From: T Wake on 16 Oct 2006 15:33 "David Brown" <david.brown(a)hesbynett.removethisbit.no> wrote in message news:4533cf16$0$16499$8404b019(a)news.wineasy.se... > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >> news:egqcsa$8qk_001(a)s961.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> In article <45306AD8.B490EBFB(a)hotmail.com>, >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> The rest of the world loathes the USA. They didn't used to. >>> This is wrong. >> >> Yes, it absolutely *is* wrong for the rest of the world to hate the USA. >> We do a lot of good for the world. We really should stop behaving in >> such a way that makes other countries forget the good that we do. >> > > Well said. It used to be the case that the good the USA did outweighed > the bad in the eyes of the world (although that was at least partly > because of what people hear about - I'd guess a higher proportion of the > world's population know about USA meddling in central and south America > now than they did at the time). Bush has single-handedly destroyed the > American image so badly that even with a total reversal of foreign policy, > it would take a generation to restore the goodwill and admiration that > people used to have for the USA. It's a real shame, because most > Americans are like most other people around the world, and are decent > hard-working and likeable people. Sadly, this is not an argument some people here can realise. It is generally assumed that if you say the US is disliked globally, you are just saying it because you are an American Hating [insert country]. It is hard explaining to some people that this is not the case.
From: T Wake on 16 Oct 2006 15:34 <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:NqQYg.372$T_1.68(a)newssvr14.news.prodigy.com... > > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote in message > news:k-mdnY3Eu6TeIa7YRVnygA(a)pipex.net... >> >> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >> news:egvkjt$8qk_003(a)s806.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> In article <DuGdnR_IgIsP06_YnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>> >>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>news:egt5lk$8u0_003(a)s995.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>>> In article <b972j2hg5vph0kft82futt7v3sd8r5penb(a)4ax.com>, >>>>> John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>>>>On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 05:43:04 +0100, Eeyore >>>>>><rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The rest of the world loathes the USA. They didn't used to. You've >>>>>>>had to >>>>> work hard to >>>>>>>get to that position. >>>>>> >>>>>>From a eurocentric point of view, maybe so. But India and China and >>>>>>Japan and Africa don't count, apparently. >>>>> >>>>> Nor the eastern countries of Europe. >>>> >>>>While I don't agree with the rest of the world loathes the US argument, >>>>it >>>>is undeniable that most countries in the world have a low opinion of >>>>"America" (as an entity) and it's actions on the world stage. >>> >>> Why do you equate a few European countries with most of the >>> rest of world? >> >> I don't. When did I do that? > > Another strawman aimed at allowing her to not take your reasoned opinion > seriously. The hallmark of Republican politics these days, I'm afraid. Not knowing much about the detail of American politics, I cant say much but it certainly is a hallmark of BAH's posts.
From: Eeyore on 16 Oct 2006 15:36 John Fields wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >John Fields wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >> >> ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote > >> >> > >> >> >> Why do you think that the first goal of the US is to be liked by everyone? > >> >> > > >> >> >That's a strawman. Our goal should be not to be hated by everyone. > >> >> > >> >> That is wrong. Our goal should be to know what is in the > >> >> best interest of the nation and its people. Reacting to > >> >> threats to national security with growls instead of swift > >> >> and lethal bites is a sign of weakness; this becomes an open > >> >> invitation to anybody who would like to take over the real > >> >> estate. > >> > > >> >You reckon that 'radical Islam' wants to invade the USA ? > >> > >> --- > >> No. They want us to fall apart because of fear > > > >And you think that can be taken seriously ? > > --- > It's beyond me why you think that radical Islam isn't a threat and > can be ignored. It's no direct threat to your way of life. Graham
From: Eeyore on 16 Oct 2006 15:39 Jonathan Kirwan wrote: > John Larkin<jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > Jonathan Kirwan wrote > ><jkirwan(a)easystreet.com> wrote: > >>John Larkin<jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>>Jonathan Kirwan<jkirwan(a)easystreet.com> wrote: > > >>>>Europeans are already beginning to work out the details of a European, > >>>>as opposed to individual country, military with soldiers who swear > >>>>allegiance to the united countries and not the country they come from. > >>>>Yes? > >>>> > >>>>With the US behaving the way it is, I'd wonder if the Europeans would > >>>>bite at the chance to field an independent force sufficiently funded > >>>>to balance US behavior and provide the necessary 'encouragements' so > >>>>the US negotiates no longer as an unopposed bully. > >>> > >>>But if it takes a multi-country concensus to act, they won't be > >>>fielded in time to do much useful. You can't "balance US behavior" if > >>>it takes a year of debating before deployment. > >> > >>I'm mostly just curious. I understand they already have many > >>thousands of highly trained Euro-troups in the form of a rapid > >>deployment force, right now. The figures slip my mind, but "rapid" is > >>part of it. And the allegiance isn't to any country, as I recall. > > > >They're only a rapid deployment force if they get depolyed rapidly. I > >bet Spanish troops will remain under actual control of Spain, and not > >be deployed if Spain were to object to, say, action against a Muslim > >country or group. And I didn't just make up "Spain" as a random > >example. > > I didn't know the exact state, but something I'd read a year ago gave > me the impression that an agreement had already been forged and that > there actually was a small force already flying under a Euro-wide > 'flag' of sorts. Graham has made me wonder just how real it is. Early stages still AIUI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Rapid_Reaction_Force Graham
From: T Wake on 16 Oct 2006 15:42
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4533B227.6594D9D7(a)hotmail.com... > > > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >So WW2 is responsible for *everything* ???????? >> >> Did you think that a political climate that culiminated with >> WWII went away when people quit fighting? War endings are >> never like a FORTRAN program where the CALL to EXIT stops >> everything. > > So everything also caused by WW1 then. Everything was caused by the Peloponnesian War. |