Why People Hate America

[taks]

i should keep quiet because, inevitably, i'll say something ignorant and get the thread shut down... not that it won't get shut down anyway.

 

taks

[Kaftan Barlast]

Shush you funny people, i am sincerely trying to teach reason here. Let me succeed, just this time? Pretty please with sugar on top?

 

 

Im sorry, I just love America too much to allow you to do that. Who needs reason when you can just go with your gut feeling and sound beliefs? In fact, isnt it the very definition of freedom to have the opportunity to do that? The very same principle of freedom that this great country was founded on.

 

Was Aron Burr using reason when he challenged Alexander Hamilton to a duel to the death despite Hamilton having a win ratio of 21:0 ? Was Custer using his reason when he decided it was a good idea to charge 10000 heavily armed indians with only a handful of men? No they did not, because they had the freedom to be unreasonable to the point of suicidal stupidity and THAT is what the United States of America is all about.

 

Reason.. is for pussies.

 

 

 

 

 

note: yes, I know Burr won

[Yuusha]

Ok, let's continue where we left off shall we.

 

HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI

In 1945, America became the first and only nation to use atomic weapons against another nation, when it bombed Hiroshima & Nagasaki. A commitee had been established to determine targets for the bombs. Their reasons for their particular target: A Military target would not be sufficient, because a large urban area would be missed. (TERRORISM). I mean they could've dropped the A bomb on the goddamn ocean for pete's sake! Why'd they have to choose a city? Hiroshima was chosen because it was a densely populated area, and the surrounding hills would have a focusing effect thus maximizing the destructive force. As many as 150.000 people may have been killed in Hiroshima and possibly 75.00 in Nagasaki. That's like 100 times worse than 9/11. Many generals regretted the event but that still doesn't change the fact that the US unleashed armageddon on Japan.

 

 

Military coups

The USA has been responsible for the removal of many democratically elected governments. An incomplete list follows:

• 1949 Syria. The elected government was pro Palestinian and against the USA
  
• 1949 Greece: Elected government was against the US business interest.
  
• 1952 Cuba. Elected government was against the US business interest.
  
• 1953 Iran. Elected government was against the US oil interest.
  
• 1953 British Guyana. USA wanted access to sugar and bauxite.
  
• 1954 Guatemala. Elected government was against the US business interest.
  
• 1955 South Vietnam. French backed leader was replaced by USA backed leader.
  
• 1957 Haiti. Elected government was against the US business in terest.
  
• 1958 Laos. Pro USA government wanted.
  
• 1960 Ecuador. Government against USA business interest.
  
• 1963 Honduras. Access to resources.
  
• 1964 Brazil. Access to resources and cheap labour.
  
• 1965 Zaire. Access to Cobalt, diamnonds and copper.
  
• 1970 Bolivia. Country took ownership of its oil and tin.
  
• 1972 Ecuador. Government was against USA business interest.
  
• 1973 Chile. Government against USA business interest.
  
• 2002 Venezuela. Foreign policy of the elected government.
  
• 2004 Haiti. Foreign policy of the elected government.
  

 

Military Intervention

The USA has bombed more countries than any other nation. The reasons presented in American media have ranged from communism to fundemantalism to weapons of terrorism.

 

Never is the question asked: "Does the USA have the right to dictate the behaviour of other nations?"

[Laozi]

No coups in the 80's

[Tale]

Now now, Laozi, the Obsidian forums are a serious geopolitical stage!

[Yuusha]

@Tale: LOL!!! Oh man that's funny as hell.....

 

You really live up to your rep as the forum's jester.

 

One more thing, if this thread is really gonna get locked I suggest you do so before I start posting the list of the US vetoes of the UN resolutions.

Edited July 30, 2007 by Yuusha

[Yuusha]

@Meshugger: US responses to dropping the A bomb on Japan.

"...the greatest thing in history."

- Harry S. Truman

President of the United States during the Atomic Bombing

 

"It always appeared to us that, atomic bomb or no atomic bomb, the Japanese were already on the verge of collapse."

- General Henry H. "Hap" Arnold

Commanding General of the U.S. Army

Air Forces Under President Truman

 

"I had been conscious of depression and so I voiced to (Sec. Of War Stimson) my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at this very moment, seeking a way to surrender with a minimum loss of 'face.' "

- General Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

"Japan was at the moment seeking some way to surrender with minimum loss of 'face'. It wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing."

- General Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

"It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was taught not to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying woman and children."

- Admiral William D. Leahy

Former Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

 

"I am absolutely convinced that had we said they could keep the emperor, together with the threat of an atomic bomb, they would have accepted, and we would never have had to drop the bomb."

- John McCloy

 

"P.M. [Churchill} & I ate alone. Discussed Manhattan (it is a success). Decided to tell Stalin about it. Stalin had told P.M. of telegram from Jap Emperor asking for peace."

- President Harry S. Truman

Diary Entry, July 18, 1945

 

"Some of my conclusions may invoke scorn and even ridicule.

 

"For example, I offer my belief that the existence of the first atomic bombs may have prolonged -- rather than shortened - World War II by influencing Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson and President Harry S. Truman to ignore an opportunity to negotiate a surrender that would have ended the killing in the Pacific in May or June of 1945.

 

"And I have come to view the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings that August as an American tragedy that should be viewed as a moral atrocity."

- Stewart L. Udall

US Congressman and

Author of "Myths of August"

 

"Certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."

- U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey's 1946 Study

 

"Careful scholarly treatment of the records and manuscripts opened over the past few years has greatly enhanced our understanding of why Truman administration used atomic weapons against Japan. Experts continue to disagree on some issues, but critical questions have been answered. The consensus among scholars is the that the bomb was not needed to avoid an invasion of Japan. It is clear that alternatives to the bomb existed and that Truman and his advisers knew it.

- J. Samuel Walker

Chief Historian

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

[Sand]

I don't particularly like the United States Government. What we need is a true change and not a simple change of the guard so to speak. I have to agree with Yuusha on some points but not all. When we used the Atomic Bomb we could have used it on Tokyo or similar city, and after their detonation could have moved in and completely annihilated the Japanese, wipe them out completely so that no one was left alive. We would have been justified in that response due to their cowardly attack on Pearl Harbor, but we did not.

 

I do agree that the US needs to mind its own business and not interfere in the workings of the governments of other nations. It seems that the US government only favors a democratically elected government when it is an ally of the US, if not they prefer a dictatorship that allies itself tot he US and let the people be damned. If the US government truly wish to spread democracy across the world then it needs to grow up and even accept democratically elected governments that oppose them. For example, we tout that we want to bring peace and democracy to the Middle East, but when Hamas was legally elected into power by the Palestinian people how did the US react?

[Gfted1]

So, "people hate America" because we nuked Japan some 52 years ago? Kooky. Never knew muslims had such strong feelings on the matter.

Edited July 30, 2007 by Gfted1

[kirottu]

So, "people hate America" because we nuked Japan some 52 years ago? Kooky. Never knew muslims had such strong feelings on the matter.

 

All muslims are secretly anime fans.

[Gfted1]

Ah, that explains it.

[Azarkon]

Before this thread gets shut down, let me just say this:

 

Amidst all the propaganda and rhetoric, two things are true: 1) America's foreign policy is the source of all the hate, and 2) despite hating America, most people outside of Europe and Japan would still like to make America their home. The complexity of national perception lies therein - it's not contradictory, for most people, to desire the life style of Americans while hating what America does on the world stage, and if you think about it just a little, the same holds in the minds of many Americans. It's at this point that you can begin to ask the real questions - such as whether the government of America (and really, any country) truly represents its people, and whether what we do on the world stage is necessary for the perpetuation of our life style.

Edited July 30, 2007 by Azarkon

[Tale]

Before this thread gets shut down, let me just say this:

 

Amidst all the propaganda and rhetoric, two things are true: 1) America's foreign policy is the source of all the hate, and 2) despite hating America, most people outside of Europe and Japan would still like to make America their home. The complexity of national perception lies therein - it's not contradictory, for most people, to desire the life style of Americans while hating what America does on the world stage, and if you think about it just a little, the same holds in the minds of many Americans. In that common ground, perhaps, true understanding might be established.

booo hssssss

 

*throws tomatoe*

[Pidesco]

So, "people hate America" because we nuked Japan some 52 years ago? Kooky. Never knew muslims had such strong feelings on the matter.

 

All muslims are secretly anime fans.

 

You mean hentai.

[Sand]

CHIBI HENTAI!

[kirottu]

So, "people hate America" because we nuked Japan some 52 years ago? Kooky. Never knew muslims had such strong feelings on the matter.

 

All muslims are secretly anime fans.

 

You mean hentai.

 

You mean I mean futanari hentai.

[Guard Dog]

So, "people hate America" because we nuked Japan some 52 years ago? Kooky. Never knew Muslims had such strong feelings on the matter.

Heck, Bin Laden and Zarqawi cite the Crusades on every other propaganda/rant video tape they put out. That was over 900 years ago. And by the way Yushaa, the US had NOTHING to do with that. You can't blame us for that one.

 

Besides, it's not like the followers of the "jihad" hate doctrine only target the US. In Bali it was just non Muslims in a night club. Australians mainly. England has been hit several times now. Spain has been hit three times in the last four years. And the terrorists there cited the reconquista as a reason. That was like 1491 for crying out loud (by the way the US had nothing to do with that one either). Germany and France have had violent riots when Muslims there did not get their way over something stupidly trivial. They hate the Danes over a newspaper cartoon. The Taliban hated the Chinese and there were a number of "border incidents" mainly consisting of Chinese being attacked. The Russians have been hit many times even back during the days of the USSR. India and Pakistan are mortal enemies. In the Philippines (particularly Mindanao) the Muslim guerrillas there kill non Muslims on sight. Sounds to me like Muslim hate is not reserved for America alone. It is directed at anything not Muslim.

Edited July 30, 2007 by Guard Dog

[Sand]

Actually the blame of the crusades can be blame on the US by extension of the Christian dominant religion here in the US along with the majority of US citizens come from nationalities represented in the European forces of the time. At least that is their mindset, right or wrong.

[Gfted1]

So, "people hate America" because we nuked Japan some 52 years ago? Kooky. Never knew Muslims had such strong feelings on the matter.

Heck, Bin Laden and Zarqawi cite the Crusades on every other propaganda/rant video tape they put out. That was over 900 years ago. And by the way Yushaa, the US had NOTHING to do with that. You can't blame us for that one.

 

Besides, it's not like the followers of the "jihad" hate doctrine only target the US. In Bali it was just non Muslims in a night club. Australians mainly. England has been hit several times now. Spain has been hit three times in the last four years. And the terrorists there cited the reconquista as a reason. That was like 1491 for crying out loud (by the way the US had nothing to do with that one either). Germany and France have had violent riots when Muslims there did not get their way over something stupidly trivial. They hate the Danes over a newspaper cartoon. The Taliban hated the Chinese and there were a number of "border incidents" mainly consisting of Chinese being attacked. The Russians have been hit many times even back during the days of the USSR. India and Pakistan are mortal enemies. In the Philippines (particularly Mindanao) the Muslim guerrillas there kill non Muslims on sight. Sounds to me like Muslim hate is not reserved for America alone. It is directed at anything not Muslim.

 

Heh, you're preaching to the choir. I was just poking holes in Yuusha's tard-like reasoning that started out with "muslims of the world hate you" and morphed into something entirely different and unrelated to the thread topic.

[Laozi]

people hate Americans because they're precieved as fatties who sit at their computer all day and talk about how they hate everything and how great stuff was ten years ago.

[Pop]

I'll tell you all the truth about why people hate America. Boy bands and Pop music. McDonald's doesn't help, either. Everytime I get a quarter pounder with cheese (mustard only, or god help you) I hate myself a little, too.

Uh, the whole boy band thing started in other countries. Remember Menudo? But I will give it to you, that we did invent Pop music. It just so happens that European Pop is much, much worse. Have you heard the new Knife record? Are these supposed to be lyrics?

 

And as far as anti-American sentiment here in America goes, the rule should be that you aren't allowed to hate America if you're A. white and B. Middle or Upper-middle class. Go wear a Che t-shirt like every other self-loathing WASP.

Edited July 30, 2007 by Pop

[Kaftan Barlast]

I think it should be illegal for anyone to hate America

 

 

 

 

p.s

 

and only lesbians listen to the Knife. the fat, ugly kind of lesbian that actually are lesbians and not normal drunk girls trying to seek male attention.

[Guard Dog]

Finally!!! Humor!!! Thank you Kaftan!

[Laozi]

Uh, the whole boy band thing started in other countries. Remember Menudo? But I will give it to you, that we did invent Pop music.

 

 

I think you mean the Beatles were first on both counts

[Pop]

The Beatles were the first big pop band to actually write their own songs, which sort of separates them from pop music (makes them "pop rock", if you will) I find Pop music is best defined as music made by committee, with a group playing songs handed to them. Jessica Simpson never sings her own songs. I'm pretty sure Good Charlotte doesn't either. Fountains of Wayne, a good pop rock band, pen all of their own stuff, and have made a few remarkable OSTs. Boy bands are commonly known to be strangers assembled into groups by producers.

 

By that definition, The Monkees were the first on both counts.

Edited July 30, 2007 by Pop