RE: Are we really that different?

RE: Are we really that different? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

meatcleaver -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 10:29:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kisshou I just kept thinking of Monty Python who tons of people love but I never found funny. In what way do the people from the US seem paranoid? For the most powerful nation in the world and its general isolation, (from a European perspective at least) the US seems overly concerned with terrorists and rather insignificant powers trying to do it down. Just look at the patriot act, that is pure paranoia. What about McCarthyism? Pure paranoia. The US has always had a bogeyman. My theory is because it is an ideological state and ideological states need an ideological enemy. I lived in continental Europe during the cold war (still do) and US politicians used to freak us (the Russians never did, they were rather predictable) and most people thought that if a war started it would be started by the US because the US was always going on about commies wanting to take over the world. Everyone knew that Russia couldn't rely on its so called allies to fight and wouldn't start anything as long as their buffer zone was left intact. Everyone new Vietnam was a colonial war and not an ideological war but the US saw commies everywhere. Now it sees Islamic terrorists everywhere. It loses all perspective, though one suspects there is a political purpose to this and isa ploy by the US establishment to keep Americans in line (Strausian philosophy) than to send messages to foreigners but foreigners hear it loud and clear too.

kisshou -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 11:58:26 AM)
I wish it were a ploy but sadly all I have to do is remember 9/11. That was not armies in a battlefield just everyday people going to work or school who were killed. It is not paranoia to recognize an enemy , arm yourself against said enemy and more than that , go forth and wipe out your enemy before it has a chance to grow stronger and spread.

meatcleaver -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 12:17:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kisshou It is not paranoia to recognize an enemy , arm yourself against said enemy and more than that , go forth and wipe out your enemy before it has a chance to grow stronger and spread. Considered risk assessment and appropriate security is one thing, paranoia is another. You suffered an horrendous terrorist attack in '91 but American paranoia started 50 years before that. At times it seems the problem the American state has is that the world has too many non-Americans in it.

farglebargle -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 12:20:17 PM)
quote: Considered risk assessment and appropriate security is one thing, paranoia is another. You suffered an horrendous terrorist attack in '91 but American paranoia started 50 years before that. At times it seems the problem the American state has is that the world has too many non-Americans in it. Don't knock it. That bullshit security theater ( the 9/11 hijackers all had valid, gov't issued photo id, btw... ) is VERY PROFITABLE for some people.

kisshou -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 12:49:09 PM)
If the US were truly paranoid for the last 50 years then 9/11 would have never happened. The United States big problem is trying to balance freedom without leaving gaping holes in our self defense. The problem is not that they are non American it is that they hate us and want us dead.

farglebargle -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 12:52:14 PM)
quote: The United States big problem is trying to balance freedom without leaving gaping holes in our self defense. No we don't. Let me say, REAL AMERICANS don't have any problems balancing freedom with self-defense. REAL AMERICANS keep and bear the arms which ensure their ability to defend themselves and their Freedom and Liberty.

missturbation -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 12:55:16 PM)
You mean there are real Americans and fake Americans? God damn i never knew that !!

farglebargle -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 12:56:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: missturbation You mean there are real Americans and fake Americans? God damn i never knew that !! The FAKE Americans expect to be PROTECTED by The Government, as if they were feeble mental defectives or orphans -- Or Commies....

missturbation -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 12:59:09 PM)
I'm asking that this please doesn't turn into a slanging match or pissing contest. [:D] I don't want to ask again lol

mgdartist -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 2:33:37 PM)
missturbation- takes me a while...had no idea you were a brit. DAAAA-YUUM!....and I was starting to like you too...../end crush hehehe, j/k-you rock, as always in my book. MGD

missturbation -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 2:43:30 PM)
You are kidding me right? Not about the crush but changing your mind bcos im a Brit? Not going to blow just yet but be careful how you answer [:D]

kisshou -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 2:47:19 PM)
and 'real' Americans know that we are the government! No man is an island.

farglebargle -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 2:48:56 PM)
"and 'real' Americans know that we are the government!" If you're a wealthy Yale graduate, with the right family connections, that is. The idea that there isn't a ruling class is the biggest scam ever to come along.

LTRsubNW -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 6:58:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: missturbation My question is are we really that different in our senses of humour, use of grammar, words etc? Do we really think when someone thinks differently to us it can be explained away as 'oh its because they are American / British? Yes. (Did that help?).

sleazy -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 8:21:41 PM)
Apologies to any who think this is mud-slinging...... quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver For the most powerful nation in the world and its general isolation, (from a European perspective at least) the US seems overly concerned with terrorists and rather insignificant powers trying to do it down. Just look at the patriot act, that is pure paranoia. What about McCarthyism? Pure paranoia. The US has always had a bogeyman. My theory is because it is an ideological state and ideological states need an ideological enemy. Here in the UK, our "patriot" act entered the statute books in the year 2000, and this was merely a re-write of older legislation. Then let us not forget the Prevention of Terrorism act, a piece of legislation that allowed for the indefinite detention of "un-uniformed combatants" to use the american term, without charge, counsel or remission, over 30 years ago. Guess that should make the UK far more paranoid than the US. I do not think the problem is ideology as such, but more one of altruism, democracy be the least worst form of government to most western nations, but that does not mean it works for all cultures. Any takers on bets that Iraq & Afghanistan are theocracys again within our lifetimes? quote: I lived in continental Europe during the cold war (still do) and US politicians used to freak us (the Russians never did, they were rather predictable) and most people thought that if a war started it would be started by the US because the US was always going on about commies wanting to take over the world. Everyone knew that Russia couldn't rely on its so called allies to fight and wouldn't start anything as long as their buffer zone was left intact. Everyone new Vietnam was a colonial war and not an ideological war but the US saw commies everywhere. If Russia had invaded Germany it would not have had to rely on the former East Germany to fight, they would have had no choice in the matter. The open route for the tanks to roll across was all that was required. Please dont forget the disparity between Russian (not inc. Warsaw Pact) conventional forces and those of NATO in combination. Rubbish, as a colonial war, Vietnam was lost when it changed from being French Indo-china. I would perhaps accept that it was used as an excuse to take the publics eyes off domestic issues. What use would Vietnam have been to the US as any kind of colony? quote: Now it sees Islamic terrorists everywhere. It loses all perspective, though one suspects there is a political purpose to this and isa ploy by the US establishment to keep Americans in line (Strausian philosophy) than to send messages to foreigners but foreigners hear it loud and clear too. I think the US should see terrorists everywhere, be they islamic, white supremacist, anti-vivisectionists, or the free the brocolli brigade, after all many other corners of the world have been dealing with such groups since the end of WW2. Seriously, no matter how much folks may think the US is on its way to being a police state, it has an awful long way to run to catch up with most of Europe and especially the UK.

SirKenin -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 10:06:47 PM)
I think the powers that be in the US see war as one thing. A chance to cash in. Why is it that every major war the US has fought in brought a boon to their economy? Today, the Iraq war is bringing a boon to Bush's wallet, thanks to his handy investments in weapons manufacturing. The country is going to hell in a hand basket, and he is getting rich. It is all about the flow in My opinion. Money money money. Protect the US' financial interests. Terrorism My ass.

Nosathro -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/2/2007 10:14:53 PM)
I've got eggs, sausage and spam, spam, eggs, sausage and spam spam, spam, eggs, sausage and spam spam, spam, spam, eggs, sausage and spam SPAM, SPAM, SPAM, SPAM, SPAM....SPAM.....WONDERFUL SPAM, SSSSPPPPAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM quote: ORIGINAL: kisshou I just kept thinking of Monty Python who tons of people love but I never found funny. In what way do the people from the US seem paranoid?

Rumtiger -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/3/2007 12:28:53 AM)
whats wrong with Monty Python? I'd rather have not much to do with anyone who dosent laugh once at Holy Grail. As for the language, i've actually adopted "holiday" in lue of just using "vacation".

meatcleaver -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/3/2007 4:22:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sleazy If Russia had invaded Germany it would not have had to rely on the former East Germany to fight, they would have had no choice in the matter. The open route for the tanks to roll across was all that was required. Please dont forget the disparity between Russian (not inc. Warsaw Pact) conventional forces and those of NATO in combination. Rubbish, as a colonial war, Vietnam was lost when it changed from being French Indo-china. I would perhaps accept that it was used as an excuse to take the publics eyes off domestic issues. What use would Vietnam have been to the US as any kind of colony? Can't figure out what your first paragraph means. If you are saying that Russia wouldn't have had to rely on its allies then you are mistaken. Its supply lines went through the Belorus, Ukraine, Poland, East Germany and Hungry, all who had majority populations that hated Russia. Apart from that, Russia was only too aware of its inferior weaponry which was publicly known about at the time and confirmed through papers relaesed in NATO countries and Russian defectors since. The Russians had I think, three times the armoury of the west but required something like ten times the armoury due to inferior arms. As for Vietnam not being a colonial war, the then British Prime Minister at the time Harold Wilson, refused to send British troops to Vietnam on the grounds it was a colonial war and that the Americans were mistaken in thinking Vietnam was an ideological war. You might call Harold Wilson's opinion rubbish but it kept Britain out of a misconceived war and looking at Vietnam now, Wilson seems to have had good judgement. quote: ORIGINAL: sleazy Seriously, no matter how much folks may think the US is on its way to being a police state, it has an awful long way to run to catch up with most of Europe and especially the UK. Just curious, have you ever spent a serious length of time in America or any European country than Britain?

sleazy -> RE: Are we really that different? (1/3/2007 6:48:17 AM)
Russia would not have required active military participation of allies, merely to stand ot one side and keep the roads/railways clear. Russia had more conventional weaponry, heck they still have T34s from the 1940s stockpiled in their south-eastern regions. They had a larger standing army, and a larger base for conscription (most of whom already had military service) but most of all they had ground to trade for time should the tide turn. But most of all, they did not have all their supplies after week 1 reliant on ocean shipping (wolf packs in the atlantic anyone?) All the wargames I have ever seen played out that do not rely on the nuclear option end up with a pretty even split between USSR wins, NATO wins, and stalemate. I guess both you & McMillian have a differing definition of colonial to me, fair enough the english language is wonderful for its flexibility in the use of words. Of, relating to, possessing, or inhabiting a colony or colonies. often Colonial Of or relating to the 13 British colonies that became the original United States of America. Of or relating to the colonial period in the United States. often Colonial Of, relating to, or being a style of architecture and furniture prevalent in the American colonies just before and during the Revolution. Living in, consisting of, or forming a colony: colonial organisms. I figured in the context of warfare option 1 best fits. (source - American Heritage Dictionary) quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver Just curious, have you ever spent a serious length of time in America or any European country than Britain? Yes, I spent a good deal of the last few years indulging in transatlantic commuting, three months here, three months there. I was also very personally involved with an american individual and accepted as part of their family much as a spouse would have been. I was not just a visitor to the US, to all intents & purposes it was more my than the UK was for some time as that was where my "family" was. You may recall earlier in the thread (page 1) I actually pretty much said that I had lived in the US quote: Having been a trans-atlantic commuter in the past I have noticed some great differences, but of course those are particularly limited to that small corner of the US that I claimed as my part-time home. Professionally I get to travel regularly too, and not to the sort of destination normally available in your local travel agent, I also have a very varied client list, from Tokyo one side of the date line, to Honolulu the other, all of who I interact with regularly and on a quite intimate (non-sexual) basis.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125