No foreigners rule
I must say - and I promise not to go on and on and on and on about this - that the other effect of the no foreigners rule in the Obama trip will be to create a somewhat exaggerated view among his supporters of how much of a worldwide bang he is getting for his buck. I have just watched the main evening news here in London and seen not a word from the Middle East.
To read this you would think we were all on tenterhooks!!
Again: I do not say it is a mistake electorally - I merely note it as a rather interesting aside to the campaign proper (to which I am enormously looking forward to returning).
Hello, I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~27~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
At the risk of sounding naive, I honestly believe that Obama does want to become more cognizant with the issues that dominate events and policies in the Persian Gulf and the rest of the Middle East. Obviously, his campaign will highlight his trip as a positive event and a sign of statesmanship, regardless of how trivial and meaningless the results may be.
In fairness to Obama and his team, McCain, and every other politician before them have done the same and use the world stage to "look presidential" and ready to take over the reins of power and guarantee the security of our country. While the economy is the top issue on our minds, the Middle East remains an important concern and is a critical factor in the upcoming election.
Complain about this comment
Not to worry, everyone has been "goinig on and on and on and on" about this virtual 'election' when in reality nothing has changed "enormously", or even modestly (not one of foreign journo's most outstanding traits, either). One can drop in and out of this campaign at random and it still looks pretty much the same. Two mature men in suits groveling for corporate handouts and lying through their eye teeth to hoodwink the proles, either with macho right wing jingoism or empty "hope and change" platitudes. Obama Copacabana, the ultimate political poseur, takes his dog and pony show on the road, with his fawning American press puppies trailing obediently behind, wagging their tails. The whole point of the staged excursion is alluded to in Creamer's dismal puff piece, "it will provide a demonstration of how fundamentally Obama will improve the way people around the globe-and especially young people- view the U.S." To inflate Obama's larger-than-life-image on the so-called "world stage". In short, it's a microcosm for the election, to invent a falsely benevolent image that naieve, impressionable young people around the world can believe in. And not a few gullible older folks, too. Not to mention a large percentage of the uncritical, obliging foreign press. All to cover up the ugly reality lurking beneath. That Obama is just another crude, conniving American imperialist every bit as committed to American (and Israeli) rule in the Middle East and around the world as any of the odious Bush gang. Different means, same ends. Imperialism with a black face, the "new" America!
Complain about this comment
Justin,
The CNN coverage of Obama's visit, Brown's address to the Knesset and the rubber bullet incident in Israel has been extensive. I guess it is down to the editors. But I see a Peter Marshall report on Obama is scheduled for Newsnight.
Complain about this comment
Justin, Yes I agree that it wouldn't hurt Obama to interview with foreign press-of which I hope, and think he'll do a lot of over the comeing months (though it would've been nice, I agree, if he had decided to do it a bit on this trip as well!!!) But again I ask you to elaborate on your thoughts on CNN/American broadcasting in general as compared to the BBC. Please explain further your comments which you made on your July 20th entry about CNN not asking a wide range of tough questions in confidence of its interviewees.
Thank You
O, and yes I completely agree--that piece you linked to is absolutely unashaimidly bias and in the tank for Obama!!
Complain about this comment
threnodio #3: Thanks for the kind words about CNN!!! And again my post on the 19th entry was in attempts at looking at this from both angles. I understand where Europeans are comeing from, and it is my dearest hope that you understand where I am comeing from as well.
Complain about this comment
What sheer arrogance on the part of Robert Creamer to write such a sickeningly fawning endorsement of Obama. Who does he think he is? No mention from this writer of the fact that the media has given Obama a free ride since his victory over Hillary. No mention about the unfair and one-sided coverage, highlighted by the three network anchors going along for the chance for an interview. And now we see yet another example of media bias with the New York Times asking McCain to "revise" his op-ed piece in answer to their hero's piece.
I wonder if Mr. Creamer would have the gall to defend that example of liberal bias!
Complain about this comment
Obama's trip abroad, his reception there, what all the media will make of it, is but one drop in an ocean, a tempest in a teapot.
His appeal to our young people IS very important. This country, at least, must give up our reliance on 'old white guys' to save us from destruction. (Come get me! I'm old and white but not a guy!) They have had their chance and they blew it!
Our young people need to become really engaged in the future of this planet or we are headed for destruction. The new broom may sweep clean.
I want Obama to tell us, as best he can, what he plans to do to improve our country, our economy, our health care and our education system. I want to know that he has a plan for withdrawing our troops from that immoral war in Iraq. I want to hear that he does not plan a war with Iran.
The Iraqi government wants us to be gone! How much clearer does it have to get? I am so sick of all this warmongering.
Complain about this comment
Latest Obama gaffe:
When talking about meeting with foriegn leaders he says these are the people I expect to be working for the next 8-10 years.
Conustituional lesson for Obama if you win you get to serve 8 years.
I bet CNN won't brodcast that gaffe!
Complain about this comment
*sigh*
He's not after worldwide bang. Even though he's in the Mideast and will be in Europe, his speeches are all intended for American consumption.
Many Americans understand the current negative opinion the world has of us. The truth is that the majority of us feel we've gone off track, too, but if we didn't feel that way, those negative opinions wouldn't make much difference to us. Americans are fundamentally isolationist. We're happy inside our borders. If the rest of the world doesn't care for us, well, we'd rather be liked, but it isn't the end of the world.
I guess that's what's referred to as American arrogance.
Complain about this comment
"Conustituional lesson for Obama if you win you get to serve 8 years."
Lesson for you: if you win you get to serve four years.
Complain about this comment
#5 - NoRashDecisions
If you are talking about exchanges on the previous thread, I never thought otherwise. Everything you wrote seemed perfectly reasonable to me.
#8 - MagicKirin
To their credit, neither did they broadcast McCain's gaffe about Pakistan having a land border with Iran.
Complain about this comment
AndyPost wrote:
*sigh*
He's not after worldwide bang. Even though he's in the Mideast and will be in Europe, his speeches are all intended for American consumption.
Many Americans understand the current negative opinion the world has of us. The truth is that the majority of us feel we've gone off track, too, but if we didn't feel that way, those negative opinions wouldn't make much difference to us. Americans are fundamentally isolationist. We're happy inside our borders. If the rest of the world doesn't care for us, well, we'd rather be liked, but it isn't the end of the world.
I guess that's what's referred to as American arrogance.
I disagree with you on the isolationist part. I think there is a backlash when there has been so much negative press from around the world. And it predates George Bush.
Many of also resent that we give the world so much and there is incredible lack of recognition
Complain about this comment
Gee! If that is the worst of mistakes either candidate makes, we are in way better shape than five years ago when:
Opps!
Those WMDs just don't seem to be here!
These guys are both tired and they have been campaigning hard. Lets not pick every nit, Okay?
Complain about this comment
Hey - They got Karadic!!!!!!
Complain about this comment
#12 MagicKirin
"we give the world so much"
Not sure what you mean by this. The USA acts like most countries, in it's own national interest.
Can you explain?
Complain about this comment
I'm not sure you do disagree with me. Whatever backlash there is would be one of resentment rather than contrition, as your last sentence indicates.
I do think that that backlash tends to make us withdraw. Perhaps you disagree with that?
Complain about this comment
, oldnat wrote:
#12 MagicKirin
"we give the world so much"
Not sure what you mean by this. The USA acts like most countries, in it's own national interest.
Can you explain?
Well lets start with disaster relief where the U.S goods and resoources are more than any other nation especially oil rich Persian gulf states.
How about that the U.S does more in donations to Africa to prevent aids
By the way Mandela has never mentioned that in his U.S criticsm.
That we lead the fight against Islamic terrorism
Complain about this comment
"What sheer arrogance on the part of Robert Creamer to write such a sickeningly fawning endorsement of Obama. Who does he think he is?"
According to the site: Robert Creamer is a long-time political organizer and strategist, and author of the recent book "Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win."
Why did you think he was unbiased? Why is speaking your mind arrogant?
Complain about this comment
Sure, Obama doesn't need to give any interviews to foreign journalists. But seeing as these countries are playing host to him (and his absurdly over-the-top security detail too, no doubt) it would be.. you know.. polite.
Now that Hillary is out, I'd like to see him win, and so I want him to interview for the BBC: to show some cojones. Hillary came across as far gutsier than him during the primaries. To show some balls, he should face a tough inquisitor - either David Dimbleby or Jeremy Paxman (our Justin is too much of a sweetie, I fear).
Fact: the questioning is a little more feral over here (and that's not always a good thing, before the Europhobes jump on me!) The BBC's David Dimbleby did two excellent interviews in recent years - the first was with Bill Clinton not long after he had left the White House (though it wasn't to everyone's taste). Having done the soft-media circuit, and gotten nice and cozy on Oprah's sofa, Dimbleby's handling left Bill ('ow you say?) ruffled. An excellent interview - a pint of beer to anyone who can find it online.
More recently, DD interviewed Rumsfeld in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. Rumsfeld didn't lose his rag like Clinton, but he at least had some difficult questions to answer (includingly the screamingly obvious 'didn't you once help supply arms to this guy' - how that didn't sink him in 2002-3, I will never know).
Anyone hoping for Paxman vs. Bush? Or would it be too much like kicking a puppy?
Complain about this comment
To weigh the effect of the trip electorally is, it seems to me, to accept Hazelbaker's characterization of the trip as mere "photo-op." If, instead, you take Obama at his word that his purpose is to listen and learn, then the electoral effect comes later, when Obama applies what he has learned when the campaign begins in earnest after the conventions.
Complain about this comment
p.s. - about your book Justin. If Obama wins, might you not be preaching to the choir a little? Or will you be joining the mass love-in?
My advice - hope for a McCain win (and why not pull some levers, like the malevolent BBC apparatchik you are). Everyone prefers the controversialist.
Complain about this comment
It is a measure of enduring respect that the standards we're are judged by around the world are so high.
I remember being upbraided by a Kenyan colleague (and friend) about the lack of U.S. involvement in Darfur and Rwanda. I pointed out to him that we're not the only people on the planet capable of doing something about the problem, but we're the only ones on the hook. No one asks China or Russia or for that matter the EU (which does have the power). Japan won't leave it's own islands. The rest of the English speaking world (while having shown a willingness to put their lives on the line alongside us) never initiate action. Africans themselves have very limited ability or will to fight for justice in their own back yards (c.f., Mr Mbeki). It's typically us fighting for justice. We're not very good at it and we often make a hash of it, but at least we try. It's Americans that do most of the dying.
This is not to say that there isn't a clear conflict of interest in the Persian Gulf for us.
A sure sign that the world has lost respect for the U.S. will be when they no longer look to us for justice. They expect us to use our power to that end and are disappointed when we don't. They don't expect anyone else to.
Complain about this comment
#18Andypost
I agree! Speak your mind!
Everyone is entitled to do that. We don't have to agree with each other but we should at least listen to what another has to say. If it is arrogant to express an opinion then EVERYONE posting on this blog is arrogant to the MAX!
Exchanging opinions and ideas is what this is all about.
Complain about this comment
#17 MagicKirin
Thanks for the response.
I recognise that individual US citizens have been generous in their charitable donations. Your government has been less than generous for many years, though I know that your political system makes this difficult.
"Islamic terrorism"?
Oh, please! This was no issue with you guys until you suffered the first attack on US soil, since the British burned the White House in 1812.
The US financed the Taliban, because opposing the Soviet Union was more important to you than the rights of women in Afghanistan.
The US continue to be the main supporter of Saudi Arabia (whose citizens funded and provided many of the suicide bombers for 9/11).
The US supported the terrorism of the Contras, and many of it's citizens financed the terrorism of the IRA.
Let's not even start with Iraq!
I have no problem with any country acting in it's national interest, but claiming some moral superiority is not acceptable from any country.
Complain about this comment
Obama's trip to Europe and the middle east is a PR trip
Complain about this comment
McCain thought he was Bre'r Rabbit tricking Bre'r Fox into throughing him into the brire patch, but it backfired. Now that he has tricked Obama into going to the Middle East and Europe, McCain can't get any press covereage.
Obama like Bill Clinton is sucking up all the political air. A difference can be seen too clearly that McCain's politics belong to the last century. However one must not forget that Prime Minister Brown is Bush's second best friend after President Sarcozy and that Ruppert Murdock who finances the Weekly Standard at a loss, also controls the media over there just as he does here.
You will not see or hear from Obama in Italy either. Belasconi, Bush staunch ally in the WoT owns all the media over there. All will be quiet on the Western Front until Obama makes his speech in Germany and perhaps the German media will give him full coverage.
Perhaps Europe is superstious and is afraid of jinxing Obama chances by showing how refreshing he is after having to put up with Bush and the Neocons for the last 7.8 years. If he had a sexy wife like Sarcozy then the people could divert attention from him to her and feel safe. But instead he has a powerhouse of a wife who would speak her mind, tell the truth and get him in trouble with the faint of heart.
Perhaps it is because Obama and Maliki are playing on the same theme of "pack your bags and get out" that Obama has been tell the American peoples. We are peoples because we come in all strips and are not mere sounding boards.
I guess the media over there is like it is over here: No war news on the weekend because nobody ever dies, they just fall. I pray that Obama does not fall over there. I am like Terry McMillian says, "Waiting to exhale until Obama returns safely home.
Complain about this comment
Thank you proles, and this comment really sells the vitual election by people that don't count. (not that you care, but it is an American election.
"Obama's ability to inspire will do more than anything else to turn him -- and America -- once again into a beacon of hope and possibility for the billions of people who desperately hope for a better life" quoted from Robert Creamer.
Contrary to Roberts belief that our views are made in youth, I believe the views of the young have a tendancy to be liberal/idealist. The views of those with children become conservative/realist, and after children have grown, we return to a more liberal/realist view.
"People's fundamental life-long views are shaped when they are young. The mental frames they use to place the political world around them into context -- to understand the meaning of what they see and hear -- are largely formed when they are in their late teens and early twenties." Hillary said it best when she refused to be called unpatriotic just because she disagreed.
all wisdom is, is what it is not
Complain about this comment
#9Andy
"...Americans are fundamentally isolationist. We're happy inside our borders. If the rest of the world doesn't care for us, well, we'd rather be liked, but it isn't the end of the world..."
Having been to some 30 of the 50 states, i tend to agree with your synopsis.
It also explains why many on here question what does it matter if a candidate doesn't talk to foreign press...and what difference does it make to me.
However, if i climbed over my garden fence and started to inspect and pull up a few flowers of my neighbour, or poke around in their potted plants, I'm sure he'll have something to say about it!
Even more so if i simply replied " what i do is of my own choosing and has nothing to do with you..."
"...A sure sign that the world has lost respect for the U.S. will be when they no longer look to us for justice. They expect us to use our power to that end and are disappointed when we don't. They don't expect anyone else to...."
This is already happening. With the blurring of the lines of justice and treatment of suspect criminals all in the name of truth has left a very bitter pill. Not calling water boarding torture, and then "we'll do whatever it takes..."- the ends justifying the means!...., you have now lost the moral higher ground, if indeed there was any to occupy.
Just as the British Empire weakened, so will the American....it is not a matter of if, but when.
Obama is trying to buck this trend and opinion, but he has just shot himself in the foot with his recent actions.
Complain about this comment
#20Garyahill
I think your comment is right on.
Complain about this comment
Mr. Webb, if you don't like Barack Obama's no foreigners rule I have just one piece of advice for you. Don't vote for him :-)
Complain about this comment
, oldnat wrote:
#17 MagicKirin
Thanks for the response.
I recognise that individual US citizens have been generous in their charitable donations. Your government has been less than generous for many years, though I know that your political system makes this difficult.
You have a short memory during the tsuamani it was us naval ships that brought the firm relief supplies.
Our political system is one of the greatest in world history
Complain about this comment
Do not be hoodwinked by the Obama media-blitz. His whirlwind world tour is meant to impress the Americans with his "foreign policy credentials". After all, one day here, one day there, . . . guaranteed to make you an expert. Obama is not that popular in America, hence the reason for the visits.
In a year in which the Democratic Party should have the electionwon, hands down, he is struggling. He couldn't clinch the nomination in the Primaries without the super-delegates weighing in, and he is running nip and tuck in the General. As unpopular as Bush is now, Americans are concerned about Obama's ego and flip-flopping on important issues.
Complain about this comment
aquagirl #7
"I am so sick of all this war mongering."
Well you'd better get used to it. In case you hadn't noticed because perhaps you've been living in a cave these last 7 years, we are in World War IV fighting for our existance.
You really should pick up a book on American history and read it. If it teaches one lesson, it's that freedom and democracy are bought and paid for in blood. If you are not willing to fight and maybe die defending it, you will not have your freedom very long. How and why do you think there even is an America and we are not all still slaves of Britain?
People like you can only win temporarily. If they get into power and have America let its guard down and we are attacked big time, our democracy and Constitution will be swept away for real (not as you bleeding hearts pretend it has been now) and a far more malevolent form of government will come to power. And then we will have a ruthless military dictatorship for real. No life anywhere on earth will be safe then. They will be everything you fear most and much more and there won't be a thing we can do about it.
Complain about this comment
#31 MagicKirin
"Our political system is one of the greatest in world history"
"Hanging chads"? Boastfulness (especially if not substantiated by reality) is really sad. ou remind me of the British - living in an unreal past of imperial glory.
#33 MA2
Independence Day was a movie. You should live in the real world.
Complain about this comment
Obama's campaign appears to be a "made for the internet" campaign for the weak(minded), the meek and the ignorant Yanks, who value video games and reality telly programmes to insightful journalism and critical thinking. He launched his campaign with a young woman with augmented glands and scanty clothing. He is probably the best American politician since Ronnie R. at reading from a teleprompter, but lacks substance.
I was intrigued with his candidacy and visited his internet website. To my surprise, the Obama website actually displayed a link to An L.A.Times website that totally belied what the Obama website proclaimed as the unassailable truth. Only in America could a candidate have the temerity to engage in such a tactic and get away with it.
After reading the L.A. Times article of March 16, 2007 by Paul Watson styled, "Islam an unknown factor in Obama bid," and the rather explicit representation made on the BarackObama.com website that: "Barack Obama Is Not and Has Never Been a Muslim. Obama never prayed in a mosque. He has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian who attends the United Church of Christ." (http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck2/religion/ ),dated 12 Nov. 2007, I was at a loss to understand why no Americn news organisation had taken up the issue of a rather clear misrepresentation of a purported material fact injected into the campaign by Obama himself.
I don't care if Obama once prayed at a mosque in Djakarta, or that his family practiced Islam, but I do part company with any candidate that deliberately lies to the voters and whose campaign heads proclaim their versions of what the truth ought to be, while linking the reader of their website to credible evidence from eye-witness accounts that Barack Obama worshiped in mosques and Islamic prayer rooms in Djakarta. That is not fluff. That is deceit.
Did Paul Watson fabricate a story about Obama's Muslim prayers at a Djakarta mosque? Were the quotations form the Los Angeles Times report of march 16, 2007, which can be accessed on the Obama website by a hyper-link false? Was the account of one of Obama's closest friend in Djakarta an utter falsehood, which hoodwinked Watson to write: "The childhood friends say Obama sometimes went to Friday prayers at the local mosque. 'We prayed but not really seriously, just following actions done by older people in the mosque. But as kids, we loved to meet our friends and went to the mosque together and played,' said Zulfin Adi, who describes himself as among Obama's closest childhood friends." What motive to fabricate such basic historical facts did Zulfin Adi and /or Watson have at the time the report was published? I submit none whatsoever.
This is a fundamental question of personal integrity of Obama, not an anti-Muslim attack on a political candidate. Why has the American news media missed the big question of whether Obama may have deliberately lied about his past practice of Islam to secure the Democratic nomination?
On January 16, 2007, Obama launched BarackObama.com and issued a press release stating that on February 20, 2007, he would make an announcement on his running for President of the United States, as reported by local Station NBC5 in Chicago. Following that announcement, on January 27, 2007, The Kaltim Post, an Indonesian newspaper carried a story about Obama's Indonesian friends clearly discussing that Obama was a practicing Muslim when he lived in Djakarta, reporting in Indonesian: " Mengenai agama yang dianut sang senator AS, Akhmad Solikhin, wakil kepala SDN 1 Menteng, tidak yakin Barry beragama Islam. . . .menurut Tine sang guru, Barry mengikuti pelajaran agama Islam semasa sekolah." That translates into English as: " Concerning the religion that was followed by the US senator, Akhmad Solikhin, the representative of the SDN head 1 Menteng, was not sure Barry was religious [devout] in Islam. . . . according to his teacher(guru) Barry took part in the Islam religious lesson during the period of the school." Additionally, another Indonesian newspaper The Benjarmasin Post, in a July 9, 2006 report on Barack Obama's time in Indonesia, based upon Obama's local friends in Djakarta wrote:"Barry dulu memang beragama Islam," which clearly translates into English: " Barry was previously quite religious [in] Islam."
Go to this page on the Obama website: http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2007/11/12/obama_has_never_been_a_muslim_1.php . There you can be linked to Paul Watson's March 16, 2007 article reporting on eye-witnesses accounts Obama's worshiping in a mosque on Fridays in Djakarta. The link is in the paragraph quoted directly below:
Obama Spokesman Robert Gibbs Issued A Statement Explaining That "Senator Obama Has Never Been A Muslim, Was Not Raised As A Muslim, And Is A Committed Christian." "Obama's campaign aides have emphasized his strong Christian beliefs and downplayed any Islamic connection. The Illinois senator was raised 'in a secular household in Indonesia by his stepfather and mother,' his chief spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said in a statement in January after false reports began circulating that Obama had attended a radical madrasa, or Koranic school, as a child. 'To be clear, Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian who attends the United Church of Christ in Chicago,' Gibbs' Jan. 24 statement said." [Los Angeles Times, 3/16/07]
Just compare the Obama Website's material representations with the Watson story linked to the Obama website and ask yourselves: Why has the Watson story never been specifically refuted by Obama?
Again, this is a fundamental question of personal integrity of Obama, not an anti-Muslim attack on a political candidate. Why has the news media missed the big question of whether Obama may have deliberately lied about his past practice of Islam to secure the Democratic nomination.
I wish that the BBC would look into this matter, as well as Obama's use of American government funds to interfere with domestic Kenyan presidential politics by campaigning for his then undisclosed first cousin Raila Odinga, the opposition candidate. Odinga admitted that he is a cousin of Barack Obama this January to the BBC ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7176683.stm ), which has a voice recording of Odinga's admission. My curiosity led me to Obama's Africa trip in 2006, where Obama publicly insulted the presidents of South Africa and Kenya. Here is what the Standard newspaper wrote on September 6, 2006 of Obama's interference in domestic Kenyan politics while purportedly on official business of the American Senate:
"I hereby wish to communicate to you the displeasure and disappointment of the Government of Kenya, (Kenyan) Embassy in Washington DC, and majority of Kenyans, with regards to your recent utterances while in Kenya. . . . Your unprovoked and uncalled for statements were in bad taste, particularly given that your visit was well arranged in advance, with full briefings given to your office in Washington DC by the Kenya Embassy. . . . You deliberately, without real cause or reason, other than what appears (to be) to seek cheap publicity and inconsequential populism, chose to publicly attack the democratically elected Government of Kenya, in total disregard for the requisite protocol and acceptable methods to address the issues you raised, what with programmed appointments to meet Cabinet Ministers and even the Head of State, since your visit was official."
In March Obama's campaign openly bragged about it (claiming: "Obama raised concerns about Kenya's lack of government transparency. Obama also appeared with opposition leader Raila Odinga -- a Luo -- who was running for president.
Violence erupted in Kenya in January after Kibaki and Odinga contested the election findings." As for the public insults of the South African president, the Obama campaign boasted: "Soon after arriving, Obama publicly criticized the South African government as being in "denial" for advocating nutritional treatments over medical alternatives to treat HIV/AIDS. Obama slapped South African President Thabo Mbeki a day before he hoped to meet with him -- and the meeting never took place."
The point I try to make is that the American press has apparently been so mesmerized by the "Obamamania" that it has failed to investigate the critical issue of a candidate's personal integrity. Will the BBC investigate these facts discovered by me by merely comparing the proclamations of the Obama with the documentation that purported to support such proclamations.
Although Obama's candidacy is for American consumption, can the rest of the World suffer through another impostor, who like the present incumbent, claims to be a uniter and above the traditional politicians.
Has critical thinking by the news media lost all favour?
Complain about this comment
For those of you who are complaining about the U.S press here is another example.
The New York Times is refusing to print a McCain op-ed after printing Obama one.
Like CNN, MSNBC and the three networks they are in the tank for Obama.
Complain about this comment
Oh come on Oldnat - '[y]ou remind me of the British - living in an unreal past of imperial glory.'
Isn't that a self-serving American stereotype of the British? You know, the one which makes the Brits the yesterday-men obsessed with their has-been empire, all the better to make America seem the fresh, forward-looking top dogs of the present?
It's another 'old Europe' jibe. And, in truth, just as crudely careless about the reality. To long for the days of empire is generally thought ridiculous. There's a good degree of curiosity about it - but then it was one of the most important elements of modern Britian and determined the make-up of the country (and various parts of the world) as it is today. Can't really ignore it, can you?
And there's as much shame towards it as there is nostalgia.
The UK still aspires to be a world player, I guess, when the best she can hope for is to punch above her weight; but since when have the Yanks disdained being a wannabe?
Whatever - the idea that fifty years after Suez the British are still kidding themselves about the empire... maybe the in UK of the American disneyland imaginaire. Otherwise, it's for the birds.
Complain about this comment
Barack Obama is an empty suit on all issues including Iraq and Afganistan - he reminds me of Bush esp at press conferences. The US people should have elected Clinton
Complain about this comment
14. At 10:51pm on 21 Jul 2008, threnodio wrote:
Hey - They got Karadic!!!!!!
good news there.
Complain about this comment
Barack Obama is the American Segolene Royal. If he's elected he'll be hopelessly out of his depth on every major issue facing America. On the economy, the war on terror, and energy policy, he knows nothing. He's filled iwth platitudes and little else. Although he is far smarter than Royal is, that will not make up for his lack of knowledge and experience. He will not be able to learn enough quickly enough to create and implement effective policies. Another leader who was in a similar boat was Gorbachev. He was also smart but not nearly as smart as Obama. His situation was hopeless only he didn't know it. He'd probably tell you had the rest of his government backed him, he'd have been successful at saving the USSR. He'd be wrong. The fact that they wouldn't cooperate should also have been taken into his calculations, he should have known that would happen and developed a strategy to deal with it. Instead he was almost assassinated. Putin by contrast is clear thinking and decisive. He sizes up a situation, develops a strategy, and then acts to execute it without hesitation. He may be the strongest leader in the world today.
President Bush was a failure not because he was too militant but because he was always a day late and a dollar short as we say here. He's actions were too little, too late. You could see he was going to be weak right from the beginning in the Chinese spy plane shootdown incident. Attacking Afghanistan wasn't wrong, but he waited an entire month allowing the enemy to escape and then outsourced much of the fighting to locals whose loyalties often sided with the enemy. Invading Iraq wasn't wrong, but he never should have waited six months for Blair to try to get his political act together and he grossly underestimated his enemy allowing them to slip though his fingers. He failed as a military strategist in every way possible in Iraq despite overwhelming advantage. You don't defeat an implacable enemy by negotiating giving him time to organize a defense strategy and you don't win wars by winning hearts and minds. Wars are won by finding and killing the enemy until they are all dead and by capturing and keeping territory. Again he failed to secure the borders and he didn't have nearly enough troops. He's already failed in Iran, he failed in North Korea. He failed even in the rescue after Katrina just a few hundred miles from Washington DC with more rescue equipment at his disposal than the rest of the world combined. It was all for the same reason, too little too late. To think that Obama would be better is absurd.
The recent Supreme Court ruling granting Habaes Corpus to detainees at GITMO was a major blow in the war on terror. The Supreme Court was off its rocker. Once again the blame lies squarely with President Bush who should have siezed the opportunity after 9-11 to get a declaration of war from Congress and put the nation on a war footing. Instead he tried to lull the public into a false sense of security and reassure them that everything would get back to normal and would be okay. Aquagirl is an example of how effective this crazy policy has worked.
If Obama wins, I give him about 18 months to two years tops before he is forced to resign....out of sheer incompetence. He won't be impeached. Incompetence is not a punishable high crime or misdemeaner. If it were, half the corporate executives and elected officials in the country would be in prison this very minute.
Complain about this comment
oldnat #24
You left out America's dumbest foreign policy blunder by far, entering World War I. It was a break of well over 100 years of following the sage advice of President Washington to stay out of European affairs.
If the American government was going to sell out the sovereignty of the country to a foreign power the way Britain's government is selling out the UK's sovereignty to the EU, there would be blood in the streets, it would be open season on politicians. But that would be unthinkable...in a nation where determining its own destiny takes precedence over everything else. You are right, defeating the USSR took precedence over women's rights in Afghanistan at least for America. Apparantly from they way you tell it, in the UK it was the other way around. That's why your nation lost three world wars and an empire on which the sun never set in less than one hundred years. Who are a bunch of losers to tell winners how to run their affairs? The only lesson the UK and Europe has to teach American is to serve as an example of what not to do. But we already know that lesson instinctively. Why do you think America fought a Revolution in the first place?
Complain about this comment
#33, Marcus.
"Freedom" and "democracy" are used in propaganda to create an emotional response. Their meanings in that context are irrelevent.
By invading a sovereign nation rich in oil, are we makeing the world "free" for "democracy"?
A small note on "demoracy": America is not one; it is a republic. We are not a democracy because the people do not elect the president.
Complain about this comment
Mr. Webb, now you know how a little kid feels when he goes into a candy store, presses his nose up against the glass, and looks at all that candy knowing he can't have any because he has no money in his pocket. So near and yet so far. And then there are married men with their ever watchful eyes oogling young girls but who are warned by their spouses that they not only can't touch, they can't even look. What frustrating agony. A killer story for a journalist that's impossibly beyond reach. There is one consolation however and that is the reality that most American journalists won't get a shot at an interview with him either.
Complain about this comment
Why do you think America fought a Revolution in the first place?
to get back to where they started.
that's easy, next?
Complain about this comment
38. At 03:00am on 22 Jul 2008, fabLondontown wrote:
Barack Obama is an empty suit on all issues including Iraq and Afganistan - he reminds me of Bush esp at press conferences. The US people should have elected Clinton
your really not that observent.
she was like bush. lied bent rules beyond limits,made crap up. wow.
thank god your not voting here.
Complain about this comment
signed gw bush war into effect, without realising because the sniper bullets were distracting her from planning a cheap populist gas tax.
Complain about this comment
when was ww3
i missed it. never even heard of it.
Complain about this comment
#35, Impostor.
Don't you wish someone was paying you by the word?
Complain about this comment
Jack Forge.
You one funny guy!
#38,
Clinton had a really shady past. That is why McCain wanted to run against her and not Obama.
Complain about this comment
#11 threnodio
What gaffe? Pakistan does have a land border with Iran??
David
Complain about this comment
To # 48:
I am not being paid one pence. I am worried that the Obama cult of personality will be disasterous for free market capitalism and Occidential society. Obama shares the very same personality flaws of George W. Bush. He is arrogant, stubborn, dismissive of criticism (like Bush he never admits to making even the slightest of mistakes), vindictive (demonstrated by his treatment of Hillary and the reporter for the New Yorker) and just like Bush, Obama is self-absorbed in his own distorted sense of historical importance.
That said about his personality, one must question his personal integrity for distorting his Muslim heritage and his rapid change of positions on so many core political beliefs.
Within one month of his defeating Hillary he has changed positions on withdrawal from Iraq, public finance of elections, the death penalty, hand guns, government funding of faith based organisations (going so far as to support discrimination in employment by those groups for religious reasons) abortion rights(David N. O'Steen, the executive director of National Right to Life, said Obama's recent change of positions "are either quite disingenuous or they reflect that Obama does not know what he is talking about." O'Steen added: "You cannot believe that abortion should not be allowed for mental health reasons and support Roe v Wade."). He also fliped on unconditional meeting with the heads of state of the Cuba, Iran, and the DRNK. Obama flip-flopped on Jerusalem the day after a publicised speech to AIPAC, on merit pay for teachers, welefare reform, and capital gains taxes, not to mention free trade. On the last two alone he has stated multiple positions since early June.
He has billed himself as a uniter, but was complicit in fomenting the root causes of the Kenyan atrocities last January by serving as an agent provocatuer for his first cousin Raila Odinga whose political actitities have been bankrolled by Muammar Gaddafi.
Obama is a disciple of radical Saul Alinsky, and like his mother and farther, is a Marxist. He is a proponent of Black Liberation Theology, which is really a racist and divisive political ideology masquerading as "theology."
Simply put, Barack Obama, like George Bush is ill-prepared to govern. The World cannot suffer through another political impostor who has little historical perspective on Afgahanistan. Just yesterday Zbigniew Brzezinski warned Obama that he risks repeating the defeat suffered by the Soviet Red Army in Afganhistan in a piece written by Daniel Dombey in the Financial Times. That is essentially what I posted the day before. The British fought Afgan wars also with essentially the same result.
Do you dispute any of the facts I have stated? If you do please set forth what you dispute.
Complain about this comment
To # 50:
You are correct the Province of Bulichistan borders Iran and is Pakistan's largest province by land mass. Does anyone of you know what Pakistan stands for or the activities on Muhammed Jinnah and the Muslim League of British India? It stands for Punjab, Afganhistan and Kashmir, the dream of Jinnah, who has the airport in Karichi named after him. To many fundamentalist Muslims that dream of a much larger and stronger Pakistan still lives and breeds hate for India and the West.
Complain about this comment
#50 - Davidgf
Sorry - typo. He refered to a land border with Iraq.
Complain about this comment
#37 Bryn_UK
You misunderstand my comparison. The vainglorious boasting of MagicKirin simply reminded me of the writings of some of the Whig historians, in the early 20th century. They believed in a historical determinism that History was a progress towards the "perfection" that they saw as the British constitution. The irony, of course, being that the seeds of the collapse of Empire had already been planted.
The ravings of MA2 are also reminiscent of the views spouted by the League of Empire Loyalists, as late as the 1960s.
Every single instance of Empire has followed a similar pattern of aggressive growth, a period of senescence during which its inhabitants see their dominance as the "natural order", then collapse. I see no likelihood that the US Empire will be any different.
#41 MA2
I actually agree with you about the US intervention in WW I. Getting involved in a squabble between decaying European Empires never seemed to me make much sense for the USA.
But you said -
"If the American government was going to sell out the sovereignty of the country to a foreign power the way Britain's government is selling out the UK's sovereignty to the EU, there would be blood in the streets". -
and I think you wholly misunderstand the concept of sovereignty. Your individual States, pooled their sovereignty within the Federal Constitution. The UK is not a "nation". In 1707, the Scots and English signed a Treaty of Union, and pooled their sovereignty (and there was "blood on the streets"!). Many Scots now see the UK as a Union that has had its day, but want to continue to pool our sovereignty within the European Union.
Although I'll be long dead by the time that the American Empire collapses, it would be interesting to see whether your Union continues in post-imperial times.
Complain about this comment
#54 - oldnat
For once, I disagree with you. By entering WW1 when it did, the US decisively stamped its authority on world events and set out it's store as the world superpower. The French and British Empires had peaked, the Hohenzollern and Hapsburg Empires were crushed and it was America's coming of age in the new world order of the time.
Complain about this comment
oldnat wrote:
#37 Bryn_UK
You misunderstand my comparison. The vainglorious boasting of MagicKirin simply reminded me of the writings of some of the Whig historians, in the early 20th century. They believed in a historical determinism that History was a progress towards the "perfection" that they saw as the British constitution. The irony, of course, being that the seeds of the collapse of Empire had already
It isn't vain glorious boasting. I am merely stating that many americans feel we should have to keep apologizing especially when a EU or UN buearacrat is offended.
And I stand by the fact that the U.S has done a great deal of good for the world.
Certanatly more than the U.N and phonies like the Elders, Mandela Tutu and Annan.
Complain about this comment
oldnat
funny, I guess my idea of sovereignty is different than yours. In my idea of it, the nation that is sovereign can; make its own laws which govern it, control who may and may not enter its territory (even if it chooses not to exercise that right), print its own money, enter into treaties whose terms it has sole authority to agree to, choose its own leaders, enforce its own laws, protect its own citizens from authorities beyond its borders if it chooses to including declaring and waging war. Well you get the picture. How many of those rights has the UK ceded? So far it has escaped adopting the Euro but perhaps one day it will succumb to that too. To an increasing degree, it has ceded some or all of the rest. The difference between having 12 million illegal aliens in your nation and 650,000 Polish plumbers is that if you want to, you can throw the illegal aliens out because they are not citizens of your country while the 650,000 Poles can stay if they want to and there is nothing you can do about it because while they are not citizens of the UK, they are citizens of the EU. As the EU assumes increasing power, the constituent nations more and more resemble not American states but provinces ruled by the center of a super state. This is a European concept of a government, not an American concept where the balance of power between the local and central authority which we call division of powers is very carefully figured out and fought over at the margins. Once the Constitution is adopted however it is called when they finally figure out how to jamb it down 540 million throats whether they like it or not, the struggle will be all but over. How ironic that a handful of Irishmen gave them a reprieve but that will end when some EU Parliamentarian invents some ingenious new way around it. The EUSSR will become a reality and UK taxpayers will be paying to build bridges and highways not just in Hungary but all over Eastern Europe with not one word to say about it. The UK will be on the receiving end of taxation without representation. How ironic.
Complain about this comment
#57 MA2
I won't bother to deal with all your errors. I'll repeat, however, that the UK is not a nation. It is a grouping of nations.
There will be no taxation without representation, since all European countries are represented in Parliament, and the Council of Ministers.
Complain about this comment
Let me get this straight: the more we approach the election, the fewer foreign journalists will be close to the candidates? Does that mean that any news' reporting will be second-hand i.e. coming from domestis news channels and papers?
Complain about this comment
What bridges and highways in Hungary, MA2? I live in Hungary, I see plenty of new highways and bridges. I don't see them branded as EU projects.
Complain about this comment
7% solution #57
Holmes by golly, I think you've done it. Why you giving the Britts a reason to start another war??
In the defence of 'thier' empire they to are offensively defencive.
the good, the bad and the ugly
past, present and future
Complain about this comment
Does anyone else just skim over the long-winded diatribes in what would otherwise be a lively enough debate?
Complain about this comment
A young school child will do as his classmates do. One who travels may have practiced five religions.
Also, babies are often formally enrolled in a faith before they can talk.
Making an "issue" of such matters suggests an entirely different agenda (common in election campaigns).
___________________
A better question is Pakistan/India/China.
How many are aware of the record of the BJP (former national governing party) in India?
Complain about this comment
#49
Shady past = Obama - Clinton vetted for the last 16 years. Clinton would have beaten McCain this Nov - Obama has no chance
Complain about this comment
64. At 3:14pm on 22 Jul 2008, fabLondontown wrote:
#49
Shady past = Obama - Clinton vetted for the last 16 years. Clinton would have beaten McCain this Nov - Obama has no chance
She was vetted the white water deal and all that not even mentioned.
lets all get back to where some have not been for a while.
tell me if he was an old black guy would you vote for him.
because it is hard to know if racists hide behind his age inexperience or if that is just the front for the fact that they are racists who are scared of black power or something.
back to the the observation that white people often do not like to see more than one coloured person together , they see a conspiracy.
Complain about this comment
#62Adliberal
Some longer posts are well worth reading and perhaps responding to, certain others are decidedly NOT.
Skim those you don't care to read. It is usually the same 'rant and cant!'
Complain about this comment
# 58 oldnat:
You are correct that the UK is a group of "nations" in the one sense that is is not a "nation state, " however "The United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland is a unitary soverign state composed of several kingdoms that are of seperate nationalities, just as India is comprised of well more than 20 "states" that contain more than 30 different nationalities in the socialogical semse.
Complain about this comment
#67 ImposterWatcher
I don't know enough about India, to know if there are secessionist movements within it. However, constitutional entities exist in response to political "identity". Most people have multiple "identities" - Georgian/Southern/American, Scottish/British (OK New Yorkers are probably different, in that they only have a single identity!).
The point I was trying to make to the US Imperialists, was that sovereignty is a different thing from nationality. The UK is an example of "pooled" sovereignty, as is the European Union, India and the USA. Sovereignty can also be "unpooled" as well as pooled - hence the American Revolution, when (if I remember my US history correctly) around one third of the colonists changed their primary identity from "British" to "American", but their status in the colonies was enough to bring about the USA.
Complain about this comment
#65
Any criticism of Obama is racist - you need to live in the real world and stop throwing around the world racist, as it demeans the word racist. Let's call out racism when we all see it but let's not use the word ' racist' as a poitical tool as some Obama supporters do
Complain about this comment
To #64Jacksforge
The 'black guy' part does not concern me at all!
The 'old' part does! We are older than McCain. We are very active, raising an orphaned grandchild, caring for our gardens, our live stock and, remodeling our older house ourselves but we know our own physical and mental limits.
Like it or not, we are just not as strong as we were at 25, 35, 45 even 55! We don't have the stamina any more. What would have taken us six months to do, even ten years ago, has now taken us two years!
I believe that age and experience deserves respect but at some point we must trust in our youth to pick up the torch and carry on.
Consider this: Regan was already experiencing the effects of Alzheimer's disease during his last years in office.
I am sorry to all who may support McCain but I think this guy is just too OLD for the rigors of the presidential office.
Complain about this comment
Obama has headed up the Senate committe responsible for Afghanistan for more than two years now. Hillary chastized him earlier for not calling even one hearing on the war there; and now the Liberal media are all "ga-ga" over the fact that Obama has finally gone. Typical really.
As for "no foreigners" -- Support for Obama from outside the US will actually work againts him among many voters in the US who frankly don't care what the rest of the world thinks. In fact many view support for a US presidential candidate from people in places like London, Paris and Ottawa as reason NOT to vote for that candidate. "Foreigners" don't have the best interest of the US at heart, the thinking goes.
Complain about this comment
'He has billed himself as a uniter, but was complicit in fomenting the root causes of the Kenyan atrocities last January by serving as an agent provocatuer for his first cousin Raila Odinga whose political actitities have been bankrolled by Muammar Gaddafi.
Obama is a disciple of radical Saul Alinsky, and like his mother and farther, is a Marxist. He is a proponent of Black Liberation Theology, which is really a racist and divisive political ideology masquerading as "theology."
Do you dispute any of the facts I have stated? If you do please set forth what you dispute."
Yep, I dispute those two facts. You have either the scoop of the century or you're deluded. Somehow none of the media (including Fox) has managed to pick these stories up. How is that? Both of them would crater Obama's candidacy. Is Fox part of the vast left wing conspiracy? Do tell.
Complain about this comment
#69Fablondontown
I agree with you, absolutely.
I suppose if you read my post #70, I could be accused of ageism. However, I will stand by what I have said. Maybe I am weak, old and wimpy but I can only imagine how physically, mentally and emotionally grueling the office of president would be for John McCain.
This worries me, as I believe it should every American who supports him.
Complain about this comment
How about elitist? Is that racist?
I just hope that whoever is next president will not be to much of either to cap CEO salaries in banking and corporations that John Q Public has to bail out.
The Freedie and Fannie Mac debacle where CEO's and top managers are knocking down Millions of dollars, losing money and yet we're going to be bailing them out.
Enron, Worldcom, Auto industries, Airlines and Banks are embarrassing for us, more so when the top Elitist CEO's take home millions and a full retirement package worth even more.
the golden parachute
Complain about this comment
"Let me get this straight: the more we approach the election, the fewer foreign journalists will be close to the candidates? Does that mean that any news' reporting will be second-hand i.e. coming from domestic
news channels and papers?"
No, the objection is with having the foreign press question the candidates, not cover them. The BBC is free to cover the U.S. as it sees fit.
Americans have for all of their history received their news from the press, and we're cognizant of the significant power that gives the press to shape our views. So, while we generally agree that a free press is vital to our system of government, we're on guard to keep it as neutral as possible. The posts on this board about the major networks being "in the tank" for Obama are a reflection of this. While I don't agree this time, I do think the question of whether yellow journalism is rising it's ugly head again should always be asked.
We simply can't allow even such a well respected foreign press organization such as the BBC to have the power to shape the dialog that is our election process. The American press may be biased (everyone's entitled to his opinion), but they are Americans and owe allegiance to no foreign power.
I'm sure some around the world will see this as paranoia. Maybe it is, but I agree with my countrymen on this.
Complain about this comment
#72Andypost
The muckrakers will muck. I wish I could send them out to my barn!
Complain about this comment
I will add:
If my phone rang at 3AM, my first question would be: Who died!
Complain about this comment
Dougtexan
Elitist?
That term could easily be applied to most any of our government leaders and many CEOs. I agree that our government has been 'protectionist' for companies that should have been hung out and left to dry!
The excuse is always that it would hurt the people more if these companies were not rescued. However, we pay! We always pay in one way or another. I believe that if you 'do the crime, you pay the time.'
There have been no real consequences for irresponsible or downright criminal behavior by our ELITIST corporate pirates so they will continue to behave as usual and wait for the FED to bail them out!
Complain about this comment
#75Andypost
Right on again!
I like the BBC because I get better foreign news coverage. This is important to me because I have family living outside the US. However, for matters concerning America I read, view and listen to all the local sources and networks that I can.
Complain about this comment
My National Geographic arrived yesterday.
This issue is focused on Iran. Interesting timing isn't it? Worth a reading, I think.
Complain about this comment
Ref #73
I agree with your conclusion. In fact, what worries the most about McCain is not his record and qualifications, but his age. I am a septuagenarian and I see lapses in his behavior that are typical of aging. The last thing we need is a President that needs someone by his side whispering answers to questions. Putting our future in the hands of a man whose biggest liability is his youthful inexperience is better than putting it in the hands of someone showing signs of senility.
Complain about this comment
What's with this talk of "Black Liberation Theology" stuff? What does it mean?
Is it like "commies under the bed" scary tales?
Or what does the fearmonger think it means?
Would the candidate have to assuage the whites by marrying one?
Also, considering it's a BBC blog, and so has a take from a non-american, why do some take any comment by other non-americans as an attack on the USA? Or why does the schoolground "my nation is better than yours" crop up?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6215847.stm
Complain about this comment
I would be interested in people's comments regarding T. Booth Pickens personal investment in wind power.
This promises to be a great boon for Texas. Maybe it will encourage other 'elitist' corporate types to do something positive. They have been biting the hands that fed them for too long. If there are no people left to buy your product, you are effectively out of business!
Complain about this comment
#80
It really is essential that news organizations get out and report from Iran. As far as I can make out, the BBC has only one regular there and the Christian Science Monitor does much better.
If all we get are the propaganda pitches from the Israeli Foreign Ministry, we are missing a tremendous opportunity for a better world
and, it would seem, risking a stupid aggression.
Complain about this comment
The term elitism is normally applied to people with personal attributes that set them apart from their peers. Those attributes typically include pedigree, wealth, intellect, outstanding education or training, special physical abilities, or experience.
Considering Obama's family background, humble beginnings, and average physical abilities I can only surmise that some people refer to him as an elitist because of his intelligence, excellent education, and...experience?
Bush and McCain inherited that distinction at birth, a fact that gave them a head start over their peers.
Complain about this comment
Concerning McCain:
Yes, we know the failing capacities of age.
More important:
(1) He still claims that America should have stayed in Viet Nam and "won". (As he claims for Iraq).
(2) He made speeches about evangelism and then went to the infamoum "University" of Jerry Falwell and made a speech in favor of fundamentalism.
(3) He made inspiring words against torture-and then signed a bill continuing the practice and setting up the kangaroo "courts" in Guantanamo.
Much as I would like to believe that he has integrity, I conclude that this shows he does not have it!
Complain about this comment
#81Dominickvila
Amen! This is an issue that I believe has not been adequately addressed. Maybe because one doesn't want to be accused of 'ageism.' I have no problem with that. I'm old.
I know that people can be active and vigorous well into their nineties. My grandparents were a case in point but they were also aware of their limitations as they aged. So am I!
Americans can be obsessed with clinging to their youth and denying limitations. We do live better, longer and healthier lives but like or not age and its limitations are a fact and a reality.
Complain about this comment
#82Alanskillcole
I don't think that most US posters here consider posts from non-Americans to be an attack on the USA. I, for one, welcome your comments because I can get a better perspective on our country and the rest of the world.
It is in communicating with each other that we can come to understand how little difference there really is between most of us.
Complain about this comment
To MagicKirin and Co:
Please leave Africa out of this idea that the US helps other countries out. The annoying thing about this is that if the US really wants to help Africa out, the US government would freeze the bank accounts of the thieving African leaders with Billions (trillions maybe) of dollars in US banks.
How can you justify America touting it's niceness to Africa whenever it gives $50 Million to eradicate malaria for instance, while turning a blind eye to the $Billions of stolen funds by African leaders sitting in US Banks?
Force the African leaders to invest that money in their respective countries and you would see the difference.
Then again that might be the monies sustaining America’s welfare and social security handouts!
It is just a no win situation for the poor people of Africa isn’t it?
Complain about this comment
#82
Addendum:
Only a few posters here seem to get caught up in the "school yard" stuff you mentioned. Most of us here, while patriotic, have respect for other countries and other cultures. Some of those posts you many be referring to are not worth reading. Just skip over them if they bother you.
Complain about this comment
If you criticize a black, you are racist. If you criticize a Jew, you are anti-semitic. If you crticize someone for being old, you are ageist. If you criticize a woman, you are sexist.
These are tricks to discredit honest opinions. I prefer to risk false condemnation and say what I think.
.
Complain about this comment
#83 - aquarizonagal
I would like to share your vision of altruistic business folk suddenly waking up to their responsibilities but alas, I think you may be naive. The bottom line is that people and corporations are waking up to the fact that there are big bucks in alternative energy.
Or maybe all those nasty foodstuffs were dug up and replaced by biofuel crops just to save the planet after all.
Complain about this comment
Why have we waited nearly an hour to see posts #84 through #92?
Complain about this comment
Dear Moderators (Powers That Be)
I say: "Publish and be damned."
If someone doesn't like a post, they can complain and that post may be removed.
Complain about this comment
Dominick: As an octogenarian who has so far managed to avoid the signs of the senility you seem to detect in John McCain, I am sad that you prefer to support a candidate who has none of the qualities that we need in a president. Surely Obama's limited experience in national politics and his abyssmal voting record in the Senate should give you pause, without the other distractions that have caused him problems during the campaign. His arrogance in purporting to be an expert on military matters during his recent trip should be very off-putting to a seasoned elder like you.
I hope that yours is the kind of financial situation that can withstand the assault we can expect on our life savings that Obama will unleash if and when he makes it to the White House. If you cannot then I suggest that you might regret that blog about McCain being too old to be our President.
Complain about this comment
Xieming
On your #84
I agree with you wholeheartedly here.
On your #86:
I think this makes my point.
How could a man who experienced imprisonment and torture not speak out against that?
How could a man who experienced war, not consider this a last resort?
How could a man whose own children are in the military not question the squandering of our precious blood in useless wars?
If this is not senility I'm not sure what is!
Complain about this comment
#93 aquarizonagal
The delay was almost 2 hours on some threads. I'm presuming a technical fault, but it would be nice for the BBC to post an explanation.
Complain about this comment
Threnodio
I may be idealistic but I don't think I am naive. My comment was somewhat sarcastic, in that, perhaps those who have fed from us for so long may be realizing that they have 'milked this cow until she is dry.'
Now they may have to find some other way to MILK us. Sorry, my rural roots are always there. Maybe will get something positive out of this for a while.
Complain about this comment
As an outsider, I am somewhat bemused by this 'Jack of all trades' mentality. No leader can be expected to be a diplomat, an expert on homeland security, a commander in chief, an economist, a social welfare expert, an environmental planner and an international lawyer.
Surely a good president would play to his strengths, recognise his weaknesses and build his team accordingly. Or is the next president going to run the place all on his own?
Complain about this comment
#95Noblefloridian
Your life must be very different from mine. Over the last nearly eight years I have experienced a terrible erosion of my so called life style.
In our old age, we are raising a young child because of a stupid war. We feel daily the effects of an incompetent immigration policy (that McCain is now hiding from, I might add) Energy costs have skyrocketed and this hurts us in many ways, though we try to conserve as much as possible. Our children, grandchildren and our land are our only 'INVESTMENTS!'
Lets give youth a chance! I will say again that the 'OLD BOYS' have failed us ignominiously.
I think McCain is too old!
Complain about this comment
#91Allmymarbles
You are right on! And I will keep saying what I think and I enjoy that you do, as well.
Complain about this comment
#89Ibbnow
I agree that our government has failed to really help Africa but I think that Magickirin may have meant individual Americans and humanitarian groups who do all they can to help people there.
Sometimes we have to look beyond governments and see that the people of a country really do care about others and want to connect in positive ways.
Complain about this comment
#99Threnodio
You are like a ruby that is beyond price!
This is why we need perspective from outside our country. It is sad, but too many Americans may look on a president as some kind of perfect person who knows all, sees all and does all.
It is so good to be reminded that whoever wins this office is just a MAN. Just a human being with faults and failings, not perfect, but saints preserve him , he had better not FAIL!
Complain about this comment
#99 threnedio
As a fellow outsider.
Could it be that since so many Americans believe in a God, they have an unconscious desire that their President have similar qualities (the leader of the other party is, of course, the Anti-Christ)?
Complain about this comment
#100 Aquarizonagal,
Sorry to inform you that your retirement will not only erode, but will be stolen through taxes. You see, the lid was put back on Pandoras box, before Hope could escape.
lust, greed, war, famine
Complain about this comment
Aqua: The "Old Boys" of course being the Democrats who have squandered their majority power in both House and Senate ever since they took over.
And, believe it or not, I absolutely agree with you about the illegals. As a legal immigrant 50 years ago, I want the government to quit coddling them and send them home. Also, I am far from the point where I can feel good about my finances, especially if Obama wins the election.
I wish you well!
Complain about this comment
The issue of McCain's age has not really been openly debated and it should be. There have been covert insinuations about race, religion etc. regarding Obama. No one has problems openly attacking his youth and inexperience. (Ageism, anyone?)
I say it is well beyond time that a frank discussion of McCain's age and his ability to discharge the office of president be considered.
Complain about this comment
McCain "It's when you win wars that the troops come home".
So US troops are still in Vietnam then?
Complain about this comment
#104 - oldnat
Could be. As an American friend pointed out recently, you don't get as many Euros for the Almighty as you used to.
I thought he meant the Almighty Dollar.
Complain about this comment
Noblefloridian
I will be an octogenarian very soon, myself, but would not want the job of POTUS if it came with bells and whistles and a billion dollars.
Maybe we should consider any contender for that office insane and have them committed! This looks to be an interesting discussion.
Complain about this comment
#106Noblefloridian
You misunderstood me completely! You do not agree with me at all!
My parents were legal immigrants, as well, but our current immigration policy is totally absurd. I do not think that we should continue the 'sweeps,' racial profiling and so forth that is happening where I live. This is causing untold damage to my state.
My definition of 'OLD BOYS' is: any politician from either party who has contributed to the mess we are in now. This nasty war KILLED MY CHILD. DO YOU GET THAT?
Complain about this comment
Please read #91 before reading this.
In my opinion:
Barack Obama is a white man in blaclface.
Joe Lieberman is a sanctimonious weasel.
John McCain is too old to be president.
Hillary Clinton is dishonest.
Complain about this comment
Dougtexan
What retirement?
Complain about this comment
To all posters
Please forgive my post. I feel war to be so repugnant that I lose all perspective in a rational discussion.
Complain about this comment
'The "Old Boys" of course being the Democrats who have squandered their majority power in both House and Senate ever since they took over.'
Yeah, that one seat majority in the Senate sure did go to waste.
Complain about this comment
#96
Rather than attributing his mental quirks to incipient senility, one should consider that McCain was, from infancy, always in a military environment and his funds always came from the state.
This produces a basic automaton with superficial human relations skills.
Complain about this comment
#114 aquarizonagal
That's perfectly understandable. No apology is required. I don't imagine I would be as decent as your posts show you are, if I had suffered like you.
Complain about this comment
oldnat, you think the UK is not one nation? How many seats does it have at the United Nations? I've been there at the UN. I've never seen a separate seat for Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, or England. Just one seat that says UK in front of it on the desk. If the UN doesn't know how to define a nation, who does? One seat, one vote. If it were multiple nations, it would get multiple seats and multiple votes. How many votes does it have in NATO? in the EU? You can put lipstick and a dress on a pig but it still oinks and stinks. Perhaps Scotland will vote to break away from the UK but if it does, it will cost it a bundle because England pays tax subsidies which find their way to Scotland resulting in lower taxes to provide government services there. It's not like the Scots in my experience to give money away just like that. I'm sure they will think long and hard about it before they do.
adliberal
"Does anyone else just skim over the long-winded diatribes in what would otherwise be a lively enough debate?"
Not me. I just skip over the one sentence pointless entries.
Complain about this comment
Aqua: Yes, I do get it and I am humbly sorry. You have no reason to apologise - anyone who thinks war is anything but repugnant and a terrible waste of human life is void of human feeling. My father was in WWI, the so-called "War to End All Wars", and look what has happened since then.
Complain about this comment
116, Xie
I always seem to be agreeing with you.
If you are in the armed forces you are trained for war, not peace. Of course McCain's choice of action is war. Without war a military man feels he has no reason for being.
McCain can call Obama a wuss if he wants, but he is my wuss. He is on the side of peace.
Complain about this comment
104, oldhat.
It is not clear how many Americans believe in a god. According to the last statistics I saw (it may have been the census), seven percent were athiests and about 15 percent (Idon't remember the exact figure) claimed no church affiliation. I should think the latter group comprised agnostics, I-don't-careists and closet atheists.
If the figures are accurate (and I suspect they are higher because in some segments of society it is disreputable to be an atheist), that would mean that almost a quarter of the population would prefer not to have religion foisted upon them.
It is unfortunate that a candidate (of any party) feels required to inject god into all his speeches. I don't think John Adams, our second president, could survive today. He said, "In the best of all possible worlds there would be no religion." Antichrist! Antichrist! Tar and feather him!
Complain about this comment
Azgal,
I so agree, war fogs the mind, drains the soul.
Property and investments you might sell=retirement. Capital gains tax is anti retirement tax.
peace. love,..
i wish I still lived there
Complain about this comment
#118 MA2
I don't normally resort to insults in my posts - but in your case, I'll make an exception. That you were ignorant was always abundantly clear, but you are also clearly stupid. You understand neither language, politics, nor the realities that exist outwith your narrow existence. Fortunately, on my frequent visits to the USA, I meet intelligent pleasant people.
Complain about this comment
When a post is too long or too esoteric, I skip over it, unless it is a subject I am particularly interested in. Most long posts would profit from editing.
Complain about this comment
#121 allmymarbles
Thanks for the info. Much appreciated. I probably get a distorted view, as most of my visits to the USA are to NC. That may be like judging Scotland's religious patterns by visiting the Outer Hebrides.
Complain about this comment
allmymarbles, maybe the reason you always agree wtih Xie Ming is that he is actually...a closet Ayatollah.
Complain about this comment
adiliberal (62).
You betchya. I do. But I never miss a comment from Xie, Marbles, Aquarizona, Doug, Guns'nReligion, Noble, nor some others I might have momentarily missed out.
Keep it up, y'all!
xx
ed
Complain about this comment
oldnat
"Fortunately, on my frequent visits to the USA, I meet intelligent pleasant people."
The only thing you left out is that they are all British ex-pats.
I have no desire to insult you. You do that well enough yourself without my help every time you post a message.
Complain about this comment
125, oldhat.
Thee is another aspect to religion in the States and it is not religious.
In small towns (of which we have untold thousands) much of the social life revolves around churches. No church, and you are out of the loop.
This was brought home to me when my parents decided that the big city was not good for five young chidren. So we went to live in a small market town (pop. 5,000). Not everyone in town could have been religious, but they all went to church and joined in the social activities (there wasn't much else to do anyway). Small towns did not suit us, and we returned to the city where we belonged.
Complain about this comment
126, Marcus.
I know you love war so I have a suggestion for you: put your body whee your pen is. Join the army. Go to Iraq. Make the world safe for democracy.
Maybe you will start a movement. You can make up your own division and call it, "Hawks for War."
Complain about this comment
#129
The religious vector will be another factor in the US election, especially in the Bible Belt and the retarded areas of the Midwest.
In the past, ministers had been well funded to convince the faithful that Jesus Christ was a Republican.
Now, there is a considerable group that thinks the message of Jesus was quite a different thing.
Financial and sexual misdeeds among the TV evangelists, coupled with Iraq and the deteriorating financial situation are causing many to reassess.
It would make for interesting reporting.
Complain about this comment
131, Xie.
When talking about southerners and religion, keep in mind that southern women have abortions.
Sometimes religion is inconvenient.
Complain about this comment
allmymarbles, if they told me my first mission would be to nuke Teheran, I'd be down there to sign up by 9 AM today.
Complain about this comment
#132
The basic tactic in the manipulation is to instill, from a very early age, an intense sense of guilt.
To release this wound up spring, the guilty must pay the minister (10%) and then project the induced self-hate by attacking the targets the minister indicates.
School teachers, single mothers, and Democratic candidates are the current targets of choice.
[You ask why Obama supports "faith-based initiatives"?]
Complain about this comment
Marcus,
Who do you hate more, Europe or Persia?
Salaam, etc.
ed
You need serious help.
Complain about this comment
Ed Itlehart #135
I don't hate anyone. I merely acceot them for what the are and don't pretend that they are anything else. They may not like hearing the truth about their nation or their society but that is their problem, not mine.
Why would I nuke Iran? Because it is a growing dangerous threat to my welfare and existance. Why would I nuke Europe economically? Because it has lived off the money that should have supported my welfare, my environment, my quality of life and then it has the gall to tell me my government does not treat me well enough. If the American taxpayer hadn't wasted trillions on defending and rebuilding Europe after WWII, we'd have a social safety net here that would make France's look like a sieve...only we'd be able to afford it.
Complain about this comment
If SOME americans don't like the comments, odd to be on the blog of the BBC...
As for who benefitted after WWII, it was also in US self-interest (much as entering the war after Pearl Harbour was) to do what they did - ostensibly, fighting the spread of communism, having a market for their goods and services, etc
If US felt she shouldn't have helped, then she shouldn't have...
MacMillan's "wind of change" - the writing on the wall as in ceding empire to the new kid on the block...Suez...changing of the guard...nothing lasts forever
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/UK-Civil-WarEcon/UK-Civil-WarEcon-9.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease
http://www.nzetc.org/tm/scholarly/tei-WH2Econ-c6-17.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6215847.stm
As in the schoolground "my nation is better than yours" gets tiresome...what's the point? Live where you want to live. Chill. Or move to a place you prefer. Doesn't mean that someone other side of the pond is any better/worse. But even if they are, who gives a ?
Complain about this comment
There's no free lunch.
Certainly the UK repaid what it owed the US PLUS ceded bases - in its then colonies - to the US.
It got creaky old ships to continue the war effort.
It fought when it gave its assurances that it would do so when another nation was invaded.
(After the war, it found itself basing more on the US$...that BBC4 documentary vaguely remembered...)
Anyhow, to each their own.It's all a matter of perspective. History, revisionist history, evolution, intelligent design...all be over soon. Thank "God".
Complain about this comment
52, Impostor.
I am not so familiar with Pakistan, but Iran's southeast province is called Baluchistan. Perhaps the name across the border is the same since the Baluchis are a tribe.
Complain about this comment
MagicKirin 16: "How about that the U.S does more in donations to Africa to prevent aids
By the way Mandela has never mentioned that in his U.S criticsm."
Perhaps that is because it was only a couple of weeks ago that Mandela was taken off the US's ‘"most wanted terrorist" list! So perhaps this frustration is clouding his egnoligements of us. Can you blame him?
Bryn-UK 18: "Sure, Obama doesn't need to give any interviews to foreign journalists. But seeing as these countries are playing host to him (and his absurdly over-the-top security detail too, no doubt) it would be.. you know.. polite."
Yes, I completely agree, and in any other circumstance I would be absolutely repulsed at his refusal to grant an interview!!! But again, this is just too big a risk to take this one time!! I'm sorry! Trust me, should he win in November and the United States have an 80% approval rateing in France of all places! Next year, you'll forgive this bit of rudeness!! O, and yes his security detail is, “obserdly over the top” for a presidencial candidate, but if you don’t already know, unfortionately our nation has a history with assasonateing carosmatic, uniting, peaceful leaders of our nation, so please forgive some people for being a little overprotective.
"Hillary came across as far gutsier than him during the primaries."
Yeah, especially when she threatened to “obliterate” (in her words) Iran!!I don’t care what the potencial circumstances, no US president with that real and obvious power should loosly whield it around!!
"he should face a tough inquisitor - either David Dimbleby or Jeremy Paxman (our Justin is too much of a sweetie, I fear)."
Well, it depends on how one defines the word "sweetie". If "sweetie" means outwardly expressing a positive opinion of certain things American, then yes he is (but I don’t necessarily think that it's a bad thing). If “sweetie” means pushover, then no, I don’t think he's one at all!! He’s respectful but tough just the same!! Forgive me, but I don't think Paxman, from what I've seen of him, is a good journalist!! He basically just yells at his interviewees!! He doesn't give them time to respond to his shouted questions!! His questions are wonderful, but he is lacking that all important ingreediant in journalism and life...respect!!! I haven't seen the other guy, but may be he's better.
"More recently, DD interviewed Rumsfeld in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. Rumsfeld didn't lose his rag like Clinton, but he at least had some difficult questions to answer."
Forgive me, but I get the impression from your post that you want to see politicions "lose their rag". Is that what you want? Because in my opinion that is the wrong desired end!! One should want their leaders to be held accountable for their actions, not humiliated!! If you want to see people embarrissed and humiliated, put them on a reality show!!
AndyPost 22: "It is a measure of enduring respect that the standards we're are judged by around the world are so high."
Or, it is a measure of the fact that we are the world’s last remaining super power. I too, would like to believe that we are respected (even when we slip up), but the truth is, if we had these same values and enshrinements in our constitution, but weren’t the world’s most powerful nation, I doubt many people would look to us for leadership/hope.
"The rest of the English speaking world (while having shown a willingness to put their lives on the line alongside us) never initiate action."
I beg to differ. The UK is the world's second or third biggest doner for aid everywhere, humanitarian aid for disasters, and if we're not already “iniciateing action”, they are doing so themselves and pleeing for us to do so as well (for instance on climate change)!
"A sure sign that the world has lost respect for the U.S. will be when they no longer look to us for justice."
Which will be when we're no longer the super power. I mean perhaps they still will, but not nearly as much as they do now.
oldnat 24: "I recognise that individual US citizens have been generous in their charitable donations. Your government has been less than generous for many years, though. I know that your political system makes this difficult."
I'm not the biggest fan of Bush, but I feel you should know, he has tripled our aid to Africa alone in the past 7 or so years! And the last time I checked, humanitarian aid (via government) was a bipartisan issue. No, our political system does not make it difficult to give aid.
""Islamic terrorism"?” Oh, please! This was no issue with you guys until you suffered the first attack on US soil, since the British burned the White House in 1812."
Yeah, because if we had taken preemptive action, we would’ve been accused of being "war mongars!!" At least the world will support you if you allow yourself to be attacked first, so that people believe what you say!!
"The US financed the Taliban, because opposing the Soviet Union was more important to you than the rights of women in Afghanistan."
Yes, us, and every other western country as well including the UK! Your country is guilty too!! Blame your country! Blame your country!
"I have no problem with any country acting in it's national interest, but claiming some moral superiority is not acceptable from any country."
I second that!
Kecsmar 26: "you have now lost the moral higher ground, if indeed there was any to occupy."
O there was, believe me! Remember Clinton? When Turks were interviewed in a pole to state their most favorite US president, the overwhelming majority of them said ‘Clinton, and truly seemed like they actually liked his policies!! I only hope it can be somewhat restored!!
Oldnat 34: "Boastfulness (especially if not substantiated by reality) is really sad. Ou remind me of the British - living in an unreal past of imperial Glory."
MagicKirin was not being "bosteful"!! They were merely expressing their opinion that they think that our political system of government is (one) of the best in the world!! That is allowed, isn't it? And for what its worth, I concur with them!! The two political forms of democratic government are ours and a parliamentary one (the form held by all other countries except South America.) I personally, if I could choose, prefer the parliamentary system, but there's no doubting that these two systems have proven to be the strongest and most enduring forms of government throughout history!! That’s not bostefulness! Its fact!
Bryn-UK 37: "The UK still aspires to be a world player, I guess, when the best she can hope for is to punch above her weight; but since when have the Yanks disdained being a wannabe?"
The UK is still a world power!! It really frustrates me, those British citizens who denigrate themselves because they are technically no longer a "empire"!! That doesn’t mean that they aren’t influencial anymore!! It just means that they are no longer the soul super power!! And for my two cents, I most certainly "disdain" being a wannabe!!! I'm not sure about the current administration, but I certainly do disdain it!! Who are you talking to to get these ideas?!
ImpostorWatcher 51 "Obama
shares the very same personality flaws of George W. Bush. He is arrogant, stubborn, dismissive of criticism (like Bush he never admits to making even the
slightest of mistakes), vindictive (demonstrated by his treatment of Hillary and the reporter for the New Yorker) and just like Bush, Obama is self-absorbed
in his own distorted sense of historical importance."
Are we talking about the same Obama? And news flash!! Few politicions (world wide), rarely, if ever, admit to "making the slightest of mistakes"!!
Complain about this comment
What? We have been ruled by an alien for the past 7.8 year: Darth Vadar. Everyone knows that our Georgie could not be that stipid unless controlled by some foregn endity.
Complain about this comment
oldnat 104: asks, '"Could it be that since so many Americans believe in a God, they have an unconscious desire that their President have similar qualities (the leader of the
other party is, of course, the Anti-Christ)?"
Wow!! That wasn't a jab at Christianity at all!!! Look, I'm not going to speek for the religious right-perhaps they do see the president/our political system in this light. But certainly not "all" religious Americans think this, as 'allmymarbles pointed out. While it s a fact that religion is more prevolent in the US than Europe, still, one of the unfair, untrue stereotypes of Americans is that they are all "religious extreemests", and that is certainly not true in the least!!! I do blame the religious right for this unfortionate reality, though. Their looking down their noses at others, pointing fingers, judgeing those of other faiths/no faith, makes Europeans especially think '"Well if some Christians in America are like that, then all of them must be!" And that is certainly not true in the least!! Might I just say, that its all bigotry!! Europeans seeing religious Americans as "evanjelical extreemist", you know, the sort that bomb abortion clinics, is just as judgementle and offensive as those right wing religious people who judge others because they don't share their faith!!!
But no, rather I think the reason why Americans expect their president to be an expert on all things all the time, is partly at least, to do with the fact that many Europeans/world citizens expect it. They offten turn to the US to solve problems, or to answer questions. So Americans, or at least this American, look around the world and think, '"Well we best try our best to keep this world peaceful, and if having a knoledgable president helps solve world problems, when they arise to meet the world's expectations and ours, then so be it." In short, they figure if everyone else has these expectations, then we'd better damn well have them as well!! And you're right, threnodio #99, I do think these expectations, both from Americans and world citizens, are a bit high!! After all, that's what a cabinit is for, is it not?
So to some up, it is ok to be religious! And it is ok not to be! The important thing, is that we be accepting of each other and each other's beliefs, and that we have an open mind about each other and are open to each other's thoughts/criticisms!!!
It is sad, though, that the presidencial candidates feel they have to pander to religious extremeists! That doesn't encourage accepting and openness, it encourages the complete opposite!! I know that there are a lot of right-wing religious people in this country, but they have to realise that religion doesn't cause one to have a clear, calm mind in a position of leadership!! I do wonder, however, how John Attoms would fair in today's world, though.
Complain about this comment
alanskillcole #138
There is nothing the UK or its people could conceivably ever do that woud be sufficient to repay the People of the United States of America for the incredible sacrifices they have main on the UK's behalf.
Complain about this comment
One of the factors to consider inthe forthcoming US election is the number of voters who believe in:
Armageddon
End Times
The primacy of Israel
Sin as the cause of the World's problems
For reporting:
Will hard times increase or decrease the present ideology of this group?
Complain about this comment
"The US financed the Taliban, because opposing the Soviet Union was more important to you than the rights of women in Afghanistan."
Yes, us, and every other western country as well including the UK! Your country is guilty too!! Blame your country! Blame your country!
well I do remember it being an issue for the brits , sorry.
it was one of the reason some brits agreed to Afganistan being invaded.
not to let america get revenge , but because they were fed up with th talliban stopping equal rights.
Complain about this comment
for anyone who havnt read this i believe this is an interesting article to read regarding the campaign.
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1826064,00.html
Complain about this comment
I feel like Fred Astire today: Heaven--I'm in heaven, listening to Obama speak. If he don't speak no more, he has said it all in Berlin, Germany today.
He may not make it to the PROMISED LAND OF PRESEDANCY of the United States, but he has made his mark on the world in any event because he has given people hope. And like faith and charity, hope is necessary in a world where the will of the people never trumps THE TRIUMP OF THE WILL of the MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX.
Like James Brown: I FEEL GOOD!
Complain about this comment
I hope that Matt Frei does not read my last post and become frightened by my outburst. It was so EMOTIONAL!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
While the comments of MarcusAureliusII are at first interesting in a kind of provocative "he said what!?" kind of way, once you've read a few they just get boring.
At the very least, they smack of the kind of rear-view boastfulness associated with crumbling empires that has been discussed elsewhere on this blog.
On a more personal note, I find them offensive to my family, who served in WWII, and apparently might as well have just have left all the hard work to their US cousins.
I'm sure most other people of the world have been offended by at least one of the comments.
Complain about this comment
And what already crumbled empire do you hail from?
You need to understand that America was born from a rejection of Europe. The most ambitious people in the world migrate to America. Their skin color doesn't matter like it does in your world. That will never be possible in your world.
America should not have military bases in Europe or the Middle east.
America has been through a lot during it's short life and I don't see it going down ever.
Never again will America be drawn into your ugly wars of extermination.
Complain about this comment
paulcrossley
Much of what I hear, see, and read on BBC and elsewhere that Europans say and write about my country I also find offensive. For one thing they are usually untrue at least in part and often taken completely out of context or without any reference to larger issues. Finally I decided it was time for the other side to speak out. You are offended by what I write? Good, that's what I call balance. As for your family, had they been told the truth about the world and history in the first place, they would not find my words at all shocking. Most of what is written about America in the European press and in their history books is plain wrong.
If my postings are repetitive and boring, I'd say they are no more so than the same old anti-American diatribe I get from Europeans.
I don't know if most other people are offended by my postings, that is presumptive of you but if Europeans are angry at being contradicted for once because they expect that their point of view will go unchallenged forever then that is exactly what I intend. Time their lies had to be confronted by the truth for once.
Is America a crumbling empire? I heard this awful series on BBC "America, Age of Empire." It was ludicrous. It is no empire in the sense of Rome as BBC seemed to imply. Except for a scattered handful of islands and territories such as American Samoa, the US Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the US has no nations it permanently controls or occupies, no colonies, no extraterritorial lands. But BBC concluded that it will be in a dominant position in the world for the foreseeable future.
It's one thing to hear the aveage "bloke" who only knows what he sees on the telly or reads in the paper be so ignorant of the US, and even surprising and disappointing to see how ignorant BBC is of it, but it was a shock to discover that even someone who is well educated and directly involved like Sir Christopher Meyers is so ignorant of it too. He revealed that in his interview on BBC.
BBC presents a very distorted picture of the US. It is highly selective in the narrow view it presents and the bias it stamps on it. Does it surprise you that there is an entirely different point of view that may be far more accurate? If you don't like my postings, don't read them.
Complain about this comment
to Marcus, I can understand how a lot of overseas media might appear to be anti-american at times (espcially to the average bloke who sees the domestic stuff most of the time). Afterall, it can be critical of your government.
I DO like your postings - on the whole they're laugh-out-loud funny and occasionally thought provoking. I had a problem with the one that seemed to insult the British peoople who fought in World War II, this one insulted people who on the whole aren't in a position to repsond any longer.
A thought for yourself though, aren't they sometimes self defeating? Your rather extreme posts make it easier for those Euro people dismiss you.
With reference to Empires, I think you're probably pretty au fait with the idea of an Empire in terms of global power - be it miltary, economic or otherwise, rather than global territories. Feel free to dispute whether this Empire is fading even if you don't recognise it in these terms.
Anyway, keep up the good work but maybe ease of the rewriting of history a little.
To Texcannuck, was your comment directed at mine? It was hard to tell. Just in case then: I come from the Crumbling British Empire. Which USA do you live in? Not the one I've been to.
Complain about this comment
paulcrossley
It doesn't matter what I say, Europeans will dismiss me anyway. Unless I agree with everything they say. But how can I? That is why I am alive and here today, because Europeans dismissed my grandparents. Not just what they said or even tried to do with their lives but the very value of their lives themselves. Some parts of Europe are worse than others but all of them IMO are bad. Fortunately for me, they up and left. It took a lot of guts. They were young and when they got here they struggled. But they made the best possible lives for themselves. Their story is far from unique. More people made better lives for themselves in the USA they were denied elsewhere not only in terms of material wealth and achievement but in terms of happiness than anywhere else ever. To hear it perpetually denigrated by a continent of jealous angry ignoramuses is disgusting. Even more disgusting is to see that go unchallenged.
I hear this nonsense about American empire even from some Americans. What is an empire? All we have to go by are the examples of empires of the past. They are characterized by military conquest, perpetual subjugation, exploitation, and ultimately punishment including death for resistance. The goal is economic exploitation through military force for as long as possible. The US does not perpetually control any government or nation. During times of war, the US has prevented some nations from becoming part of an enemy empire. Iran and Chille are examples. Once the threat is over, so is that control. I also hear a lot of nonsense about how America must fight its wars to conform to some sort of moral code or according to some code of law. In war there is only one code, the more effective combatant wins. In war the ends justifies the means especially when a civilized society like the United States is fighting for survival against an implacable barbaric enemy like Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, The USSR, or militant Islam. Innocent people always get killed and atrocities are always committed in every war, often in large numbers. That is its nature. To shrink from using the means available because of the fear that we will become exactly like the enemy is a very dangerous proposition, it is potentially a prescription for suicide. It says in effect that we must fight for our lives with one hand tied behind our backs. It ignores the rational decision to take the necessary steps for survival for fear that we will become so irrational that we will forget to abandon them when the threat is over. Where I come from, if a burglar invades your house, attacks your family and you have a gun, you shoot first and ask questions later. American law agrees. The right of survival is the first inalienable right, the right to life. When attacked or faced with mortal threats, any and all means are acceptable to defend yourself including a pre-emptive nuclear strike if it comes to that. Europeans don't see it that way do they? And yet that is the only reason they were not swallowed up to become part of the USSR's empire.
As I've said here, America is not Europe, it does not think or act like Europe. And having lived there it does not feel like Europe either, not at all. Expectations to find common links are naive and futile. One mistake viewing America Europeans often make including BBC in that pathetic series is that it believes that America and Americans are the way they are because they are rich and powerful. They got it backwards. America became rich and powerful from out of nowhere in no time by historical measure because of what it is. Its creation was the single greatest invention in human history. The most crucial aspect in understanding it is the one BBC did not even try to explore. How amazed its founders would have been to see it after a mere two and a quarter centuries later. And I don't think they would have had any problems with the way it conducts itself at home or around the world. If anything, they would be annoyed at its occasional timidity and self doubts. Its succes especially in contrast to the failures of so many others is the only proof it needs to know that it is on the whole right and should go its own way without listening to outsiders. And by and large, that is exactly what we do.
Complain about this comment
Hiya Justin,
You're right things are slow. Now you're back in England you've probably noticed too that there really isn't that much hoo-ha about Barack Obama in Europe.
I remember writing s'thing like that in a post on your blog a month ago (I was writing about Italy) and I got shouted down -Europeans LOVE Barack Obama.
Complain about this comment
Hi Justin I just found this interesting piece about reporter access
http://www.tnr.com/story_print.html?id=6e9f4a42-9540-4d99-aba2-25adc276c25d
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS