Europe as Superpower

[Wooz]

Pot was a communist. Kissinger, Nixon nor LBJ would never support him.

Islom Karimov is a brutal dictator. The current US government would never support him.

Counter THAT, NEOCON!

Pinochet

No idea what you are talking about. He instituted a FREE MARKET ECONOMY.

Yes, go tell that to his victims' families.

Face it, most of the time American policy of installing "fascist" dictators helped the country in the long run.

Nicaragua is a brilliant example of that. Vietnam's pre-war government was US supported, too ya know? Sure helped them. Iran isn't the only example.

We never offically ruled everybody, and are helping everybody out at the same time.

Yes, now you unofficially rule most of the globe, and are "helping" people with the difficult task to choose their government.

America is now the fountain head of Western Civilization. Anyone want to go against that?

What I meant is that Western civilization isn't only American

You completely ignored my point about birth rates, and rapidly growing Muslim populations. Age and the fact that the only people having kids wear headscarves was one of my main points, so counter THAT, HUH PUNK!?!

Dunno what it has to do with welfare. If you work and pay your taxes for an amount of time (can't remember how many years), you get a 1 year aid from the government to find another job. After that year, you're on your own, with a minimal aid to buy food.

France
9.1% (2002 est.)
Germany
9.8% (2002 est.)
USofA, which is alot bigger and alot more economically diverse
5.8% (2002)

Great, but it wasn't my point. 9% unemployment isn't enough to stop a country from growing nor collaborating with its neighbours.

Bronze is more of a solid then an Elephant dancing on the top of a Crem Brulla (FUCK FRENCH SPELLING!)

Yes, well, you can't compare economically the US and France, for a start.
My point is that while the EU's economy is slowly growing or stagnating, the US experiences a period of recession. Spells Creme Brulee, BTW.

And the KKK and WCotC are RACIST organizations, not Nationalist.

Meh. You won't tell me there aren't *any* separatist militias in the states.

And by the way, racist, nationalist... same scum. They will all have their heads chopped when the Revolution arises.

 

[Murdoch]

Man, I would really appreciate it if both CCR and PS woud stop spouting off like either of them are speaking for all Americans.

I for one appreciate it when foreigners, for lack of a better term, criticize the US. The biggest enemy of free speech is lack of dissent. Sander, Wooz, etc: thanks.

As for the article itself; meh. I think the argument that the French foreign minister makes about the US fighting, Europe funding and the UN feeding is unfortunately correct. I also beleive that Archie Bunker types will never respect European power until it can match the US in military terms, not just economic.

Then the progressive in me says that Europe has been mooching off American military supremecy for far too long and its about time Europe built a military to defend itself, so we could bring all our troops home. And then my selfish bastard side hopes that Europe never does, so the US can justify keeping troops around the globe in case Europeans go on another of their genocidal binges. But I digress.

 

[Brother None]

France
9.1% (2002 est.)
Germany
9.8% (2002 est.)
USofA, which is alot bigger and alot more economically diverse
5.8% (2002)

Missed a spot

Netherlands 3% (2002 est.)
United Kingdom 5.2% (2002 est.)
Sweden 4% (2002 est.)
Portugal 4.7% (2002 est.)
Austria 4.8% (2002 est.)
Greece 10.3% (2002 est.)
Spain 11.3% (2002 est.)

If you're going to argue "USA against the EU", it would be handy if you didn't just select numbers but calculated the average, don't you think?

Also, compare the above numbers to which one of these are "wellfare states", since you've been hacking that concept up. That'd be interesting. Big wellfare states? The Nertherlands, Sweden, Austria...not Greece, Spain or England

What's that? "Kharn, post the numbers for people below the poverty line" Well, those numbers don't prove much, but let's, for fun
United Kingdom 17%
United States 12.7% (2001 est.)

Two non-big-wellfare-states?! Gasp!

France 6.4% (1999)

Hmmm...too many N/A's there, darn

 

[Murdoch]

Hmm, so how do you know if all the countries you cited define poverty the same way Kharn? Just asking.

 

[Brother None]

Hmm, so how do you know if all the countries you cited define poverty the same way Kharn? Just asking.

That's why I said "those figures don't mean much". I have no way of telling, but I do suspect, though, that the variation between how its measured is slim between countries such as the UK and France, and not that big compaired to the US either, so there would be some basis for comparison, especially since the difference in percentages is HUGE

 

[Paladin Solo]

Man, I would really appreciate it if both CCR and PS woud stop spouting off like either of them are speaking for all Americans.

I for one appreciate it when foreigners, for lack of a better term, criticize the US. The biggest enemy of free speech is lack of dissent. Sander, Wooz, etc: thanks.

Man, I could say the same thing to you. Stop spouting off like you are speaking for all Americans.

Murdoch, first off, I wasn't speaking for all Americans. Second, I was trying to argue my point, just like you are now. But, heh, if you can't take that, then just say so. Criticism is ok, hell, criticize all you want, but don't tell me or imply that you're better and being patriotic is evil.

 

[Murdoch]

Man, I could say the same thing to you. Stop spouting off like you are speaking for all Americans.

Did you not notice the "I for one" part?

Murdoch, first off, I wasn't speaking for all Americans. Second, I was trying to argue my point, just like you are now. But, heh, if you can't take that, then just say so. Criticism is ok, hell, criticize all you want, but don't tell me or imply that you're better and being patriotic is evil.

Whenver you make statements with such a broad pen they can be interpreted as you speaking for all Americans, even if you didn't mean it that way. And again, you miss the point that patriotism is the preponderance of criticism. You are implying that my criticism of your incorrect brand of patriotism is unpatriotic, which is awfully ironic.

Oh hell, I give up, I can't take your criticism PS, you win

 

[Paladin Solo]

Also, I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I prefer...

I also find it...

Murdoch, like I said, I wasn't speaking for all Americans. Nor did I say or imply that you were unpatriotic.

P.S. incorrect brand of patriotism? What are you talking about? I said I could take criticism, just not any "we're better than you because..." crap.

 

[welsh]

Your nationalism has killed millions, and is still rampant across half the continent.

Tsk Tsk.
American suprematism has killed millions and is still rampant across half the globe.

CC, ever heard of Pol Pot?
Ever heard of Agent Orange in Vietnam?
Ever heard of Pinochet?
Ever heard of the Irani Shah?
Suharto? Indonesia? Ring a bell?

*pops patriotic bubble*

Wooz, I think you overstep yourself here.

Polpot was supported by China
Agent Orange was a defoliant that caused cancer, not exactly mustard gas
Pinochet came to power with significant Chilean support
The Shah of Iran and his father were in power a long time, had lots of domestic support as well and modernized his country
Suharto- came to power overthrowing a weak Sukarno, but was a military coup.

Yes, the US had some role in these, but dropping the blame on the US as the main cause or primary cause behind much of this is overstepping it.

Babboon wrote-

Don't forget North Korea.

CCR, I doubt any Vietnamese person today wishes North Vietnam had lost. You went there, fucked up the country, and left leaving a lot of fucked up things. I think that's mainly what's bothering them today.

North Korea invaded South Korea led by T-54 tanks given to them by the Russians after the US had withdrawn from South Korea.

And there are many Vietnamese who hate the communist government in power, which has left Vietnam an economic ruin.

Regardless, you guys are derailing this thread.

The US was set to be a world power by the end of the 19th Century because, economically, it was outproducing much of Europe. That US was recognized as a world power only 20 years later (after WW I) came as a result of it's participation in that war.

But the economic capacity was already in place.

I am wondering if Europe isn't there already. Nuclear weapons have, arguably, made major war unthinkable. But countries still compete and they can be measured by other forms of power, especially economic.

You cannot be a powerful military power without having economc power. Why? Economies of Scale, for one. For another militaries are only the results of state economic practices (one must pay for militaries- through revenue extraction). Thirdly, as the article argues, the EU is capable of frustrating US economic power, as the US is capable of doing the same to Europe through anti-trust law.

PErhaps the measure of power in the modern, globalized age, is not military but economic power- and in these the principle armies are multinational corporations.

 

[SkynetV4]

Which unfortunately will bury countries like mine. Sometimes, I wonder if in whatever plans those economic giants have, there is a part that involves third world countries developing into bigger economies or if we are more beneficial (to them) as good sources of expendable, cheap labor.

 

[Wooz]

Regardless, you guys are derailing this thread.

Yup, it seems your "American Imperialism" thread filters into the other discussions. Scary.

Wooz, I think you overstep yourself here.

Polpot was supported by China

And the US, during the conflict with Vietnam. The US couldn't risk another communist state "model country" to spread around southeast Asia. More on this later

Agent Orange was a defoliant that caused cancer, not exactly mustard gas

Never said it was mustard gas-like. Not only causes cancer, but stays in the food chain for ages, completely destroying it, children are deformed at birth, etc etc. Now how much about that was known at the time it was employed is up to debate.

And there are many Vietnamese who hate the communist government in power, which has left Vietnam an economic ruin.

And the US didn't "lose" the Vietnam conflict, as it reached its primary objective: destroy the country to avoid it joining the ranks of models of communist states with China, Cuba, The URSS...
Hard to become a model when the country is completely ruined. The commie government significantly aggravated and still makes the situation worse today, but the main cause of Vietnam's economical impotence is linked to the war.

Pinochet came to power with significant Chilean support

Yes, by extreme right fanatics. The military coup wouldn't be successful without US approval/support.

The Shah of Iran and his father were in power a long time, had lots of domestic support as well and modernized his country

"Modernized", giving exclusive exploatation rights to US oil giants. The trouble started when the government came in conflict with the population's needs and tried to maintain itself by whatever means possible.

Suharto- came to power overthrowing a weak Sukarno, but was a military coup.

Same as Chile.

Yes, the US had some role in these, but dropping the blame on the US as the main cause or primary cause behind much of this is overstepping it.

I'm pointing out the US played a role in those. In some cases it's a crucial role, but not the root cause of the problem. Agreed on that.

I know this looks like I'm some kind of conspiration-theorist claiming that all that is evil in the world comes from a brain in a vat commanding the US.

I'm not.

The US was set to be a world power by the end of the 19th Century because, economically, it was outproducing much of Europe. That US was recognized as a world power only 20 years later (after WW I) came as a result of it's participation in that war.

But the economic capacity was already in place.

I am wondering if Europe isn't there already. Nuclear weapons have, arguably, made major war unthinkable. But countries still compete and they can be measured by other forms of power, especially economic.

So you're comparing the EU's current economic situation to pre-WW1 US (if I understood this correctly, that is)?

I'm no expert in world economics, but what I've learned in High School is that, since the half of the 19th century, the United States were significantly ahead in production capability. I'm not sure if the EU can compete with the US on that ground.

Perhaps the measure of power in the modern, globalized age, is not military but economic power- and in these the principle armies are multinational corporations.

If those multinational corporations are run the way the WTO is run today...

 

[Loxley]

*laughs* runner and solo i love you guys, you are so hillarious, and at the same time you guys make me feel sad. You know i had been on a liveaboard for ten days traveling with four americans. And they were really great people, it is good to come back and get pulled down on earth once more.

EU as a super power, nah i don't want that, cause norway is not a part of Eu and then we would be like canada, and i'm damn sure those annoying swedish bastards would come over the border to remind us that we are not a part of that superpower. It will have to wait until the EU becomes more democratic, and until norway has either joined the EU or destroyed sweden.

Ahh it is good to feel superior.

 

[John Uskglass]

INdonesia? YOu mean, go through a lot of internal combat, get a load of dictator who oppress people and milk the country for their own money? Yeah, that's a good idea.
Besides that, this is pure speculation, CCR. YOu state it like it's a fact.

Indonesia's economy is going thru the roof. And it is on the road to Democracy. Vietnam would have probably surpassed that, and gone thru to the Democracy which was inevitable.

Face it, the vast majority of the time, a far right government, unless overthrone by a leftist or other one, will eventually become Democratic, while a far Left one will not. Happened with Caing Kai-Shek in Taiwan, happened across all of the South American continent.....

NO. That's the entire PRINCIPLE of a welfare state. Tsch.

In theroy, nothing is wrong with it. But in practice, it cripple's half of Europe's economy, and is so ineffective as to kill an older generation of Frenchman.

Oh, no, muslims! Let's go run and hide!
SHUT.UP! Right now. I have had it with your bigoted, andti-social, prejudiced BULLSHIT statements you use EVERY GODDAMN TIME stating nothing but "No, muslims, you suck. YOu have them."
DIE!

Nice Saidism here- "O NO, HE THOUGHT A HUGE IMMIGRATION OF MUSLIMS IS BAD!! RACIST!!"
By 2020, most of the Children in the Netherlands will be Muslim. Which means that most of them will be either immigrants or the children of immigrants.

Same thing happened to Lebanon, and that did'nt work well did it?

Don't acuse me of being a bigot again. It's really getting on my nerves. I don't like Islam......yeah.......but what the hell does that have to do with me hating a billion muslims? Nevermind the fact that I am the only person here trying to learn a Muslim languages?

Population growth can actually be bad, since it tends to stretch the resources.

That is certainly true, but we do not have that kind of population growth, while negative populationg growth is a total fucking disaster in every imagineable way, like you and most of your European friends have.

The EU is not a state, because that's not what it's about.

So, you are not a Federalist?

ANd the economy in the EU is currently in a dip, and it will rise again. It's the principle of economy: the conjuncture movement. RIse and fall, CCR.

There is such a thing as a long term ressecion, and Europe seems to be in it for the reasons I have already listed.

If a welfare state is inherently bad, then WHY.THE.FUCK are we one of the most succesful countries in the entire world?

Horrible misquote. I never said they where inherintly bad. Never. They are'nt, at all. But in the situation Europe is in, with negative population growth, and most of the population growth coming from largely angry, fed up Muslims who lack the money to support a geritocracy's welfare, spells serious shit.

THe rate of birth does not really matter. Lastly, the fact that most are not even "really" DUtch is also a stupid notion. "Oh, no, they have non-Dutch parents, I hate them! They suck!"

I said that? I don't think they suck, as quite a few of them are Turkish, and the only predjudice I have against Arabs I am trying to get past. Again, thanks for the Saidism.

The rate of assimilation is nowhere near the rate of immigration. True that that might change, and eventually as immigration stops there will be time for assimilation, but this is diffirent, as there is no end in sight, and Muslims-in any situation-tend to be the hardest groups to assimilate.

My point was that the bad history of nationalism you were referring to (WOrld wars etc.) were DIFFERENT kinds of nationalism than the ones we have now. The problems we have now are mainly seperatist problems, instead of nation v. nation problems.

A good point. But you still, despite what you say, have some of that, and we have neither of them.


And stop getting so angry at me. I don't think I have ever exploded in your face like that.

 

[Brother None]

Regardless, you guys are derailing this thread.

Why do you think I refuse to carry this aspect of our debate outside of the lessons of WW II thread?

And tread carefully, people, you're totttering near over-stepping certain boundaries

Good job on keeping your cool there, CC, but please stop sayign "Nevermind the fact that I am the only person here trying to learn a Muslim languages?" as if that means you somehow have a more open mind to other cultures. It only means you *can* understand the culture better, not that you actually do or are less biased in your understanding...

 

[Wooz]

And tread carefully, people, you're totttering near over-stepping certain boundaries

Such as? (no sarcasm/irony intended)

I'm sorry, can't see how this thread differs radically with other ones in flame/derail categories. The thread derailed quite a bit, ok; but then again a lot of threads derail after a page or two, non? Didn't notice more hostility than usually... No pictures going against the forum rules, no blatant flames, no spamming, no flamebait, no quote pyramids...

 

[Brother None]

Such as? (no sarcasm/irony intended)

I have had it with your bigoted, andti-social, prejudiced BULLSHIT statements you use EVERY GODDAMN TIME stating nothing but "No, muslims, you suck. YOu have them."
DIE!

Criticising a thread, for all clearity, doesn't equal criticising everyone, so don't take the above as a person attack. But once flaming and people getting annoyed at each other starts, it tends to spiral downwards.

 

[John Uskglass]

Good job on keeping your cool there, CC, but please stop sayign "Nevermind the fact that I am the only person here trying to learn a Muslim languages?" as if that means you somehow have a more open mind to other cultures. It only means you *can* understand the culture better, not that you actually do or are less biased in your understanding...

I actually do keep a fairly open mind. This schtick, it's just an internet persona. Except for the Muslim thing.

And you still don't understand that Turkish, despite probably being the most rational languge this side of Esperanto, which it actually influenced alot, is still really hard, and I am doing that despite the fact that I live in a nation with a miniscule Turkish population, as opposed to yours.

 

[Brother None]

I actually do keep a fairly open mind. This schtick, it's just an internet persona. Except for the Muslim thing.

Uh-huh, sure thing.

And you still don't understand that Turkish, despite probably being the most rational languge this side of Esperanto, which it actually influenced alot, is still really hard, and I am doing that despite the fact that I live in a nation with a miniscule Turkish population, as opposed to yours.

So? Why do you continue being proud of wasting your time?

 

[John Uskglass]

So? Why do you continue being proud of wasting your time?

Because my dream is too spend alot of time there. Heck, I've wanted to be an archeologist there sens Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.

 

[Johns Volition]

well they have great food there too... but if you ask me the languange sounds a little ruff... ützgür! (i'd wish to hear how you americans pronounce it )