The youngest person held by the US in the 'name of security'

[Stan]

Seriously, though. Americans are patriotic typically because they participate in the process of being American. They also work in the companies you talk about. I work for GE. Great American company in America. I have friends in the military and friends who have retired.

America in not just a place where we live. It is what we are. We want to be part of the global community, but we consider ourselves Americans first.

[nitefyre]

I consider myself a New Yorker first

And an American...erm...second...or maybe student second...American...third? Nah...that slot goes to Cantrian...hmm.

[Nixit]

I'd say Chicagoan is first for me, but it's at basically the same point as being an American. But I expect it's no different than any other person from a country.

[Missy]

You're just saying that because this is your thread. Nothing good can come out of this. You and I both know this. I doubt either side will persuede the other to thier point of view.

And you say that its my fault i'm too patriotic and see these as attacks on america as attacks on me? Honestly, think about it for a second. Every generation, a member of my family has been a part of the military. How am I suppose to feel when the blood of my family has been used to make this country as free and as good as it is today.

My family and my people have fought to hard for me to just allow you all to badmouth what we have all fought for. Lock it.

Personally I don't see this as bashing. It's people discussing an issue that exists.

Bashing would be- "Stan you're an idiot american" Noone has said that or even come close to implying it.

Secondly I'm American and I'm not offended. My husbands military and Im not offended. For someone to imply that one person is patriotic because they find these writings offensive, but another isn't because they don't is more of a bash than anything. I celebrate fourth of July and it so happens it's my favorite time of year, especially here on base. I'm moved on the fourth of July durring the canon salute for the fifty states here on Schofield. I'm moved when I walk past a unit in formation. Still these writings are not appauling or offensive to me.


Could you please explain to me, what is so offensive about them?

To me some people seem to have double standards. They say "Well you should be proud you have your freedoms, soldiers lose their lives so you can have freedoms." Then say: "But don't say anything when you disagree with a policy or the way some things turn out." That doesn't make any sense to me.

[DylPickle]

"If I could change America then I would make America just like Canada."

Then hockey can be everywhere, and Timmy's can take over the world! Yar.

[AoM]

I second what Missy said.

Sometimes a Patriot's greatest duty is to question his country.
Questioning does not equal disrespect.

[Stan]

I'm wasn't actually referring to bashing in this thread. But there are several threads that do get into bashing. I just thought it was time to speak my mind on the issue. I have the freedom to do that as well.

People can bash and trash if they want. I wouldn't get physical over it. But, I have a right to argue the point.

By the way, I still believe for the size of the nation and all that comes with that, America is still the land of the free. I also believe it is a society of good people, creative people, giving people...of course, that's on the whole. We have our share of the bad guys too.

[Nixit]

Yes, I agree with that as well.

[formerly known as hf]

None of the arguments so far have been intentionally personla Yo_Yo. No one has said anything about American people as such, just about the actions of the government and the companies. None of it has been directed at anyone specifically. Everyone has a right o express thier views in a respectful way, which is what everyone here has been doing.

[Just A Bill]

I think one of the problems we are having in this discussion is that some are trying to seperate the American people from their government. As Americans we elect a government that represents us. We believe our government is "Of the People, by the People and For the People", now of course, people have different opinions, thats why we have elections, as imperfect as they sometimes are. A politician may do something that the American people don't approve of, but if he/she does something with which the American people truly and strongly disagree with, he/she won't be a politician much longer.

I noticed that the list of nations that America bombed that do not have democracy/respect for human rights starts convienently at the end of WW2. An interesting place to draw a line. Draw it a year earlier and the list of conrtries bombed + democratic includes much of western europe, japan, as well as other parts of Asia. Even so, with the line drawn as it is, the number should be at least 0.5 as south Korea is reasonably democratic and respectfull of human rights.

America in the 20th century was a nation threatened by an ideology which threatened to "Bury You". Ignoring the threat of Communist expansion would not have made America or the world a better place. But it did involve at some points working with people/governments who were not freely elected nice guys. This was unfortunate, but we had to play with the hand we were dealt.

Fortunately, the threat of global destruction was sufficient to deter the Russians, long enough for the problems associated with communism be apparent enough that their people demanded change.

Now we live in a different world. With the world view of many Muslims, we are not sure deterence will mean anything to nations like Iraq and Iran, and fankly that frightens us. We see our supposed allies secretly supplying them with the tools and materials to make WMD's while making a mockery of the treaties and sanctions put in place to stop the spread of WMD's. All the while we are called Greedy Capitolists and blamed for the worlds ills.

Anyways, thats enough of a rant for now...

[Just A Bill]

Just for fun, lets list some of the countries that were bombed by Islamic Terrorists and compare how they are on the democracy/human rights scale. Lets see off the top of my head, I can recall terrorists bombings in

France,
Germany,
Spain,
USA,
Iraq,
Phillipines,
Indonesia.

Lets see that looks like somewhere between 4-7 of those 8 nations are Democratic and have reasonable human rights records, ok if you don't include the US in human rights perhaps 3 of 8. Still thats a much better record than Americas record. So we must conclude that Islamic terrorists are doing a much better job of creating democratic, human rights respecting nations than America. Isn't it obvious.

[Schme]

Neither the American goverment nor islamist groups are doing anything to bring American style democracy to anywhere.

[Junesun]

I noticed that the list of nations that America bombed that do not have democracy/respect for human rights starts convienently at the end of WW2. An interesting place to draw a line. Draw it a year earlier and the list of conrtries bombed + democratic includes much of western europe, japan, as well as other parts of Asia. Even so, with the line drawn as it is, the number should be at least 0.5 as south Korea is reasonably democratic and respectfull of human rights.

I started the list there because WW2 was quite unlike all of the latter missions:
- the target were first world countries and at least in Western Europe democracy and human rights had a historical foundation on which could be built
- it was a war forced on the USA, not a war the USA forced on other countries
- the USA didn't even have the pretense of going to war in order to promote democracy and human rights; the mission was to occupy Germany, not to liberate it.
In fact, if Germany is democratic and prosperous today, it is probably due to the cold war, not some altruistic goal that the USA went to war for. Yes, I mean it. The cold war brought about a change of mind regarding Germany's desired future status, in the USA. Right after the war, Germany was regarded an enemy country. Fraternisation was forbidden. The country was in ruins. The people were left starving and freezing. France and Britain started to dismantle all industry, like the Russians were doing in the east, with the goal of leaving Germany a weakened agricultural state. As the relationship between the USA and Russia got worse however, the USA began to see West Germany's importance as a wall against Communism. A bit later, they realised the possibility of making West Germany a model country showing the superiority of democracy and free markets. They stood up against criticism and fears, especially coming from France, and started pumping lots of money into Germany, launching re-education and de-nazification programs and helping the people to rebuild their country and society. Nation-building. But that's not what the war was about. Only later wars have seen the installation of democracy or human rights as their justification. That's also why I didn't include the interventions prior to WW2 as an example - if it wasn't the goal to create democratic societies respectful of human rights, one can't blame them for not achieving that.

[Just A Bill]

Do you blame the allies for not wanting Germany to have a vast industrial base? After WWI, they tried to let Germany be an industrial, but mostly unarmed nation. That didn't work too well. We could also talk about France, which I suppose America and England might have attempted to divide. What about Japan?

WW2 was also the last time we decisively engaged and won. You can hardly be responsible for those places where we lost (Korea and Vietnam). While we are on the subject, if you had to live in Korea, would you rather be in the north or south?

The one nation we did take over in this time period was Kuwait, which was not on your list. While it probably doesn't meet your criteria for democratic and respecting human rights, is closer now than it under Sadam, and also closer than before Sadams invasion.

As to most of the other nations on the list, we haven't invented a bomb (yet) that can cause people to have free elections and respect one anothers rights.

Most Americans would just as soon live and let live, but find our citizens taken hostages, passanger jets blown up ect and in cases like this we react.

It is only recently (G W Bush Administration) that we have made spreading democracy around the world, when necessary, an objective. GW Bush actually spoke against America as the "Worlds Policeman" before 9-11. That day, like Dec 7, woke America up. We realized that there were many in the world who wanted to kill us, and were willing to die to do it.

In the current deployment in Iraq, before we went in, and ever since, many have been thinking about the "exit strategy", in otherwords, how soon can we bring the troops home leaving a nation that does not threaten us or its neighbors. Thru history most nations went to war to obtain territiry, we worry about how quick we can go home...

[Ian]

I feel that people with radical political beliefs are usually just plain stupid. Come on, do you thin Rush of Roger, Bush or Osama really could tell us the best way to live? No. Everyone has different perspectives, so essentially everyone is right. America can justify everything they do, and you guys and justify being upset about it. You can also say unfounded generalizations like "America sucks" if you really want to, and I won't try to change your mind. You just look stupid. Especially if you're an American. You can be all "Oh, I hate America, I can't wait to get out" if you want. Well then get out. I certainly don't want you here. And you Europeans: It was all fine and good when you were the superpowers, well now it's our turn. And there's nothing you can do about it.