BobbyMike
Member
Registered: Dec 1999
Location: "Children are a gift from God, they are a reward"
Posts: 1049 |
quote:
Originally posted by ToolkiT
Of course it is my view, but I am not alone with this view.
I agree with you, from your perspective it must look different, no harm no foul.
the ironic thing is the US boosts itself for being democratic, but from what you are saying the democratic principle only applies to internal issues, not worldwide ones... you are saying (simplisticly put): We are the biggest superpower, so we can do as we please.
I dissagree with that attitude (correct me if I read you wrong).
Yes, being bigger the US should have a bigger say in 'world issues' but no they cannot act alone.
The attitude 'we are the biggest and most powerfull so we can act alone and do what we want' is the arrogance I'm talking about. This is not meant to dehumanize or reduce anybody. I'm merely pointing out a flaw in US politics. In general I like america, but like any country it has its flaws, some are mere funny (i.e. Jerry springer like trailer park people) but some are affecting the rest of the world (which includes me!). I'm merely using my freedom of speach to state what I find wrong... Ever since Bush came in office more things went wrong IMHO (kyoto, Iraq etc. etc.) this may make me look anti american, but trust me I am not...
Actually the point I was trying to get across was that regardless of what the US decides to do, we're going to piss someone off. Being the biggest means that when ever we move the world shifts. No matter which direction we move it's going to unbalance someone. We never get credit for the good things we do, and always get blamed for anything wrong that occurs (often before anything does happen!)
I would think it ridiculous for any country to decide it's national policy based on what the rest of the world thinks it should do. National governments exist to implement policies that it sees as best for it's citizens.
Nations aren't formed to please the rest of the world, they're formed by a group of people to deal with the rest of the world.
They view that any country should base it's decisions only on who will not agree would eventually lead to a world where decisions are never made to be proactive, but countries constantly are just ineffectually reacting to forces (kind of like the UN does).
Here our President decides to take action, other nations agree (for their own reasons) such actions are necessary. Those nations are seen as blindly (stupidly, etc.) following US arrogance, while the nations opposing (the actions) are seen as ok, even righteous. Where's the logic in that? If all the nations that do agree with the US are ignored by one side ("The attitude 'we are the biggest and most powerfull so we can act alone and do what we want' is the arrogance I'm talking about." ) than whom is really the arrogant one? You're assuming that you are right and we are wrong. That, to me, is arrogant.
The thing that is really funny to me is that Europe as a whole is mostly responsible for the Mideast mess because of it's failed colonialism in that area. The result of that was a huge clash of cultures that exists to this day. The US has only been involved since the '40-50s, and yet were get the blame for the all forces at play. Sure we've screwed up policy wise in that area (and others), but we do try to clean up our messes instead of letting others do it while we wring our hands and say "Why doesn't everybody just get along?"
__________________
"I am a debtor both to Greeks and to Barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish."
|
03-05-2003 04:57 PM
Email This Page to Someone! |
Receive updates to this thread
]