So many realists, so few idealists.

i like to recall: too many freaks, not enough circuses (particularly when thinking of good ol uncle sam)

Mostly when I think about all those folks housed in the UN building :-)

I do think it's about time somebody else started being the leader of the free world. They can start by taking that particular circus off our hands, and house it some place where the true defenders of the poor and oppressed live - somewhere where they really do it right, as compared to our fucked up system - that oughta cut the US freak quotient about 90%. It's just not right that the HQ of the new transnational progressivism movement should be placed in land of it's most dire foe.

Sudan, maybe. No, I got it, Greece! That birthplace of democracy just outlawed computer games. What devotion to personal freedom. No, even better, Cuba! They've outlawed personal ownership of PCs altogether. See, they don't want the rest of the world finding out how good they have it over the internet. Why, if folks around the world ever found out about those wonderful literacy rates, universal health care and all those other ways that socialist freakin' paradise just knocks the damn socks off the worker-exploitin', free-market, Third World oppressin' United States of AmeriKKKa, they wouldn't be able to handle the influx of immigration as the New Boat People came crashing onto the shores in their ciagarette boats and yachts yearning to finally breathe free.

Must be a bitch to be irrelevant these days. but if you wanna play baseball, you gotta buy a glove, and if you wanna have a say in what goes on in the world, you better have an economy and/or a military that makes your opinions about the ways things oughta run more weigh more than a butterfly. France has opinions. So do Canada, Andorra, and I, and every other soul with an internet connection. Funny thing is though, I, and every other US citizen, have a lot more say in what goes on in the world than most heads of state, as our decision makers are responsible to me and people like me, and not Kofi Annan, Jacque Cretin (sp?) the UN, the Euros, Greenpeace, the Holy Potato, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the editors of Le Monde.

'Course, the whole damn concept of deriving your power from, and being answerable to, the people you represent (not those you "rule" and that's a big difference), is sorta strange to most of the governments that criticize us, so I really don't blame them for not being able to wrap their pointy little heads around it.

Let me help make things clear...

If Jeebus H. Freakin' Christ came down tomorrow and wanted to run things, he better hope that he could win the election, as otherwise, he's outta luck, and even if he did, if he tried to pull some dumb shit like establishing a theocracy, the Supreme Court would kick his ass six days from Sunday.

So don't take it personally if we don't roll over for the ICC, the Kyoto Accords, the Summit for Taking US Taxpayer Money And Giving It To Third World Dick-Taters In The Name Of... damn, what was it y'all called it, I forget, (it was some shit where they went to a country in Africa and talked about starving people while they drank champagne and ate lobster, steaks, and caviar about two Sammy Sosa longballs from people eating weeds and roaches and drinking out of a ditch), oh yeah, that jogged my memory banks, "World Hunger." We just don't work that way.

And you can completely forget about deterring us from taking Saddam down. We got about 2900 reasons to do that, and every single fucking one of them means more to us than anything you have to say about.

The American Empire.

Get used to it.

The dogs can bark, but the caravan's moving on.

in your terse argument on the democratic power that is the States are you equally proud of the many times america has abused that power?

since WW2 the states has made 235 unprovoked attacks on countries. im too young to recall, but most of them particularly ones on panama, guatemala and ecuador had a huge conglomerate at the centre of it, pushing the button for the states...money, money, money....

let us not forget the 'accidental' bombing of civilians in afghanistan, let us not forget that no word of regret has been expressed by bush on that matter, let us not forget that if you do want to cast a vote that couldn't even hold air then florida is the place to go, let us not forget that thousands of workers outside the states are losing jobs because of bush's stance on the steel tariifs, let us not forget that the states is the biggest pollutor of the environment, let us not forget that one in twenty americans do not even hold a passport, let us not forget that the welfare state in america has financially crippled thousands of is own countrymen...and let us not forget that america was not made the policeman of the world but took on that job when bush declared war ..you may argue it was a just war, id argue that there is no such thing

your reply, im sorry to say cos im sure your a pretty affable kinda guy, was the embodiment of why america is on most people's to-do list...no sense that america put sadam there, put osama there...even allowed stalin a wide berth...no iota of humility, of a sense that things need to be fought out around the table first...giving the UN a chance, just a gung-ho approach... he wont talk? fine, send the missiles in, who gives a stuff if there's a woman and kid in the way

being irrelevant isnt so bad; being thought ill of is worse. whenever i meet someone from (middle) america im always shocked that they really cant hear their over-exalted opinion of themselves, just think before you act:

better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt

an american said that

Sunny writes:

in your terse argument on the democratic power that is the States are you equally proud of the many times america has abused that power?

You probably won't be surprised to hear that I believe that while our record is not perfect, there are very few times America has abused it's power, especially in light of the enormity of that power, and as compared to other nation that from time to time found themselves in a postion to get away with something.

Exercise for the historically challenged - investigate the recent history of the Middle East, Asia and Africa, particularly that of current hotspots Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Zimbabwe, and Palestine. Compare European imperialism, (particularly the rivalry between England and Russia) as a source of the current crises, as a factor in relation to that of the United States. Conclude by deciding just whose mess the US is currently cleaning up.

since WW2 the states has made 235 unprovoked attacks on countries.

Allow me to cry "shenanigans" here. Source, please.

im too young to recall,

I'm trying to be civil here, but I'm sorry, that's just too stupid for words. I'm too young to recall WWII, or the Punic Wars, for that matter, but that does not absolve me from ignorance about them. If you wanna talk US history, limiting it to the stuff you personally recall as it happened is sheer intellectual laziness.

but most of them particularly ones on panama, guatemala and ecuador had a huge conglomerate at the centre of it, pushing the button for the states...money, money, money....

Again, you wanna talk specifics, or do you just wanna rant?

let us not forget the 'accidental' bombing of civilians in afghanistan,

This is the point where I begin to doubt your reasoning capability. Please offer one shred of evidence that the US intentionally, as policy, bombed Afghan civilians.

As a bonus question, please examine the ratio of military to civilian casualties in the Afghan War, or even GWI, to any other major conflict in the history of the world, you get to pick. Please explain the ratios you discover as evidence for any deliberate targeting of Afghan civilians.

let us not forget that no word of regret has been expressed by bush on that matter,

(sigh) Any number of US officials have expressed the postion of the US - that in war, civilian casualties are simply unavoidable, that we will do all that we can to minimize them, and we regret those that happen. Your point is what?

As a further shedding of light on the matter, consider the history of the Taliban. I will mention one incident out of the many available.

In early august of 1998, the Taliban took control of Mazar-e-Sharif. (link here) In the ensuing days, they put to death 6,000 of their religious opponents. This far surpasses even the wildest exaggerations of the Taliban claims of US-caused civilian deaths in Afghanistan. In fact, during every year of the Taliban rule, the Afghan population declined, and more people were put to death by the Taliban than were killed in the Afghan War.

A further fact to help you put thngs in perspective - a year ago today, Bush had given permission to the military to shoot down Flight 93 if it came down to that. He did this knowing US civilians were on board. I fail to see how a President that would be willing to kill US civilians to prevent a greater loss of life does not have the moral standing to conduct a war where Afghan civilians might be killed, to the same end.

let us not forget that if you do want to cast a vote that couldn't even hold air then florida is the place to go,

(yet another sigh) Every single respected organization, liberal, conservative, unaffiliated, whatever, that has gone back to look at the records has concluded that the margin of Bush's victory was in fact greater than thought at the time. Get over it. This dog won't even get off the porch, much less hunt.

You're grasping at straws now, tossing out non-sequiturs, trying to bolster a failed argument.

let us not forget that thousands of workers outside the states are losing jobs because of bush's stance on the steel tariffs,

I support free trade, and think that the steel tariffs (most of which are effectively set aside now - you knew that right?) are a major mistake, along with the farm subsidy bill. You happy now? The subject was GWII.

I will point out that the Euros remain the most protectionist nations in regard of agriculture, and that it is not in the US President's job description to maximize employment in other countries.

let us not forget that the states is the biggest pollutor of the environment,

That comes with being the biggest source of the world GDP. Bonus essay question - compare the air quality of Mexico City to that of any US city you care to choose. Explain. Reconcile those numbers with the allegation that we are "bigger pollutors." The word is "polluter,'" by the way.

let us not forget that one in twenty americans do not even hold a passport,

This is germane to the conversation just how? How many Cubans have a passport? Zimbabweans? Russians? Why does this matter? Do you argue that Americans are not free to travel? Go ask a Saudi woman if she can leave the country without her male guardian's permission.

let us not forget that the welfare state in america has financially crippled thousands of is own countrymen...

I can't forget that, as I agree. We should be much less socialist, and let the working people keep more of their earnings, leaving many of the safety net functions to private charities. Is that really what you meant to write?

and let us not forget that america was not made the policeman of the world but took on that job when bush declared war...

No, America got handed the role of world policeman when the other free industrialised countries (can you spell Euros?) decided to default on their obligations to defend their citizens, so they could spend their GDP on their socialistic pipe dreams.

A fitting analogy of European behavior in the post WWII era would be that of a bunch of friends dining at restaurant. Most of them get up and leave one guy to pay the tab, since he's making more money than they are. They then later meet at a coffeshop, and talk about what a jerk the the guy that just paid for the meal is, and then get pissed off that he won't take them to dinner again, at a restaurant of their choosing.

It's not enough that they're sponges, it's the ingratitude that really rankles.

Another step on the Journey to Enlightenment - compare and contrast the European and American efforts to stop the conflict in the Balkans. In your conclusion, argue whether the European coalition is able to effectively enforce human rights even in their own spheres of influence. Be sure to mention the Euro criticism of the US for not getting involved before we did, after the Euros proved unable to fix the situation themselves.

you may argue it was a just war, id argue that there is no such thing

It is here that I would argue that you are either a historically ignorant idiot, or less harshly, being overly hyperbolic. Please show me how I'm wrong. Tell me how the war against Hitler in WWII was an unjust war.

your reply, im sorry to say cos im sure your a pretty affable kinda guy,

By all reports, I'm a very affable guy, until such point as you start flying airplanes into office buildings where my countrymen are peaceably trying to live their lives, or over in your country, killing as many people as it takes to stay in power, (google for Saddam, Mugabe, biography) or putting people to death for whackass religious reasons. (google nigeria, adultery, stoning) At that point, I'm liable to saddle up and turn into the Goddam Avenging Fucking Angel of Human Rights, and along with a buncha folks like me, some B-52's, an aircraft carrier or two, and some Abrams tanks, come and permanently settle your fucking hash.

no sense that america put sadam there,

We didn't. Read up before you have to chew your feet off to talk, OK? He shot his way into power.

put osama there...even allowed stalin a wide berth...

Yeah, in both cases we used them to help us fight a more dangerous foe, then turned against them after we no longer needed them. Please, since you're dissing the US, point out any nation that didn't allow Stalin a "wide berth" before WWII, and then inform me of any nation that was actively pursuing OBL before 9/11.

no iota of humility, of a sense that things need to be fought out around the table first...giving the UN a chance, just a gung-ho approach... he wont talk? fine, send the missiles in, who gives a stuff if there's a woman and kid in the way

Humility, or the lack therof, is irrelevant. We've given the UN waaaaay too many chances, and they do nothing, and the rest of that statement is semantically null fluff.

being irrelevant isnt so bad; being thought ill of is worse. whenever i meet someone from (middle) america im always shocked that they really cant hear their over-exalted opinion of themselves, just think before you act:

Hey, it's a bitch trying to be humble when you're by every rational measure a member of the most wealthy, free, compassionate, and powerful nation in the world. Sucks to be you, I guess. Irrelevant, uneducated (at least historically, by looking at this post) and guess what, we pretty much think ill of soft-headed analysis like this, too. So you've managed to complete the trifecta.

better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt

Truer words we ne'er spoken. :-)

Thanks for the comments, but until you can do better than this, don't bother in the future. You're making me feel like a big bully. Shooting this weak stuff down is about as hard as spanking a puppy. You got any friends that can play in the big leagues?