Therumancer said:
Anti-US sentiment is based on the US being the dominant world power, pure and simple. There is nothing more to it than that. This combined with a genuine lack of fear of the US due to the belief that we will not use our military power efficiently is why people are willing to strike against it with such imputiny.
And this is why you need to get outside of the U.S.
Therumancer said:
I mean I get it, all your comments come down to the fact that you don't like the US.
Ah, the old intellectually bankrupt battlecry of "If you're not with us, you're against us"
I really hate giving out personal details over the internet but your ignorant little comment about "pantywaists" needs some perspective.
My father was Army. That's how he met my mother in Germany. He raised military kids. (Go Army) My youngest brother is still in the military as a medic. My immediate to say nothing of extended family (on the U.S. side) has stepped up to do what YOU said you would not even if you could.
What have you ever done for this country?
That's where my arguments come from. Not the idealistic hippie perspective that you attribute to me but from someone who has one foot on both sides of the Atlantic. The basis for my arguments comes from:
a) Not only having family outside this country but having been outside this country and finding out that "Hey. U.S. news media is completely inaccurate when it comes to portraying people outside the U.S.". Thorinair keeps saying that U.S. citizens aren't responsible for the decisions of our politicians to go to war. Do you think that's somehow different in other countries? Travel outside the country (and I KNOW you haven't. Travelling outside the country does not mean you'll take the Daniel Pearl attitude of "We are citizens of the world" but most people, except for the truly psychotic, do not take the "Kill 'em all" attitude that you have displayed once they actually meet people outside the country and see that they're not just targets in a video game but actual people albeit with different languages and customs.) and you'll see that those "Death to America" crowd scenes are cherry-picked by the U.S. media to convince the citizenry that it's "us vs. them". This is not to say that they aren't there. This is not to say that they haven't been growing in intensity due to our actions overseas. But, if you travel overseas, you'll see a world of people that you almost never see in U.S. news media.
And, no, they aren't all jealous of us. You'd be surprised at how many would live and let live if we didn't stick our nose in everything.
b) my concern for U.S. soldiers. Yes, you could say that I'm biased because I don't want my little brother to get a leg blown off by an IED just because Congress isn't willing to admit that Afghanistan is a Vietnam-type quagmire. That would be a fair enough argument because, obviously, that does worry me a little. But it goes beyond that. I mean, who do you think you are when you say "I wouldn't serve but I have no trouble advocating putting others in harm's way just to satisfy my irrational fear of Muslims"?
.........
I've honestly tried to talk to you as if you were a rational human being. I've honestly tried to ignore the xenophobia you have displayed against the Muslim world in your posts. I've honestly tried to reason with you as if you weren't one of the people that COD is aimed at and could actually recognize that unwarranted aggression simply turns the rest of the world against us.
I see that was a waste of time. You may think of me as a "pantywaist". Fine. I see you as one of the domestic enemies that they talk about in the military oath of enlistment where a soldier swears to defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. People like you do nothing but advocate policies that are bankrupting our nation, sending thousands of our troops to die in a foreign hellhole, turning every nation on earth up to and including those who are our staunchest allies against us, and then you have the audacity to say "Well, I wouldn't serve even if I could."
If I had way, I would have the military gather, at gunpoint, every "cynical militant" whether they were young/old/male/female/black/white/handicapped/whatever. I would pile them into every C-130 that I could get my hands on. They would be given a gun, one change of clothing, and 5 MREs. Then they would be dropped into Afghanistan with the single directive "None of you are coming home until you can deliver Osama Bin Laden's head." This way, the "cynical militants" would get all the war that they desire....and then some.... and the rest of us would be allowed to pursue a policy of foreign engagement which is not influenced by people who mistake COD for real war.
I have no problem with stomping a nation flat if they attack us. While I understand the purpose behind reconstruction, I would have no problem stomping that same nation flat and letting them rebuild themselves as a warning to the world not to attack us. But I do not support these preemptive brushfire wars that are sold to a public that has been anesthetized by U.S. news media while hopped on Rambo movies and COD games. There is a MAJOR difference between the two.
Frankly, I'm done discussing this with you. Where my perspective is that of the "idealistic pantywaist", your perspective is typical of people who speak up but won't step up. Until you do, you don't have any moral basis to criticize anyone else on how they feel about this country.
Thorinair said:
thepyrethatburns said:
Thorinair said:
thepyrethatburns, you're done arguing with me? I'm... hurt...
I'm sorry. It's just that you're not advocating exterminating millions of Muslims on the basis that they may possibly be a threat at an indeterminate time in the future so I don't have as much motivation to argue with you.
I think we've pretty much reached a conclusion in our argument. The US citizens are not responsible for the wars we enter, but we don't do as much as we can to let the government know we want them to stop. Does that sound about right?
Let me try to define myself in this a bit more.
As you can see, I'm a bit heavy into the whole personal responsibilty argument. I think it's a weird thing that many people in this country are willing to hold the citizens accountable for the actions of their government as you can see (as a very recent example) by the argument on bombing a civilian populace in order to topple a government but claim to have no personal responsibility for the actions of the U.S. government. I realize that, once in office, a politician can turn around and do the exact opposite of what was promised.
But I would still say, ultimately, the responsibility still lies with us. If the system is broken (and I'm not saying it is), then we need to work to change it. When it comes time to vote, we should study the issues and the candidate records before voting as opposed to voting on the basis of 30-second soundbites and what letter is in front of a candidate's name. If a politician is doing something unconsciable, then we should, at least, drop an E-mail (Use a meltmail or junkmail account for this. Once you write to a congressman, that seat holds it. I wrote to one of my House representatives when he was a Democrat and his Republican successor got my address as well. Fortunately, I used my junkmail account which is probably one of the oldest hotmail accounts in existence.) protesting such action. This doesn't mean that you have to take to the streets every time a representative votes a certain way on a bill but, at least, make your voice heard.
While we may not personally make the decision to vote, we do put these people in power to represent us. Much as a business may not be personally responsible for hiring someone who takes off their pants at a luncheon and then dry-humps the main course, they are still ultimately responsible for giving the person the job in the first place. In the same fashion, while we may not be the ones to personally make the decision, we are still ultimately responsible for putting them in power in the first place.
That is what I mean when I say that we are ultimately responsible for the actions that our government takes. Yours is a fine compromise argument but I think we're getting tangled up on our definitions of responsibility and how it relates to the relationship between our citizenry and the government.
