Who knew P-3's were so threatening?

[Silverbolt 104]

Arroganz is the first step to underestimate an enemy. Underestimation is the first step in the mud. So it was in Korea, so it was in Vietnam, so it was in Iraq, so it was in Afghanistan ... Hopefully not in Venezuela.

Nobody is forced to love Chavez. But call him a MF or ass..le or nuts or crazy or stupid does not solve the problem. In contrary. You give him what he need, the outside enemy. Its so easy for Chavez to wave with the fingers and call the old song of "old bad imperialistic US". And his people will believe him.

Sometimes it is better to set on smart ideas than on the power of muscles. The war on the heads in the arabic world is already lost. And it are serious signs that the war on the heads will be lost in south america.

 

Indeed Gepard i do conccur with many things you say but yes, chavez is an ass...he does persuit politically his oposition, the workers lost 67% of their sallary due to inflation, and as you know, many countries in south america(including mine and venezuela) doesn't have a good distribuction of the money, so, people get starved, which is IMO unacceptable in a country with a huge amount of oil .

 

IMO he is an ass because of the opression and because its not from today that he screwd the regular worker in venezuela.

 

besides all, he have a huge motivation to hate US personally, i would if its true that kidnap story.

[xclusiv8 35]

My response is, screw the rest of the world if they don't like us. If they want to bend over and get taken over by some Islamic fundamentalist regime, or be ran by some peacenik leader or a lunatic dictator go right ahead, won't happen here. If that makes us arrogant, oh well.

 

Now that just makes me angry. I do agree that Chavez is a big a-hole but your arrogance towards the rest of the world is not okey. We can all agree that its no secret that USA is a great leader in the world and as a leader USA should lead with dignity and a great sense of moral. All your statements in this thread has been nothing but condensending and arrogant. Other nations should be respected. Just because you are the biggest at the moment those not give you the right to treat the rest of the world like s**t.

All the hate that exists towards USA, USA has created all by itself.

And what makes you belive the rest of the world is even close to beeing overtaken by some Islamic fundamentalist regime i just dont know.

 

As far as spying goes. I belive we all have a responsebility to keep people like Chavez in our eye of sight.

 

Dont get me wrong, i admire what America stands for but i do not admire arrogance and lately its been alot of that.

[serverandenforcer 33]

Now that just makes me angry. I do agree that Chavez is a big a-hole but your arrogance towards the rest of the world is not okey. We can all agree that its no secret that USA is a great leader in the world and as a leader USA should lead with dignity and a great sense of moral. All your statements in this thread has been nothing but condensending and arrogant. Other nations should be respected. Just because you are the biggest at the moment those not give you the right to treat the rest of the world like s**t.

All the hate that exists towards USA, USA has created all by itself.

And what makes you belive the rest of the world is even close to beeing overtaken by some Islamic fundamentalist regime i just dont know.

 

As far as spying goes. I belive we all have a responsebility to keep people like Chavez in our eye of sight.

 

Dont get me wrong, i admire what America stands for but i do not admire arrogance and lately its been alot of that.

 

 

I think you mis-interpreted what Dave said. If the rest of the world doesn't like us, so what? How is that going to affect our policitical, military, economic position? It's not. Matter of fact, they can hate us all they want, but it wont do moot for them. Infact, if we really wanted to, we can completely seperate ourselves from them, and they will come crying back asking for forgiveness. Just imagine what would happen to the world market if the US decided to go back to the isolationist theme that it was operating under pre WWI? The world needs the US and they know it, and they hate that fact. Quite frankly, we have treated the rest of the world quite fair and kind if you take a look through history and how prior super powers / empires have used their might on the minor powers of the world. If this country ever went to the side of dictatorship, facisim, or a militaristic regime, and the leader was worse than Hitler... the whole globe would be in a world *pardon the pun* of trouble. Everybody should be lucky that the USA is the way it is and operates the way it does today. This planet could have been a hell of a lot worse if we were not like the way we are today.

 

So, have we been a bit arrogant... yeah, we might have been a bit. But you can't say that the rest of the world hasn't been arrogant either! I would have to say that the rest of the world has been worse than the US on the arrogance part. So, I wouldn't start pointing fingers at the US so quickly. Considering how much we really have invested into other nations, we have the priveledge to be a bit arrogant. Just be glad that we're not fully exercising that priveledge.

 

As far as Islamic fundamentalist taking over other countries, that is unfortunately true in some cases. There are a lot of countries (big players too by the way) that are allowing Islamic culture to slowly take over their current government. Some parts of England is one example. It's something to keep an eye on.

 

Oh, and just for the record, I would be very concerned if we weren't spying on Venezuela.

Edited January 13, 2010 by serverandenforcer

[eraser_tr 29]

Actually it's quite the opposite. the EU is very quickly becoming as powerful in every way, so is china. We barely produce anything, we're dead broke and all we can do is fight amongst ourselves publicly while the same old suits run everything and line their pockets. The rest of the world could watch us implode and probably be no worse off.

[serverandenforcer 33]

Actually it's quite the opposite. the EU is very quickly becoming as powerful in every way, so is china. We barely produce anything, we're dead broke and all we can do is fight amongst ourselves publicly while the same old suits run everything and line their pockets. The rest of the world could watch us implode and probably be no worse off.

 

Hm... not sure if the rest of the world would be no worse off. I think there would be a significant financial shock wave if the US went under. I'm not disputing that it won't happen. I'm pretty sure it will. Just a matter of time. But I think the rest of the world would be affected by it.

[Silverbolt 104]

As Eraser said, US is getting threated in global scenario by china and EU, the major point is that US is the most politically stable of those, and that's a key point to still in the top, IMO.

[Vigilant 1]

Actually it's quite the opposite. the EU is very quickly becoming as powerful in every way, so is china. We barely produce anything, we're dead broke and all we can do is fight amongst ourselves publicly while the same old suits run everything and line their pockets. The rest of the world could watch us implode and probably be no worse off.

 

USA threatened by EU? Sorry, I almost fell from my chair laugting. All that you wrote about US - broke, etc. - applies to EU in far greater degree, though economy is not the greatest problem, politics is. If EU would be unified under a centralized, transparent and representative government then you would not be too far from truth(and of course if it can be achieved, a big if). But as it is today (and in foreseeable future) you are completely wrong. The politicians sitting in Brusels are mostly people that in older, more civilised times (if you know Serenity) would be made governors of the Farthermost Far Easter Pacific Ocean Territories(no pun to anyone who lives there, it's just on the other side of the world) - or any other "out of sight, out of mind" exile. And even if some of them are not that bad, they exist in completely virtual reality of "compromises". Like the recent election of "president" and "foreing secretary" - their selection was primarily ruled by a)small x large member state represantaion, b)left x right, c)don't interfere with Merkel&Sarkosy. And in the end it was criticised from all sides (left, right, federalists, skeptics, etc.) because an oportunity to give the EU a clear vision by electing a well known representative(and thus a strong policy) was missed. In situation when EU is governed by treaties hundreds of pages long, incomprehensible for anyone except the most hardcore lawyer-masochists and containing a lot of "may" and little of "must" or "must not", when it is not clear whether it is European Union, French Empire or Grossdeutchland (whether it is represented by Brussels, Paris or Berlin), when most citizens have no idea why it exists, then it simply can not formulate any policy and become in any way powerful.

[eraser_tr 29]

Well from over hear, it certainly looks like Europe is in much better shape and far more functional and united than we are. Anda t least in Europe you have more political parties to choose from. Here they're both owned by banks and insurance companies and the only real choice is between people who can't get anything done or people who can't get anything done and scream about everything.

[+Dave 2,318]

Dont get me wrong, i admire what America stands for but i do not admire arrogance and lately its been alot of that.

 

That statement only fuels it more. "Oh we like you but your arrogant." Gee how am I supposed to take that. I am not going to bend over because the world thinks we are arrogant and I take offense to that statement. But if chest pounding is how you see it then I am not going to disappoint.

[xclusiv8 35]

That statement only fuels it more. "Oh we like you but your arrogant." Gee how am I supposed to take that. I am not going to bend over because the world thinks we are arrogant and I take offense to that statement. But if chest pounding is how you see it then I am not going to disappoint.

 

No you are getting it wrong. It means sure, do your thing but show some god damn respect towards people or you wont get any back. The future of this world is for all of us to be together and if the most powerful nation cannot get their heads out of theire asses then how will anyone else be able to follow. So yes you should feel offended cause acting arrogant is offencice towards the people that you are arrogant towards.

 

I dont think the rest of the world just made up the fact that you guys can be arrogant.

You seem to be a smart guy, tell me how you will win the hearts and minds of those that oppose you when you think like that. And to what exactly are you bending over for? No one is asking you to bend over for anything.

Edited January 13, 2010 by xclusiv8

[+Dave 2,318]

No you are getting it wrong. It means sure, do your thing but show some god damn respect towards people or you wont get any back. The future of this world is for all of us to be together and if the most powerful nation cannot get their heads out of theire asses then how will anyone else be able to follow. So yes you should feel offended cause acting arrogant is offencice towards the people that you are arrogant towards.

 

My arrogance comes not from me being an American but from knowing what my USAF could do to a piss ant like Chavez. That comes from 18 years of being at the tip of the spear and counting!

[serverandenforcer 33]

No you are getting it wrong. It means sure, do your thing but show some god damn respect towards people or you wont get any back. The future of this world is for all of us to be together and if the most powerful nation cannot get their heads out of theire asses then how will anyone else be able to follow. So yes you should feel offended cause acting arrogant is offencice towards the people that you are arrogant towards.

 

 

Actually, you can either choose to be offended by it, or just shrug your shoulders and move on. This is where the whole theme of tolerance gets so hypocritical. We have to tolerate others, while they don't tolerate us. I cry BS on this one.

[xclusiv8 35]

My arrogance comes not from me being an American but from knowing what my USAF could do to a piss ant like Chavez. That comes from 18 years of being at the tip of the spear and counting!

 

If you ask me Chavez should be overthrown. I agree with you on that part.

 

Actually, you can either choose to be offended by it, or just shrug your shoulders and move on. This is where the whole theme of tolerance gets so hypocritical. We have to tolerate others, while they don't tolerate us. I cry BS on this one.

 

For others to tolerate you, you have to tolerate them equally back. Thats the little thing called respect.

Edited January 13, 2010 by xclusiv8

[+Dave 2,318]

For others to tolerate you, you have to tolerate them equally back. Thats the little thing called respect.

 

I have yet to see anywhere where we didn't tolerate someone. We are called arrogant because we choose not to lie down and be terrorized. We take the bull by the horns. We have the right to self preservation and if some gets mad too bad. But we sure are the first ones in line to help someone when they ask for it, yet we are still called arrogant.

[serverandenforcer 33]

For others to tolerate you, you have to tolerate them equally back. Thats the little thing called respect.

 

Really? I don't fully agree with you on that. True, respect can be a two way street - but that only applies to two powers that are equally matched. Considering the fact that the US has done a lot for the world (Operation Provide Hope is one example), we have received little to no respect at all from almost everybody. So why should we always be blasted for not showing respect and tolerance to other nations (and by the way, we have shown a lot of respect and tolerance to other nations, probably more than what we should have done... which is why we're getting punked left and right)? Respect is also a recognition that somebody else has a lot of power and has done good and great things with that power. It also recognize that they have the ability to wipe you out in a moments notice if they really wanted to. So sure, say we need to respect you all you want after all that we've done for you... but in the end, if you push the right button, and we have the right leader in office, you're done! Recognize that and tread softly. What you're asking for is the dillusional thinking of a little country to maniuplate a bigger one with a snap of it's fingers. Not going to happen buddy. Not while I stand and guard my birds every day that I'm on duty.

[MigBuster 2,861]

Europe is still fairly divided just as its always has been - its a group of sovereign nations which will hopefully stay that way.

Regards to the economy I think you will find the Global meltdown we are just emerging from was caused by a housing crisis in the US (well so we are told) so that kinda tells me a lot currently rides on US economic stability. Europe faired pretty badly as a whole and so did the UK - in fact I'm not sure we are even out of recession yet.

As for the comments about how the US should act etc on here - being nice to everyone all the time doesn't get you to the top - that's reality!.

Edited January 13, 2010 by MigBuster

[MaverickMike 10]

I may be slightly off topic but I believe the financial meltdown was a direct result of 9/11. All the politicians etc said that the 9/11 attacks would not have an effect on the economy, yet 8 years later there is a global meltdown that was completely unforseen.

 

Mike

 

 

[+Dave 2,318]

Do not get me wrong, I value NATO and the friendship of our European Allies but man they are the loudest at saying we suck. For the life of me, I can't figure out where that started. We help repair Europe after WWII, we beat the Russians in the cold war and kept Europe out of being a WWIII front line (with the help of NATO). Our country gets attacked, and we go after them T-ban jerk roids. We invade Iraq and got rid of insane Hussein (but that reason alone wasn't why we are there and we all know that) Yet we are spit on as the evil ones when people like Chavez and the T-Ban are oppressing their people, killing them and are looking for a fight. We haven't asked anything but a few places to bury our dead, but just about every time I deal with Europeans I get this kind of rhetoric. I never once treated one of my Europeans colleagues with an ounce of disrespect, but I have certainly been disrespected. I am at a loss on what to say.

[JediMaster 451]

The global meltdown can be directly traced to the dot com-meltdown at the end of the last century, but I'm not sure what that one can be pinned on.

 

When the dot com bubble burst, with worthless yet overpriced stocks suddenly seen as truly worthless, things went into free fall that led to the 2001 recession. That began on 3/2001, BTW, well before 9/11. In fact, I believe economists see 11/2001 as the end of the recession itself, although the next couple of years recovery was slow. That's when the real estate bubble started, around 2003, when the Fed lowered interest rates so much that the only investment that was worthwhile was land. So everyone started buying it and then selling it again real fast to make money, and next thing you know MY house tripled in value in just 3 years! Of course that couldn't last, especially with banks making bad loans then selling them off so as to not have to be responsible for them, and that led to what has happened in the last couple of years.

 

So, what caused the dot com bubble? Why was so much money invested into companies that offered nothing but ideas with no practical way of making money off them? Why was there so much money that people were trying to invest in anyone with a website, a catchy name, and a neat theory?

I think the only things that successfully emerged from that time is ebay, PayPal, and Amazon. Everything else came later or is based on established companies that merely took their business online as well.

[serverandenforcer 33]

I am at a loss on what to say.

 

 

I got a few ideas... hehehehehe!

[xclusiv8 35]

Do not get me wrong, I value NATO and the friendship of our European Allies but man they are the loudest at saying we suck. For the life of me, I can't figure out where that started. We help repair Europe after WWII, we beat the Russians in the cold war and kept Europe out of being a WWIII front line (with the help of NATO). Our country gets attacked, and we go after them T-ban jerk roids. We invade Iraq and got rid of insane Hussein (but that reason alone wasn't why we are there and we all know that) Yet we are spit on as the evil ones when people like Chavez and the T-Ban are oppressing their people, killing them and are looking for a fight. We haven't asked anything but a few places to bury our dead, but just about every time I deal with Europeans I get this kind of rhetoric. I never once treated one of my Europeans colleagues with an ounce of disrespect, but I have certainly been disrespected. I am at a loss on what to say.

 

I meant no disrespect USAFMTL and in no way do I belive that America is evil.

[Silverbolt 104]

That's not about be evil or good, not so simple, and after all if we talk about war, we're talking about people lives, families going to the bottom this is deffinatelly not demagoguery.

[Derk 265]

Do not get me wrong, I value NATO and the friendship of our European Allies but man they are the loudest at saying we suck. For the life of me, I can't figure out where that started. We help repair Europe after WWII, we beat the Russians in the cold war and kept Europe out of being a WWIII front line (with the help of NATO). Our country gets attacked, and we go after them T-ban jerk roids. We invade Iraq and got rid of insane Hussein (but that reason alone wasn't why we are there and we all know that) Yet we are spit on as the evil ones when people like Chavez and the T-Ban are oppressing their people, killing them and are looking for a fight. We haven't asked anything but a few places to bury our dead, but just about every time I deal with Europeans I get this kind of rhetoric. I never once treated one of my Europeans colleagues with an ounce of disrespect, but I have certainly been disrespected. I am at a loss on what to say.

 

Disagreeing on some mathers does not mean there is no respect.

The place over here where the American dead are buried (Margraten) is a great cemetary that is very well maintained with remembrances every year (pres. Bush was there together with our Queen an couple of years ago) and the US role in WW II is no discussion point at all, also for the younger people

I for myself am glad that the US bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki put an end to the war, because my parents would have been murdered by the Japanese without them and I simply would't have existed....

In general we are thankfull over here -just 200 miles from the former Iron Curtain- for the US support in the Cold War and for example 32 FIS at Soesterberg is very well remembered in Holland with a lot of sympathy.

And although a lot of measures in the war on terror are discussed over here, we do agree that there was reason to react after 9/11. The point is that those who disagree are always the noisiest but they don't necessarily represent the general opinion.

Because of our involvement in Iraq it is quite possible that there will be a cabinet crisis in the Netherlands very soon, but that has more to do with faulty procedures where the gouvernemnt at that time failed to inform the parliament in a correct way and maybe the legal side of the invasion, but not with the actual sending of troops or the removal of Sadam..... I think Europe and for that matter my own country, being an old independent and democratic country, is entitled to have an own opinion. Criticism is in lots of cases on details and even individual people but does not mean disrespect for the US (or any other country for that matter)

And for the record: Chavez is considered an unspeakable a..hole and the T ban are religious fascists, also over here !!

 

Hou doe and be happy in the US

 

Derk

[Vigilant 1]

Well from over hear, it certainly looks like Europe is in much better shape and far more functional and united than we are. Anda t least in Europe you have more political parties to choose from. Here they're both owned by banks and insurance companies and the only real choice is between people who can't get anything done or people who can't get anything done and scream about everything.

 

There is a saying about neigbor's grass being always greener. From the other shore of the pond it seems reversed .

First you have to understand that in political sense there is no EU. The European parliament spends most of it's time arguing about what is the "standard European banana", "English sausage" (if you know Yes, Prime minister ) and so on. And the standars they produce usually create only obscure loopholes for European industry(that then must spend money to meet these standards, increasing the already high cost of labour), rather than standartising anything. For example there is still no common standard for something that simple as a electric socket. Or a single European patent registry. And this process is under strong lobbing of NGOs that are best described as Red-Green guerrilas.

The actual great internal or external matters (like "let we Greece hang because they can't get they fiscal policy under control?") is always a contest between Prime ministers of France, Germany and the country that currently holds the chairmanship, Barroso as the chairman of European commision and with strong nod of respect towards the opinions of Spain, Italy and Britain. So there is no real decision making process and more inportanty on responsibility. Everything hides behind vague "it has been decided" or "it is essencial that" phrases. In the US you can pin such decisions to people - President xy decided that zx. And there are videly known speeches about it. That is all missing here. If you say "European federalism" you don't remember that is is Mr. ab's idea and his speech where he so well explained his goals.

 

The multi-party system also has serious flaws. It ineviteably creates coalition goverments that can't get anything done because coalition partners don't like it. It also creates the "small party fenomena" - party with about 10% popular vote that allows one of the major parties to create a goverment. This tipping of scales gives the small party influence that is completely out of proportion to it's actual support(and if you take into account the low number of peple that actualy vote it's even worse). And the parties by themselves are nothing spectacular either. From left to right you have different communists, Greens (that focus more on protecting nature from capitalism, rather than on protecting nature), Social democrats, that combine naive believe in "all men are good" (that takes phrase "wishful thinking" to a new level) and ruthless vote buing by social spending (with "after us the flood" as a motto), the right (usually Christian democrats, but not always), that in actual policy look like social democrats light with the difference only in scale, reather in intention and finaly the nacionalists, that live on shouting "France to the French!", "Germany to Germans", etc.. They don't get much support, mostly because strong believe that "nacionalism"->"fascism"->"Hitler"->"Evil". But with immigration, intergation of immigrants and apparent total failure of multiculturalism becoming the strong undercurrent of politics across Europe (that is ignored by the mainstream parties), there is IMHO a large risk of the new unified Europe falling into the hands of another Austrian painter by popular vote.

[serverandenforcer 33]

There is a saying about neigbor's grass being always greener. From the other shore of the pond it seems reversed .

First you have to understand that in political sense there is no EU. The European parliament spends most of it's time arguing about what is the "standard European banana", "English sausage" (if you know Yes, Prime minister ) and so on. And the standars they produce usually create only obscure loopholes for European industry(that then must spend money to meet these standards, increasing the already high cost of labour), rather than standartising anything. For example there is still no common standard for something that simple as a electric socket. Or a single European patent registry. And this process is under strong lobbing of NGOs that are best described as Red-Green guerrilas.

The actual great internal or external matters (like "let we Greece hang because they can't get they fiscal policy under control?") is always a contest between Prime ministers of France, Germany and the country that currently holds the chairmanship, Barroso as the chairman of European commision and with strong nod of respect towards the opinions of Spain, Italy and Britain. So there is no real decision making process and more inportanty on responsibility. Everything hides behind vague "it has been decided" or "it is essencial that" phrases. In the US you can pin such decisions to people - President xy decided that zx. And there are videly known speeches about it. That is all missing here. If you say "European federalism" you don't remember that is is Mr. ab's idea and his speech where he so well explained his goals.

 

The multi-party system also has serious flaws. It ineviteably creates coalition goverments that can't get anything done because coalition partners don't like it. It also creates the "small party fenomena" - party with about 10% popular vote that allows one of the major parties to create a goverment. This tipping of scales gives the small party influence that is completely out of proportion to it's actual support(and if you take into account the low number of peple that actualy vote it's even worse). And the parties by themselves are nothing spectacular either. From left to right you have different communists, Greens (that focus more on protecting nature from capitalism, rather than on protecting nature), Social democrats, that combine naive believe in "all men are good" (that takes phrase "wishful thinking" to a new level) and ruthless vote buing by social spending (with "after us the flood" as a motto), the right (usually Christian democrats, but not always), that in actual policy look like social democrats light with the difference only in scale, reather in intention and finaly the nacionalists, that live on shouting "France to the French!", "Germany to Germans", etc.. They don't get much support, mostly because strong believe that "nacionalism"->"fascism"->"Hitler"->"Evil". But with immigration, intergation of immigrants and apparent total failure of multiculturalism becoming the strong undercurrent of politics across Europe (that is ignored by the mainstream parties), there is IMHO a large risk of the new unified Europe falling into the hands of another Austrian painter by popular vote.

 

In other words, in the appropriate American slang that I grew up on, Europe is currently a cluster ****.

Edited January 15, 2010 by serverandenforcer