What the U.S.A. thinks of the world.
 

After reading this thread I became very curious what Americans think about other countries or continents.

It doesn't matter to me if you can speak from experience or not. A lot of the people in Europe that have opinions about the U.S.A. can't speak from experience either. I am just very curious how you view the world.

well, in a positive light for most countries.

there are some countries that i dislike, but i'm optimistic about them. (consider most of the world in equal footing on intelligence)

I like the Netherlands because of the liberal aura.

I think the World is becoming a smaller and smaller place. I've been around longer than the majority of those who frequent these boards. In the time I've been on Earth a lot has changed - far more for me than most who might read this. I'm a veteran of the US Navy - I've had the chance to visit a lot of interesting places - some far more interesting than others - some I don't care to ever to return to. I am most familiar with our closest neighbors, Mexico and Canada. I spent the better part of three years in Argentia, Newfoundland. I gained a lot of respect for the Newfies! They are a very lovable and hard working group of people. You cannot judge the rest of Canada by looking at the people of the Maritimes - a place where for the most part, life is rough and very hard. The people of Newfoundland are resourceful, the hardest working and most honest people I have ever had the opportunity to be around. Since my time in the navy I have visited Canada several times and in spite of the views of many Canadians who reply to these board I believe that most Canadians are no different than us, they are honest and caring people. Those I have been around the most, other than the citizens of Newfoundland, are the people who live in the Prairie Provinces, people who are just like me, talk a lot like me, except without the obvious Texas heritage in accent, and believe in most of the same things that I do. I've never had the privilege of visiting British Columbia. I hope to in the near future. I know a lot about Mexico. I've spent a lot of time in Mexico and enjoyed the pinker parts of a lot of gorgeous young ladies - when I was younger! Oh to be younger again! I was raised on the Gulf Coast of Texas, an hour from the border. I have been well educated at a very low price. I have enjoyed many beautiful young Mexican girls and parted company with them mutually satisfied - I satisfied - she with a couple of dollars - a buck well spent. I've been all over Mexico, from Cancun to Chihuahua, from Mazatlan to Mexico City, Taxco, and Guadalajara - I spent fifteen years on the Highway Patrol - taught high school history for another fifteen after leaving a 440 Dodge Interceptor a whole lot worse for wear, loaded on a trailer in three different pieces. What do I, an American from the SW US think of the rest of the world? It's still all out there somewhere and I'd like to see a lot more of it! I would love to go back to Europe. I would love to visit the Scandinavian countries... I 'd like to fly over Paris, and feel an uncontrollable urge to go to the restroom. That is what I, just an ordinary guy from the heartland of the US, thing about the world.

Probably my "favorite" country aside from the US would be Switzerland. They have some smart policy, and a good reputation for not intervening when they aren't wanted.

Germany is a nice place to visit, but wouldn't want to live there.

A person could look at this from two perspectives. The first would be the political view, which opens up a huge can of worms. The second, IMO more preferable view, would be the people of other countries, in which case I've never met one I didn't like.

If you've never been outside the U.S. then you have NEVER seen poverty, or famine. Seeing that really drives home the luck many of us have of being americans. I look at the world and I see a multitude of different cultures and ideas that all americans could benefit from. It's a pity there's so few who are open-minded about it. I love America, but we're only a speck on this Pale Blue Dot.

I have had the luck to travel to large portion of the Earth; both in and out of the military. I've been to some real shitholes and places that fit every meaning of the word paradise. There are two things that were always common: everywhere had something interesting to offer and in the end I was always glad to come back. The United States seems to have a piece of the different types of geography Ive seen everywhere, but not the deep culture that I observed. (It is a new country understandably)

It makes me sad in way that we as humans in this day and age cant freely travel the world to see all the wonders (and forgotten lessons) it has to offer without being in danger from fellow humans.

I tend to take the situation of each country as I see them.
Some are doing very well for the most part.
Others are still needing to allow their citizens decent lives.

What amazes me sometimes is how those in authority,
can allow others to suffer for their own selfishness.

While this can happen within the U.S. and other post-industrial nations to a certain extent,
the plight of those within oh so many countries around the world
surpasses what we who live here could even imagine.

Just take a simple road trip across Mexico for instance,
and you will see the definition of a 3rd world nation.

seems like: the rest of the world is always having problems and the US *must* take care of it.

Oh man, I'm going to restrain myself here, so I don't offend anyone. But other countries of the world have been joke fodder for me for as long as I can remember.

No polish jokes, please.

A third perspective is pure geography. I've always wanted to visit New Zealand as I heard from several people that it is the most scenic country in the world

most are trying to achieve what america has, even if its through total hate of the notion

The typical american can't get their fat as*es off the couch and take the remote out of their pudgy hands to give a crap about anywhere or anybody else other than themselves or where they live. America leads the industrialized world in obesity. Mostly between the ears.

Every time Amercia steps into another countries problems they get burned. That country hates us or the enemies of that country now hate us. The peace loving countries say we are warlike and we are only there for personal gain. Then our own people turn against us. It also costs us money, resources, and lives to clean up others messes.

America was not created to run the world. The only obligation we have is defend ourselves. We should not go out on a limb to help others. Especially when its not appreciated and the problem wasn't started by us. I don't see other countries fighting wars for small 3rd world countries.
It just makes me mad when everyone wants our help but no one likes us.

Don't let it get to you SuperSix2, people will give us shit regardless, we are top dog and you can't make everyone happy.

exactly mojo

Please explain this, sportsrule. I want to make sure that I understand you properly before I respond.

So trying to make everyone unhappy is more fair, isn't it? :D

Ultimately you are incharge of your own shit, if it makes it easier for them to blame shit on America that is really sad...

Don't be too offended. All i'm saying that those countries do NOT need the U.S.A. to be the policeman of the world. Unlike what many Americans seem to think. If there is a policeman of the world it should NOT be the U.S.A. but the U.N.

If America would have kept their nose out of certain things the world would have been a lot more stable and more save.

Just 2 examples.
1. During the Afghan war the CIA trained and funded Osama Bin Laden.
2. During the 1st Gulf war (the 3rd was the last one) Saddam Hussein was equiped with American weapons by the Americans.

Oh well, hindsight is a beautiful thing.

Why stop there? During WWII the United States funded and aided a fellow by the name of Ho Chi Minh in his fight against the Japanese in Indochina. This later cost the lives of 50,000+ Americans in Vietnam. Should we not have helped him? What would history have written differently if we hadn't? Gazing into a crystal ball to judge the future is not an option- people must react to current circumstance. The only thing certain is change.

Hmmm, what does aiding Ho Chi Minh have to do with the loss of American lives in Vietnam?

If LBJ would not have gone into Vietnam, no American lives would have been lost either. It was just the fear for communism that caused LBJ to start a war in Vietnam. If America would not have started supplying the French (who were basically running South Vietnam then) with weapons etc. The French grew tired of the war and backed out. That is when the USA stepped in themselves.
The only thing that would have happened had the USA not infered is that the south also turned communist.



Just to remain a bit ontopic, how do Americans in general feel about the French and Vietnamese?

Had they not aided Ho Chi Minh to begin with, his struggle may have been unsuccessful to the point of his death and/or capture. One never knows.


Sorry to sidetrack. Never met one I didn't like.

Both of these statements are skewed and mistakingly taken out of context.

1. The USA/CIA funded Pakistan during the Russian/Afgani war. They inturn trained and supplied the Mujadin (Not the Taliban or AL Qeada).

2. Those weapons were given to Saddam to fight the Iranians during the Iran/Iraq War. If you remember at the time Iran had just had a revolution and had 60+ America hostages (at least in the beginning of the conflict).

I would like the rest of the world to have everything they need, to be "happy", whatever that may be. Six Billion people, is it possible?

Everyone should have enough food and clean water.

Everyone should be free to say and think what they want.

There's too much hate.

I'm all for the UN, but the US has all the power, and we're not about to give it up. I think in general, we're afraid of the rest of the world, or too preoccupied with media to give a rats ass.

And who gives a shit WHY we give/gave arms to other countries. We sponsor the terror in this way, and it will come back to haunt us. But the people who profited from these actions will be safe in their secured castles and bunkers with their millions, smiling as it all comes tumbling down on the rest of us.

I always view other countries based on what people tell me about them. When I have actually visited places, however, I have often had a different opinion from them. Overall, I am in awe of other places. Whether it is because of poverty or not, I always seem to be amazed at the people who live in foreign countries. I guess it is just because they are different to me, but I think it really shows how much this world has to offer that most Americans seem to be completely ignorant to, myself included for the most part.

If we really indulge in the "what if" scenarios, Ho Chi Mihn would never have become a Communist in the first place if France and the US had listened to him during his trip to Europe.
He became a communist, because he discovered that the communists were the only Westerners that were supporting the notion of Vietnamese independence.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by porkpie
I'm all for the UN, but the US has all the power, and we're not about to give it up. I think in general, we're afraid of the rest of the world, or too preoccupied with media to give a rats ass.

and hopefully we never will lose that power. We need to maintain both military, and economical supreamacy

Oderint dum metuant? ;)

How ironic that your favourite country (aside from the US) would be polar opposite of the US policy wise.

I love the history and culture of the European countries. I've visited all of Scandinavia, all of the Eastern European countries and a great deal of Western Europe, and I just find the cities visually stunning, the people freindly and the history and culture fascinating.

Can't really comment on other parts of the world that I have never visited though....

The U.N. is a joke and we would be smart to stop funding it. Basically we fund 20%+ of the running of it and far more when you consider aid, military presence, and food aid. The sole purpose of the U.N. these days seems to be to counter U.S. policy. Its a spit in the face that Libya sets at the head of the Human Rights Comission.

That was truly the only reason?

I know this is another thread, but theres a large discussion behind this.

As time goes on and immigration occurs from EVERY country on Earth to the US, it becomes difficult to state what an American looks like. Freedom of religion, way of life (for the most part), and certain basic human rights has allowed all cultures to blend in a diverse mixture representing Earth.

What is the typical American? What do they look like?

American leads the industrialized world in obesity between the ears, leading my challenged American mind to assume your stating were stupid.

Very strong statements. Please dont leave us hanging, your gracious enough to provide that information, surely your confident and proud enough to complete your thought.

Who leads the world in the direction most beneficial to humans beings on the world? Which country should America strive to raise its standards and essence to?

Thanks for your input; Im sure it will be enlightening.

We've used the UN to our advantage too many times to be able to call for its dissolution without catching flak for it. Of course, we should still do so, but expect quite a bit of howling from all sides about it.

Maybe that should tell you something. You can't always have it your way all the time.

The US drop out of the UN.

Never in a billion years, it's too handy as a tool of your own foreign policy. Especially when it comes to Israel.

Read the following then tell me the USA doesn't use the UN to its own advantage.

:crazy:

the US has vetoed 30 draft UN resolutions on Israel. Of the numerous resolutions on Israel that were adopted by the UN, especially 242(1967) and 338(1973) which both chart a road to peace, Israel has not complied. The Security Council has been unable to act on these noncompliances due to the US's threat of veto, which creates a double standard, noted in the UN Press Release GA/9793, 20 October 2000. The US has even threatened to withdraw from the UN if Israel were to be suspended for failing to abide by UN resolutions.
Here are some of the more critical draft UN resolutions against Israel that have been vetoed by the US:


S/11940 of 23 January 1976 (9 in favour, U.S. veto, 3 abstentions-Italy, Sweden, UK. China and Libya did not participate.) The U.N. affirms "The right of Palestinian refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours to do so and the right of those choosing not to return to receive compensation for their property" and also "That Israel should withdraw from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967."

S/12022 of 24 March 1976 (14 in favour, U.S. veto) Noted that the U.N. is "Deeply concerned further at the measures taken by the Israeli authorities leading to the present grave situation including measures aimed at changing the physical, cultural, demographic and religious character of the occupied territories and, in particular, the City of Jerusalem, the establishment of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories and other violations of the human rights of the inhabitants of those territories."

S/14943 of 1 April 1982 (13 in favour, U.S. veto, 1 abstention-Zaire) Noted that the U.N. "Calls on Israel, the occupying Power, to rescind its decision disbanding the elected municipal council of El Bireh and its decision to remove from their posts the Mayors of Nablus and Ramallah."

S/15185 of 8 June 1982 (14 in favour, U.S. veto) Noted the U.N. "Reiterates its demand that Israel withdraw all its military forces forthwith and unconditionally to the internationally recognised boundaries of Lebanon."

S/15347/Rev.1 of 6 August 1982 (11 in favour, U.S. veto, 3 abstentions-Togo, UK, Zaire) Requested that "all the States Members of the United Nations should refrain from supplying Israel with any weapons and from providing it with any military aid until the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from all Lebanese territory."

S/17769 of 29 January 1986 (13 in favour, U.S. veto, 1 abstention-Thailand) Noted that the U.N. "Determines once more that all measures taken by Israel to change the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any part thereof, have no legal validity and that the policy and practices of Israel of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in those territories constitute a flagrant violation of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East."

S/20945/Rev.1 of 7 November 1989 (14 in favour, U.S. veto) Noted that the U.N. "Strongly deplores those policies and practices of Israel, the occupying Power, which violate the human rights of the Palestinian people in the occupied territory, and in particular the siege of towns, the ransacking of the homes of inhabitants, as has happened at Beit Sahur, and the illegal and arbitrary confiscation of their property and valuables."

S/21326 of 31 May 1990 (14 in favour, U.S. veto) Attempted to establish "a Commission consisting of three members of the Security Council, to be dispatched immediately to examine the situation relating to the policies and practices of Israel, the occupying Power, in the Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, occupied by Israel since 1967."

S/1997/241 of 21 March 1997 (13 in favour, U.S. veto, 1 abstention-Costa Rica) Noted that the UN "Demands that Israel immediately cease construction of the Jabal Abu Ghneim settlement in East Jerusalem, as well as all other Israeli settlement activities in the occupied territories."

S/2001/270 of 27 March 2001 (9 in favour, U.S. veto, 4 abstentions-France, Ireland, Norway, United Kingdom) Noted "Voting against efforts to establish a United Nations observer force to protect Palestinian civilians, the United States vetoed a draft resolution expressing the Council's readiness to set up such a mechanism."

The_Dude, rogue49, and especially here, Liquor Dealer:

It was good coming across your thoughts in context in this thread.
Thanks.