The role of the US in the world

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

The role of the US in the world

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> The role of the US in the world

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

The role of the US in the world - 11/3/2009 3:48:56 AM

Posts: 6121
Joined: 3/18/2006
From: Tamaris
Status: offline

I was thinking about why is it whenever there is a squabble somewhere in the world, it is highly likely the US will become involved in some form or other, and there I thought the US believes itself the world police force. But thinking again on the matter and the thought came that the US being the last made country, is made up of nearly all the peoples of the world, people who have emigrated from everywhere to seek something new, something better than they were leaving behind, be that poverty, or persecution. If that is the case, then maybe the US being a conglomerate of the world's peoples now seek to right the wrongs in the lands of their ancestors, effectively become the nation that polices the world.

I wonder how much ancestry plays a part in the U.S.'s interactions abroad ?

_____________________________

Everything we are is the result of what we have thought, the mind is everything, what we think, we become - Guatama Buddha

Conservatism is distrust of people tempered by fear - William Gladstone

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/3/2009 4:35:29 AM

Rule

Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline

It is a recipe: If you want to have power in another country or want to effect changes in another country, then first, secretly (it is what secret services are for), stir up trouble in that country, next publicly get involved in the matter and save the day and be the hero; everybody will be grateful that you made things all right. What you are seeing is the public part; what you are not seeing is the secret part that preceded it.

(in reply to Aneirin)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/3/2009 4:54:56 AM

Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline

That would be easier to swallow if main media was not so controlled, embedded.

The economic hit man is a good vid/book to explain much of it.

The typical person is oblivious to the bad we do/did. If we seen the real deal- the reaction would not quite to rah rah.

I do think there is a number of people who do seek to help their native lands. But when the huge corporations factor in-

(in reply to Rule)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/3/2009 7:29:48 AM

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

It is economic and military strength and moral supremacy. You may argue that those are the results of having such diverse roots, but that isnt the reason in and of itself.

(in reply to pahunkboy)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/3/2009 6:52:41 PM

Casie

Posts: 450
Joined: 1/5/2006
Status: offline

I think ancestry has little to do with it unfortunately. That would certainly be a nobler cause for our wars. The grave truth is our wars line the pockets of private bankers. Tragically, this is not a new concept some of the most well known banking families have been doing it for hundreds of years.

< Message edited by Casie -- 11/3/2009 6:53:26 PM >

(in reply to pahunkboy)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/3/2009 9:26:27 PM

Posts: 1551
Joined: 4/19/2005
From: Texas
Status: offline

quote:

It is a recipe: If you want to have power in another country or want to effect changes in another country, then first, secretly (it is what secret services are for), stir up trouble in that country, next publicly get involved in the matter and save the day and be the hero; everybody will be grateful that you made things all right. What you are seeing is the public part; what you are not seeing is the secret part that preceded it.

To this I agree completely but also want to toss in there that it isn't just the US that seeks to promote change in other countries but usually a host of countries to include persons in the country of question. The US can do alot but to achieve some of the things done it takes many hands in the pot despite the fact that often were the ones seen as the initiators.

Not that it was any significant part by any stretch of the imagination but does any one recall all the Iraq Americans pleading with our government to step in and do something. I suppose they would fall into the ancestry aspect to a degree.

starshine

_____________________________

"And in the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years." --Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Rule)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/8/2009 12:12:35 PM

Posts: 1
Joined: 11/8/2009
Status: offline

I don't really think it has anything to do with ancestry but rather economics. After the World Wars the US became a super power because they were the only country not running on a deficit economy and so through the Truman Doctrine manipulated Europe's economy to its own advantage- which was capitalism. During the Cold War Europe used the US as a personal security system and so they became a primacy. After 1989 the US has continued to struggle for this supremacy through international investment and capitalism in general. They become involved in other countries sovereignty because of these international investments. Right through the Cold War the US were very upfront about trying to over throw communism but now when a country speaks out against capitalism they try and manipulate that economy in a different way as the world now values freedom of speech. Without capitalism the US would collapse. It's domestic policy is no where near as strong as it's international because that is what they have always concentrated on. As a super power they are not governed by the same laws as other countries, the UN mandate's which govern Europe don't apply the the US- well they do apply but are ignored and tolerated because of their economy.

Sorry for the history lesson, but I hope this rough account explains it!

(in reply to starshineowned)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/8/2009 12:16:34 PM

Posts: 622
Joined: 1/8/2008
Status: offline

I thought the US became an empire because they held the world's reserve currency. Of course, they then went off the gold standard and debased their currency to 4% of its current value. No wonder most countries are talking about dumping it any month now. When that happens, watch the real troubles occur for the economy.

_____________________________

I won't see your reply, because I don't use this account anymore.

(in reply to Shanzie)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/8/2009 12:19:23 PM

Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

It is economic and military strength and moral supremacy. You may argue that those are the results of having such diverse roots, but that isnt the reason in and of itself.

Moral supremacy?

Implying the rest of the world does not meet our moral standards?

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/8/2009 12:21:03 PM

Posts: 862
Joined: 3/13/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

It is economic and military strength and moral supremacy. You may argue that those are the results of having such diverse roots, but that isnt the reason in and of itself.

Moral supremacy! Oh my, we are humble today.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/8/2009 12:24:28 PM

Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline

"moral supremacy"
And some wonder why Americans travelling abroad are often advised not to wear items advertising their country of origin.

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4

(in reply to Lorr47)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/8/2009 12:42:28 PM

Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

It is economic and military strength and moral supremacy.

...can't argue against the first two. However, the third one is highly problematic. i'll come back to it later.

quote:

You may argue that those are the results of having such diverse roots, but that isnt the reason in and of itself.

.....got to say it's an interesting suggestion you're..er...apparently not making there. The idea that the US owes its economic strength in particular to its diverse roots is intriguing.

Oddly enough, while i think you're on to something there, i think you've not taken the thought far enough. The US, especially in its nacency, attracted people from an extraordinarily broad set of cultures. However, i'd suggest that it drew the same sort of people from each of those cultures. Essentially creating a singular culture from parts of multiple ones. The same parts of those cultures. What drew those people is what is called 'the American dream'. So, you have a lot of cultures represented by the members of those cultures who share the same ideals. A lot of people with a similar way of thinking who still have access to an incredibly broad set of cultural experiences (and business contacts).

Which leads us nicely back to that moral supremacy thing. Choice is everything. Someone whose entire family for several generations just happens to be, say, Welsh does not make a choice about culture. They look back and can see the same cultural memes stretching out behind them. Those whose recent ancestors made a choice to help create a new culture don't have that same sort of cultural inertia behind them. Instead they have pride (and justifiably so) in the courage of those who chose to choose. Which means that there is a somewhat inevitable corralary. That those who didn't choose to choose failed a test of some sort. Failed to be courageous. Therefore that whiff of moral supremacy is predictable. And wrong.
Because it fails to take into account the whole spectrum of courage possible. Undoubtedly there is courage attached to the act of choice. What American culture doesn't always seem to recognise is that there is just as much courage attached to making a different choice or, indeed, none at all.

The role of the US is exactly the same as the role of Ancient Athens. Both are/were powerful cultures consciously trying to figure out how best to be organised. The Athenian culture still has strong echoes in todays Western society. In 2500 years time US culture may have the same type of influence. However, the US is still at the beginning of that curve. It has a vast amount to learn and many more mistakes to make.

In the long run though, how can the noble ideals that make up the american dream fail to have some major positive impact on human culture as a whole?

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/8/2009 4:29:07 PM

Posts: 16926
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

moral supremacy

I wonder what planet you live on, I really do

.

_____________________________

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/8/2009 4:32:21 PM

Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

moral supremacy

I wonder what planet you live on, I really do .

Unfortunately for the rest of us......ours.

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4

(in reply to kittinSol)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/8/2009 4:48:57 PM

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

i did a google on that term....

I found it, interestingly enough, in a letter to the RNC from an ex-republican, dated 2003.

quote:

The “Moral Majority” holier than-thou approach has poisoned the image of your party because it is obvious and blatant hypocrisy, and your continual crusade on the platform of moral supremacy is insulting to voters and their intelligence. Republican leadership having gay sex in public restrooms, multiple extramarital affairs, homosexual relations with male pages, illegal gambling, and solicitation of prostitution (also gay, mind you), combined with a caviler attitude about when and how we initiate the military conflicts that claim the lives of far more children than abortion ever will shows the true colors of your party, and if you excuse my language, make you look full of SHIT. You claimed the need for "moral supremacy" when you scorched Bill Clinton, brought government to a standstill, and launched impeachment efforts against his presidency for actions, which in comparison to your own seem like grade school heavy petting! But you pretend that nobody’s paying attention to the dictionary-sized list of sexual impropriety and moral shortcomings of your party members, many of whom are on the microphone preaching the polar opposite of what they practice! The past 5 years have seen more republican moral scandals than the Democrats have had in the past 2 decades, if not longer. Yet Republican leadership continues to tout moral supremacy as a cornerstone of the party's platform, which sends the message that the party thinks voters are not only mindless idiots, but command the memory retention rivaling the shelf life of an cut avocado. Your actions in contrast to your message are proof that human nature is human nature and we cannot punish people or force feed them religiously-originated moral dogma banning what they want to do if it’s peaceful and private. Yet you still do it shamelessly and hypocritically, even though the Republican party was designed to be the party of limited government intervention into the private lives of Americans!

http://cameronmacpherson.com/articles/open-letter-republican-party

< Message edited by tazzygirl -- 11/8/2009 4:50:11 PM >

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to slvemike4u)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/8/2009 4:53:17 PM

Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline

Would they be the ideological heirs to Agnew's silent majority circa late 60's early 70's?

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4

(in reply to tazzygirl)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/8/2009 4:56:28 PM

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

Thats just a tiny snipet. I dont know how true or not the author was, perhaps he is a dem in disguise. I just found it funny that willbe used that term, then i found it in regards to the RNC.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to slvemike4u)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/8/2009 5:04:18 PM

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

You can snark away as much as you like, but moral supremacy is simply the opposite of moral equivalency, the plague that has rendered liberals impotent to achieve anything on the world stage.

"There was a time not all that long ago when most of us agreed about what constituted good and evil. But that time, I’m afraid, has come and gone and is now as passé as five cent cigars and 45 cents-a-gallon gasoline.

Our former sense of morality hasn’t been replaced by immorality, at least not entirely, but by something that’s probably more dangerous because it comes cleverly disguised as broad-mindedness. Those in the mass media and academia ridicule people who still believe there are nations, values and cultures, that are superior to others, and they regard those Americans who have the temerity to disagree with them as yokels, super patriots and religious hypocrites. The elitists trumpet moral equivalency as an ideal. And yet, time and again, they display their own double standards. The same folks who were so upset about George W. Bush’s time in the Air National Guard and his early problems with alcohol aren’t the least put out by Barack Obama’s avoidance of military service and his admitted use of illegal drugs. Apparently even moral equivalency doesn’t exist if one of the parties is a Republican and the other is a Democrat.

Steven Spielberg and his sophomoric cohorts got the moral equivalency ball rolling with “Munich,” a piece of Hollywood hooey that contended that there was no real difference between Palestinian cut-throats murdering 11 Israeli athletes at the ’72 Olympics and Israel’s tracking the murderers down and meting out justice.

More recently, we had Barack Obama’s insisting that Israel’s taking steps to defend itself against the constant missile attacks from Hamas is as inexcusable as the attacks, themselves. But then what can you expect from a guy who kept insisting that Iran wasn’t worth worrying about and that the Jews should seriously consider giving up half of Jerusalem to people who insist that any piece of real estate they covet is a holy Islamic city?

Those on the left regard themselves as the moral, as well as intellectual, superiors of those on the right because they claim to see shades of gray whereas conservatives see only black and white. The problem is that most things are black and white, and the inability to realize that doesn’t suggest clearer vision, but only lack of courage and conviction. So, while those on the right are convinced that capitalism, for instance, is better than communism and socialism, and have no problem saying as much, liberals go around parroting sound bites. They would have you believe that Guantanamo is the same as Buchenwald, Bush is the same as Hitler, and that the members of the U.S. military are either the same as storm troopers, in the words of Sen. Dick Durbin, or merely uneducated suckers, according to Sen. John Kerry. "

< Message edited by willbeurdaddy -- 11/8/2009 5:33:36 PM >

(in reply to tazzygirl)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/8/2009 5:07:38 PM

Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline

Nixon/Agnew (Rep) used "silent majority"in the late 60's to describe what they argued was the largely unseen multitudes who were satisfied with their prosecution of the VietNam "conflict"(war?) as a counterweight to the multitudes marching in the streets protesting that conflict.
Or at least thats the way I remember it......of course back then none of the Republican leadership was ever caught in a bathroom exchanging love letters with some hippie peacenik.....but times change.

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4

(in reply to tazzygirl)

RE: The role of the US in the world - 11/8/2009 6:39:54 PM

Posts: 16926
Status: offline

I mean, let's face it: it borders on nationalistic hysteria and on pure blind faith to claim that any postmodern nation has any kind of claim on 'moral supremacy'.

Morally speaking, nations are all equally crap, and the USA are no exception.

_____________________________

(in reply to slvemike4u)

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> The role of the US in the world

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.094