RE: verboten WAS: Insider #59: IDS Express

Maybe we should bring George Bush into this discussion ...... :-)) -----Original Message----- From: owner-informix-list@iiug.org [mailto:owner-informix-list@iiug.org] On Behalf Of Data Goob Sent: 13 June 2005 07:05 AM To: informix-list@iiug.org Subject: Re: verboten WAS: Insider #59: IDS Express Andrew wrote: > Well thanks for clearing that up. No problem chap n oll that. > Here was me thinking that you didn't give > a toss and were hiding from the entire affair until the Japanese bombed > Pearl Harbour, thus forcing you into a war that, until that point, you were > determinedly hiding from. Unlike the Canadians, for example. Who? :-) > Ok - once in, your troops showed incredible valour and determination - but > when you put that sacrifice against those made by the Russians and Chinese, > who lost about 60 million people defending against the Japanese and Germans, > the rather arrogant comeback you always hear from the Yanks 'If it wasn't > for us you'd all be speaking German' really has to be countered with - > 'Well, if it wasn't for the sacrifices the Russians made on the western > front (they lost up to 17% of their total population by some respectable > academic studies - you lost less then 1/3 of one percent) and the Chinese in > northern China, while you were sitting it out, you'd be speaking Japanese.' > The involvement of the US was not a noble gesture based upon humanitarian > concerns. Your hand was forced. Let's say you're right, it would still argue we paid a price, and did put skin in the game. So maybe it accounts for my particular attitude that I don't go around telling people I'm better than they are. I do argue I'm better off, but simply luck 'o the draw, and for that I cannot remain anything but grateful, and humble to be where I am. Knowing many others from here and elsewhere paid for my comparably "easy" living, it reminds me not to forget that I could have just as easily been in the shoes of those that suffered at the hands of evil. It is true many Americans represent us badly, as overweight, t-shirt wearing slobs with no taste or decorum, and for that you have my apologies, as much as I accept there are many from Europe or elsewhere that are not the best representatives of their particular nations. It is a challenge to see beyond the worst examples. > Before you bring it up - yes, the supplies you gave to the USSR in lend, > lease were absolutely critical in allowing them to hold out once you did get > involved. This is not Yank bashing, just an assessment of the facts. As > I'm sure you'd accept, essential as it was, it was very nearly too little, > too late. > Well, history speaks for itself, really at this point it's all academic. > >>In recent times we have lent a hand to other disasters > > Like Iraq, Afghanistan, Central America, Vietnam, Korea etc etc? Again, don't think that America has one hive-mind that thinks all the decisions our illustrious leaders have made, have been the right ones. Not all of us voted for GW Bush or his ultra-right-wing war mongers. There are plenty of us who can think and are not happy with the current state of affairs, but there is little we can do for now but wait it out till the next election. I'd be willing to bet that the 80/20 rule would apply anywhere, 80% of the population voted without really thinking and the 20% that did think weren't enough to make a difference. But don't readily assume we all think alike, or enjoy seeing our soldiers die for oil barons. > Or your support for regimes like that in Uzbekistan and others where torture > and human rights abuses are rampant (admittedly, the UK sacked our > ambassador for mentioning the fact that they were boiling people to death)? > Or your funding and training for the likes of Usama Bin-Laden > Or the School of the Americas? > Illegal arms sales to Iraq, which many believe were funded partly through > sales of drugs from US client states in Central America? > It is dreadful to think that these things happen, but again don't think all Americans are blind to what is going on. > > and provided aid > >>because of our dominant sub culture having the opportunity to give to >>others in need, > > Ok - so the massive debt write offs for highly indebited countries just > announced by the IMF was an American led initiative, was it? Or have they > been fighting it tooth and nail. Like the still stalled initiative to > disengage aid from neocon requirements to privatise and 'restructure' > markets to bring down protection for local markets designed to protect the > impoverished to prevent dumping of produce over produced due to the massive > subsidies paid to your agricultural sector? While you still maintain the > tarrif barriers for products like cotton, sugar etc that you seek to deny > others? Wow, too much to comment on here. Whew! > Remind me again - what proportion of GDP do you give in foreign aid not > linked to US military or construction work, or other projects directly > related to US economic interests. The UK has explicitly delinked aid from > backdoor support for UK companies. The US hasn't. > The CIA it'sself has identified global warming as the most important factor > in growing global political and military instability, and negative impact on > the global poor. Your contribution to tackling this is hardly a positive > one is it? (Not you personally, mate, but you know what I mean) > Uhb well, I'm just a data goob, not qualified to comment on this you'll have to forgive me. > > >>I've worked with a lot of foreigners who come to America thinking they >>are better than we are, > > If that's the case then you're letting in some rather unfortunate > individuals. No one person is better than another on the whole. I may > disagree with a lot of what the US does, but I've met some class Yanks. Oh good. I've met a few class people(s) too from every corner of the planet. > THere again - look at US literature, find me 10 authors better than > Steinbeck, Irving, Vonnegut (naturalised, I know, but he's still an > American), Salinger, Wolfe - a better writer of sports stories than Ring > Lardner. Then there's the Simpsons. Depressingly enough, the 'US' king of > lowbrow tat, on the other hand, Gerry Springer, is actually a Brit. Dunno if I can help you here either, I've read my share of literature, but again not qualified to really get into this kind of debate. Now get me going on music, well, that's another thread...for another time. > However - are these people - in general - really as arrogant as you suggest, > or do they just, like Vonnegut, disagree with US foreign policy, having a > broader view having lived elsewhere in the world and seen the results? You > live in a country, remember, where fewer than 2% of the population even hold > a passport. Given the wealth of the nation, that does hint at a degree of > self satisfied insularity. >@@NL