However I understand they are people like everyone else.
To be 100% honest, I really hate American cheese the most. The stuff doesn't change when heated. it like... never melts or something. Especially that canned stuff. Not much food from the USA seems appealing (well that I have seen).
I like it here for the most part. I'm fairly safe, in a mostly stable economy, I have plenty access to clean drinking water, ample opportunity for gainful employment and affordable nutritious food. On the other hand the political climate is a bit disheartening I guess, I'm not fond of our criminal justice system, and we've got some oddly backwards cultural artifacts still swimming around. Still on the whole I can't complain too much. The country has treated me well enough and I'm more than happy to pay my taxes.
To be 100% honest, I really hate American cheese the most. The stuff doesn't change when heated. it like... never melts or something. Especially that canned stuff. Not much food from the USA seems appealing (well that I have seen).
American cheese isn't cheese. It's a processed food product made with some cheese. That said we've got some pretty good food overall. The place is huge so you've got great seafood on the coasts, all manner of dead land critters to eat further in and just about every grain you can imagine grows here, diverse fruits there is seriously a ton of variety. Not to mention our immigrant heavy history has spawned all sorts of tasty mutations on the cuisine of other cultures.
I know Europe does not allowed perservative in their livestock and grown products.....
Why we can tell the difference between a American and a European. Bone color. American has a yellowish tinge to it
Is Australia/NZ same way to?
Totally unsure about SE Asia
The ME I would avoid like the plague.....wait I got inoculated for that and small pox to three times over.....anthrax series shots...still avoid it like the plague. Those are not mud pies drying on the wall on some places....
Whether or not I, as a Canadian, can make fun of the USA for all its quirks, depends on if we can get rid of the Harpercons in October. I'll call back then.
I admire it. I more admire what it could be, and what it has been in the past.
I think the country's endless focus on relatively small (or even symbolic issues), mostly all stemming from religion (abortion, evolution, gay marriage, what church your next President currently goes to, etc.) stifles what would be the greatest nation on Earth.
I think it's a great country, happy to put 'love it' as my answer.
This thread is pretty sad though. Weirdly insecure. You're the strongest, richest kid in the whole school, running around asking all the other kids if they really like you is lame.
Most of the US seems fine, and your average American is a friendly guy though not always aware of things outside that huge country. I know I'm not as well versed in US history as I could be, but at least I don't call the German guide a liar for claiming her family house is older than Columbus. You know, because history starts when Columbus discovered 'Murica.
I hate how many 'Muricans believe that they're superior to everyone else and they're from the greatest country in the world... Reminds me a bit of Nazi Germany...
SGTPozy wrote: I hate how many 'Muricans believe that they're superior to everyone else and they're from the greatest country in the world... Reminds me a bit of Nazi Germany...
You didn't fall for the FEMA Deathcamps conspiracy did you?
SGTPozy wrote: I hate how many 'Muricans believe that they're superior to everyone else and they're from the greatest country in the world... Reminds me a bit of Nazi Germany...
You know I haven't met very many Americans who actively think they're superior to everyone else. Patriotic? Yes. Defensive of their country? Yes. But those who actively think they're better? No. besides, many Americans who come to foreign countries, which is who I'm assuming you've met, encounter rampant Anti-Americanism, which, through a variety of sub-conscious things going on, gets interpreted as a personal attack. It can get quite vicious on both sides when really its just one person telling the other they disagree with some aspects of US foreign policy.
I was born in the US, though I don't live there, and I consider myself American. Like others in this thread I love what we stand for and what we have the potential to become. I can see past the racial issues and the focus of meaningless stances on moral issues to see that the core values of the USA are something to be admired.
To the OP, the anti-americanism you so so prevalent in the western world is a recent phenomenon, brought about by the invasion of Iraq and subsequent PR nightmare that the war on terror became, and is exacerbated by the poor race relations and controversy over gun control. It'll pass in time I feel, we're already starting to get over Iraq.
Jihadin wrote: I know Europe does not allowed perservative in their livestock and grown products.....
Why we can tell the difference between a American and a European. Bone color. American has a yellowish tinge to it
Is Australia/NZ same way to?
Totally unsure about SE Asia
The ME I would avoid like the plague.....wait I got inoculated for that and small pox to three times over.....anthrax series shots...still avoid it like the plague. Those are not mud pies drying on the wall on some places....
No idea about Africa
My grandfather enjoyed his years in Africa, but then again, he was on the back of a tank, all guns blazing
My grandfather enjoyed his years in Africa, but then again, he was on the back of a tank, all guns blazing
Ah yes, the good old state sponsored OE
See Africa, Sicily, Italy, France, Holland and Germany! Get paid while doing it! Free room, clothing and board! Meet other young men your age!
It's a strange thing to say, but I think my grandfather was one of the very few people that enjoyed WW2
He came from a tiny village, spent years working down the mines (very dangerous in those days) had never been abroad in those days (he was too poor for that)
and jumped at the chance of joining the army. He seen a ton of countries, got discipline (his words) and made life-long friends like no other.
My grandfather enjoyed his years in Africa, but then again, he was on the back of a tank, all guns blazing
Ah yes, the good old state sponsored OE
See Africa, Sicily, Italy, France, Holland and Germany! Get paid while doing it! Free room, clothing and board! Meet other young men your age!
It's a strange thing to say, but I think my grandfather was one of the very few people that enjoyed WW2
He came from a tiny village, spent years working down the mines (very dangerous in those days) had never been abroad in those days (he was too poor for that)
and jumped at the chance of joining the army. He seen a ton of countries, got discipline (his words) and made life-long friends like no other.
I can understand that, it was a pretty good deal for a lot of young men in the Western Allied armies.
My grandfather enjoyed his years in Africa, but then again, he was on the back of a tank, all guns blazing
Ah yes, the good old state sponsored OE
See Africa, Sicily, Italy, France, Holland and Germany! Get paid while doing it! Free room, clothing and board! Meet other young men your age!
Indeed. My relatives got to see northern Russia, Iran, the sweet beach front property off of France, and the beautiful tropical paradise that was the Pacific. One liked the island life so much he stayed.
In the words of that great philosopher and gentleman, Milo Aukerman:
Listen up man, I'll tell you who I am
Just another stupid american
You don't wanna listen
You don't wanna understand
So finish up your drink and go home
My grandfather enjoyed his years in Africa, but then again, he was on the back of a tank, all guns blazing
Ah yes, the good old state sponsored OE
See Africa, Sicily, Italy, France, Holland and Germany! Get paid while doing it! Free room, clothing and board! Meet other young men your age!
Indeed. My relatives got to see northern Russia, Iran, the sweet beach front property off of France, and the beautiful tropical paradise that was the Pacific. One liked the island life so much he stayed.
How did he go from Northern Russia to Iran during WW2?
And please don't be a smart-ass by saying he went by plane/boat
I voted meh. Met some yanks in my time, most of them were stand up blokes (somewhat arrogant though), but some of the events/news from there make me go WTF way to often for me to seriously consider living there.
My grandfather enjoyed his years in Africa, but then again, he was on the back of a tank, all guns blazing
So did mine. Even after the Empire threw the colonials under the German bus the unfortunate events in Tobruk sent him on a Nazi sponsored holiday in Italy. Apparently the accommodations were lousy, the service was slow and the food bland. And, after a while, he felt the institution had nothing left to offer him, so he left.
My grandfather enjoyed his years in Africa, but then again, he was on the back of a tank, all guns blazing
Ah yes, the good old state sponsored OE
See Africa, Sicily, Italy, France, Holland and Germany! Get paid while doing it! Free room, clothing and board! Meet other young men your age!
Indeed. My relatives got to see northern Russia, Iran, the sweet beach front property off of France, and the beautiful tropical paradise that was the Pacific. One liked the island life so much he stayed.
How did he go from Northern Russia to Iran during WW2?
And please don't be a smart-ass by saying he went by plane/boat
One was a merchant marine sea captain. he did runs to Mother Russia, when his ship wasn't being torpedoed.
Two others in the Navy-one in ETO, one in the Pacific. Another was in the 2nd Marine Division.
My grandfather enjoyed his years in Africa, but then again, he was on the back of a tank, all guns blazing
Ah yes, the good old state sponsored OE
See Africa, Sicily, Italy, France, Holland and Germany! Get paid while doing it! Free room, clothing and board! Meet other young men your age!
Indeed. My relatives got to see northern Russia, Iran, the sweet beach front property off of France, and the beautiful tropical paradise that was the Pacific. One liked the island life so much he stayed.
How did he go from Northern Russia to Iran during WW2?
And please don't be a smart-ass by saying he went by plane/boat
One was a merchant marine sea captain. he did runs to Mother Russia, when his ship wasn't being torpedoed.
Two others in the Navy-one in ETO, one in the Pacific. Another was in the 2nd Marine Division.
Ah, I thought the same person had done all that, which would have been quite a story!
Anyway, back on topic.
I like American history, politics, culture, and these pretzels.
Unfortunately, they spoil themselves with root beer , cheese and that god-awful bud beer
and writing dates as month/day/year, when the rest of the fricking world writes them as day/month/year!
I personally don't care what other people think of my country. Having said that I'm not happy with America anymore. At least in my area everyone is to concerned with making all the immigrants happy and ignoring all our own traditions and beliefs.
SGTPozy wrote: I hate how many 'Muricans believe that they're superior to everyone else and they're from the greatest country in the world... Reminds me a bit of Nazi Germany...
'Merica people don't travel much, except for Disney and the Grand Old Opry.
Having been to Canada, Mexico, UK, and France, I can say that people are people wherever you go. There are lots of great countries out there, and if you truly believe in yourself, you can make Kanye West fething move to one.
sebster wrote: I think it's a great country, happy to put 'love it' as my answer.
This thread is pretty sad though. Weirdly insecure. You're the strongest, richest kid in the whole school, running around asking all the other kids if they really like you is lame.
^This.
For all her worts, I have no desire to leave my homeland.
Politically, there's a large segment (primarily the lefties, who wants us to be more like the rest of the world) believes that we should NOT be the bigggest kid on the block.
Freakazoitt wrote: Americans, do you think, in 1950s 60s USA was better than now?
Hell no.
We have internet, now. And Game of Thrones. And D&D. And more vaccines. And my wife can work and make good money. I can play Bubble Witch on my iPhone while I drop the kids off at the pool while listening to Pandora radio.
Born and raised here. I love America, but an some stuff needs to change. We are in 2015 and the people running it still live in 1950. A bunch of old White people who are afraid of change, and instead of embrace it they fight it every chance they get.
I am not sure if I would stay if I had the chance to leave.
Freakazoitt wrote: Americans, do you think, in 1950s 60s USA was better than now?
Hell no.
We have internet, now. And Game of Thrones. And D&D. And more vaccines. And my wife can work and make good money. I can play Bubble Witch on my iPhone while I drop the kids off at the pool while listening to Pandora radio.
One of the big "it depends" regarding the '50s is who you were. If you were a white male, things were pretty good so long as you weren't fighting in Korea, and could roll with the paranoia about the Commies ready to turn our quaint towns and villages into radioactive craters.
If you were a woman or non-white...not such a good time, methinks.
gorgon wrote: One of the big "it depends" regarding the '50s is who you were. If you were a white male, things were pretty good so long as you weren't fighting in Korea, and could roll with the paranoia about the Commies ready to turn our quaint towns and villages into radioactive craters.
If you were a woman or non-white...not such a good time, methinks.
It may not be as bad but it is still kinda crappy for Non-Whites and Women.
Freakazoitt wrote: Americans, do you think, in 1950s 60s USA was better than now?
Hell no.
We have internet, now. And Game of Thrones. And D&D. And more vaccines. And my wife can work and make good money. I can play Bubble Witch on my iPhone while I drop the kids off at the pool while listening to Pandora radio.
feth the 50s. THIS is the golden age.
I'm going with this + no Jim Crow + no Cold War threatening to go Hot (Korea/Vietnam the great nuking) - complete loss of manufacturing jobs - complete loss of middle class.
Its a bit of a tossup.
Vash108 wrote: Born and raised here. I love America, but an some stuff needs to change. We are in 2015 and the people running it still live in 1950. A bunch of old White people who are afraid of change, and instead of embrace it they fight it every chance they get.
I am not sure if I would stay if I had the chance to leave.
The change that needs to happen is not going forward but backward. We need to go back to what worked instead of trying to change for the better when we already had a functioning system.
Vash108 wrote: Born and raised here. I love America, but an some stuff needs to change. We are in 2015 and the people running it still live in 1950. A bunch of old White people who are afraid of change, and instead of embrace it they fight it every chance they get.
I am not sure if I would stay if I had the chance to leave.
The change that needs to happen is not going forward but backward. We need to go back to what worked instead of trying to change for the better when we already had a functioning system.
Still have to examine the causes of these things. Look at the ones still causing these issues to occur. If we can change that fine. But until the people who call those shots that effect our country change, nothing will.
I accept it as it is. There's amazing parts, there's sad parts, and there's scary parts.
As a country, we tend to idealise it a lot from afar, but I am fairly ambivalent. I do admire the technology advancements, and opportunities for research though. Plus the art colleges and animation schools.
I don't want to live there though. Maybe some day when I retire.
Vash108 wrote: Born and raised here. I love America, but an some stuff needs to change. We are in 2015 and the people running it still live in 1950. A bunch of old White people who are afraid of change, and instead of embrace it they fight it every chance they get.
I am not sure if I would stay if I had the chance to leave.
The change that needs to happen is not going forward but backward. We need to go back to what worked instead of trying to change for the better when we already had a functioning system.
Can you give a few examples?
Marriage licenses is one example. Why would a government agency ever take over a religious practice? It is a religious practice. The govt should have NO stance on marriage neither allowing or barring it in any form.
Excessive government policing agencies. Why the hell do we need ATF, FBI, NSA, CIA, INS, NCIS, THE BUREAU OF ENGRAVING AND PRINTING POLICE(WTF!!!), the list goes on.....
SOCIAL POLICIES. The government should neither PERMIT OR DENY anyone's rights with social policy.
The imperialistic nature of our govt. We have so much military all across the planet and we spend billions doing so. Sure send the navy out on cruises through those areas but why do we need 5 major bases in Japan alone? Shut it down
Today it seems as if everyone cant get along so big brother has to micro manage peoples lives with this law and that law. The govt needs to get the hell out of things. Society will regulate itself should its basic needs be met. Society will fall apart when we no longer have food, shelter, and clothing. Still we have no federal budget and a national debt that is 3 times what it was even 10 years ago but yet we have congress arguing about if gays can marry. That's insane.
We spend way too much on Arms and not on Soldiers. We have planes, tanks, boats, ect. being shat out and left to sit in yard to rot. While we spend no Money on the actual soldiers who come back here with PTSD and other problems and they are left out in the cold with the back up of VA logs to months?
We need to take a serious look at our tax system along with income inequality, so maybe we could have a middle class again.
But a lot of politicians are in a lot of pockets both D & R. for example, Just look at the recent GOP gathering to Pander to the Koch bothers to see who gets the billion dollar funding from them. I wonder who has their leash?
namiel wrote: Marriage licenses is one example. Why would a government agency ever take over a religious practice? It is a religious practice. The govt should have NO stance on marriage neither allowing or barring it in any form.
Marriage was a government thing long before religions got their hands on it. The rulers needed to know who would inherit and all that so having a framework for producing legal heirs was necessary. Religions only got into it much later - for example in Europe until the 1500s a priest wasn't necessary at all, only the agreement between two parties.
The real point one should take from it is that the government shouldn't have any say in a contract consenting adults enter into.
But that's what a government does for a marriage contract - sees that both are consenting adults. Without a government having a look at it you're reduced to churches doing it, and they often have laxer standards for "consent" and "adult".
The real point one should take from it is that the government shouldn't have any say in a contract consenting adults enter into.
But that's what a government does for a marriage contract - sees that both are consenting adults. Without a government having a look at it you're reduced to churches doing it, and they often have laxer standards for "consent" and "adult".
No, they're dictating far more than age. Which isn't just for marriage, but for the entry into ALL contracts.
They should have zero say in who can enter those contracts and how many people can enter them once they're past that age of consent.
Anyways. I couldn't give a golden rat's feth about what other countries think of us. Quite simply, we don't need most of them and they can take a hike. I personally wish we'd take some further isolationist policies and give a big Stone Cold to the entirety of the Middle East.
Been pretty much all over the world
Canada, Mexico, Panama, Brazil, Philippines, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Some other 'Stans, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi, Israel, Egypt, Ukraine, Romania, Poland, Bosnia, Kosovo, Italy, Germany, France, Sweden, Norway, UK, Honduras........
Jihadin wrote: Been pretty much all over the world
Canada, Mexico, Panama, Brazil, Philippines, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Some other 'Stans, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi, Israel, Egypt, Ukraine, Romania, Poland, Bosnia, Kosovo, Italy, Germany, France, Sweden, Norway, UK, Honduras........
BBQ......no one has better BBQ then the US of A
its hard to say, north Carolina BBQ is the best in the world hands down but second is defiantly Korean bbq
Jihadin wrote: Been pretty much all over the world
Canada, Mexico, Panama, Brazil, Philippines, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Some other 'Stans, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi, Israel, Egypt, Ukraine, Romania, Poland, Bosnia, Kosovo, Italy, Germany, France, Sweden, Norway, UK, Honduras........
BBQ......no one has better BBQ then the US of A
its hard to say, north Carolina BBQ is the best in the world hands down but second is defiantly Korean bbq
Voted “like”. Don’t love because of my displeasure with our current political leaders and I what I believe to be serious inequities in US society and foreign policy.
Obviously I am hopelessly biased and really appreciate the perspective of non-US residents, which is one of the things that I think does make the US great is that more often than not the US collectively is willing and seemingly compelled to submit anything it does to the scrutiny of others. There are of course problems with this and is typified by the opinion poll itself. While seeking the input and opinion of others as driven by our democratic ideals that everyone should have a say and everyone has a right to say it that there are many in this world who do not share those values and cynically take advantage of those ideals to pursue their own agenda. An agenda that which sometime can be the very destruction of the US or to make the US subservient or “weak”. It’s one of the reasons why I dislike the UN and object to the US ceding any authority to it. It is not a body that collectively has the US’s best interests at heart and whose representatives are personally corrupt or from corrupt governments.
Overall, I think the world is a better place because of the US which is why it is at least deserving of "like". That if and when the US falls, much of the civilized world will really and truly mourn and regret its passing.
I strongly dislike America as a state. It is hard to find a state whose foreign policies I disagree more with. I always disliked them, but I think the russophobia that became much more prominent in American media since 2014 pushed me to hate. I could start an entire rant here about how the US is evil and everything it did wrong, but I don't think anyone is interested. You can just read it on the internet anyway, my reasons are pretty much the same as those of most Russians.
But once you take their self-righteousness away, I quite like Americans as a people. They are funny and crazy (both in good and in bad ways). They are open, optimistic and have a great sense of humour. Even American politics seem like a comedy show. At least, that is how they present it on the Dutch news, where they only show the crazy parts.
I love America based upon what it has achieved in the past and what it could be in the future.
But based upon how it currently is and what all signs are pointing to it being like in the future, I feel a lot of disappointment. At this point I wouldn't at all mind going to somewhere like Canada or one of the nordic countries, where money isn't tied so firmly into every aspect of the society.
Man... the news you get over there must be something else.
Given that he appears to be going mostly by foreign policy, it doesn't require much imagination to see how someone could "hate" America. Especially given, you know, America's (as presented in the news disclaimer) attitude towards Russians, or anyone suspected of being from the vague area of the middle east.
Personally, I vote meh. I mean, it's got a lot going for it, but man, you do have some weird shut going on over there, and unfortunately some of that actually seeps through to us. Things which in my opinion are fething weird (or broken) include your political and judicial systems, military expenditure, copyright law and gun culture. That's just my opinion, though, and I don't mean any of this as a personal attack.
Also, cheese. Man up and call it what it is, that gak is yellow/orange rubber, and is probably outlawed by the Geneva Convention!
Jihadin wrote: Been pretty much all over the world
Canada, Mexico, Panama, Brazil, Philippines, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Some other 'Stans, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi, Israel, Egypt, Ukraine, Romania, Poland, Bosnia, Kosovo, Italy, Germany, France, Sweden, Norway, UK, Honduras........
BBQ......no one has better BBQ then the US of A
Ummm NZ is like the home of the BBQ (the new home). COme here for a real BBQ, heck sometimes we have a BBQ and a Hangi and just feast on the best of both worlds.
Man... the news you get over there must be something else.
Given that he appears to be going mostly by foreign policy, it doesn't require much imagination to see how someone could "hate" America. Especially given, you know, America's (as presented in the news disclaimer) attitude towards Russians, or anyone suspected of being from the vague area of the middle east.
Personally, I vote meh. I mean, it's got a lot going for it, but man, you do have some weird shut going on over there, and unfortunately some of that actually seeps through to us. Things which in my opinion are fething weird (or broken) include your political and judicial systems, military expenditure, copyright law and gun culture. That's just my opinion, though, and I don't mean any of this as a personal attack.
Also, cheese. Man up and call it what it is, that gak is yellow/orange rubber, and is probably outlawed by the Geneva Convention!
Yay, another American cheese hater. Last time I tried their cheese I felt like my life shortened.
Sausages, steak, pork, onion, bacon, tomato, kebabs, chicken, beef, hash browns, and well... Probably easier to list what we don't BBQ: Deserts and bread. Oh and some Salads we don't BBQ...
Sausages, steak, pork, onion, bacon, tomato, kebabs, chicken, beef, hash browns, and well... Probably easier to list what we don't BBQ: Deserts and bread.
the only bbq is PORK. anything else is grilled/smoked meat it is not BBQ.
cincydooley wrote: They should have zero say in who can enter those contracts and how many people can enter them once they're past that age of consent.
Because what? I might not like governments too much, but at least we elected these idiots to run our affairs. A priest has no responsibility and no accountability unless a government keeps tabs on him. Personally I wouldn't trust a priest even if I could throw him in front of a car at any moment.
Sausages, steak, pork, onion, bacon, tomato, kebabs, chicken, beef, hash browns, and well... Probably easier to list what we don't BBQ: Deserts and bread.
the only bbq is PORK. anything else is grilled/smoked meat it is not BBQ.
Sauce is not required fyi, sauce is not bbq
Sauce on a BBQ? Nobody puts sauce on a BBQ... You put the sauce on after the BBQ. I think thats what the lid is for, to smoke the meat or something for the most flavour.
We have BBQs in most houses, most beaches and parks and we usually just cook anything we got on them. Usually we simply go "bring some meat" and people come with all kinds of meat. It gets put on and we all eat it after its slow cooked with all the flavour locked in the lid.
Without the lid it is a grill yes. Which is common when it is cold outside.
cincydooley wrote: They should have zero say in who can enter those contracts and how many people can enter them once they're past that age of consent.
Because what? I might not like governments too much, but at least we elected these idiots to run our affairs. A priest has no responsibility and no accountability unless a government keeps tabs on him. Personally I wouldn't trust a priest even if I could throw him in front of a car at any moment.
I think you're taking it the wrong way. I read cincy's statement as saying that, as it takes place between consenting adults, it shouldn't be anyone's business who does what with whom. Adult over the age of consent? You can make up your own bloody mind what to do with your life, you shouldn't have the government telling you that you can't marry someone of the same sex, or two people at the same time. Nohing in there implies giving power to priests. At least, that's my interpretation.
... actually, this marriage stuff is a bit off topic, really. I don't want to drag this thread down this well-trodden route, so I'll end it there.
I'm fairly neutral towards the US. There's obviously good and great stuff that's come out of America (cartoons like Venture Bros./Rick and Morty and guys like Stephen Colbert) but then you have the bad stuff which I won't bother repeating since other posters have already covered most of them. The main time I really go against them is during any kind of national/global sports competition like FIFA or the Olympics in particular, its not fair that they win out all those medals from the sheer number of competitors!
America is a great place with great things for most people. It's not a perfect place and it certainly has lots of problems that certainly can and should be better addressed. There are places that do better in some areas, a lot of places that do a whole lot worse. I'd rather live in the US that most other places on earth. Beyond that, I'm not sure what there is to say. It's not perfect, but no place is.
I see a lot of petty jealously and envy in this thread. You just need to let go of that hate, and accept that the USA is the greatest country on earth.
Spetulhu wrote:Marriage was a government thing long before religions got their hands on it. The rulers needed to know who would inherit and all that so having a framework for producing legal heirs was necessary. Religions only got into it much later - for example in Europe until the 1500s a priest wasn't necessary at all, only the agreement between two parties.
Marriage really has been tied to religion for much longer then that. Even the Church recognized it as a sacrament by the 12th century. Before even early Christianity, Judaism and Hinduism recognized it as an essential part of one's religious experience. I am not saying the state hasn't had a hand in the development of marriage, but it has had a religious element to it for as long as people have been worshiping.
Spetulhu wrote:But that's what a government does for a marriage contract - sees that both are consenting adults. Without a government having a look at it you're reduced to churches doing it, and they often have laxer standards for "consent" and "adult".
I find this amusing. Since when has the Western Church been accused of being more lax then the government on anything? That certainly hasn't come up in the last 15 years or so.
namiel wrote:its hard to say, north Carolina BBQ is the best in the world hands down but second is defiantly Korean bbq
As somebody who loves BBQ, I must protest. If I wanted something stringy, sour, pathetic, uninspired, and barely palatable I will play Age of Sigmar thank you very much. Truly good BBQ comes from the Lone Star State. I have never had BBQ that even comes close to a good brisket, and lets not forget it is EVERYWHERE in this wonderful state.
-Shrike- wrote:Given that he appears to be going mostly by foreign policy, it doesn't require much imagination to see how someone could "hate" America. Especially given, you know, America's (as presented in the news disclaimer) attitude towards Russians, or anyone suspected of being from the vague area of the middle east.
Personally, I vote meh. I mean, it's got a lot going for it, but man, you do have some weird shut going on over there, and unfortunately some of that actually seeps through to us. Things which in my opinion are fething weird (or broken) include your political and judicial systems, military expenditure, copyright law and gun culture. That's just my opinion, though, and I don't mean any of this as a personal attack.
Also, cheese. Man up and call it what it is, that gak is yellow/orange rubber, and is probably outlawed by the Geneva Convention!
Wait a second. When did Putin become the good guy? I have a ton of friends in Europe, and while they (and myself for that matter) don't care too much for American foreign policy, they all love us in relation to Russia. For Christ's sake, my family in Eastern Europe is terrified of that madman, and they wish we would send over the military to beat the hell out of him. Is Putin a greater political genius then I give him credit? Did he really convince swaths of Europe that he is a pretty decent guy, even after his escapades in Georgia and the Ukraine?
Spetulhu wrote:But that's what a government does for a marriage contract - sees that both are consenting adults. Without a government having a look at it you're reduced to churches doing it, and they often have laxer standards for "consent" and "adult".
I find this amusing. Since when has the Western Church been accused of being more lax then the government on anything? That certainly hasn't come up in the last 15 years or so.
OK, that was perhaps a bit unfair. But the church doesn't protect people from the government - in fact quite a few of our European wars have had the church endorse one side or the other, or both. The church having any say in marriage at all up here in the North is mostly due to the Swedish king giving his new Protestant Church a few gifts after he disbanded the Catholic Church and took all their stuff. And after that the Church made sure to send Chaplains (like those Space Marine guys) with every army, telling people how fighting for the King Ordained By Heaven was righteous and just. And ofc, the Americans have that issue of Mormon subsects endorsing multiple wives and child brides despite the law forbidding such practices.
Point being: Priests aren't automatically any more righteous than anyone else, and if they can hide behind the church they're even less likely to be brought to answer for any wrongdoing. Powerful priests have abused their position before and will do it again. Having set rules is good for everyone.
I love it here. And hopefully I can go for citizenship soon
Spetulhu wrote: Most of the US seems fine, and your average American is a friendly guy though not always aware of things outside that huge country. I know I'm not as well versed in US history as I could be, but at least I don't call the German guide a liar for claiming her family house is older than Columbus. You know, because history starts when Columbus discovered 'Murica.
We have pubs back home older than the US
SGTPozy wrote: I hate how many 'Muricans believe that they're superior to everyone else and they're from the greatest country in the world... Reminds me a bit of Nazi Germany...
I've lived here 3 years and have yet to meet a single person like that.
I don't like when someone judges others. but now I can't keep.
It is obvious that the USA now the most evil country (for others).
Evil Empire as the Rome was for everyone who refuse to be enslaved.
now there is nobody who so widely uses violence for the purposes
Аnd the country was such earlier - it killed 100000000 native indians and never consider it as crime. "Good indian - dead indian". Something like nazi's slogan isn't it?
WW1, WW2 - it everything sources of the income for the USA. Favorable business.
The American agents financed revolution 1917 in Russia. Then they financed Trotsky. In total for introduction of chaos. in the same way, as they do it today.
Panama, Costa-Rika, Gonduras, Guatemala, Turkey, China, Nikaragua, Salvador, Yougoslavia, Greece, Philipines, Korea, Vietnam, Lebanon, Laos, Gaiti, Dominican, Irac, Brazil, Bolivia, Chilie, Uruguai, Central Africa, Cambodia, Zambia, Grenada, Libia, Columbia - everywhere America does revolutions, prepares acts of terrorism, interferes, finances dictators and destroys stability.
USA sponsored an prepeared Georgia to invade South Ossetia.
It sposored 2004 Ukraine crysis. It resposible for 2014 events in Ukraine,
There is no justification to all this, but USA own interests.
They even don't have proves, that Bin Laden resposible for 9/11. Note, that Bin Laden was prepeared by USA in 1980s.
Anybody of you knows all details how it was prepared 9/11? no
Freakazoitt wrote: I don't like when someone judges others. but now I can't keep.
It is obvious that the USA now the most evil country (for others).
Evil Empire as the Rome was for everyone who refuse to be enslaved.
now there is nobody who so widely uses violence for the purposes
Аnd the country was such earlier - it killed 100000000 native indians and never consider it as crime. "Good indian - dead indian". Something like nazi's slogan isn't it?
WW1, WW2 - it everything sources of the income for the USA. Favorable business.
The American agents financed revolution 1917 in Russia. Then they financed Trotsky. In total for introduction of chaos. in the same way, as they do it today.
Panama, Costa-Rika, Gonduras, Guatemala, Turkey, China, Nikaragua, Salvador, Yougoslavia, Greece, Philipines, Korea, Vietnam, Lebanon, Laos, Gaiti, Dominican, Irac, Brazil, Bolivia, Chilie, Uruguai, Central Africa, Cambodia, Zambia, Grenada, Libia, Columbia - everywhere America does revolutions, prepares acts of terrorism, interferes, finances dictators and destroys stability.
USA sponsored an prepeared Georgia to invade South Ossetia.
It sposored 2004 Ukraine crysis. It resposible for 2014 events in Ukraine,
There is no justification to all this, but USA own interests.
They even don't have proves, that Bin Laden resposible for 9/11. Note, that Bin Laden was prepeared by USA in 1980s.
Anybody of you knows all details how it was prepared 9/11? no
An all many wars USA was participated, everywhere USA was attacker (except of Pearl Harbor / Japan). But even Pearl Harbour wasn't real US territory that time (Hawai was occupied).
I understand that could exaggerate a little in the previous post, but the fact - America always an aggressor (except Pearl Harbour)
And I didn't learn who and why blew up towers 9/11 nobody offered any exact explanations. though the event was shocking, as a doomsday
But it tured to be doomsday for others, not for USA
Freakazoitt wrote: I don't like when someone judges others. but now I can't keep.
It is obvious that the USA now the most evil country (for others).
Evil Empire as the Rome was for everyone who refuse to be enslaved.
now there is nobody who so widely uses violence for the purposes
Аnd the country was such earlier - it killed 100000000 native indians and never consider it as crime. "Good indian - dead indian". Something like nazi's slogan isn't it?
WW1, WW2 - it everything sources of the income for the USA. Favorable business.
The American agents financed revolution 1917 in Russia. Then they financed Trotsky. In total for introduction of chaos. in the same way, as they do it today.
Panama, Costa-Rika, Gonduras, Guatemala, Turkey, China, Nikaragua, Salvador, Yougoslavia, Greece, Philipines, Korea, Vietnam, Lebanon, Laos, Gaiti, Dominican, Irac, Brazil, Bolivia, Chilie, Uruguai, Central Africa, Cambodia, Zambia, Grenada, Libia, Columbia - everywhere America does revolutions, prepares acts of terrorism, interferes, finances dictators and destroys stability.
USA sponsored an prepeared Georgia to invade South Ossetia.
It sposored 2004 Ukraine crysis. It resposible for 2014 events in Ukraine,
There is no justification to all this, but USA own interests.
They even don't have proves, that Bin Laden resposible for 9/11. Note, that Bin Laden was prepeared by USA in 1980s.
Anybody of you knows all details how it was prepared 9/11? no
Yeah we're an Evil Empire, and if you Russians keep trying to muscle in on our turf, we'll be sending in the Star Destroyers.
Now I'm off to listen to the new American National Anthem:
Freakazoitt wrote: I don't like when someone judges others. but now I can't keep.
It is obvious that the USA now the most evil country (for others).
Evil Empire as the Rome was for everyone who refuse to be enslaved.
now there is nobody who so widely uses violence for the purposes
Аnd the country was such earlier - it killed 100000000 native indians and never consider it as crime. "Good indian - dead indian". Something like nazi's slogan isn't it?
WW1, WW2 - it everything sources of the income for the USA. Favorable business.
The American agents financed revolution 1917 in Russia. Then they financed Trotsky. In total for introduction of chaos. in the same way, as they do it today.
Panama, Costa-Rika, Gonduras, Guatemala, Turkey, China, Nikaragua, Salvador, Yougoslavia, Greece, Philipines, Korea, Vietnam, Lebanon, Laos, Gaiti, Dominican, Irac, Brazil, Bolivia, Chilie, Uruguai, Central Africa, Cambodia, Zambia, Grenada, Libia, Columbia - everywhere America does revolutions, prepares acts of terrorism, interferes, finances dictators and destroys stability.
USA sponsored an prepeared Georgia to invade South Ossetia.
It sposored 2004 Ukraine crysis. It resposible for 2014 events in Ukraine,
There is no justification to all this, but USA own interests.
They even don't have proves, that Bin Laden resposible for 9/11. Note, that Bin Laden was prepeared by USA in 1980s.
Anybody of you knows all details how it was prepared 9/11? no
Ok, lets be fair here. The US has done lots of gakky things. A lot. But the US could also be a lot worse, particularly next to the acts of many other nations. A lot of the above list is true, but a lot of it is pure fantasy (really, the US killed a hundred million native americans...where on earth are you getting that number? Really, the US was behind the 1917 revolution? Methinks the Germans were the foreign power to blame for that, the US invaded Vladivostok in an attempt to stop the Bolsheviks...), and a lot of other nations have been a lot worse.
Every major world power has done stupid, inexcusable gak. The US absolutely has. The UK absolutely has. Even little ol' Belgium has some extremely uncomfortable history. Russia certainly isn't blameless either, lets not forget the role of Russia/USSR in like half the countries from the list above (China, Vietnam, Korea, etc) or their rather awkward history in Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, etc
Trying to portray the US as the "great evil" is somewhat absurd. Has the US done gakky things, and continue to do them? Absolutely. Is is responsible for every evil in the world ? No. Is it the only nation to do gakky things? No. As far as world-dominating empires go, the US is relatively benign next to most other Empires, certainly next to the British or Roman empire's at their heights. Does that mean it doesn't do terrible things that are absolutely reprehensible and deserving of condemnation? No it doesn't. But it's certainly not the great singular source of evil in the world, particularly when the US is the largest source of food & medical aid, medical and technological research, etc on the planet that has saved and extended more lives than any other nation in history.
Freakazoitt wrote: An all many wars USA was participated, everywhere USA was attacker (except of Pearl Harbor / Japan). But even Pearl Harbour wasn't real US territory that time (Hawai was occupied).
I understand that could exaggerate a little in the previous post, but the fact - America always an aggressor (except Pearl Harbour)
And I didn't learn who and why blew up towers 9/11 nobody offered any exact explanations. though the event was shocking, as a doomsday
But it tured to be doomsday for others, not for USA
The US was the aggressor in Korea? Methinks not, given that the North Koreans were the ones that launched that conflict and major US forces didn't arrive until South Korea had been almost totally defeated.. The US was the aggressor in WW1? Methinks not coming in three years late (I don't even think you could point to a singular aggressor there). The US was the aggressor in the 1991 Gulf conflict? Methinks not, when Iraqi forces were the ones that invaded Kuwait.
Yes, the US has been the aggressor in many instances, but nowhere near all, and not really any moreso than most other major world powers.
(really, the US killed a hundred million native americans...where on earth are you getting that number?
I counted them
Really, the US was behind the 1917 revolution?
No, but they add fuel to the fire
. Russia certainly isn't blameless either, lets not forget the role of Russia/USSR in like half the countries from the list above
Of course not blameless. But it acted to defend agaist USA imperialistic actions. Sometimes it was necessary to do different things as support of Arabs instead of Israel. Oh acting as a home-assaulter in Afghanistan. But I wonder how americans proud of all they did or just ignore.
Is is responsible for every evil in the world ? No.
No. But who is more "evil"? Russia, which is only protected themself to survive many years? North Korea, which doesn't need real war, and the situation "as is" is ok for them. Iran, which was slandered? Nazi Germany, which no more?
There weren't even that many Native Americans when the US was founded. Most of them died when diseases spread by the Spanish wiped them out a few centuries earlier.
Freakazoitt wrote:I don't like when someone judges others. but now I can't keep.
It is obvious that the USA now the most evil country (for others).
Evil Empire as the Rome was for everyone who refuse to be enslaved.
now there is nobody who so widely uses violence for the purposes
Аnd the country was such earlier - it killed 100000000 native indians and never consider it as crime. "Good indian - dead indian". Something like nazi's slogan isn't it?
WW1, WW2 - it everything sources of the income for the USA. Favorable business.
The American agents financed revolution 1917 in Russia. Then they financed Trotsky. In total for introduction of chaos. in the same way, as they do it today.
Panama, Costa-Rika, Gonduras, Guatemala, Turkey, China, Nikaragua, Salvador, Yougoslavia, Greece, Philipines, Korea, Vietnam, Lebanon, Laos, Gaiti, Dominican, Irac, Brazil, Bolivia, Chilie, Uruguai, Central Africa, Cambodia, Zambia, Grenada, Libia, Columbia - everywhere America does revolutions, prepares acts of terrorism, interferes, finances dictators and destroys stability.
USA sponsored an prepeared Georgia to invade South Ossetia.
It sposored 2004 Ukraine crysis. It resposible for 2014 events in Ukraine,
Well it's not like we can sieze emergencey powers with out a senate or world government to sieze them from. Clearly we orchestrated all global chaos to facilitate the founding of a global government and congress were we could secure special privelages and increase our political power so that we might gain enough power and military backing to deploy storm troopers on every continent and purge the jedi scum hiding in the Eurasian land mass specifically.
There is no justification to all this, but USA own interests.
well lets be honest if we're an empire comparable to (or greater than) rome do we will need any other justification. Personally I think once we complete the death star we know congress and the pentagon are building (They said no, but we all heard yes.) I really think the appropriate question the world should be asking is not "Is the US justified in this?" but instead "How might we appease our new overlords?" Don't you agree? besides with out slave labor where are we going to get the dispossable bodies to build in Zero G and Absolute Zero? Wookies? They're all dead or devolved into Koalas and do you really believe koalas have the dexterity or intelligence to work in those coinditions? On a strict diet of difficult to obtain Eucolyptus?!! By Gods no!
They even don't have proves, that Bin Laden resposible for 9/11. Note, that Bin Laden was prepeared by USA in 1980s.
Anybody of you knows all details how it was prepared 9/11? no
Well of course not if we all knew the details we would know how exactly how carefully plotted and timed as santa claus' annual journey using stolen alien technology to deliver presents to all the good America Fearing children of the world. And we'd finally see a funding report for the easter bunny's genocide against all chicken kind clearly backed by the states sometime around his conception. Clearly we aren't eating them fast enough so we must devour their chicks while they are still in their soft marshmallowy phase...
Freakazoitt wrote:An all many wars USA was participated, everywhere USA was attacker (except of Pearl Harbor / Japan). But even Pearl Harbour wasn't real US territory that time (Hawai was occupied).
I understand that could exaggerate a little in the previous post, but the fact - America always an aggressor (except Pearl Harbour)
And I didn't learn who and why blew up towers 9/11 nobody offered any exact explanations. though the event was shocking, as a doomsday
But it tured to be doomsday for others, not for USA
imma leave these here... and hopefully hopefully something amazing happens. You know aside from the imminent firing of the North American Death Star.
Edit: To the person who beat me to the star wars references... You win this battle... but the war will be mine.
Is is responsible for every evil in the world ? No.
No. But who is more "evil"? Russia, which is only protected themself to survive many years? North Korea, which doesn't need real war, and the situation "as is" is ok for them. Iran, which was slandered? Nazi Germany, which no more?
Why are we talking about nazis? I mean yes those uniforms were stylish, but lets be honest they coppied everything from the First Order or the one True Galactic Empire.
There weren't even that many Native Americans when the US was founded. Most of them died when diseases spread by the Spanish wiped them out a few centuries earlier.
Look at him. It denies genocide of native indians. That's it it also does Americans not "best in the world". it forces to think of them, as "best in the world"
We quite literally, had nothing, to do with the Revolution of 1917. No one did. The Western World was in an uproar about the whole thing.
You might be thinking of how we backed the Whites in the Russian Civil War (who didn't?), but that just leads us to the completely hilarious claim that we support Trotsky. The only time the US wanted anything from Trotsky was use him to shut down the American Communist Party, which failed miserably because like most people, Trotsky was smarter than a US Senator
Of course not blameless. But it acted to defend agaist USA imperialistic actions. Sometimes it was necessary to do different things as support of Arabs instead of Israel. Oh acting as a home-assaulter in Afghanistan. But I wonder how americans proud of all they did or just ignore.
More than half the countries you listed were thrown into chaos by the KGB trying to start Communist Revolutions all over the world. We can debate the morality of America's penchant for intervening in foreign conflicts (and the CIA's continual losses to the KGB in those conflicts I might add ), but describing the policy as imperialistic isn't just hypocritical, it's counter factual.
No one in the US denies that we were gakky to the Native Americans. We might not use the word genocide, but I doubt anyone would oppose calling it a crime against humanity.
(really, the US killed a hundred million native americans...where on earth are you getting that number?
I counted them
Ok...
Aside from the fact that there never were that many native peoples in the Americas, and most were had been killed by diseases by the time the US was established, methinks this is a wee bit of a ridiculous claim.
Really, the US was behind the 1917 revolution?
No, but they add fuel to the fire
No moreso than any other major western power. Singling out the US in this instance is also rather silly. Everyone who was anyone had a role in making that situation worse, but had very little to do with bringing the Bolsheviks to power.
. Russia certainly isn't blameless either, lets not forget the role of Russia/USSR in like half the countries from the list above
Of course not blameless. But it acted to defend agaist USA imperialistic actions.
Soviet backed North Korea launched a war of aggression to defend against US Imperialism? Lets be real here, most of these instances were cases of Imperialism and Realpolitik on both sides...
Sometimes it was necessary to do different things as support of Arabs instead of Israel.
Yes, but lets not pretend these actions weren't any less Realpolitik/Imperialist than US actions were.
Oh acting as a home-assaulter in Afghanistan. But I wonder how americans proud of all they did or just ignore.
Afghanistan has been the honeytrap of most major empires, and the US was stupid to go in there the way we did, absolutely.
No. But who is more "evil"? Russia, which is only protected themself to survive many years?
Hrm, methinks most of Eastern Europe would like to disagree with that assertion. I'll fully admit that Russia and the USSR have historically been nowhere near as warmongering as the US has often attempted to portray it (just as the US is nowhere near as warmongering as the USSR/Russia has attempted to portray it), but lets not make it out like Russia didn't act offensively in many cases in its own interests either.
North Korea, which doesn't need real war, and the situation "as is" is ok for them. Iran, which was slandered? Nazi Germany, which no more?
North Korea is certainly more "evil" if you really want to go there. The US has its issues, but it's not allowing its people to starve in order to prop a single family in power and does not publicly execute people who voice disagreement with the government or ship their families to prison camps for multiple generations. We have our problems, but yeah, North Korea is pretty insane. As for Iran, I wouldn't really consider them any more "evil" than the US, perhaps a bit nuttier, but no, I wouldn't call Iran, as a nation, any more "evil" than anyone else doing stuff over in that area of the world, the US included.
We quite literally, had nothing, to do with the Revolution of 1917. No one did. The Western World was in an uproar about the whole thing.
You might be thinking of how we backed the Whites in the Russian Civil War (who didn't?), but that just leads us to the completely hilarious claim that we support Trotsky. The only time the US wanted anything from Trotsky was use him to shut down the American Communist Party, which failed miserably because like most people, Trotsky was smarter than a US Senator
American supporters of revolution: Jacob Schiff, Felix and Paul Warburg, Otto Kahn, Mortimer Schiff, Gugenhaim, Isaak Selingman.
(really, the US killed a hundred million native americans...where on earth are you getting that number?
I counted them
Ok...
Aside from the fact that there never were that many native peoples in the Americas, and most were had been killed by diseases by the time the US was established, methinks this is a wee bit of a ridiculous claim.
We quite literally, had nothing, to do with the Revolution of 1917. No one did. The Western World was in an uproar about the whole thing.
You might be thinking of how we backed the Whites in the Russian Civil War (who didn't?), but that just leads us to the completely hilarious claim that we support Trotsky. The only time the US wanted anything from Trotsky was use him to shut down the American Communist Party, which failed miserably because like most people, Trotsky was smarter than a US Senator
American supporters of revolution: Jacob Schiff, Felix and Paul Warburg, Otto Kahn, Mortimer Schiff, Gugenhaim, Isaak Selingman.
These people are also all german. Are you telling me that Germany also backed the bolsheviks. Because WW1 and WW2 propganda suggests otherwise.
We quite literally, had nothing, to do with the Revolution of 1917. No one did. The Western World was in an uproar about the whole thing.
You might be thinking of how we backed the Whites in the Russian Civil War (who didn't?), but that just leads us to the completely hilarious claim that we support Trotsky. The only time the US wanted anything from Trotsky was use him to shut down the American Communist Party, which failed miserably because like most people, Trotsky was smarter than a US Senator
American supporters of revolution: Jacob Schiff, Felix and Paul Warburg, Otto Kahn, Mortimer Schiff, Gugenhaim, Isaak Selingman.
We're going to assume a handful of private individuals are now stand-ins for the entirety of the US and represent US government policy in the matter?
(really, the US killed a hundred million native americans...where on earth are you getting that number?
I counted them
Ok...
Aside from the fact that there never were that many native peoples in the Americas, and most were had been killed by diseases by the time the US was established, methinks this is a wee bit of a ridiculous claim.
Good call. Yeah, lots of bad stuff happened to the people who lived here before, but 100 million is a silly number
These people are also all german. Are you telling me that Germany also backed the bolsheviks. Because WW1 and WW2 propganda suggests otherwise.
To be fair, it was the Germans who facilitated Lenin's return to Russia from Switzerland in the (subsequently achieved) hopes of destabilizing the Czar and forcing them out of the war (. It ended up being something of a backfiring policy ), and socialist ideals were quite strong among many elements of the German population
To be fair, it was the Germans who facilitated Lenin's return to Russia from Switzerland in the (subsequently achieved) hopes of destabilizing the Czar and forcing them out of the war (. It ended up being something of a backfiring policy ), and socialist ideals were quite strong among many elements of the German population
That is a fair point, but it was an attempt to remove Russia from the war. It was clearly Successful but shouldn't be interpretted necessarily as Supporting the Bolshevik cause. It was mearly intended to divert the Armies away from the United Austro-German-Ottoman Front and focus the attention on the homefront. To that regards it was incredibly successfuly (And clearly American Manipulation, not german ; P) The Socialist Ideals to some extent did remain, and clearly do to this day. I think we can attribute much of Germany's Robust Economy to many of their socialist leanings.
American supporters of revolution: Jacob Schiff, Felix and Paul Warburg, Otto Kahn, Mortimer Schiff, Gugenhaim, Isaak Selingman.
Jacob Schiff was not involved in the 1917 Revolution (you're thinking of either the failed 1905 Revolution, or his promotion of Pro-Japanese Propaganda in the Russo-Japanese War + financing the Empire of Japan to execute the war). In either case, he didn't really 'finance' anyone so much as he used his influence to block lines of credit to the Imperial Russian Government). EDIT: Stricken for incorrectness.
The men you list are part of what was called the 'Pro-Germany Faction,' a group of Germans around the world who helped finance the Whites in the Russian Civil War. They did finance various Pro-Jewish groups prior to the Revolution out of altruistic concern for the oppression of Jews in the Russian Empire, but the Bolsheviks just as vehemently Anti-Jewish, so feel free to make up reasons for why they would support the 1917 Revolution.
Also, all of the above were Germans (Except Gugenhaim who was Swiss), who immigrated to America (Except Jacob's son Mortimer, who was born State Side). So, if we're really going to start blaming states for the actions of individuals, I propose that Germany is really the most evil empire, and America is simply her patsy, and clearly Kuhn, Loeb, & Comp was part of the secret Zionist movement. The Nazi's were right!
There weren't even that many Native Americans when the US was founded. Most of them died when diseases spread by the Spanish wiped them out a few centuries earlier.
Look at him. It denies genocide of native indians. That's it it also does Americans not "best in the world". it forces to think of them, as "best in the world"
I'm not denying the atrocities the United States committed against the Native Americans. Our march to the West left a bloody trail of footprints. I'm just saying that your claim that we killed 100 million Indians are exaggerated at best given that there weren't that many Native Americans around when the US became a country.
The current US population is a little over 300 million. If there were 100 million Native Americans 200 years ago, you'd think someone would have noticed, especially as there were only about 5 million Americans within the US in 1800...
Yes, America is responsible for a lot of bad things over the years in the name of American Interests and Spreading Freedom and Democracy. There are, however, other countries whose hands are demonstrably dirtier.
This poll would have been more interesting if seperated into views of people from the US vs RoW.
Personally I am a "meh" on America. Plenty I like and plenty I dislike, with both good and bad people. Certainly whenever I have been there I have enjoyed it and everyone has been pretty nice. Most of the issue I have is with the "big picture" stuff.
I see the us imploding within the next 50 years if they don't resolve the race problems they are having, and then taking The world with them, seriosly, it looks like your headed for your 3rd civil war.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Not that Britain's any different, how many have we had? 5/6?
Freakazoitt wrote: I don't like when someone judges others. but now I can't keep.
It is obvious that the USA now the most evil country (for others).
Evil Empire as the Rome was for everyone who refuse to be enslaved.
now there is nobody who so widely uses violence for the purposes
Аnd the country was such earlier - it killed 100000000 native indians and never consider it as crime. "Good indian - dead indian". Something like nazi's slogan isn't it?
WW1, WW2 - it everything sources of the income for the USA. Favorable business.
The American agents financed revolution 1917 in Russia. Then they financed Trotsky. In total for introduction of chaos. in the same way, as they do it today.
Panama, Costa-Rika, Gonduras, Guatemala, Turkey, China, Nikaragua, Salvador, Yougoslavia, Greece, Philipines, Korea, Vietnam, Lebanon, Laos, Gaiti, Dominican, Irac, Brazil, Bolivia, Chilie, Uruguai, Central Africa, Cambodia, Zambia, Grenada, Libia, Columbia - everywhere America does revolutions, prepares acts of terrorism, interferes, finances dictators and destroys stability.
USA sponsored an prepeared Georgia to invade South Ossetia.
It sposored 2004 Ukraine crysis. It resposible for 2014 events in Ukraine,
There is no justification to all this, but USA own interests.
They even don't have proves, that Bin Laden resposible for 9/11. Note, that Bin Laden was prepeared by USA in 1980s.
Anybody of you knows all details how it was prepared 9/11? no
Holy Hell. A Russian gone self righteous. I would counter but the path that this one is going down is to damn funny
(really, the US killed a hundred million native americans...where on earth are you getting that number?
I counted them
Really, the US was behind the 1917 revolution?
No, but they add fuel to the fire
. Russia certainly isn't blameless either, lets not forget the role of Russia/USSR in like half the countries from the list above
Of course not blameless. But it acted to defend agaist USA imperialistic actions. Sometimes it was necessary to do different things as support of Arabs instead of Israel. Oh acting as a home-assaulter in Afghanistan. But I wonder how americans proud of all they did or just ignore.
Is is responsible for every evil in the world ? No.
No. But who is more "evil"? Russia, which is only protected themself to survive many years? North Korea, which doesn't need real war, and the situation "as is" is ok for them. Iran, which was slandered? Nazi Germany, which no more?
Russians I'm buds with had this conversation with me as we compared what scared us as kids about each other's countries. After that we all had a laugh and went out on the town for the night.
However I understand they are people like everyone else.
To be 100% honest, I really hate American cheese the most. The stuff doesn't change when heated. it like... never melts or something. Especially that canned stuff. Not much food from the USA seems appealing (well that I have seen).
Perhaps you have not tasted the glory of a bacon-cheddar cheese buffalo burger?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
sebster wrote: I think it's a great country, happy to put 'love it' as my answer.
This thread is pretty sad though. Weirdly insecure. You're the strongest, richest kid in the whole school, running around asking all the other kids if they really like you is lame.
Are you kidding me? I'm divided between dislike and meh. I've contemplated moving to another country a million times. Our government is untrustworthy, not to mention murderous. Feminists hold way too much power (it's an outdated movement, and it has accomplished its stated intentions. Why won't it just go away and stop sounding like the Nazis for women?). Half the people in this country are idiots, 4 fifths of it are mediocre intelligence, and maybe a tenth are actually worth talking to. We argue over the most slowed things. The freedoms and food we get here are the redeeming qualities for so many things about this country that I dislike, and the food might be the only reason I don't move to a different country. Quite simply put: the US has the potential to be the best country in the world, it was once, and it could be again. However, it sucks right now, and, no matter how much I love the vision of America that I wish could come true, there is far too much wrong with this country for me to honestly say that I live in the best country in the world.
Freakazoitt wrote: Americans, do you think, in 1950s 60s USA was better than now?
I'd say that the xenophobia is counterbalanced by less drugs, smaller prisons, etc. That would be a definite yes.
Hrm, I'd rather live in the US of today than the US of the 50's or 60's. Drug use has always existed, they just didn't have the insane "war on drugs" back then. Standards of living are higher now (across the broad spectrum of the entire population), social & ethnic tensions are significantly less (despite what one may see on the news), access to knowledge and technological proliferation is better than ever before, etc. While the current state of affairs has its issues, I'd certainly rather live in the US of today than the US of the 50's or 60's.
Iron_Captain wrote: I strongly dislike America as a state. It is hard to find a state whose foreign policies I disagree more with. I always disliked them, but I think the russophobia that became much more prominent in American media since 2014 pushed me to hate.
I could start an entire rant here about how the US is evil and everything it did wrong, but I don't think anyone is interested. You can just read it on the internet anyway, my reasons are pretty much the same as those of most Russians.
But once you take their self-righteousness away, I quite like Americans as a people. They are funny and crazy (both in good and in bad ways). They are open, optimistic and have a great sense of humour. Even American politics seem like a comedy show. At least, that is how they present it on the Dutch news, where they only show the crazy parts.
lol, you gotta love that Russian propaganda. Especially because I have yet to see any phobia regarding Russia over here in my homeland, the US of MURICA
(really, the US killed a hundred million native americans...where on earth are you getting that number?
I counted them
Really, the US was behind the 1917 revolution?
No, but they add fuel to the fire
. Russia certainly isn't blameless either, lets not forget the role of Russia/USSR in like half the countries from the list above
Of course not blameless. But it acted to defend agaist USA imperialistic actions. Sometimes it was necessary to do different things as support of Arabs instead of Israel. Oh acting as a home-assaulter in Afghanistan. But I wonder how americans proud of all they did or just ignore.
Is is responsible for every evil in the world ? No.
No. But who is more "evil"? Russia, which is only protected themself to survive many years? North Korea, which doesn't need real war, and the situation "as is" is ok for them. Iran, which was slandered? Nazi Germany, which no more?
The US? Not a fan, for various reasons, on one hand they declared war on us through treacherous means, and proceeded to dishonourably beat the gak out of us, and they didn't even give us monies.
And there is also a certain hug with someone you don't want to be seen hugging while you claim to be the lords of freedom and democracy.
And they have ridiculous names, I mean, Dwight? Really? and Montgomery, what were his parents thinking? what are his friends going to call him? Mongo? Mary?
And while my dear Spain is a horrible country, with rampant corruption and incompetence, we have two things the US doesn't, a king (a good chap, doesn't get into policy too much, granted, after all the problems his now happily retired dad got in he better be quiet), and socialized health care, who is envious now?
On Russia, while Putin is a controversial character, and while some of his actions are... not exactly declarations of universal friendship, the guy is competent, you don't see Obama annexing peninsulas (*ahem*nor do you see him close a certain place he promised he would close*ahem*), and he has been voted.
And hey, we have so many Russians in Catalonia that he may even support our unilateral declaration of independence.
aldo wrote: And while my dear Spain is a horrible country, with rampant corruption and incompetence, we have two things the US doesn't, a king (a good chap, doesn't get into policy too much, granted, after all the problems his now happily retired dad got in he better be quiet), and socialized health care, who is envious now?
I lived under a monarch, and the NHS. I can't say that I miss either one
Sinful Hero wrote: @dusara217 They're talking about the Kraft "American Cheese". That or Velveeta. Both of which are terrible.
Nah, all American cheese.
You guys need to learn to let your cheese mature and get some flavour
Rogue Creamery seems to do just fine. Caveman Blue is better than any French blue I've ever had. But then again I'm just an uncultured American.
Well, your first mistake was using french cheese as any kind of measure of quality
Also just browsed Rogue Creamery's cheddar selection. Only one thing on there was aged past 30 days. Here in the UK even a mild cheddar has matured for 3 months.
dusara217 wrote: Feminists hold way too much power (it's an outdated movement, and it has accomplished its stated intentions. Why won't it just go away and stop sounding like the Nazis for women?).
At least you didn't use the term "feminazi" explicitly, I'll give you that. But if you truly believe feminism has a single set of goals, then you have no idea what you're talking about.
That said, I'm curious as to the nature of this power you believe feminists hold. Can you describe it to me? Can you explain how they wield it?
They're talking about the Kraft "American Cheese". That or Velveeta. Both of which are terrible.
They each have their uses, much like any food.
Its also worth noting that people tend to acquire preferences for certain foods over time, due to acclimation and nostalgia. For example, my dad loves Hershey's chocolate despite the fact that its pretty damn bad because it reminds him of his childhood.
Vaktathi wrote: "American" cheese, the Kraft slices stuff, was engineered (yes, that's the correct word) for a specific purpose. To go on burgers.
Actually it was designed to be cheap, and shelf-stable. The melting quality of American cheese, particularly the individually packaged slices (which are one step above spray cheese), is largely an accident.
Formosa wrote: I see the us imploding within the next 50 years if they don't resolve the race problems they are having, and then taking The world with them, seriosly, it looks like your headed for your 3rd civil war.
Honestly, I don't think it's race problems that can destroy the US, but class problems. Just think, there was a recent meeting of about 400 wealthy Republican donors. Those few hundred will be responsible for nearly $1 BILLION spent on the Republican presidential campaign. $1 billion spent solely on election campaigns. Imagine what that money could do if used to actually improve things around the country, building schools, etc. That's more money than what some of the US government agencies get each year for their budgets.
Oh, and I love British cheddars, but I also like Tillamook here in the US.
Tannhauser42 wrote: Honestly, I don't think it's race problems that can destroy the US, but class problems. Just think, there was a recent meeting of about 400 wealthy Republican donors. Those few hundred will be responsible for nearly $1 BILLION spent on the Republican presidential campaign. $1 billion spent solely on election campaigns. Imagine what that money could do if used to actually improve things around the country, building schools, etc. That's more money than what some of the US government agencies get each year for their budgets.
Is it just the Republicans who finance their candidates like this?
Tannhauser42 wrote: Honestly, I don't think it's race problems that can destroy the US, but class problems. Just think, there was a recent meeting of about 400 wealthy Republican donors. Those few hundred will be responsible for nearly $1 BILLION spent on the Republican presidential campaign. $1 billion spent solely on election campaigns. Imagine what that money could do if used to actually improve things around the country, building schools, etc. That's more money than what some of the US government agencies get each year for their budgets.
Is it just the Republicans who finance their candidates like this?
No, the Democrats have their mega-donors as well, it's just that the large majority of mega-donors are on the Republican side of the fence and the behavior is a bit different. On the Democratic side, the mega-donors, at least the way I've seen it, seem to be more about general elections and getting someone from their general side of the political spectrum (that's usually somewhat established) into office, while the Republican mega-donors play a whole lot more in the primaries and are more concerned with orthodoxy and will "build their own candidates" so to speak. Exceptions exist as always.
Freakazoitt wrote: Americans, do you think, in 1950s 60s USA was better than now?
I'd say that the xenophobia is counterbalanced by less drugs, smaller prisons, etc. That would be a definite yes.
Considering that Blacks didn't have the right to vote in the 1950s, were being fairly frequently lynched (the perpetrators of such crimes generally being white locals in positions of power, such as police officers), women of all races were treated as second-class citizens (beating one's wife was socially acceptable, to a degree, in 1950s America), not to mention the decidedly-WASPy bent to American society in general in those days...
Feth, no, the 50s and 60s were not better than today. You're looking at history through some extremely rose-colored glasses.
Formosa wrote: I see the us imploding within the next 50 years if they don't resolve the race problems they are having, and then taking The world with them, seriosly, it looks like your headed for your 3rd civil war.
Honestly, I don't think it's race problems that can destroy the US, but class problems. Just think, there was a recent meeting of about 400 wealthy Republican donors. Those few hundred will be responsible for nearly $1 BILLION spent on the Republican presidential campaign. $1 billion spent solely on election campaigns. Imagine what that money could do if used to actually improve things around the country, building schools, etc. That's more money than what some of the US government agencies get each year for their budgets.
Oh, and I love British cheddars, but I also like Tillamook here in the US.
Actually I see your class issue as a race issue, it's strange over here when I was growing up I was poor, I had a black mate who was also poor, so we were poor together, whenever I have visited the states (usually for 6-8 months at a time) I seem to see self segregation, he's a white trash poor person, he's a Mexican poor person etc.
On top of that the massive rich poor divide that you mentioned just compounds the problem, thing is... I like the us, lovely people... Mostly lol, I had issues when I was in alabama with the religious nuts as they just wouldn't accept I wasn't a believer, but they were mostly harmless.
Back to my point, I'm an outsider looking in, I've spent a very long time working jn the states and every time I go back it feels a little worse, a bit more tense, correct me if I'm wrong on any count.
I voted love it, but to be honest I'm not really qualified to vote. I've never lived in any other country so I can't really form an educated opinion.
I think we do a lot of things that are good, and a lot of things that are less good, but I don't think any of those things are unique to America either. Sometimes I'm really pleased with the stuff we do, and sometimes I'm fairly disappointed. I'm usually happy though.
I have not voted, if I did, Meh would be my answer. Since Reagan, we have seen the dismantling of the safety nets and support of infrastructure and educational investment, Clinton also helped undo FDR New Deal items that helped keep our Nation stable. We now outspend 11 other nations (Including Russia and China) twice over in war preparations, and maintaining an empire suited less for spreading freedom and more for supplying the mega-corporate and wealthy overlords.
To be cutting and denying funding for so many things that help Americans, safety nets, infrastructure that helps people get to and from work, education on many levels, hospitals and Libraries, police and fire departments, leaving things for states, and even worse than that, allowing profit seeking corporations to do Municipal jobs(Proven to be failure with "privatizing" due to the profits only tunnel vision).
Yet when we have a new "boogyman" the funds are always ready for wars. Always. and if extra? is needed,,,,cut this or that rather than shift funds from over due prototypes to stuff that is known to work. (F-35 is a "dog": of a project)
America is right now, more an Oligarchy just like in 1929 than a real Democratic Republic. We can sure use shifting things back to set us straight.
Rich folks if they pay taxes only pay 10% they can actually afford much more and still live like frigging kings.
Corporations cry about taxes, yet they get pack all of their 10% taxes claiming issues that are tax write offs, and the subsidies they get (Corporate Welfare) so they get money past what they paid back, hence why Bernie Sanders said they do NOT pay taxes when they get it all back from tax write offs, breaks and subsidies paid for by the poor and middle class.
America is really great, especially if you are in the 1% (Not talking about people making less than 1million a year btw), make less than that and it gets tougher, yet the Billionaires also fund think tanks and "institutes" that demonize the poor, and make it seem like good ideas to screw the middle class, who make jobs when they can afford to buy things, so demand goes up, manufacturers would hire more workers to fill plants making more of their wanted product.
Rich guys hoard the money away. maybe the spend a little every now and then, but even at 70% Taxes, Koch Bros take 3.9million a day home instead of the 13million they are listed for as an example. Let that sink in 13million a day,,,even taxed to 3.9 million is more than most folks make in their lives. and folks wonder why things are so messed up?
They get that kind of money not from their own blood and sweat BTW but they inherited it from the family fortunes and then getting supporters to help take over other industries. That is why Billionaires ought to help the society that put them so high up the scales instead of parasitize and screw it over.
Formosa wrote: I see the us imploding within the next 50 years if they don't resolve the race problems they are having, and then taking The world with them, seriosly, it looks like your headed for your 3rd civil war.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Not that Britain's any different, how many have we had? 5/6?
we uh... only had 1 civil war... I don't know how to break that to you exactly.... Aside from saying we have only had 1 civil war. If you were taught or read that there was a 2nd Civil war somewhere... you were taught or read wrong... I mean I suppose you could look at the Revolutionary War as a civil war of sorts from the Brittish pov, you know ignoring that from the American POV it was a fight against a foreign power, not to point fingers but Brittain. So imho I would find british people viewing it as a civil war a bit uh... how you say... Imperialisitc? Archaic? Insensitive? Stupid? Pick your word. Also Our present race issues have been laying low in the system for years its just finally time to deal with them. Honestly we aren't heading towards any cataclysmic future as long as congress doesn't start more wars and burn more bridges. We also need to work on our religious intolerance as that's a big cultural issue here too but these factors will in no war start a civil war. Some riots yes probably, but you know.. London has pretty frequent riots doesn't it? The last riot in D.C. was what? 1968? 91? As far as Riots in the capital go i think we're doing pretty damn good.
Considering that Blacks didn't have the right to vote in the 1950s, were being fairly frequently lynched (the perpetrators of such crimes generally being white locals in positions of power, such as police officers), women of all races were treated as second-class citizens (beating one's wife was socially acceptable, to a degree, in 1950s America), not to mention the decidedly-WASPy bent to American society in general in those days...
Feth, no, the 50s and 60s were not better than today. You're looking at history through some extremely rose-colored glasses.
I many times met in media of the statement that USA in 50s 60s was better than now (- advances in technology, of course).
but if look at comments here, this statement isn't right
America is a better country than most out there when it comes to people being able to do what they want. At the same time, religion takes far too much of a role in the politics which dictates peoples lives (so in things like education, abortion access, etc).
American people are very plain spoken, which makes them friendly, and fun to get along with. At the same time however, that trait can sometimes come across as blunt, and makes them less aware of subtleties.
America has a good standard of living generally, but fails to provide that safety net of healthcare and has a good proportion of the nation in working poverty.
America helps to provide a considerable amount of stability across the globe, but at the same time has a bad habit of bullying weaker nations, and treating stronger ones as being either subservient or enemies.
America helps generates and exports some phenomenal culture, but is culturally very insular itself and refuses to take foreign ideas or conceptions on board, or treat as being of equivalent weight to its own.
America makes it very easy to run a successful business and make money. At the same time it is so capitalistic that corporations have evolved into quasi-political beasts that seek domination and monopoly in their own right.
There's lots of pros, but a con of equal weight each time.
There is no other country on earth in which I can spend my time killing and skinning wild and domestic animals, turning their skins into bags and clothes, selling the meat to eateries, spend my weekends fighting people in bars, and reliably look up dumb videos on the internetand browse dank memes and have no criticism of judgement leveled towards me.
I love America because, through the boons of this nation, I own a swath of forest large enough to hide a small town, in which I have free reign over all life. Or if I just want to caper about the trees with an AR-15 and a fifth of bourbon I can do that too.
Formosa wrote: I see the us imploding within the next 50 years if they don't resolve the race problems they are having, and then taking The world with them, seriosly, it looks like your headed for your 3rd civil war.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Not that Britain's any different, how many have we had? 5/6?
we uh... only had 1 civil war... I don't know how to break that to you exactly.... Aside from saying we have only had 1 civil war. If you were taught or read that there was a 2nd Civil war somewhere... you were taught or read wrong... I mean I suppose you could look at the Revolutionary War as a civil war of sorts from the Brittish pov, you know ignoring that from the American POV it was a fight against a foreign power, not to point fingers but Brittain. So imho I would find british people viewing it as a civil war a bit uh... how you say... Imperialisitc? Archaic? Insensitive? Stupid? Pick your word. Also Our present race issues have been laying low in the system for years its just finally time to deal with them. Honestly we aren't heading towards any cataclysmic future as long as congress doesn't start more wars and burn more bridges. We also need to work on our religious intolerance as that's a big cultural issue here too but these factors will in no war start a civil war. Some riots yes probably, but you know.. London has pretty frequent riots doesn't it? The last riot in D.C. was what? 1968? 91? As far as Riots in the capital go i think we're doing pretty damn good.
And now I shall return to my year of lurking....
Yeah the revolutionary war was a civil war, it was colonists fighting each other and Britain, politics aside that's what it breaks down to, call it insensitive but the USA didn't exist as a nation. And it's not mutually exclusive, it can be both a war of revolution, independence and a civil war, case in point look at northern Ukraine, they are fighting a war of independence, aggression, a civil war and have a foreign power invading the southern part, and like the war of independence there are people on both sides who want the status quo and independence, and are will to fight and kill for it, hence a civil war, genuine question here, but do American schools teach that all the colonists wanted independence?
Hmm London doesn't riot that often as far as I'm aware, but that's moot point, as London (as much as it think it is) is not the UK, just a disproportionate part of it, people in the rest of the UK don't really like London that much as a city, it sucks so many resources out of country and is massively corrupt, it's just the capital of England though, not Scotland, northern Ireland or Wales, Cardiff hasn't had a riot in....decades at least.
Considering that Blacks didn't have the right to vote in the 1950s, were being fairly frequently lynched (the perpetrators of such crimes generally being white locals in positions of power, such as police officers), women of all races were treated as second-class citizens (beating one's wife was socially acceptable, to a degree, in 1950s America), not to mention the decidedly-WASPy bent to American society in general in those days...
Feth, no, the 50s and 60s were not better than today. You're looking at history through some extremely rose-colored glasses.
I many times met in media of the statement that USA in 50s 60s was better than now (- advances in technology, of course).
but if look at comments here, this statement isn't right
You always have some elements of society that see a previous era in a nostalgic light for various reasons, but it's not an opinion held by a majority of Americans, though is held very strongly by some, typically older groups.
In fancy terms, Revolutionary wars are fought to radically alter existing power structures (usually fought by the disenfranchised), while Civil Wars are fought because the existing power structure has started fighting itself. These two terms are not mutually exclusive. Some Civil Wars are revolutionary in nature, such as the English Civil War. < This distinction is in fact attributable to Karl Marx, who spend a fair bit of time studying and elaborating on the differences between revolutions and civil wars
The fact that the United States did not exist yet, is precisely why it was called the American Revolution, and the fact that the American colonies held no position in the existing power structure of British governance why it is not by definition a civil war. One can consider the American Civil War to also be a failed Revolution, but we tend to just call it a Civil War because well, the Union won, and not recognizing any state called "the Confederate States of America" got to call it whatever they wanted
H.B.M.C. wrote: I admire it. I more admire what it could be, and what it has been in the past.
I think the country's endless focus on relatively small (or even symbolic issues), mostly all stemming from religion (abortion, evolution, gay marriage, what church your next President currently goes to, etc.) stifles what would be the greatest nation on Earth.
@H.B.M.C: I'm not sure if you are an american living in australia or a seriously confused australian that thinks he's an american. Both are fine and the 2nd is funny and touching. Maybe i'm wrong but i always imagined H.B.M.C. to be the crazy racist archie bunker character from 'all in the family' that annoys us but we still love.
Freakazoitt wrote: Ukraine and Georgia very very very love USA =) it's new religion and america is like paradise for them, Europe pugratory and USSR is hell for them.
Russia tried not to hate USA but it all ruined in 2014 (as in 2008, 1999)
That's the odd thing i've noticed. Eastern european people or at least the ones i've met seem to love the usa. That or they think it's infinitely better than the soviet union before it collapsed so love it because they believe it to be better than what they hated. Either that or it's just better than their current country.
I did not vote nor looked at the results. For I believe you get out what you put in and also Freedom of opinions.
I'm neutral overall Might be due to my NCOish nature
Tannhauser42 wrote: Right, it's not just Republicans, I only used that particular example because it just happened a week or so ago.
Thank you for the clarification. Given that many non-US users are likely reading this thread I hope you would agree that ascribing this type of behaviour to only one party in a two party system may create a distorted impression.
Voteo meh. They have more vegetarian burgers than France, which is good. But they have more religion, which is BAAAAD! Their foreign policy is incredibly amoral and selfish and vile. So is France foreign policy, but at least French people tend to have less delusions about being the harbringers of justice and frredom. They do make some good movies, but their mainstream is formated to Bollywood level. Not even kidding, they even burrowed Bollywood terrible habit of making remakes of foreing movies. That Old Boy remake. That The Ring remake. That Morse remake...
Conclusion: Switzerland is better. In Switzerland, you shoot bigger guns and you do it for free. You get higher standards of living and your government just let the banks take the dictatos money, instead of putting the dictators in charge, which gives you the moral high ground. You also get a way more democratic system. And chocolate. And way less violent crime. And less terror attacks. And less people in the world hates you. Also cheese and chocolate.
Formosa wrote: Actually I see your class issue as a race issue, it's strange over here when I was growing up I was poor, I had a black mate who was also poor, so we were poor together, whenever I have visited the states (usually for 6-8 months at a time) I seem to see self segregation, he's a white trash poor person, he's a Mexican poor person etc.
This sounds strange, but it reminds me of Northern Ireland to a extent. There we had both communities facing a lot of the same class issues, disenfranchisement, and similar socio-economic problems, but the political atmosphere was framed along a religious division.
For America replace the religious division with race and there are some similarities.
Formosa wrote: Actually I see your class issue as a race issue, it's strange over here when I was growing up I was poor, I had a black mate who was also poor, so we were poor together, whenever I have visited the states (usually for 6-8 months at a time) I seem to see self segregation, he's a white trash poor person, he's a Mexican poor person etc.
This sounds strange, but it reminds me of Northern Ireland to a extent. There we had both communities facing a lot of the same class issues, disenfranchisement, and similar socio-economic problems, but the political atmosphere was framed along a religious division.
For America replace the religious division with race and there are some similarities.
Yeah that makes sense, either way I'll find out for myself in October, off to work in pencilvania (sp?) for 6 months, should be educational
Dust wrote: There is no other country on earth in which I can spend my time killing and skinning wild and domestic animals, turning their skins into bags and clothes, selling the meat to eateries, spend my weekends fighting people in bars, and reliably look up dumb videos on the internetand browse dank memes and have no criticism of judgement leveled towards me.
I love America because, through the boons of this nation, I own a swath of forest large enough to hide a small town, in which I have free reign over all life. Or if I just want to caper about the trees with an AR-15 and a fifth of bourbon I can do that too.
I'm pretty sure you can do that in a lot of countries.
Formosa wrote: Actually I see your class issue as a race issue, it's strange over here when I was growing up I was poor, I had a black mate who was also poor, so we were poor together, whenever I have visited the states (usually for 6-8 months at a time) I seem to see self segregation, he's a white trash poor person, he's a Mexican poor person etc.
This sounds strange, but it reminds me of Northern Ireland to a extent. There we had both communities facing a lot of the same class issues, disenfranchisement, and similar socio-economic problems, but the political atmosphere was framed along a religious division.
For America replace the religious division with race and there are some similarities.
Yeah that makes sense, either way I'll find out for myself in October, off to work in pencilvania (sp?) for 6 months, should be educational
Pennsylvania
Where at in that state.....was a former stomping grounds of mine
Formosa wrote: Yeah that makes sense, either way I'll find out for myself in October, off to work in pencilvania (sp?) for 6 months, should be educational
Enjoy. You'll be there in the autumn/Fall so the leaves changing colour should be impressive. Just remember that the US has 4 seasons I had to learn that when I moved here
Dust wrote: There is no other country on earth in which I can spend my time killing and skinning wild and domestic animals, turning their skins into bags and clothes, selling the meat to eateries, spend my weekends fighting people in bars, and reliably look up dumb videos on the internetand browse dank memes and have no criticism of judgement leveled towards me.
I love America because, through the boons of this nation, I own a swath of forest large enough to hide a small town, in which I have free reign over all life. Or if I just want to caper about the trees with an AR-15 and a fifth of bourbon I can do that too.
I'm pretty sure you can do that in a lot of countries.
If you don't think 'Murica is the bestest country ever, you're a no-good, pinko commie. Because 'Murica. And Captain Steve Rogers. And Tex-Mex. and Hooters. And South Park.
I like America. Now that doesn't mean I don't have problems with it. We have a very flawed country. Too often do I see people trying to deny our flaws, and even questioning the patriotism of those who bring them up. We are not a perfect country, nor are we (necessarily) the best country. We have prob elms aplenty. But what I like about America, is we have the capacity to be great. We have the ability to fix our flaws, and make ourselves great. And it's more than just the ability to do so, it's a belief that we can and will. A belief that is the American dream. The hope to be better than what we started out with.
The USA is my home country. Sure it has it's problems and boy are those big problems but I wouldn't want to live anywhere else. We've got the freedoms and standards of living of most "Western" countries along with some beautiful landscapes.
Besides that, we get good exchange rates when it comes to GW products and mass produced goods. Is nice. And I can legally own a Panther. Is also nice.
dusara217 wrote: Are you kidding me? I'm divided between dislike and meh. I've contemplated moving to another country a million times. Our government is untrustworthy, not to mention murderous. Feminists hold way too much power (it's an outdated movement, and it has accomplished its stated intentions. Why won't it just go away and stop sounding like the Nazis for women?). Half the people in this country are idiots, 4 fifths of it are mediocre intelligence, and maybe a tenth are actually worth talking to. We argue over the most slowed things. The freedoms and food we get here are the redeeming qualities for so many things about this country that I dislike, and the food might be the only reason I don't move to a different country. Quite simply put: the US has the potential to be the best country in the world, it was once, and it could be again. However, it sucks right now, and, no matter how much I love the vision of America that I wish could come true, there is far too much wrong with this country for me to honestly say that I live in the best country in the world.
That’s a really weird kind of self-loathing nationalism. Half rah-rah America #1, and the other half a list of complaints.
Both sides of that show some really insular thinking. The problems you list are problems that exist everywhere*, and the strengths you give really aren’t. I liked the food in the US, but food is actually pretty great everywhere, except maybe China. Even they’re getting better, though.
And if you think moving away is a way to avoid stupid people, well I’d suggest travelling. Stupid people are everywhere.
*Well, if they’re actually problems at all. How a feminist might end up a nazi I have no idea.
What do you think about american medical service? From mass media it describes as crazy expencive and no one will help in hospital if you don't have insurance, except of some urgent life-saving treatment. Is it true or not?
Its partially true. Hospitals will take you no matter what if you show up, they legally have to in most of the country (maybe all of it now, not sure). The difference is you get stuck with the expensive bill that will follow you for years and affect your credit.
<---Federal Blue Cross/Blue Shield
<----VA Medical for service connected injuries sustain (found out my jump status contribute towards my PTSD being I suppress my fears; go figure eh)
<------Choice Program for VA Medical Benefits allowing me to see the same provider I see with my Blue Cross Blue Shield Medical Insurance
Oh also my Dental fall under Blue Cross/Blue Shield. Throw in Eye Care to
Freakazoitt wrote: What do you think about american medical service? From mass media it describes as crazy expencive and no one will help in hospital if you don't have insurance, except of some urgent life-saving treatment. Is it true or not?
I love being able to get into my doctor when I need to and without needing to sit on a month long waiting list.
It is expensive if you don't have insurance.
Hospitals will absolutely help you. And many don't expect you to even pay for uninsured care. They're referred to as "safety net" hospitals and typically service larger portions of the uninsured; however, all hospitals allocate a certain % of their budget to uncompensated care.
Hospitals will absolutely help you. And many don't expect you to even pay for uninsured care. They're referred to as "safety net" hospitals and typically service larger portions of the uninsured; however, all hospitals allocate a certain % of their budget to uncompensated care.
But sometimes those hospitals are a real pain since you have to constantly step over the bodies of dead and dying poor people while you listen to the laughter of the evil capitalist hospital staffers and doctors.
Formosa wrote: Yeah that makes sense, either way I'll find out for myself in October, off to work in pencilvania (sp?) for 6 months, should be educational
Enjoy. You'll be there in the autumn/Fall so the leaves changing colour should be impressive. Just remember that the US has 4 seasons I had to learn that when I moved here
Some places have 4 seasons.
Oklahoma has:
Ice Season
Spring Season
2nd Ice Season
Tornado Season
Inferno Season
One week of Fall
Surprise Tornado Season
Winter
It's quite hard to answer the question because the USA is so big and there are so many different kinds of people/culture. Even just here in VA, I would say I dearly love Richmond and the people here and "our ways" but I am not too fond of Northern Virginia (which is DC's suburbia FYI). That's not a North/South thing either; I also really love SE Michigan but cannot (for example) really stand Atlanta. I think the same way about countries I have visited. Do I love Germany, for example? Impossible to say: I know that I encountered wonderful people where I was (outside of Stuttgart).
Ice Season
Spring Season
2nd Ice Season
Tornado Season
Inferno Season
One week of Fall
Surprise Tornado Season
Winter
My wife assures me that we have four seasons. To date I have witnessed in an annual cycle;
Ice
Rain
Snow
Warmer rain
Thunderstorms
Power loss
Summer
How can anything live in this heat
Tornado watch
Rain
Football
Wet football
Frozen football
Winter
Blizzards
Coming from somewhere that shuts down if there's three inches of snow the novelty of snow hasn't worn off yet. Even if we do get 120 inches of it
Ice Season Spring Season 2nd Ice Season Tornado Season Inferno Season One week of Fall Surprise Tornado Season Winter
My wife assures me that we have four seasons. To date I have witnessed in an annual cycle; Ice Rain Snow Warmer rain Thunderstorms Power loss Summer How can anything live in this heat Tornado watch Rain Football Wet football Frozen football Winter Blizzards
Coming from somewhere that shuts down if there's three inches of snow the novelty of snow hasn't worn off yet. Even if we do get 120 inches of it
Oh you poor fellas.
I think we have like 3 seasons over here in California land.
Its Sunny Rainy (Edit: Excuse me a very light amount of rain. we really need it right now :/) then back to sunny.
Ice Season
Spring Season
2nd Ice Season
Tornado Season
Inferno Season
One week of Fall
Surprise Tornado Season
Winter
My wife assures me that we have four seasons. To date I have witnessed in an annual cycle;
Ice
Rain
Snow
Warmer rain
Thunderstorms
Power loss
Summer
How can anything live in this heat
Tornado watch
Rain
Football
Wet football
Frozen football
Winter
Blizzards
Coming from somewhere that shuts down if there's three inches of snow the novelty of snow hasn't worn off yet. Even if we do get 120 inches of it
PA has 4 seasons. Almost Winter, Winter, still Winter, and Road Construction. Guess which one we are in now...
On the whole I like america. It's got a lot of charming idealism and a sort of "We're the good guys!" attitude which is endearing, if a bit short sighted sometimes.
At the same time, there's a fairly robust culture of criticism of America, in America. So for every "MURICA! EFF YEAH!" guy, there's going to be a Jon Stewart or a Bill Hicks pointing out the crap, loudly. I appreciate that.
I think what stops me from saying "love" is that America is like most major powers. It lacks empathy for the weak, because it is so incredibly strong it cannot imagine what it is like to exist in such a position of weakness. I find this is where I tend to disagree with americans on all sorts of issues, but to be honest, that is not a trait limited to Americans but to all powerful nations. America is the most powerful, so I find it is more prevalent there.
I mean on these boards I have often read the sentiment that American lives are worth more than other lives, for example. I find that disgusting, and worrying.
But on the whole you guys are cool, and I'd love to visit some day.
I think what stops me from saying "love" is that America is like most major powers. It lacks empathy for the weak, because it is so incredibly strong it cannot imagine what it is like to exist in such a position of weakness. I find this is where I tend to disagree with americans on all sorts of issues, but to be honest, that is not a trait limited to Americans but to all powerful nations. America is the most powerful, so I find it is more prevalent there.
I mean on these boards I have often read the sentiment that American lives are worth more than other lives, for example. I find that disgusting, and worrying.
Interesting comments. I would like to address them from my viewpoint. I don't agree with the US having no empathy for the weak. From Tsunami relief and other natural disaster relief (Haiti, plenty of places in South and Central America, Asia, Africa and so on) we send help both from a governmental perspective (generally Fed buy there have been states and even counties and municipalities that have sent material aid and people) and from a private organizational and even private citizen perspective. Our DoD even has a name for these types of missions, HA/DR (Humanitarian Assistance/Disaster Relief) and we expend resources to train and equip for it.
Your other issue about us believing American lives worth more is also interesting. I've been a lot of places where very bluntly, human life is worth gak in many cases. When you see some places it becomes very clear not all human lives are worth the same. I believe it is perfectly normal for humans, not just Americans to value their society/customs/ways of life and yes their people (be it at the nation/tribe/sect/neighborhood/family or whatever level) over others. And honestly, I KNOW how much effort and how many resources we put into protecting others/minimizing civilian casualties and so on. And I am damned well sure not many nations (or non-state entities) do the same. Do we feth up? Yep. But from ROE to a lot of money spent to acquire non-lethal capabilities and develop TTPs that enable both mission accomplishment and protecting all human life, we try pretty damned hard compared to plenty of others I've seen.
I wasn't particularly talking in a military sense there, Jake, I know that american military ethics are pretty high and a lot of care is taken. Thanks for replying to what I said though, I appreciate it.
I think in terms of aid and supplying help, there is no doubt that Americans are really very generous, especially in disaster relief.
But I think in other ways, it is hard for Americans to understand for example, asymetrical warfare. Terrorism. I can sort of understand what would drive someone to attack like that, because I can recognise the feeling of powerlessness. My home country is laughably incapable militarily. We know we have to kow tow to America, and we're lucky that everyone pretty much likes us. But I can look at the likes of Palestine and sort of understand, if not condoning, horrible methods like suicide bombing and so on, because they are trying to fight a war from a position of absolute weakness. I hope you get what I'm saying and don't think that I'm being an apologist for violence, I simply mean that I can understand the perspective, and I've often been in discussions with Americans who expect these sorts of guys to "fight fair", as if there was ever anything fair about the richest, best equipped, best trained and most experienced military in the world going up against a bunch of half trained dudes with AK 47s.
As for "American lives are worth more", well, as someone from outside of america it is scary to think that you guys could literally wipe my home country off the map, and if it needed to happen it would, and we would not be "worth" as much in that equation as american lives. I'm not trying to be alarmist, I don't think it would ever happen or anything like that, but it gives me an uncomfortable feeling when I see that sentiment expressed.
I hope I'm expressing this clearly enough. It's a little difficult for me to verbalise it.
SGTPozy wrote: I hate how many 'Muricans believe that they're superior to everyone else and they're from the greatest country in the world... Reminds me a bit of Nazi Germany...
Yes because a little bit of Patriotism = concentration camps and mass murder.....
Anyway. I love my country for the most part. We have plenty of personal freedoms, a good economy, and the people are generally friendly. I dislike how divided we have become regarding politics. It's to the point where we can't even come toghter to get anything major done. We'd rather see the other guy lose then see us win.
Slush/Rain
Unbearable Heat
Snow that makes your garage look small
The Yeti moves out because of the cold
Rinse, and repeat. (Lately weather has been more cold than snow though. -20°F isn't fun. Not that the local school dared to close, no sir. That'd be ridiculous.)
I love the freedom that it provides. And not just things like the Bill of Rights, but things like the ability to go out and shoot things. Yeah other country can "do that" but not even Canada is as free about is as we are.
I love the ability to get on the road and start driving, and 3 days later still be going in the same direction.
I love the variety of cultures that our nation has. I love that I can eat authentic Greek food one day, Japanese the next, Indian after that, and a big ass greasy cheeseburger to wash it all down.
I could go on and on. Do other countries have this? Sure, to some extent. But none of them have it like we do.
Slush/Rain
Unbearable Heat
Snow that makes your garage look small
The Yeti moves out because of the cold
Rinse, and repeat. (Lately weather has been more cold than snow though. -20°F isn't fun. Not that the local school dared to close, no sir. That'd be ridiculous.)
Spent two winters in WI. I got my taste of REAL COLD in the mountains of Afghanistan. Stuck for ten days at Manas when the Freedom Bird broke where you hope it broke Zero and at night it goes double digit. I thought I experience real winter in South Korea
shasolenzabi wrote: I have not voted, if I did, Meh would be my answer. Since Reagan, we have seen the dismantling of the safety nets and support of infrastructure and educational investment, Clinton also helped undo FDR New Deal items that helped keep our Nation stable. We now outspend 11 other nations (Including Russia and China) twice over in war preparations, and maintaining an empire suited less for spreading freedom and more for supplying the mega-corporate and wealthy overlords.
To be cutting and denying funding for so many things that help Americans, safety nets, infrastructure that helps people get to and from work, education on many levels, hospitals and Libraries, police and fire departments, leaving things for states, and even worse than that, allowing profit seeking corporations to do Municipal jobs(Proven to be failure with "privatizing" due to the profits only tunnel vision).
Yet when we have a new "boogyman" the funds are always ready for wars. Always. and if extra? is needed,,,,cut this or that rather than shift funds from over due prototypes to stuff that is known to work. (F-35 is a "dog": of a project)
America is right now, more an Oligarchy just like in 1929 than a real Democratic Republic. We can sure use shifting things back to set us straight.
Rich folks if they pay taxes only pay 10% they can actually afford much more and still live like frigging kings.
Corporations cry about taxes, yet they get pack all of their 10% taxes claiming issues that are tax write offs, and the subsidies they get (Corporate Welfare) so they get money past what they paid back, hence why Bernie Sanders said they do NOT pay taxes when they get it all back from tax write offs, breaks and subsidies paid for by the poor and middle class.
America is really great, especially if you are in the 1% (Not talking about people making less than 1million a year btw), make less than that and it gets tougher, yet the Billionaires also fund think tanks and "institutes" that demonize the poor, and make it seem like good ideas to screw the middle class, who make jobs when they can afford to buy things, so demand goes up, manufacturers would hire more workers to fill plants making more of their wanted product.
Rich guys hoard the money away. maybe the spend a little every now and then, but even at 70% Taxes, Koch Bros take 3.9million a day home instead of the 13million they are listed for as an example. Let that sink in 13million a day,,,even taxed to 3.9 million is more than most folks make in their lives. and folks wonder why things are so messed up?
They get that kind of money not from their own blood and sweat BTW but they inherited it from the family fortunes and then getting supporters to help take over other industries. That is why Billionaires ought to help the society that put them so high up the scales instead of parasitize and screw it over.
If it weren't for the fact that intelligence and hard work are sufficient to get a man into that wealthy 1% (or at least the wealthy 5%), in the US, then I would agree with you heartily. However, this is not the case, and you seem to have just described a huge chunk of the first world.
dusara217 wrote: Are you kidding me? I'm divided between dislike and meh. I've contemplated moving to another country a million times. Our government is untrustworthy, not to mention murderous. Feminists hold way too much power (it's an outdated movement, and it has accomplished its stated intentions. Why won't it just go away and stop sounding like the Nazis for women?). Half the people in this country are idiots, 4 fifths of it are mediocre intelligence, and maybe a tenth are actually worth talking to. We argue over the most slowed things. The freedoms and food we get here are the redeeming qualities for so many things about this country that I dislike, and the food might be the only reason I don't move to a different country. Quite simply put: the US has the potential to be the best country in the world, it was once, and it could be again. However, it sucks right now, and, no matter how much I love the vision of America that I wish could come true, there is far too much wrong with this country for me to honestly say that I live in the best country in the world.
That’s a really weird kind of self-loathing nationalism. Half rah-rah America #1, and the other half a list of complaints.
Both sides of that show some really insular thinking. The problems you list are problems that exist everywhere*, and the strengths you give really aren’t. I liked the food in the US, but food is actually pretty great everywhere, except maybe China. Even they’re getting better, though.
And if you think moving away is a way to avoid stupid people, well I’d suggest travelling. Stupid people are everywhere.
*Well, if they’re actually problems at all. How a feminist might end up a nazi I have no idea.
The food in the US is heavily diversified, you can get French, Italian, Chinese, Mexican, and good 'ole American within five miles of eachother. This is why I like the food.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spoiler:
Da Boss wrote: I wasn't particularly talking in a military sense there, Jake, I know that american military ethics are pretty high and a lot of care is taken. Thanks for replying to what I said though, I appreciate it.
I think in terms of aid and supplying help, there is no doubt that Americans are really very generous, especially in disaster relief.
But I think in other ways, it is hard for Americans to understand for example, asymetrical warfare. Terrorism. I can sort of understand what would drive someone to attack like that, because I can recognise the feeling of powerlessness. My home country is laughably incapable militarily. We know we have to kow tow to America, and we're lucky that everyone pretty much likes us. But I can look at the likes of Palestine and sort of understand, if not condoning, horrible methods like suicide bombing and so on, because they are trying to fight a war from a position of absolute weakness. I hope you get what I'm saying and don't think that I'm being an apologist for violence, I simply mean that I can understand the perspective, and I've often been in discussions with Americans who expect these sorts of guys to "fight fair", as if there was ever anything fair about the richest, best equipped, best trained and most experienced military in the world going up against a bunch of half trained dudes with AK 47s.
As for "American lives are worth more", well, as someone from outside of america it is scary to think that you guys could literally wipe my home country off the map, and if it needed to happen it would, and we would not be "worth" as much in that equation as american lives. I'm not trying to be alarmist, I don't think it would ever happen or anything like that, but it gives me an uncomfortable feeling when I see that sentiment expressed.
I hope I'm expressing this clearly enough. It's a little difficult for me to verbalise it.
I sort-of agree with you.
The US military kind of has the same issue fighting terror as it did fighting the Viet Kong. We throw conventional soldiers at it, and hope that it gets the job done. Now, don't get me wrong, some of our soldiers (like the MPs, or black ops divisions) do a helluva job in that kind of a role - it's what they're trained for. But, virtually all of the grunts are trained to fight a conventional war, which doesn't involve having a child walk up to you and exploding. It gets to the point that you have to shoot the little five-year-old girl if she doesn't back off, because your entire squad could be killed if you don't. And then, the US military gets demonized for doing what is only logical and right to do.
As an example: my father's company was stationed a town over in Iraq, fighting Al Quaeda. He and the other MPs were able to be tactful and police the town with minimal violence - maybe two small skirmishes in the entire time they were there. They get sent to a different town, and a company of Marines moves in. A week later, an full-scale battle ensues and more than a hundred people die, because the Marines don't know what the hell they're doing.
Honestly, though, I think that this kind of thing is intentional. We have Black Ops squads that routinely go out, assassinate an enemy (or ally, or ourselves, for that matter), commit mass murder, then come back without a hitch. A couple of old guys who I used to be close to were in Black Ops, and they literally went insane from all of the gak they had to do (one of them just kind of cracked, the other is full-on pskyzophrenic, though the military might just have aggravated an existing condition). We've also got MPs in all of the four branches who actually are trained for the gak that the soldiers are going through over there, but, instead of training a boatload more MPs and less grunts, they just throw a bunch of infantry into a war on unconventional terrorists, who will never fight fair, and will never give them an opportunity to do as they were trained to do.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote: Texas has four seasons
Hot
Hellfire hot
OH DEAR GOD THE BUILDINGS ARE MELTING AND THE SKY IS ON FIRE
Hurricane!
You just described the Valley of the Sun (I would say AZ, but there is literally every biome except for ocean in AZ). Except, with the temperature varying between 120 and 30 degrees, it always feels like it's 10 below or 130 above.
We get:
Holy hellfire it's fething hot, I think that my face is melting, I just fried on an egg on the sidewalk (not even joking), my feet have first-degree burns from walking across the street
then: hotter than hell, but at least we get the occasional ten inches of rain all falling in the space of half a minute
followed by: feth, is it snowing? You know we live in the sonoran desert, right? ... this doesn't make sense...
Not wishing to derail the thread, but I think the entire idea of "fighting fair" is just ridiculous. The only way they could fight fair is if they were similarly equipped and trained to you guys, and they are never going to be because their economies are a joke compared to the US and they lack the culture that makes the US military so great.
I think the real message is that you can't actually fight terrorism conventionally, it must be tackled politically and socially. You have to look at the causes of terrorism (and no, it isn't "these guys are all crazy") and address those through some other means than violence, or in some way combined with violence, perhaps.
The US military can pretty much go in and make a pancake out of any country it chooses, you guys are that good. We all know it, and sometimes we have to be grateful for it. But making a pancake out of a country will often not achieve the objective of making that country stable and US friendly, as we have seen. The technical skill of the US military is sadly let down by a lack of political/diplomatic skill from your political overlords.
Another point that is close to my heart is the casual way the US can sometimes disregard the laws of other countries and then be like "Nah nah, can't prosecute us!" In my home country of Ireland, we're supposed to be neutral. But the US asked our politicians if they could land plans in one of our airports en route to the War on Terror. This was ridiculously unpopular in Ireland, but in the climate of "you're with us or you're against us" a small country like ours that relies heavily on foreign investment could not risk annoying the US, so we had to allow it. This grated, but then more than once there have been planes with actual weapons or prisoners on them that have landed. This is a clear violation of our neutrality, but the american response is basically "shrug?". Even though we are a hugely pro US country, that sort of thing stirs anti-American feeling because we feel that you do not really respect us, but merely patronize us.
Da Boss wrote: Not wishing to derail the thread, but I think the entire idea of "fighting fair" is just ridiculous. The only way they could fight fair is if they were similarly equipped and trained to you guys, and they are never going to be because their economies are a joke compared to the US and they lack the culture that makes the US military so great.
I think the real message is that you can't actually fight terrorism conventionally, it must be tackled politically and socially. You have to look at the causes of terrorism (and no, it isn't "these guys are all crazy") and address those through some other means than violence, or in some way combined with violence, perhaps.
The US military can pretty much go in and make a pancake out of any country it chooses, you guys are that good. We all know it, and sometimes we have to be grateful for it. But making a pancake out of a country will often not achieve the objective of making that country stable and US friendly, as we have seen. The technical skill of the US military is sadly let down by a lack of political/diplomatic skill from your political overlords.
Another point that is close to my heart is the casual way the US can sometimes disregard the laws of other countries and then be like "Nah nah, can't prosecute us!" In my home country of Ireland, we're supposed to be neutral. But the US asked our politicians if they could land plans in one of our airports en route to the War on Terror. This was ridiculously unpopular in Ireland, but in the climate of "you're with us or you're against us" a small country like ours that relies heavily on foreign investment could not risk annoying the US, so we had to allow it. This grated, but then more than once there have been planes with actual weapons or prisoners on them that have landed. This is a clear violation of our neutrality, but the american response is basically "shrug?". Even though we are a hugely pro US country, that sort of thing stirs anti-American feeling because we feel that you do not really respect us, but merely patronize us.
Point of order, you can absolutely fight terrorism conventionally, it simply requires a specific moral/philosophical outlook.
I'll accept that. Though I also think you'd have to kill pretty much everyone involved or you're going to have trouble down the line from the survivors. And by down the line I mean years or decades later. Something like that would not be forgotten.
I mean, it's fair to say any insurgency can be defeated by conventional means, but you have to be ok with obliterating the local populace and destroying everything of value and use, and such action usually defeats the ostensible purpose of engaging in said conflict in the first place
It's also been historically pretty rare that someone could "obliterate" a populace to the degree where there isn't some element left to "continue the fight".
Perhaps it is more possible than I think, but the damage such a brutal and inhumane campaign would do to your own soldiers would not be worth it.
BTW, this is another example of that terrifying feeling that "You know, some people in the States think this is a viable way to deal with conflict, and they're probably the only people who actually could get away with it these days..." that makes me feel uncomfortable with america.
Da Boss wrote: It's also been historically pretty rare that someone could "obliterate" a populace to the degree where there isn't some element left to "continue the fight".
usually because the occupying power wants something to remain, cities, factories, farmland, labor force, mines, etc. The Mongols managed it fairly well when they just didn't care about anything except what they could pack onto a horse, the Germans were getting there with Warsaw, and any nuclear armed power could do it in a few minutes if if didn't care about the effects of fallout
Perhaps it is more possible than I think, but the damage such a brutal and inhumane campaign would do to your own soldiers would not be worth it.
It's just not a possible option in most scenarios, either because there is a desire to retain resources, or because it can't be made to fit the party line, or another reason, and yes, it is absolutely difficult to get soldiers to engage in that sort of slaughter for long periods of time. You can get most to do it for a bit, many may even enjoy it for a few days, but unless you're coming from a cultural background like the Mongols, they start to have problems with it after a while and their...efficiency drops to a level of mere brutality instead of wholesale mass slaughter. Many governments found that many combat units quickly started reported increasing levels of fatigue and soldiers reporting "sick" and whatnot when engaged in such actions for more than a couple of days at a time.
BTW, this is another example of that terrifying feeling that "You know, some people in the States think this is a viable way to deal with conflict, and they're probably the only people who actually could get away with it these days..." that makes me feel uncomfortable with america.
You'll find people everywhere with this kind of mindset. The US obviously has them, but it's not unique to the US either, the US just happens to be in positions where such a conversation is relevant more often coupled with the fact that we have the power to actually do these things. It scares most of us sometimes too however, which I guess is saying something as far as dominating world empires go
I don't think it's true that the Mongols obliterated the populace though. It's true that nukes could do in the major population centres, but there would be survivors, and they'd be highly embittered.
I guess the Germans did come the closest to it, with genocide on an industrial scale. Actually, the disease which killed so many of the native peoples of the americas is probably the best example of resistance being crushed by an outside source, though it was biological rather than military, something similar could be achieved with biological weapons.
Kraft's American cheese aka processed yellow sludge is horrible and shouldn't exist. Dairy and amazing cheeses of all kinds is plentiful in Wisconsin aka the US's fat people preserve
God I love the specialty cheese shop that's right over the WI border. Their white cheddar is so sharp it almost melts your eye balls just smelling it, I'm drooling just thinking about it. Chicago wouldn't have the best pizza in the world without all the cheese coming down from WI, it's amazing.
The US military kind of has the same issue fighting terror as it did fighting the Viet Kong. We throw conventional soldiers at it, and hope that it gets the job done. Now, don't get me wrong, some of our soldiers (like the MPs, or black ops divisions) do a helluva job in that kind of a role - it's what they're trained for. But, virtually all of the grunts are trained to fight a conventional war, which doesn't involve having a child walk up to you and exploding. It gets to the point that you have to shoot the little five-year-old girl if she doesn't back off, because your entire squad could be killed if you don't. And then, the US military gets demonized for doing what is only logical and right to do.
I suspect you'r unaware of how conventional units have ben training for the last decade and how the whole institutional Army training base adapted to the recent/current wars. NTC, JRTC and home station training not only focused on the types of ops the units were going to do, but even put in specific training geared towards the region/sector the units were supposed to deploy to. Thousands of native speaking role players were hired to add even more realism to the training. Scenarios/situations at the school houses from the basic courses to the War Colleges moved very far away from conventional war. Now, even as we shift back a bit towards decisive action training, it is being conducted as part of hybrid warfare training. I could go into how things like the Human Terrain Teams and Female Engagement Teams, whole BCTs switching to 'train and advise' roles, tons of money spent developing new non-lethal capabilities and doctrines, changes in intel collection and planning cycles, the changes to mission planning software and apps, and so on have signaled MAJOR changes in how we take on hybrid and low level warfare, but clearly you know it all and it would be a wasted effort.
As an example: my father's company was stationed a town over in Iraq, fighting Al Quaeda. He and the other MPs were able to be tactful and police the town with minimal violence - maybe two small skirmishes in the entire time they were there. They get sent to a different town, and a company of Marines moves in. A week later, an full-scale battle ensues and more than a hundred people die, because the Marines don't know what the hell they're doing.
As the expert in unconventional warfare that you are, the part I highlighted for you should have tipped you off to one reason the situation was likely different. It very well may NOT have been the presence of Uncle Sam's Misguided Children that was the root cause for different experiences in the different towns...
dusara217 wrote: Honestly, though, I think that this kind of thing is intentional. We have Black Ops squads that routinely go out, assassinate an enemy (or ally, or ourselves, for that matter), commit mass murder, then come back without a hitch. A couple of old guys who I used to be close to were in Black Ops, and they literally went insane from all of the gak they had to do (one of them just kind of cracked, the other is full-on pskyzophrenic, though the military might just have aggravated an existing condition). We've also got MPs in all of the four branches who actually are trained for the gak that the soldiers are going through over there, but, instead of training a boatload more MPs and less grunts, they just throw a bunch of infantry into a war on unconventional terrorists, who will never fight fair, and will never give them an opportunity to do as they were trained to do.
Now you are really displaying your ignorance. 'Black Ops' squads do NOT "routinely go out, assassinate an enemy (or ally, or ourselves, for that matter), commit mass murder". That is just asinine and frankly offensive. Your misunderstanding of the role of MPs and infantry is pretty telling as well.
The US military kind of has the same issue fighting terror as it did fighting the Viet Kong. We throw conventional soldiers at it, and hope that it gets the job done. Now, don't get me wrong, some of our soldiers (like the MPs, or black ops divisions) do a helluva job in that kind of a role - it's what they're trained for. But, virtually all of the grunts are trained to fight a conventional war, which doesn't involve having a child walk up to you and exploding. It gets to the point that you have to shoot the little five-year-old girl if she doesn't back off, because your entire squad could be killed if you don't. And then, the US military gets demonized for doing what is only logical and right to do.
I suspect you'r unaware of how conventional units have ben training for the last decade and how the whole institutional Army training base adapted to the recent/current wars. NTC, JRTC and home station training not only focused on the types of ops the units were going to do, but even put in specific training geared towards the region/sector the units were supposed to deploy to. Thousands of native speaking role players were hired to add even more realism to the training. Scenarios/situations at the school houses from the basic courses to the War Colleges moved very far away from conventional war. Now, even as we shift back a bit towards decisive action training, it is being conducted as part of hybrid warfare training. I could go into how things like the Human Terrain Teams and Female Engagement Teams, whole BCTs switching to 'train and advise' roles, tons of money spent developing new non-lethal capabilities and doctrines, changes in intel collection and planning cycles, the changes to mission planning software and apps, and so on have signaled MAJOR changes in how we take on hybrid and low level warfare, but clearly you know it all and it would be a wasted effort.
As an example: my father's company was stationed a town over in Iraq, fighting Al Quaeda. He and the other MPs were able to be tactful and police the town with minimal violence - maybe two small skirmishes in the entire time they were there. They get sent to a different town, and a company of Marines moves in. A week later, an full-scale battle ensues and more than a hundred people die, because the Marines don't know what the hell they're doing.
As the expert in unconventional warfare that you are, the part I highlighted for you should have tipped you off to one reason the situation was likely different. It very well may NOT have been the presence of Uncle Sam's Misguided Children that was the root cause for different experiences in the different towns...
dusara217 wrote: Honestly, though, I think that this kind of thing is intentional. We have Black Ops squads that routinely go out, assassinate an enemy (or ally, or ourselves, for that matter), commit mass murder, then come back without a hitch. A couple of old guys who I used to be close to were in Black Ops, and they literally went insane from all of the gak they had to do (one of them just kind of cracked, the other is full-on pskyzophrenic, though the military might just have aggravated an existing condition). We've also got MPs in all of the four branches who actually are trained for the gak that the soldiers are going through over there, but, instead of training a boatload more MPs and less grunts, they just throw a bunch of infantry into a war on unconventional terrorists, who will never fight fair, and will never give them an opportunity to do as they were trained to do.
Now you are really displaying your ignorance. 'Black Ops' squads do NOT "routinely go out, assassinate an enemy (or ally, or ourselves, for that matter), commit mass murder". That is just asinine and frankly offensive. Your misunderstanding of the role of MPs and infantry is pretty telling as well.
Thanks for the good laugh this early in the morning. Not you Jake
I love the freedom that it provides. And not just things like the Bill of Rights, but things like the ability to go out and shoot things. Yeah other country can "do that" but not even Canada is as free about is as we are.
I love the ability to get on the road and start driving, and 3 days later still be going in the same direction.
I love the variety of cultures that our nation has. I love that I can eat authentic Greek food one day, Japanese the next, Indian after that, and a big ass greasy cheeseburger to wash it all down.
I could go on and on. Do other countries have this? Sure, to some extent. But none of them have it like we do.
You could get most of that in Russia
Anyway, the way this thread's going, I detect a debate between me, CptJake, and Jihadin, on the subject of America's role as a global superpower, but we had that a few months ago
timetowaste85 wrote: America is the place I touched my first boob. It's pretty much awesome.
I plan on touching a lot of American boob when I get there, British accent and military uniform, sorted.
Don't bank on your British uniform getting you past US customs/security - they're one of the most obnoxious bunch of people I've ever had the misfortune of meeting. It's one of the very few things I hate about the USA
If they walked up to me whilst drinking rootbeer
Automatically Appended Next Post:
I suspect you'r unaware of how conventional units have ben training for the last decade and how the whole institutional Army training base adapted to the recent/current wars. NTC, JRTC and home station training not only focused on the types of ops the units were going to do, but even put in specific training geared towards the region/sector the units were supposed to deploy to. Thousands of native speaking role players were hired to add even more realism to the training. Scenarios/situations at the school houses from the basic courses to the War Colleges moved very far away from conventional war. Now, even as we shift back a bit towards decisive action training, it is being conducted as part of hybrid warfare training. I could go into how things like the Human Terrain Teams and Female Engagement Teams, whole BCTs switching to 'train and advise' roles, tons of money spent developing new non-lethal capabilities and doctrines, changes in intel collection and planning cycles, the changes to mission planning software and apps, and so on have signaled MAJOR changes in how we take on hybrid and low level warfare, but clearly you know it all and it would be a wasted effort.
\you'll know better than most of us that all the training in the world doesn't compare to the heat of battle. Of course it helps to be prepared and to know what you're doing...
Figure after ten years of on and off again deployments we pretty much have it down pat. Just don't get complacent. Complacent gets one or someone else killed/maimed/ass chewed off
I was responding to the ignorant comment that " virtually all of the grunts are trained to fight a conventional war", which is about as dumb a comment as I've read lately.
If anything, we have neglected training for conventional wars.
Freakazoitt wrote: What do you think about american medical service? From mass media it describes as crazy expencive and no one will help in hospital if you don't have insurance, except of some urgent life-saving treatment. Is it true or not?
It's mostly but not completely true.
If you go to a hospital with a gunshot wound, or some other grievous injury, by law hospitals in the US must stabilize you regardless of your ability to pay. You will then get a ruinous bill, depending on how much they had to do. Medical bills are far and away the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US. It's nearly universally agreed this isn't a great way of doing things. It inflates the cost of care for everyone else, and provides no care for chronic conditions or preventative treatment.
If you have a life-threatening condition that won't kill you immediately, like cancer, you are on your own; an emergency room at the hospital will not set you up with rounds of chemotherapy.
Some hospitals will reduce their bills on a sliding scale or give you free care if you don't have insurance and are indigent but it's not a given.
If you are poor enough, you should be eligible for government-sponsored healthcare plans.
Jihadin wrote: Figure after ten years of on and off again deployments we pretty much have it down pat. Just don't get complacent. Complacent gets one or someone else killed/maimed/ass chewed off
Also we were getting into the FOB mindset before OIF/OEF by sitting up berms around units deployment into the "box" of JRTC.
Ft. Polk was, before that Camp Chaffee/Smith in Arkansas, the were going through transformation
Last rotation at Chaffee/Smith the Germans caught OPFOR Commander as he was coming out a store in one of the towns located on Chaffee Reservation. OPFOR mounted an attack on the Germans. Germans rolled up into the fight (Last rotation btw before we started going to Polk) in their Marders.....mayhem ensued
Crushed OPFOR force
Occupied the town
OPFOR mounted another attack at the Germans in town (town and civilian pop wear Miles gear and take part in the training)
Germans go Waffen SS stubborn
Running gun battles through town (yes the civilian pop drove the Germans around in back of pick up trucks)
Even a house was used as the German Task Force HQ which also was the rally point for the remainder of the German forces moving into area. Back porch to be exact with lot's of freshly made coffee readily handy
have to remember. People just hear us going through our training. Never seen us in action. So they were quite into the game
US Task Force were at a complete loss on why the Germans were in that AO. Turns out later "Beer Run"
US Doctrine/Policy/Common Sense/Fear of career prevented US forces from involving themselves into the situation that the Germans found themselves
Civilian Pop start diming out those individuals who were active members of OPFOR force and those who supported them
Germans "executed" the OPFOR Commander being the bounty on him Dead or Alive was A Ball of Twine and two rolls of 100 MPH tape
Germans "executed" key partisan leaders(?) after OPFOR commander POV was identified which contain radio freq rotation, maps, positions, units, unit "Call Rosters"....treasure trove of intel. So why bother with guards who can be used to prosecute war on OPFOR
It was insane fun MAYHEM.....and we can only watch......and be jealous of them They remember to pillage first before "notionally" burning down the town. After they got their beer
Ice Season
Spring Season
2nd Ice Season
Tornado Season
Inferno Season
One week of Fall
Surprise Tornado Season
Winter
My wife assures me that we have four seasons. To date I have witnessed in an annual cycle;
Ice
Rain
Snow
Warmer rain
Thunderstorms
Power loss
Summer
How can anything live in this heat
Tornado watch
Rain
Football
Wet football
Frozen football
Winter
Blizzards
Coming from somewhere that shuts down if there's three inches of snow the novelty of snow hasn't worn off yet. Even if we do get 120 inches of it
paulson games wrote: Kraft's American cheese aka processed yellow sludge is horrible and shouldn't exist. Dairy and amazing cheeses of all kinds is plentiful in Wisconsin aka the US's fat people preserve
God I love the specialty cheese shop that's right over the WI border. Their white cheddar is so sharp it almost melts your eye balls just smelling it, I'm drooling just thinking about it. Chicago wouldn't have the best pizza in the world without all the cheese coming down from WI, it's amazing.
I'm glad someone else appreciates the fine American cheese that do exist. Between Wisconsin, Oregon, Washington, California, and then the Upper East Coast, you can get amazing, incredibly diverse cheese in the US.
From my uncle who served in the British army in the 1960s, to people on dakka. Military men the world over loathe MPs!
Why is that?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CptJake wrote: I was responding to the ignorant comment that " virtually all of the grunts are trained to fight a conventional war", which is about as dumb a comment as I've read lately.
If anything, we have neglected training for conventional wars.
I said this once a few months ago on another thread, and I got shot down for it.
My point was this: during the cold war, the US military trained to fight the WARSAW pact nations in Europe, but ended up in Vietnam, and was unprepared for it,
and now, they're training for unconventional war in the ME, but Russia and China are on the rise, which would be a conventional war
'Murica has got its virtues and flaws like everything in this world.
Lately however I've started to wonder if the crazy lack of gun control laws and the random chance you might be shot by a cop if you are black (which I could be viewed as) are worth the benefits.
paulson games wrote: Chicago wouldn't have the best pizza in the world without all the cheese coming down from WI, it's amazing.
Vetril wrote: 'Murica has got its virtues and flaws like everything in this world.
Lately however I've started to wonder if the crazy lack of gun control laws and the random chance you might be shot by a cop if you are black (which I could be viewed as) are worth the benefits.
paulson games wrote: Chicago wouldn't have the best pizza in the world without all the cheese coming down from WI, it's amazing.
The what in the world?
In you never visit the USA, you won't have to worry about that
From my uncle who served in the British army in the 1960s, to people on dakka. Military men the world over loathe MPs!
Why is that?
I don't hate them, I've worked with some darned good ones. I've also seen some who were real gak bags (the ticket for a 16 in a 15 got some poor LT a letter of reprimand from a general that effectively ended his career before it started just so some 19 year old PFC could feel superior, and I dealt with some with issues as a commander in Panama who decided padding their stats was better than being good soldiers).
But the main reason I brought them up was again in response to the ridiculous idea that MPs and 'Black Ops squads' are the only forces capable of handling non-conventional warfare. In fact, there are very few MP specific tasks suited to unconventional warfare (route security, manning check points, convoy security, and perhaps the biggest is forensic investigations). And frankly many other units can do *most" of those tasks as well.
CptJake wrote: I was responding to the ignorant comment that " virtually all of the grunts are trained to fight a conventional war", which is about as dumb a comment as I've read lately.
If anything, we have neglected training for conventional wars.
I said this once a few months ago on another thread, and I got shot down for it.
My point was this: during the cold war, the US military trained to fight the WARSAW pact nations in Europe, but ended up in Vietnam, and was unprepared for it,
and now, they're training for unconventional war in the ME, but Russia and China are on the rise, which would be a conventional war
I'm confused
We've really just started 'decisive action' rotations and training again in the last couple of years. Very recently they did a Joint Forcible Entry exercise at NTC which was the first in a LONG time where an actual airfield takedown was done (not to mention an MLRS/HIMARS raid, I haven't seen that practiced in a while).
The reality is that training resources are always limited, and when you have multiple deployments into two+ theaters you MUST focus/prioritize on getting those troops ready. Now we have *some* relief we can regain some of the atrophied skill sets (and are working to keep the lessons learned ingrained by making sure hybrid threats are kept in the training plans).
From my uncle who served in the British army in the 1960s, to people on dakka. Military men the world over loathe MPs!
Why is that?
I don't hate them, I've worked with some darned good ones. I've also seen some who were real gak bags (the ticket for a 16 in a 15 got some poor LT a letter of reprimand from a general that effectively ended his career before it started just so some 19 year old PFC could feel superior, and I dealt with some with issues as a commander in Panama who decided padding their stats was better than being good soldiers).
But the main reason I brought them up was again in response to the ridiculous idea that MPs and 'Black Ops squads' are the only forces capable of handling non-conventional warfare. In fact, there are very few MP specific tasks suited to unconventional warfare (route security, manning check points, convoy security, and perhaps the biggest is forensic investigations). And frankly many other units can do *most" of those tasks as well.
CptJake wrote: I was responding to the ignorant comment that " virtually all of the grunts are trained to fight a conventional war", which is about as dumb a comment as I've read lately.
If anything, we have neglected training for conventional wars.
I said this once a few months ago on another thread, and I got shot down for it.
My point was this: during the cold war, the US military trained to fight the WARSAW pact nations in Europe, but ended up in Vietnam, and was unprepared for it,
and now, they're training for unconventional war in the ME, but Russia and China are on the rise, which would be a conventional war
I'm confused
We've really just started 'decisive action' rotations and training again in the last couple of years. Very recently they did a Joint Forcible Entry exercise at NTC which was the first in a LONG time where an actual airfield takedown was done (not to mention an MLRS/HIMARS raid, I haven't seen that practiced in a while).
The reality is that training resources are always limited, and when you have multiple deployments into two+ theaters you MUST focus/prioritize on getting those troops ready. Now we have *some* relief we can regain some of the atrophied skill sets (and are working to keep the lessons learned ingrained by making sure hybrid threats are kept in the training plans).
Thanks for the interesting info.
According to my cold war book from the 1980s, the role of the MP, in case of a Soviet invasion was: dealing with enemy propaganda, guarding bridges and key crossroads, handling POWs, keeping civilians away from key roads and railways, and rounding up stragglers into military ready units. Don't know if that's till the case these days.
Yep, that translates to manning checkpoints. They don't deal with propaganda, the civil affairs and MISO (new name for Psyops) guys handle that.
They are still responsible for POW collection points and detention centers (see Abu Graib for how well they handled that, wonder how a certain poster deconflicts that wondrous example of training and leadership in the MP force with his perceptions).
CptJake wrote: Yep, that translates to manning checkpoints. They don't deal with propaganda, the civil affairs and MISO (new name for Psyops) guys handle that.
They are still responsible for POW collection points and detention centers (see Abu Graib for how well they handled that, wonder how a certain poster deconflicts that wondrous example of training and leadership in the MP force with his perceptions).
We're going way the hell OT here , but that same books highlights NATO's worries over Soviet special forces or paratroopers grabbing key objectives if there was an invasion. Who on the NATO side would deal with that? Surely not the MPs?
paulson games wrote: Kraft's American cheese aka processed yellow sludge is horrible and shouldn't exist. Dairy and amazing cheeses of all kinds is plentiful in Wisconsin aka the US's fat people preserve
God I love the specialty cheese shop that's right over the WI border. Their white cheddar is so sharp it almost melts your eye balls just smelling it, I'm drooling just thinking about it. Chicago wouldn't have the best pizza in the world without all the cheese coming down from WI, it's amazing.
I'm glad someone else appreciates the fine American cheese that do exist. Between Wisconsin, Oregon, Washington, California, and then the Upper East Coast, you can get amazing, incredibly diverse cheese in the US.
"American Cheese" is like "American Beer".
The mass produced generic "one flavor for all" crap that lines the grocery shelves everywhere is crap. But if you can't be bothered to go out and look for the good stuff that is getting more variety all the time, has more and more local producers, and can be found in more of your "normal" stores every year, then you really don't have anyone except yourself to blame for eating/drinking the nasty stuff.
You do have MPs doing rear area security. You also had a(n up to) BN sized force (often dual hatted as a reserve force) pulling rear are a security/TCF duties. You could see a(n up to) company sized force at lower (say BDE) echelons.
Basically the cooks/mechanics support troops were responsible for perimeter security of their various support areas and were supposed to rehearse that task. At a certain threat level MPs would respond, at another the TCF would.
And (this is honest to God truth!), the Division Band had the METL task to secure the Division TOC and TAC and were supposed to train that task and be proficient at it (I know the guys at 1st Cav took it seriously).
Back in the days before FOBs we called this Base Cluster Security.
E-31. Threats to bases in the rear area are categorized by the three levels of defense required to counter them. Any or all levels may exist simultaneously in the rear area. Emphasis on specific base defense and security measures may depend on the anticipated threat level. A Level I threat is a small enemy force that can be defeated by CS and CSS units operating in the rear area or by the perimeter defenses established by friendly bases and base clusters. A Level I threat for a typical base consists of a squad-size unit or smaller groups of enemy soldiers, agents, or terrorists. Typical objectives for a Level I threat include supplying themselves from friendly supply stocks; disrupting friendly C2, logistics, and facilities; and interdicting friendly lines of communication (LOC).
E-32. A Level II threat is enemy activities that can be defeated by a base or base cluster augmented by a response force. A typical response force is a MP platoon; however, it can be a combat arms maneuver element. Level II threats consist of enemy special operations teams, long-range reconnaissance units, mounted or dismounted combat reconnaissance teams, and partially attritted small combat units. Typical objectives for a Level II threat include the destruction, as well as the disruption, of friendly C2 and logistics and commercial facilities, and the interdiction of friendly LOCs.
E-33. A Level III threat is beyond the defensive capability of both the base and base cluster and any local reserve or response force. It normally consists of a mobile enemy force. The friendly response to a Level III threat is a TCF. Possible objectives for a Level III threat include seizing key terrain, interfering with the movement and commitment of reserves and artillery, and destroying friendly combat forces. Its objectives could also include destroying friendly CSS facilities, supply points, command post facilities, airfields, aviation assembly areas, arming and refueling points, and interdicting LOCs and major supply routes.
My recon platoon used to play OPFOR and test out base and base cluster security. That was a LOT of fun!
Wisconsin habanero pepper jack. Best cheese on the planet.
I'm not a cheese fan. I eat mozz on my pizza and Parmesan on my pasta and salads. That's really about it. And I started branching into regular pepper jack on burgers. But it always has to be on something. I can eat Wisconsin habanero pepper jack straight. So therefore...best. If a non-cheese fan goes rabid over it, you got a winner.
CptJake wrote: You do have MPs doing rear area security. You also had a(n up to) BN sized force (often dual hatted as a reserve force) pulling rear are a security/TCF duties. You could see a(n up to) company sized force at lower (say BDE) echelons.
Basically the cooks/mechanics support troops were responsible for perimeter security of their various support areas and were supposed to rehearse that task. At a certain threat level MPs would respond, at another the TCF would.
And (this is honest to God truth!), the Division Band had the METL task to secure the Division TOC and TAC and were supposed to train that task and be proficient at it (I know the guys at 1st Cav took it seriously).
Back in the days before FOBs we called this Base Cluster Security.
E-31. Threats to bases in the rear area are categorized by the three levels of defense required to counter them. Any or all levels may exist simultaneously in the rear area. Emphasis on specific base defense and security measures may depend on the anticipated threat level. A Level I threat is a small enemy force that can be defeated by CS and CSS units operating in the rear area or by the perimeter defenses established by friendly bases and base clusters. A Level I threat for a typical base consists of a squad-size unit or smaller groups of enemy soldiers, agents, or terrorists. Typical objectives for a Level I threat include supplying themselves from friendly supply stocks; disrupting friendly C2, logistics, and facilities; and interdicting friendly lines of communication (LOC).
E-32. A Level II threat is enemy activities that can be defeated by a base or base cluster augmented by a response force. A typical response force is a MP platoon; however, it can be a combat arms maneuver element. Level II threats consist of enemy special operations teams, long-range reconnaissance units, mounted or dismounted combat reconnaissance teams, and partially attritted small combat units. Typical objectives for a Level II threat include the destruction, as well as the disruption, of friendly C2 and logistics and commercial facilities, and the interdiction of friendly LOCs.
E-33. A Level III threat is beyond the defensive capability of both the base and base cluster and any local reserve or response force. It normally consists of a mobile enemy force. The friendly response to a Level III threat is a TCF. Possible objectives for a Level III threat include seizing key terrain, interfering with the movement and commitment of reserves and artillery, and destroying friendly combat forces. Its objectives could also include destroying friendly CSS facilities, supply points, command post facilities, airfields, aviation assembly areas, arming and refueling points, and interdicting LOCs and major supply routes.
My recon platoon used to play OPFOR and test out base and base cluster security. That was a LOT of fun!
So you would have been confident of dealing with Soviet special forces if you'd been serving back then?
CptJake wrote: You do have MPs doing rear area security. You also had a(n up to) BN sized force (often dual hatted as a reserve force) pulling rear are a security/TCF duties. You could see a(n up to) company sized force at lower (say BDE) echelons.
Basically the cooks/mechanics support troops were responsible for perimeter security of their various support areas and were supposed to rehearse that task. At a certain threat level MPs would respond, at another the TCF would.
And (this is honest to God truth!), the Division Band had the METL task to secure the Division TOC and TAC and were supposed to train that task and be proficient at it (I know the guys at 1st Cav took it seriously).
Back in the days before FOBs we called this Base Cluster Security.
E-31. Threats to bases in the rear area are categorized by the three levels of defense required to counter them. Any or all levels may exist simultaneously in the rear area. Emphasis on specific base defense and security measures may depend on the anticipated threat level. A Level I threat is a small enemy force that can be defeated by CS and CSS units operating in the rear area or by the perimeter defenses established by friendly bases and base clusters. A Level I threat for a typical base consists of a squad-size unit or smaller groups of enemy soldiers, agents, or terrorists. Typical objectives for a Level I threat include supplying themselves from friendly supply stocks; disrupting friendly C2, logistics, and facilities; and interdicting friendly lines of communication (LOC).
E-32. A Level II threat is enemy activities that can be defeated by a base or base cluster augmented by a response force. A typical response force is a MP platoon; however, it can be a combat arms maneuver element. Level II threats consist of enemy special operations teams, long-range reconnaissance units, mounted or dismounted combat reconnaissance teams, and partially attritted small combat units. Typical objectives for a Level II threat include the destruction, as well as the disruption, of friendly C2 and logistics and commercial facilities, and the interdiction of friendly LOCs.
E-33. A Level III threat is beyond the defensive capability of both the base and base cluster and any local reserve or response force. It normally consists of a mobile enemy force. The friendly response to a Level III threat is a TCF. Possible objectives for a Level III threat include seizing key terrain, interfering with the movement and commitment of reserves and artillery, and destroying friendly combat forces. Its objectives could also include destroying friendly CSS facilities, supply points, command post facilities, airfields, aviation assembly areas, arming and refueling points, and interdicting LOCs and major supply routes.
My recon platoon used to play OPFOR and test out base and base cluster security. That was a LOT of fun!
So you would have been confident of dealing with Soviet special forces if you'd been serving back then?
If it was USA vs. USSR that wasn't the problem. All those hard metal containers coming in from low orbit would have been the problem.
CptJake wrote: You do have MPs doing rear area security. You also had a(n up to) BN sized force (often dual hatted as a reserve force) pulling rear are a security/TCF duties. You could see a(n up to) company sized force at lower (say BDE) echelons.
Basically the cooks/mechanics support troops were responsible for perimeter security of their various support areas and were supposed to rehearse that task. At a certain threat level MPs would respond, at another the TCF would.
And (this is honest to God truth!), the Division Band had the METL task to secure the Division TOC and TAC and were supposed to train that task and be proficient at it (I know the guys at 1st Cav took it seriously).
Back in the days before FOBs we called this Base Cluster Security.
E-31. Threats to bases in the rear area are categorized by the three levels of defense required to counter them. Any or all levels may exist simultaneously in the rear area. Emphasis on specific base defense and security measures may depend on the anticipated threat level. A Level I threat is a small enemy force that can be defeated by CS and CSS units operating in the rear area or by the perimeter defenses established by friendly bases and base clusters. A Level I threat for a typical base consists of a squad-size unit or smaller groups of enemy soldiers, agents, or terrorists. Typical objectives for a Level I threat include supplying themselves from friendly supply stocks; disrupting friendly C2, logistics, and facilities; and interdicting friendly lines of communication (LOC).
E-32. A Level II threat is enemy activities that can be defeated by a base or base cluster augmented by a response force. A typical response force is a MP platoon; however, it can be a combat arms maneuver element. Level II threats consist of enemy special operations teams, long-range reconnaissance units, mounted or dismounted combat reconnaissance teams, and partially attritted small combat units. Typical objectives for a Level II threat include the destruction, as well as the disruption, of friendly C2 and logistics and commercial facilities, and the interdiction of friendly LOCs.
E-33. A Level III threat is beyond the defensive capability of both the base and base cluster and any local reserve or response force. It normally consists of a mobile enemy force. The friendly response to a Level III threat is a TCF. Possible objectives for a Level III threat include seizing key terrain, interfering with the movement and commitment of reserves and artillery, and destroying friendly combat forces. Its objectives could also include destroying friendly CSS facilities, supply points, command post facilities, airfields, aviation assembly areas, arming and refueling points, and interdicting LOCs and major supply routes.
My recon platoon used to play OPFOR and test out base and base cluster security. That was a LOT of fun!
Besides ones Primary MOS and some who might have secondary and third MOS skill set. Everyone pretty much know the basics of soldiering. Every week there's SGT Time to go over soldier tasking.
So in a transportation unit (Trucks) you might have a reclass from another MOS, say infantry, Artillery, or somewhere else. The unit gains a new driver(s) plus also skill sets not commonly used in their situation. Every troop, NCO, Officer wear many "hats" and have assign "Lanes" they deal with
Edit
We're still OT being the US Military is a very different animal compare to all other military
We train to doctrine and standards but once bullets flys we improvise and take initiative
Vash108 wrote: Born and raised here. I love America, but an some stuff needs to change. We are in 2015 and the people running it still live in 1950. A bunch of old White people who are afraid of change, and instead of embrace it they fight it every chance they get.
I am not sure if I would stay if I had the chance to leave.
I was with you until the whole "white men" thing.
You do realize that Black Men voted overwhelming against gay marriage right?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Iron_Captain wrote: I strongly dislike America as a state. It is hard to find a state whose foreign policies I disagree more with. I always disliked them, but I think the russophobia that became much more prominent in American media since 2014 pushed me to hate.
I could start an entire rant here about how the US is evil and everything it did wrong, but I don't think anyone is interested. You can just read it on the internet anyway, my reasons are pretty much the same as those of most Russians.
But once you take their self-righteousness away, I quite like Americans as a people. They are funny and crazy (both in good and in bad ways). They are open, optimistic and have a great sense of humour. Even American politics seem like a comedy show. At least, that is how they present it on the Dutch news, where they only show the crazy parts.
A Russian doesn't like our Foreign Policy.
Better go Crimea River
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Formosa wrote: I see the us imploding within the next 50 years if they don't resolve the race problems they are having, and then taking The world with them, seriosly, it looks like your headed for your 3rd civil war.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Not that Britain's any different, how many have we had? 5/6?
I think we have some major issues going on right now regarding race, and yes It wouldn't surprise to see some sort of major insurrection within the next 20 years or so.
However with that being said, the EU nations have some serious race problems going on right now as well.
Da Boss wrote: I'll accept that. Though I also think you'd have to kill pretty much everyone involved or you're going to have trouble down the line from the survivors. And by down the line I mean years or decades later. Something like that would not be forgotten.
MEh, we just need to pull a Vlad the Impaler, and this'll all be a lot easier.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Race issues? In the US? Pretty sure the only people making a stink over race is the black people in the ghettos, I've never heard of anybody else doing it - not white trash, my hillbilly family, rich white/black/Asian/brown people, normal black people, Mexicans, or anybody else but poor black people.
Formosa wrote: I plan on touching a lot of American boob when I get there, British accent and military uniform, sorted.
Because wearing the uniform of a foreign country off a military base is always such a good idea...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: My point was this: during the cold war, the US military trained to fight the WARSAW pact nations in Europe, but ended up in Vietnam, and was unprepared for it,
and now, they're training for unconventional war in the ME, but Russia and China are on the rise, which would be a conventional war
I'm confused
Isn't the old saying that every army is always fighting the last war?
Iron_Captain wrote: I strongly dislike America as a state. It is hard to find a state whose foreign policies I disagree more with. I always disliked them, but I think the russophobia that became much more prominent in American media since 2014 pushed me to hate.
I could start an entire rant here about how the US is evil and everything it did wrong, but I don't think anyone is interested. You can just read it on the internet anyway, my reasons are pretty much the same as those of most Russians.
But once you take their self-righteousness away, I quite like Americans as a people. They are funny and crazy (both in good and in bad ways). They are open, optimistic and have a great sense of humour. Even American politics seem like a comedy show. At least, that is how they present it on the Dutch news, where they only show the crazy parts.
A Russian doesn't like our Foreign Policy.
Better go Crimea River
What now, American, couldn't resist Putin in a pun? Ukraine yet?
Iron_Captain wrote: I strongly dislike America as a state. It is hard to find a state whose foreign policies I disagree more with. I always disliked them, but I think the russophobia that became much more prominent in American media since 2014 pushed me to hate.
I could start an entire rant here about how the US is evil and everything it did wrong, but I don't think anyone is interested. You can just read it on the internet anyway, my reasons are pretty much the same as those of most Russians.
But once you take their self-righteousness away, I quite like Americans as a people. They are funny and crazy (both in good and in bad ways). They are open, optimistic and have a great sense of humour. Even American politics seem like a comedy show. At least, that is how they present it on the Dutch news, where they only show the crazy parts.
A Russian doesn't like our Foreign Policy.
Better go Crimea River
What now, American, couldn't resist Putin in a pun? Ukraine yet?
Sausages, steak, pork, onion, bacon, tomato, kebabs, chicken, beef, hash browns, and well... Probably easier to list what we don't BBQ: Deserts and bread. Oh and some Salads we don't BBQ...
Plenty to like , plenty to dislike. All things considered, I'm glad I was born in the USA in a time and place with plentiful food and water and some amount of freedom and opportunity. There are certainly less hospitable numbers to draw in the birthplace lottery.
I don't think I'm constitutionally capable of loving a nation state, per se. Sort of does not compute. So I voted Like.
I grew up and a great time frame
MTV going Live
Superman movies on the big screen
Star Wars on the big screen
Star Trek on the big screen
Rabbit ears
4' spaghetti telephone cords stretch 10'
Saturday morning cartoon
Three channels that comes in excellent using rabbit ears
Cell phone making an appearance
Internet taking off
Pentium chip coming and computer systems going to public market
Watching live TV one of the moon landing
Watching American POW's coming home from Vietnam
Heavy Metal taking off\
Birth of Rap
Breakdance
Footloose
Yoo-hoo's
etc etc etc
paulson games wrote: Kraft's American cheese aka processed yellow sludge is horrible and shouldn't exist. Dairy and amazing cheeses of all kinds is plentiful in Wisconsin aka the US's fat people preserve
God I love the specialty cheese shop that's right over the WI border. Their white cheddar is so sharp it almost melts your eye balls just smelling it, I'm drooling just thinking about it. Chicago wouldn't have the best pizza in the world without all the cheese coming down from WI, it's amazing.
I'm glad someone else appreciates the fine American cheese that do exist. Between Wisconsin, Oregon, Washington, California, and then the Upper East Coast, you can get amazing, incredibly diverse cheese in the US.
"American Cheese" is like "American Beer".
The mass produced generic "one flavor for all" crap that lines the grocery shelves everywhere is crap. But if you can't be bothered to go out and look for the good stuff that is getting more variety all the time, has more and more local producers, and can be found in more of your "normal" stores every year, then you really don't have anyone except yourself to blame for eating/drinking the nasty stuff.
its also another one of those "American inventions" that Canadians actually invented!
, cheese 
and that god-awful bud beer 
