BF2S Forums What would the U.S. need to do to gain 'World Opinion'?

CameronPoe wrote:

I don't really know anyone who harps on in the least about US aid to other countries. The primary reason for anti-US sentiment worldwide is the 'perceived' imperialism of the US and their unwillingness to mind their own business.

The Cold War has a lot to do with it. Back then you had two superpowers fighting for global supremacy, the perceived 'good' one being the US - a kind of father figure holding back the USSR who would take over everything if left to their own devices. When the cold war ended that should have been it - happy ever after, everybody minds their own business. Unfortunatley it appears as though the 'father figure' has turned bad (in the minds of non-Americans) doing the same things and exerting the same influences over the rest of the world that the US swore to protect the 'free world' from during the Cold War: an external superpower dabbling in another nations affairs.

great points cam.

I would like to think that everything going on in regards to American foreign policy is only temporary and part of the process of cooling down the guns of the cold war.  it has been more than a decade but i am more optimistic.  obviously, the American people are not happy with it and for the most part, most of our representatives arent either.  I am hoping and expecting things to calm down in a few more years once everything gets settled.  It might or might not be too soon to judge the foregin policy, i tend to side with the "might be".  the cold war ending just last decade, im willing to give it time before I say all is lost with our image.  As I remember, the world, for the most part, loved the US up until bush and after bush it just be like that again. this is one reason we have term limits.

Harmor wrote:

Would this make the World safer?

Make an example out of North Korea an Iran by bombing them back to the stone age..

Last edited by DBBrinson1 (2007-05-21 10:10:37)

CameronPoe wrote:

If you efficiently searched people boarding planes to the US/within the US for box-cutters then you wouldn't need to care what happens to the freed ones once you dump them back in Afghanistan. Just amke sure they never get back in again. I think you'll find Clinton fired missiles at Osama - I don't think any 'lack of evidence' gave cause for restraint.

Not everything is on the planes.  We have hundreds and thousands of tourist overseas everyday and these people are exposed outside of our border security and would be at a higher risk.  No I am not saying hold them indefinately, but if they were picked up in a battle ground where insurgents fired on US troops and there is reasonable suspicion that they were involved then hold them for a while, in country.  Gitmo should be used for the ones that we have evidence for and can try in a court of law or an international court of law. 

It's funny because I know for a fact we had feet on the ground within visual sight, several times with sights set on Osama and the call went up stairs to Bill Clinton at least twice and they didn't kill him or grab him.  Firing missiles is all great and all, but I can fire a missile at the Middle East and say that I shot it at Osama.  Missiles are PR, bullets are results.

CameronPoe wrote:

Why are guys always so concerned about other peoples resources? That's why bottom-up global opinion has turned anti-US.  "..other nation states that will then use the Iraqi land and oil fields". The US is another 'nation state'. The hypocrisy is overwhelming. It's essentially - "It's our oil, not anyone elses". That is one of the core things acting against the US in terms of world opinion - it is seen as the most opportunistic and imperialistic power on earth at the moment: willing to ruthlessly use force to stack the cards of global  free market capitalism in their favour. It's bending the 'rules' of fairplay to well beyond breaking point. That's the difference between you and me: I idealistically would like to see a world where countries defend their own domestic economic interests without resorting to force, each fairly trading with each other as they see fit. For me military might is about DEFENCE, not about expansionism or imperialism. For most of the rest of the world that is the case also - hence global opinion currently being in anti-US mode.

Not claiming the oil, technically don't really need the oil.  We have enough trade with other countries and mining of our own.  Conducting a war has increased our gas prices two and three fold from pre war prices.  The oil can go rot in hell.  What I was talking about and you took out of context is if Iran gets ahold of more power in the Middle East you will start seeing one bloc controling all of the area after a (relatively) short period of time.  This whole you're fighting for land and oil crap is utterly stupid.  It is costing the United States more money to be there then the country could possibly profit by.  What is happening is the prevention of a Middle East super power that can dominate the region's oil and other trades.

And yes we are different I cannot say that I am idealistic in the least.  Sure not having to rely on having a strong military to protect your economic interests.  And fair trade is probably, unfortunately, never going to happen.  The United States has been trying to have fair trading throughout the world according to it, which means that the money in and out are equal.  Sometimes this isn't possible with 3rd world countries, other times the supply and demand for products pushes it one way or another or lastly, as is the cause with China, the other country only sees it as a fair trade when they export a significant amount more then they import.

CameronPoe wrote:

Or some radical assassinates Yitzhak Rabin. Or some radical war criminal visits the third holiest shrine in Islam. Or some radicals decide to continue building houses on land that does not belong to them under international law. Or some radicals decide to build a wall that does not belong to them under international law. Israel's right to defend itself does not extend to the wholesale slaughter of civilians and the creation of what are essentially large open air concentration camps.

PS It's anti-Israel not anti-Jewish - I struggle to think what impact any of these UN resolutions would have on a Jew living in Coney Island, NY or in Tehran, Iran.

The area is filled with people too filled with their perverted idealistic hopes and dreams of either no Israel or no Palestine or what not that peace is going to be hard.  Espically when you have terrorist attacks and very heavy handed responces.  I don't agree with attacking civilians, espically a nation state doing that, but when your enemy hides behind the civilians what are they suppose to do?  Sugerical strikes and raids? Thats even more bad PR.  The house building and living on the wrong side of the line is wrong, and I thought that the Israel military went in and bulldozed many of those houses to force them back out.  And I love that refugee camps are now considered concentration camps world wide now, it's the case in Africa too.  What the actual term concentration camp means is that it is a concentration of people, hence the name.  It got a bad rap from the Germans in WWII and sense is populary used as a negative term while the media will use it as another name for the camps.  Some of the camps, the ones for the 9,000 prisoners would better be described as internment camps.

You praise this wall later in your post.  Just pointing that out. 

CameronPoe wrote:

What the fuck does socialism have to do with this?

A small rant.

CameronPoe wrote:

I think you need to read up about socialism. Europe is socialist and has 100% press freedom, exactly like the US. I wouldn't have done anything with Latin America. Why? BECAUSE IT'S NONE OF MY FUCKING BUSINESS. You see I'm an idealistic true democrat. I believe people should determine the nature of their government/nation without external interference. We in Ireland suffered at the hands of British interference for many centuries, which might explain my ardour for true and actual democracy.

Why when someone explains why the US is not well like across the globe at the moment must you try to turn this into a criticism of the EU, as if two wrongs make a right? I'm well aware of EU flaws. But we're not talking about the EU are we??? Do you think everyone in the world loves the EU? Hell no. Are you aware of the kind of atrocities the French, Brits, Belgians and Spanish are responsible for over the years?

Someone sanctioned taking those photos on MILITARY PROPERTY (generally adorned everywhere with 'No Photography' signs). Those pictures were meant to get into the public eye by the powers above to 'strike fear' or whatever into the 'enemies of the US'. It's a shame now because when footage of imprisoned Americans gets broadcast people are less sympathetic as a result.

The reason why I bring up the EU is because it is a political and ideological difference and an example to be used of another international power.  Socialism is not something I will be wanting any time soon.  Free health care that takes 2 or 3 times longer then private care here.  Sure free health care for those that can't afford anything else would be great, but taking the money from private citizens is uncalled for.  And as far as I can tell is that the EU press generally is hard left leaning, compared to the US it is very hard left.  Free but highly biased. 

Yes it would be great to let every country mind its own business, be isolated from the rest of the world and not interfer with any other nation on the face of the world.  Hmm that country has been invaded by Nazi Germany but we shouldn't do anything they'll be fine and resist and win in a few years.  OH SHIT WE"RE BEING INVADED BY THEM NOW!  Or should I bring up the genocide in Uganda I believe it is currently, Rwanda before, or Somilia, or one of dozens of other African countries.  Oh and the Colombian drug empires extensive reach and influence in Latin America to influence, buy, and corrupt governments?  Sure freely elected governments shouldn't be messed with, I'll concede that, but what about the ones that were won through drug money funding? 

CameronPoe wrote:

It is not the business of external parties to subvert the political process in another country unless that regime is a very real, meaningful and imminent threat to the homeland. One can facilitate change by exercising your right not to trade with them or by funding NGOs in a principled and not in an underhanded manner. That is it as far as I'm concerned. It is the PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY of those living under a dictatorship or rigged regime to agitate for political change. Not anyone else. Ukrainians came out in their thousands to protest rigged elections there and affected change. When the CIA plotted a coup against the democratically elected leader of Venezuela the people turned out in their millions to demand justice and duly received it. Do you think that any Latin American country can possibly trust US motives given its unbridled desire to undermine left wing regimes there - regimes chosen by the people for the people in free and open elections? It's a case of 'chicken and egg, which came first' - the anti-US rhetoric or the CIA-plotted coups/exploitation by external parties. If and when Chavez actually does away with democracy I fully expect the people of Venezuela to rise up in disgust. Interventionism generally always draw ire and suspicion - hence global opinion being now firmly anti-US.

So we are to sit back and watch as millions (maybe billions suffer) like we do in Africa?  Just sit back and watch as millions are slaughtered in genocide?  Or thousands who speak out disappear?

CameronPoe wrote:

Northern Ireland peace process. Battle for independence in India. Egypt-Jordan-Israel peace agreement. Hand of strength works against a conventional army. Against terrorism it doesn't work and all I need do is direct you towards literature on the past 30 years in Northern Ireland to enlighten you.

So basically what is going to happen is give up and give in to the terrorist?  I'm sorry but I fail to see anything here that would help.  I know Northern Ireland had a really tough time, I mean really bad.  But in two of those cases presented I do believe that the UK lost land, production, GDP, population, etc.  I'm not trying to say that you are saying to give in to terrorist but it just seems to be the viable solution you are looking at.

CameronPoe wrote:

OK then just give up on border security....

I wouldn't care about global opinion when it comes to domestic affairs - I'm an isolationist remember? The rest of the world could go fuck itself as far as I'm concerned. Most of the enlightened world believes in strong borders - something the US seems to pay a woeful lack of attention to. This is about taking the tough decisions to ensure real and meaningful security.

Yes and many Americans believe in strong borders, I'm one of them.  Only we have a large problem with that here as well, its called the illegal workers that crossed and now protest routinely anytime a border issue is brought up.  Sure I would love to have a strong border North and South, East and West.  And expand the Coast Guard to were it can effectively do its job.

CameronPoe wrote:

Illegal? If so then I don't agree with that. The fact of the matter is that one cannot ensure security from terrorism through military might so it's up to you: infiltrate or prepare to get blown up.

Opponents to such measures over here see it as tiptoeing the line towards becoming a big brother nation and will not give in to such measures.  The reasoning is a little insecurity is worth the extra freedom.  The only problem is that we always profile a race as a subhuman in the United States and pin all worries, warrents of fear etc. on them.  First Irish, then Blacks, now Middle Easterns, oh and Jews to moderation throughout all of US history.

CameronPoe wrote:

I don't see the relevance of your example in the context of global opinion. If someone sees the US acting underhandedly that will shade their opinion. Simple as.

The relevance is that if a group doesn't have someone watching the interests in something that some people see as shady (IE lobbying in Washington, D.C. to some is just a way to buy votes and interest to some) then you can bet that someone else in the shady business will take full advantage and try and dismantle the success.

CameronPoe wrote:

Suicide bombings/terrorist attacks cannot be prevented by conventional military force or occupation of a foreign culture and land. When the enemy doesn't wear a uniform an army is about as much use as a used piece of toilet paper. The reason the suicide bombings have dropped to nearly nil is because they have built a ruddy great wall to hem the Palestinians in: border security. Their greatest military efforts haven't managed to dent the onslaught of mortar attacks in the least.

And that wall hasn't been caste as the Berlin Wall internationaly?  It hasn't brought ire and disdain down on them?  It hasn't made people look at the Israelis with some not so good feelings has it?  I know what you are saying about when the enemy doesn't wear a uniform, it doesn't take a genius to figure it out.  But with the way international opinion goes it is nearly impossible to combat it without getting very negative press.

CameronPoe wrote:

I come from Ireland. We don't have a military. We're a militarily neutral country, as defined in our constitution. We have no capacity or desire to exercise our influence on the people of another country where their will has little or no impact on us. When I was young I admired the US greatly, almost everyone I knew did. The American flag was looked on favourably and in admiration then. Many of my fellow countrymen emigrated there and even joined the US navy.

Something changed somewhere along the line though. On September 11th 2001 the US suffered an horrific tragedy and the whole world came together in sympathy. But strangely the following years exposed the rest of the world to things they had long turned a blind eye to when it came to America. The Bush administration started to take actions that were not what the rest of the world would associate with 'American Values'. The American dream was shattered for many of us spectators in this whole 'war on terror' fiasco.

The difference between you and me is that I believe in principles, in maintaining the moral high ground, in minding my own business unless threatened in a real and meaningful manner and in free market capitalism played by the rules with fair trade (protectionism) not free trade.

I would prefer not to see the EU exert influence outside its borders by military means under any circumstance. So to suggest that I'm 'jealous' or whatever of some 'top dog' status enjoyed by the US which is maintained through military endeavour is fatuous.

Never said jealous did I? If I did I'm sorry.  I know that wealth has nothing to do with your life, coming from the small stone shack and now making a lively fortune.  Your economic interest, forgien and domestic are protected by the EU am I correct?  So even if N.I. is a neutral country when it comes to the military they are still protected by its allies and neighbors.  Unless Ireland has absolutely zero forgien trade then I doubt that its interest aren't protected by if not the EU then NATO forces either directly or a by product of one of those two organizations having a trading partner in the same region.

And don't try and act like you have the moral high ground in all of this.  If it were possible to do everything on the moral high ground and a country not be torn apart that would be great.  But it comes down to fighting fire with fire truthfully.  If you could get rid of all of the scum and villianly across the globe then we all could stay on the moral high ground and not have to worry about petty things.  Free trade would be fair trade and it would be a collective interest.  But as long as there is a single person that wants to "win" or be the top dog then it is an impossibility. 

I'm not a small guy, 6'2" 190 lbs roughly.  My size gives me an advantage in a fight usually, but because of my rasing I try and avoid fighting, in fact the last 'fight' I was in, I put the guy in a headlock until he quit trying to hit me and then walked away.  Why did he want to fight me? I don't know, it got us both fired and quite literally pissed me off more then.  For several weeks he had been trying to pick his way up the ladder, he was at the bottom.  Constantly starting rumors, talking trash, saying he could beat me or any of the other big guys in a fight.  When it came down to it he picked me and loss but I still got in trouble because I responded in like force instead of just letting him swing away.

It is kinda like international relations today.

well, I don't think you can really blame the US to pursue their national interests so vigorously, especially considering their background, starting from the monroe doctrine, back in the 19th century.

If you have the time, read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroe_doctrine


I guess the best thing the US could do is to take a step back, and realize that not everyone on this planet wants to live their life according to US / western values. Spreading Freedom and Democracy is certainly a good thing, but not if you do it only on your terms. Let other nations decide their own fate, and try to work together with the international community.

The UN has a lot of improving to do, for sure, but it should be the place where international affairs are discussed and resolved, peacefully. I do hope it will come to that one day.

Certainly, it is every nation's right to do what is necessary to protect its national interests. That is what every nation does. The US, however, seems to have adopted a very broad view as far as defining those national interests is concerned, and are willing to take extraordinary measures to push their agenda through.

Part of that "special" US way of looking at foreign politics stems certainly from the cold war superpower status. The idea of being the world's police man seems to be deeply embedded in American culture. Ever since the end of WWII, no nation has been more involved in military operations outside of their own country, than the US, supposedly all for a "good" cause. As a result, the US has a long history of interfering with other nations' internal affairs, often resulting in catastrophic failures, that had to be "corrected" later on. Iraq is just one example of this often short-sighted foreign policy.

To me, foreign politics is the main issue, regarding the OP. Cultural and economical imperialism is kind of natural in a globalized world, and it goes in all directions. It cannot be controlled. Foreign policy, however, is 100% US-made, and therefore should be the main focal point for change. If you want change, that is....

Robin Williams as President.




I vote for Robin Williams for PRESIDENT !
Here goes Robin Williams again!


Robin Williams, wearing a shirt that says "I love New York " in Arabic.


You gotta love Robin Williams ...... Even if he's nuts! Leave it to Robin Williams to come up with the perfect plan. What we need now is for our UN Ambassador to stand up and repeat this message.
Robin Williams's plan. .. (Hard to argue with this logic!)

"I see a lot of people yelling for peace, but I have not heard of a plan for peace. So, here's one plan.

1) "The US will apologize to the world for our 'interference' in their affairs, past & present. You know:  Hitler , Mussolini , Stalin , Tojo, Noriega, Milosevic, Hussein , and the rest of those 'good ole boys;' we will never 'interfere' again.

2) "We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany , South Korea , the Middle East , and the Philippines They don't want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No one allowed sneaking through holes in the fence.

3) "All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave. We'll give them a free trip home After 90 days, the remainder will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of who or where they are. They're illegal!!! France will welcome them.

4) "All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days unless given a special permit!!!! No one from a terrorist nation will be allowed in. If you don't like it there, change it yourself and don't hide here. Asylum would never be available to anyone. We don't need any more cab drivers or 7-11 cashiers.

5) "No foreign 'students' over age 21. The older ones are the bombers. If they don't attend classes, they get a D, and it's back home, baby.

6) "The US will make a strong effort to become self-sufficient energy-wise. This will include developing nonpolluting sources of energy, but will require temporary drilling for oil in the Alaska wilderness. The caribou will have to cope for a while.

7) "Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil-producing countries $10 a barrel for their oil. If they don't like it, we go someplace else. They can go somewhere else to sell their production. (About a week of the wells filling up the storage sites would be enough.)

8) "If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not 'int erfere.' They can pray to Allah, or whomever, for seeds, rain, cement, or whatever they need. Besides, most of what we give them is stolen or given to the army. The people who need it most get very little, if anything

9) "Ship the UN Headquarters to an isolated island someplace. We don't need the spies and fair-weather friends here. Besides, the building would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.

10) "All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way, no one can call us 'Ugly Americans' any longer. The language we speak is ENGLISH...learn it...or LEAVE."

"Now, isn't that a winner of a plan?"

"The Statue of Liberty is no longer saying, 'Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses' She's got a baseball bat, and she's yelling, 'You want a piece of me?' "

GOD BLESS AMERICA

Last edited by GATOR591957 (2007-05-23 10:24:07)

You could always educate the bible bashers who think "the end times" are upon us and so don't give a fuck about anything coz they're expecting to be raptured any second.