Jacob, how can you say skin color isn't an issue anymore with all of the terrible racism surrounding soccer? The UEFA tournament was marred (yet again) by racist chants and slurs this summer.
Sorry, but I don't think Europeans are always as enlightened as they think they are.
Little World
@Jacob: "All of these were established to prevent war, so it kinda ruins things when someone begins to start wars with very little justification."
I understand this, but Obama has proxy wars going on in how many countries?.. Meanwhile, no wars ended.
"Obama is doing the same things, because now he does it with approval of the int. community, more or less."
THIS, is what is so baffling and dangerous. Why does he get free war pass? Because democrats don't start wars? (does not include covert, proxy, drone campaigns)
I suppose I would have no preference in that list of losers to meet the aliens. They look different, might even sound different, but the differences stop there.
@Dragline: Yes, many in the international community would praise US for "finally" electing a female president... It's tiresome, I want every possible variable of gender/race/sexual preference/religion/height/weight/age/hair, eye, skin pigmentation elected so I can stop hearing variations of this.
I do talk to many non-Americans, I've heard "Yay, black man!" many times, perhaps more than anything else.
I wasn't born in EU (parent was), but have visited maybe 12 times, have family there, hope to live there soon. I can say I feel an undercurrent of racism from UK/Netherlands/Italy/Russia more strongly than I do in the western US... Europeans are so quick to bring up the shameful racist episodes from US history, yet have perfect amnesia on similar European events.
I understand this, but Obama has proxy wars going on in how many countries?.. Meanwhile, no wars ended.
"Obama is doing the same things, because now he does it with approval of the int. community, more or less."
THIS, is what is so baffling and dangerous. Why does he get free war pass? Because democrats don't start wars? (does not include covert, proxy, drone campaigns)
I suppose I would have no preference in that list of losers to meet the aliens. They look different, might even sound different, but the differences stop there.
@Dragline: Yes, many in the international community would praise US for "finally" electing a female president... It's tiresome, I want every possible variable of gender/race/sexual preference/religion/height/weight/age/hair, eye, skin pigmentation elected so I can stop hearing variations of this.
I do talk to many non-Americans, I've heard "Yay, black man!" many times, perhaps more than anything else.
I wasn't born in EU (parent was), but have visited maybe 12 times, have family there, hope to live there soon. I can say I feel an undercurrent of racism from UK/Netherlands/Italy/Russia more strongly than I do in the western US... Europeans are so quick to bring up the shameful racist episodes from US history, yet have perfect amnesia on similar European events.
-
jacob
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17125
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
- Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
- Contact:
Europe has a rich history of persecuting minorities (and different-thinking people many of whom fled to the US) but it's generally based on culture (especially religion), not physical characteristics. US is the other way around. I'm not saying that it's 100% one and 0% the other. Just that one continent is leaning one way [in its motivations and interpretations] and the other the other way. There are dumb people on both continents; they're humans after all.
The UN hands out the free war passes. If you wanna go to war, you ask the UN (all the other countries) which then takes a vote. If the UN says yes, you're good. If the UN says no and you go anyway you're bad. It's probably best to think of politics in terms of sports (it's a good model for human competitive behavior). In general, it is necessary to play by the rules in order to have a game. However, when the ref looks away, it's common to cheat a little. Similarly, there are rules of war (Geneva convention) and rules for going to war.
The UN hands out the free war passes. If you wanna go to war, you ask the UN (all the other countries) which then takes a vote. If the UN says yes, you're good. If the UN says no and you go anyway you're bad. It's probably best to think of politics in terms of sports (it's a good model for human competitive behavior). In general, it is necessary to play by the rules in order to have a game. However, when the ref looks away, it's common to cheat a little. Similarly, there are rules of war (Geneva convention) and rules for going to war.
I definitely agree with Jacob, concerning why the rest of the world cares about the US Presidential election. It's understandable considering how much influence we have, even when we don't intend to exert it.
@JohnnyH
The UN ref is fine when the wars are "clean" wars using only special operations troops, planes, and drones.
I'm sure the U.S. ambassadors to the U.N. and the more powerful countries made respectful "we are pretending to ask permission, but really aren't" stops to the other important players. Bush didn't do this. Heck, he purposefully picked a UN ambassador who was a jackass. He didn't play the game.
The game: The other powers/nobles just want the lone superpower/king to acknowledge that they exist and matter to a certain extent. The powers/nobles get restless and worried when the superpower/king might be powerful enough to ignore them all together, as this would mean their position may be threatened. Of course, this also means the superpower/king position is threatened.
Easier to just play the game. Especially, when you are operating with a huge homefield advantage of having been the prime driver in setting up these world organizations.
Yemen and Somalia are good examples of "clean" wars. Surprisingly, the Somali's don't seem that bothered by our air and drone strikes. Of course, living in true chaos is hardening.
Great article on the new "clean" wars (my term).
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/08/somalia-drones/
Note: This does not mean I agree with these wars.
@JohnnyH
The UN ref is fine when the wars are "clean" wars using only special operations troops, planes, and drones.
I'm sure the U.S. ambassadors to the U.N. and the more powerful countries made respectful "we are pretending to ask permission, but really aren't" stops to the other important players. Bush didn't do this. Heck, he purposefully picked a UN ambassador who was a jackass. He didn't play the game.
The game: The other powers/nobles just want the lone superpower/king to acknowledge that they exist and matter to a certain extent. The powers/nobles get restless and worried when the superpower/king might be powerful enough to ignore them all together, as this would mean their position may be threatened. Of course, this also means the superpower/king position is threatened.
Easier to just play the game. Especially, when you are operating with a huge homefield advantage of having been the prime driver in setting up these world organizations.
Yemen and Somalia are good examples of "clean" wars. Surprisingly, the Somali's don't seem that bothered by our air and drone strikes. Of course, living in true chaos is hardening.
Great article on the new "clean" wars (my term).
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/08/somalia-drones/
Note: This does not mean I agree with these wars.