Jump to content

Welcome to Nightly.Net
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

anti americanism. really pisses me off.


158 replies to this topic

#51
The Incoharent Jedi

The Incoharent Jedi

    INTERNET FREEDOM FIGHTER

  • Members
  • 7,211 posts
t2 is awesome.

#52
Morgan Freebase

Morgan Freebase

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,903 posts
The Incoharent Jedi is awesome. So much more awesomer than the Incoherent Jedi.

#53
Fat_Gut_Strut

Fat_Gut_Strut

    Member

  • Members
  • 526 posts

yolande:

yolande:
Word RaveMAster.

If I hear once more about how the US saved the world in ww2 I think Im going to scream. Its as if they single handedly saved the world from the Germans and Japanese. And thanks to American war movies, where there is no accurate representation of what really happened, people buy into that ****. Where in reality, if the war had stayed in Europe and North Eastern Asia the USA would have happily stayed un involved in the conflict

But thats beside the point, and kinda belongs in the past. I think alot of Anti American sentiment these days is deserved. Not all of it of course, but a lot yes.

so now ya'll are complaining about us not intervening!!!!! yes actually we would have stayed out of ww2 if we hadnt been atacked at Pearl Harbor. and yes actually that would have changed the way the world is today if we had stayed out.

and by the way would you mind telling be who was winning before the us came into the war? because to my knowledge it was Germany and Britian was the last country standing in hittlers way and the only reason they werent captured also was because of the english channel and because he was fighting on two fronts.


and since you find american envolvenment to be so futial in ww2 how exactly do you think it would have ended up if we hadnt interveaned?


and why exactly are you complaning about how americans wouldnt have interviend if we wernt attacked !!! isnt that what you people want for us to become issolationists again and stop meddling!!! why wont you make up your minds already.

ITs not your involvment or lack of involvment that I am complaining about. Thats the problem with Americans, you always think everybody wants something from you.

What I was complaining about is how Americans boast about how they saved everybody elses arse. Never mind if you actually did or not, ever heard of being modest or gracious in victory? I suppose not. Its just tiresome being constantly subjected to loud, vulgar self righteous patriotism. Its okay to love your country but not everyone else wants to hear that ****.

#54
tsquare

tsquare

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,888 posts

The Incoharent Jedi:
t2 is awesome.

Ahhh gee...thanks!

#55
yolande

yolande

    Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Darth Krawlie:

Darth Krawlie:

Darth Krawlie:
I'm utterly pissed of by the stupidity I see from some Americans.

yeah I know, I deal with it every day. Did you know that about half of all Americans finished in the bottom 50% of their class in school? Bell curves are a *****.

...

wait what

r u 4 reel that half of all Americans were in the bottom half of their class? OMG I CAN'T BELIEVE IT.

isnt it obvious that you can do that with all countries if you adjust the standards your judging by!!!!!!!!!

and isnt it equally obvious that 50% graduated at the top of their class!!!!!!!


and why dont you go get the stats on other countries also. leading nations and poor nations also. and make sure they are all being judged by the same standard.

#56
yolande

yolande

    Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts
Critisizing america and americans is fine thats part of your right as a free person to do so and state your opinion.

but if your going to do so they you can at least do so equally.

i mean americans are not the only ones who are patriotic, or brag about their victories (as an american i have never seen another to this to a foreigner), or interfear in areas of other countries concerns.


if your going to critisize you can at least do it equally rather that making america out to be this big bad place where only evil thrives. when all your really doing is holding this generation accountable for past generations doings when you ignor your own.


you say we are arogant. ok fine i accept that. but how about you? and your country? and other countries?

usually a world power is blamed for things and disliked and i accept that but why exactly is that only one sided and why cant people see that they also to the same thing?

#57
Fat_Gut_Strut

Fat_Gut_Strut

    Member

  • Members
  • 526 posts
YOU DONT UNDERSTAND ME!!!!!!!!!!!!! GAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH

Never once did I say that America was place where evil thrives!! Where the **** did you get that from???? I am crirticising equally, because it is mostly Americans that boast about their military and how much they kick ass in the world.

If you want me to criticise other nations fine, the French are arrogant to anyone who doesnt speak french, and Italian men a sleazy in general but those are just cultural differences. ANd this is a thread about ANTI AMERICANISM not sleazy italians and arrogant french people.
Jesus Christ. I mean, your avatar just sums up my whole argument. UNCLE ****ING SAM POINTING HIS FAT ****ING FINGER IN MY FACE!!!!!!!!!!

#58
Sigh Snootles

Sigh Snootles

    now with increased kung fu grip!!!

  • Members
  • 12,160 posts
i think that the problem started when dubya said 'you are either with us, or against us'.

well, i'm not for the war, so according to dubya, i'm 'anti-american'.
no, i don't believe i am. i am just saying that the war was the wrong way to go. the dude never proved to me that there were wmd's in iraq, never proved to me that bin laden and his gang had anything to do with saddam. so i thought the war was unjustified as a means of 'fighting terrorism'. hey, i'll stand beside america in any fight against terrorism, but i didn't believe this war was doing that.
that doesn't mean i'm anti-american, though, does it?? but according to bush, i am. he just painted a pretty wide swath with the 'with us or against us' brush there.

and i know, i know, my spelling and grammer sucks.

#59
Obi-Wan Cannoli

Obi-Wan Cannoli

    rogue scholar

  • Members
  • 6,283 posts

quote:


Sigh:

I am just saying that the war was the wrong way to go. the dude never proved to me that there were wmd's in iraq, never proved to me that bin laden and his gang had anything to do with saddam. so i thought the war was unjustified as a means of 'fighting terrorism'. hey, i'll stand beside america in any fight against terrorism, but i didn't believe this war was doing that.

Sigh, I'm not going to argue for the war, because I was against it, too. But I'm curious about something you said. Your answer is probably already implied in your statement, but here goes....

I agree on the wmd's. I agree on OBL and Saddam not having a working relationship. And I'll agree that Saddam was not committing acts of terror against Americans. However, Saddam was a supporter of terrorism in the Middle East, most notably in Israel/Palestine.

So, when you talk about "fighting terrorism," you're referring to "fighting terrorism" which directly threatens the U.S., right? Because if you mean "fighting terrorism" in general, I think you just gave a little fuel to people who support the war, right?

#60
Sigh Snootles

Sigh Snootles

    now with increased kung fu grip!!!

  • Members
  • 12,160 posts
i'm not sure what you're asking me, canolli... but i'll try, anyways. let me know if i'm close here!!!

personally, i don't think attacking iraq was 'fighting terrorism'. hey, if any good ends up coming out of it, i applaud. i must admit, seeing saddam hussein captured was a great moment. i'm just not a big believer that canadians should have been throwing our money at that war... i think that there are better ways for the canadian military to fight terrorism.
we don't have the 2 billion or so to spend every week on the occupation of iraq. if america does, well go hard guys. what money we have, i think should be spent on rebuilding nations like afghanistan.

but no, i don't hate americans. aside from the fact that most think canadians are scum now, i don't have a problem with americans personally.

edit: actually, just forget i even wrote all that. i think i must be still hungover from celebrationIII... i'm just not able to transcend with you today, canolli!!!

#61
Obi-Wan Cannoli

Obi-Wan Cannoli

    rogue scholar

  • Members
  • 6,283 posts
LOL It's cool, Sigh! When you recover, here's what I meant....

Like I said, "Your answer is probably already implied in your statement."

I was sort of curious as to your feelings about Saddam supporting terrorism against Israel. You've answered that by saying, "i don't think attacking iraq was 'fighting terrorism,'" and the more I think about it, the more I agree with you.

Removing Saddam didn't stop suicide bombings in Israel. (Besides, most of what Saddam paid was the families of the suicide bombers). Plus, terrorism in Iraq has gone up. So, yeah, the war didn't really "fight terrorism." At best estimates, terrorism remained at the same level in the Middle-East, and at worst, it increased.

#62
EmperorTarkin

EmperorTarkin

    Member

  • Members
  • 85 posts

quote:


Originally posted by Obi-Wan Cannoli:
Plus, terrorism in Iraq has gone up. So, yeah, the war didn't really "fight terrorism." At best estimates, terrorism remained at the same level in the Middle-East, and at worst, it increased. [/QB]

It really all depends on what you consider "terrorism," doesn't it? Doesn't Uday feeding someone through a plastic shredder count as terrorism, in some comparable sense? How would the numbers murdered by Saddam, were he still in charge, compare to the numbers murdered by terrorists?

Let's suppose the numbers actually murdered by terrorists in the past couple years since the start of the war would be higher. This still only accounts for these two years and doesn't take a long view of the war with terrorists. With Saddam's support structure eroding in Iraq, armed civil conflict was inevitable at some point. Either Saddam would have sought support from terrorists, or terrorists would have sought to help remove him in order to fill the power vacuum with their own cause, if not both. If the latter, we risk terrorists gaining popular support among the Iraqi people.

The truly honest and thoughtful question to ask when taking the long view, then, is: whose resulting order would be most beneficial to us in the war against terrorists?

#63
Obi-Wan Cannoli

Obi-Wan Cannoli

    rogue scholar

  • Members
  • 6,283 posts

quote:


Emperor Tarkin:
It really all depends on what you consider "terrorism," doesn't it?

Yeah. Fair enough. Perhaps I misspoke. Let me try this: terrorism is still present in the lives of the Iraqi people. Whether Saddam's terrorism or the current terrorism is worse for the Iraqis, I guess everyone will have different opinions on that.

#64
UK Legend Killa

UK Legend Killa

    Double NFF Champion

  • Member
  • 19,652 posts
Oh god, you found my favourite topic in the world....

The few things about Americans that are annoying become more and more obvious with the news stories that break out but I'll pitch things one a ta time so people can air their views on all topics.

The controversy that has surrounded the Americans in the last Century (20th) has been some of the worst. The things that have been intricated by American people have been horrific. The Vietnam war is a prime example. I believe, though I am not sure on this, is that you were there as Peacekeepers?? Yes?? Then they start to fight back. The View Cong soldiers start to fight back. Understandable?? Of course it is, they see you as invaders and want to protect your property as you would and do. Now explain to me this.If you were there as peacekeepers or not why did American soldiers torch young children? Or lay down Napalms across harmless villages? Not understandable. Out of order.

The Acts of Americans in war have been terrible. This may offend people but even the Nazi's didn't murder every POW they captured and then this happens. Images of seared flesh appear on television screens all over the world. That explain some anti-America feelings??

I know you can't judge everyone by one lot of people and have learnt that even more since joining here, but perhaps the actions of American soldiers that were, I think, not condemned by the government, could just contribute to the feelings.

There you go, point 1. I'll be back though, in 15 years, 11 months and a few weeks I've learnt a hell of a lot.

#65
EwoksSuck

EwoksSuck

    Til All Are One

  • Members
  • 31,462 posts
Why is it that the US is always portrayed as either the savior of the human race or the devil of the free world? The US is like any other country when it comes to it's foreign policy. It acts on it's own self interests like every other nation on Earth.

However, I do think the US does set itself up for attacks of being hypocrital because our government is always going on about how we support freedom and democracy, while we often look the other way and support regimes that go against everything we claim to support in order to support our way of life. Don't forget we supported Saddam in the 1980's when it suited our interestes. We can't claim to be the beacon of light for the world when we are so selective in who we let the light shine on.

#66
tsquare

tsquare

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,888 posts
you're going to love this one

quote:


UNCONDITIONALLY-that's the way I support the Iraqi Resistance these days. While I do not offer political support to all groups involved in the anti-imperial struggle in Iraq, I work to support its collective purpose: forcing the troops out now. Forcing because the United States won't leave any other way.

and in other news:

quote:


While the recent claim that a draft should be expected within 75 days is, at best, a misunderstanding of the Selective Service Administration (a vestige of the Cold War, the SSA was created to intimidate the Soviets with the possibility of short-notice US conscription), a future draft is not by any means out of the question. With its roots in the mid-1990s, the national crisis in military recruiting has been marked by a recent plummet undoubtedly related to the multiform horrors of the war in Iraq-not least the increasing threats to under-armed and under-manned US troops which have resulted in the increased use of carpet-bombing (and civilian-killing) which has typically led to increased resistance, continuing the vicious spiral.

carpet bombing? Draft? Just how many times are these folks going to try that one?

there's more but I'm too tired

#67
EmperorTarkin

EmperorTarkin

    Member

  • Members
  • 85 posts

quote:


Originally posted by Obi-Wan Cannoli:
Yeah. Fair enough. Perhaps I misspoke. Let me try this: terrorism is still present in the lives of the Iraqi people. Whether Saddam's terrorism or the current terrorism is worse for the Iraqis, I guess everyone will have different opinions on that. [/QB]

Alright, but you're not speaking to the point I made about the long-term. If someone is going to oppose the war in Iraq because there is presently terrorism, shouldn't they compare the likely future outcome of carrying out the war against that of not carrying it out?

Isn't that what a 'war on terror' should be about?

#68
EmperorTarkin

EmperorTarkin

    Member

  • Members
  • 85 posts
[quote] UK Legend Killa:
Oh god, you found my favourite topic in the world....[/quote]Hating on America is your favourite topic in the world?

quote:

The Vietnam war is a prime example. I believe, though I am not sure on this, is that you were there as Peacekeepers?? Yes?? [/quote]It was a "police action" officially, but this is to blame on foolish politicians, not the American people.

The Vietnam War was a noble cause. That a bunch of politicos f'ed it up shouldn't be used an excuse to trash Americans in name.

quote:
Then they start to fight back. The View Cong soldiers start to fight back. Understandable?? Of course it is, they see you as invaders and want to protect your property as you would and do.[/quote]B. S.

You've now exposed yourself as having no idea as to what you're talking about. North and South Vietnam were two completely different political entities. South Vietnam did not "belong" to anyone in the North in any real sense of the word. The North attempted a hostile takeover of the South with support from the usual Communist bigwigs and America stepped in to protect the South. How that makes America bad in any way has yet to be explained.

Furthermore, your description of the Vietnamese people borders on the racist. You talk about the Viet Cong almost as if they were so stupid they couldn't even understand what the Americans' intentions were in defending the people that they, the Viet Cong, were attacking and murdering. 'Oh, but they were just standing there minding themselves, and they saw Americans coming near them, so the poor little things just naturally had to fight back!' What are the Vietnamese - canines?

quote:
Now explain to me this.If you were there as peacekeepers or not why did American soldiers torch young children? Or lay down Napalms across harmless villages? Not understandable. Out of order.[/quote]And rarely an occurance and always an exception to the rule. I'm sure you could go through the history of the World Wars and find crooked military men of any nation. What point does that make about the moral stature of those nations if they go against the tide?

quote:
The Acts of Americans in war have been terrible. This may offend people but even the Nazi's didn't murder every POW they captured and then this happens. Images of seared flesh appear on television screens all over the world. That explain some anti-America feelings??[/quote]When did America murder every POW?

quote:
I know you can't judge everyone by one lot of people and have learnt that even more since joining here, but perhaps the actions of American soldiers that were, I think, not condemned by the government, could just contribute to the feelings.[/quote]Baloney. Most people who hate America do so for idealogical reasons.

quote:
There you go, point 1. I'll be back though, in 15 years, 11 months and a few weeks I've learnt a hell of a lot. [/quote]Keep on learning, friend.

#69
Obi-Wan Cannoli

Obi-Wan Cannoli

    rogue scholar

  • Members
  • 6,283 posts

quote:


Emperor Tarkin:

If someone is going to oppose the war in Iraq because there is presently terrorism, shouldn't they compare the likely future outcome of carrying out the war against that of not carrying it out?

Yes, I agree completely. I've said this many times on this board, and I don't believe long-term the war in Iraq is making Americans safer. I'm not even convinced it's going to make Iraq or the M.E. region any safer. We'll just have to wait and see. shrug

#70
Sigh Snootles

Sigh Snootles

    now with increased kung fu grip!!!

  • Members
  • 12,160 posts

EwoksSuck:
However, I do think the US does set itself up for attacks of being hypocrital because our government is always going on about how we support freedom and democracy, while we often look the other way and support regimes that go against everything we claim to support in order to support our way of life. Don't forget we supported Saddam in the 1980's when it suited our interestes. We can't claim to be the beacon of light for the world when we are so selective in who we let the light shine on.

that's exactly it. you are so wise, es.
and like you said earlier, every nation on earth is guilty of this... canadians wander around saying we are this wonderful loving nation too, when we have an entire native population here that lives what has been compared to a 'third world' existence...

#71
Obsidian

Obsidian

    Kill Humanity

  • Members
  • 7,343 posts

yolande:
and by the way would you mind telling be who was winning before the us came into the war? because to my knowledge it was Germany and Britian was the last country standing in hittlers way and the only reason they werent captured also was because of the english channel and because he was fighting on two fronts.

History lesson time.

The Soviet Union.

The USSR had spent most of the war playing defensive, merely protecting their borders while building up in their forces. When they officially entered offense action in 1944 (I think), Hitler's forces were running out of steam. So too were the Americans (unlike the USSR, we entered the war only half-prepared.) The Russians lost more troops than any other nation on either side, and in the shortest amount of time. That should tell you something there. Russia actually ended WWII. They came in fresh, energized and ready for battle. Russia constantly battered down on the Germans, ultimately driving them back to Berlin and crushing them there. America and Britain played clean up, taking out the scattered troops that were fighting elsewhere. The one semi-notable achievement America accomplished in the final days of the war was capturing Nuremburg. That's it. The Soviet Union did most of the rest.

Make no mistake, America was important, but not crucial. Hitler's overconfidence (like stopping weapons production in 1941, believing that victory was just around the corner. Production resumed the following year, but after many loses to Germany) did more to hurt Germany's chances than any nation. Add to that, the German army was running out of steam when the US entered, and it had been severely weakened in some engagements (mainly getting their asses kicked trying to invade Russia), and the Nazi's defeat was inevitable. All America's entry did was bring the war winding to a close sooner, and with fewer lost lives. It would have ended the same way regardless of whether we entered it or not.

And the whole idea of 'national pride' is laughable to me. What nation you are born in is something out of your control. To me, being proud of being American or British or whatever is like being proud over having blue eyes. It's something you didn't choose (excepting immigrants), so you can't have pride in it.

I laugh when one proclaims America (or any other nation) to be the greatest on Earth. It is the height of arrogance to claim greatness upon yourself. Only the eyes of history can determine such greatness.

I reluctantly agree with EmperorTarkin about the failure of VietNam lying with the politicians, not the people. However, to claim altruistic motivations in the war is naiviety. No nation on earth does anything unless it helps themselves. Self interest isn't neccesarily a bad motivating factor, but it is important in every governmental action. Vietnam was about asserting American power in the world, and protecting our interests.

To say, however, that America is innocent of any war crimes is a lie. The fire-bombing of Dresden by the US during WWII was a war crime by any definition, as too could be considered the use of atomic bombs on civilian cities. Had such actions been taken by the Axis powers, they would have been tried for them. However, given that the Allies won the war, actions such as those I mentioned, as well as some of the Soviet Union's atrocities during the war, went unpunished.

I want to add that I do appreciate the principles America was founded on. I do not appreciate what America has become, how some of those principles have been perverted.

#72
Sigh Snootles

Sigh Snootles

    now with increased kung fu grip!!!

  • Members
  • 12,160 posts
seriously, yolande... i have british friends who CRINGE every time they hear someone say that 'america won the war'... the tide had already turned before america joined the fight.

#73
devanshoom

devanshoom

    Member

  • Members
  • 22 posts
Yeah, a lot of people dislike America these days. I would say it has mushroomed over the last 5 years. But do remember there is a difference between disliking a country's government and disliking the average person in the street. A lot of people are afraid of the US government cos they are so obviously evil and devious. There is also the fact that global westernization is killing cultural diversity. many older people is foreign countries see that as a threat. But that comes from Europe as well as the states. I am English and although i dislike the US government intensely I have nothing against American people in general.
Certain individuals can be rather aggressive at times, being very quick to fire off a round of abuse or get pissed off with bad service in foreign countries, but in general Americans are okay. I have some good American friends.

#74
devanshoom

devanshoom

    Member

  • Members
  • 22 posts
By the way I agree with Obsidian's history lesson about russia in the second world war. Spot on. Hitler couldnt break them down, pure and simple. English and Americans often overlook the significant role Russia played in ending the Third Reich. It's just a pity they went and annexed all those unfortunate eastern bloc states.

#75
Bora.Horza

Bora.Horza

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,063 posts

yolande:
and by the way would you mind telling be who was winning before the us came into the war? because to my knowledge it was Germany and Britian was the last country standing in hittlers way and the only reason they werent captured also was because of the english channel and because he was fighting on two fronts.

You are correct, Hitler was winning in 1941 when he declared war on the US. Then he completely screwed up his Russian campaign which eventually resulted in his meat grinder being worn down to the last few thousand men.



Reply to this topic