Zeld2.0

The irony being that the Yankees haven't won a WS while a republican was in the white house in the last 44 years

Personally though, I don't see how this has anything to do with the subject at hand - baseball sports are a different dynamic from world politics and real feelings in world situations - hating the Yankees is often a thing of rivalry (see: Sox fans)

Mephisto2

I'm hoping it was a satirical post...



Mr Mephisto

irateplatypus

roachboy - am i right in assuming that you were involved in the antiwar movement in paris? you said that you attended their meetings... it would appear that you at least appeared to tacitly support their cause.

if so, then i think you can safely infer that the reason why those french people were so hospitable to you is because you added credence to their political notions... not because they were more adept than we here in the US are at separating people from national policy.

nothing would be more welcoming to a french marxist than an American who admires their cause. "see, even the American agrees with us... so we must be right."

if you made yourself to appear completely neutral (which would be next to impossible to do in that crowd for any length of time.) then you may not be seen as a supporter of their cause. if you did not maintain complete neutrality in word and deed, i'm doubting you expressed agreement towards the administration...

think, would they have been nearly as hospitable to you if you supported the war? would they then have no difficulty in separating you from the government's actions?

i think i've tipped my hand as to what my opinions are... but you were there and i am interested in hearing your thoughts.

sidenote: i've been to france as recently as two years ago in fact. i did not personally encounter a large amount anti-american sentiment, though there were times when it was clearly present.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

whocarz

I just want to point something out to you. By this logic, you are telling me that the Europeans are just blowing hot air as well, since a free Europe would not be here today if not for the United States. You would either be saluting the crooked cross or praying to father Stalin right now.

__________________
If there exists anything mightier than destiny, then it is the courage to face destiny unflinchingly. -Geibel

Despise not death, but welcome it, for nature wills it like all else. -Marcus Aurelius

Come on, you sons of bitches! Do you want to live forever? -GySgt. Daniel J. "Dan" Daly

Zeld2.0

Hell, I was just in France about 4 weeks ago - if there is much hate for Americans right now, it's not that present as people like to imagine - much of the war on Iraq and other issues is sort of "sooooo yesterday."

As in, there isn't much reason to argue over issues when whats done is done.

For the most part and for most sentiments they don't really mind Americans and are appreciative of what we did do for them years ago, but just as in any nation, there is going to also be those people who don't like you.

It was obvious among some people but it's nothing different from appearing as a minority in an area that doesn't like them in our own country. Of course, if you have the money, all is good

Zeld2.0

By that logic, saying stuff against France is just blowing hot air since we wouldn't be a country without French assistance...

Much of what is said by politicians, no matter how stupid it might sound, is used to please the domestic audience - do you really think our president would say something to piss off the nation despite what he feels? Never in public or we would demand his dead.

It's the same for all politicians...

Mephisto2

Zeld took the words right out of my hat.

I was wondering how long it would take before someone brought up the "America saved Europe's ass during WWII" topic. True, but so very stale and worthless as an argument here. Also, please remember that Germany declared war on the US, not the other way round. Despite the Lend Lease program, the US up to that point, supported isolationism.

Mr Mephisto

Lebell

When Al Queda parrots the Democrat theme of "Anyone But Bush", that makes up my mind pretty well.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

W for Four More.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Mephisto2

Al Queda [sic] are supporting political parties in the US?! References?

This is the first I've heard of it.

And your logic is flawed in any case. Or don't you believe that the Democrats would persue Al Queda too?


Mr Mephisto

OpieCunningham

Wow. That was easy.

Reverse psychology will be your ultimate downfall.

Cynthetiq

Mephisto, my hat to you for being man enough (ugh person damned feminists ) to admit prior mistakes. I too am like you willing to change my opinion if one can logically explain to my why my viewpoint should move from where it is, and hopefully replace it with a better one.

art, there's not many people out there like Mephisto or myself who are willing to listen to someone's intellegint discourse and re-evaluate their position.

Lebell

It's around, if you want to Google it. I really don't care if you or OpieCunningham believe me or not.

And no, I don't believe that Kerry has the backbone needed to protect this country.

I believe that if he had been president after 9/11 that we would still be asking the Taliban to "pretty please with sugar on it" hand over Osama.

As to the "world hating us", they already did or didn't you notice?

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Zeld2.0

I have a hard time believing that any president, no matter which party, would have done nothing military wise to take out the people who were responsible for 9/11 - indeed, it's literally demanded by rule to

98MustGT

My neighbor here at work is a hard core Yankee fan and people bash him eveytime the Yankees lose. You ought to see the email he got today after their 22-0 loss.

That is a great piece of trivia re: the Yankees.

Paq

about the french issue. I was talking to several french people the other day and a few of my friends just returned from france. Here's the gist...

basically, *most* sane/rational french people dislike the US policies, but have nothing against the people. Therefore, an american can roam freely and interact w/out much hatred being spewed forth. I say w/out much bc there are a few who "hate' americans, but all in all, most understand that the average person has nothing to do with any of the US policies at the current time.

and i think it was mentioned before, w/out france, we wouldn't be around in the same manner.

Also, i don't believe the world hates US in particular. I believe they hate the policies more than the people. Of course, this is oversimplified and there are some obvious omissions

__________________
Live.

Chris

Halx

Lebell, if you're basing your decision off of what your enemy said, you've got something wrong.

Al Qaeda stated that under Bush, they would continue to thrive, but Kerry's methods would be their end. What can you derive from this? Absolutely NOTHING. They're playing a 2/7 off-suit hand in poker. They're bluffing. Their entire statement should be null and void in the eyes of any rational thinker.

So now you're telling us all that a decorated war veteran is not fit to defend the country, while a dumb rich party kid who avoided the draft and was frozen solid for 7 minutes after he was told the country was under attack IS? Check your logic, sir!

__________________
You have found this post informative.
-The Administrator
[Don't Feed The Animals]

Halx

AND you're resigned to just letting the world hate us? Shit, people, where is your honor?

__________________
You have found this post informative.
-The Administrator
[Don't Feed The Animals]

Cynthetiq

Yes. another over simplified soundbyte, "I'd rather be the best father than the best neighbor, it's not possible to accomplish both."

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Halx

VERY oversimplified. Being the best in one area doesn't mean you've gotta be the worst in the other. We could do MUCH better in BOTH areas.

__________________
You have found this post informative.
-The Administrator
[Don't Feed The Animals]

ubertuber

Halx, I respect what you are saying, but I have to say that I feel that I believe that principles are more important than a popularity contest. Hell, I'd rather be disliked for doing the right thing than liked for being a conformist or push-over. Now, as to whether I think Bush is actually doing the right thing... Sometimes, and sometimes not. It's just that I am not interested in voting for president based on my perceptions of how much others LIKE us. I'm trying to weigh how much I value what each candidate is saying they will do.

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

ARTelevision

"art, there's not many people out there like Mephisto or myself who are willing to listen to someone's intellegint discourse and re-evaluate their position."

Cynthetic, that's correct. I'd furthermore maintain that even your own opinions were changed not so much by the positions of others but, more deeply, by your experience of and reflection upon the world and the socio-political and global matrix vis-a-vis the practicability of actually effecting change. These are difficult, if not impossible, qualities to quantify or delineate. This is why I am more interested in the positions people take than I am of their explanation or defense of them.

__________________
create evolution

Mephisto2

What is that supposed to mean?

Our "experience of the socio-political and global matrix"?

Erm...

Check out this link: http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/

:-)

I can't speak for Cynthetiq, but my opinions were changed because of the logical arguments of others, the fact that I realised my position was based on falsehoods and the fact that sometimes I simply just got it wrong.

And I will continue to develop my opinions and change my beliefs as I live my life. To do otherwise is silly. Finally, things are not usually black and white; there's usually shades of grey to consider.


Mr Mephisto

Cynthetiq

art, I tend to think that my presence alone is enough to affect change. It may not be huge change but the possibility exists. I'm going to go with Mephisto on this and say it's more or less the logical argument and realizing the my own position happened to not have enough or correct information.

An item to your point true is that I do try things differently from time to time just to see if I still dislike them, example foods that I did not like as a kid I do now, and vice versa. Every so often I will try something again and see if my palate has changed. Sometimes to my surprise it has changed, sometimes I still have dislike for it.

I agree with Mephisto that it's part of my learning lessons in life. Since I am the culmination of all my experience and years, if I pay attention I can see how I shared some of the more liberal viewpoints in my younger years with some of the young people of today.

as for Halx, yes we could do better, but I do think that it's hypocritical to try to (again simplified soundbyte) "fix the neighborhood before fixing your own house." By fixing my own house and encouraging others to do so leading by example, I fix the neighborhood.

Cynthetiq

I was just thinking more about what you said art, and "the practicability of actually effecting change." sounds to me like submission, acquiesing, defeatist or "giving up" even.

I will agree that in my older years I've not been as active as I was from physical to political, but I think that has more to do with time than not being able to effect change.

Halx

Indeed. This is also my preferred method. This is also why I severely dislike Bush.

__________________
You have found this post informative.
-The Administrator
[Don't Feed The Animals]

Lebell

No, I don't base any decision of this importance on any one factor, but I also surely weigh them all and give some more importance than others.

I believe differently than you in that Kerry would effectively deal with Al Quaeda, decorations aside.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

matteo101

You can go to virtually any country in theworld and in almost every country you will find people that dislike the United States, if you ask them why they will say because George W Bush is a unqualified and "stupid" leader, and he made bad desisions. Look at Athens for an example. Just by hearing that Colin Powell(which I think is the best member of the Bush Administration) was coming to watch the closing ceremonies they had a huge riot.

Halx

Ahh, so pissing off the Iraqis, like kicking a beehive, is a rational and constructive way to subdue a civilian-rooted movement? Do we need to remember Vietnam?

Bush is no closer to overcoming either Al Qaeda or the Iraqis than he was 4 years ago. They've only taken on different forms. He's incompetent. The action is despicable.

__________________
You have found this post informative.
-The Administrator
[Don't Feed The Animals]

shakran

I've been waiting for someone to say that. Because you see you're right - for now.

We should not yet be ashamed to be from America as many Americans are now saying. Bush ran on an isolationist platform. No one who voted for him could have any inkling of the idea that he would invade Iraq and turn the world against us. The American people are not to blame and should not be held accountable for our country's actions if they're ordered unilaterally by the president UNLESS

They fail to vote him out of office this election. See, if Bush is reelected in a fair (read: Florida doesn't fuck up) election, then it means that the majority of the country supports the idea that we should attack anyone we want to even if they pose no threat to us. It would mean that it's NOT just Bush screwing up, but that we're endorsing his screw up by putting him in office for another 4 years. THEN would be the time to be ashamed to be an American, because our country, rather than just one rogue leader and his posse of warmongers, has shifted from its original course of being a respected bulwark of freedom to being a tyrannical superpower.

Hopefully, I won't have to be ashamed to live here.

docbungle

I agree that Bush's main problem is his incompetence. And also his bull-headedness. When he digs himself (and the country) into a hole, he refuses to admit it; he simply keeps digging, blindly, without any kind of foresight. Who in the hell is going to fix this mess? Certainly not him. We need to give someone else the opportunity to get shit back on track.

__________________
Bad Luck City

Lebell

"pissing off the Iraqis"??

Those of us who are a little older remember well the shock when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, not to mention all the other people that maniac killed.

Want me to go down the list of why that man needed to be taken out?

And quit playing the "Vietnam" card, because it doesn't apply, and yes, Bush is MUCH closer.

Bush is doing a tough job that won't be accomplished by hand-wringing or half measures.

If anything, Vietnam was lost by attitudes like yours, which prevented Johnson from doing what needed to be done early on. So thanks, but no thanks. You can keep Kerry, because if he gets in I can totally see another Vietnam as we pull half assed out of Iraq and fail to answer attacks from extremists with the force necessary to destroy them.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Mephisto2

[QUOTE=Lebell]"pissing off the Iraqis"??

Those of us who are a little older remember well the shock when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, not to mention all the other people that maniac killed.

Want me to go down the list of why that man needed to be taken out?
[quote]

There are plenty of reasons. NO ONE is disputing this.

However, the way it was done, the falsehoods that were presented to the public, the implication that he was involved in 9/11, the personal familial animosity affecting national policy.... All these topics are what are pissing people off.

Remember, the world believes in teh UN and multi-lateralism. It doesn't really matter if the US does or not. The fact is, that a unilateral US will piss off other countries because you are working outside accepted standards, international law (to which you are signatories), the United Nations (of which you were founding members and is the child of the League of Nations, itself created by a great American President) and that your approach of "might means right" does not make you any friends.

THAT'S why Bush is damaging US reputation. Continue to stomp around flailing your arms like a big bully if you wish, but it won't make any difference. And don't be surprised when someone sneaks up on you and kicks you in the balls. That's basically what's happened already, eh?

My God... you don't actually believe that, do you? Witness what the Russians have done in Chechnya. They have bombed that country almost back into the stone age and the rebels still fight. The only way the US could have "won" the Vietnam War would have been by turning it into a sheet of glass. Get real.

At least he fought there. :-) I don't like it when Bush supporters spout bullshit about "their man" being braver, better, bigger... Kerry fought, fought well and was not afraid of his duties.

Bush? erm...


Mr Mephisto

PS - those last comments are kinda cage-rattling. :-) Let's not degenerate into a Bush vs Kerry military experience debate. Even Bush knows when to back off that hot potato...

Bodyhammer86

kerry's military record has been called into question too, you know

__________________
Pantera, Shadows Fall, Fear Factory, Opeth, Porcupine Tree, Dimmu Borgir, Watch Them Die, Motorhead, Beyond the Embrace, Himsa, Black Label Society, Machine Head, In Flames, Soilwork, Dark Tranquility, Children of Bodom, Norther, Nightrage, At the Gates, God Forbid, Killswitch Engage, Lamb of God, All That Remains, Anthrax, Mudvayne, Arch Enemy, and Old Man's Child \m/

Lebell

It seemed appropriate to quote you.

Yes, I actually believe what I said, and feel much the same about what you said.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Halx

Let's prioritize here. If Saddam needed to be taken out, then why are we also not involved in Sudan? Puh-leeze. If you're claiming that Bush was justified in taking over Iraq because Saddam was a bad guy and it was our duty to do so, you're blinding yourself. The US's military might is NEEDED in many other areas of the world, but GWB chooses Iraq over them all.. why?

Don't cover up for GWB's greedy motives for him.

Bush's idea of diplomacy is, "Give up or we'll take over." What the fuck kind of policy is that? You think the USA will become pussified with Kerry in charge? Damn, I'd expect a man with an actual military record to know how to perform an operation better than a trigger-happy blowhard who probably has Battlefield 1942 on his presidential computer... assuming he even knows how to turn it on.

I'm gonna pull every card I have to spread the word that Bush is a terrible president.

Every time someone says, "God Bless America" or "God Bless George W Bush" I cringe. I'm an American, but I don't believe in God. I don't want to be carried away with the rest of the country on this mission "backed" by fuckin' *God*. We're crusading... shit, it's infuriating.

__________________
You have found this post informative.
-The Administrator
[Don't Feed The Animals]

Mephisto2

Much about what I said? I'm confused now. About Vietnam?

As far as I know, very few realistic people believe the Vietnam war could ever have been won. There are many many cases where such wars have proven unwinable [sp?].

Vietnam itself.
Afghanistan (the original Russian invasion)
Two Russian invasions of Chechnya
Iraq (today)
Peninsular War (where the term guerilla was born)
etc
etc

When the native population of the country are against an occupying force, and do not fight in standard military doctrine, you simply can not "win". That's been proven so many times.

The one time the Vietnamese fought in standard military actions (the Tet Offensive of 1968) they were soundly defeated by the US. But America still lost the war. And you think Johnson had his hands tied? Was illegally bombing the shit out of Laos not enough? Blitzing Hanoi not enough? Killing thousands of innocent civilians not enough?

What more would you have done to proffer the American services a glorious victory?


Mr Mephisto

Lebell

I really don't see the point of this.

I've stated my opinion and you've stated yours.

You've made up your minds about what is true as I've made up mine.

I'm as sure you are wrong as you are I am wrong.

Halx and Mephisto, I'm glad we live in a country where we can all have our own opinions.

Ciao.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

roachboy

on vietnam. the "vietnam card"......

the americans were not stabbed in the back by anyone..that is a far right canard that somehow has wended its way into mainstream discourse....the fact is that the americans had no idea what they were fighting against, what the historical situation that shaped that fight was--hell if robert macnamara can admit this freely, you would think the american right would be able to follow suit.

and there **are** parallels between these situations--formal ones--but they exist--from the selling of a war under false pretenses (the tonkin gulf charade) to the refusal to take seriously what is happening on the ground, to the idiotic idea that you can impose democracy, in its shallow american form even, through war and simply wipe out and entirely different mode of thinking about politics, to a kind of collective mental block that prevented the americans in both cases from understanding that national liberation did not mean colonial occupation by americans==the list goes on and on.

the john-wayne attitude (we cahnt do nuthin with handwringing gestures) functioned during vietnam as a public justification carnage in vietnam, much more than waht might have been necessary, even if you accepted the american argument for being there in the first place--which i do not. the same kind of john wayne idiocy in iraq has and will do the same.

that saddam hussein was not a great guy is not in dispute--but (i have written this before) the americans have supported dictators far wrose than him without the slightest qualm over the past 70 years or so--if you look at the history of american foreign policy, you find that this is a country that really does not give a shit about human rights unless the matter gets tangled up in one of political expediency
.
saddam hussein was a problem for the neocons because of the narrative they floated about the first gulf war--that "the job was not finished" because the americans were hobbled by the evil united nations--this war is much more about an attempt by these people to reverse a precedent and place american military power over any and all international institutions--except they fucked it up and will continue to fuck it up---because they believed the totally false scenarios created by nitwits like wolfowitz who actually persuaded bush that this would be easy, that the americans would be welcomed with open arms and flowers--we'll be home by christmas, ma--blah blah blah.

instead you have a fiasco. unjustified from the outset, sold on the basis of lies at worst, of wildly misread "intellgence" at best, not thought out, not going according to plan--an action with nothing--aboslutely nothing--to do with any "war on terror" that has causesd thousands of civilian casualties that the americans try to deal with by not talking about them. great stuff. worked out great in vietnam too.

you even have a repeat of the "guns and butter" mode of funding a war by not funding it really thing that worked so fabulously for johnson.

it is astonishing. it required an incompetent of a really high order to pull this off. you have one in george w bush--who by the way is obviously a unilateralist, not an isolationist (buchanan was and is one of these)....

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Mephisto2

Well, that's a bit of a cop out, isn't it? I thought the whole purpose of TFP, and open debate in general, was discussion and sharing of views.

If you are simply going to say "I've stated my opinion and I'm sure you're wrong" then walk away, why do you bother coming here?

I agree with and enjoy lots of your posts on different subjects. I just don't think you've thought this one through. You say you believe the war in Vietnam could have been won if Johnson didn't have his hands tied.

One simple question.

How?


Mr Mephisto

roachboy

irate: i think most of my experience was a function of being able to speak french.
i even got to the point where i could understand that a joke had been uttered, even if i did not always actually get the joke--and started to be able to have actual emotions in french--which was good, ebcause of r awhile i was a very placid fellow who did not react to things much and smiled vacantly when others were laughing.

the language thing preceded everything else.
as for making myself neutral--not possible---beginning with my height (6'2", or something like that) and running through how i carry myself, my sense of personal space--all of it marked me over and over as american. i was interested in the place, in what was going on around me, but i never tried or wanted to try to become french or pretend i was.

like anywhere, if you are in a place long enough you meet a certain percentage of assholes--at least after a while i knew what they were saying.

as for the question of whether i expect i would have met with the same reception if i had supported the war--well i probably would not have put myself in the same situations. i would not have met the same people. there are many many scenes, political and otherwise, in paris and you can choose where you turn up and how you go about it--it is a big city. i could have had a great time there and not met anyone from the left. i could have spent just as much time in exactly the same clubs i went to and not run into political discussions. it is like anywhere else, that way, any city.

but at no point---not one--even with people i came to see as assholes---did anyone confuse me as a person with the policies of the american government.

i suspect that this response goes differently than you anticipated, but there we are.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite