Robin Williams' Plan for the USA
- Thread starter g/re/p
- Start date
lnoelstorr
Registered
g/re/p said:
No he doesn't (and that applies to all your accusations in that quote)
bbloke
Registered
g/re/p said:
Unfortunately, I think fryke is right on the money. He is indeed displaying a good understanding of what is happening world wide, and it often concerns people outside the US that some (not all, I don't want to generalize) within the US do not see how Bush's actions are having a detrimental effect on international relations and world stability.
Just as a quick aside, I have spent half my life living in the US and half in the UK, so I feel in a reasonable position to comment on the relative pros and cons of the different countries' ways of doing things. I assure you my posts are not meant to offend anyone or to attack a country that I have a lot of affection for, but there are some serious issues involved surrounding recent US foreign policy (I can back this up with further references if this thread widens).
Again, I just want to assure you that there is nothing personal in all of this and that I'm certainly not anti-American (if anything, I get accused over here of supporting the US too much!).
g/re/p
I can haz cigar?
Well, i do still strongly disagree with what many of you have
to say, but i guess i should take a step back and calm down
a bit.
We all have opinions and some of us are always going to disagree with each other, but i grow tired of some of these "tongue-in-cheek" posts by non-US citizens that appear - to me - to be badmouthing the US - i see many generalizations and much criticism with no corresponding solutions suggested.
As a side note, i really should have known better than to argue politics on a computer forum - it was mistake, and i assure you that i will no longer participate in such discussions.
to say, but i guess i should take a step back and calm down
a bit.
We all have opinions and some of us are always going to disagree with each other, but i grow tired of some of these "tongue-in-cheek" posts by non-US citizens that appear - to me - to be badmouthing the US - i see many generalizations and much criticism with no corresponding solutions suggested.
As a side note, i really should have known better than to argue politics on a computer forum - it was mistake, and i assure you that i will no longer participate in such discussions.
lnoelstorr
Registered
Zammy-Sam said:
Indeed, and sometimes it helps if you don't.
I'm sorry if I sound like I'm attacking the US. I'm not, I merely attacking the Bush administration, and the people who believe they are doing a good job (both in America and abroad), and who share their views on certain issues.
Oh, and grep, I suggest that maybe you do some research, before shouting us down just because we don't agree with you and live outside of the US.
diablojota
Doctoral Student
Yet again, the "foreign policy" that the Bush administration has pushed on the rest of the world (Iraq War, War on Terror) has divided the countries in terms of who supports them and who does not, however, the relationship between the countries are not bad. We had a spat. However, in terms of economics, relationships are quite sound. When governments are trying to keep their distance, you only hear about the Iraq issue, not that they want to stop trade with the US. Why? Because the US imports and exports so much to many of these countries. The US also contributes billions of dollars into many countries to provide aid, such as Egypt.
Okay, so everyone disagrees with Bush's war in Iraq. Even I don't agree. However, the governments had the choice to assist or not, they chose not to, and that was that. They still choose to buy products and sell products to the US and do business with US companies.
No system is perfect, but obviously the American People spoke, and the said "we want Bush for 4 more years".
Yet again, don't just look to the US and complain about us. Look at Germany. The people in former East Germany showed some surprising support for the PDS (near communists) and for the NPD (sort of a reborn nazi party). I think these results are potentially far more dangerous in the long run, especially if support continues to grow for these parties.
Okay, so everyone disagrees with Bush's war in Iraq. Even I don't agree. However, the governments had the choice to assist or not, they chose not to, and that was that. They still choose to buy products and sell products to the US and do business with US companies.
No system is perfect, but obviously the American People spoke, and the said "we want Bush for 4 more years".
Yet again, don't just look to the US and complain about us. Look at Germany. The people in former East Germany showed some surprising support for the PDS (near communists) and for the NPD (sort of a reborn nazi party). I think these results are potentially far more dangerous in the long run, especially if support continues to grow for these parties.
g/re/p
I can haz cigar?
lnoelstorr said:
Well, terrorism is one of the things i read about extensively.
It is a very complicated subject, and its cause(s) have developed slowly but surely over several years.
Yes, i do strongly agree that some of the utterly ignorant
BS the bush administration has perpetrated over the last
four years has done much to feed the fire - but there is
much more to terrorism than meets the eye ,and it cannot
be explained away by simply blaming the US and the goatf**k known as "the war in iraq"
This post is intended to get on better terms with g/re/p, so I urge you to keep this in mind when you read the following...
I really hate (harsh word, I know) how quite often right wing people take on very simplistic views on many problems. As an example: I hate how Bush fights a "war on terrorism" by basically "bombing their a**es" on "the axis of evil". I have thus started to say what _I_ want to say in a pretty similar way. And _of course_ now people accuse me of 'not backing up my statements' etc. I believe you, grep, that you know your stuff about terrorism. And I perfectly support your very last sentence that there's much more to terrorism than meets the eye. The difference between us is how we understand these things and how we hope terrorism is dealt with.
But talking to right wing (republican) Americans, saying how I think a democrat president would be better for the world and how I think the USA should be more social and more aware of 'left' ideas, I'm marked "communist" very, very quickly. Yet, if I were to react in the same way, every right wing (republican) American would be a Nazi, and that would seem about as right to me as me being a communist - which I most certainly am not.
I really hate (harsh word, I know) how quite often right wing people take on very simplistic views on many problems. As an example: I hate how Bush fights a "war on terrorism" by basically "bombing their a**es" on "the axis of evil". I have thus started to say what _I_ want to say in a pretty similar way. And _of course_ now people accuse me of 'not backing up my statements' etc. I believe you, grep, that you know your stuff about terrorism. And I perfectly support your very last sentence that there's much more to terrorism than meets the eye. The difference between us is how we understand these things and how we hope terrorism is dealt with.
But talking to right wing (republican) Americans, saying how I think a democrat president would be better for the world and how I think the USA should be more social and more aware of 'left' ideas, I'm marked "communist" very, very quickly. Yet, if I were to react in the same way, every right wing (republican) American would be a Nazi, and that would seem about as right to me as me being a communist - which I most certainly am not.
diablojota
Doctoral Student
fryke said:
Well, I never accused you of being communist, nor do I think Liberals are communists. Yes, there are the extremes, but most people are within the bounds of "normal" political views. I have nothing against the liberals. However, I do disagree with their ideas on social programs.
I think this may have also been a reason why Bush won over the Democratic canidate. I believe people in the US are getting tired of everything being so focused in on building our relationships abroad during a Democratic presidency, and would finally like someone to focus in on the interests back home. Also, I think many Americans are fed up with people outside of the US trying to tell them how to run their country and who they should choose for president.
g/re/p
I can haz cigar?
believe it or not - i actually consider myself a conservative
(but i an NOT a neo-con, lol) with radical leanings - but i do
not lean to the left OR the right and i also share many of
the same ideas as the libertarians.
In my veiw of things, politics (and polititians) are responsible for almost every single thing that is wrong in the world today
- especially in the US.
Somewhere along the way, "by the people for the people" became
"ok, time to bend over take it" when no one was looking.
(but i an NOT a neo-con, lol) with radical leanings - but i do
not lean to the left OR the right and i also share many of
the same ideas as the libertarians.
In my veiw of things, politics (and polititians) are responsible for almost every single thing that is wrong in the world today
- especially in the US.
Somewhere along the way, "by the people for the people" became
"ok, time to bend over take it" when no one was looking.
diablojota
Doctoral Student
lnoelstorr said:
Now, be careful here. Those were issues for certain State elections, not federal. These are issues that are affecting the people who live in those States. These are issues that people think are pertinent to their lives in their local states, that affect them locally. These are topics for the state governments to decide on. These were not on the Federal ballots. I do support gay marriage, however an overwhelming majority do not. I also think we should support stem-cell research. There are potentially many cures for diseases that can be derived from this.
People are worried about National security and the economy. However these are not issues on the State ballots. Those are issues of the Federal government. These issues are for those who are elected into the Senate and House and on up to the President.
lnoelstorr
Registered
diablojota said:
Ha ha, how do you think the rest of the world feels. At least we don't bomb you if we don't like your president.
Yet.
lnoelstorr
Registered
diablojota said:
Sorry, I'm just going by repots I've read (from many sources).
From what I've read, people were asked when leaving the polls as to what the most important factor was when choosing who they were going to vote for in the presidential election. The choices given were: moral values, terrorism, iraq, the economy. More people gave 'moral values' as their answer than any of the other issues, and most people who gave that answer said the had voted for Bush. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3973197.stm
What amuses/amazes/worries me is that people seem to be more interested in electing a president who will help stop abortions and gay marriages (things that don't actually have any impact on their own lives - except for getting them all worked up about it) than they are in electing one who will help rebuild the economy, or help build peace in the middle east, for example.