What is Digg?294 Comments
- bcasper1, on 10/12/2007, -9/+62I am not very surprised that the world doesn't want the U.S. to be the world police.
- Philluminati, on 10/12/2007, -22/+74@ RuffRidr
Americans are only interested in Americans - that's why your all saying "If we can't control you...we won't help you".
Why can't you contribute to a better global society (which benefits EVERYONE in the long run) without dominating and controlling it?
/watch me get dugg down! - digghasnoethics, on 10/12/2007, -12/+57I'm trying to work out why so many responses are akin to that of a little child.
People around the world are saying the US should pull its weight as part of the international community, not attempt to throw its weight around in defiance of that community. What is so ridiculous about that?
Is it any wonder that most countries consider US decision making to be hellishly suspect? Most americans think the same. The US has a long and ignoble track record of getting suckered into bad, short term decisions that they then regret as things play out. In the battle of intellects Al-Qaeda is winning and is basically tweaking the puppet strings from a cave in Pakistan. What's more they SAID what they were doing, but the US still went blindly on.
No wonder people want the US involved, but not in control.
The US needs to rebuild some international goodwill, and quickly. Cutting the hubris would be a good start. - floorman56, on 10/12/2007, -0/+41Cool ...close all U.S. bases in Germany, Spain, Italy, England, Korea, Japan, Pull out of NATO. we will save BILLIONS!!!
- caban, on 10/12/2007, -27/+60It's always a bit amusing when Americans cry about how much foreign aid they are giving, when in reality they are one of least generous of the developed nations. 0.16% of GDP in government aid is hardly much to boost about, and also when it comes to private donations they are not very generous at all.
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2676 - fordicus, on 10/12/2007, -7/+40while I don't think it's an "all-or-nothing" approach, I do support withdrawing armed forces (some not all) and foreign aid (again some not all) to focus on issues at home. While providing help for those who cannot do so on their own can be seen a generous and what the US should do, should we also be turning our backs on our own citizens in order to do so? Should we provide money to those who don't want us there? I would rather take the money and do things like helping our own citizens who are less fortunate and bolstering the economy.
- REBELinBLUE, on 10/12/2007, -15/+44"Truth is that when you are at the top, everyone hates you cos they want to be you."
Ah, the old jealously excuse. Are we a bunch of 9 year olds or something? - sonofdy1, on 10/12/2007, -59/+82China is one of the worlds biggest human rights abusers, excuse me if i don't want to emulate them. My thought? if we pull back, we take our aid with us. They want our money but don't want any strings? screw them.
- therealrico, on 10/12/2007, -6/+28Basically, we don't act like the only country on the planet, and do whatever the hell we want i.e. invade Iraq. That really is what is killing our reputation, that and the fact that we elected a guy who probably should have been riding on the short bus to school.
Basically we need to work with the UN, and act like a part of the Global Community. - spoiled1, on 10/12/2007, -51/+70So its not aid money, its taking advantage of their situation. Typical American way of thinking.
- jobenly, on 10/12/2007, -10/+27@sandman
Yep. Microsoft. WalMart. The New York Yankees. McDonald's. Starbuck's. It's a really bizarre part of human psychology, really.
The fact is, everyone posting here has never lived in a world without a U.S. superpower, so no one really understands what it would be like. I don't know about you, but I think a world where a country like Nazi Germany has a good chance of reshaping the map sounds pretty scary. And that's the way it was for millennia (Huns, Mongols, Romans, Muslim conquerers, Babylon, Assyrians, Aztecs). Even if the U.S. did take over another country with brute force, it would never last (observe what's going on in Iraq). The public at large can't handle wars. Democracies with a free press definitely can't. - corporate70, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19Interesting quotes from the article:
"Only five out of 12 publics favoured decreasing the number of overseas U.S. military bases: Argentina (75 percent), Palestinian territories (70 percent), France (69 percent), China (63 percent) and Ukraine (62 percent)."
"No countries had majorities or pluralities who say relations with the United States are getting worse. " - helinism, on 10/12/2007, -13/+29How childish most of the comments seem to be, if I can't have my own way I'll throw my toys out the pram seems to sum it up!
'Seventy-six percent of those polled in the United States also agree that their country plays too big a role as a global cop' Better close US bases and withdraw aid from US people also! =D - ubuntuedgy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16We don't need to act like China, we need to act like a sensible America.
We have troops all over the planet. Although this is tactically and strategically smart, it makes others view us as imperialists (rightly so). We can send a bomber anywhere on the planet from the US and deploy troops from anywhere within a matter of days. They need to come to our shores and be with their families until they are REALLY needed. I don't care what type of $$ help our bases bring. We have to think about America first...and then help others.
I am not an isolationist, but we are spread too thin and we leave things undone at home.
As far as the UN goes (as much as I think they are pathetic and just as corrupt as our own government (if not more so)) we have to work with the rest of the planet. In today's day and age the rest of the planet is our neighbors. We need to stop pissing in their backyards and be good neighbors. Things CAN be solved diplomatically in many circumstances but we have been quick to get aggressive with the military before we really get aggressive with diplomats. That needs to change.
We have a responsibility to ourselves first, and then our neighbors. Yes, war does solve some issues, but it must be an absolute last result after all efforts have failed otherwise, or we are put in such a situation that there is no choice. War would rarely occur if we would use our heads instead of our might!
Our present leadership has to go and the neo-con view of the world has to die. We don't have to be like everyone else, but we certainly have to start seeing their sides of any issue. When we are forced to take a hard stand, we should not be ashamed, but we must do it professionally and with compassion.
So many don't care what the rest of the planet thinks. That is a very bad stance. So many problems could be resolved if we could pull a large coalition together and force some places like Sudan to change if the rest of the planet is breathing down their necks; no need for military action.
I honestly believe we can do this and after the past 6 years, I think everyone is ready for positive change. Us Americans have to demand positive change in our government and we can do that in the next election. We cannot keep doing things the way we are. - d3c0yn4m3l355, on 10/12/2007, -17/+31What surprises me is that Americans in general consider them to be doing a good thing. If they come to Europe (I live nearby a US base) they seem to be surprised that everybody dislikes them for their acts. Now how i read this article is trying to collect more money to press the expenses. This isn't what the world thinks, this smells to me like the US governement trys to press the huge expenses by making their operations a UN-like operation to spread the costs. What repulses me more though is that Americans consider their act good, and that they arent financially responsible for the mess they created. First you go to whatever place, bomb it flat and then after that you spend huge sums on your army but an insignificant ammount on restructure the locals.
Last thing what is probaly the most dispicable thing ever, the US lies every part they manage together to give valid reasons for attacking Iraqi and their previous attacks. - Egoist, on 10/12/2007, -8/+22"Are we a bunch of 9 year olds or something?"
Given the blind hatred that many exhibit, I would say so. Best example was the article recently about Bush not throwing out the traditional first pitch of the season and people skewered him for screwing something else up. Many people on digg hate to hate. They search for the bad in everything. The US gives billions of dollars to charities internationally, yet someone here would say, "It's less per capita than ______________!!"
Most diggers who comment here simple have nothing but hate and contempt, and there's absolutely nothing the country or world could do to make those people happy. For some, they're so wound up and ready to hate that I believe they'd only find happiness with a warm gun. - Myonosken, on 10/12/2007, -8/+21@Sultan: Protected?! During wars, Yorkshire (middle of England. Pretty green and full of countryside) was one of the least attacked areas of the country (except for one city nearby, but that's very acute bombing). Nowadays, we'd be the first to get nuked thanks to the US setting up a missile silo in the middle of the countryside. Yeah thanks a lot.
- avasol, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Why make billions when we can make....millions?
- therealrico, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16Yeah, but I am more talking about our governments decision to go into Iraq in the first place. We didn't have the blessing of the UN, and only one Allies. As oppossed to Desert Storm where we had many countries participating and there was a good reason to go there. Now all we have done is stirred a hornests nest, and givin muslim extremists even more reason to hate us.
- Egoist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11The fact that you've been dugg up to +8 shows was a sad group of misinformed people visit digg.
There's an Italian girl I know who was 17 when the attacks on 9/11 happened. She says the exact same thing that you did -- that America was wonderful before 9/11, but they the country has gone downhill since. That Bush is doing worse things than past presidents and that we should impeach him now.
A comment like this shows that your knowledge of US history begins on September 11, 2001, and everything before it is irrelevent. Read about the US in the 60s and 70s. Read why we went into Vietnam. Read what we thought of the Ayatollah in the 80s. Read how we took on a policy of assasinating communist leaders during that time.
Your perspective goes back only 6 years, and your memories of what the US was like before that are like your memories of an old TV program that you watched as a kid, but when you saw it again as an adult you say, "What the ***** was I thinking?!"
And please, no more "War for Oil" nonsense. We have yet to touch a single drop in that country, and other countries have already signed rights to drill there. - pintomp3, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12"you don't have to go home, but you've got to get the hell out of here" other countries aren't saying that the US shouldn't be involved on an international level and shouldn't have relationships with other countries. but when you look at how many countries we have military bases in, our track record for using the CIA to topple democratically elected governments and plant puppet dictators, committing torture and human rights violations abroad, and invasion of sovereign nations it's easy to see why many people around the world don't like us. we're not so much a global cop as a global bully.
- IslandDog, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11"ver heard of the ~500000 dead iraqi children during the sanctions?"
Ever heard of the U.N. taking advantage of that? Ever heard of oil-for-food?
You are the perfect example of why nobody in the U.S. cares what you think. - klawz, on 10/12/2007, -6/+16THe problem that I see with you (not personally), like the rest of the world (including the US) is you get FILTERED news. Stuff is put out there on the net, newspaper, news shows on tv, and blogs. People PUSH items they want you to know about, and PULL (keep private) or low key, the stuff they don't want you to know much about. It's called political posturing in a way. If I can control the information, I can control the views I put out there. I say this because news coming from the BBC seems to be much less filtered than the news coming from CNN for instance. He who controls the information, will control the world.
- REBELinBLUE, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10"Why do we even HAVE a blue water Navy? No one else does."
um....
Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue-water_navy#Examples_of_operating_blue-water_navies
Never heard that term though, in the UK it is called an expeditionary force :) - tkstock, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16Caban
"0.16% of GDP in government aid is hardly much to boost about,"
What is the GDP from the country where you're from? 0.16 of trillions of dollars is a lot more than 0.7% of millions...
What that report doesn't take into account is the INFRASTRUCTURE donations we provide that have no specific cash value, such as sending in ships to the region to deliver aid, helicopters to rescue people, air-drops, etc. We provide aid that other countries can't because we have the physical infrastructure to do so. I doubt that report takes that into account. - Aliarse, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Stop the world, i want to get off.
- jobenly, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Actually the Phillipines has its (have their?) own problems with terrorism, so they sympathize to a certain degree.
- bentman78, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11along with the UN...what have they done...for anyone...lately. Nothing.
Their main focus is to condemn the US and Israel for everything while letting despot countries like Sudan and Saudi Arabia sit on the Human Rights Council. They're a joke. - joeTaco, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14You missed my point. The kids who got sent off to die in Nam are victims of American foreign policy, just like the Iraqis and Vietnamese you mention. Calling CONSCRIPTS a bunch of 'stupid, ignorant *****' is pretty goddamn ignorant itself.
BTW, I'm not an American. - BarneyF, on 10/12/2007, -10/+18The comments on this site kind of demonstrate why the US shouldn't try to be the world police. Ignorance and disinterest are what you mostly read between the lines. McCain's "joke" about bombing Iran is an even better example. I mean would you thing it appropriate for the police in your town to make jokes about shooting members of a given minority?
The US is about 4% of the world's land area and population and has bankrupted itself spending about half of the world's total military budget. That doesn't even include various paramilitary organizations like the DEA in the Andes.
The country's leadership has repeatedly demonstrated a clear inability use its power responsibly or at all effectively.
Much of the military spending is completely useless. Why do we even HAVE a blue water Navy? No one else does. What are those carrier other than pork?
The stuff that theoretically makes sense is so messed up by bad doctrine (look at the Pentagon's counterproductive behavior in Iraq) that it is worse than useless.
America basically has no non-military foreign aid, so no foreigner is going to feel threatened by calls for America to reduce that, except maybe a few generals. - Corrosionx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Foreign aid goes to support corrupt dictator in poor countries.
And why are they poor? Because they're not free.
And why aren't they free? Because we keep their dictators in place. - Myonosken, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13Wait, sorry. The US is the only democracy? Well ***** me, can we have our Scottish devolved powers back please?
Also, democracy doesn't stop one person making wars. You used US as an example which, as we all know, is probably the main example of one guy and his cronies forcing a whole nation into war. - jobenly, on 10/12/2007, -11/+18"Why do we even HAVE a blue water Navy?"
Because there WILL be another huge war someday. Wars, like murders, happen. It's a fact of life. The U.S. doesn't want to be caught with aircraft carriers that have wooden decks. That and the U.S.'s biggest advantage is its wealth and ingenuity, so spending to have the best trained, highest tech military makes sense. China and India both have way too many people, so they can use that to their advantage. Russia's basically impossible to invade.
People don't like the U.S. military, but no one wants to go to war with it. That's the point of having a blue water Navy. - Mescaline, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13I think the world just wants the US to work with the rest of the world instead of going on it's own tangent. If we can only work together instead of the US driving it's own path maybe we can get stuff done.
- crapfactory, on 10/12/2007, -10/+17jobenly:
>> Because there WILL be another huge war someday.
Yup, pretty soon I guess. And you, the US, will most likely be the instigator. - agimat, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13"So its not aid money, its taking advantage of their situation. Typical American way of thinking."
What would not be 'taking advantage' then? Would totally FREE money do the trick?
Typical Freeloader way of thinking. - ploskinj, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8If only we could be among the global moral giants, Russia, France, Indonesia. If only the American people could be as free as Chinese citizens. If only our government was as free of corruption as the Philippines.
If only the cool kids on the block liked us, we could be invited to the BEST parties.
I like Nirvana before they were cool.
If only we could be more like the World... - crunchyeyeball, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11I'm pretty confident a lot of so-called anti-Americanism is actually anti-Bushism. Most of us in Europe actually rather like the American culture and people. We often holiday there, we watch a lot of American TV shows and movies, and we interact with Americans on a daily basis.
From this side of the pond, we saw Clinton as one of the best world-leaders ever to come out the US, or any other country - intelligent, articulate, charismatic, and well-meaning. As soon as Bush came on the scene, opinion started to shift noticably - A lot of Eurpoeans see him as a right-wing religious fanatic, completely closed off from all rational debate, with the intellect of a grapefruit. Polite attempts to suggest an opinion which differs from that of his neocon bubble is met with agression. When the rest of the free-thinking world is treated with that kind of contempt, is it any surprise opinions have shifted? - tugger, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11@sonofdy1
Sorry? you mean the US is actually paying it's United nations dues..?? sorry, WRONG!!!
Clinton had his problems, but the administration was inspired with their work around the world, from the turbulant middle east, N.Korea, to N.Ireland where he and blair contributed to the foundations for peace.
The fact that Bush used the United Nations to authorize the iraq war (and the subsequent seizure of the iraqi northern oil fields, which was the actual reason for it all) but can't even keep up UN payments... With all the western resources, couldn't Saddam and family have been helicoptered quietly out of the country??
It's great to have a cop around, things stay nice and quiet, unless of course he's walking around shooting at anything that moves. Bush is the biggest risk to world security right now, so yes, we'd love the US to pitch in and help, we'd also love you to make a payment occasionally, just stop stamping around with the pearl-handled six-shooters blazing for a while, ok? - BohicaTwentyTwo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Great. I'm sure we can just trust the rest of the world to fix Darfur then. Glad I don't have to keep on hearing about this one anymore.
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+82 Million Dead Chinese during the 'Great Leap Forward' disagree with you.
- Myonosken, on 10/12/2007, -7/+12Klawz, did you not hear of the US squad that shot a whole village up the other week?
Jesus christ, some of you act like My Lai did not happen in Nam' either. - Area417, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10@corporte70 I found that interesting too. The attitude seems to be "we hate you, but please keep your bases here so we don't have to spend money on our own defense."
- korvan504521, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5if we went to iraq to get some kind of proffit from it, we sure do suck at it. it's like the school bully asking for your lunch money and then spending his entire savings trying to get you cleaned back up.
- mattmoto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Wow, crapfactory just made one of the most hateful comments I have ever read. Why is he being dugg up? Here is a sample of his excellent wisdom:
"Now, you lost 58000 people. How many of those were stupid ignorant *****? 100%,"
Damn! If thats not ignorant and hateful, I don't know what is! - radio1mike, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6This thread is crap.
Essentially what I've discerned from this topic is that the world wants our wallets but nothing else. That even might be a valid point of view, especially if you do not live in the US. But, it does not really fly here.
My thoughts:
1) Stop spewing hyperbole-based rationales like: (excuse para-phrasing)
a) 'What the CIA has done [to the world] is worse than what China has done to it's citizens...' Yeh, that's wrong. Ask the 100-200+ million people who died of starvation after Mao's Great Leap Forward.
b) 'Britain has done so much more, and better even when it was an Empire...' Wrong again. Care to ask the entire subcontinent of India about that one? Or maybe perhaps all of Africa? Or about the Opium Wars in Asia?
c) 'FOXPepsiCokeMicrosoft is ruling the world's media...' Really, how unfortunate. Great thing is you can vote with your currency! Don't buy American-based products. Do you think most Americans care if you don't like FOX, Pepsi, Coke or Microsoft? Or care if you buy them? I don't. You know why, because you are addicted to them anyways. You mock Americans for consuming their own natively-generated media. Yet, if you look at growth of US media outlets (and other heavily commercialized industries)- the overseas growth usually outpaces domestic growth.
d) The US populace is stupid. Really? Let's quiz the man on the street in Stoke-On-Trent, Manchester, Paris, Berlin about US History or further more specific state history. Please, please, also try not to argue that the US is 47th in literacy or somesuch thing. Get me the mean, std deviation of studies. Funny, how the news syndicated don't print those (even if they are available).
2) Stop using revisionist history:
a) 'UN sanctions kills hundreds of thousands after Gulf War...' Yah, and that whole 'Food for Oil' embezzlement scheme with Kofi's relatives had nothing to do with that.
b) 'We never needed bases in Europe and UK during the Cold War...' Frankly, that's not what the West Germans, UK and all the rest agreed to, against the threat of the Eastern Bloc.
3) Stop using US money, power, as you see fit:
a) I get the feeling that rest of the world want us to act like the Great Majin. Use our resources and money, but shut up.
b) Don't accept our foreign aid, and only accept private charity contributions. - wowwbagger, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Do as we say or be crushed? All empires fall. When yellowstone park erupts the US will no longer be the world superpower. Then it is down to this question - "Do you have more friends than enemies?" Remember that in your aggressive rantings.
- dmclone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I don't know where you live or what countries you've been to but when you say:
"homelessness, unemployment, transportation infrastructure"
Our homelessness and unemployment are near record lows and our transportation infrastructure is excellent compared to most countries. If you mean high speed rail when talking about transportation than you need to do a little more research. Those high speed rail systems seem great until you ride on one and realize that 80% of them are half empty and highly substidized by the government.
As far as manufacturing, why? Where is this workforce going to come from? Are you talking about jobs for the illegal Mexicans? - Aliarse, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"Do you think filtering news is a bad thing?"
Yes, yes i do.
Why would anyone be content with only getting one side of the story? - Egoist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5And for all of the people saying that the US should be in Darfur right now -- I hate to break it to them, but that war would be no different than the war in Iraq. In the middle of two factions that want to kill each other, and civilians getting in the way.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 293 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is