Pages:
Author

Topic: Opinion on the US - page 7. (Read 19000 times)

full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 101
November 23, 2013, 09:18:47 AM
I like the US

US foreign policies not always to my taste but I have no particular issue with the people of the US

most of them (not all) aren't aware of their surroundings, they think the USA is the center of the universe and I don't like them Cheesy
there are some americans I completely respect because they aren't like this but the rest..
legendary
Activity: 4760
Merit: 1283
November 23, 2013, 03:32:08 AM
I like the US

US foreign policies not always to my taste but I have no particular issue with the people of the US

I met a really cool guy today in my hometown.  He had and awesome workshop, and built his own very advanced plasma-cutting rig from scratch and it seems to work well.  He did it just for fun.  To top it off, he was a really nice guy who wasn't a conceited asshole or anything like that.  This is one of string of such people I've met around and about.  Like many of us, he had the resources to do such things which are denied to many in this world.  There are likely many such people around the world, and would be many more if everyone was rich.  But I think it is fair to point out that the U.S. is a diverse place with all kinds of people.  Some are fat wife-beating assholes.  Some are mindless flag-wavers.  Really, probably a majority of people have the basic instincts to be decent, and I expect that it is the same just about everywhere in the world.

Unfortunately it is hard to remember some of these things when U.S. foreign policy and empire building efforts are so disturbing.  I go through my own phases of demoralization and loss of confidence in the makeup of our nation.

hero member
Activity: 490
Merit: 500
November 23, 2013, 03:17:22 AM
I like the US

US foreign policies not always to my taste but I have no particular issue with the people of the US
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 253
November 23, 2013, 12:24:52 AM


Well put. I'm one of those who blame the USA for getting involved in the first place. It has never worked out well for us, and has often (regardless of intent) prolonged and exacerbated the conflicts.

The original foreign policy of the united states worked very well. Be the cheerleaders of liberty, trade with all, and entangling alliances with none. Our nation became the biggest powerhouse in the world via this policy, and has spent the last 114 years dismantling that progress.

Starting out with a government was the problem.   Rather than the rest of the world looking to America, your politicians looked to their counterparts in other countries and said "wouldn't it be great if we could set up a similar type of system here, especially with all the wealth here, imagine the power we could have".

Thinking the constitution was more than just a piece of paper was your downfall.

Not mine. I agree one hundred percent. But it was, prior to the constitution, a good start. The dream didn't die as quickly as the revolution, but by 1791 it had been crucified. By 1899 the good that had been done was fully on the run. By 1913 the parasites were firmly in control of the host. Now we have Rome, only even more corrupt.

True.  It held on a long time.  And there were a lot of good people who tried to enforce the good ideals through the decades and centuries.  Even today there is the occasional person like Ron Paul.  But the problem, at least from my POV, was that the structure was in place in 1788 and it was an inevitability from that point forward that you would lose your freedom.   It's a real shame, not only for you, but that the rest of the Western World politicians follow along, but I guess that's how empire has always worked.

I think though that the seeds of the new freedom, a true freedom this time, are being born mostly in America and spreading to the rest of the world as we speak.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 101
November 22, 2013, 05:47:23 PM
The US Gov't. Is always trying to be the "WORLD POLICE" or what have you, but these so called "Guardians of Justice" have gone Megalomaniac as of late.
My friends in the EU say that it's pissing the big boys over there off. Ever since Nam in the 60's and korea before that we've being sticking our noses into everyones business.
Now the NSA is even ALL THE WAY in everyones business. Citizens, Foreigners, even God's if he didnt have the ALMIGHTY firewall. (Made in China) LOL they own US.

 What else is there left to do? US military has grown so big, than they need to constantly put it to use. They cannot simply disband everyone. Where will those people/equipment go. Work at mcdonalds? There's enough unemployment already.
 I always considered servicemen in most countries to be a waste of oxygen.
 I live in Latvia, it's a small country. If invaded by any of our neighbors - our military won't do shit. But it's still there, eating away our tiny budget. What for? Why the hell they buy new tech?
 If I came to power, one of the first things I would do - make those soldiers into part-time street-sweepers. To get at least some use from them.

Funny thing about that. Our 'dear leaders' are in violation of their oaths of office simply by HAVING a large standing army. It's specifically illegal, absent a congressional declaration of war, and supposed to be disbanded after two years even in that event (unless the war is still going on, and congress AGAIN votes to keep it). None of these preconditions have been met. The american military was supposed to disband down to levels consistent with maintenance by the end of 1946.

The reason, and this is not speculation, was exactly as stated above. Standing armies are a temptation to those with a lust for power. Making it difficult to have them at all was supposed to limit that temptation. But hey, as a recent unlamented parasite said of the constitution of the United States of Imbecilies err... America.... "It's just a goddamn piece of paper".

Centralization simply doesn't work for large populations. It works well for those at the top, but nobody else. Even with good intent. Which is sorely lacking in the ruling class.

the problem is that it's extremly difficult to fight those at the top as they are integrated into almost every part of the society..
full member
Activity: 134
Merit: 100
November 22, 2013, 03:02:34 PM
GO AMERICA!!! WE INVENTED FREEDOM!!!
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
November 22, 2013, 02:39:36 PM
 Cheesy LoL @""Dear Leaders"
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1022
Anarchy is not chaos.
November 22, 2013, 02:07:36 PM
The US Gov't. Is always trying to be the "WORLD POLICE" or what have you, but these so called "Guardians of Justice" have gone Megalomaniac as of late.
My friends in the EU say that it's pissing the big boys over there off. Ever since Nam in the 60's and korea before that we've being sticking our noses into everyones business.
Now the NSA is even ALL THE WAY in everyones business. Citizens, Foreigners, even God's if he didnt have the ALMIGHTY firewall. (Made in China) LOL they own US.

 What else is there left to do? US military has grown so big, than they need to constantly put it to use. They cannot simply disband everyone. Where will those people/equipment go. Work at mcdonalds? There's enough unemployment already.
 I always considered servicemen in most countries to be a waste of oxygen.
 I live in Latvia, it's a small country. If invaded by any of our neighbors - our military won't do shit. But it's still there, eating away our tiny budget. What for? Why the hell they buy new tech?
 If I came to power, one of the first things I would do - make those soldiers into part-time street-sweepers. To get at least some use from them.

Funny thing about that. Our 'dear leaders' are in violation of their oaths of office simply by HAVING a large standing army. It's specifically illegal, absent a congressional declaration of war, and supposed to be disbanded after two years even in that event (unless the war is still going on, and congress AGAIN votes to keep it). None of these preconditions have been met. The american military was supposed to disband down to levels consistent with maintenance by the end of 1946.

The reason, and this is not speculation, was exactly as stated above. Standing armies are a temptation to those with a lust for power. Making it difficult to have them at all was supposed to limit that temptation. But hey, as a recent unlamented parasite said of the constitution of the United States of Imbecilies err... America.... "It's just a goddamn piece of paper".

Centralization simply doesn't work for large populations. It works well for those at the top, but nobody else. Even with good intent. Which is sorely lacking in the ruling class.
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1022
Anarchy is not chaos.
November 22, 2013, 02:02:24 PM


Well put. I'm one of those who blame the USA for getting involved in the first place. It has never worked out well for us, and has often (regardless of intent) prolonged and exacerbated the conflicts.

The original foreign policy of the united states worked very well. Be the cheerleaders of liberty, trade with all, and entangling alliances with none. Our nation became the biggest powerhouse in the world via this policy, and has spent the last 114 years dismantling that progress.

Starting out with a government was the problem.   Rather than the rest of the world looking to America, your politicians looked to their counterparts in other countries and said "wouldn't it be great if we could set up a similar type of system here, especially with all the wealth here, imagine the power we could have".

Thinking the constitution was more than just a piece of paper was your downfall.

Not mine. I agree one hundred percent. But it was, prior to the constitution, a good start. The dream didn't die as quickly as the revolution, but by 1791 it had been crucified. By 1899 the good that had been done was fully on the run. By 1913 the parasites were firmly in control of the host. Now we have Rome, only even more corrupt.
hero member
Activity: 980
Merit: 500
FREE $50 BONUS - STAKE - [click signature]
November 22, 2013, 08:08:10 AM
The US Gov't. Is always trying to be the "WORLD POLICE" or what have you, but these so called "Guardians of Justice" have gone Megalomaniac as of late.
My friends in the EU say that it's pissing the big boys over there off. Ever since Nam in the 60's and korea before that we've being sticking our noses into everyones business.
Now the NSA is even ALL THE WAY in everyones business. Citizens, Foreigners, even God's if he didnt have the ALMIGHTY firewall. (Made in China) LOL they own US.

 What else is there left to do? US military has grown so big, than they need to constantly put it to use. They cannot simply disband everyone. Where will those people/equipment go. Work at mcdonalds? There's enough unemployment already.
 I always considered servicemen in most countries to be a waste of oxygen.
 I live in Latvia, it's a small country. If invaded by any of our neighbors - our military won't do shit. But it's still there, eating away our tiny budget. What for? Why the hell they buy new tech?
 If I came to power, one of the first things I would do - make those soldiers into part-time street-sweepers. To get at least some use from them.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 253
November 22, 2013, 07:57:56 AM


Well put. I'm one of those who blame the USA for getting involved in the first place. It has never worked out well for us, and has often (regardless of intent) prolonged and exacerbated the conflicts.

The original foreign policy of the united states worked very well. Be the cheerleaders of liberty, trade with all, and entangling alliances with none. Our nation became the biggest powerhouse in the world via this policy, and has spent the last 114 years dismantling that progress.

Starting out with a government was the problem.   Rather than the rest of the world looking to America, your politicians looked to their counterparts in other countries and said "wouldn't it be great if we could set up a similar type of system here, especially with all the wealth here, imagine the power we could have".

Thinking the constitution was more than just a piece of paper was your downfall.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
November 22, 2013, 07:52:20 AM
A very hostile country with very aggressive foreign policy and a straight up stupid monetary policy which transfers the wealth further to the monopolists.
The spying on your allies didn't exactly get you alot of positive PR. The 25+ wars you have started the last 50 years didn't help alot either and your countrys kill count is slowly, but steadily cathing up on Germany in the Hitler era.

Dear Enemy of Freedom:
Which God-forsaken foregny are you from?  Please respond with your exact GPS coordinates.  Our Hate-Seeking Missiles are gassed up & ready to peace the shit out of you.

~Your American Liberators~
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
November 21, 2013, 11:21:23 PM
The US Gov't. Is always trying to be the "WORLD POLICE" or what have you, but these so called "Guardians of Justice" have gone Megalomaniac as of late.
My friends in the EU say that it's pissing the big boys over there off. Ever since Nam in the 60's and korea before that we've being sticking our noses into everyones business.
Now the NSA is even ALL THE WAY in everyones business. Citizens, Foreigners, even God's if he didnt have the ALMIGHTY firewall. (Made in China) LOL they own US.
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1022
Anarchy is not chaos.
November 21, 2013, 05:03:34 PM
A very hostile country with very aggressive foreign policy and a straight up stupid monetary policy which transfers the wealth further to the monopolists.
The spying on your allies didn't exactly get you alot of positive PR. The 25+ wars you have started the last 50 years didn't help alot either and your countrys kill count is slowly, but steadily cathing up on Germany in the Hitler era.

Yes, the military industry is out of control.
There are more than 40 wars in active conflict right now, around the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflicts
Most are ethnic / religious, US tends to come along after and take the blame (from both sides) for either being too late, or for getting involved at all.  Often both simultaneously.
One thing the US is great at, Ranked #1 in blame garnering, people like to hate it.

This is one thing that bitcoin, and hard currency in general, tends to help prevent.  Even Lincoln couldn't wage war without making a new fiat (greenbacks).
Napolean was the exception that proves the rule, and operated within the limits of hard money, but it cost him.

Well put. I'm one of those who blame the USA for getting involved in the first place. It has never worked out well for us, and has often (regardless of intent) prolonged and exacerbated the conflicts.

The original foreign policy of the united states worked very well. Be the cheerleaders of liberty, trade with all, and entangling alliances with none. Our nation became the biggest powerhouse in the world via this policy, and has spent the last 114 years dismantling that progress.
legendary
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1002
Gresham's Lawyer
November 21, 2013, 07:01:32 AM
A very hostile country with very aggressive foreign policy and a straight up stupid monetary policy which transfers the wealth further to the monopolists.
The spying on your allies didn't exactly get you alot of positive PR. The 25+ wars you have started the last 50 years didn't help alot either and your countrys kill count is slowly, but steadily cathing up on Germany in the Hitler era.

Yes, the military industry is out of control.
There are more than 40 wars in active conflict right now, around the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflicts
Most are ethnic / religious, US tends to come along after and take the blame (from both sides) for either being too late, or for getting involved at all.  Often both simultaneously.
One thing the US is great at, Ranked #1 in blame garnering, people like to hate it.

This is one thing that bitcoin, and hard currency in general, tends to help prevent.  Even Lincoln couldn't wage war without making a new fiat (greenbacks).
Napolean was the exception that proves the rule, and operated within the limits of hard money, but it cost him.
full member
Activity: 200
Merit: 100
November 21, 2013, 06:50:18 AM
A very hostile country with very aggressive foreign policy and a straight up stupid monetary policy which transfers the wealth further to the monopolists.
The spying on your allies didn't exactly get you alot of positive PR. The 25+ wars you have started the last 50 years didn't help alot either and your countrys kill count is slowly, but steadily cathing up on Germany in the Hitler era.
newbie
Activity: 20
Merit: 0
November 21, 2013, 12:09:37 AM
Life is what you make it...no matter the geographical location...USA is ok with me!
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1022
Anarchy is not chaos.
November 20, 2013, 11:50:13 PM
When you are given a choice of two pistols to shoot yourself with, the correct answer is "NO!". If you vote, you can't bitch, because you HAVE accepted the clearly illegitimate system as legitimate. As Emma Goldman said, if voting could make a difference, they would outlaw it.

+1 - Totally agreed Smiley

not really, that is a total passive way of dealing with problems
the correct way would be to forbid offering people to shoot themselves Cheesy

more generally when someone does stuff and you don't like any of the options, change the way it works Smiley

I am trying. It's why I preach what I believe, so that others might take up the banner as well. The principles that the revolution were fought over, most of them, were lost before the nascent country was even 100 years old. So long as the majority are complacent (even if they see the problems, they are unwilling to see alternatives), then it will continue to spiral out of control until it breaks altogether. Then there will likely be a bloodbath, which is what I, and like minded men, are trying to head off. This system has run it's course, and it has failed the people completely. Not the politicians, it's doing quite well by them, but US, the people. Violent revolutions play into the hands of the politicians, but simply withdrawing your consent, one at a time and all over the place, will hurt them more than any number of bullets.
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
November 20, 2013, 05:58:29 PM
if you are given the choice to shoot your self with a choice of two pistols, cut off both of your hands. it will hurt, but it's probably better than dying  Grin
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
November 20, 2013, 04:41:58 PM
...When you are given a choice of two pistols to shoot yourself with, the correct answer is "NO!". If you vote, you can't bitch, because you HAVE accepted the clearly illegitimate system as legitimate. As Emma Goldman said, if voting could make a difference, they would outlaw it.
...

By not making a choice yourself, you're simply letting the guy holding the pistols choose for you.
If i understand your analogy correctly, he's not your friend Smiley
Pages:
Jump to: