto. Santa Anna himself was taken captive by the Texas militia and released after signing the Treaties of Velasco in which he promised to recognize the sovereignty of the Republic of Texas and the Rio Grande as the boundary between Texas and Mexico. The Mexican government, however, refused to acknowledge these concessions, arguing that Santa Anna was not a representative of Mexico, that he had no authority to negotiate on behalf of Mexico, and that he signed away Texas under duress. The Mexican government never ratified the Treaties of Velasco.
Mexico's subsequent defeat left them with little choice but to accept the United States' demands, or risk total annexation of Mexico.

quote:

ORIGINAL: EPGAH

Around here, it'$ not about quality, it'$ about price$!
After each World War, we have gone isolationist...in fact, BEFORE each World War, we said, "We'll sit this one out"...and had to be drawn in by some disaster involving Americans. I listed those in a previous rebuttal.
Just because you post some inane drivel does not mean anyone believes it.


I thought we had agreed that MEXICO started the Mexican-American War:

quote:

Wikipedia
No we agreed to no such thing.  That is simply your unsubstantiated opinion.
Perhaps you might want to read "Dual of Eagles" isbn 0688072526
it is well footnoted and perhaps a bit more in depth than your sixth grade history tome.


The Mexican-American War[1] was an armed military conflict between the United States and Mexico from 1846 to 1848 in the wake of the 1845 U.S. annexation of Texas. Mexico did not recognize the secession of Texas in 1836; it considered Texas a rebel province.
In the United States, the war was a partisan issue with most Whigs opposing it and most southern Democrats, animated by a popular belief in the Manifest Destiny, supporting it. In Mexico, the war was considered a matter of national pride.
The most important consequence of the war for the United States was the Mexican Cession, in which the Mexican territories of Alta California and Santa Fé de Nuevo México were ceded to the United States under the terms of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. In Mexico, the enormous loss of territory following the war encouraged its government to enact policies to colonize its northern territories as a hedge against further losses.
On April 21, 1836, the Texans decisively defeated Santa Anna's forces in the Battle of San Jacinto. Santa Anna himself was taken captive by the Texas militia and released after signing the Treaties of Velasco in which he promised to recognize the sovereignty of the Republic of Texas and the Rio Grande as the boundary between Texas and Mexico. The Mexican government, however, refused to acknowledge these concessions, arguing that Santa Anna was not a representative of Mexico, that he had no authority to negotiate on behalf of Mexico, and that he signed away Texas under duress. The Mexican government never ratified the Treaties of Velasco.
Mexico's subsequent defeat left them with little choice but to accept the United States' demands, or risk total annexation of Mexico.

Mexico was willing to fight a war over their national pride? How...noble (read: STUPID![:D]) Before starting a war, you're supposed to make sure you're attacking a country weaker than yourself, or at least one that you have some chance in Hell of winning, right? And the losers are SUPPOSED to give something up in exchange for cessation of hostilities. HOWEVER, America gave Mexico a few MILLION dollars...BUYING, rather than CONQUERING! This started a dangerous precedent: Start a war against America, and LOSE to them for fun&profit. (We've also rebuilt Japan's economy, helped Germany rebuild, airlifted them supplies, gave France and Belgium back to their owners, despite having been bought in American laws, and "forgave our debtors"--all WWII, quoted from my old-fashioned PAPER history-book, rather than an Internet site!) I DID take history; everything I've told you is from my schoolbooks...or from my personal experiences!
It also, however, made a line which Mexcio has not respected since Day 1. Only recently, they've gotten militant about it, rather than sneaking in. Of course it's our own fault for allowing an 8-digit number of illegals to LIVE in America, much less get jobs, medicine, and school!
And if your history-book was more even-handed about it, the "subversion" of Tripoli was because they were charging us basically "protection racket" money. Pirates are more than just a Disney attraction/movie![;)]
The U.S. charges those who wish to use our port facilities and to utilize our waterways for comerce...this is exactly what had been going on for hundreds of years in the Mediterranean.  England the most powerful naval force in the world at that time paid her taxes to the pasha on time and in cash. 
While we are on the subject of reneging on agreements you forgot to mention that potus and the U.S. senate had signed off on a treaty with those folks when the potus sent Decatur and O'bannon to get him off the hook for the money we owed.



American and Egyptian forces (Piracy makes strange bedfellows) forced the pasha to quit helping the pirates...After the civilized countries "won" once, the pasha had "forgotten" his promises, so Americans had to "remind" him once more...While one lesson is "when will criminals ever learn?", the opposite is, "Why doesn't America just CRUSH enemies, rather than 'teaching lessons', that seem to be forgotten soon?" Or you might have seen the more recent airstrike in response to Libya's support of terrorists...
In Panama, France sacrificed 22,000
this is not exactly true.


workers to malaria and yellow fever (Back when it was a disease, not a derogatory term for preferring Asian women) American advances in hygeine meant that "only" 3,000 Americans died in its construction
Again not the whole truth.

(What a bargain!) Panama ignored these sacrifices and wanted to just take it over (Why didn't they waste their own lives building it?) However, cooler heads prevailed, and America DID cede the Canal, IF they promised to keep it neutral, AND allow Americans access to it! (No sense letting a possible enemy have a very expensive "bargaining chip", right?)
You might want to read David McCollough's book on the Panama Canal  "The Path Between the Seas" ISBN 0671225634
While you are at it you might also read Lowell Thomas's book on Smedley Butler "Old Gimlet Eye" ISBN 0940328011 
General Butler was the marine who stopped the Columbian army from putting down the U.S. inspired insurrection in Panama


Hawaii, we were called in by growers who were threatened by the natives, and Americans imposed order, bailing out the growers--but the "enemy" ran and hid, rather than fight and "risk" losing...Hmm, spears and muskets vs. a fully modern Army/Navy combined assault? I don't think it was a "risk" of losing, it would've been a guaranteed humiliating one-sided masochistic POUNDING! (Severe feeling of deja-vu here, I think I wrote this Hawaii incident 2-3 times before?)
Yes you did and you still do not seem to grasp what you are talking about. 
A customer comes into your shop and because you want him to pay for the goods he wants he refuses and calls on his buddies who are well armed and they come in and take your shop. 
It seems you are all in favor of the U.S. thugging people out of their shit just not when it happens to you.


What history book did you read that shows America as the bad guy in all this? I always thought that politically correct self-loathing by Americans was a recent invention?
I DID take French, back when taking a foreign language was OPTIONAL, and back when there were multiple choices, not just Spanish! And where did you get that I'm bad at math? That said, the personal attacks are getting old, please stick to the issues...Or are my positions so unassailable, you have to attack ME personally to "win"?
Your position is not unassailable it is non existent.
As long as you keep posting bigoted mindless drivel I will continue to point it out to you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

I'm sorry Epgah - but you seem to be suggesting that the US paid for WWII and the post war recovery for the European countries involved?

You do realise I hope, that all those supplies which the US kindly sent us, were not gifts? That we paid our way, and in fact have been paying it all back until very recently? And that we also paid for the stuff we sent on to Russia, to keep them in the war and to provide for them eventually to defeat the nazis? (because, to be fair, the Russians defeated the nazis, not us so much, despite the significant sacrifice we made in the west).

You do also realise I hope, that the UK didnt get anything to rebuild after the war, from the US? Whilst those who had been the enemy received everything required for them to rebuild a robust state and economy, we did it on our own, and the expense cost us our Empire? And the best bit, that the funds used for the Marshall Plan came to a large extent from our repayments?

Funny how it works out dontchathink? We resist alone, get bankrupted over it - and the US seizes our place in the world at our expense and puts a former enemy ahead of us to make sure we stay out of the game.

E

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: EPGAH
I thought we had agreed that MEXICO started the Mexican-American War:

quote:

Wikipedia
No we agreed to no such thing.  That is simply your unsubstantiated opinion.
Perhaps you might want to read "Dual of Eagles" isbn 0688072526
it is well footnoted and perhaps a bit more in depth than your sixth grade history tome.
I quoted you directly from Wikipedia, so any anti-American "fact"books you read are to blame for you believing America is bad?

And if your history-book was more even-handed about it, the "subversion" of Tripoli was because they were charging us basically "protection racket" money. Pirates are more than just a Disney attraction/movie![;)]
The U.S. charges those who wish to use our port facilities and to utilize our waterways for comerce...this is exactly what had been going on for hundreds of years in the Mediterranean.  England the most powerful naval force in the world at that time paid her taxes to the pasha on time and in cash. 
While we are on the subject of reneging on agreements you forgot to mention that potus and the U.S. senate had signed off on a treaty with those folks when the potus sent Decatur and O'bannon to get him off the hook for the money we owed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wikipedia article about Tripoli
The Barbary Wars
Main article: Barbary States
In the early part of the 19th century, the regency at Tripoli, owing to its piratical practices, was twice involved in war with the United States. In May 1801, the pasha demanded an increase in the tribute ($83,000) which the US government had been paying since 1796 for the protection of their commerce from piracy under the 1796 Treaty with Tripoli. The demand was refused, and a naval force was sent from the United States to blockade Tripoli. The First Barbary War dragged on for four years, the Americans in 1803 losing the frigate, Philadelphia, the commander (Captain William Bainbridge) and the whole crew being made prisoners. The most colorful incident in the war was the expedition undertaken by William Eaton with the object of replacing the pasha with an elder brother living in exile, who had promised to accede to all the wishes of the United States. Eaton at the head of a motley crew of 500 US Marines, Greek, Arab and Turkish Mercenaries marched across the desert from Alexandria, Egypt and with the aid of American ships, succeeded in capturing Derna. Soon afterwards, on June 3, 1805, peace was concluded. The pasha ended his demands and received $60,000 as ransom for the Philadelphia prisoners under the 1805 Treaty with Tripoli.

See? Tripoli was involved in piracy, we paid "protection money", and he decided to raise it. Abruptly America realized they could give a small-time gangster the boot of the American military! Why we were paying protection-money in the first place is beyond me. That is called extortion, and in First World countries, it's a crime. In third-world dumps, it may be a legitimate revenue-stream, but they should know that Americans' patience with foreign criminals is...variable...to say the least!

Hawaii, we were called in by growers who were threatened by the natives, and Americans imposed order, bailing out the growers--but the "enemy" ran and hid, rather than fight and "risk" losing...Hmm, spears and muskets vs. a fully modern Army/Navy combined assault? I don't think it was a "risk" of losing, it would've been a guaranteed humiliating one-sided masochistic POUNDING! (Severe feeling of deja-vu here, I think I wrote this Hawaii incident 2-3 times before?)
Yes you did and you still do not seem to grasp what you are talking about. 
A customer comes into your shop and because you want him to pay for the goods he wants he refuses and calls on his buddies who are well armed and they come in and take your shop. 
It seems you are all in favor of the U.S. thugging people out of their shit just not when it happens to you.
No, I read it as some growers were cultivating the sugarcane in Hawaii, which was cheaper--at first--than other growers, until the McKinley Tariff, which eliminated their advantage in the "free" market. The Queen, apparently desperate for money, wanted to join the profitable opium trade.
Even the Queen's Cabinet feared for their lives from upsetting the money-starved Queen. Local businessmen and politicians called on America's help, even though before that point, they didn't WANT America, due to our "strict" labor and immigration laws! It took 5 YEARS for them to convince America to annex them! (Pretty odd, an imperial country NOT wanting to annex territory, but still offering to help and protect it...?)
And yes, I realize that is what America does nowadays, protect territories we have little to no reason to be interested in, WITHOUT the benefit of actually gaining/"taking over" that territory!
This incident to me reads more analogous to some thugs sieging my shop, I call in the cops and they quickly swarm in and subdue the attackers (Which probably wouldn't happen unless one of the attackers was OJ Simpson or some other high-profile criminal). Getting a "swarm" of police around here would be difficult in and of itself, 13 full-time officers, and a varying number of part-timers. (The turnover in the part-time roster is either impressive or scary, depending your perspective!)

What history book did you read that shows America as the bad guy in all this? I always thought that politically correct self-loathing by Americans was a recent invention? That said, the personal attacks are getting old, please stick to the issues...Or are my positions so unassailable, you have to attack ME personally to "win"?
Your position is not unassailable it is non existent.
As long as you keep posting bigoted mindless drivel I will continue to point it out to you.
I ask again, what makes America the bad guy instead of the international superhero?
But if America gets called in to help--usually by roughing up some bad guys--we're thugs...if we don't, we're useless and inhumane...
Doesn't that make your position just as bigoted?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen
I'm sorry Epgah - but you seem to be suggesting that the US paid for WWII and the post war recovery for the European countries involved?
You do also realise I hope, that the UK didnt get anything to rebuild after the war, from the US? Whilst those who had been the enemy received everything required for them to rebuild a robust state and economy, we did it on our own, and the expense cost us our Empire? And the best bit, that the funds used for the Marshall Plan came to a large extent from our repayments?
Funny how it works out dontchathink? We resist alone, get bankrupted over it - and the US seizes our place in the world at our expense and puts a former enemy ahead of us to make sure we stay out of the game.
E

quote:

ORIGINAL: EPGAH
I DID take French, back when taking a foreign language was OPTIONAL,