Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rolan7]

It's not like NATO invaded Iraq or anything
Okay sorry, I'm done venting.

[Frumple]

We actually are kinda' assholes in general on foreign subjects, though.* Even below the governmental/corporate level. Like, I'd probably be pretty accurate calling myself better than most americans (or at least most of the ones I live near) on that subject, and I'd still call myself a fair bit of an asshole in regards to what I'm aware of, what does and doesn't bother me, attempts to connect with other (non-english speaking) countries, etc., etc.

Like... I get most folks here, and plenty of individuals all over the nation, aren't really jackasses (or at least try to mitigate it) when it comes to foreign matters, be they countries, cultures, or people. But, uh. Quite a lot are. I'm of the opinion it's a good idea to own up to that, m'self, and either do something about it (to whatever extent you can) or at least acknowledge the extent that foreign pathos for the US isn't exactly groundless.

*And fairly specific assholes for certain nations and areas. We aaaarrreeee kiiiiiinda' fairly substantially responsible for several hundred thousand dead civilians over the last decade or so, after all, among all sorts of other shit, and most of the actions that lead to that got rather substantial domestic support, even after it was pretty broadly known the reasons we did it were more than somewhat shoddy ones.

[penguinofhonor]

After America demonized everyone who didn't want to invade with us. There are still places that avoid using the term "French fries" because of that.

[Wolfhunter107]

Particularly when it's Europeans who enjoy better labor rights, education, and actual representative democracy.  Thanks in part to our extravagant spending on world peacekeeping.  But no, sure, we're the big bad assholes.

To be fair, WWII ended half a century ago, but the US is still prepared for total war tomorrow. It doesn't help kick the habit of invading countries to spread DEMOCRACY before leaving them to be unstable and spawn terrorists.

Perhaps we'd have a smaller military if our more of our allies could carry their own weight militarily. Instead, they depend on us for protection while simultaneously bragging about their superiority.

[smjjames]

Particularly when it's Europeans who enjoy better labor rights, education, and actual representative democracy.  Thanks in part to our extravagant spending on world peacekeeping.  But no, sure, we're the big bad assholes.

To be fair, WWII ended half a century ago, but the US is still prepared for total war tomorrow. It doesn't help kick the habit of invading countries to spread DEMOCRACY before leaving them to be unstable and spawn terrorists.

Perhaps we'd have a smaller military if our more of our allies could carry their own weight militarily. Instead, they depend on us for protection while simultaneously bragging about their superiority.

Yeah, it would be nice if our allies could pick up some of the slack and carry their own weight better.

The Europeans mostly doing Libya was nice for once.

[Reelya]

I wouldn't really call Iraq 2003 a "NATO" operation. Almost all the actual NATO countries had nothing to do with it. USA, UK, Spain, Poland were the only NATO nations involved in the military operation. Poland had only recently joined NATO at the time, leaving only UK and Spain as the only traditional European NATO countries involved in the invasion.

The "Coalition of the Willing" contained more countries, but it's still quite lacking in the core NATO countries. Zero support from Germany, France, Canada. Most support came from Eastern Europe / ex-Warsaw Pact countries which only joined NATO after 2003.

[Rolan7]

We live in the third largest country by population, yes we have a lot of racists and xenophobes.  In the first-world sense.
China is sooo progressive, right?

After America demonized everyone who didn't want to invade with us. There are still places that avoid using the term "French fries" because of that.

... America.  Guilty of a bad meme.
And using geopolitical clout to try and reform a fucked-up tyranny, along with:
The UK
Australia
Denmark
The Netherlands
Italy
Spain
Poland
Azerbaijan
Thailand
South Korea
Ukraine
Bulgaria
El Salvador
Georgia
Slovakia
Latvia
Romania
Estonia
Some other countries

But yes, France didn't join us.  Clearly we were on a solo crusade against the will of the entire civilized world.  Please.

[Reelya]

UK and Spain were the only traditional NATO members who actually went along with the invasion. Linking NATO to the Iraq invasion is silly.

There was extensive reporting at the time that the US had made humanitarian aid dependent on verbal support for the war. That is why so many minuscule and emerging countries appear on the list. They're still an equal vote in the UN, regardless of population, so the Bush Administration was bankrolling them for UN votes.

Plus some foreign government leaders have publicly stated they were threatened to be bombed by the Bush administration if they didn't offer military support (e.g. Pakistan and the Afghanistan War). So this free and open process was steeped in bribery and extortion.

Plus, a number of countries that appeared on the Coalition of the Willing lists are US dependencies, and not really independent nations.

[mainiac]

I'm a bit unsympathetic to the idea that Europe doesn't carry it's weight militarily.  For one thing, the US spends about as much on inefficiencies as healthcare as our military so it's not like it's even the reason we can't have nice things.  For another thing, the europeans do have plenty of military hardware, they just tend to go with proven stuff instead of cutting edge.  I'd probably rather have an Abrams then a Leopard when it comes to keeping the Soviets from invading West Germany but there is a reason why Leopards are highly sought after in international arms sales markets and Abrams are not.  So is it really Germany's fault that they spend less on tanks by making a more cost effective, logistically simple vehicle?  Or look at the Eurofighter compared to F35s and how much more foreign countries want to buy Eurofighters.  And finally there is the matter of deployments.  Deploying troops is expensive and it means you have legacy healthcare costs and pensions for decades.  But most American costs for that boil down to Iraq.  Europe didn't want us invading Iraq.

[Rolan7]

UK and Spain were the only traditional NATO members who actually went along with the invasion. Linking NATO to the Iraq invasion is silly.

There was extensive reporting at the time that the US had made humanitarian aid dependent on verbal support for the war. That is why so many minuscule and emerging countries appear on the list. They're still an equal vote in the UN, regardless of population, so the Bush Administration was bankrolling them for UN votes.

I'd be more sympathetic to this except that almost nobody praises the USA as the world's biggest humanitarians.  Everybody scoffs and writes our support off as geopolitical influence.  So fine.  We made the world a better place, and in return we got some support toward *trying* to make the world a better place.

Turned out shitty, but it was pretty shit to start, and people exaggerate how much the world supposedly opposed us.

Actually, haha, it's not like FRANCE ever left a foreign country in a shitty state... right??
_{Vietnam
Which they actually held as a COLONY, unlike the USA}

Plus some foreign government leaders have publicly stated they were threatened to be bombed by the Bush administration if they didn't offer military support (e.g. Pakistan and the Afghanistan War). So this free and open process was steeped in bribery and extortion.

Is that so?

Plus, a number of countries that appeared on the Coalition of the Willing lists are US dependencies, and not really independent nations.

Considering that South Korea isn't a "US dependency", I don't think any of the countries I mentioned are.

[Reelya]

Yes it was so. Here's a typical article that appeared at the time:
http://www.salon.com/2003/03/12/foreign_aid/
Or from a print newspaper if you prefer (San Franscisco Chronicle)
https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/167/35379.html
https://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EC06Ak02.html

Coalition of the Willing ended up with a lot of members who were tipped in that article:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Coalition_of_the_willing.svg

[Orange Wizard]

Perhaps we'd have a smaller military if our more of our allies could carry their own weight militarily. Instead, they depend on us for protection while simultaneously bragging about their superiority.

The only European countries that "depend" on the US for protection are ones like Iceland that don't have an army at all. The overwhelming majority of Europe maintains their own defense forces. They don't have overwhelming forces because there's no wars to fight - barring the ones that were started with significant US support.

I'd be more sympathetic to this except that almost nobody praises the USA as the world's biggest humanitarians.  Everybody scoffs and writes our support off as geopolitical influence.  So fine.  We made the world a better place, and in return we got some support toward *trying* to make the world a better place.

... how did US-initiated wars make the world a better place?

Actually, haha, it's not like FRANCE ever left a foreign country in a shitty state... right??
_{Vietnam
Which they actually held as a COLONY, unlike the USA}

Modern-day France doesn't try to justify the mistakes France made in history. This is the problem people have. If the US government were to turn around and say, "Actually, these things were not a good idea" rather than trying to justify it then people would be ragging on past-US, not modern US.

[Reelya]

I'd be more sympathetic to this except that almost nobody praises the USA as the world's biggest humanitarians.

Sorry, but that's hype. EU gives almost 3 times the foreign aid as the USA. Considering that the US and EU have similar GDPs and total populations, you're nowhere near the biggest givers. When I hear stuff like that I feel like that stems from what the media bombards you with, and it doesn't necessarily stand up to a little fact-checking:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_development_aid_country_donors

Just check the numbers. USA gives around $30 billion, whereas UK, a country with 1/5th the population and 1/6th the GDP, gives $18 billion. And I'll bet that if you didn't see that in print you'd have discounted The UK's humanitarian aid as a pittance compared to the good ol' USA.

[Frumple]

I'd be more sympathetic to this except that almost nobody praises the USA as the world's biggest humanitarians.

Y'do realize most people are like that because our per capita et al humanitarian spending is not exactly impressive, yeah? And that's on both the public and private front, so far as I'm aware. They don't praise us for being the world's biggest humanitarians because we don't put near as much relative effort into being humanitarians as a number of other countries do. We still get praised for being humanitarians, really, because even if we're on the whole sorta' comparatively lackadaisical about it, the raw amount is one of the largest net lumps in the world, but US insistence that we're the biggest givers is pretty deceptive.

E: And... actually, that's kinda' what I was talking about a bit up, at least in part. That sort of casual unawareness of why foreign sentiment or reactions are what they are. Much of the time it doesn't take much digging to find out, and it's not uncommon for it to be fairly well grounded, but most of us just... don't make the effort, y'know?

[Rolan7]

The *entire EU*, which is not a country but is rather a union of the most highly developed and ancient states of the most developed continent, has a bigger gross humanitarian output than the USA?

Yes, I'm sorry for being so casually unaware 

I tried to figure out how much of that was spent on Greece and other very local interests, but I've already spent too much time on this solo.