My Statement to Nations That Hate the US - Page 5

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>Look at the graph again. Why the declines? Why not a steady increase? Look at around 1998 and see what happens.....</strong><hr></blockquote>It looks to me like there is about a .5 degree see-saw every couple of years. But there is clearly an upward trend over that time, particularly in the last couple of decades, that is much stronger than those yearly variations.

I'm not knowledgeable enough on this stuff to know how to analyze these data myself. And unless you are, you have to sift through the information and the sources and look at people's agendas and make a judgment. That graph and those statements I quoted are from the Bush administration, which said that "most of the warming over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities."

It's almost impossible as a non-scientist to figure these things out. But it just seems to me that you can get a feel for what's non-biased and what's advocacy here. And it seems clear to me that the non-biased sources show a consensus that global warming is occuring to a dangerous degree and could be prevented.

[oops, almost at 1000 posts. better stop for a while.]

[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
[QB

[oops, almost at 1000 posts. better stop for a while.][/QB]<hr></blockquote>

No it's too late : you are doomed too

Europe's right.
We're wrong.

Packing my bags.

Yes we are right. Now that you have seen the light please dress in a blue sheet with stars all over it and go to NYC and sell flowers to passing cars while you spread the word

The year to year shifts can be explained by things like sunspot activity, El Nino, vulcano activity etc. while the most logic explanation to the long term trend on the grph is human activity. Notice its not only the average over a couple of years that are growing but also the local lows and highs. The graph is clearly showing an upward and accelerating trend in the periode where we have accelerated our industrial activity.

[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>
And really, what sacrifices would people have to make? Buying somewhat more fuel-efficient cars? Given the likely consequences of continued global warming, it hardly seems such a sacrifice.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Kyoto wouldn't make any difference even if we signed on. Whatever we did would be overwhelmed by those nations (India and China in particular) not bound by the protocols. And as for the sacrifices people would have to make, what do think would happen to the coal miners of West Virginia? The sacrifice you'd make might be fairly insignificant. For somebody else, it could easily be catastrophic. It will take more than just driving more fuel efficient cars. Compared to what people drove 25 years ago, we are already doing that. The problem is: the total miles driven has gone up dramatically eclipsing any progress we've made on average fuel efficiency.

The greenest policy we could pursue would be to fix our cities. (I'm serious.) If our cities were more attractive places to live, more people would choose to live there and mass transit would become a viable option in more places. We would also relieve the pressure on our green spaces and for the kicker you'd get brownfield redevelopment.

[ 06-10-2002: Message edited by: spaceman_spiff ]</p>

Sorry but, that isn't what you said when this began. Should I quote you again? Besides it looks like you've done some editing on those posts.

This really is becoming tiresome. I could scour the web for links but, to what end? A waste of my time.

You don't believe the facts anyway. ( yawn )

[ 06-11-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>

I think spaceman is partially right. If people could find cities attractive . . . but that would also demand that people find public transport attractive at least part of the time. It works in Europe . . I have lived there and I know that htere are many benefits to having a transportation system that is not only for those to poor to buy cars.

As for China nad India, it is true that they would continue to pollute, especially China which is staring at employing the worlds largest coal expenditures without the pollution controls and efficiency that we have (because of those THUGS the environmentalists) now if the world found it to be in all of our interests to tackle this problem ( a "manhattan project for alternative energies" as one scientist put it) then we might very well come up with something . . . but the two problems of 1&gt; people (hear Rush and gang and) don't believe that the environment IS really in any way their interest. and 2. no funding for research, because of #1, keep this from happening.

now,

SDW you are completely biased. THe way you spit out the word "liberal" every chance you get as a curse word shows it clearly. You exhibit the first quality of an ideologue; namely, that their prejudice is invisible as a prejudice that they have themselves.

The way that the graph is read by scientists is in terms of the over-all trend towards increase. The sawtooth quality is due to consistent variability, the over-all trend IS NOT CONSISTENT and hasn't been. As far as ice cores show it hasn't been for millenia with regards to CO2.

[ 06-10-2002: Message edited by: pfflam ]</p>

I live not far from Portland Oregon where they have a light rail system that seems to work! I wish we had one here. That's part of the problem. Not every city can find a light rail project cost effective. We are a lot smaller than Portland. Our bus system is better than it was before ( a few years ago it only ran until 6:00pm ) but, isn't enough of an answer.

[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>Europe's right.
We're wrong.

Packing my bags.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Who's we? The majority of Americans believe that global warming is a real threat. Kyoto wasn't squashed because of that, it was because most third world nations were allowed to bypass the regs that the US and Europe would have to follow-China, for example. The treaty should just be rewritten and reapplied to include all countries......................................... ......

You're a moron, and you ARE biased, as is shown repeatedly by your childish venom . . .
...most "liberals" are not as agenda driven as you clearly think they are, (and as you are)...(some liberals are, and they too can be as idiotically closed minded as people here-abouts) However, most people who you call themselves 'liberals' but who don't wear it on their sleave, merely believe in a balance between infrastructural needs and absolute anarchy. Liberal became a swear word when Rush Limbaugh became the media/corporate sweatheart that he was for many years... and still is.... just not on television. People, listened to him and programed themselves like bits of software, swollowed everything he said... every spitefull lie and distortion of the truth, and, he and his funders shifted the debate so far to the right that every clone, or "ditto" head who has a bit of bile in their gut and is looking for people to blame anything on have created a fictitious monster: the "L" word.

And what is so hard to understand that what one (a scientist for example)is looking at when they see this graph is an over-all rise. . . . if you take the median average of the graph - -which also shows the ordinary variances - then you see a very clear steady rise . . . what the hell is so hard to see and understand here . . . are you completely blinded by your ideaology to the point that you can't even read a godamn graph :confused:

I am amazed by people on these boards who cannot respect the differences in political thoughts of others to such a point that they will hate them AND will distort what is right in front of their nose just to hold on to the PARTY LINE!!!

grow the f*ck up!!

This is bullshit. We should teach our kids more history and english and less science and math to even out the widespread discrepancy in education of these areas. Then we could produce a generation of kids who actually care about the world at large and not some US/ "ME"-centric world.

God dammit we're not the world's envy. We're powerful for sure (we could kick the **** out of any nation)- but we have our problems much like every other country. STOP thinking we're all that and a bag of barbeque chips and START thinking we're a great country among many other great countries with good but different ideas.

*packin my bag for europe..........*

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>

Oh, OK. I forgot how dumb I am. Thank you very much. Please enlighten us further with your superb academic snobbery.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Being snobbish yourself to "academic snobbery" is itself- SNOBBISH. Have you not heard the phrase "two wrongs do not make a right?" Well, probably not considering that you probably are reciting that "Eye for an Eye" part of the Old Testament. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

[ 06-12-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>Oh, and Pflam.....

I will hereby dedicate myself to becoming as intelligent as you. But, being the flag waving, Bush voting person I am, I will need to become immortal, so that I might have the time required to overcome my supreme stupidity.

Oh, and this just in:

This thread I have started is beginning to prove a point I only heard put into words the other day: Patriotism is not being taught in our liberal schools, and is now considered to be "taboo" by many. The difference between you and I is that I LIKE being called a flag waiver. I think it is a good thing. I think being patriotic is a GOOD thing. I appreciate the nation I live in. I appreciate my freedoms and a nation that gives me the ability to speak and generally act as I want. I realize that not all places on earth are like this. We have problems, and I know that. But, I truly DO believe we are the "best" nation, so to speak.

The problem in this country is the people that have stopped believing in the greatness of America.
[ 06-03-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

There is an extent to which one may appreciate one's country. That extent, or the line that one crosses, lies where one's patriotism evolves into isolationism- or even worse- jingoism.

What most of us are expressing our serious concern for is your JINGOISM. You express your patriotism quite zealously- yet mainly through hostility towards other nations. Simply loving the good ol USA is one thing but lashing out at every country that doesn't like us shows us the distinction.

[quote]Originally posted by stimuli:
<strong>
The sad part is that there are many informed, intelligent Americans... hell, some of the greatest minds in the world are American... but so few compared to the ignorant knee-jerks. They are whispers in a stadium of cheering idiots.</strong><hr></blockquote>

A Poet! Great quote!

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>SDW2001's response to what Stimuli writes:

Why, thank you! I love being called stupid! What is truly funny is how people actually criticize people like me for thinking their nation is "the best". God forbid! I must be a facist! How dare I suggest that some of the totally failing nations on earth try democracy! How dare I suggest that some nations envy us for our money and power! What totally absurd suppositions! </strong><hr></blockquote>

You know what? **** you and your ****ing sarcasm. Who the **** do you think you are? Sarcasm really pisses the hell out of me. Like people MUST belittle each other. You just snobbishly criticized someone exercising their academic prowess (quite snobbishly yourself i might reiterate), and now you must snobbishly think you are better than Stimuli- the man-the poet? GOD. Speak sincerely, dumbass.

<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

[ 06-12-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by macvasco:
<strong>

Mate, we´re getting away from the point here.

In a nutshell. You post on here claiming that countries hate your country because they are jealous of your might, power and wealth.

In response to that I said it was nonsense. Later on I explained that it is nonsense because it´s simply not the reason. I told you what the reasons were.

Let me generalize for a bit...

Europeans, including myself, have digs at your country because we dislike overconfidence like you show in your original post.

Muslims, of course not all of them, hate your country for its support to Israel and for its continued presence in the Middle East. Others, however, are happy you are there. However, that is never talked about since these days any Arab must be a muslim and thus a terrorist. That´s the way GWB wants it.

I´m not going to deny that people take the wee out of the USA but in my opinion that is in no way related to a bunch of terrorists who think they have a good enough excuse to kill civilians. You say, and rightfully so, that you have a right to be pissed off by what happened on 9/11 but don´t the Arabs have a right to be pissed off by things that the US has done against them?

Now, like I said, there are things about America that I don´t understand or simply dislike but I´d still love to live there for a while in the near future. Not as long as GWB is in office though!



So in the end, what I wanted to say, was that you´re right to claim that countries hate the US. Just not for the reasons that you suggested.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Great, poised post. Are you in any way affiliated with ETA? (Not like many of our US-ONLY posters here know what that group is...)
[quote]Originally posted by steve666:
<strong>

Who's we? The majority of Americans believe that global warming is a real threat. Kyoto wasn't squashed because of that, it was because most third world nations were allowed to bypass the regs that the US and Europe would have to follow-China, for example. The treaty should just be rewritten and reapplied to include all countries......................................... ......</strong><hr></blockquote>
I wasn't referring to Kyoto, I was referring to Europe generally speaking. I pretty much dig their world views. BBC all the way!

[quote]Originally posted by pfflam:
<strong>You're a moron, and you ARE biased, as is shown repeatedly by your childish venom . . </strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> Pfflam... we MUST get together sometime for laughs and drinks over a decidedly pro-democrat environment. We'll bring the girlfriends/wives for some more engaging discussion. Whew <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

[ 06-12-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>
You know what? **** you and your ****ing sarcasm. Who the **** do you think you are? Sarcasm really pisses the hell out of me. Like people MUST belittle each other... GOD. Speak sincerely, dumbass.

<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah, name-calling and swearing is so much better. At least you sincerely belittled him.

[quote]Originally posted by steve666:
<strong>

Who's we? The majority of Americans believe that global warming is a real threat. Kyoto wasn't squashed because of that, it was because most third world nations were allowed to bypass the regs that the US and Europe would have to follow-China, for example. The treaty should just be rewritten and reapplied to include all countries......................................... ......</strong><hr></blockquote>

Exactly. This point is not covered over here in Europe. The main US objection, at least one of them, is that developing countries like China for example are *excluded* from Kyoto. Now, a country like China, with over 1 billion people and the fastest manufacting growth of any major country is excluded. China's growth is something like 8% which is Huge and its only growing at the expense of other SE Asians, etc. The manufacturing base, where a large amount of pollution is created, is happening in countries like China as well as first world countries. So, when Europe critises US for Kyoto, they should be aware of China and aware of the economic disadvantage. Unfortuneatly, most people here in Europe just do the knee jerk anti-american kyoto bashing without ever bring this important objection. I follow news here avidly and this is never (or rarely) mentioned.

There is a lot of resentment/(secret envy or frustration of Europe beuracracy/being sidelined?) here of US actions and Kyoto is one of the talking points among a host of other issues. but, for Kyoto and US, this is widely misunderstood and US should do a better job explaining this reason.

My feeling is that if you do a deal like Kyoto, you need to *address* the major objections from major players. The US is a major player and sometimes its better to address or comprimise (or include China for example) to ratify the treaty. As it stands now Europe is frustrated without US and in process of ratifying Kyoto without US or China. They blame US for this. It would be better to get this worked out esp since China is now in the WTO. Why was China excluded from Kyoto? That is my question and why didn't Europe listen to US objections on this point?

The Americans are not stupid and are very aware of the environment and greenhouse emmissons. The idea that Americans do not read or care about international press or issues is false. For Europeans to just fall back to very sterotypical resentments and to underestimate Americans on a number of issues is not right. There is a definate fragmentation going on between Europe and US and this is, in essence, the general thread of this topic. If we are allies, we should act like allies and not like pissed off siblings. These are my observations.

[ 06-12-2002: Message edited by: eat@me ]</p>

For Europeans to just fall back to very sterotypical resentments and to underestimate Americans on a number of issues is not right.

Let them underestimate up. They underestimated us during the revolutioanry war. They underestimated us during WW1. And WW2. Since then we have grown to be the biggest superpower in the world. Keep on underestimating us! The Taliban underestimated us...

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>. I wasn't talking about friggin' France, here folks.</strong><hr></blockquote>

France doesn't like us as well- mainly because they see us a bunch of cowboy hat waving jingoists. GWB perpetuates that image.
[quote]Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:
<strong>

Yeah, name-calling and swearing is so much better. At least you sincerely belittled him.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Get off your highly pious horse about swearing. I used it to puncuate my message, not as a substitute for the message itself. As for name calling- We've settled that issue way back in page one. It's clear that throughout SDW2001's posts, name calling is a vital part. Just think of how many times he used the word "liberal," which he clarified to mean as a "curse" word. Please, you're hypocritical to criticize me. (Although, unlike GWB, I am completely open to it)

[ 06-12-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>
France doesn't like us as well- mainly because they see us a bunch of cowboy hat waving jingoists. GWB perpetuates that image.</strong><hr></blockquote>

If that's all you're looking for, then that's all you'll find.

[quote]Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:
<strong>

If that's all you're looking for, then that's all you'll find.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Please. The US creates its world image through foreign policy. (It's like a job interview... you know that you are qualified but you must SHOW it.) Ignoring mostly every other country but itself for the majority of GWB's administration does not bode well with other countries- thus perpetuating the cowboy hat waving, isolationist American stereotype.

[ 06-12-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by eat@me:
<strong>
The Americans are not stupid and are very aware of the environment and greenhouse emmissons.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes- about half of all Americans and those who voted for Gore actually care. Democrats actually do things about the environment- even when it hurts Big Industry. Republicans aren't willing to support the environment to that extent. Sure they WANT greener pastures and bluer skies, but voting republican AIN'T gonna make it happen any time soon. I would be moritified to be in Christie Todd Whitman's shoes.

[quote]Originally posted by eat@me:
<strong>
The idea that Americans do not read or care about international press or issues is false. For Europeans to just fall back to very sterotypical resentments and to underestimate Americans on a number of issues is not right. There is a definate fragmentation going on between Europe and US and this is, in essence, the general thread of this topic. If we are allies, we should act like allies and not like pissed off siblings. These are my observations.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Read my above post about the perpuation of stereotypes.

[ 06-12-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>
Please. The US creates its image through foreign policy. Ignoring mostly every other country but itself for the majority of GWB's administration does not bode well with other countries- thus perpetuating the cowboy hat waving, isolationist American stereotype.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Please. The U.S. has responsibilities that other nations don't have. The idea that this administration is isolationist is absurd. Peddling such canards is not the same thing as seriously thinking about international affairs.

[quote]Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:
<strong>

Please. The U.S. has responsibilities that other nations don't have. The idea that this administration is isolationist is absurd. Peddling such canards is not the same thing as seriously thinking about international affairs.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Don't mock me. If the US is a world leader, then it should SHOW it on the world stage as a world player- not a go-it-alone ball hog. It's fact that the 43 administration did almost nothing on it until they were forced to as a result of the explosive events of 911.

Nothing here is truly "serious thinking about international affairs." If that's what you are looking for, then read Fareed Zakaria of Newsweek or an essay or serious newspaper article about it. AI Forums is akin to a tableside discussion.

[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>
Don't mock me. If the US is a world leader, then it should SHOW it on the world stage as a world player- not a go-it-alone ball hog.</strong><hr></blockquote>

A ball hog? Sorry but you make it awfully hard to not mock you.

We can't not be a world player even if we tried. And we're not. The simple fact is that our interests are global. As such there's always going to be somebody who isn't happy with us. If Bejing doesn't like us, Taipei still does. If Paris is peeved, Moscow is has it's own set of reasons to be pleased with us. You can't please everybody all the time. We shouldn't even try.

[quote]Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:
<strong>

A ball hog? Sorry but you make it awfully hard to not mock you.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'll try to focus on the substance of your messages rather than on any snobbish personal attack.

[quote]Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:
<strong>
We can't not be a world player even if we tried. And we're not.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Can you please clarify that statement? Your use of a double negative "can't/not" obscurs your point. (can not not?) Notice that I don't use my knowlege of the english language to belittle you for making a mistake- I give you the opportunity to clarify.

[quote]Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:
<strong>
The simple fact is that our interests are global. As such there's always going to be somebody who isn't happy with us. If Bejing doesn't like us, Taipei still does. If Paris is peeved, Moscow is has it's own set of reasons to be pleased with us. You can't please everybody all the time. We shouldn't even try.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well... agreed. Though, no one claims to please everyone anyway. Is that what you got from my post? Listen, stepping up on the world stage DOESN'T involve pleasing everyone. But the act of stepping up WILL show that we are not the stereotypical ugly Americans that we project to other nations.

[ 06-12-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]

[ 06-12-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</p>

You're worried about our looks? i don't care if people think we are fat and ugly. Our stock comes from their countries so they are just insulting themselves.

French guy: You fat, stoo-ped , oogly American! You are a peeg!

American: Thanks, I'm half french! Nice to meet you too! w00t! I have to go to McDonalds and get half a dozen Big Macs and go home to watch teevee. Man, I wish they delivered.

[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:

<strong>I'll try to focus on the substance of your messages rather than on any snobbish personal attack.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah, it must be so hard for you to not just swear at me or call me a name. Im impressed.

[quote]<strong>Can you please clarify that statement? Your use of a double negative "can't/not" obscurs your point. (can not not?) Notice that I don't use my knowlege of the english language to belittle you for making a mistake- I give you the opportunity to clarify.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Wow! What a guy!

[quote]<strong>Well... agreed. Though, no one claims to please everyone anyway. Is that what you got from my post? Listen, stepping up on the world stage DOESN'T involve please everyone. But the act of stepping up WILL show that we are not the stereotypical fat, ugly Americans.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Thats your stereotype. We are already on the world stage Theres no stepping up to do. Just because Bush doesnt have your priorities that doesnt mean we are isolationist.

[quote]Originally posted by Outsider:
<strong>You're worried about our looks?
</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> No, not quite. You're entirely amusing, but probably just missed the point. The "Ugly American" stereotype is what Europe thinks of us. Such headlines appeared in many Euro newspapers when the US Golf team beat PGA Europe in that tournament a few years back.

[ 06-12-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</p>

[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>I'll try to focus on the substance of your messages rather than on any snobbish personal attack.</strong><hr></blockquote>Yeah. That's just the spaceman's MO. I think he just honestly believes he is superior, so he doesn't realize that he's doing it.
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> spaceman_spiff, in another conversation, we'd be friends.

But seriously, it seems the far right uses "sarcasm" to make their point. Why can't we just be earnest about things? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>Yeah. That's just the spaceman's MO. I think he just honestly believes he is superior, so he doesn't realize that he's doing it.
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>


<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

Reading all this thread i come to the conclusion that there is too many stereotypes in each side in it.
We are supposed to be intelligent people trying to remove stereotypes with a constructive discussion. In fact i see that too many stereotypes are promoted in this thread.
Discovering the differences of other and try to understand them is interesting, flames wars can be fun from time to time but will not improve your culture and your wisdom

Amen

[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> spaceman_spiff, in another conversation, we'd be friends. </strong><hr></blockquote>

I don't doubt it. I have a lot of liberal friends.

[quote]<strong>But seriously, it seems the far right uses "sarcasm" to make their point. Why can't we just be earnest about things? :confused: </strong><hr></blockquote>

The far right. Yeah, that's it. No stereotypes here. What do you expect? Sarcasm is a pretty obvious response to someone who bitches about the perpetuation of stereotypes while relying on them like a crutch.

[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>Yeah. That's just the spaceman's MO. I think he just honestly believes he is superior, so he doesn't realize that he's doing it.
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

And BRussell's MO is to police my posts.

[quote]Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:
<strong>

The far right. Yeah, that's it. No stereotypes here. </strong><hr></blockquote>

I suggested the possibility that the far right may rely upon sarcasm more frequently and crtically than the far left. The distinction lies at suggesting a general trend rather than stereotyping the former group.
[quote]Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:
<strong>
What do you expect? Sarcasm is a pretty obvious response to someone who bitches about the perpetuation of stereotypes while relying on them like a crutch.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes- your use of sarcasm was "obvious." As opposed to what- "implicit?" Sarcasm in any form is wrong in an earnest dicussion because it mocks the other person.