why do so many people hate Americans?
？＿＿＿＿
／::::::::::::::::／
|:::::::: ∧_,,,､ What will I find in /pol/ today...?
|￣＼(#/;; ;;ヽ＼
| ？ |￣|;;;～￣|
|＿＿|＿U"U＿|
？＿＿＿＿
／::::::::::::::::／
|:::::::: ∧_,,,､彡 Hmm...
|￣＼(#/;; ;;ヽ＼
| ？ |￣|;;;～￣|
|＿＿|＿U"U＿|
_ |￣|--|￣~|￣|￣￣ヽ ￣￣
（））￣￣￣￣￣￣￣| | | ｢｣ | ￣￣￣
~￣￣￣区二二二| | | | ￣￣￣￣
？＿＿＿＿ ___|___|＝|_____|______|＿＿_| ＿ VRRRRRRR
／:::::::::::::,,,∧ What is this shit? ＿＿＿/_==__/＿/----/￣| ヽ~^-) ) ）=
|::::::::::::::::(ﾟ-;;ﾟ#) /＿___7____----~---__/￣￣/￣￣￣￣￣￣￣ヽ ￣￣￣￣
|￣＼ξと;; ;;|＼ ヽ===/＿＿＿＿＿___V≡≡|~)~~(()~~(()~~(()~(~） ￣￣￣
| ？ |￣|;;; ;;;|～ ヽ==＼＿＿＿＿＿__V===７|√ |√|√|√|√|/ ￣￣
|＿＿|＿U"U＿| ヽ===√λλλλλV===/ λ λλλλ/ ￣￣
The USA's foreign policies have something to do with it. We, the countries of whom are not the United States of America all agree that what the USA do to their own is not our problem. What you do to us, however, is our problem.
>>1
Bush administration != Americans
Bush administration == Hate
Americans != Hate
o rly?
http://www.cafepress.com/web_store/219067
It's a common fallacy of unsystematical political thinkers that politics are supposed to be largely dominated by a specific group of people or a single person.
well even some of us Americans also hate the bush adminastration
i think that some of the ideals of American scociety have been breaking down for years...i mean the patriot act is Juest one more excuse for certan federal organazations to detain ordanary people. had the extention to the patriot act been passed people would be screened for the things for which they read
some people "hate Americans", because of the US' policies.
some people "hate Americans", because it's the "hip" thing to do right now.
some people "hate Americans", because their ideology tells them to ("Nigger-Jew-Conspiracy from New York").
and some people "hate Americans", because they have decided that those millions of Americans who fit all the stereotypes outweight the handful ("also millions!") who don't.
that stereotype is not quite as large frome what i have seen...now i do admit that many Americans are fat,stupid,anoying pigs...but the rest of us who are not idiots far make up for that. as for US policies, i do admit that i dont agree with them, and frankly so do many Americans
(apology to the world: sorry that Bush won again)
It's not just Bush you know. A lot of US presidents fucked things up around the world a lot too. The US has strong worldwide influence, so they have a lot more opportunities to fuck things up. Anyway, it is stupid to blame the presidents for everything the US does in their terms.
true, however i belive John Kerry could have done more good than George Bush...working closer with the worlds contrys may be slower, but the US alone should not make the choices that shape the world. I belive that John Kerry could have acchaved this in more ways than Bush has.
Do you know that during the presidential elections, Ratzinger (who is now pope, remember?) advised the American catholic bishops to excommunicate Kerry and all those who'd vote for him because supposedly Kerry was pro abortions and pro "euthanasia"?
Amusingly enough, he explicitly stated that war and death penalty were issues catholics were allowed to disagree on, but not on abortions and "euthanasia".
not all of the people who voted fore cary where catholic or fore that matter christion 4 that matter...what the catholic chirch said is none of my concern.
sory about the spelling
I just brought up that little bit of info to show that there's a lot of interests involved in US domestic and foreign politics that aren't neccessarily directly affected by them.
This is, to me, among the most interesting issues with the US' role in global history right now: Where sovereignity (of a state) begins and where it ends, theoretically as well as practically.
>>16
There is a lot of involment. The dollar crashing affects other markets. The US issuing economic sanctions on countries which declined to go to the war in Iraq, means suffering for those countries. Foreign journalists/helpers getting killed by US troops. People living in an European country getting kidnapped by the CIA, sent elsewhere for torture. The US issuing orders to foreign countries to stop such and such activities, not going thru the UN for coordination and approval.
Plus the human rights aspect, it feels uneasy for any sensible human being to hear that innocent men, women and children are getting killed day after day.
not only that but what about the suposed "terorists" being held.the problem that i have is that none of these people are getting fair tryals. Acording to what my father says (he is a US Airforce cornal)there pisaners wont be freed even if they are aquited...
Umm... most of the world doesnt' agree with american values, buddy.
Posting in a legendary thread.
unfortanantly in the modern world cpitalism is a major part of a stong and industrealized contry. i mean its not like capitalism is alwase a good thing, but we cannot change how it affects ower lives. not to mention the fact that because of capitalism people can work(in a non yealding job), than buy what they want.
> but we cannot change how it affects ower lives
Yes we can. That's why the market is regulated.
but it still and a profound influence on ower every day lives...i mean juest the fact that you are using a computer online is only possabul because of capitalism. whene you go out to eat, this is somthing else that would not be possabul without capitalism. litteraly anytime you use money for anything capitalism is affecting your life.
It's also the "general" american populace mentality of "we are the greatest nation on earth". Most of them think the American way is the only way and anybody else's is insignificant. There was a survery that showed 70% of the populace didn't even have a passport. Showing how well americans know about other cultures.
i totaly agree with you.unfortanatly most Americans juest dont care about other cultures or other languages, and this more than anything piss me off about many Americans( b/c i'm going into the linguistical anthropology). fortanatly however, there are some of my fellow countrymen who are interested with the world outside America
> ( b/c i'm going into the linguistical anthropology). fortanatly
NO DON'T
> There was a survery that showed 70% of the populace didn't even have a passport. Showing how well americans know about other cultures.
>>28
Because it shows they have never left the country on an overseas holiday. It just one indicator of how well the populace travels and knows about other cultures. And I am not talking about just flying like to Europe or Asia. I am talking about as well going over the border to South America or even Canada (though ok Canada you don't need a passport to enter). And it wasn't made up survery when it was reported in the BBC.
BBC > CNN
It's true that Americans don't do as much international travel as folks from other nations, especially Europeans, but think of it this way... You're an American and you want to travel. Wanna go somewhere tropical? You can head to Hawaii, Florida or Puerto Rico. Wanna go somewhere chilly? Head to Washington, Montana or, of course, Alaska. Wanna see amazing natural sights? Go to Yosemite or Yellowstone or the Rockies or the Grand Canyon. Heck, you can find great skiing, great surfing, great camping, great hiking, big cities, small towns, forests, deserts, and more all without leaving just California, much less America... Compare this with the small and relatively monoterraneous (if you will) countries of Europe, and you can see why fewer Americans travel internationally -- there's little need to.
As for ignorance of other cultures... Find me any country in the world more multicultural than America, please.
America dose have alot of racial diverity, however most of these people adhere primeraly to an American culture and less and less to there traditinal ways. I think it is important to reconnect with ones heratige; and what better way to do that than go to the place where your ancesters came from.
not to mention, how many Americans know the traditinal values of another cultures. or for that matter how many Americans can actuly speek more than one language
People hate america because they're and empire. Not much to say besides that. We may not act like countries are part of our empire, but they really are... We go into a country and we set up a base, and we never leave.
Nothing lasts forever...
The point isn't that America has diverse terrain, or even a diverse population. The point is that culture doesn't change much from place to place, as it does in, say, Europe. Take Germany, Austria, and Switzerland for example. All three countries speak German (well, Switzerland also speaks French and Italian, but that's not the point), but the cultural and historical differences are quite drastic. One does not see such contrast in America.
The US just can't compare to a nation awesome enough give us Freud, Hitler, Haider, and set off WWI (and thanks to Hitler, WWII).
Here's some (new) fodder:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-americanism
This is not so true...lets look at for example the difference between the North East, the souththwst, the midwest, Hawaii and the "south" (which i have lived in each of these regons)
the southwest has primeraly a Mexican and centrel american influence where as lets say Hawaii has a huge Japanese and Chinese influence. in the south we can find people speeking French because of the cagons(which has French roots)as well as the remonats of the old plantatins.also in the south we can find a strong and very traditianal Black comunitys. the midwest is very much farming comuitys, even in the larger citys we can see this infuence.
hell... Hawaii and Texas where bolth at one point its own country! the contrast in "culture" within the US is profound if you have the eye to make the distinction, so to say that the culture dosent change much frome place to place is ubserd
>>38 makes good points, albeit whilst demonstrating a tenuous grasp of the English language.
Because god gave is the right to do so.
Perhaps a mild case of dyslexic dysgraphia.
In any case, it's no big mystery that there's some friction between the different parts of the US as well. Take a look at the whole North/South flamefest, or the attitudes that city- and country-dwellers have for each other.
Maybe people hate Americans because their regime places bombs in London to give themselves an excuse to prolong their so-called "Patriot Act" and further take away the liberties of their own citizens, and others...?
Or is that too paranoid?
Well, Hawaiians hardly consider themselves Americans, but that's besides the point...
Look at the bottom of the page, for comments from people "from the USA": http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=9270
Hay, i am Hawaiian... so please dont assume things. i do in fact think of myself as an american...but, yah shure i do want my people to be freed, but there is littel i can relly do but to perserve my culture
Noho au ma Hawai'i. A me, o'lelo au i ka o'elo Hawai'i
He koma'aina au
bollocks to that, usa gave the world j. edgar hoover, jimmy hoffa, terrenc mckenna and took some part in most (if not all, depending on the definition of the following word) major (yep, that's that following word thing) armed conflicts of the 20th century
ps.(i like these () things even though at the moment i could not remember what they're called with a gun to my head)
>>48
Parentheses.
>>45
lol internet
I think that people 'hate' any entire population of any country because of ignorance. They base their judgement on black sheep (few OR many in number) and politics. I'd say there are many good reasons to dislike American capitalist expansion and the fact that few Americans bother to learn a 2nd language. (See March editorial article in Houston Chronicle on 'foreign languge month').
>>35 is blatantly wrong. If s/he has lived in or spent a significant amoutn of time in America, s/he would know the cultural differences of the Est, West, and 'Third' (Southern) Coasts. Hell, even wishing to distinguish 'your' coast from the 'other' coasts reveals an underlying conciousness of that coastal cultural as unique, or a active dislike of another coastal culture. Also, >>35 is being unfair by comparing countries to states. Yes, there will be more cultural variation in the European Union because it is composed of different countries, and countries have this funny little way of carving out a culture for themselves. And, well, that's just the coasts. There are other cultural regions, too - they have accents, slang, and mannerisms just like regions in the UK. Is that not culture?
Unfortunately, mass media/mass consumerism/mass marketing/sprawling corporations can have a degradative affect on any country. If there's a McDonald's in Hollywood and a McDonald's in San Antonio, a McDonald's 'culture' will be transmitted to both those cities - this is especially more important because McDonald's has a strong, corporate, advertising-based outlook, thus needing a homogeneous culture to transmit. If every McDonald's had different adverts and different slogans, the brand would not be as strong. Just because every large city in the United States has a McDonald's doesn't mean they've been homogenised. Many cities change McDonald's, they force it to carry x product, to give customers more nutritional info. See information on In-n-Out Burger, a California-based fast food chain, for an example of postive local corporations.
And speaking of mass media, BBC is better than commericial American news - and many who seek out important and informative news items know that. PBS, while a tad subliminal in it's advertising, is growing from seeds sown by BBC. It is a fairly good (though under-supported) emulation of the BBC style.
Multinational corporations are everywhere; they come from Europe and Asia as well. Any anti-Americanism hinging on corporate abuses and capitalism should target them, too. Schlumberger, anyone? It's wording might be suspect, but this isn't a dig at Europe, just a simple fact.
An American tourist helped the injured Londoners in these recent blasts, along with Britons, Muslims, and others. Does anyone hate her? She might have a Texan accent, that was her first time out of the US (she was ~35), but she did help. Don't hold those things against her. (source: Sky News, morning after the attacks)
And, well, most of us know about the more blatantly political arguements against the United States. I don't like the political system, I don't like the lack of choice, I don't like the majority's view on sexual issues, I don't like the baseless war, I don't like the PATRIOT ACT I & II, I don't like the imperialism. But, hey, I like the United States. It isn't superior, it's an equal to the major cultural powers of Europe and Asia, and that's how it should be portrayed.
I hope ** makes Italics. if TL;DR, then here's a summary: >>35 has not observed cultural regions in America well enough to realise subtlties or even basic differences. Mass markets affect every country. There are corporations from all around the world (and I believe they can have negative, as well as positive effects); they are not American phenomenons. Americans have helped people earnestly, and that's not bad. That doesn't extend to the whole population, but are those indivduals to face anyone's hate STILL, after doing good? On political issues, blah. Dislike the politics, don't push that dislike on ALL of the population. I couldn't care for the politics of many countries; I'm certainly receptive towards their people.
>>49
lol...im glad people think like i do since you reiderated my point...thankyou
< 2 cents worth:
No one really hates America, they hate how different and unacceptable America is to their current culture. People hate change, and change largely is the reasoning for conflict (this is all generalized, plz don't rip into me about these opinions... see? OPINIONS!). Europe, not much different. Middle East? Hella different. And guess what they have which America and Europe need on a daily basis? Oil. That's all there is to it. Like the Native Americans and their massive amounts of land, the ME's have oil, or as Jon Stewart put it, "our oil". History, repeating itself. Ahh, how the world turns and maintains it's precarious orbit around a ball of energy that could wipe our existence from the very black emptiness that mocks our own dependence on its viscous, dinosaur-corpse existensial cousin.
Note: ME's may just hate being blown up and killed over a resource that they have absolutely no desire to control past the value we in America and Europe have for it. I dunno. I'm just a rambling neophyte roaming the endless weeb. No one takes this shit seriously and ironically remains the greatest source of unbiased information we as a race have ever seen.
Unrelated: The World is one confused minagery of endless stupidity and periods of progress. Which are you?
I think people are ignoring the sheer size of America, as other people have mentioned you can travel -IN- the country and see a much different place than you can in other places, but on top of that it's one hell of a lot harder to go somewhere else. Have any of you Europeans actually traveled to the U.S.? I've met plenty of well traveled Europeans who have been to just about every country in western Europe but maybe four or five who have been to the states. (Don't get me wrong, I'm not expecting any of you to come here. The only thing you might learn is how easy it is to get sucked into the fast food culture) but I was an army brat that spent large amounts of her childhood in other countries and when we were in Germany the same amount of planning went into flying to paris for a week as our vacation to Disney world ten years later, but going back home for Christmas was a year long planning event.
I don't agree with how a lot of Americans view the world, but I can kind of understand it.
>>54
I've read a few British travel guides on America. They're excellent and really do a good job of explaining the diversity. Of course, they (like EVERY travel guide) have a bit of a tourist or 'look! a foregin culture!' tone...
Any guide that mentions a San Francisco gay bathhouse is good enough for me!
i play many korea games legally, and have to say the attitude shown towards english speakers or americans is just appaling, abuse thrown at anyone who talks english, i often find myself defending english speakers in foreign games because of racist jackasses
i cant say why people hate americans, i have no problem with americans, americans are great at playing games, americans or good to play with when they arent argueing over who is better or whatever
>>56
People who speak english are not a race, nor do those who live in english-speaking countries constitute a race. I believe the word you are looking for is 'xenophobia' or possibly just plain old discrimination.
People who speak English natively are generally not Korean (barring children of immigrants, of course). Thus, Koreans belittling English speakers still smacks of racism in my opinion.
I dunno, if you are not targetting specific races it seems like plain old xenophobia to me. Especially Korea doesn't seem to make much of a difference in their opportunistic propaganda against everybody else.
Could be wrong, though.
Korea's a pretty homogenous place; not many people there that aren't Korean... Kind of hard to say there's not an element of race there. I don't think it has to target a specific race if it's still putting one race above all others.
I suppose some people just need an outlet for bad mood of theirs. They will blame anybody but themselves for their real and imaginary problems.
"iam a loser, but because of bad guys made me so". Maybe very often people fall victims to circumstances, but people hardly can "blame circumstances" - they think that they will be clearly seen as whiners then. So they think that blaming something more substantial make it "constructive criticism and fight against oppression", etc, etc.
Thats the usual stuff with inferiority complex. Unfortunately too many modern people are affected by it in one way of other.
I do not hate the American people. I have many American friends who are fine people.
I hate America's politicians for the following reasons:
> I do not hate the moon people. I have many moon friends who are fine people.
I despise this stupid and meaningless with a fierce and bitter passion! It's so apologetic and overdone!
In short, you're making a bunch of trite and old arguments (except for #2, no idea WTF that is). Try again or go away.
>PATRIOT ACT PATRIOT ACT ZOMG I know nothing about it but other people who also know nothing about it are afraid of it so PATRIOT ACT ZOMG, I mean surely it has turned America into a police state where hundreds are falsely imprisoned each day right?
In a country of close to 300 million people, hundreds being imprisoned under a specific law each day is quite reasonable.
Of course, people would learn about this.....except the patriot act allows making it criminal to say anything about it.
>>62 may have been a standard tiresome anti-US rant by someone, but the patriot act sucks big time. I cannot comprehend why you mind someone not liking it.
Oh bull-freakin'-shit. You too are ranting against this bill without knowing anything about it except its hype. Makes it illegal to talk about people being imprisoned? The hell did that come from?
Please read about what this bill actually does, and what it has actually been used for, and you'll probably be surprised at its benign-ness compared to all the fuss idiots make about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act
The fact that it's been overblown doesn't automatically mean it's not problematic. I thought you were a supporter of lessened government power - shouldn't you oppose it on those grounds alone?
>>68
You're driving him into the liberals/conservatives dichotomy again, you mischievous rascal!
>>68: Of course it's problematic, and of course there are parts of it that I'm uncomfortable with. But my point is that people who just accept the nonsense that gets passed around about how the PATRIOT Act has turned America into a police state under constant martial law without bothering to find out the facts for themselves are people not worth trying to have a conversation with. These are people that just steadfastly believe things people tell them if it sounds good to them, instead of believing things that are true and ignoring things that are not. These are the people that are making Michael Moore and Al Franken more rich.
> Michael Moore and Al Franken more rich
Behold! The free market at work!
;D
>Behold! The free market at work!
Hahaha! That comment was so mean that no-one outside Slashdot really deserved it though. ; )
>>67 Oh and I'll get back to this when I've read the entire act....I admit my knowledge of it wasn't good enough so reading it all can't hurt.
Hey, I never said it was wrong. But to pretend Moore or Franklin are more in touch with working-class America than Bush and Cheney is ludicrous.
"I work in a casino."
"That's great! You take stupid people's money! Very capitalist!"
I hate because americans burn 1/4 of all world's oil. (Even though they are only 250 million people)
>PATRIOT ACT PATRIOT ACT ZOMG I know nothing about it but other people who also know nothing about it are afraid of it so PATRIOT ACT ZOMG, I mean surely it has turned America into a police state where hundreds are falsely imprisoned each day right?
It reeks of Stalin's Russia, and the law was passed in a "free" society. It's enough to irk me.
>Your country signed into NAFTA. We didn't invade your country and steal your lumber or anything.
Brian Mulroney, the one who signed the FTA and then the conservative leader who signed the NAFTA in 1992 were both voted out with the most number of seats in Canadian history. Now America is claiming that when Canadian's are being protectionist, it is unlawful and wrong, but when America practices protectionism over its wood industry, it's "protecting capital interests".
>So freeing the Iraqis was a bad thing, something we shouldn't have wasted our time doing?
America went to war to protect itself from the Bad Guys. America went to war for ITSELF, not the democracy or freedom of a bunch of people. But once the damage was done and the government found nothing (like they knew they would) they shifted their propaganda campaign to Promoting Democracy And Freedom For Those Poor Iraqi's.
It wasn't about helping the Iraqi's at all. It was about America's people being frightened little sheep, and swallowing everything Bush and his cronies give them.
Just so you know, during the war, 1/3rd of Americans thought Saddam Hussien had used WMD's against American troops during the Shock And Awe campaign.
People hate Americans because it's easier to see people as members of a group than as individuals.
I SOLVED THE THREAD.
>>77
It's not as if a majority of Americans stands in violent opposition to their own citizenship...
>It was about America's people being frightened little sheep, and swallowing everything Bush and his cronies give them.
If you're trying to endear us to your point of view, you're failing completely.
I don't think he cares.
Americans aren't sheep. The ones I've met were all capable of critical thought (although, admittedly, my sample is biased towards academia). <insert nasty side comment about the Bible Belt>
The problem comes from the information they're provided with. US media is one-sided and disgustingly empty. It's like MTV wearing a newsman's clothing. I can't stand watching CNN, FOX, MSNBC, et al because I have the strangest sensation my IQ is dropping by the minute. Yet this is the tripe Americans are fed with every day. Unless they actively seek out news sources in other countries, they're almost doomed to think a certain way.
Anybody who believes that someone who is constantly soaked in a particular worldview will seriously consider alternate possibilities outside of that worldview is deluding themselves. We are shaped by our environment. See: psychology.
FYI, Australian TV is just as bad. Argh! Kill!
lol Patriot Act
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/09/AR2005090901847.html
"For the second time since the USA Patriot Act broadened the FBI's power to demand private records in secret, a federal judge ruled yesterday that it is unconstitutional for the government to impose an automatic and permanent ban on public disclosure of any case in which it uses that power.
U.S. District Judge Janet C. Hall found that the statutory gag order, invoked every time the FBI uses a "national security letter" to demand information in terrorism or espionage cases, violated the First Amendment rights of a Connecticut library consortium that is refusing to cooperate with the FBI."
>>81
you are absolutely correct about CNN et al. But is the national news of other countries much better? I used to watch BBC and some french news and it seemed just as trivial.
>>83 The way I see it... CNN is probably the closest America has to a good news network. NBC and ABC are more biased in the direction of supporting the Democratic Party. CBS also leans in that direction. Fox news is blatently Biased towards the republicans. If you notice when they have a debate between "Experts" They have a very vocal, strong willed, good worded guy representing the Republican view. And have a weaker guy representing the Democrats, Usually the latter has less information thus the "Republican Expert" can trip him up and make the Democrat look dumb.
CNN Does occasionally lean to one side or the other, more at a matter of conveniance. But for the most part attempts to bring the news from the dead center of the rift. Trying to equally show both sides view.
In the words of Lewis Black: "America is the only country in the world that announces to the rest of the world on a nearly constant basis that it is the greatest country on the planet. And that's pretty fuckin' obnoxious."
I hate americans because they dropped atomic bomb to our country, and they say it was right and empire of Japan was wrong. It is why I come to be revisionist.
The Atomic Bombing of Japan was neccessary only in the aspect of it was the most peaceful way to get Japan to surrender with the least amount of death. (Braces for reaction) The reason I say this is we had two choices for an unconditional surrender of Japan. Either drop the A-Bomb. Or full out Invade. I respect Japan and their honor to their nation. Every man and woman, and even children would stand against the American forces. Thus,Both sides would have lost millions in the Invasion. It would have taken many years, and the russians then would have gotten involved as well, causing more turmoil in the effect of loss of life then land disputes. Now, I mourn for the life lost in those two cities, and hold a moment of silence on the anneversarys, though not japanese, my brother (Who comes from a different father, from my moms previous marrage) is Half Japanese. His great grandfather was Mitzumi Shimizu. The Commander of the Japanese Submarine Fleet in WWII. Also the man who was a part in Proposing to Hirohito that they attack pearl harbor. I do not see the Atomic Bombings as "Vengence for Pearl Harbor" Like so many say it was. The Dolittle Raid in early 1942 was the revenge strike for Pearl. I see the atomic bombing as a horrendous yet neccessary act which saved more lives in the long run. And I pray every day that these weapons never are used in combat again.
No, the US has shit news. Period. There are no ifs, ands, ors, or buts. I lived in Canada for over a decade, and I saw the junk the major news networks pump out. When I say they're MTV in newsman's clothing, I don't say that in jest.
I can think of numerous examples where I simply couldn't believe what I was hearing, but my favorite anecdote is this:
A few days after the twin towers came down, I was watching the US news networks work themselves in a frenzy (call it a morbid fascination of mine). Suddenly I came across a discussion where some "experts" were going to argue the reasons behind the terrorist attack. The moderator introduced the three individuals with a long list of qualifications, and by the looks of it, this was going to be a serious discussion.
Oh, this was good. I sat down, getting ready to be enlightened. I was waiting for an argument that would be worthy of political analysts or politics professors specialized in the Middle East.
The first person sits up, and confidently states: "They attacked us because they hate our freedom."
...what? Okay, fine, let's hear person no.2:
"Yes, I agree. They hate the United States because of the freedoms we enjoy."
Anybody with an IQ above "mentally challenged" can recognize this is false with even a little bit of thought. So, here I am, waiting for the third person to tear these two idiots to shreds.
Guy no.3 agrees with the first two.
Incidentally, I believe this was CNN.
It's a good thing you have a perfect knowledge of events that never happened, because otherwise, how would you be able to rationalize actions after they occured?
>>89 The hell are you talking about?
Which event that I mentioned did not happen? Hrm, let me see.
Pearl Harbor happened.
The Dolittle Raid Happened.
Hiroshima and Nagisaki happened.
And the planned invasion of Japan was slated to start in October of 1945, yet Truman decided to attempt to divert it with the atomic weaponry. And succeeded. Japan held their honor high. If their nation was directly invaded, they would fight to the bitter end. Just as if America was invaded today. Not only would the invaders have to deal with the Military. But Gangs, Rednecks, and damn near anyone who is willing to fight for their country, or their home.
>Japan held their honor high. If their nation was directly invaded, they would fight to the bitter end. Just as if America was invaded today. Not only would the invaders have to deal with the Military. But Gangs, Rednecks, and damn near anyone who is willing to fight for their country, or their home.
This is a common perception, but it's not all that clear. Many things point to Japan being very afraid of further Soviet invasion. The Red Army approaching often increased people's will to surrender to the western powers dramatically.
I don't particularily mind the US using nukes those two times though. War is messed up, not using nukes won't magically make everything nice in any case. This doesn't make me think Nagasaki was necessary though.
people hate americans because lets face it, nobody likes the generic big guy. see rome, see the han, see microsoft, see mcdonalds, see the brit empire, see walmart, see naruto and other popular commericial things
and also, america is pretty conservative compared to most industrialized countries, especially asia where morality is only a convenient buzzword (no offense of course, im asian, and asian countries do just fine without morals). We all know how we feel towards people who are more conservative than us, and not everyone can hold back that desire to say "you're fucking nuts"
that hate pretty much just snowballs into a tradition, half the teens here in canada "hate" the americans, most of them have no idea why they should
>>92
Thank you for your detailed analysis into modern mass psychology and its relations to international relations and historical crises.
>>91 I understand fear. But when the enemy is there killing your family, and taking your land, many would stand and fight. Wouldn't you rather fight and die to protect what is yours and what/who you love? Or would you surreneder and watch those be taken from you.
>asia where morality is only a convenient buzzword (no offense of course, im asian, and asian countries do just fine without morals).
I am totally ROFLing. Thanks, dude.
> Which event that I mentioned did not happen?
How about:
> Every man and woman, and even children would stand against the American forces. Thus,Both sides would have lost millions in the Invasion. It would have taken many years, and the russians then would have gotten involved as well, causing more turmoil in the effect of loss of life then land disputes.
>>96 I know it did not happen, because we used a way to avert that situation. What, do you think the Japs would have danced in the streets and welcomed the American soldiers? They would have fought us. Some may surrender, but a majority would have fought. We anticipated the worst case scenario with the invasion of Japan, which would have left well over a million dead. So we chose to see if we could end the war before millions of americans and japanese are killed in the invasion.
the nukes on two cities were ok but the attack on wtc was wrong?
hypocrisy? word.
The Atomic (Not Nukes, very big difference in the two) Strike on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were wartime strikes neccessary to avert a larger amount of death involved with an invasion of Japan, as well as done with the intent of ending the war. I never say they were ok, but they were neccessary. I think Atomic, Hydrogen, and Nuclear weaponry is an abomination of mankinds intellegence.
The attacks on the WTC were peace time terrorists attacks with the soul intention of killing civillians.
There is a large difference between the two. One was Nation to Nation. The other was Just genocide.
You're still talking about things that never happened and that you frankly haven't the slightest clue about as if they were objective facts. You're making blanket generalizations like "Some may surrender, but a majority would have fought" that do not have the slightest connection to reality. You're ignoring the fact that people are rational beings and will not willingly walk to their deaths when they have the option of living. You're ignoring that the Japanese military command knew very well that they were losing already, and were already planning to surrender. You're ignoring the ulterior motives of dropping the bombs. You're bascially looking a lot like you're making up a fairytale to justify the bombings to yourself.