It takes a Frenchman to see the greatness in the USA

[BaldEagl]

Originally posted by Thruster
Partially, but more importantly it means my fore bearers paid ALL the dues that made this country so attractive to the huddled masses. They won our freedom, created this nation and shed blood in just about every major threat this nation faced. I'm proud of that fact. Not to disparage those progeny of the later immigrant waves but it's my feeling that they would tend to have a less proprietary view of where this country comes from and where it goes.

Funny but the forefathers of our nation forgot the part about senority when they wrote the constitution, possibly quite intentionally.

BTW, may father fought in WWII, first in the infantry then as a merchant marine.  My brother fought in Korea.  My grandfather was one of the original settlers in NE Minnesota in the 1800's and can be found in books about the history of the area.  So much for your family paying ALL the dues that made this country what it is.

[Thruster]

You missed an earlier post that may have saved you both the effort of trying to call me out on this issue. But as long as we're quoting earlier posts, I may as well play along.
 
"I suggest you man up. I was taught to follow my values and faith, to hell with what some foreigner thinks, or what some other citizen thinks."

And of course, you missed the central point of the post, but that's not my problem. I suppose we could draft another few pages bantering the relative value of our individual lineages but I don't have the patience. I suppose it goes without saying that it's interesting how some can take a dialog as nebulous as this one and distill it down to whether or not I think you are valid because your ancestors saw this nation as a place of refuge and salvation, came here, and apparently assimilated well whereas mine (and many others like them) saw a land of opportunity and molded this nation into the destination of so many that yearned to breathe the air of freedom.

Speaking of Ellis Island and the aforementioned "huddled masses" Remember where The Statue of Liberty came from. The only other major democracy in the world at the time provided us with that inspiring national hood ornament which, it has been said, signified to those entering our country for the first time the great promise this nation held.

[lazs2]

thruster.. thank you for spending the time to think about my question.  

I am not sure that I understand your answer.   Not in the context of how you worded your original post.    I read that you were ashamed of the tyranny our country was inflicting on others.

My point was that we inflict very little tyranny on other countries and almost all of it is inflicted on ourselves.. you seem to agree with at least the latter half of that statement.   Do you agree with the first part?    We are the worlds most benign superpower.. none has ever been as much so.

I am not ashamed but I am disgusted with the way that we have destroyed our own bill of rights and constitution.   I am disgusted with the welfare state.

This has nothing to do with the thread except..  the french welfare state to me is also disgusting.

lazs

[Thruster]

Lasz2,

What you read was,
"I hate that I see my government behaving like the tyrannies our fathers paid so dearly to defeat and purge from humanity."

The term , to my knowledge is almost exclusively employed when characterizing a government's treatment of it's citizens or those under it's political influence.  

Regarding the U.S. conduct as the world's most benign superpower, it's my impression that you really meant most benevolent superpower but I take issue with your frame of reference.

The U.S. is, by current definition, the world's first and ONLY superpower. That may change in time but I doubt it will be in our lifetimes save a major shift in the geo-political status quo.

It's not just about nukes, satellites(mechanical or political) and acreage. There's also an economic and societal factor. In that context there are nor were any other qualified members of that club.

The question is have we acquitted ourselves admirably on the world's stage to the point where we can claim moral superiority and assume the right to become arbiters of other nations sovereign agendas. I personally think we have a bit more to accomplish.

As far as the American PEOPLE are concerned, well that's an entirely different issue.

The numbers speak for themselves. Nowhere else contributes more towards charity, nowhere else welcomes and embraces those of different ethnicities and values (maybe to our eventual chagrin) as we do, nowhere else will you find more people willing to put their lives on the line for the sole benefit of another.

As far as the evolution of the constitution and the changing perspective on the bill of rights. It sucks, by somehow I feel that dialog has been going on since the first amendment was passed.

As far as the welfare system, there's actually very little wrong with it except the performance of those tasked to administer it. We need to change our attitude about accountability vis-a-vis our bureaucracy if any positive change is take place.

[BaldEagl]

Originally posted by Thruster
...it's interesting how some can take a dialog as nebulous as this one and distill it down to whether or not I think you are valid because your ancestors saw this nation as a place of refuge and salvation, came here, and apparently assimilated well whereas mine (and many others like them) saw a land of opportunity and molded this nation into the destination of so many that yearned to breathe the air of freedom.

My ancestors saw the U.S. as a land of opportunity.  They were not refugees from some third world country nor were they politically or religiously persecuted.

Your's, however, probably were seeking to escape religious persecution, and did in fact, see America as a place of refuge and salvation.

[Thruster]

Bald,

Maybe I should have been more clear in my phrasing. I was simply pointing out that the reaction to my post seemed infantile and self absorbed. Considering the primary discussion was really about international relations it seems some input to that dialog would have been constructive to everyone else who reads the thread.

What little you have betrayed about your pedigree tells much with regard to what I originally posted. I won't bother with detail, you wouldn't understand any of it and I would come off as more of an elitist than I have so far.

But thanks for adding your opinion. Here in The U.S. it's o.k. to have one. We made sure of that back in '87

[bj229r]

Originally posted by Thruster
Bald,

Maybe I should have been more clear in my phrasing. I was simply pointing out that the reaction to my post seemed infantile and self absorbed. Considering the primary discussion was really about international relations it seems some input to that dialog would have been constructive to everyone else who reads the thread.

What little you have betrayed about your pedigree tells much with regard to what I originally posted. I won't bother with detail, you wouldn't understand any of it and I would come off as more of an elitist than I have so far.

But thanks for adding your opinion. Here in The U.S. it's o.k. to have one. We made sure of that back in '87

How about this? Instead of being condescending, snotty and issuing veiled threats,

As far as the "Hillary Supporter" shot, be advised the last person that intimated I might be receptive to either Clinton in office is still waiting for an organ donor.

to those of us attempting via several replies now to painstakingly extract from you your thoughts regarding the negative aspects of our country, perhaps you might......just STATE THEM! A few sentences ought to do it, you can even use BIG words:)

[Thruster]

Sorry the language was over your head. Bet that happens a lot. As far as my thoughts , extract away, you've got them to read till your head explodes, if your still confused, I can't help you. It looks like too much work to get you up to speed.

[bj229r]

Typical, still skirting around the edges...half a dozen posts and you fail to say ANYthing of substance. Though you profess not to be a liberal, and I've no reason to doubt your honesty, this is lib-debate tactics 101 in play:huh

[sgt203]

Originally posted by Viking
Yeah Dago that's right. You didn't valiantly join the fray to fight tyranny and oppression. You waited ... and waited ... and waited ... while you sold often outdated weapons to the allies at inflated prices. And if not for the Royal Navy you would have sold arms and goods to the Germans too. Only after Japan attacked you and Germany declared war on you did you join the fight. How valiant ... how heroic. What a selfless sacrifice indeed.

Im not sure how much outdated weapons we SOLD....

We did supply the royal navy with 50 destroyers prior to lend-lease act.. Notice I said supplied and for what??? Some basing rights.

As far as what was supplied it was much more than weapons, Food, Trucks, Locomotives and yes also arms were supplied.

And if im not mistaken repayment was accepted at $.10 on the Dollar and again as far as I know the only repayment was made by Great Britian.

As far as us selling arms to Germany..... why dont you back this claim up with some facts. You wont find them as this is nothing more than oral dysentary.

As far as I know it was the cut-off of supplies and materials to Japan that eventually forced their need to expand in the pacific for materials. Thus forcing the Japanese to try and eliminate the US Carriers at Pearl Harbor.

To make this sound like the US was being war profiteers, when we were supplying allied countries (with the execption of Canada) materials that were needed, is simply untrue.

Did we jump headlong and willingly into WWII??? I would have to say no we didnt. But we did what we could while we ramped up military production and supplied allied countries with materials to continue the fighting and producing military arms of their own.

As for the soliders all soldiers who fought for the rights of freedom from any country deserve and have earned their respect and get such from me.

I will not engage in bashing any county for their "contributions" during WWII, nor did I in my original post.

But the above quoted post does not reflect the truth or the facts.

However spout off jibberish and distortions of the facts to support your untenable position and disdain of the United States.

In the future though, as a suggestion, you may wish to include some truths in your statements in the event someone would call you a MORON..


PS.. No I do not speak German  

[Viking]

Originally posted by sgt203
Im not sure how much outdated weapons we SOLD....

We did supply the royal navy with 50 destroyers prior to lend-lease act.. Notice I said supplied and for what???  

And what is the difference between "supplying" and "selling" in this context? Are you suggesting Britain didn't pay for them? Basing rights are a commodity with substantial value; that Britain wanted your destroyers as payment makes it no less of a business deal.

Originally posted by sgt203
And if im not mistaken repayment was accepted at $.10 on the Dollar and again as far as I know the only repayment was made by Great Britian.

You are mistaken. Only the supplies in transit to Britain or in warehouses in Britain when Washington terminated Lend-Lease on 2 September 1945 were sold for 10 cents on the Dollar. All the equipment and supplies delivered during the war was paid for in full or returned as per the Lend-Lease deal. Apart from the Soviets who only repaid one third of their debt before the Cold War, by 1960 practically all war debts to the USA were repaid.

Britain made the final installment on the "transit supplies" loan in 2006. In total Britain repaid more than 20 billion Pounds.

The United States in 1972, accepted an offer by the Soviet Union to pay $722 million in installments through 2001 to settle its indebtedness.

Originally posted by sgt203
As far as us selling arms to Germany..... why dont you back this claim up with some facts. You wont find them as this is nothing more than oral dysentary.

First of all I didn't say you sold arms to Germany, I said "if not for the Royal Navy you would have sold arms and goods to the Germans too". You seem to have issues with basic reading comprehension.

That said ... two thirds of the trucks used by the Wehrmacht was made by Opel (a General Motors company) and Ford Motor Company, or rather by their subsidiary: Ford-Werke AG in Cologne. Ford-Werke still thrives today as the headquarters of European Ford.

Most of the trucks that rolled into Poland, Denmark, the low countries, France, Greece, and the Soviet Union had Opel or Ford logos on them.

During the first two years of the war, General Motors and Ford executives from the United States negotiated with the Nazi leadership the terms under which their German factories were converted to wartime functions. Their highest priority at all times was to maintain and achieve growth in production and revenues.

James Mooney, the leading GM executive in Europe, met with Hitler and Göring in the months from October 1939 to March 1940. Mooney was a recipient of the Order of the Golden Eagle, the highest Nazi honor for foreigners. He shared that distinction with Henry Ford.

Without these invaluable contributions from America, Germany's Blitzkrieg across Europe could not have taken place.

Originally posted by sgt203
But the above quoted post does not reflect the truth or the facts.

Actually it does. You just don't know the truth or the facts.

Originally posted by sgt203
In the future though, as a suggestion, you may wish to include some truths in your statements in the event someone would call you a MORON..

Look in the mirror bud.

[MiloMorai]

Britain got a raw deal on those 50 clapped out WW1 Caldwell, Clemson, and Wickes class destroyers. They spent much time in repair and overhaul because they were in such bad shape. HMS Campbeltown (ex USS Buchanan) was even expended at St. Nazaire.

[Scherf]

Didn't GM also receive compensation from the U.S. government for damage caused to its German Opel plants during the course of the war?

[Torque]

well... i hate to see viking tear the paper patriots to shreds with facts... but so be it.

to be technical tho...the august dieppe raid had some 50 american rangers on board... over 900 canadians lost their lives in the raid... and when did they eventually haul in prescott bush under the 'trading with the enemy act'... yeah...oct of 1942.

[Dago]

Originally posted by Torque
well... i hate to see viking tear the paper patriots to shreds with facts... but so be it.

You must wonder what it would be like to live in a country you could have a reason to be proud of.  Instead you live in a country known as a haven for military deserters.