US should just become a genuine Imperial power...

[morteduzionism]

(bleep) the half-arsed economic/cultural crap...

Story

Another man told her bluntly: "Please forgive me, but I would like to say we've been fighting your war."

This is what's got me so annoyed...

I mean, by appeasing and catering to...people/terrorists...you keep yourself relatively safe. But those people are flinging (bleep) into your neighbors yard.

Of course noone thinks it's your responsibility but...if you don't do something about it you can't get mad if your neighbor knocks down your fence in order to get the bastards.

I mean, it's as if Pakistani's et al are like...(bleep) the world as long as it doesn't bother me. That's cool.

But if your attitude is (bleep) others...why should others respect anything about you? Sovereignity. Freedoms. Etc.

It's like the people are cowards and simply don't want to fight for anything. Their own freedom or to help their neighbor.

If "allies" are going to be half-arsed and constantly waffling and (bleep)ing and moaning about every little thing...(bleep) 'em!

Treat the whole Middle East as a whole, (bleep)ing Israel too...(bleep)ing always spying on us, and crush the whole area.

Who's going to stop it? Fake arse China? Russia? Japan? U.K.? Any European country? Who? Pakistan can't even beat the Taliban...India?

It's been proven on multiple occasions that a united Europe can't even handle another single European country...

That guy acts as if Pakistan was a bastion of civility and a beacon of stable governance and the US upset that...and that seems to be a common theme. As if the world was a literal Utopia until the US came along...

That's why the US shouldn't discriminate.

Hilary should've told the woman who asked about the drones: Would you prefer we just carpet bomb entire regions where we know terrorists are hiding? Or would you prefer we simply bomb the whole country back into the 18th c.?

Rant done...

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Eventhough that article/comment did annoy me...I was already highly annoyed because I can't get help with my PC and it looks like I won't be able to play any Fallout tonite...lol

[Jaketh]

sigh, people shouldnt about the drone attacks when we could if we wanted turn the entire middle east into a giant ing crater.

[Yosemite]

sigh, people shouldnt about the drone attacks when we could if we wanted turn the entire middle east into a giant ing crater.

we? you mean you i think

US governement isn't so irresponsible

[★Bandiera Rossa☭]

we? you mean you i think

US governement isn't so irresponsible

Please do not worry about his attitude, he thinks the US should be a Fascist dictatorship.. now.. we should not be an Imperial Power.. remember how this turned out the last time? Anyone remember the Cuban crisis?

[barbarossa pasha]

Are you actually fully appraised of the situation in Pakistan? It's easy to criticize them from the other side of the world when they don't crack down enough on terrorists, but I would suggest the situation is far more complex than a simple conflict between the Pakistani government and terrorist insurgents. Pakistan is a highly divided country, its geography is in many places extremely harsh - attempts to impose any sort of central control over Baluchistan, for instance, have been extremely difficult. In trying to tackle the problem of the Taliban the government is having to finely balance the opposing viewpoints of the United States and much of its own public and religious leaders, it can't really risk angering either one. In addition, the relationship between the military and the government is not particularly healthy, and the government must be wary of it and keep it placated.

You're trying to boil down an extremely complicated situation on the ground into an American-centric view that says 'these are our priorities and they should be yours as well regardless of opinion and division within your own country'.

For one thing, you seem to refer to Pakistan and Pakistanis as some sort of monolithic entity, this is far from the case. And (to some Pakistanis) it could be seen as if they are fighting America's war, their government and military are being pressured to take on the Taliban and other extremist groups, when it seems unlikely they would be doing much about it if left to themselves.

Would you prefer we just carpet bomb entire regions where we know terrorists are hiding? Or would you prefer we simply bomb the whole country back into the 18th c.?

Yeah, that's an enlightened viewpoint, and likely to garner world support for the United States. Anyways, the US is constrained by its people, who are - thankfully - not all as jingoistic as you. The US shies away from Empire because it's expensive and it means that Americans will have to die. It also cuts against the whole National Mythology.

It is interesting though that a country that is built on respect for legal process is willing to execute people without a trial and kill innocent bystanders in the process, seems like a perversion of justice to me.

[Morkonan]

(bleep) the half-arsed economic/cultural crap...

Story


This is what's got me so annoyed...

I mean, by appeasing and catering to...people/terrorists...you keep yourself relatively safe. But those people are flinging (bleep) into your neighbors yard.

Of course noone thinks it's your responsibility but...if you don't do something about it you can't get mad if your neighbor knocks down your fence in order to get the bastards....

I was a bit ticked off at her comment as well.

As far as I am concerned, Pakistan is fighting a war against terrorism. If they don't want to control the people within their own country, that is their Right! I can respect that. However, then they must be prepared for someone else coming in there and controlling them.

Pakistan has Sovereignty Issues. In short, they have shown they are not in complete control over their entire country. I don't mean they have to be a totalitarian state. Not by any means. But, if they have a segment of their population causing problems, it's their primary responsibility to solve those problems or else deal with the consequences. They have been ignoring their sovereignty issues for years and have let entire regions of their country act independently with little governance.

Pakistan has accepted billions of dollars in aid and debt forgiveness from the United States. They have accepted military aid as well and constantly ask for more equipment. This isn't just from the US's good nature either. Yes, we were forced to forgive their debt, we were forced to give them economic aid in guarantee of their cooperation in fighting against terrorists.

And then we get "We're fighting your war.."

/sigh

OK, fine. Now I'm ticked. They had a choice, they chose to fight against terrorism. AT THAT MOMENT it was not "Our War" but a war we shared with Pakistan against terrorists. Now that they're having problems, now that they're finally fighting instead of simply paying off terrorists and getting the deals broken, now that they have serious Sovereignty issues that have arisen due to YEARS of neglect of their own regions.. it's suddenly "Our War."

Screw that. If they want to withdraw from fighting against terrorists then FINE, let them. Then, when the Taliban and al Qaeda sit in Pakistan's parliment, who's war will it be then?

[Oldgamer]

The US should just become a genuine imperial power?

It's got my vote. Being a good guy hasn't got us very far ...

[Dr. Croccer]

The US should just become a genuine imperial power?

It's got my vote. Being a good guy hasn't got us very far ...

Being a bad guy has?

[Oldgamer]

Being a bad guy has?

No, being a bad guy might!

@Holger
But the United States has not been an empire striving for world domination, or else it would have taken control of the Iraqi oilfields. In case you haven't noticed, that didn't happen.

[Dr. Croccer]

No, being a bad guy might!

The US has already been a bad guy for a quite a whiler, you know, supporting genocidal maniacs and the like, sending tens of thousands of it's soldiers to some hellhole to defend the regimes of aforementioned maniacs and whatnot. The proxy wars during the Cold War, in which there was a lot of US involvement, easily cost the lives of several tens of millions of people.

@Holger
But the United States has not been an empire striving for world domination, or else it would have taken control of the Iraqi oilfields. In case you haven't noticed, that didn't happen.

Iraq's oil is nothing compared to Saudi's or Canada's oil.

[Kjertesvein]

But the United States has not been an empire striving for world domination, or else it would have taken control of the Iraqi oilfields. In case you haven't noticed, that didn't happen.

You are right, as in eographical sence, but not political, we are still colonial powers.
As a matter of fact, I can name a democrat who actually made 35 billion US$ giving the minoritys high end powers in their(Iraqi) constitution. Prick, good thing he does not operate in the Ghan anymore.

[Niles Crane]

The US should just become a genuine imperial power?

It's got my vote. Being a good guy hasn't got us very far ...

The British Empire was meant to be a "good guy" and it got them pretty far until the 20th century.

[wearenemesis]

I bet more people would participate in politics if they could be Emperor instead of President

[alhoon]

I bet more people would participate in politics if they could be Emperor instead of President

Well... there have been good empires and bad empires. But never an empire with an elected emperor. So, by default, far, far less people could become emperors of an empire instead of presidents of a democracy.

[Holger Danske]

Somehow I'd suddenly take America more seriously if they openly admitted they were an Empire striving for global domination... At least that would be honest...

[Exarch]

(bleep) the half-arsed economic/cultural crap...

Story


This is what's got me so annoyed...

I mean, by appeasing and catering to...people/terrorists...you keep yourself relatively safe. But those people are flinging (bleep) into your neighbors yard.

Of course noone thinks it's your responsibility but...if you don't do something about it you can't get mad if your neighbor knocks down your fence in order to get the bastards.

I mean, it's as if Pakistani's et al are like...(bleep) the world as long as it doesn't bother me. That's cool.

But if your attitude is (bleep) others...why should others respect anything about you? Sovereignity. Freedoms. Etc.

It's like the people are cowards and simply don't want to fight for anything. Their own freedom or to help their neighbor.

If "allies" are going to be half-arsed and constantly waffling and (bleep)ing and moaning about every little thing...(bleep) 'em!

Treat the whole Middle East as a whole, (bleep)ing Israel too...(bleep)ing always spying on us, and crush the whole area.

Who's going to stop it? Fake arse China? Russia? Japan? U.K.? Any European country? Who? Pakistan can't even beat the Taliban...India?

It's been proven on multiple occasions that a united Europe can't even handle another single European country...

That guy acts as if Pakistan was a bastion of civility and a beacon of stable governance and the US upset that...and that seems to be a common theme. As if the world was a literal Utopia until the US came along...

That's why the US shouldn't discriminate.

Hilary should've told the woman who asked about the drones: Would you prefer we just carpet bomb entire regions where we know terrorists are hiding? Or would you prefer we simply bomb the whole country back into the 18th c.?

Rant done...

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Eventhough that article/comment did annoy me...I was already highly annoyed because I can't get help with my PC and it looks like I won't be able to play any Fallout tonite...lol

ppl in this day and age like to BELIEVE that they live and support a government that has the MORAL HIGH GROUND; overt imperailism tends to shatter such beliefs; what do i mean by OVERT imperialism? as you suggested, ACCEPTING collateral damage without TRYING to correct it.
plus, you really think the US could last long azs a major power, sorry, an imperial power, if they did what all those other FORMER empires did in the past?

[danzig]

I love the comment we are fighting your war, shows a complete level of ignorance on Pakistan history in establishing/aiding the Taliban which brought a safe haven to extremist...uh no mr pakistani man this whole mess, a large part of it fails squarely on Pakistan and its intelligence agency. Wont hear me say this often but kudos to Hillary for being diplomatic but standing relatively firm.

[Dr. Croccer]

That is one impression, if you think exclusively isolationist. Eventually the United States would enter the war no matter what.

I doubt that.

The surprise Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was merely the "straw that broke the camel's back".

It's a bit silly to pretend that the US and Japan already hated eachother. The US government was largely oblivious to the Japanese plans. There's a reason Churchill was quite glad with the Pearl Harbour attack.

For example, the USA had been helping out the United Kingdom by sending supplies across the Atlantic long before Pearl Harbor

So? They did the same in WWI, and only declared war after several U-boot attacks and the Zimmermann telegram. Several European countries funded the Germans during WWI and WWII as well, yet they showed little intention of fighting. War was quite profitable to the neutral countries.

[Lord Rahl]

I doubt that.

And your evidence of it not eventually happening is what, exactly? Do not forget that Europe was the main objective instead of the Pacific for the United States.

It's a bit silly to pretend that the US and Japan already hated eachother. The US government was largely oblivious to the Japanese plans. There's a reason Churchill was quite glad with the Pearl Harbour attack.

The United States and Japan had been at odds before Pearl Harbor. Ever heard of the oil embargo?

So? They did the same in WWI, and only declared war after several U-boot attacks and the Zimmermann telegram. Several European countries funded the Germans during WWI and WWII as well, yet they showed little intention of fighting. War was quite profitable to the neutral countries.

More profitable even more so when the war wasn't on the US mainland. That isn't the point of this argument. A historical fact is that the United States entered the war and helped defeat the Axis powers and is the main reason why much more of Western Europe didn't fall under the "Iron Curtain".

If anyone actually took the time to read my post correctly, you would have noticed that what I am saying is that none of it actually matters to the point. Good, Evil it is irrelevant often current governments ignore the policy of the previous one never mind the last x amount of governments. I did not throw political mud for the sake of making it stick. I threw it to make a point. I’m British by the way also I have American ancestors I do not care what other people in the history of those nations did for any longer than the most recent political policy and the most obvious trends that brought them there.

I think all of it matters to the point, but mostly in a historical context. Yes, the USA has done many bad things, but I think the nation has proven time and time again that it is willing and able to change.

It should be noted that since World War Two, America has had a domineering policy to the entire world and that the European powers gradually withdrew from Empire regardless of whether it was voluntary or policy. The British Empire left quite quickly in a lot of places and is tiny right now. You could probably lose the whole thing in Texas.

Of course the United States became a dominant, even a domineering, power. After WWII the only countries that could come out of it on top were the USA and Soviet Union. The USA because it was not completely devastated by the war directly, and the Soviet Union because it's government was so overpowering that it could overcome the devastation by sacrificing its huge population.

As for the US money in WW2; Britain was the only country that had to pay the entire debt back, we only completed payment a few years ago. All other countries had the US write the debt off. As far as I could tell since WWII it has been the US policy to take out any international competition first Germany and Japan (fair enough), then British Empire, then the USSR and next eventually will be China. Along the way there have been other things that fulfil the short term goals that will facilitate the long term goals.

One goal of capitalist business is to take out the competition. This isn't exclusively an American trait. For example, Japanese car manufacturers have done much better than American car manufacturers for awhile now. This isn't because the Japanese have some hate of American business. They simply want to do better.

Europe is to inward looking to be an imperial power just yet and will be more unstable than Italy around 1900. Russia is trying to step up to the Big Boys again and be a power. The biggest most blatant powers right now are US, Russia and China no one else comes close to this and certainly cannot have claims to be imperialistic in any rational sense of the word. I have not got a problem with what America does just the veiling of the power, it is unhealthy to the US populace and will not help in the long term.

The United States will always want to be the Big Boy in the world. They've (we've) been that way since the end of WWII and there is no reason why they wouldn't want to stay that way. I don't see any problem with Russia and China trying to do the same. It's how the world works.

[G-Megas-Doux]

I think all of it matters to the point, but mostly in a historical context. Yes, the USA has done many bad things, but I think the nation has proven time and time again that it is willing and able to change.




Of course the United States became a dominant, even a domineering, power. After WWII the only countries that could come out of it on top were the USA and Soviet Union. The USA because it was not completely devastated by the war directly, and the Soviet Union because it's government was so overpowering that it could overcome the devastation by sacrificing its huge population.



One goal of capitalist business is to take out the competition. This isn't exclusively an American trait. For example, Japanese car manufacturers have done much better than American car manufacturers for awhile now. This isn't because the Japanese have some hate of American business. They simply want to do better.




The United States will always want to be the Big Boy in the world. They've (we've) been that way since the end of WWII and there is no reason why they wouldn't want to stay that way. I don't see any problem with Russia and China trying to do the same. It's how the world works.

This is my point, if you want to be one of the Big Boys then you have to accept that one, people won’t like you. People still hate Britain and it has not been one of the Big Boys for a long while, currently we are US henchman number one but still not one of the Big Boys. Number Two being a Big Boy requires imperialistic tendencies otherwise you are not a Big Boy. Number Three, denying that you are a Big Boy when you are is condescending and looses face to all other nations and peoples. It is the old money new money thing. New money only gets respect when it stops denying it is not in the rich club. It ignores outside assumptions and feeling and goes with its nature. The nature of the US is to be an imperialistic power and thus it should show itself to be one.