The best thing about the signature is that it applies mainly to Yurrup!
How Yurrupeans love to forget their colonial past and how it has created the vast majority of the problems we have today with these "developing" and "terrorist" nations.
This is absolutely correct and explains why the emerging African Union won't deal with Mugabe even though he's the mad embarassment he's become. It's true, too, that the British government gave the Middle East its borders with no regard to ethnicity and religious orientation. The problems in Central Africa and West Africa right now are worse because the divisions were so, so abitrary. Look at those long, straight borders on an atlas. The British army is not popular in Iraq. Why? We gassed them from aeroplanes.
So, I muse, who are these 'developing' nations that really hate America so much? South Africa's not keen on GWB at all (denied them ports for GW2), but they're not supplying suicide bombers, and none on the sub-Saharan Africans are. Generally, they don't really give a toss as far I can tell. If anything they're grateful for the aid I expect. Mugabe hates the British but Zimbabweans themselves don't at all (Mugabe accused Blair of destroying the economy and said that his cabinet were sleeping with each other because they were mad homosexuals and is clearly both playing politics and mad.) They want the land the white people have got, though, but that's another matter. The Angolans don't give a stuff about the Portuguese, and nor the Mozambiquans (as far as I know.) In South Africa the government doesn't like Blair because he's going out with George Bush, but there's no anti-British feeling at all. The people there don't hate the Dutch, either. In Kenya, they don't hate the British. The Namibians don't hate the Germans any more than they should. In Nigeria they don't hate the British. There are exceptions, of course: they don't like France in the Cote d'Ivoire, but that's because they don't like the French-brokered peace, which was recent. And they don't like the Belgians in the Congo. (And why should they. Der Kopf? ) But the state of Belgium is not threatened by people from Central Africa.
Other colonies: India? They beat us at cricket. They re-name their cities. But I've never experienced tangible anti-British feeling there, despite the fact that Britain's responsible for awful famines and massacres. People will tell you articulately how they don't like what colonialism did: but then others will eagerly practice their English on you and invite you for tiffin. The Dutch and the Phillipines? I don't know, but I don't that that Holland is singled out for Phillipino suicide bombers. In Australia and New Zealand the genocide was too awful for words and we should pay reperations, but the surviving indigenes of the Pacific do not threaten us. Who else? The people of the Amazon? No. The Inuit? No. The Chinese? They've got Hong Kong. The lease ran out, we gave it back.
Big bomb in Bali, though: we mustn't forget that.
Pakistan's another matter. The North African countries are another matter. But these people aren't angry at the countries that colonised them: they're angry at 'The West', personified by the United States of America.
I don't know what point I'm trying to make other than you're quite right, Groverat, that many Yurrupeans need to be reminded of their colonial past and the harm's it's done and still doing the world, but the comparison between Europe and America doesn't quite hold up. Don't know why, not trying to get into a fight, merely musing off the cuff and probably wrong on a number of points. but still.
Pakistan's another matter. The North African countries are another matter. But these people aren't angry at the countries that colonised them: they're angry at 'The West', personified by the United States of America.
Great post Hassan.
In regard to above issue I would submit there are two views of living that clash. The first being those who wish for strict Islamic Law and the west with freedom. Freedom and Islamic Law have their differences.
I tend to agree with you. The colonialy history of Europe is very much the reason for many of the problems of the world today. American Imperialism and so-called free-trade is the natural continuation of this horrible history.
As for my country, it has no colonial past, or rather, it actually was a colony. So I think I can pretty much say what I want on the matter.
What? It can´t have been that hard. You almost kept the flag
On a more serious note: New is right. Much of the resentment from the europeans against the war is excatly because of the european history. On the basis of the second world war the last fifteen years have been an experiment to mix realistic and liberal IR policy to ensure that we would never fall back in the track that lead to WWII despite the horrors of WWI. At the core of this is the idea that the use of a favourable position can very easy lead to disasterous results. That doesn´t mean you should never use your powers but always consider ALL the consequenses of your actions, both when iot comes to "realpolitik" and morals.
Thats why Joschka Fischers remarks at the SC is classic and at the heart of the current german political moral. When Donald Rumsfeld had criticised Germany and France would do "their part" after Powell had "proved" the WoMDs in Iraq JF told him that the evidence hadn´t been convincing enough for him and if he was to put german military forces into the war in Iraq then he had to know that the reason was jusitfied.
So anything that boarders "So what if the reason (WoMDs) for going to war showed to be wrong?. The war is justified by the result on other areas" is a very dangerous slope for many europeans.
As for my country, it has no colonial past, or rather, it actually was a colony. So I think I can pretty much say what I want on the matter.
you can, indeed.
(your grandfathers didn't coincidently occupy england and normandy? or were that the danish?)
we dutch on the other hand, we are one of the inventors of intensive western colonialism (together with the spanish and portugese) we transported hundreds of thousands of africans to the carabian and the southern states of america. we killed thousands of innoccent indonesians in sumatra alone. all in the name of free trade (wow, where did we here that before?) but that doesn't mean i can't say what i want on the matter.
The best thing about the signature is that it applies mainly to Yurrup!
How Yurrupeans love to forget their colonial past and how it has created the vast majority of the problems we have today with these "developing" and "terrorist" nations.
"What!? SHUT UP! IT'S ALL AMERICA'S FAULT!"
I have to concur with the evil moderator.
........although a close study of the culture of Tanzania or the conditions in Karachi mid 1800s make you wonder if they didn't need to come in and clean house. People worth less than cattle--yikes.
Otherwise anti-American sentiment is just a continuation of the king-of-the hill game that has been going on since we started killing our siblings out of jealousy.
Just 100 years ago this nation (the US) was little more than a European backwater. Our first encounter with a European power (Spain) in the new colonial era had at first proceeded nicely except by this point 100 years ago, paramilitaries in the Philippines had begun to attack our colonial outpost effecting a change in the way the territory was governed -- towards one with marshal law and interspersed violence (eventually the US pulled out)... Hawaii, at the same time, had been a sucessful monarchy modeled after the best in Europe. Local missionaries/plantation owners, set into motion a tragic series of events. There was a coup, another coup, the US ordered the plantation owners to cede back the power to the royal family, but by the time the order was made, I believe the royals had been slaughtered. Instead of giving back the power to the native people of Hawaii, the US took the islands and made the plantation owners the territorial rulers.
These event or similar ones have happened over and over again in the 20th century. The reason why the US is hated where it is hated is because of the hypocracy of a nation founded on the notion of a people's free will to set into motion and support the foundation of pro-US governments where anything but the people's voices are heard (except often when they are screaming from torture). No, the US didnt make the world it found so tempting and easy to manipulate, but it did choose to manipulate it and it must face the consequences of that.
As for hatred in countries the US did not directly manipulate, well simplistically it is jealousy ...
The reason the US is hated so much in the Middle East is because it supports Israel against the Arab Muslims that want to recreate the holocaust in modern day Israel.
The reason the US is hated so much in the Middle East is because it supports Israel against the Arab Muslims that want to recreate the holocaust in modern day Israel.
Duh!
The rest is a wash.
If anyone made any such statement towards another ethnic group or religion, it would be called racism immediately.
Unless you want to say that either all Arab Muslims believe that way or none do...
ok, the clever wording makes the statement ok.
he is implying that there are major forces amongst the arabs in the middle-east that want to recreat the holocaust. It's a bit like sayin the KKK is major political force in US politics.
he is implying that there are major forces amongst the arabs in the middle-east that want to recreat the holocaust. It's a bit like sayin the KKK is major political force in US politics.
Wake up and smell the anti-Semitism. What ****ing planet do you live on? Head in the sand for the last 50 years? Read some of the leading Arab news papers see some of the prime time TV shows. Full of recycled anti-Semitic propaganda from ... Europe.
Because the US refuses to allow the arabs to slaughter the jews ... we?re hated. Europe would never act against such and act ... they're loved.
United the world can solve problems and divided we will trip over numerous additional problems at no benefit to any.
I like the idea of the United World.
If people would understand all people are just people, and not make stupid problems about religion, sex, politics or skin colors, there won't be wars ...
Be lucky there isn't such thing as United Islamic States. They would be scarefeully powerful, even with less $$ capital than U$A.
If people would understand all people are just people, and not make stupid problems about religion, sex, politics or skin colors, there won't be wars ...
Be lucky there isn't such thing as United Islamic States. They would be scarefeully powerful, even with less $$ capital than U$A.
Comments
Originally posted by groverat
The best thing about the signature is that it applies mainly to Yurrup!
How Yurrupeans love to forget their colonial past and how it has created the vast majority of the problems we have today with these "developing" and "terrorist" nations.
This is absolutely correct and explains why the emerging African Union won't deal with Mugabe even though he's the mad embarassment he's become. It's true, too, that the British government gave the Middle East its borders with no regard to ethnicity and religious orientation. The problems in Central Africa and West Africa right now are worse because the divisions were so, so abitrary. Look at those long, straight borders on an atlas. The British army is not popular in Iraq. Why? We gassed them from aeroplanes.
So, I muse, who are these 'developing' nations that really hate America so much? South Africa's not keen on GWB at all (denied them ports for GW2), but they're not supplying suicide bombers, and none on the sub-Saharan Africans are. Generally, they don't really give a toss as far I can tell. If anything they're grateful for the aid I expect. Mugabe hates the British but Zimbabweans themselves don't at all (Mugabe accused Blair of destroying the economy and said that his cabinet were sleeping with each other because they were mad homosexuals and is clearly both playing politics and mad.) They want the land the white people have got, though, but that's another matter. The Angolans don't give a stuff about the Portuguese, and nor the Mozambiquans (as far as I know.) In South Africa the government doesn't like Blair because he's going out with George Bush, but there's no anti-British feeling at all. The people there don't hate the Dutch, either. In Kenya, they don't hate the British. The Namibians don't hate the Germans any more than they should. In Nigeria they don't hate the British. There are exceptions, of course: they don't like France in the Cote d'Ivoire, but that's because they don't like the French-brokered peace, which was recent. And they don't like the Belgians in the Congo. (And why should they. Der Kopf?
Other colonies: India? They beat us at cricket. They re-name their cities. But I've never experienced tangible anti-British feeling there, despite the fact that Britain's responsible for awful famines and massacres. People will tell you articulately how they don't like what colonialism did: but then others will eagerly practice their English on you and invite you for tiffin. The Dutch and the Phillipines? I don't know, but I don't that that Holland is singled out for Phillipino suicide bombers. In Australia and New Zealand the genocide was too awful for words and we should pay reperations, but the surviving indigenes of the Pacific do not threaten us. Who else? The people of the Amazon? No. The Inuit? No. The Chinese? They've got Hong Kong. The lease ran out, we gave it back.
Big bomb in Bali, though: we mustn't forget that.
Pakistan's another matter. The North African countries are another matter. But these people aren't angry at the countries that colonised them: they're angry at 'The West', personified by the United States of America.
I don't know what point I'm trying to make other than you're quite right, Groverat, that many Yurrupeans need to be reminded of their colonial past and the harm's it's done and still doing the world, but the comparison between Europe and America doesn't quite hold up. Don't know why, not trying to get into a fight, merely musing off the cuff and probably wrong on a number of points. but still.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Big bomb in Bali, though: we mustn't forget that.
Pakistan's another matter. The North African countries are another matter. But these people aren't angry at the countries that colonised them: they're angry at 'The West', personified by the United States of America.
Great post Hassan.
In regard to above issue I would submit there are two views of living that clash. The first being those who wish for strict Islamic Law and the west with freedom. Freedom and Islamic Law have their differences.
Fellowship
Originally posted by New
I tend to agree with you. The colonialy history of Europe is very much the reason for many of the problems of the world today. American Imperialism and so-called free-trade is the natural continuation of this horrible history.
As for my country, it has no colonial past, or rather, it actually was a colony. So I think I can pretty much say what I want on the matter.
What? It can´t have been that hard. You almost kept the flag
On a more serious note: New is right. Much of the resentment from the europeans against the war is excatly because of the european history. On the basis of the second world war the last fifteen years have been an experiment to mix realistic and liberal IR policy to ensure that we would never fall back in the track that lead to WWII despite the horrors of WWI. At the core of this is the idea that the use of a favourable position can very easy lead to disasterous results. That doesn´t mean you should never use your powers but always consider ALL the consequenses of your actions, both when iot comes to "realpolitik" and morals.
Thats why Joschka Fischers remarks at the SC is classic and at the heart of the current german political moral. When Donald Rumsfeld had criticised Germany and France would do "their part" after Powell had "proved" the WoMDs in Iraq JF told him that the evidence hadn´t been convincing enough for him and if he was to put german military forces into the war in Iraq then he had to know that the reason was jusitfied.
So anything that boarders "So what if the reason (WoMDs) for going to war showed to be wrong?. The war is justified by the result on other areas" is a very dangerous slope for many europeans.
Originally posted by New
As for my country, it has no colonial past, or rather, it actually was a colony. So I think I can pretty much say what I want on the matter.
you can, indeed.
(your grandfathers didn't coincidently occupy england and normandy? or were that the danish?)
we dutch on the other hand, we are one of the inventors of intensive western colonialism (together with the spanish and portugese) we transported hundreds of thousands of africans to the carabian and the southern states of america. we killed thousands of innoccent indonesians in sumatra alone. all in the name of free trade (wow, where did we here that before?) but that doesn't mean i can't say what i want on the matter.
Originally posted by groverat
The best thing about the signature is that it applies mainly to Yurrup!
How Yurrupeans love to forget their colonial past and how it has created the vast majority of the problems we have today with these "developing" and "terrorist" nations.
"What!? SHUT UP! IT'S ALL AMERICA'S FAULT!"
I have to concur with the evil moderator.
........although a close study of the culture of Tanzania or the conditions in Karachi mid 1800s make you wonder if they didn't need to come in and clean house. People worth less than cattle--yikes.
Otherwise anti-American sentiment is just a continuation of the king-of-the hill game that has been going on since we started killing our siblings out of jealousy.
Originally posted by ena
I have to concur with the evil moderator.
Then you should read Hassan's post.
Originally posted by bunge
Then you should read Hassan's post.
I did.
I am loath to do it, but I must admit that al Dajjal is keen to point out the realities of African sentiments.
Originally posted by ena
I did.
I am loath to do it, but I must admit that al Dajjal is keen to point out the realities of African sentiments.
Genius. Even Mika never thought of this. Excellent.
ena, you're OK.
These event or similar ones have happened over and over again in the 20th century. The reason why the US is hated where it is hated is because of the hypocracy of a nation founded on the notion of a people's free will to set into motion and support the foundation of pro-US governments where anything but the people's voices are heard (except often when they are screaming from torture). No, the US didnt make the world it found so tempting and easy to manipulate, but it did choose to manipulate it and it must face the consequences of that.
As for hatred in countries the US did not directly manipulate, well simplistically it is jealousy
Duh!
The rest is a wash.
Originally posted by Scott
The reason the US is hated so much in the Middle East is because it supports Israel against the Arab Muslims that want to recreate the holocaust in modern day Israel.
Duh!
The rest is a wash.
If anyone made any such statement towards another ethnic group or religion, it would be called racism immediately.
Since that's what it is , basically...
Unless you want to say that either all Arab Muslims believe that way or none do...
Originally posted by gar
you can, indeed.
(your grandfathers didn't coincidently occupy england and normandy? or were that the danish?)
I always blame the Danes, they have silly politicians.
(no, seriously, Norway was not a country back then, it's not really the same.)
Originally posted by groverat
He clearly specified "the Arab Muslims that".
Unless you want to say that either all Arab Muslims believe that way or none do...
ok, the clever wording makes the statement ok.
he is implying that there are major forces amongst the arabs in the middle-east that want to recreat the holocaust. It's a bit like sayin the KKK is major political force in US politics.
Originally posted by New
ok, the clever wording makes the statement ok.
he is implying that there are major forces amongst the arabs in the middle-east that want to recreat the holocaust. It's a bit like sayin the KKK is major political force in US politics.
Wake up and smell the anti-Semitism. What ****ing planet do you live on? Head in the sand for the last 50 years? Read some of the leading Arab news papers see some of the prime time TV shows. Full of recycled anti-Semitic propaganda from ... Europe.
Because the US refuses to allow the arabs to slaughter the jews ... we?re hated. Europe would never act against such and act ... they're loved.
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
United the world can solve problems and divided we will trip over numerous additional problems at no benefit to any.
I like the idea of the United World.
If people would understand all people are just people, and not make stupid problems about religion, sex, politics or skin colors, there won't be wars ...
Be lucky there isn't such thing as United Islamic States. They would be scarefeully powerful, even with less $$ capital than U$A.
Originally posted by Mulattabianca
I like the idea of the United World.
If people would understand all people are just people, and not make stupid problems about religion, sex, politics or skin colors, there won't be wars ...
Be lucky there isn't such thing as United Islamic States. They would be scarefeully powerful, even with less $$ capital than U$A.
You contradict yourself here. No?
Originally posted by Scott
Because the US refuses to allow the arabs to slaughter the jews ... we're hated.
Pull your head out of your ass...
Originally posted by Scott
What ****ing planet do you live on?
Thankfully not the one you are on.
Originally posted by Scott
You contradict yourself here. No?
i am not contradicting myself. i would opt for the United World.
and the conservatives or those with the us-flags in their patios, would be scared if there was such thing as United Islamic States.