Quote from: RPGPundit....but I really don't see the US being able to "take over" it the way, say, the British Empire did.

Of course the British couldn't, and well no one could in the same way. It's not the nineteenth century any more man. Saying that is a kind of a lot of silly, in my opinion.

I'm curious as to how substantiate your claim that America as a whole doesn't care about the freedoms of people in various places. Had you limited that statement to "major portions of the the military industrial complex and your government" I'd be much more inclined to whole heartedly agree.

But see I see way to many kids with "War is Terrorism" stickers, and other such nonsense to be able to say anything so cut and dry. The fact is this country is way too big to just have one set of opinions, no matter who is in power at the moment.

There is no average American, no one way of looking at things, no one regional view, or universal dialect.

Anyone who believes there is hasn't lived here. I've lived in America most of my life, and I still know less than I should about vast swaths of this nation, and I am an avid reader and historian.

Yes, well, by "America" I meant the military-industrial-corporate complex that governs said nation.  The vast majority of actual Americans aren't really hostile to other people's freedoms, just utterly apathetic to them.  And there are a few college kids who are in favour of "freedoms" because its fashionable.

Then there are the people who are educated enough and compassionate enough to have a real and informed, and enlightened, opinion on the subject. All six of them.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditThen there are the people who are educated enough and compassionate enough to have a real and informed, and enlightened, opinion on the subject. All six of them.

I sniggered at that.

Quote from: Serious PaulOf course the British couldn't, and well no one could in the same way. It's not the nineteenth century any more man. Saying that is a kind of a lot of silly, in my opinion.

Not entirely, and it was gone about differently. Interestingly, though, it was when we were more self interested that we did better. We 'civilised' as a byproduct of our self interest, introducing technology, railways, semi-efficient bureaucracy, law and security. It's once we started crusading, once the evangelicals got their claws in and we started interfering in other ways it all wen to pot (though getting rid of suttee in India was quite popular with widows).

Quote from: RPGPunditYes, well, by "America" I meant the military-industrial-corporate complex that governs said nation.

Military-industrial complex? That phrase is still in use?

Quote from: RPGPunditThe vast majority of actual Americans aren't really hostile to other people's freedoms, just utterly apathetic to them.  And there are a few college kids who are in favour of "freedoms" because its fashionable.

Then there are the people who are educated enough and compassionate enough to have a real and informed, and enlightened, opinion on the subject. All six of them.

And again, how - exactly - is this different from any other nation on Earth?

Its not our apathy or self interest that sets us apart from France or Uruguay, its the fact that we can touch any point on this globe any time we want - and nobody else can. That's what makes us a target for every other 2nd or 3rd world nation on this planet. They fear and envy our power.

Tell me I'm wrong.

Quote from: SosthenesMilitary-industrial complex? That phrase is still in use?

Apparently by at least one person

But realistically, if Pat Buchanan were elected President tomorrow and issued an executive order to withdraw all American forces to within the territorial borders of the USA (something he more or less promised to do when running for President), who would be the most upset?

Europeans.

So there's a lot of mixed feelings about American power. Europe and Japan can concentrate on their economies while we foot the bill for the aircraft carriers and Rangers that would protect them within 48 hours if something went bad.

Of course there's the other side of that, that we occasionally use our power when WE want to, not just when Europe wants us to.

But honestly, if we completely disarmed tomorrow, Europe, Japan and Korea would be very upset (even France- maybe ESPECIALLY France) and South America would probably throw the world's biggest block party.

Quote from: RPGObjects_chuckApparently by at least one person

But realistically, if Pat Buchanan were elected President tomorrow and issued an executive order to withdraw all American forces to within the territorial borders of the USA (something he more or less promised to do when running for President), who would be the most upset?

Europeans.

In one of his editorials on one of his manga, masamune Shirow said he did not was america to pull out of japan, so don't be so sure that europe would be the most distressed of america basically told the world "Screw you guys, I'm going home."

Quote from: WerekoalaAnd again, how - exactly - is this different from any other nation on Earth?

Its not our apathy or self interest that sets us apart from France or Uruguay, its the fact that we can touch any point on this globe any time we want - and nobody else can. That's what makes us a target for every other 2nd or 3rd world nation on this planet. They fear and envy our power.

Tell me I'm wrong.

Your statement isn't totally wrong, but it carries the implication that somehow that fear is unfounded or something.  They hate you because of what you've done with that power. In almost any region of the world there is a serious track record, at least a couple of countries, if not a metric ton of them like here in latinamerica, where that power was used to destroy many many people's lives, many people that had fuckall to do with being an "enemy of america" in any real or active sense.

So it is not an unjustified paranoid fear, it is a fear that has been confirmed by actions over and over again.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Dominus NoxIn one of his editorials on one of his manga, masamune Shirow said he did not was america to pull out of japan, so don't be so sure that europe would be the most distressed of america basically told the world "Screw you guys, I'm going home."

Edit: Oops totally misread that.

Yeah, I mentioned Japan, and I'm sure they'd be VERY unhappy about America being isolationist.

They have very very little military capacity.

They have that luxury thanks to us.

Note: I am by no means excusing all the stupid things we have done with our power. I am just stating that for every country that would be thrilled for a return to the isolationist 30's there would be others that would be far less than thrilled.

Also, I'd like to point out that power seems to abhor a vacuum.

Maybe I'm cynical, but I firmly believe if America was not a dominant military power throwing its weight around, someone else WOULD be.

I mean, it's not like Russia or Britain have shown much reluctance to militarily intervene.

Quote from: RPGPunditYour statement isn't totally wrong, but it carries the implication that somehow that fear is unfounded or something.  They hate you because of what you've done with that power. In almost any region of the world there is a serious track record, at least a couple of countries, if not a metric ton of them like here in latinamerica, where that power was used to destroy many many people's lives, many people that had fuckall to do with being an "enemy of america" in any real or active sense.

So it is not an unjustified paranoid fear, it is a fear that has been confirmed by actions over and over again.

I'll accept that premise if you are willing to accept this one: MOST of our actions have been well-intentioned, regardless of the outcomes.

And while there is a good deal of Fear of the US, there's also a metric assload of envy. Go on, admit it - it won't hurt.

You can haggle about the personal motivations of the men putting the actions in motion, but the folks who carry out those decisions generally do so with good intentions.

Hell, next left... of course.

But we're NOT an "evil" country.

Ahhh Pundit....so much about America to hate, so little time.

I'm trying to get a handle on exactly what you'd prefer.

• America projects power everywhere it can to help better the world (Sudan, etc), not just where it wants.
• America doesn't project power anywhere to help better the world (pull out of not only Iraq but Afghanistan, Bosnia, Europe, Japan, the Phillipines, the list goes on and on).
• America projects power at the behest of the International community - where the UN says go, we go.

Everyone seems to answer #2, except deep down inside what they really want is #3. America out of Iraq, but in Africa; out of Latin America, but in South Korea (after all, Kim's a nutjob!); and for secular-atheisms sake, protect Tawian!

The problem is #3 is right out. When you're footing the bill, you get to tell the piper the tune. That leaves us with #1, which not even Americans want, or #2, which (as others have pointed out) the rest of the world doesn't really want. So that leaves us with the path chosen - use some sort of criteria to decide where to project.  What better choice then national self interest?  What would your criteria be?

Here's the thing - if you don't like how America projects its power, you have two choices:
[LIST=A]

• Defeat it.  That's right, just stop America from being able to project that power.
• Move here, become a citizen (optional, apparently), and change it from within.

My suspicion is that the hostility around the world towards American power is that they want to stop it, but can't do either A or B.  So the only option left is to complain that America doesn't project it's power the way you'd like.

Now you've got a bug up your ass about the way America treats Latin America.  OK, on behalf of the other 299,999,999 of us, I'm sorry.  We'll try to do better in the future. At least we'll try - which is more than can be said about most others.

And really, PNAC? Are you serious?  Did you get a visit from Cindy Sheehan or something when she was down visiting Chavez?

I agree with almost all your points James- though I would add these caveats:

America does need to be beat with the +5 Bludgeon of Humiliation for the way it has treated South America every chance we can, because we've done some really dumb things for dumb reasons.

When you compare our meddling in S. America to our meddlings in the Middle East, for example, there's a marked difference in kind. At least you could make the case that our national interest was served by Iraq. I disagree, but I can see a case a reasonable person would make.

Our support for the Shah of Iran in the 50's and our support for Israel throughout are also cases where an even better case could be made that we were acting in our national interest. The Shah, for example, had been an American ally since WWII, when he replaced his pro-Nazi father.

By contrast, in South America we overthrew governments at the behest of General Foods. That's just dumb. You're also talking about an area where the Kirkpatrick Doctrine was used again and again- supporting dictatorships of the most brutal sort as long as they were anti-communist.

South America has a legitimate beef with us, and given the way Georgie beats his chest over Venezuela, we still seem to not have learned our less that we don't need to LIKE the governments down there and can't PICK them.

The other point I'd make is that talking about PNAC right now is very necessary, because they have the ear of some prominent politicians, including our President, Vice President and a Presidential contender (McCain is even more well liked by PNAC than Bush).

So we do need to get the word out what a radical bunch of losers PNAC is, not to mention that their high-minded theories never turn out to be correct, so that they lose all influence in American foreign policy, forever.

But on your basic premise, I agree.

America completely withdrew from world affairs after WWI. We reduced our military to the 19th largest military in the world (we had a smaller army than Poland at the start of WWII) and let Europe and Japan run things.

How did that work out? Not so well.

So since then we've focused on collective security through NATO (not the UN- NATO) and have managed to finally bring a lasting peace to Europe.

So I think most reasonable people agree the world is better off with America manning the helm of the USS Big Stick (TM) than anyone else (since, as I mentioned earlier- SOMEONE would step up to be that great power- politics seems to abhor a vacuum). But that doesn't mean we should stick our noses everywhere.

Quote from: WerekoalaI'll accept that premise if you are willing to accept this one: MOST of our actions have been well-intentioned, regardless of the outcomes.

And while there is a good deal of Fear of the US, there's also a metric assload of envy. Go on, admit it - it won't hurt.

You can haggle about the personal motivations of the men putting the actions in motion, but the folks who carry out those decisions generally do so with good intentions.

Hell, next left... of course.

But we're NOT an "evil" country.

Oh shit, there's a huge amount of Envy, speaking as someone living in a country where a huge percentage of the population still willingly describe themselves utterly seriously as "communists", there's a park dedicated to Che Guevara, and the president's a socialist; the US is despised by many people here, utterly despised... in one breath. In the other, they're always trying to buy the latest stuff from America, their kids get in line to go to the McDonald's, and they desperately want to imitate that country in any way they can.  Shit, the "smoking ban" that has been set up here was done mainly because it was an attempt to prove how "1st world" Uruguay really is, how much like the US. There's tons of shit like that.
And Argentina is about 100 times worse than Uruguay.  They're desperate, desperate to do anything that brings them closer to the "1st world" in appearance, and while the 1st world means Europe AND the US, it definitely includes the US in that.

Not to mention that if just about anyone was offered a chance to move to the US legally, they would take it.

But what this doesn't mean, at all, is the stupid stupid fucking Bush-conservative line of "They hate us because they're jealous of our freedom".  That's nonsense.  

People hate you because of this: there's a guy in my gaming group who never knew his parents.  They were taken one night, from their house, by secret police when he was just a baby.  They are, to this day, "disappeared". He never got to find a body or bury them, much less know them and have everything a son should have from his parents. He was raised instead by his elderly grandmother, whom he no doubt loves, but who had to also no doubt make incredible sacrifices in the face of incredible tragedy to take care of him.  He still almost certainly has psychological scars from what happened to his family, which will no doubt haunt him for the rest of his life.

And why did his parents get taken away? Because they belonged to an illegal organization. They hadn't killed anyone, harmed anyone, bombed anyone; but someone in the CIA's Plan Condor decided they had to be one of the thousands to die as part of the overall master plan to secure american hegemony in latinamerica.  So they died.

And that's why you're hated. You're hated because in much of the world, people know someone, they have someone in their gaming group, or a neighbour, a friend, a co-worker, whatever, who was a direct victim of your "good intentions".  Good intentions, my ass. That is my entire point, most of the times you DO NOT have "good intentions" aside from the good intention of wanting to hold onto power in the region you are taking over.  There's nothing well-intentioned about it.

Oh, and I will even go so far to say that when you are loved, it is more for the idealisms that you cast, be they the illusions of the "Land of capitalist plenty where everyone's rich", or the illusions of "the land of freedom and democracy".  And there's nothing wrong with either of these, but when you're hated it tends to be not for what you represent, but for what you ACTUALLY DO, the reality as opposed to the illusion; and that means that when push comes to shove that hate will always be stronger than any love people might have.

RPGPundit

Quote from: James J SkachAhhh Pundit....so much about America to hate, so little time.

I'm trying to get a handle on exactly what you'd prefer.

Hey, dude, I'm just trying to get you to understand WHY you're hated. Which you all seem to have a very hard time getting.

You can argue about why you shouldn't be hated all you like, but until you really, truly understand why you're hated, you're kind of taking shots in the dark.

And sure, you can really say you don't give a fuck, but then please, stop complaining about everyone "unfairly hating you". Just shut the fuck up and take it.  If you don't even want to bother to know the whys and whatfors, then you really don't have a right to say anything in protest about it.

As for changing it, what really needs to change is a change of attitude and criteria, IF you want to be less despised.  But it isn't OUR job to change that, its yours.  The reason many American citizens are desperately interested in doing so is because they realize that in the Long Term (and not the really long term, I'm talking very close long term here) the attitude of "I don't give a fuck what you think, I'm going to be the global bully and claim that I'm doing it as a favour to all of you" is going to come back and bite you in the ass. It creates far more needless problems for America than it solves.  

And fixing your problems is your job, not ours. We have enough trouble trying to survive your "help".

RPGPundit