2008

[forge]

Face it, Western Civilization is the greatest thing to happen to all of humanity.

..... I'll never understand how conservatives can only look at themselves and see how dammed cool they think they are?? .

funny this comment stuck with me too and while my first reaction was similar to yours I ended up feeling envious that M.Breqs is so comfortable in his own skin and content with the way things are - I can never claim that by a long shot and I'm really not sure that quality makes me a better person or my life any easier - it just means I'm always feeling bad about something

[djadonis206]

Face it, Western Civilization is the greatest thing to happen to all of humanity.

The reason a nation of any stripe goes to war right there. Of course your aware that all fascist governments use that argument previous to attacking another nation they deem inferior morally or ethically right? Just replace Western Civilization with the name of a country and take a look at the results.

Face it, Rome is the greatest thing to happen to all of humanity.

Face it, Nazi Germany is the greatest thing to happen to all of humanity.

Face it, Stalin is the greatest thing to happen to all of humanity.

Face it, White Civilization is the greatest thing to happen to all of humanity.

Face it, Western Civilization is the greatest thing to happen to all of humanity?

Ask any survivors of any great western ideological advancement, and you might get a different opinion. I doubt the small amount of Native Americans here in the states would agree that the constitution helped them out.

I don't apologize to anybody for being a white man in the USA, but I'll never understand how conservatives can only look at themselves and see how dammed cool they think they are?? Seriously, any indication that the situation is not a bowl of cherries runs up against this sort of cultural bragging, it's odd to me.

The world (the universe in general) is a very strange and dynamic place

we're making shit up as we go. The next minute isn't promised to anyone or guaranteed for that matter so...

you have to ask yourself what's the truth at this very moment - taking into account where we've come from

I believe everything that's happened in times past brings us to where we are now in every imaginable way

so...with all the bad things that have happened to all kinds of people without those experiences in humanity would we be where we are now - maybe things would be better, maybe they'd be worse - we don't know and have no way of knowing we just know what's what right now

we learn from our mistakes hopefully not to make the same mistakes again - somethings we just have to go through to get to the other side

[M. Bréqs]

Ask any survivors of any great western ideological advancement, and you might get a different opinion. I doubt the small amount of Native Americans here in the states would agree that the constitution helped them out.

Technically, I could be considered a Metis. I don't bother though, I look mostly like a darker Caucasian and I'm pretty content in Western society. In the interest of full disclosure, on my father's side of the family (Quebec Aboriginal, half-Cree) I've lost contact with them, so my mom raised me pretty much vanilla Canadian. My spouse is from the Northwest Territories, and though she's fully Caucasian, the community she grew up in was about 70% Aboriginal (Deneh, and some De'Cho). I've lived up North for a few years, in communities with at least a 50% Aboriginal (Inuit, Deneh mostly) populations.

Our experiences, and familiarity with Canadian Aboriginal society bear out the opposite of your view. Assimilated aboriginals are much better off, and much happier than those who still hang on the reserves (a product of Western society admittedly) or live in treaty lands (sovriegn, self-governing Aboriginal communities).

Sure, Western civilization has done some bad stuff; every society has. But we're conscious of the bad things we've done, and try to make amends when we can. But we keep getting better. We are responsible for most of the good in the modern world, and the "white guilt" people tend to forget that.

[Machinesworking]

Face it, Western Civilization is the greatest thing to happen to all of humanity.

..... I'll never understand how conservatives can only look at themselves and see how dammed cool they think they are?? .

funny this comment stuck with me too and while my first reaction was similar to yours I ended up feeling envious that M.Breqs is so comfortable in his own skin and content with the way things are - I can never claim that by a long shot and I'm really not sure that quality makes me a better person or my life any easier - it just means I'm always feeling bad about something

Personally I'm comfortable in my own skin, but I'll never be content with the way things are. It's simply a major difference in people. Some believe that Western civilization is somehow the answer, but personally I think we need to clean up our own back yard before making those sort of value judgments on other cultures. That, and I believe our continued intervention both militarily and through draining the rest of the worlds resources through doing business with fascist governments of all stripes etc. and arbitrary ethical decisions like preemptive strikes are doing more harm than good. I also don't for a minute believe that any governmental or corporate western entity has any interest at all in raising the standard of living among the lower and working class peoples of counties like Afghanistan, Iraq and the countries we support show that. Not everybody in Saudi Arabia benefits from the autocracy there. Hugo Chavez's anger towards the USA and the whole political climate in south america is very much due to our support of various dictators down there. In fact in pretty much any country that isn't wester europe we don't seem to have any definable policy of ethical standards, it's most definitely monetary, and in that sense socialist democracies are looked upon with much more disdain than autocratic dictatorships...... but hey, it's OK if people have their hands cut off in public etc. if the government gives us a good price for oil.
Think about it, we raise the standard of living in China to even the minimum wage in the USA and suddenly things get real expensive.
Even mbreqs argument of western civilizations superiority and this supposed added benefit of getting a western economic model falls flat when you realize that we support all kinds of despots and military governments, that we (the west) have continually shown that we do not care about human rights concerns if there's a profit to be made. Heroin production in Afghanistan is at record highs from what I hear, great job of moving that country towards a free market.....

Jesus, really, it's not a big mystery that the main reason people in the middle east dislike the USA is due to our continual military and CIA intervention in their lives, and the answer to how to turn that around will never be violence and force. especially considering the simple fact that our military superiority is so staggering that terrorism is the only weapon of choice among those that oppose us.

[popslut]

...our military superiority is so staggering...

Really?

I'd suggest the current situation in Iraq and Afghanistan demonstrates otherwise.

The fact that the combined US and UK military forces are unable to subdue their opposition in the Gulf suggests that this whole "military hyperpower" myth is just that.

Regardless of what they're capable of on paper, it's real-life results that count and on current form I'd suggest that "...your reputation far exceeds your ability."

...that terrorism is the only weapon of choice among those that oppose us.

"Terrorism" is a tactic used by all sides in this conflict, although having just spent two weeks in the US watching your TV news I can see why you might be tempted to make such simplistic distinctions.

[popslut]

We are responsible for most of the good in the modern world...

Words fail me.

[dcease]

oh yeah. i forgot. google oil shale, and click on the wiki page. i doubt the US will have any problems with money. the technology is coming along, and its a bunch of it on government land in colorado, with companies competing for the gov't approval to start extracting the oil. way more oil than whats left in the middle east. our gov't has known about this rescource for a very long time, and i wonder if their intent was to use up the worlds supplies, drive the price up, when shit starts looking bad, poppin out with all this oil at a lower price, and cornering the market, sending all the oil barons in the middle east into financial crisis, and THEN renegging on their loans. what could the middle east do then? china needs lots of fuel...i don't think they'll have a problem with this, as has been noted a few times in this topic, china relies on a strong US economy. supply and demand, right? the conerstone of capitalism. now that would be some investments right their... if anyone knows whos gonna get the contract, spread the love, and let me know... i need money to move out of the country

[Machinesworking]

...our military superiority is so staggering...

Really?

I'd suggest the current situation in Iraq and Afghanistan demonstrates otherwise.

The fact that the combined US and UK military forces are unable to subdue their opposition in the Gulf suggests that this whole "military hyperpower" myth is just that.

Regardless of what they're capable of on paper, it's real-life results that count and on current form I'd suggest that "...your reputation far exceeds your ability."

You're confusing hearts and minds with just general conquest. The US military can take out your government, and wipe out your standing army, but no colonial power has ever totally won the hearts of the people, and if it's as stupid of a reason for attacking as Iraq was, then there's no way. Also keep in mind we've occupied a country for what four plus years now? with minimal causalities on our side, sick, but from a military standpoint, it's a success.
like Ireland for the UK though, it will never be stable, or at least take 60 odd years.

...that terrorism is the only weapon of choice among those that oppose us.

"Terrorism" is a tactic used by all sides in this conflict, although having just spent two weeks in the US watching your TV news I can see why you might be tempted to make such simplistic distinctions.

I think you're not understanding what I mean by that, not necessarily the forces fighting us in Iraq, ( insurgents is even a stretch, they are partisans, it's just too nice of a word for the media I guess ) but the "reason" we went over there in the first place. No country is going to mount any attack against the USA, but a group or organization might, that basically is the definition of a terrorist. One mans Boston Tea Party is another's act of terrorism.

[dcease]

^^word^^

[glu]

Ask any survivors of any great western ideological advancement, and you might get a different opinion. I doubt the small amount of Native Americans here in the states would agree that the constitution helped them out.

Technically, I could be considered a Metis. I don't bother though, I look mostly like a darker Caucasian and I'm pretty content in Western society. In the interest of full disclosure, on my father's side of the family (Quebec Aboriginal, half-Cree) I've lost contact with them, so my mom raised me pretty much vanilla Canadian. My spouse is from the Northwest Territories, and though she's fully Caucasian, the community she grew up in was about 70% Aboriginal (Deneh, and some De'Cho). I've lived up North for a few years, in communities with at least a 50% Aboriginal (Inuit, Deneh mostly) populations.

Our experiences, and familiarity with Canadian Aboriginal society bear out the opposite of your view. Assimilated aboriginals are much better off, and much happier than those who still hang on the reserves (a product of Western society admittedly) or live in treaty lands (sovriegn, self-governing Aboriginal communities).

Sure, Western civilization has done some bad stuff; every society has. But we're conscious of the bad things we've done, and try to make amends when we can. But we keep getting better. We are responsible for most of the good in the modern world, and the "white guilt" people tend to forget that.

Indigenous Canadians had a very different experience than American Indians, Meso Americans, and Amerindians etc. etc.

France colonized North America through articulation of culture, there was assimillation, but it was initially mutual. The English (and then American) dealt with the American Indians through expulsion- genocide, population displacement or ethnic cleansing, and assimilation at different points in the US policy toward Indians. The Spanish took over Latin America through social and biological assimilation, population displacement, and stratification- by superimposing New Spain over the Royal indigenous rulers while keeping local caciques in power to help pacify the masses. Canada's indigenous population survived colonialism far better because they didn't suffer an indigenous genocide like the one that occurred in the U.S. Look at the surviving indigenous languages in North America compared to Canada, just to start.

Of course a Canadian aborigine would be more successful assimilating in a society that is dominated by foreign, what's your point? You would assimilate if you were a Cree a couple of hundred years ago- at least you would have a better chance of surviving-

[popslut]

The US military can take out your government, and wipe out your standing army...

Only if it is prepared to wipe itself out in the process.

As has been demonstrated time and time again the US military, as a conventional fighting force, is surprisingly inept at conquest, considering its size and standard of equipment. The last sixty years is littered with US military failures from Vietnam to Somalia to Korea to Iraq and Afghanistan: I'm of the opinion that all this US military superiority stuff is just so much hubris and bullshit.

The 800lb gorilla in the room, as usual, is the massive, technologically literate and well armed China which, if provoked, could pull the plug on your economy and saunter casually into Des Moines, Iowa.

Sorry if that wipes a few of the stripes off your flag.

Also keep in mind we've occupied a country for what four plus years now? with minimal causalities on our side, sick, but from a military standpoint, it's a success.

I'm sorry, even from a military standpoint, Operation Clusterfuck cannot be considered a success, as the constant stream of generals and other top brass queueing up to criticize and distance themselves from it will attest.

...like Ireland for the UK though, it will never be stable, or at least take 60 odd years.

More like 350 years if Ireland is your benchmark. That one has been festering since around 1650.

No country is going to mount any attack against the USA, but a group or organization might, that basically is the definition of a terrorist.

Terrorism expert Walter Laqueur in 1999 has counted over 100 definitions and concludes that the "only general characteristic generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence."

Terrorism is an anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-) clandestine individual, group or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal or political reasons, whereby — in contrast to assassination — the direct targets of violence are not the main targets. The immediate human victims of violence are generally chosen randomly (targets of opportunity) or selectively (representative or symbolic targets) from a target population, and serve as message generators. Threat- and violence-based communication processes between terrorist (organization), (imperilled) victims, and main targets are used to manipulate the main target (audience(s)), turning it into a target of terror, a target of demands, or a target of attention, depending on whether intimidation, coercion, or propaganda is primarily sought (Schmid, 1988).

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_terrorism

Shock and Awe anyone?

I bet that didn't just scare, maim and kill the "partisans". We've all seen enough photos of burned and dismembered children to know who the "message generators" were in that little demonstration.

One mans Boston Tea Party is another's act of terrorism.

And one man's insurgent is another's heroic resistance fighter.

[Machinesworking]

The US military can take out your government, and wipe out your standing army...

Only if it is prepared to wipe itself out in the process.

As has been demonstrated time and time again the US military, as a conventional fighting force, is surprisingly inept at conquest, considering its size and standard of equipment. The last sixty years is littered with US military failures from Vietnam to Somalia to Korea to Iraq and Afghanistan: I'm of the opinion that all this US military superiority stuff is just so much hubris and bullshit.

The 800lb gorilla in the room, as usual, is the massive, technologically literate and well armed China which, if provoked, could pull the plug on your economy and saunter casually into Des Moines, Iowa.

Sorry if that wipes a few of the stripes off your flag.

you're misinterpreting again, technologically we can do these things, military might is all technology at this point, and that is very different than 20 years ago etc. I'm not saying it to brag, it would be stupid to IMO, but it's undeniable that nazi Germany had the clear technological advantage in the beginning of WWII, and it wasn't until people caught up with them that the war turned around. Granted this isn't the same, but I think it's silly to underestimate that advantage.

Also keep in mind we've occupied a country for what four plus years now? with minimal causalities on our side, sick, but from a military standpoint, it's a success.

I'm sorry, even from a military standpoint, Operation Clusterfuck cannot be considered a success, as the constant stream of generals and other top brass queueing up to criticize and distance themselves from it will attest.

There has been little casualties on our side, you simply cannot deny that. Are we doing anything more than holding a hostile country hostage? I don't think we are for sure, but the occupation is pretty hard core. Whether or not there are some smart generals who think it's a ridiculous disaster is besides the point. It's not a matter of whether it's a success as far as establishing a government and lack of unrest, in simple terms of occupation, it's a success.

...like Ireland for the UK though, it will never be stable, or at least take 60 odd years.

More like 350 years if Ireland is your benchmark. That one has been festering since around 1650.

350 for occupation of Ireland, it was some time in the last couple years that the IRA and Ulster groups calmed down a bit in Northern Ireland, which is still UK, and has been a disputed territory for about 90 odd years, the last being calmer. So 60 was low.

No country is going to mount any attack against the USA, but a group or organization might, that basically is the definition of a terrorist.

Terrorism expert Walter Laqueur in 1999 has counted over 100 definitions and concludes that the "only general characteristic generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence."

Terrorism is an anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-) clandestine individual, group or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal or political reasons, whereby — in contrast to assassination — the direct targets of violence are not the main targets. The immediate human victims of violence are generally chosen randomly (targets of opportunity) or selectively (representative or symbolic targets) from a target population, and serve as message generators. Threat- and violence-based communication processes between terrorist (organization), (imperilled) victims, and main targets are used to manipulate the main target (audience(s)), turning it into a target of terror, a target of demands, or a target of attention, depending on whether intimidation, coercion, or propaganda is primarily sought (Schmid, 1988).

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_terrorism

Shock and Awe anyone?

I bet that didn't just scare, maim and kill the "partisans". We've all seen enough photos of burned and dismembered children to know who the "message generators" were in that little demonstration.

One mans Boston Tea Party is another's act of terrorism.

And one man's insurgent is another's heroic resistance fighter.

You're using arguments and facts to agree with me here.

My basic definition of terrorism would be any resistance organization without a standing army and country. Maybe that's too simplistic, but it covers 90% of what people call terrorism. It's an over used word for sure.

[popslut]

You're using arguments and facts to agree with me here.

I do concur with your analysis of the situation in Iraq, but I also take issue with some of your points of reference.

I really don't agree that the US is the unvanquishable military giant you think it is and I suspect that if your country continues to act like a greedy and beligerant bully, the next ten years on Earth will bear that out.

Hopefully a change in government and an accompanying shift in public perception will cause the US [the only really dangerous rogue state currently at large in the world] to withdraw back within its borders and concentrate on taking care of its own people rather than posturing abroad.

[abotha5]

Interesting discussion. Can anybody tell me why you really hate George Bush? Is it because the Liberal CNN tells you too, or because its the flavour of the month. Bush went into this war with the approval of the Senate as well as the Congress. You should therefore hate all those politicians. The reason he went into the war is because the United Nations had their fingers up their butts for 10 years with the Iraq situation. Bush has been the only one not to turn yellow and run like those with the Korean and Vietnam war. At least he sticks with his principles and dont change like the wind. Pelosi and Harry Reid has had control of the Senate and the house for more than a year and despite their promises has done nothing to end the war. Why not criticise them. I would much rather prefer the religious right than the atheist left. The republicans will once again win the Presidency. Liberals (Democrats) just like to hate America and will lose the election because of their stance on the Mexican question.

[b0unce]

Liberal CNN

lol.