I could point the finger at my government, but I live in a republic. Those leaders were elected into office, and a lof of them are now just doing whatever they have to in order to appease voters and win the next election, instead of risking their jobs by trying to really fix things. The problem is that appeasing the voters and fixing things are not the same thing. They ought to be.Thyunda said:
What does the world have against America?
- Thread starter Pierce Graham
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Laughably enough, the reason we stayed out of the two world wars so long is exactly what you wanted us to do during the 'Communism Crisis.' Namely, keep to ourselves and mind our own business. Selling weapons (For dirt cheap, by the way) was the only way those who wanted to get involved could. Also, it wasn't just weapons - America supplied the Allies with just about everything imaginable.Cazza said:
You can't have it both ways. Granted, I'm not saying the Vietnam War was a good thing, but, hey - We weren't there first (Looking at you, France).
As for why people hat Americans... it probably has to do with exposure. There's probably not a single country in the world that doesn't get news coverage on the US, but tell me this: how many of you (In countries other then the US) get daily, or even weekly news coverage of Peru? Georgia? Japan? Not many, I'd venture (Unless, of course, you live there).
That...Thats just dumb. It was never "really" abused in the UK but when it even looked like it was starting to become a problem limits were put in place on donation sizes and your not allowed to publically campaign for someone. Even if they did I think the media here would basically kill the campaign outright the moment it happens. Irony time, it wont be changed because it would require someone who use it to gain power to change it. Who in their right mind would do that?ComradeJim270 said:
I know its going a way back but in both world wars Britain was at Total War. So was Germany actually (or near enough). A state of total war is far more complete in terms of military capacity and spending than the US is at present. A few years ago the Royal Navy might have bought the CarriersComradeJim270 said:
They have recently commissioned 3 new ones. Saying the tech is illegal to export is a bit....off isnt it? If the government wants it sold they are the ones making the laws, this just comes back to the fact the policy makers really have little interest in solving the problem. Most of the countries in a position to buy that sort of aircraft are more than capable of developing their own if they really wanted to, so if its a case of "national secrets" its a little misplaced. On the other hand just scrap em. Time is bad right now but 4 years ago the value of scrap was amazing. Ok not carrier amazing but an object is only worth what someone will pay for it. Ultimately a carrier is worth noting if noone wants it.
Lewis Black has it right
America has a bad rep mostly because of the country itself and the government. Yes there are some really ignorant people in this country that go to other countries and make Americans like me look bad, but for the most part we are nice people. The government and the major companies in it tend to do things that other countries frown upon, usually exploiting other countries through money or resources.
There have been a few votes on "rudest citizens" and it generally ends up being the French, not Americans. I think America is like that high school student that has made a name for itself like the class clown would and instead of correcting people it reinforces it because why the hell not?
Remember Team America? AMERICA! Fuck yea!
Personally I love being an American, I love the freedom to say whatever the hell I want and have a chance to be whomever I want to be. Not every country has those freedoms. However, I am not proud of my country, nor its government.
America has a bad rep mostly because of the country itself and the government. Yes there are some really ignorant people in this country that go to other countries and make Americans like me look bad, but for the most part we are nice people. The government and the major companies in it tend to do things that other countries frown upon, usually exploiting other countries through money or resources.
There have been a few votes on "rudest citizens" and it generally ends up being the French, not Americans. I think America is like that high school student that has made a name for itself like the class clown would and instead of correcting people it reinforces it because why the hell not?
Remember Team America? AMERICA! Fuck yea!
Personally I love being an American, I love the freedom to say whatever the hell I want and have a chance to be whomever I want to be. Not every country has those freedoms. However, I am not proud of my country, nor its government.
Stealth planes are worth about nothing in scrap - their extreme price is related to R&D and manufacturing. It would be like taking apart a book and expecting more then a penny for the scrap paper.Talshere said:I know its going a way back but in both world wars Britain was at Total War. So was Germany actually (or near enough). A state of total war is far more complete in terms of military capacity and spending than the US is at present. A few years ago the Royal Navy might have bought the Carriers
Saying the tech is illegal to export is a bit....off isnt it? If the government wants it sold they are the ones making the laws, this just comes back to the fact the policy makers really have little interest in solving the problem. Most of the countries in a position to buy that sort of aircraft are more than capable of developing their own if they really wanted to, so if its a case of "national secrets" its a little misplaced. On the other hand just scrap em. Time is bad right now but 4 years ago the value of scrap was amazing. Ok not carrier amazing but an object is only worth what someone will pay for it. Ultimately a carrier is worth noting if noone wants it.
As for carriers... modern carriers are actually pretty cheap to run, all things considering. It's mostly just the initial cost, and then plutonium/uranium fuel (Which would be the problem). A Nimitz class carrier cost slightly less to run then an entire F-15 wing, if the numbers I read a few months back can be believed.
In any case, I don't understand how anyone can justify decommissioning a super carrier that's not even close to the end of its life span. No mater the cost, its cheap as hell, considering that its pretty much the most powerful weapon currently in existence (Besides some weaponized small pox I KNOW Russia's got somewhere.).
I'm just curious... whats your point of reference on this?Caramel Frappe said:
Trying to act as world police for 60 years when we have the UN to do that yet before that hating the world themselves (see: US Isolationism); Not wanting to be a part of the world wars until the very last second, which both of those included "the world"; even considering a republican for presidency; the bible belt; the fact that their economy is doomed to fail as it is based on consumerism (things expiring / breaking), and now in the 21st century continuing that practice for their economy even though there are no infinite resources on this planet = doomed to fail.
I like the country overall, but they have more negatives than most other western countries, yet so much blind patriotism (the French are far, far worse though). I don't even get why they have a US flag on almost every public building, as though they need to remind themselves/visitors where they are. The only thing I can say I favour are the F16/18/22's over the Eurofighter, and their fast food is done damningly good.
I like the country overall, but they have more negatives than most other western countries, yet so much blind patriotism (the French are far, far worse though). I don't even get why they have a US flag on almost every public building, as though they need to remind themselves/visitors where they are. The only thing I can say I favour are the F16/18/22's over the Eurofighter, and their fast food is done damningly good.
I've had an American family stay with us for 3 weeks. They are friends of my step mums that she hasn't seen for yonks, so they decided to come pay her (and us) a visit. There was a fat mother with a big mouth, who liked to down a bottle of wine every night, which made her even louder. There was a skinny father, who barely said a word the entire 3 weeks. I could actually stand him. And then there was the spoilt 8 year old fat daughter, who would just sit there watching me as I played games. Not watching the game. She would watch ME. No idea why. The most annoying thing though was their accent. They had a really deep, Southern accent, which pissed me off to no end whenever they would open their mouths. And as the fat mother would get drunk every night, the annoying accent would be heard from further and further distances. I really hope I never see those people again. I am not going to go to America, ever. I cannot stand that accent, and those people have ruined my perception about the country.
I don't know about everyone else, but this is why I don't like America.
(also, the patriotism I always see in the media, movies, etc, is sickening. Not a fan)
I don't know about everyone else, but this is why I don't like America.
(also, the patriotism I always see in the media, movies, etc, is sickening. Not a fan)
AccursedTheory said:Stealth planes are worth about nothing in scrap - their extreme price is related to R&D and manufacturing. It would be like taking apart a book and expecting more then a penny for the scrap paper.Talshere said:I know its going a way back but in both world wars Britain was at Total War. So was Germany actually (or near enough). A state of total war is far more complete in terms of military capacity and spending than the US is at present. A few years ago the Royal Navy might have bought the Carriers
Saying the tech is illegal to export is a bit....off isnt it? If the government wants it sold they are the ones making the laws, this just comes back to the fact the policy makers really have little interest in solving the problem. Most of the countries in a position to buy that sort of aircraft are more than capable of developing their own if they really wanted to, so if its a case of "national secrets" its a little misplaced. On the other hand just scrap em. Time is bad right now but 4 years ago the value of scrap was amazing. Ok not carrier amazing but an object is only worth what someone will pay for it. Ultimately a carrier is worth noting if noone wants it.
As for carriers... modern carriers are actually pretty cheap to run, all things considering. It's mostly just the initial cost, and then plutonium/uranium fuel (Which would be the problem). A Nimitz class carrier cost slightly less to run then an entire F-15 wing, if the numbers I read a few months back can be believed.
In any case, I don't understand how anyone can justify decommissioning a super carrier that's not even close to the end of its life span. No mater the cost, its cheap as hell, considering that its pretty much the most powerful weapon currently in existence (Besides some weaponized small pox I KNOW Russia's got somewhere.).
Fair point on the carriers. I didnt know they were that cheap to run. *Shrug*
Also, be fair, pretty much every developed country has the capacity to manufacture within a shot time or already has significant and potent bio weapons. Some of the crap our pharmaceutical companies play around with on a daily basis could wipe out a country. I dare to think what our own military R&D departments have their hands on.
The thing is, total war is total mobilization, but it also involves destroying the enemies ability to fight... part of the reason the US emerged as a superpower at that time is that the British military had taken such a beating by the time the war was over that it had been eclipsed in power by the US and USSR, both of which had only been strengthened by the war that devastated everyone else. Plus, this was after a full-scale war. Countries know how to demobilize and disarm after that, it's part of the process. But doing that on a huge scale in a time of peace is... tricky. I'm just saying it would take time.Talshere said:I know its going a way back but in both world wars Britain was at Total War. So was Germany actually (or near enough). A state of total war is far more complete in terms of military capacity and spending than the US is at present. A few years ago the Royal Navy might have bought the Carriers
Oh, and I did hear the Royal Navy was getting a supercarrier but that it was going to be British-made.
I don't understand it very well, I guess congressional approval is required to do it, and that doesn't seem likely, especially since right now they probably couldn't pass a vote that roses smell nice. I do know Australia showed some interest in buying F-22s (the new stealth fighters) and Lockheed Martin couldn't sell them any without congressional approval. Maybe the process is different since the government owns the F-117s, but it just illustrates the point that the US military jealously guards it's technological superiority wherever possible, which means a lot of the stuff being taken out of commission would just endup in bunkers and hangars, gathering dust, not dollars.Talshere said:
Anyway, as I said, it's all just a symptom of a larger problem. At least I think I said that. I'm sleepy and I should probably go to bed. Shame, because this is an interesting discussion.
Well firstly there's the fact that they're the largest economic power and the head of the western world at this stage, this means that their actions are under very close scrutiny and that much is expected of them.
Secondly there would be the foreign policy of the last administration of "We invade whoever the hell we like for whatever reason we like because we're America! Screw the rest of the world, either you bend over or you're next!" which did little to endear America to the rest of the world.
One shouldn't overestimate the hatred towards America though - You hear about it because you talk with Europeans. The talks Europeans would have with nationalist Chinamen or Russians, provided the language barrier could be reduced, would be far nastier if they persisted long enough.
Secondly there would be the foreign policy of the last administration of "We invade whoever the hell we like for whatever reason we like because we're America! Screw the rest of the world, either you bend over or you're next!" which did little to endear America to the rest of the world.
One shouldn't overestimate the hatred towards America though - You hear about it because you talk with Europeans. The talks Europeans would have with nationalist Chinamen or Russians, provided the language barrier could be reduced, would be far nastier if they persisted long enough.
Well, what can I say, we learned from the best. And you did teach us a lot about how to deal with pesky natives. Well, sorta. Conquering China because, hey, why not, right? That was inspired. You could say we misunderstood that point though. We thought the idea was to get rid of the drugs coming to us, not ship them to other countries. Our bad.BiscuitTrouser said:
It was the understandable knee jerk reaction of having once been subjects of a foreign Imperial government, well, not foreign to you, but you understand, right?BiscuitTrouser said:
We care. Americans, contrary to what you may have been told, do have big hearts. It's the only things that keep us upright after we eat the things we do.BiscuitTrouser said:
No more forgotten than the Welsh or Scots. You know, the native peoples of the British Isles. The only surviving native people.BiscuitTrouser said:
Well, the forces invading from Beta Andromedae are a persistent threat, and one we must remain vigilant against since they seek to sexually violate our rural, and possibly inbread, population.BiscuitTrouser said:
Although in a moment of clarity, I agree that US Immigration policy is fucked.
Well, what can I say, we learned from the best. Though to be fair, we haven't actually gotten that one really rolling yet. Turns out, it's hard to institute the president as head of our church seeing as we have too damn many.BiscuitTrouser said:
People hate America because the worst of you gets the most exposure. Being the worlds last superpower, and the influence of music and movies, means that most people who see the news see stuff about America as well.
But we never hear of Bill Smith, the man who works hard, looks after his family, gets a degree at night school and volunteers for charity.
All we ever hear about are the Scientologists, the homophobes and the racists. I know its only a small minority but its the small minority that gets the most "air time".
Its the same with Terroism. 99% of Muslims are hard working, family people who don't care about killing Jews, but all you get exposed to is the 1% of maniacs, which clouds your views and gives the implications that all muslims are terrorists, which is bullshit.
The same with america. Sure 99% of you are intelligent, hard working good people, but all the rest of the world ever sees are the gay-hating, flag worshipping, racist, ignorant wankers, and so it clouds our view.
But we never hear of Bill Smith, the man who works hard, looks after his family, gets a degree at night school and volunteers for charity.
All we ever hear about are the Scientologists, the homophobes and the racists. I know its only a small minority but its the small minority that gets the most "air time".
Its the same with Terroism. 99% of Muslims are hard working, family people who don't care about killing Jews, but all you get exposed to is the 1% of maniacs, which clouds your views and gives the implications that all muslims are terrorists, which is bullshit.
The same with america. Sure 99% of you are intelligent, hard working good people, but all the rest of the world ever sees are the gay-hating, flag worshipping, racist, ignorant wankers, and so it clouds our view.
Indeed, and we will have no planes for them because the carries finish in like 2016 while the planes wont be ready till like 2022 because they decommissioned all the HarriersComradeJim270 said:The thing is, total war is total mobilization, but it also involves destroying the enemies ability to fight... part of the reason the US emerged as a superpower at that time is that the British military had taken such a beating by the time the war was over that it had been eclipsed in power by the US and USSR, both of which had only been strengthened by the war that devastated everyone else. Plus, this was after a full-scale war. Countries know how to demobilize and disarm after that, it's part of the process. But doing that on a huge scale in a time of peace is... tricky. I'm just saying it would take time.Talshere said:I know its going a way back but in both world wars Britain was at Total War. So was Germany actually (or near enough). A state of total war is far more complete in terms of military capacity and spending than the US is at present. A few years ago the Royal Navy might have bought the Carriers
Oh, and I did hear the Royal Navy was getting a supercarrier but that it was going to be British-made.
Ah well, its not like we need em.My point is that while you say the US mlatary guards its secrets, the technology is such that its not really any more advanced than any other 1st world country. They wont sell any f-22's to Australia but your not telling me they are really that much better than say the Euro Fighter? Any first world country could build this stuff if it wanted too. Easily. Not selling them then is just pointless because theyl just make their own or buy a slight different design from a different 1st world country.ComradeJim270 said:
Yes. I hear Breakfast calling
Gn.
The US government has mandated that no further research be done on bioweapons, with the exception of cures. USAMRID, of Fort Detrick, USED to have a bioweapons program, run on the basis that if they could create bioweapons that were likely to be manufactured by other nations, they could proactively create countermeasures.Talshere said:AccursedTheory said:Stealth planes are worth about nothing in scrap - their extreme price is related to R&D and manufacturing. It would be like taking apart a book and expecting more then a penny for the scrap paper.Talshere said:I know its going a way back but in both world wars Britain was at Total War. So was Germany actually (or near enough). A state of total war is far more complete in terms of military capacity and spending than the US is at present. A few years ago the Royal Navy might have bought the Carriers
Saying the tech is illegal to export is a bit....off isnt it? If the government wants it sold they are the ones making the laws, this just comes back to the fact the policy makers really have little interest in solving the problem. Most of the countries in a position to buy that sort of aircraft are more than capable of developing their own if they really wanted to, so if its a case of "national secrets" its a little misplaced. On the other hand just scrap em. Time is bad right now but 4 years ago the value of scrap was amazing. Ok not carrier amazing but an object is only worth what someone will pay for it. Ultimately a carrier is worth noting if noone wants it.
As for carriers... modern carriers are actually pretty cheap to run, all things considering. It's mostly just the initial cost, and then plutonium/uranium fuel (Which would be the problem). A Nimitz class carrier cost slightly less to run then an entire F-15 wing, if the numbers I read a few months back can be believed.
In any case, I don't understand how anyone can justify decommissioning a super carrier that's not even close to the end of its life span. No mater the cost, its cheap as hell, considering that its pretty much the most powerful weapon currently in existence (Besides some weaponized small pox I KNOW Russia's got somewhere.).
Fair point on the carriers. I didnt know they were that cheap to run. *Shrug*
Also, be fair, pretty much every developed country has the capacity to manufacture within a shot time or already has significant and potent bio weapons. Some of the crap our pharmaceutical companies play around with on a daily basis could wipe out a country. I dare to think what our own military R&D departments have their hands on.
Fort Detrick has been out of bioweapon creation for over 3 decades. Most of the stock of weapons created there have been destroyed 9in some cases, entirely, which is probably a bad thing). The primary focus is now on counteracting natural pathogens, creating equipment and standard procedure for counter-bioweapon deployments, and being a second opinion for the US, when the CDC's answer is questionable.
Actually, recently, the Army's USAMRID program has become quite militant in its role as front line defenders against disease. They've gone head to head with both WHO and the CDC over matters such as Ebola (The most dangerous thing the US Army has, completely natural) and small pox. They strongly disagreed with the destruction of WHO's small pox vaccine stockpile (Cost - 10s of billions of dollars to replace), and have actively petitioned to have Small Pox samples remain is existence (The CDC/WHO wants all samples and data on Small Pox's DNA structure destroyed, which is kind of like throwing away all the guns and hoping no one remembers how to make more of them).
So, to my point - A civilian organization (CDC) actually has MORE DANGEROUS pathogens stored then the US's own Army. Something to think about.
Actually false. US airplanes don't cost billions in R&D because their construction and technology is common knowledge.Talshere said:My point is that while you say the US mlatary guards its secrets, the technology is such that its not really any more advanced than any other 1st world country. They wont sell any f-22's to Australia but your not telling me they are really that much better than say the Euro Fighter? Any first world country could build this stuff if it wanted too. Easily. Not selling them then is just pointless because theyl just make their own or buy a slight different design from a different 1st world country.
Yes. I hear Breakfast calling
Gn.
The F-22 cost so much because it has dozens, if not hundreds, of technological break throughs that no one else, at this time, possesses (Well, Britain maybe. I think we still owe them for Chobham Armor). Just because those technological leaps don't translate into a fighter craft that can fly in space and break mach47 doesn't mean they are any less out of reach by other countries who have not started the research.
For example - The PAINT on the B-2 bomber is just now starting to become available to other countries, after they spent billions on its research. And its still not as good as what the US could field. And that shits old as sin.
Because there's a lot of outspoken Americans who are both arrogant and ignorant enough to annoy the crap out of the rest of the world.