[MoreTEN]

Im new here, but I have been reading a bit on the threads posted here.

One of the things I see, is little understanding in the Europen anger against USA, and by that I mean President Bush & co.

Now Bush is fearing the EU, and that it will become an Europen Superstate. Then fearing that the French & German anger towards the Irag-war.

So Bush is saying on behalfe of all americans, that USA fears EU?

That we will someday rise up against the USA?

[Gordon Fink]

Historically, Europeans have been bad news … for everyone else. Therefore, can you blame some for watching the formation of the European Union with a certain amount of trepidation?

~G. Fink

[ACP230]

Whenever a Euro shows up with one of these American bashing threads, I am reminded of how glad I am that my ancestors got out of Norway and came to America back in the 1880s.

We were the smart ones IMO.

[MoreTEN]

Gordon Fink wrote:

"Historically, Europeans have been bad news … for everyone else. Therefore, can you blame some for watching the formation of the European Union with a certain amount of trepidation?"

Europeans are peacefull:) We mean you no harm:)

You fail to answer my question, but that does not suprise me;)


:evil:

[MoreTEN]

ACP230 wrote:

"Whenever a Euro shows up with one of these American bashing threads, I am reminded of how glad I am that my ancestors got out of Norway and came to America back in the 1880s.

We were the smart ones IMO."

You fail to answer the question. Why is that?


"Never part with your weapons when you are in the field. You never know when on some lengthy plain, you may suddenly need your spear." Norse Saying from The Havamal."

Why quote something your glad you escaped?

[Gordon Fink]

To answer your question, I don’t think the U.S. fears the E.U. There may be a mutual sense of caution, however.

~G. Fink

[hillbilly]

What's wrong with EU?

Okay, well let's make a comparative list.

Let's make a list of all the wars the USA has been involved in since 1776 and
then let's make a list of all the wars that the members of the EU have been involved in since 1776.

Okay, yeah, hmmmmmmm..............

USA
Revolution
War with the Shawnees
War with the Seminoles
War of 1812
War with Mexico
Civil War
American Indian Wars of the Plains
Spanish American War
World War I
World War II
Korea
Vietnam
Gulf War I
Gulf War II

What wars did I miss with the USA?

And now for the EU list?????????

egads............

[jdege]

It's not the idea of a European Union we fear, but the consequences of an EU established without proper checks and balances, run by the usual crowd of unaccountable bureaucrats.

[Standing Wolf]

So Bush is saying on behalfe of all americans, that USA fears EU?
That we will someday rise up against the USA?

Europe is hostile toward the United States, on the whole, but no one in the U.S. is afraid of Europe. It's conceivable Europe could engage in trade hostilities with the U.S., but I believe it's unlikely.

Europe seems to be turning more socialist every year; by contrast, the United States seems to be leaving leftism further and further behind.

[Jim March]

The EU is being set up without adequate "checks and balances". There's not enough oversight of what the bureaucracy is doing, independent nations are being pressured into giving up sovereignty into something they don't have near enough control over.

And while some of the nations chipping in have a long history of democracy (such as Norway), others don't. The EU Constitution's personal freedom clauses are woefully inadequate.

Upshot: long term, the potential for disaster is extreme. A man could make his grandkids a LOT of money betting it'll all end up under the thumb of yet another totalitarian jackarse like Hitler, Muselini, Franco, Stalin, Milosevich, Tito and the rest of the blood-stained maniacs Europe has a habit of making "leaders" out of, inside of 100 years.

Damn straight we don't trust the EU. About as far as we can throw the lot of 'em. And the UN ain't any better.

[MoreTEN]

Hillbilly wrote:

"What's wrong with EU?

Okay, well let's make a comparative list.

Let's make a list of all the wars the USA has been involved in since 1776 and
then let's make a list of all the wars that the members of the EU have been involved in since 1776.

Okay, yeah, hmmmmmmm..............

USA
Revolution
War with the Shawnees
War with the Seminoles
War of 1812
War with Mexico
Civil War
American Indian Wars of the Plains
Spanish American War
World War I
World War II
Korea
Vietnam
Gulf War I
Gulf War II

What wars did I miss with the USA?

And now for the EU list?????????

egads............"


Are you serious? You must be kidding?

Well, Norway was ocupied for 5 years during world war 2. My parents remember that, thats how fresh that is. So, when was USA ocupied?

Mayby its because we still remember the horrors of war, that we speak up against war.

And by the way, do you know what the vietnames call the Vietnam-war?

[Old Fuff]

MoreTEN:

I don’t think Americans are afraid of Europe in a military sense. You may become an economic competitor, but we thrive on competition.

The problems that are now between us have too do with perceptions.

During the last century, which has just passed, we sent our young men to fight and die in Europe on two occasions, to liberate those that were occupied by a common enemy, and to restore their freedom.

Following the last war we sent considerable treasure - that was taxed from the American people - to rebuild a ruined Europe, including our former enemies.

Now when we believe we should be rewarded for out past efforts we find that any support is lacking.

You and others may not believe that we deserve any help in the present instance, but perhaps you may understand why our anger and frustration is forthcoming.

On this day - today - we honor our veterans, many who lie in graveyards all over Europe. These are the men, and sometimes women, that came and gave you your freedom back, the ones who liberated you from under Hitler’s heel.

They are Americans that we have not forgotten. Hopefully you will not either.

Hopefully this will answer your question.

[MoreTEN]

Jim March


"And while some of the nations chipping in have a long history of democracy (such as Norway), others don't. The EU Constitution's personal freedom clauses are woefully inadequate."

Most countries have long history of democracy. The new ones have moved to that, most of them are pieces of the ghost of the USSR.

Remember that Europeans suffered from the ghosts of World War 2. We were the "battelfield" of the cold war.

But Europe have a long tradition of peace, and democary. Far more stable then that of the ways of the USA.

"Upshot: long term, the potential for disaster is extreme. A man could make his grandkids a LOT of money betting it'll all end up under the thumb of yet another totalitarian jackarse like Hitler, Muselini, Franco, Stalin, Milosevich, Tito and the rest of the blood-stained maniacs Europe has a habit of making "leaders" out of, inside of 100 years."

Europe has nothing to do with Hitler, that was one country. The USA did not do anything before they were attacked by japan.

But I dont see what you whant to say by naming dictators. When did South-America drop out of the map? Huh?

"Damn straight we don't trust the EU. About as far as we can throw the lot of 'em. And the UN ain't any better."

The UN told USA that Iraq had no weapons of massdestruction. They were right!

The UN wanted to wait it off, see what else could be done. The USA said."NO! Lets attack NOW!" Why?

[CommonSense]

MoreTEN: Being part Native American, I can say that some of my ancestors weren’t real happy that Europeans “found” the Americas. But it’s a little too late to chat about that.

As far as us fearing the EU, I don’t see that happening. If members of the EU want to interact with the USA, we should have every right to expect them to behave in a manner that respects our beliefs and interests. Much of the world’s economy relies on the United States.

If the EU ever wanted to become the next North Korea, so be it. Start burying food so your family can eat if any EU Military Service decides to act in a hostile manner against us. I’d hate to see you starve.

The USA has been the most giving country on the face of the planet for the last 100 years. If a country or union wants to opt-out of assistance from the USA, that’s fine with me.

I see you’re stating that your questions aren’t being answered. I hope I answered them for you.

Take care!

[JohnBT]

No I don't and don't really care. I do remember the S. Vietnamese general's son who sat in my high school homeroom for 3 years and never learned a word of English. Never went home to defend his country either. Others did. The world is not always clear and everything in black and white.

Question...why are you so demanding. You remind me of a child with your insistent "You didn't answer my question. Why not?" I don't think we're here to serve you. Try being polite. Please.

To answer your question...We didn't trust the Europeans when my family came to Virginia before the Revolutionary War and we don't trust them, as nations, now. See, the President doesn't speak for Americans as individuals and I don't think that most of us on THR dislike individual Europeans. We just dislike their governments and their history of regularly following policical idiots to bad ends. This applies primarily to England, France, Germany and Italy - the ones with the resources to really make a mess. I guess we could include Spain, Portugal and Holland with all of their colonialism, but I'll let it slide for now.

To answer another of your questions...the southern part of the U.S. was occupied for a long time after the Civil War. Some of it was occupied during the Revolutionary War. Some of it was occupied during the War of 1812. I'm sure I've missed some, but what the heck.

John

[JohnBT]

"But Europe have a long tradition of peace, and democary. Far more stable then that of the ways of the USA."

Oh c'mon, like we've ever had something called the Hundred Years War. Europe stable? What history books have you been reading? Seriously.

[TallPine]

But Europe have a long tradition of peace, and democary.
Since when ....?

Since we came over there and helped out with the last Balkan mess ???


As far as your question about Iraq ... I have no clue. I thought we should have invaded Mexico instead (liberate the Mexican people, since they all seem to want to live in the US anyway)

[hillbilly]

MoreTen

I think you are missing the point of my list.

I suggested the list of comparative wars to illustrate a point.

Many times, "enlightened Europeans" like to lecture us Americans about how we are backwards, war-mongering cowboys, and they are peaceful, enlightened and noble.

But I always find it amusing when Europeans, of any type, lecture us about being backwards, war-mongering cowboys when the history of Europe is one soaked in the blood of millions and millions.

And, has been pointed out on this thread, it was the Americans who saved the Europeans from their own homegrown bloodbaths twice in the 20th Century alone.

As for Norway "knowing the pain of war" because it was "occupied" by the Nazis and thus being superior to us arrogant, war-mongering Americans????

Well, I think that Vidkund Quisling and a lot of other Norwegians didn't seem to mind that occupation too much. Neither did the volunteers for the SS "Viking" division nor the 45,000 members of the Nasjonal Samling.

I am not saying that all Norwegians were goose-stepping Nazi stooges.

No, far from it. Many Norwegians were brave enough to take up arms and resist the evil power that took over the country.

But, to get back to my point about Norway being a country full of enlightened, noble, peace-loving folks who are so much more knowledgable than us stupid Americans......I don't think there was an American SS division in WWII.......

hillbilly

[MoreTEN]

Old Fuff:

Remember that the US came in when they were attacked by Japan.

What would have happened if that never happend?

We thank your veterans, and hail them!

But about one million russians died alone during stalingrad. Thats just one battle. But the battle that made nazi-germany fall!

But this is to easy, remember the cold war?

[Zak Smith]

This thread started with a vague ill-formed question ("Why do you hate us?") and has gone downhill from there.

I humbly suggest that starting a thread with a precise thesis statement backed by argument and asking for comments and debate would be more productive.

-z

[MoreTEN]

JohnBT, you wrote:


"Oh c'mon, like we've ever had something called the Hundred Years War. Europe stable? What history books have you been reading? Seriously."


It happend in the year 1337 to 1453. World war 2 is still in my parents memory!

What has the hundred year war got to do with it? Do you remember it? Have not the world gone further since 1453?

[TallPine]

remember the cold war?
Oh yeah, wasn't that when those cowboys bluffed the Bear into not taking over all of western Europe ... ?

[CommonSense]

MoreTEN: The U.S. was involved prior to Japan attacking. Or don’t you count the merchant ships and their personnel that were lost while supplying goods to our allies? I’m sad to see you don’t hail them as well as our military dead. :mad:

You post sounds now like you’re blaming us for not wanting to bring our military in to another’s conflict. Which is it?

[Don Galt]

I think Jim March was pretty much spot on.

While its taken us 200 years to remove most of the checks and balances in our system, the EU is imposing a constitution that does not recognize human rights on its people.

Its a good question in my mind how long it will be before a totalitarian takes control over the EU or the US. The US is harder, but we've got a head start. The EU is much easier to do so under their non-constitution.

Plus, the Euro threatens the dollar... it will start supplanting the dollar as a reserve currency before too long. The UN and the EU aren't in conflict-- both want to disarm everybody, including the US citizens.

Smells like a crisis to me... don't know what form it will take, but the next 10-20 years will not be as peaceful as the last 50 years-- as the cold war.

MoreTENs lack of understanding of the US and dislike for our way of life is probably typical of the society he lives in. They see us as "cowboys" and want to take our guns away.... never realizing that doing so is to advocate violence against us.

Why are you violent MoreTEN? I know you think you aren't, and don't directly advocate it. But if you take someones ability to defend themselves away, do you not realize that you are making them your subject? Do you not see subjucation as a form of violence?

[MoreTEN]

Hillbilly:

Im not lecturing you, im just trying to get you to see my world.

I dont have anything against americans, but I do not like your president.

"But I always find it amusing when Europeans, of any type, lecture us about being backwards, war-mongering cowboys when the history of Europe is one soaked in the blood of millions and millions."

Well, thats way back. You have have fresh blood on your hands.


I think you are missing the point of my list.


"And, has been pointed out on this thread, it was the Americans who saved the Europeans from their own homegrown bloodbaths twice in the 20th Century alone. "

Ohh, when?


"Well, I think that Vidkund Quisling and a lot of other Norwegians didn't seem to mind that occupation too much. Neither did the volunteers for the SS "Viking" division nor the 45,000 members of the Nasjonal Samling."

Well, he couped the gouverment. The norwegian king and sitting gouverment whent to England.

Many brave norwegians stod up against the nazis.

Many americans earned money on nazis, including the Bush familiy & Disney.

[MoreTEN]

TallPine wrote:

"Oh yeah, wasn't that when those cowboys bluffed the Bear into not taking over all of western Europe ... ?"

But it happend in Europe, not in the states.

[FPrice]

"But this is to easy, remember the cold war?"

Yeah, it was in all the newspapers over here.

By the way, Europe did not win it. It was won by the leadership of a man named Ronald Reagan, the President of the United States. He took the tough actions needed to defeat the Soviet Union.

Europe helped, I'll grant you that. But without our leadership and political, economic, and military might, the Soviet Union would still be charge over there.

[CommonSense]

MoreTEN: NOW I see what you are saying and I have the answer you are truly looking for. You state, “I don’t have anything against americans, but I do not like your president.”

Problem solved: Don’t vote for him in 2004.

‘Nuff said.

[greyhound]

I dont have anything against americans, but I do not like your president

Ah, so now I see what prompted all this. We all loved the US till that cowboy Bush came and ruined everything by not toeing the UN line on Iraq (and somewhat on Afghanistan, but there's no way the usual suspects could totally boycott that one).

Just get someone else in there, and things will get back to "normal" (i.e. 9/10/01), right?

[MoreTEN]

Im trying to answer everybody, but the clock is 02:25(thats night-time), and my eyes are getting blurry:)

But, Don Galt:

"While its taken us 200 years to remove most of the checks and balances in our system, the EU is imposing a constitution that does not recognize human rights on its people."

Well, USA is the only western country not respecting common human rights, like putting children on deathrow, and that in the year 2003.

"Plus, the Euro threatens the dollar... it will start supplanting the dollar as a reserve currency before too long. The UN and the EU aren't in conflict-- both want to disarm everybody, including the US citizens."

Norway is not a part of the Euro, we still have Kroner. But the Euro is helping struggeling countries, like the ones left dead by the bear. The Euro also opens for a more steady economy for europeans, and I for one, since I live in Europe, find that quite ok.

"Smells like a crisis to me... don't know what form it will take, but the next 10-20 years will not be as peaceful as the last 50 years-- as the cold war."

Smells like paranoia to me..

"MoreTENs lack of understanding of the US and dislike for our way of life is probably typical of the society he lives in. They see us as "cowboys" and want to take our guns away.... never realizing that doing so is to advocate violence against us."

This is bull, and you know it. First of all, I do not dislike your ways. I dislike your president, and his ways.

The "cowboy" image is one of Hollywood.

Again, you sound paranoid.

Why are you violent MoreTEN? I know you think you aren't, and don't directly advocate it. But if you take someones ability to defend themselves away, do you not realize that you are making them your subject? Do you not see subjucation as a form of violence?"

Do I take away your right to defend yourself? Where do I do that? Im only stating my meaning, and saying that theres not one way, but many.

It is Bush who says theres only one way, and that is to follow him.

But the theme of this thread was EU & Bush. Bush has by fact said he fears an European Superstate, and he`s going to talk to Blair about the new EU laws.

If he can change EU laws, then it must be right for us to change US laws? Right?

[Destructo6]

But it happend in Europe, not in the states.
No, that happened throughout the world, not just your little piece of it. Stop being so Euro-centric.
"And, has been pointed out on this thread, it was the Americans who saved the Europeans from their own homegrown bloodbaths twice in the 20th Century alone. "

Ohh, when?
Try 1914-1918 and 1939-1945. Why are you being obtuse?
But about one million russians died alone during stalingrad. Thats just one battle. But the battle that made nazi-germany fall!
The US is not responsible for Stalin's inaction, ineptitude, and disregard for the lives of his people. However, I suppose some credit is due to the many supplies given to Russia in her time of need, at no small risk to US members.

I'm worried about an EU where members other than France and Germany are bullied into going along with the big plans of their betters. It seems to be a recipe for disaster. Time will tell.

[MoreTEN]

FPrice wrote:

"Yeah, it was in all the newspapers over here."

Yeah, here too! And it happend just one hour by plane from my home.


"By the way, Europe did not win it. It was won by the leadership of a man named Ronald Reagan, the President of the United States. He took the tough actions needed to defeat the Soviet Union."

No, it wasnt our war. It should never have happend. And no one won, it was just stupid.


"Europe helped, I'll grant you that. But without our leadership and political, economic, and military might, the Soviet Union would still be charge over there."

Helped? Well, were im from, in the north-of-norway, we helped alot. There are american bases all over the place, we even had one american atombomb on our soil, and we are a no-nuke country. We had American & Russian subs in our waters, some are still there. We also had some nice assasinations, some russian and some norwegian.

[Jeff White]

MoreTEN said:
“I don’t have anything against americans, but I do not like your president.”

If you don't like our president I will politely suggest you emigrate to the US, apply for citizenship, become naturalized and vote for who you'd like to see president of the United States. Until then, it really isn't any of your concern.

I'm sorry if that sounds rude, but American politics aren't the concern of anyone who's not an American citizen. The very fact that you are a Norwegian citizen makes you unable to have any understanding of what is best for the American people. You have no stake in what goes on in our politics.

How many Americans come to Norwegian internet forums and try to involve themselves in your political process? Any that do would be as wrong as you are here.

If you'd care to debate specific American policies and how they are affecting Europe, that's fine. If you just want to come here and state you don't like our president, then take it elsewhere. That will only cause the thread to degenerate into a flame match that will be closed and maybe even get members banned.

Let's start again. Specifically, what US policies are bad for Norway and what makes them bad?

Jeff

[CommonSense]

MoreTEN: Where are you reading this stuff? Bush cannot change EU laws. He can only state the response the USA may make for changes that aren’t in our interests. Are the newspapers you read slanted or are they owned by the State?

[Old Fuff]

More10:

We did not enter the war after Pearl Harbor. We were sending supplies to England and Russia during 1940. And we equipped an air force, called the Flying Tigers, in China - including the pilots. Part of the reason both the Russians and English were able to hold out was because of those supplies we sent. The Russians weren't the ones that invaded France in June, 1944 and opened up a second front that forced Hitler to split his forces. And Germany's ability to support it's forces was destroyed by the American 8th Air Force and the British Bomber Command.

And after the end of World War Two it was not the military might of France, England, Italy, Spain and the Low countries that stopped Russia from rolling all the way to the Atlantic Ocean.

No, it was Uncle Sam's military, and Uncle Sam's money. In some cases we actually had to pay rent on the bases in Europe that we were using to defend Europe.

Now we are starting to wonder, "why did we go to the trouble?"

[Mike Irwin]

"So Bush is saying on behalfe of all americans, that USA fears EU?"

Fear? No.

A burgeoning force that bears close watching? Yes.

Quite frankly, there's nothing to fear about the EU yet. The situation hasn't deteoriated nearly that much.

Quite frankly, I don't see the European Union surviving as a viable, cohesive political, cultural, or economic entity. The differences between the members are simply too vast.

"Most countries have long history of democracy. The new ones have moved to that, most of them are pieces of the ghost of the USSR."

No, most European nations have a long history of Monarchy, with a relatively recent overlay of democratic processes.

"But Europe have a long tradition of peace, and democary. Far more stable then that of the ways of the USA."

You're joking, right?

Since the United States was founded in 1783, do you really wish to go through the list of general European wars that were fought in Europe?

World War I
World War II.
The Franco-German War.
The Napoleonic Wars.
The Spanish Civil War.
The Russian Revolution.
The Revolutions of 1848.
The War of Italian Unification.
The War of German Unification.
The Crimean War.
The Balkan Civil War.
The Greek Civil War.
The Russo-Finnish War.

Then we have all of those quaint colonial conflicts that took Europeans off their continent and into combat zones around the world, such as...

The Algerian Uprising.
The Vietmihn Rebellion/French Indochina Excursion (which, when the United States took over from a badly beaten France, turned into the Vietnam War).
Any number of British expeditions into the Orient, including the Opium Wars.
The Mau Mau Rebellion/Kenyan Civil War.

I won't count the Spanish-American war because, well, we started that one. :)

The list is virtually endless...

That's just the tip of the iceberg, my friend.

As for the Norwegians speaking up against the horrors of war because of the Nazi occupation, it's interesting that prior to World War II, Norway had virtually no standing military of any kind.

Now the Norwegian military is quite well thought of.

[Mike Irwin]

"But this is to easy, remember the cold war?"

Hum...

I seem to remember the Cold War...

Ah, yes.

That's the holding action against the Soviet Union and Communist expansion.

During which, at any one time, year, era, period, etc., the United States was sinking more money into the defense of the free Western European nations, including Norway, than all of those European nations COMBINED.

You provided some of the men, the United States provided almost as many men and the vast majority of the equipment and the money that ensured European democracy.

In a VERY real sense, US tax payers footed the lion's share of the social welfare states that have sprung up in Europe since World War II. The defense dollars that European nations weren't spending were put into social welfare programs.

[greyhound]

How many Americans come to Norwegian internet forums and try to involve themselves in your political process?

Jeff, I was about to say the same thing myself. Its kinda like those that wail "why do they hate us?".

Some of us could care less.

I imagine the same sort of thing would have been going on if the internet had been around during the Reagan years, but that is only my opinion....

OTOH, it is totally interesting to be able to see a small slice of world opinion up close and personal.

[MoreTEN]

Destructo6 wrote:

"No, that happened throughout the world, not just your little piece of it. Stop being so Euro-centric."

Stop being US-centric. Yeah, it happend all over the world, but it also happend one hour by plane from my home.


"Try 1914-1918 and 1939-1945. Why are you being obtuse?"

That was not alone, and again, stop being US-centric, it happend all over the world, as you said it. I dont know the word obtuse, neither did the dictionary.


"The US is not responsible for Stalin's inaction, ineptitude, and disregard for the lives of his people. However, I suppose some credit is due to the many supplies given to Russia in her time of need, at no small risk to US members. "

Yeah, im greatfull. But stop saying that the amricans alone won the second world war, its not true. I mention Stalingrad, because there alone there died more russians in one battle than americans alone in the world war 2. It is not in any disrescpet of your heroes, its just stating the facts. Stalingrad has nothing to do with Stalins wrath, its simply one of the most important battles of the second world war.

"I'm worried about an EU where members other than France and Germany are bullied into going along with the big plans of their betters. It seems to be a recipe for disaster. Time will tell."

EU members can vote upon laws & all, like Sweden just said no to the Euro.

[Mike Irwin]

"Well, thats way back. You have have fresh blood on your hands."

Oh?

Tell me this, then, MoreTEN...

The EUROPEAN blood of the massacred EUROPEAN victims of the EUROPEAN Balkans civil war, the war which you compassionate EUROPEANS allowed to progress unchecked in your EUROPEAN backyard...

Has that fresh, fresh, EUROPEAN bloodied dried to a dull, EUROPEAN brown yet?

For almost 5 years you EUROPEANS did absolutely NOTHING to check the bloodshed in the Balkans, ethnic cleansing and human rights abuses that make your allegations against the United States pale in comparison.

You fine, upstanding EUROPEANS had to be shamed into acting by the United States, and even then the EUROPEAN response was halfhearted and barely registered.

Yes, you EUROPEANS must really love war, since you allowed that one to continue for so very long, at such a tremendous cost.

And now you and your ilk have the audacity to play the sanctimonious cousin?

You know what?

I think I hear an orphaned child from the Balkans calling your name, begging for help.

What? You can't hear it?

Not surprising. You didn't hear it the first time, either.


Yes, I'm sure you and your fellow Europeans are well acquainted with that color...

After all, it's the color of the blood on your hands...

Doesn't matter how much you rub, either.

It never comes off.

[MoreTEN]

Okay, now its nighty night for me:) Its late here in Norway:)

I wish you all a good night:) And sleep tight:)

This has been fun:)

[Don Galt]

The "cowboy" image is one of Hollywood.

Again, you sound paranoid.


Except that I never said that.

Hey, I don't like Bush either. But I dislike the socialism you propose even more.

And if a tyrant like Hitler rises again in Europe, what are you going to do?

The funny thing is, I'd likely volunteer to come fight for your people, if that happened.

But not for you specifically-- if you won't fight for your right to defend yourself, you don't have much room for complaint when you can't do anything when its needed.

[CommonSense]

Again, while fighting, they hide under the covers. Ni-Nite!

[MoreTEN]

But, Mike Irwin..

That was just plain silly....

The Balkans laid in the shadows of the bear, its was not all that open to the west.

You can see the Balkan wars as the war against Israel & Palestina. Why is that still going on then?

There is still coming new information on the Balkans, were they still have no peace.

There is also coming reports of massgraves being of civilians bombed by USA & NATO, so the world goes on....

[MoreTEN]

I will fight, if there is a war. Yes, I will. But I see no war to fight for, except peace.

And, its almost four o`clock at night, and its work tomorrow...so good-nite:)

[Zak Smith]

"By the way, Europe did not win it. It was won by the leadership of a man named Ronald Reagan, the President of the United States. He took the tough actions needed to defeat the Soviet Union."No, it wasnt our war. It should never have happend. And no one won, it was just stupid.

This response sums up the naivety of your politics.

Given that the USSR acted to gain power and convert more of the world to communism/statism, what would you do about it? Asking everyone to "play nice" will not do it.

Good triumphed over evil because good did something about it - and that something was a brilliant strategy with clear moral purpose executed over decades.

-z

[CommonSense]

MoreTEN: You stated it was passed your bedtime! I’m telling your Mommy!

[MoreTEN]

Well, China is a communist state that have close relations to the USA. So, I dont know?

Good night from the fjords:)

[ksnecktieman]

I think I know how to reduce the reasons moreten hates us:) First we have to remove our soldiers from europe (personally, I like that, I have a daughter and son in law and my only two grand babies in germany right now.). We should not fight their wars.
We should not meddle, in their affairs, I understand that, so we should stop all foreign aid payments, RIGHT now:) I like that too. We have given,,,,(pardon me, loaned with no expectation of repayment) Europe too much aid, and destroyed their ability to live at the standard that we have established for them.

I am sure that most of our soldiers would be happier riding horses around on patrol of our borders, and looking like cowboys, than they would wearing those stupid looking blue berets of the un anyway:)

"Fear the EU"? I do not think so, they never saw a gun until they were in the military, and probably can not hit a volkswagon from the inside.

[Mike Irwin]

"That was just plain silly....

The Balkans laid in the shadows of the bear, its was not all that open to the west.

You can see the Balkan wars as the war against Israel & Palestina. Why is that still going on then?

There is still coming new information on the Balkans, were they still have no peace.

There is also coming reports of massgraves being of civilians bombed by USA & NATO, so the world goes on...."

Plain silly?

Is that how you explain European indifference to what was happening in Yugoslavia and the Balkans in the 1990s, or AFTER the supposed "shadow of the Bear" was no longer looming over Europe?

Time line check for you, Ten.

The Soviet Union broke up in 1991. Your supposed "shadow of the bear" was NO MORE.

The general conflict in the Balkans begain in 1992.

Europe did nothing.

Reports of Bosnain Serb atrocities, mass killings, mass rapes, etc., began filtering out not long after.

Europe did nothing.

The United States, in the face of European indifference, managed to spearhead an initiatitive, called the Dayton Agreement, that established the Bosnian Serb Republic and the Muslim-Croat Federation.

It also established a NATO peace keeping force, largely paid for by... the United States, and manned mainly with... Americans.

Europe?

Again, did nothing.

In 1998 and 1999, when Slobodan Milosevic was rising to power, and begining anew the bloodbath that AMERICAN intervention had slowed, what did Europe do?

Nothing.

Finally, in 1999, "NATO" launched an air war against the Serbs...

NATO is in quotes, because once again, the United States led the charge.

Europe?

Largely nothing from them.

You're right, there's no peace in the Balkans.

But what IS NOT there now that WAS there before the United States became involved?

Mass murder, mass rape, mass torture...

Did your vaunted European nations stop the bloodletting in their back yards?

Nope.

Now you ask about the Israel-Palestine issue...

Do you know anything about the history of the Trans-Jordan region, as it was named by the EUROPEANS who colonized it?

Europeans, not Americans, are largely responsible for the continuing problems in that area. You only need to read about the history of the area from 1900 to 1948, when the independent state of Israel was established, to see how badly Europeans screwed up the situation.

Finally, you try to throw in a cannard about "mass graves of civilians killed by American bombing in Iraq."

Would those be larger, or smaller, than the mass graves left by Saddam Hussein, a man who originally rose to power, and terror, in Iraq largely with the help, complicity, and backing of EUROPEAN nations?

It's piteous that you have so little concept about the bloody history of European indifference and misguided intervention, and then try to argue just how bad the Americans are.

It shows that for all the taxes that are collected in Europe to support schools, the teaching of history, and the role that Europeans have played in flooding the world with blood, has been sadly ignored.

Climb off your high horse, boy. It's not a horse at all. It's a pile of Europe's victims.

[Destructo6]

That was not alone, and again, stop being US-centric, it happend all over the world, as you said it. I dont know the word obtuse, neither did the dictionary
Notice that the dates span the entire course of the wars, not just the US involvement? I know Norwegian schools aren't that bad.
Main Entry: ob·tuse
Pronunciation: äb-'tüs, &b-, -'tyüs
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): ob·tus·er; -est
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin obtusus blunt, dull, from past participle of obtundere to beat against, blunt, from ob- against + tundere to beat -- more at OB-, CONTUSION
Date: 15th century
1 a : not pointed or acute : BLUNT b (1) of an angle : exceeding 90 degrees but less than 180 degrees (2) : having an obtuse angle <an obtuse triangle> -- see TRIANGLE illustration c of a leaf : rounded at the free end
2 a : lacking sharpness or quickness of sensibility or intellect : INSENSITIVE, STUPID b : difficult to comprehend : not clear or precise in thought or expression
synonym see DULL
- ob·tuse·ly adverb
- ob·tuse·ness noun
Definition number 2 fits.
but it also happend one hour by plane from my home.
What's your point here? Does proximity give you some special insight or make your opinion more valueable?

[goon]

I have no problem with the EU, or with any Europeans in general. I don't really know any Europeans, but I would bet that there are huge differences depending on what country they are from and what they are like as individuals.
Having said that, I think that the US needs to get out of everyone else's business ASAP. I am opposed to the action in Iraq because I don't see how it was my fight. I do support the action in Afghanistan because it actually did disrupt the terrorists responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
But in general, we need to mind our own business. We should stay out of everyone else's affairs and only really get involved for the purposes of commerce and perhaps some limited humanitarian action.
I have no desire to furnish people in another land with freedom at the expense of American blood. We won our own freedom, and if the rest of the world wants theirs they can do the same.
We need to explore alternative energy sources to break our dependency on foreign oil so we can get the hell out of the middle east.
We sit around and complain when the UN wants to yammer at us about how we live, then we turn around and yammer at the rest of the world about how they live.
Personally, who needs all the BS?
I would just as soon live my life as an American and allow the rest of the world to do their own thing as well.

[Mike Irwin]

One other thing, Ten...

You claim that the Balkans were in the "shadow of the bear," which implies some great fear of the Soviet Union (which, as is kown, didn't even exist anymore...)

That implies general European Cowardice, especially in the face of a threat that the United States had the courage to face down for you.

And the United States had the courage go into the Balkans to stop what your vaunted Europeans feared to face.

It's a lengthy trend that we've become used to, really -- essentially the politics of cowardism from Europe.

But what I don't think I'll ever get used to, though, is the crass ignorance displayed by many Europeans about their own history.

That's just downright sad.

[geekWithA.45]

This surreal thread has happened before.

THR members might recall.....The Metallic Kitty Threads.

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/search.php?action=showresults&searchid=90217&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending


You'd have thought that we'd have learned not to feed the EuroTrolls by now.

[Intune]

Welcome to THR MT! WHY are you angry at our President? Just about Iraq or is there more? "Just because" isn't gonna cut the mustard or slice the herring, skin the reindeer, whatever. Is Iraq better or worse off with Saddam deposed? "Mass graves?" Do you mean like Dresden & Hamburg or much , MUCH smaller ones? Ask your elders if killing Germans to break their will to fight & defeat them was necessary or not. Do you get various news options? I smell propaganda.

Europe should pay us to keep our troops there. In fact, let's close the bases & bring them home. Russia is no more so should our bases be. I feel that the U.S. is like a parent that has raised their kids but refuses to let go. It is time for Eur to stand on its own. And the next time we have to go spill some blood over there we should keep the land. We paid for it.

[7.62FullMetalJacket]

The Euroweenies can tut-tut all they want. The USA saved them in WWII, THEN pumped a ton of cash into the economy there with the Marshall Plan, allowing stable democracies to exist. WE also stared down the BEAR at our own expense to protect a then fragile western Europe. After WWII Europe experienced nearly half a century without a new and major conflict. The Balkans tested the Euroweenie mettle, and it failed. It is quite intesting that WWI (another one we stepped into) was started by the assissination of Archduke Ferdinand of SERBIA. But the Euroweenies are too high and mighty to be judgemental and take action to prevent a larger conflict in the Balkans. Europe is still taking a ride on our dime. Then comes 9/11, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Who stood by us? Britain and Spain. Who did not? All the freeloaders. With all the children running Europe, someone needs to be an adult. GWB happens to be daddy right now. So take your non-judgemental, pampered, protected, euroweenie a$$ to troll elsewhere.

[Don Galt]

I think this article will answer Tens complaints (And be at least mildly interesting to the rest of you)

http://www.lewrockwell.com/edmonds/edmonds153.html

A rifle behind every blade of grass.

[ksnecktieman]

May I have six blades of grass please?:D :)

[jfh]

but you know, moreTEN has big brass balls: He came into a forum full of well-spoken members who have a strong conservative perspective, and he stated his questions and answered responses for nominally--what, five hours?

He also posed his questions in a second language and attempted to answer our responses--responses that are not only linguistically and logically subtle at times, with word play involved, but complex constructions liguistically AND conceptually. His replies were more than adequate, and should yield a good dialogue if we can keep him going...he might even get the idea that VIPs can be plain-spoken.

I travelled to Europe a LOT in the mid-to-late eighties, but almost exclusively to Switzerland, so I won't claim to speak to a grand knowledge of 'Europe.' I also lived outside the US--in Western Canada--from '73 through '75--during Watergate. It was an enlightening experience to live in a country dominated (culturally, and economically) by the B-I-G country to the South. so, from my perspective, keep in mind these things:


1. In one form or another, Europeans in general have been around in one social structure or another for a l-o-n-g time: My friends in Lausanne lived in a building that was about 500 or more years old. I reached the conclusion that part of the way they see things is because their 'general' social memory is longer than ours.

2. Most importantly, these small countries found a way to maintain (or not maintain) their cultural / social identity through not only war but also through compromise and compliance. Combine that with the time span, and you have a general cultural identity not given to what we would call idealism.

3. Finally, NONE of these countries--save, arguably France and the latest Russian castoffs--have had the opportunity to form a new Union/Republic from the ground up, as we did here, and that we could do without much interference from Other Countries, given the oceans....

They did not grow out of a Revolution; at most, the concepts of the Declaration and the Constitution were not tested in the purifying fire we had here. Even Canadians don't get the Second Amendment, in my experience in discussing it with them. Sure, they intellectually understand the arguement, but their nation-building sure wasn't ours.

So, moreTen had some political opinions about us--how could he not? As one of us, I want to hear more why he thinks that way. So, I hope he's back after work today--or whenever.

Jim H.

[Moparmike]

Ooooohhh boy, what an interesting thread.

MT, you may find that many of us here dont like most of the things GWB1 has done while POTUS2.

However, your USA bashing serves no purpose. We didnt single-handedly thwart oppression in Europe. We did however provide the majority of funding and support in most if not all the conflicts we participated in during the 20th century.

Personally, I think that we should exhume all military cemetaries and bring those boys back home. We should then wait for the next time Europe needs our help and reply "Request Denied." I believe in personal responsibility, and I say that if y'all are going to help dig your own grave and then be surprised when your "Benevolent Masters" stick a gun in your back and say "get in", then maybe you deserve what you asked for.

Gawd I am so tired of some Europeans' attitudes toward the US. We save their a$$ a couple of times and still no gratitude. I really dont care what Europe's opinion of the USA is, just keep it to yourselves.

Like others here, I dont have a dislike of any particular European, just their respective governments (that means you France and Germany).

1. Dubbya
2. President of the United States

[Mike Irwin]

"Archduke Ferdinand of SERBIA"

Small point of order, 7.62...

He was Archduke Ferdinand of the Austro-Hungarian empire, a member of the Hapsburg royal family.

He was a member of the extended monarchial family (nephew of Emperor Franz Josef) and came to the line of secession by the suicide of the Emperor's son and the death of Ferdinand's father.

He was assassinated by a Serbian nationalist.

[jimpeel]

That we will someday rise up against the USA?Yes.

Two world wars started in Europe and the U.S. was dragged in, the French and Indian Wars, the British burning the White House in thew War of 1812.

Its not like you haven't tried it before (except Norway).

Yes, and Hell yes.

[7.62FullMetalJacket]

Thanks Mike.

[jimpeel]

So Bush is saying on behalfe of all americans, that USA fears EU?
Yes.

The Europeans were too cowardly to take care of their own problems in Bosnia / Kosovo / Serbia / Croatia / Herzegovenia (sp?) and we had to go in and take care of it for you. Even the countries that shared borders did nothing.

Yes, we fear you. We fear you will drag us into another one of your inane conflicts so you can once again fill your cemeteries with American dead; and then tell us how much you hate us for our arrogance.

[jfh]

the concerns about the EU are well-deserved, from what I see reading elsewhere. They are well on their way to being dominated by the big Bullies, have an inadequate constitution for human rights (except as determined by changable law and regulation), and are already dealing with several corrupt bureaucracies. Just read the BBC news or the IHT.

[Mike Irwin]

"3. Finally, NONE of these countries--save, arguably France and the latest Russian castoffs--have had the opportunity to form a new Union/Republic from the ground up, as we did here, and that we could do without much interference from Other Countries, given the oceans...."

Actually, on that point, it could be claimed that a LOT of Europe has had that opportunity, whether from the aftermath of war or the overthrow of communism to the example of Finland becoming an independent nation in the wake of the Communist revolution in Russia.

What's interesting, though, is that when someone from one of these newly emerging democratic nations speaks about the ideals and principles of a democratic government, it's not the British or Norwegian Constitutional Monarcy (article 1 of the Constitution of 1814), or even Iceland's government with its Althing, of which they're speaking.

It's the United States.

[jfh]

right, Mike--but they sure aren't inclined to do it--that seems to me to be because of the characteristics defined in one and two.

You gotta wonder if we would have the energy if we were nation-starting-over for about the 20th time. Would/will our collective memory reach back to the values expressed here at some point in the future?

[Sergeant Bob]

Geekwitha45 Wow! Holy Deja Vu Batman!
This surreal thread has happened before.
THR members might recall.....The Metallic Kitty Threads.

Yeah, I was thinking that before I got through the first page.
Circular arguements. Just goes around and around without actually having an end.
Got to admit, MK was pretty good at it. Kept alot of people going for a long time. More Ten seems to have alot of the same qualities.
I wonder if other boards have the same type discussions going on periodically, like someone is making the rounds from board to board (til they get bored), or exposed?

[goon]

He was assassinated by a Serbian nationalist.

IIRC, the trigger man was Gavrillo Princip.
Do I get a cookie?:D

[igor]

This is your resident European chiming in... :p

just to say that there are great things going in this one. No, I don't subscribe to all that the aspiring Norseman says (velkommen, gjör deg koselig).

I do see it approximately like goon or necktieman do - a good idea would indeed be that the US just packed their bases together and took the good men home to, say, keep an eye on the southern border.

Who was it that said "we thrive on competition"? That was a very good angle to this - both in the economic EU vs. US sense as re: this thing about conflict intervention in Europe from WW!! onwards. Could it be that Europe as a whole has been able to conveniently lack any incentive to build any common force of their own capable enough to, say, go against the Serbs at that time? They still don't have it.

NB that I say "they". As always, I feel the need to point out that Europe and the EU are perceived as much more united (in the sense of United...) than ever was or ever will be the case. My priorities go Finnish first, Scandinavian/Nordic second and a European/EU citizen, say, umpteenth, as a Texan would be Texan vs. a Southern Gentleperson vs. an American patriot in a very different manner.

The EU is an inter-governmental discussion forum with no alphabet agency muscle to actually enforce. Just like the UN. It's just that us meticulous people up north take all of the discussion way too seriously... we really need to compare and take up ways of dealing with EU norm setting like, say, the Greek or Portuguese. Try to lump together the British, French, Greek, Swedish, Polish and Estonian for a sample of the variety of cultures of political discourse in Europe and compare that to the variety of elected officials in the US gov. At least you, generally, have a common language.

I also completely agree on the Jacks and Palances (sorry, I had to :p ) thing about the discussion around the EU "constitution" in preparation that several here brought up. My take is, it won't fly.

- edit to check quoting

[greyhound]

Seems to me there was another of these a couple months ago (I think he was "white wing" or something like that and hasn't been back since).

These have been a real eye-opener for me. I remember last winter, in the run up to Gulf War II, these overwhelmingly negative polls about both the US and President Bush coming out of Europe. My thoughts then were, "this has gotta be wrong, Europeans are just like us, they just live in smaller countries".

Boy, was I wrong. Looking back I seriously think too much reading/studying about WW II had frozen my judgments of Europe in 1945.

There can come a time when allies are no longer allies. Maybe not enemies, but neutral competitors.

My only question mark is the UK. Lots of protests against us, but how do they majority really feel?

[BigG]

remember the cold war?

Oh yeah, wasn't that when those cowboys bluffed the Bear into not taking over all of western Europe ... ? :p Good un, Tallpine! :evil:

[Iain]

I don't really want to get involved in this thread but I was taken aback by the attitude of some that 'you ain't american so get the hell out'. Some, not me, might say 'you ain't Iraqi so get the hell out'.

Cold War - MT is a little simplistic on this one. So are many of you. It ended over 10 years ago. Besides anyone who knows about Stalin and Trotsky knows that Trotsky was of the ''the whole world needs to be communist'' and Stalin of the ''isolationist communist'' schools. Stalin (a nasty nasty piece of work) built a 'buffer zone' aggressively to protect himself from Europe and US staging posts in Europe. Seems unlikely to me that anyone was going to be doing any invading during the Cold War, it was a MAD situation from the early 60's on.

EU as a threat - afraid of the competition? I've got a good idea, lets do the whole 'bipolar politics' thing and paint the EU as the enemy and have another Cold War because the last one was so much fun. :scrutiny:

Greyhound - "There can come a time when allies are no longer allies. Maybe not enemies, but neutral competitors.

My only question mark is the UK. Lots of protests against us, but how do they majority really feel?"

I guess we can only wait and see what happens when Bush arrives in London soon. I predict large protests by a minority and some resentment by the majority. I disagreed not with the war but with the handling of Iraq after the war (I see some want to disband the Iraqi Ruling Council), others felt that the war was wrong full stop.

The thing is, Europe and America are quite different. That doesn't make us raving socialists and thus commies and thus the enemy. Some need to stop looking at the world in this way.

Praises to MT for stating his questions and answering your questions without resorting to the easy reaction that he could have. Say like the third poster did 'OMG you are so anti-american". Why is this always the reaction? The US is the major player in the world, remember when Britain was - the other countries of the world carped and criticised Britain then. Validly, and so do they now. Some need to learn to listen and distinguish the genuine 'anti-american' sentiments from the genuine constructive criticism.

[Iain]

Couple of other thoughts:

There is constant criticism of the UK on this board. Do Ag and I respond with 'you ain't British so what has it got to do with you?' No. Because at times you make valid criticisms (often interspersed with a lot of hyperbole) and I am mature enough to read and digest them. No implicit accusation of immaturity - just what I feel.

Secondly. I watched a programme by an Australian journalist about Iraq. He annoyed me because he was just criticising for the sake of criticising, no particular platform just criticism. He got an interview with a State Dept. official (can't remember name, glasses, bad wig) who answered his questions rather well. Except that after he thought the cameras had been turned off he turned and incredibly seriously said to this journalist "Are you a communist?"

Is it just the communists and the Islamic Fundamentalists out to get you? Possibly. Is it just them that criticise you? No way. I am pretty damn pro-American compared to many, I constantly say to people "Are all Americans stupid? No. Art isn't stupid. Don isn't stupid. Keith isn't stupid" and I could go on and on based on the people here at THR. I still criticise where I feel it is valid.

Do me a favour though. Would one of you look at your newspapers and news sites from the 20th of October and tell me what the headlines were - more specifically if and how far in, Tony Blair's heart scare was mentioned. I can guarantee if that happened to Bush it would have been top two stories in the UK.

[7.62FullMetalJacket]

I do not recall any airliners flying into the world trade towers in Norway. Nor do I recall that Norway was threatened by WMDs from Iraq. The US is the big dog on the world block and is the enforcer of world order in many cases. The US is a target. The US must take action to defend itself. By doing so, we defend others by default. Others may not like it and that is too bad.

All the hue and cry over Iraq is spilt milk. The US took the opportunity to remove a dangerous threat and begin the process of developing a peaceful, model state in the middle east. Others will see the model and act accordingly. The US did this to Japan and Germany after WWII. Look at the result. There was much carping about "losing the peace" after WWII also, but look at the result.

If you remove personalities from the debate, such as hatred for Bush/Cheney, then it all comes down to the issue of prudent action. The world moved against Irag in 1991. The UN acted to find and destroy WMD and protect ethnic populations until 1998, when UNSCOM was kicked out. British and US intelligence showed that the WMD game was afoot again with no supervision. The opponents to acting in Irag were France, Germany and Russia. We now know that each had an agenda, whether it be oil contracts, weapon contracts, or WMD contracts. Promises were made and the UN melted down, incapable of acting to enforce its own mandates.

The US, acting with coalition partners, neutralized the threat in short order. Since that time, Syria and Iran have seen the writing on the wall and have become, at least on the surface, more compliant. Libya has bowed to the alter of enlightenment as well. Over 90% of Iraq is secure and liberated and pursuing life, liberty and happiness. Work still needs to be done and it will not happen overnight.

If you overlay that recent emboldenment of terrorists like Al Qaeda, then you understand that the resistance in Iraq is mostly foreign, or a mix of terrorists and Baathists loyal to Hussein.

The US does not act lightly. Believe ot or not, the US is a peaceful country that only acts in its self-defense. The US is not an imperialist country. The US will take steps to ensure tranquility.

We do not live in a world anymore where armies with rifles and artillery aggress against nation states. We live in a world where an oil-rich dictator can buy nuclear, chemical or biological weapons capable of inflicting massive casualties on non-combatants. An oil-rich disctator may also provide this technology to agents from no nation-state (terrorists) to inflict damage on its enemies. This is the world we live in.

The best defense is an offense.

[matis]

Mike Irwin,

If I don't say this I'm afraid I'm gonna bust, so here goes:



My hat is off to you.

Your posts here make me proud that I'm American and a THRer

I can't even remember what sides of past arguments we may have been on, but you've got your stuff together here.

More power to you.



(Sorry, just couldn't hold it in.)


matis

[cuchulainn]

St Johns: The thing is, Europe and America are quite different. That doesn't make us raving socialists No, the fact that you've got hugely socialist policies in place and want more makes you raving socialists (at least a lot of you). ;) Just look at the breakdown of party affiliation of EU representatives. Sure are a lot of "peoples" "social" and "green" in there.

But yes, you've got a point that it's wrong to say, "You ain't American so go away."

[Iain]

Well, yeah there are a few raving socialists around. Looks like Holland might be leading the way in the euthanasia route so.... kidding of course.

My point was that just because we are different to americans does not make us by default socialists. Sorry to be unclear.

[cuchulainn]

St. Johns,

I understood that. I was just ribbing you. Thus the ;)

[Iain]

Ah, sorry. Just come back from the gym. I think the term 'mental and physical exhaustion' is appropriate.

[Mike Irwin]

St. Johns,

Blair's heart scare was headline news on radio and TV stations nationwide here when it first broke -- CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, and local stations in Washington, DC, where I live, all gave it heavy coverage, and then slacked off when it became known that it wasn't a life-threatening situation.

I read newspapers on-line these days, instead of the printed copies, but the New York Times, Washington Post, and Seattle Post-Intelligencer websites all had very prominent links to the story.

As for where it appeared in the print versions, that's impossible for me to say for the previously mentioned reason, but.... Placement of reporting on that issue in a print newspaper would depend on a lot of things -- when it was first reported in relation to the newspaper's deadline and other news that day, among other factors.

[TallPine]

More10 and others:

I have no problem with your criticism of our President and US foreign policy.

I have enough criticism of my own :) I have to agree with goon.

But I do have problems with sweeping statements that are blatantly untrue. The Russian Bear was more than willing to use conventional forces to overwhelm western Europe if the US conventional and nuclear forces had not been a deterrent. Maybe we should have just let them ...?

As far as you being an hours flight from the Cold War, I live within 50 miles of ICBM silos - so there :p

[Mike Irwin]

"My point was that just because we are different to americans does not make us by default socialists. Sorry to be unclear."

No, you're absolutely correct.

It's the strong socialist policies, political parties, and sentiments that make your nations socialist. :neener:

Britain is a very curious case, though.

After World War II the Labour government nationalized part or all of the steel, coal, communications, and transportation industries in Britain. Different than nationalization in Communist nations where the businesses were simply seized, but it was still a socialist movement.

Britain, and some other nations, have since backed off the nationalization movement. To the best of my knowledge, Britain has almost fully divested itself of nationalized industries, reintroducing them to privatized control.

What it has continued to do (along with much of the rest of Europe), however, is to move toward a "cradle-to-grave" concept of governmental intervention in private lives.

[Iain]

Ah okay Mike. In a way that is nice to hear, some americans I know say that events occurring in the 'outside' world are pretty much ignored by the news media over there. Was just testing that out. There any truth to it?

I actually think that Britain is moving away from cradle-to-grave through a mixture of choice and necessity. In Europe as a whole, it is for example predicted that in France by 2050 there will be one state pensioner per working man/woman - one wage and two people (one of whom may well have a family)

Nationalisation is an interesting one. British Rail was bad. Our present system is worse. Other industries had been re-privatised you are absolutely correct.

We have different ideas to you lot that is true. Maybe they are informed by socialism or just downright socialist, whichever - they are different. I would say that perhaps the difference that many euro's perceive is that a while ago European nations stopped imposing their system on others (after much damage) and stopped assuming their system was best. Some perceive that Americans think their system is best and wish to impose it. Where you say 'democracy for the Middle East', many interpret 'American democracy (possibly with American influence too) for the Middle East.' Not saying that is what I think, but some certainly do.

[Mike Irwin]

Matis,

Thank you.

I helps knowing European history better than the Europeans themselves... :)

[MoreTEN]

Im back:evil:

Before I start to answer the threads, I would like to "say" something.

My english might not be as correct as those from England or USA, but I try to do my best:)

Im trying to "paint a picture", so I can understand. I just dont understand that its always someone elses fault, not the USA. As I recal, USA have never apologiesed(?) for dropping THE bomb on Japan.

Professor of Peace Studies, Johan Galtung, says-and I agrea-that the first step towards peace is apologising. Galtung also mentions Finland(Hei, jag er snell:)as an example in peacetalks, when they parted with Russia. The sat down, with russia, and the only one allowed to say anything was Russia & Finland. All the other countries had to shut their mouths.

Well, lets not dwell on that. But Johan Galtung is a great man, with many good ideas.

But I do not hate anybody, especially not the americans. You have done alot for the world, but my point is that many of you think you have done it all, and that is represented by President Bush. He is that cowboy, shooting from the hip.

Look at Hollywood, thats one of the USAs biggest windows to the world. I know that Hollywood is not you, the people, its a dream and a propaganda machine. But look at the enemies, how many of them are americans?

When Lars von Trier (Danish filmdirector & madman) made "Dogville", he was criticised for making a movie about USA without even being there. He replied:"Did the americans go to Casablanca to make Casablanca?"

I know this seems far-fetched, but think about it.

I know that every country on the planet have made some errors,as an example, Norway sold weapons to Argentina & England during the Falkland Wars & we suppresed the sami people for many decades.

The French have had their wars, they have killed their people and blew-up a greenpeace boat.

The list could have been long, but whats the point...

[TallPine]

As I recal, USA have never apologiesed(?) for dropping THE bomb on Japan.
Hell, No!

Just like I'm not going to apologize for shooting someone who just broke into my house. (but I hope that never happens)

I guess we're not on different continents - we're on different planets.

[Mike Irwin]

"USA has never apologized for dropping the atomic bomb on Japan."

I believe you're wrong about that. I believe that Jimmy Carter apologized on behalf of the United States in the 1970s, and pissed off a lot of people in doing so.

At the same time, Japan has never apologized, or even acknowledged, their unbelievable brutalization of other Asian peoples before and during World War II.

Their history books are virtually lacking of any mention of their atrocities in China, Korea, the Philippines, etc., and yet dwell on their losses during the war in a finely honed sense of victim mentality.

Ultimately, one truth remains...

The dropping of two atomic bombs to force the Japanese to capitulate SAVED lives. Had the United States and its allies invaded Japan, as planned, the Japanese civilian dead likely would have been counted in the millions.

Yet, all we hear, in the perfect 20/20 vision of historic hindsight, is how brutal and ruthless the United States was.

Your characterization of the supposed "peace talks" between Finland and the Soviet Union are also a joke. The Finns, despite a hard-fought defense, ultimately had to bow to a much more powerful nation, and were forced to give up significant swaths of territory to the Soviets in WW II. Finland also allowed German troops to occupy significant portions of its nation as a buffer against the Soviets.


"The list could have been long, but whats the point..."

Obviously you thought you had a point when you tried to pillory the United States with Europe's supposed moral superiority in your opening messages. Now that that lie has been exposed, and you've come to realize just how indefensible your original position is, you're running from it.

Finally, your English is fine. A lot better than my Norwegian. It's your knowledge of history that's an abomination.

[cuchulainn]

As I recal, USA have never apologiesed(?) for dropping THE bomb on Japan. How's this?

We're sorry we dropped the a-bomb and ended the war early.

We're sorry we dropped the a-bomb and saved tens-of-thousands of Japanese lives.

We're sorry we dropped the a-bomb and saved tens-of-thousands of American lives.

We're sorry we dropped the a-bomb and saved tens-of-thousands of British lives.

We're sorry we dropped the a-bomb and saved tens-of-thousands of Australian lives.

We're sorry we dropped the a-bomb and saved tens-of-thousands of Canadian lives.

etc.

[MoreTEN]

Dear, FullMetalJAcket:

You wrote:

"I do not recall any airliners flying into the world trade towers in Norway. Nor do I recall that Norway was threatened by WMDs from Iraq. The US is the big dog on the world block and is the enforcer of world order in many cases. The US is a target. The US must take action to defend itself. By doing so, we defend others by default. Others may not like it and that is too bad."

I can not take this seriouse, you have to understand that.

I, as many others, was shocked by 11.09. SHOCKED! But that does not give you the right do go around the world, and leading on new wars.

Norway was occupied for five years, and I promise you, that was not a sunshine ride. Is it any wonder Europe is angry?

And what WMDs? And by the way, Saddam had nothing to do with 11.09

"All the hue and cry over Iraq is spilt milk. The US took the opportunity to remove a dangerous threat and begin the process of developing a peaceful, model state in the middle east. Others will see the model and act accordingly. The US did this to Japan and Germany after WWII. Look at the result. There was much carping about "losing the peace" after WWII also, but look at the result."

Ohh, you did this to Japan? Please explain...please...


"If you remove personalities from the debate, such as hatred for Bush/Cheney, then it all comes down to the issue of prudent action. The world moved against Irag in 1991. The UN acted to find and destroy WMD and protect ethnic populations until 1998, when UNSCOM was kicked out. British and US intelligence showed that the WMD game was afoot again with no supervision. The opponents to acting in Irag were France, Germany and Russia. We now know that each had an agenda, whether it be oil contracts, weapon contracts, or WMD contracts. Promises were made and the UN melted down, incapable of acting to enforce its own mandates."

The UN had inspectors in Iraq that stated that Iraq had no weapons of massdestruction, nor did they have any weapon that could be of any threat to any of us, nor its neighbours. This was true, but England & USA called this a lie.

What WMDs?

President Bush sr. had the chance, and he could have backed up the uprising inside of Iraq. Did you know that Bush sr. approved the crushing of this uprising?

"The US, acting with coalition partners, neutralized the threat in short order. Since that time, Syria and Iran have seen the writing on the wall and have become, at least on the surface, more compliant. Libya has bowed to the alter of enlightenment as well. Over 90% of Iraq is secure and liberated and pursuing life, liberty and happiness. Work still needs to be done and it will not happen overnight."

Look at the coalition list, and tell me what you find.

90% of Iraq secure? Well, were did you hear that? From the white house? And this happiness?


"If you overlay that recent emboldenment of terrorists like Al Qaeda, then you understand that the resistance in Iraq is mostly foreign, or a mix of terrorists and Baathists loyal to Hussein."

This was one of the warnings pre-war...

"The US does not act lightly. Believe ot or not, the US is a peaceful country that only acts in its self-defense. The US is not an imperialist country. The US will take steps to ensure tranquility. "

Most countries around the world are peaceful, including the french, german & russian.

"We do not live in a world anymore where armies with rifles and artillery aggress against nation states. We live in a world where an oil-rich dictator can buy nuclear, chemical or biological weapons capable of inflicting massive casualties on non-combatants. An oil-rich disctator may also provide this technology to agents from no nation-state (terrorists) to inflict damage on its enemies. This is the world we live in. "

Saddam was not a terrorist, he was a dictator. He hated Osaman, and loved western culture. He was just mad mad mad. But there was no point in rushing to a war, when the UN inspectors actually were moving on, and told everybody that Iraq was no treath to the world.

Why did you go to war? Whats the reason?

"The best defense is an offense."

Is it?

[Partisan Ranger]

The EU rejects the notion of the nation state and they seem to think they are going to find Nirvana by banding together. I think the result will be more failure, stagnation, and socialism, but on a larger scale.

Our nation state works because of our Constitution, our economic system, and our values.

[geekWithA.45]

moreTEN:

That you believe without question that apologizing for nuking Japan to end WWII is correct, just, and desirable, and the fact that we haven't undergone some national orgy of guilt about it makes us somehow deficient, screams volumes about the values you hold.

This set of values is false, and will lead it's holders into hell.




You don't apologize to the rapist after you've shot him.

[Mike Irwin]

"I, as many others, was shocked by 11.09. SHOCKED! But that does not give you the right do go around the world, and leading on new wars."

Wrong. We have that right. We have the right to protect our national interests by pursuing those who perpetrated the September 11 attacks and if necessary, by toppling those nations that support international terrorism.

Whether or not Saddam Hussein was directly involved in the September 11 attacks is irrelevant, especially given his 10 year history of ignoring, violation, and flaunting the strictures laid down by the United Nations following the first Persian Gulf War.

Since Europe didn't have the will to insist that Iraq submit to those mandates, the United States did.

"Ohh, you did this to Japan? Please explain...please..."

You're JOKING, right? Or are you truly that ignorant?

The United States removed a brutal military dictatorship that had ruled Japan for nearly 50 years, and which had invaded many of its neighbors in its quest for a Pan-Asian Empire.

The atrocities committed by Japan in other nations are legion and legendary.

By defeating the Japanese Empire, the United States established a stable Constitutional Monarchy in that nation.

The Constitution, adopted in, I believe, 1947, gave ALL Japanese citizens, including women, the right to vote, something that had never been available to them before.

It established a codified, independent court system that was NOT the arm of a dictatorship.

It esablished universal education for Japanese children, male AND female, again something that had never been available to all children before.

I believe that the Japanese Constitution also established the primacy of a citizen's property rights, abolishing the feudal system and landed peasant servitude that had established prior to 1945.

Finally, the United States rebuilt Japan and the Japanese economy virtually from the ground up, based on a free-market system, that allowed Japan to, in less than 20 years, go from burned out cinder to one of the world's most vibrant economic powers.

So, given that the Japanese started the war in the Pacific, and drew the United States into it with a sneak attack, that's what the United States did for Japan in the post war period.

Any other questions about that?

[oldfart]

MoreTen:
I've read through this thread with considerable interest. Until you brought up the bombing of Hiroshima I left the defense of our policies to those who have already done it so well. But I have some first-hand information with regard to the A-bomb subject.

As an American servicman, I was stationed in Japan during 1956-58. I visited both Hiroshima and Nagasaki and spent a great deal of time just traveling around the country. A fellow servicman was a Neisei, which is a second-generation Japanese-American. He had many relatives around Japan who I had the opportunity to meet and talk with.

During my travels I noticed that nearly any hill or mountain of any size had several tunnels or caves dug into it. Exploring these occupied some of my time and I was amazed at their length and complexity. Conversations with my freind's relatives led me to the conclusion that the tunnels had been constructed to be used in the event American troops invaded the home islands.

As a child, I heard all the stories about the difficulty of digging Japanese troops out of the caves and bunkers of Iwo Jima and I couldn't even imagine how many people would have died if our army had been forced to invade Japan in the conventional manner.

Adding to that, I was told that the Japanese civilian population had been "informed" that American troops were actually cannibals and that they especially liked the flesh of women and children. Obviously, those tunnels would have been filled with civilians as well as military and government people. The losses would have made Stalingrad, which you mentioned, look like a tea party.

Dropping the bomb was not a pleasant thing, but it was far better than the alternative.

[Mike Irwin]

MoreTen,

Here's some text from the Japanese Constitution, which was adopted in 1946, not 1947...

This is from the section entitled "Rights and Duties of the People."

Please note that prior to the end of World War II and the rebuilding of Japan by the United States, this simply didn't exist for the Japanese.

They had none of these protections or guarantees under law.

Article 26, the right of education.

Article 11, a guarantee of fundamental human rights.

Articles 20 and 21, freedoms and religion and speech.

Article 15, free elections and universal suffrage.

These rights, never before availble to the Japanese civilian, are what the United States gave to the Japanese at the end of World War II.



"Article 10:
The conditions necessary for being a Japanese national shall be determined by law.

Article 11:
The people shall not be prevented from enjoying any of the fundamental human rights. These fundamental human rights guaranteed to the people by this Constitution shall be conferred upon the people of this and future generations as eternal and inviolate rights.

Article 12:
The freedoms and rights guaranteed to the people by this Constitution shall be maintained by the constant endeavor of the people, who shall refrain from any abuse of these freedoms and rights and shall always be responsible for utilizing them for the public welfare.

Article 13:
All of the people shall be respected as individuals. Their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness shall, to the extent that it does not interfere with the public welfare, be the supreme consideration in legislation and in other governmental affairs.

Article 14:
All of the people are equal under the law and there shall be no discrimination in political, economic or social relations because of race, creed, sex, social status or family origin. 2) Peers and peerage shall not be recognized. 3) No privilege shall accompany any award of honor, decoration or any distinction, nor shall any such award be valid beyond the lifetime of the individual who now holds or hereafter may receive it.

Article 15:
The people have the inalienable right to choose their public officials and to dismiss them. 2) All public officials are servants of the whole community and not of any group thereof. 3) Universal adult suffrage is guaranteed with regard to the election of public officials. 4) In all elections, secrecy of the ballot shall not be violated. A voter shall not be answerable, publicly or privately, for the choice he has made.

Article 16:
Every person shall have the right of peaceful petition for the redress of damage, for the removal of public officials, for the enactment, repeal or amendment of laws, ordinances or regulations and for other matters; nor shall any person be in any way discriminated against for sponsoring such a petition.

Article 17:
Every person may sue for redress as provided by law from the State or a public entity, in case he has suffered damage through illegal act of any public official.

Article 18:
No person shall be held in bondage of any kind. Involuntary servitude, except as punishment for crime, is prohibited.

Article 19:
Freedom of thought and conscience shall not be violated.

Article 20:
Freedom of religion is guaranteed to all. No religious organization shall receive any privileges from the State, nor exercise any political authority. 2) No person shall be compelled to take part in any religious acts, celebration, rite or practice. 3) The State and its organs shall refrain from religious education or any other religious activity.

Article 21:
Freedom of assembly and association as well as speech, press and all other forms of expression are guaranteed. 2) No censorship shall be maintained, nor shall the secrecy of any means of communication be violated.

Article 22:
Every person shall have freedom to choose and change his residence and to choose his occupation to the extent that it does not interfere with the public welfare. 2) Freedom of all persons to move to a foreign country and to divest themselves of their nationality shall be inviolate.

Article 23:
Academic freedom is guaranteed.

Article 24:
Marriage shall be based only on the mutual consent of both sexes and it shall be maintained through mutual cooperation with the equal rights of husband and wife as a basis. 2) With regard to choice of spouse, property rights, inheritance, choice of domicile, divorce and other matters pertaining to marriage and the family, laws shall be enacted from the standpoint of individual dignity and the essential equality of the sexes.

Article 25:
All people shall have the right to maintain the minimum standards of wholesome and cultured living. 2) In all spheres of life, the State shall use its endeavors for the promotion and extension of social welfare and security, and of public health.

Article 26:
All people shall have the right to receive an equal education correspondent to their ability, as provided for by law. 2) All people shall be obligated to have all boys and girls under their protection receive ordinary education as provided for by law. Such compulsory education shall be free.

Article 27:
All people shall have the right and the obligation to work. 2) Standards for wages, hours, rest and other working conditions shall be fixed by law. 3) Children shall not be exploited.

Article 28:
The right of workers to organize and to bargain and act collectively is guaranteed.

Article 29:
The right to own or to hold property is inviolable. 2) Property rights shall be defined by law, in conformity with the public welfare. 3) Private property may be taken for public use upon just compensation therefor.

Article 30:
The people shall be liable to taxation as provided for by law.

Article 31:
No person shall be deprived of life or liberty, nor shall any other criminal penalty be imposed, except according to procedure established by law.

Article 32:
No person shall be denied the right of access to the courts.

Article 33:
No person shall be apprehended except upon warrant issued by a competent judicial officer which specifies the offense with which the person is charged, unless he is apprehended, the offense being committed.

Article 34:
No person shall be arrested or detained without being at once infomed of the charges against him or without the immediate privilege of counsel; nor shall he be detained without adequate cause; and upon demand of any person such cause must be immediately shown in open court in his presence and the presence of his counsel.

Article 35:
The right of all persons to be secure in their homes, papers and effects against entries, searches and seizures shall not be impaired except upon warrant issued for adequate cause and particularly describing the place to be searched and things to be seized, or except as provided by Article 33. 2) Each search or seizure shall be made upon separate warrant issued by a competent judicial officer.

Article 36:
The infliction of torture by any public officer and cruel punishments are absolutely forbidden.

Article 37:
In all criminal cases the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial tribunal. 2) He shall be permitted full opportunity to examine all witnesses, and he shall have the right of compulsory process for obtaining witnesses on his behalf at public expense. 3) At all times the accused shall have the assistance of competent counsel who shall, if the accused is unable to secure the same by his own efforts, be assigned to his use by the State.

Article 38:
No person shall be compelled to testify against himself. 2) Confession made under compulsion, torture or threat, or after prolonged arrest or detention shall not be admitted in evidence. 3) No person shall be convicted or punished in cases where the only proof against him is his own confession.

Article 39:
No person shall be held criminally liable for an act which was lawful at the time it was committed, or of which he had been acquitted, nor shall he be placed in double jeopardy.

Article 40:
Any person may, in case he is acquitted after he has been arrested or detained, sue the State for redress as provided for by law.

[Iain]

Oldfart - you are right on that one. In some instances these tunnels were not found for weeks after the occupation by US troops. Inside were the hundreds of military staff who had committed suicide rather than give up to American troops. Not pleasant for all concerned.

There was an extensive thread on the Enola Gay and the Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombings a while back. Recently I have become inclined to the view that although Truman appeared unaware of the total capability of the bomb and that the bombing was partly a demonstration to other 'uppity' world powers, it saved many lives.

Mike is right in a way. Us Euro's might not like it but something had to be done about Hussein and the Taliban. What irked me was the clumsy attempts to convince us that Saddam had something to do with 9/11.

Some Brits were also annoyed that the 'War on Terrorism' only began after 9/11 (which is fair enough) and is a hypocritical stance because of the extensive funding and support that the IRA and others recieved from US citizens. Funding and aid that got many people killed in my country and in Northern Ireland.

Others in Europe are annoyed by the military aid given to Israel. Really easy to dismiss this as anti-semitism but it isn't necessarily the case. Israel is on the doorstep of Europe and problems there are likely to cause Europe problems too. Forgive them their self interest. I don't necessarily agree with them, but this thread is turning into 'What Europe thinks' so I thought I would state some of what Europe thinks.

[MoreTEN]

Dear Mike:

"I believe you're wrong about that. I believe that Jimmy Carter apologized on behalf of the United States in the 1970s, and pissed off a lot of people in doing so.

At the same time, Japan has never apologized, or even acknowledged, their unbelievable brutalization of other Asian peoples before and during World War II. "

The Germans apologized to the Jews and the Poles. The Japanese apologized to the Chinese and the Koreans, and to the United States for failing to break off diplomatic relations before attacking Pearl Harbor. The Russians apologized to the Poles for atrocities committed against civilians, and to the Japanese for abuse of prisoners. The Soviet Communist Party even apologized for foreign policy errors that heightened tension with the West.

"Your characterization of the supposed "peace talks" between Finland and the Soviet Union are also a joke. The Finns, despite a hard-fought defense, ultimately had to bow to a much more powerful nation, and were forced to give up significant swaths of territory to the Soviets in WW II. Finland also allowed German troops to occupy significant portions of its nation as a buffer against the Soviets. "

I know...may fault, I mixed two things here Sorry ...I ment KSSE in Helsinki, 1973...


"Obviously you thought you had a point when you tried to pillory the United States with Europe's supposed moral superiority in your opening messages. Now that that lie has been exposed, and you've come to realize just how indefensible your original position is, you're running from it. "

What? Explain...

The EU thing is from Norwegian press, and has its roots in British press. President Bush is going to England, and he and Blair are going to discuss the new EU laws, were Bush said he:"feared an Europen Superstate"

All this is true...

Im not running from anything...please tell me where im running from something?

"Finally, your English is fine. A lot better than my Norwegian. It's your knowledge of history that's an abomination."

My knowledge in history is ok, but its not my best subject. Remember this thread was not about history, but the fear of the European Superstate. It kinda expanded.

Im good at human rights, and psychology. And movies, beacuse thats my job;)


"The dropping of two atomic bombs to force the Japanese to capitulate SAVED lives. Had the United States and its allies invaded Japan, as planned, the Japanese civilian dead likely would have been counted in the millions."

This is just hypothetical, the Japanes were about to surrender.

[Mike Irwin]

"Some Brits were also annoyed that the 'War on Terrorism' only began after 9/11 (which is fair enough) and is a hypocritical stance because of the extensive funding and support that the IRA and others recieved from US citizens."

I don't know of anyone in my circle who would have had a problem with a British invasion of Boston and New England in the 1970s or 1980s designed to stamp that crap out.

I also know that the Federal government did try to crack down on it some in the 1980s. But at that point the whole thing was seen as an internal British problem.

My ex-wife and I had a HORRIBLE fight years ago when I found out that she was giving to "charities" that were linked with the IRA. But, what do you expect, the little (unbelievably foul word) was of Irish Catholic extraction.

[Iain]

You just made me smile Mike. Sorry about the divorce.

[MoreTEN]

Mike:

The Japanese Constitution, which came into force in 1947(some say 46), is based on three principles: "sovereignty of the people, respect for fundamental human rights, and pacifism."

This is the laws of democacy, wich many lands live by, not the USA alone.

The Japanes were infact about to surrender, the pros & cons of the bomb is just speculation.

[MoreTEN]

Dear Mike:

"My ex-wife and I had a HORRIBLE fight years ago when I found out that she was giving to "charities" that were linked with the IRA. But, what do you expect, the little (unbelievably foul word) was of Irish Catholic extraction."


Sorry about the divorce, and hope love have found your heart again :)

[Mike Irwin]

"The Japanese apologized to the Chinese and the Koreans..."

BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!

Wrong answer. Thanks for playing. To the best of my knowledge Japan as NEVER issued a formal apology to the Chinese or Koreans.

Japanese courts, just last year, denied claims by Korean and Chinese women who were forced in prostitution and slavery by the Japanese.

"What? Explain..."

As I said, you attempted to claim that America was a warmongering nation, while ignoring the breadth and depth of Europe's war-like depravity.

This has been pointed out to you repeatedly, and now you're fleeing from the realization that Europe is the birthplace of some of the world's greatest slaughters.

AS for whether or not the United States should, or does, fear the EU, I think it's pretty clear hear that no, we don't fear the European Union. There's nothing to fear at this point socially, economically, culturally, or militarily.

20 years from now, who knows.

But I suspect I do know what the next 20 years will bring, and it's not an ascendent European Union -- the continued rise of India and China as economical and military powers.



"This is just hypothetical, the Japanes were about to surrender."

No, the concept that the Japanese were about to surrender is hypothetical. Your lack of historic knowledge is showing again.

The United States had, on several occasions, called on Japan to abide by the demands of the Allied powers and surrender unconditionally. No other surrender option would be entertained.

Japan repeatedly balked.

Just prior to the dropping of atomic weapons, Japan attempted to open talks for a NEGOTIATED peace -- again, that was not an option open to them. Unconditional surrender was the only option.

After the dropping of both atomic weapons, and the Emperor's decision to order the nation to surrender became known in military circles, there was an attempted coup that failed only through a series of happenstance events.

The point of the coup attempt was clear -- to force the Japanese nation to continue the war at all costs, even to the point of the absolute destruction of the Japanese race.

The fantasy that the Japanese were TRYING to surrender is EXACTLY that.

A fantasy.

The Japanese knew the terms and conditions that were demanded of them.

The Japanese could have, through the Russian intermediaries, accepted the terms demanded by the Allies, yet they refused to do so even given the clear indication that nothing short of unconditional surrender would be accpeted.

The Japanese were not trying to surrender. They were hoping beyond hope that the Allied powers had grown weary enough of the war, given the end of the war in Europe (another case of unconditional surrender only), and would somehow allow the Japanese to bring their armies home.

Fat chance.

[Mike Irwin]

"You just made me smile Mike. Sorry about the divorce."

"Sorry about the divorce, and hope love have found your heart again"

Well, thank you, but you two are the only ones who are sorry about it. I look back at the marriage and have to ask, just what the hell was I thinking?

[MoreTEN]

Dear Oldfart..

"As an American servicman, I was stationed in Japan during 1956-58. I visited both Hiroshima and Nagasaki and spent a great deal of time just traveling around the country."

Deep respect for that, I mean it


But to comments on the "apologize", I think you took it wrong. This is just a theory by Johan Galtung, and I used the bombing of Japan as an example.

But to those who connects this with rape & criminals, I find that you lack respect for humans in general.

:evil:

[cuchulainn]

My ex-wife and I had a HORRIBLE fight years ago when I found out that she was giving to "charities" that were linked with the IRA. But, what do you expect, the little (unbelievably foul word) was of Irish Catholic extraction. "What do you expect"?

"What do you expect"?

Um, Mike, most Irish Catholics -- me included -- don't do that. There's a difference between "most IRA funds come from U.S. Irish Catholics" and "most U.S. Irish Catholics give the IRA funds (or to thinly veiled 'charities')." :)

[MoreTEN]

Dear Mike:

Well, then its a good thing:) But such pain is hard, but im glad your fine:)

To comment on the bomb, this is Gen. Dwight Eisenhower's words:

"Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary. ... I thought our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of face. The secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude, almost angrily refuting the reasons I gave for my quick conclusions."

[Partisan Ranger]

I don't recall the Brits or the Germans apologizing for firebombing each other's cities. And we did same to the Germans. Those actions killed more people than the A-bombs, but we never hear about that, do we?

This whining about the A-bomb is so much mental masterbation. It was a brutal war, one we did not start. But we finished it, and I am sure dropping those bombed saved lives on both sides.

[MoreTEN]

Dear PatrisanRanger:

I posted this earlier, but it answers your question:

The Germans apologized to the Jews and the Poles. The Japanese apologized to the Chinese and the Koreans, and to the United States for failing to break off diplomatic relations before attacking Pearl Harbor. The Russians apologized to the Poles for atrocities committed against civilians, and to the Japanese for abuse of prisoners. The Soviet Communist Party even apologized for foreign policy errors that heightened tension with the West.

[Mike Irwin]

cuchulainn,

Please don't take that as a slam against Irish Catholics; it wasn't meant to be.

In order to understand what I truly meant (if I even do), you'd have to either have known my ex-wife, or listen to a several day recounting of my life together with her.

[Destructo6]

is that a while ago European nations stopped imposing their system on others (after much damage) and stopped assuming their system was best.
Only after WWII, when they were incapable of doing so. France sure tried to hold onto Indochina and Algeria. France has been bitter about their loss of prestige ever since: perhaps dominating the EU is a way to regain some. Germany and Italy obviously had better things to do, like get their own water running again. The motives closest to altruism were that of Britain, but again it was not economically viable to keep their various jewels in the crown.
The UN had inspectors in Iraq that stated that Iraq had no weapons of massdestruction, nor did they have any weapon that could be of any threat to any of us, nor its neighbours.
Show me. They said that Iraq couldn't and wouldn't account for massive amounts of WMDs. They never gave Iraq a clean bill of health. "nor its neighbors'? Quite a few Iranians would argue with that.

[Waitone]

I'll bypass the erudite comments regarding apology for nuking Japan. Seems a while back there was a mega thread discussing the topic quite effectively.

I will direct my attentions to the original questions on the thread. A few random comments in no particular order.

--Europeans seem to hold a cowboy in some contempt. No so in the US. A cowboy is generally held up as a role model for simple life, straightforward way of dealing with people, saying what is mean, meaning what is said, and having no pretense in dealing with people. It is often said of a cowboy personality "there is no more to that person than what you see." Again, not a negative comment but positive.

--Americans have a saying and is used all over the United States. I believe it is based in the cowboy ethic. "Lead me, follow me, or get the hell out of my way." What is means is we can work together in a variety of ways to achieve our objectives. But make no mistake, I will make my objectives with or without your help. What Bush did with the UN in the run up to the war is classic American attitude. Germany, France and Russia did not want to follow, did not want to lead, and did not what to get out of the way.

--My father did the walking tour of Europe in 1944-1945. He told me Europe will rise to become a major power but look out if it turns out Germany is the dominant country.

--My attitude is simple. The European Union is the realized dream of Her Adolph Hitler without all the unpleasantness of the gas chambers. I was not impressed with the last iteration of German hegemony and I'm surely not impressed with the current variation. No fear of economic competition. It will be years before the EU has its act together. I have a healthy respect for a potential superpower with no regard for individaul rights.

--Hollywood is in no way representative of America. If you think American films represent accurately the attitudes and morals of Americans you are sadly in error. Hollywood is as much an embarrasment to us as it is an oddity you Europeans.

[Coronach]

This is neither a gun, nor civil liberties issue (as worthy a topic as it is).

Closed, OT

Coronach