Author Topic: Evil Americans (Read 1849 times)

miko2d · « **Reply #15 on:** August 13, 2003, 10:32:19 AM »

You guys are talking as if the countries are persons with minds, motivations, feelings, etc. rather than imaginary mental constrcts.

In reality a country is a geograpfical area with a lot of disparate and often conflicting population groups ruled by special interests.

It is those rulers who are responcible for the voting of their country in US and thy do not have to go to all the trouble of being nice to US. They just have to buy support of some politicians in US or link up with some special interests groups who would benefit/share in the loot.

From the point of view of the people of those countries, the "US help" may not be that much helpfull - especially if it is used for oppression of the population.

Peter Bauer proved that internatiopnal help is the main reason of the troubles of the developing world - making possible the totalitarian regimes and preventing free markets and development of the democracy. I would not be that proud of such help.

miko

milnko · « **Reply #16 on:** August 13, 2003, 10:43:06 AM »

I pay taxes in the US for fairly simple reasons;

I like having maintained roads
I like having Fire Stations
I like having Police
I like having a Military to protect our borders

I don't like nor want ANY of my tax dollars to be spent on foreign aid.

But if the US is gonna buy votes in the UN, then it's reasonable to expect the countries being bought should stay bought or quit taking the money.

Half the countries on Ripsnort's list don't need the aid anyway, those countries need thier rulers to spread the wealth.

I wonder how fast the US could pay off it's own deficit with that money, instead of proping up dictatorships in the middle east.

Saurdaukar · « **Reply #17 on:** August 13, 2003, 10:48:39 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding
I know how to add up, divide, multiply and take away. Evidentally whoever wrote Ripsnort's quote did not.

Do you know how to do anything other than snipe at people from the sidelines? Come down from the cheap seats and dispute the points I made.

Quote

What a load of bollocks.

Those that vote against the US in a UN resolution vote hate the US. Okaaay.

Pakistan hates you by giving unprecendented support, effectively destabilising themselves in the process. I'm sure all those Pakistani security agents killed hunting Al-Queda operatives in and around Pakistan hated the US too. Dig up a few old posts of wulfie's - he had some interesting insights.

Ripsnort, India is neither Arabic nor Islamic. They are majority Hindu. But then they are also brown, so I can see how you might be confused. If that's not the case, then feel free to fill me in.

The idea that the US taxpayer is carrying this huge burden far and above what any other citizen in any other country carries is a lie. Per capita, the US is not 'in the lead' - it is behind countries such a Norway, for instance.

Lock this obvious troll?[/b]

I'd love to dispute with you, but I dont see any relevant points. The fact that you altered the rgument from the simple numbers of monetary support to a 'per capita' figure is a seperate issue, and if youd like to discuss that, create a another post.

India has a sizable Muslim population... but what does that have to do with the argument? What the color of their skin has to do with anything is even further beyond my comprehension ability.

So what are you saying again?

Puke · « **Reply #18 on:** August 13, 2003, 10:54:05 AM »

Well put Milnko. I was looking at that list and thinking, though they may not be superpowers, I'm not sure some of them are destitute and really need any handouts.

Fishu · « **Reply #19 on:** August 13, 2003, 10:56:06 AM »

I'd be more interested in the percentage of GNP used to foreign aid by the countries than the sums.

Like.. for US a billion dollars is something like pocket money compared to what it is for countries like finland, sweden, norway, denmark...

percentage of the GNP speaks with more volume about each country.

Quote

U.S. foreign aid to those that hate us:

Didn't know India hates US...
Well.. I guess it can be put that way if 'disagreeing' is the same as hate.

US is becoming isolationistic state eh?
"everyone out there hates us. since they dont agree with everything we say"

-dead- · « **Reply #20 on:** August 13, 2003, 11:06:37 AM »

THE UNITED NATIONS -- MYTH AND REALITY
AMERICAN SUPPORT

Fact Sheet

American Financial Support

Myth: The United States pays for almost all of the United Nations' programs and peacekeeping operations.

Reality: The U.S. pays 22% of the UN's regular budget and about 27.2% of the peacekeeping budgets. It also pays about 25% of the costs of the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and Former Yugoslavia.

* * * * *

Myth: The U.S. pays too much to the UN. Other countries are getting a free ride.

Reality: UN membership dues, known as assessments, are based primarily on each nation's share of the global economy. The U.S. economy represents about 31% of the global economy. The U.S. therefore benefits from the 22% ceiling on assessments for the regular budget. Many countries actually pay more in assessments than their share of the global economy.

* * * * *

Myth: The U.S. spends a large portion of its federal budget on UN policies/programs.

Reality: Total U.S. payments to the entire UN system (including the World Bank and IMF) amount to less than one-quarter of one percent of the federal budget. In 2001, for example, the U.S. paid about $300 million as its share of the UN's regular budget. All told, U.S. contributions to the entire UN system, including those for peacekeeping missions, amounted to about $3.5 billion in 2001.

[Also see the section on Financing in the United Nations Fact Sheet.]

* * * * *

American Military Support

Myth: Too many American soldiers are serving in UN peacekeeping operations. The U.S. provides most of the military men and women involved in UN peacekeeping operations.

Reality: Fewer than 40 American military men and women are currently serving in UN peacekeeping operations. Americans therefore represent less than 1% of the approximate total of 40,000 soldiers serving in UN peacekeeping operations.

* * * * *

Myth: Serving in UN peacekeeping operations means that Americans are serving under the command of the UN or a foreign government.

Reality: As Commander-in-Chief, the President never gives up his command authority over American troops. Although the U.S. sometimes allows temporary operational control to be given to the UN or a trusted ally, the President always retains ultimate command authority over our troops.

Source

For the record on 14 "important issues" in 2002, even the UK differed from the US in 8 votes (6 opposite and 2 abstains).
UN Voting with handy US comparison

AKIron · « **Reply #21 on:** August 13, 2003, 11:10:34 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
What do you mean? AFAIK all the discussions regarding UN donations or foreign aid has been started by an American whining about how it should stop.

What I mean is that we (Americans) complain about bearing most of the financial burden of the UN but aren't accordingly influential. When we complain here, many, like you, say stop whining. If the US were to simply pull out of the UN how much more whining would then be heard from you and others like you?

When enough Americans are fed up with the UN we will withdraw our support. To spread our feelings we execise our right to voice our opinions hoping to enlighten and encourage others to feel the same. So long as HTC allows it, we can use this forum to do so.

Torque · « **Reply #22 on:** August 13, 2003, 11:36:31 AM »

Geezus, Dead no need to slap that hard. It's always a good chuckle to watch him call others brainwashed, he proves the point well on all accounts.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #23 on:** August 13, 2003, 11:48:57 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Torque
Geezus, Dead no need to slap that hard. It's always a good chuckle to watch him call others brainwashed, he proves the point well on all accounts.

The article I posted said 1/3, turns out to be 22% only off a few BILLION

and a quick glance at the voting records of countries mentioned seemed to be in the ballpark of the article. So, what are you saying Torque?

Sandman · « **Reply #24 on:** August 13, 2003, 11:52:49 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron

When enough Americans are fed up with the UN we will withdraw our support. To spread our feelings we execise our right to voice our opinions hoping to enlighten and encourage others to feel the same. So long as HTC allows it, we can use this forum to do so.

Methinks that most Americans have no idea why the UN exists at all.

miko2d · « **Reply #25 on:** August 13, 2003, 11:53:33 AM »

Fishu: Well.. I guess it can be put that way if 'disagreeing' is the same as hate.

US is becoming isolationistic state eh?
"everyone out there hates us. since they dont agree with everything we say"

This line of reasoning just shows how ignorant you are politically.
US is not "becoming isolationistic" - just the opposite. It is rapidly becoming even more of an imperial power.

As for protrayinh the people who disagree with us as "hating us" - it's only a necessary step in the process. Once our population is convinced someone or othwr hates us, it will be easy to believe that the country in question is cooperating with terrorists and is in need of a "regime change".

I'd be more interested in the percentage of GNP used to foreign aid by the countries than the sums.

Would you respect US more if we increased our "percentage of GNP used to foreign aid" by giving Taliban more than $43 million in 2001?

miko

Krusher · « **Reply #26 on:** August 13, 2003, 12:02:56 PM »

posting it as our myth is nice touch but not based in reality.

American Financial Support

Myth: The United States pays for almost all of the United Nations' programs and peacekeeping operations.

Reality: The U.S. pays 22% of the UN's regular budget and about 27.2% of the peacekeeping budgets. It also pays about 25% of the costs of the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and Former Yugoslavia.

I didn't see anything in Rips post that said anything about paying for almost all of the United Nations' programs and peacekeeping operations

* * * * *

Myth: The U.S. pays too much to the UN. Other countries are getting a free ride.

Reality: UN membership dues, known as assessments, are based primarily on each nation's share of the global economy. The U.S. economy represents about 31% of the global economy. The U.S. therefore benefits from the 22% ceiling on assessments for the regular budget. Many countries actually pay more in assessments than their share of the global economy.

Fact some countries routinely pay nothing.. that's right nothing in dues. Under UN rules a country that forfeits its dues is not supposed to be able to vote. Name one country other than the USA that has either had its vote cut off or has been threatened with it? For the last few years the UN has threatened (LOL) to cut off the US vote not because they didn't pay dues, but because they have not been paying the full amount for peace keeping missions.
* * * * *

American Military Support

Myth: Too many American soldiers are serving in UN peacekeeping operations. The U.S. provides most of the military men and women involved in UN peacekeeping operations.

Reality: Fewer than 40 American military men and women are currently serving in UN peacekeeping operations. Americans therefore represent less than 1% of the approximate total of 40,000 soldiers serving in UN peacekeeping operations.

who's myth is this? as far as I know we try our best to never participate under UN supervision. That being said we still pay the largest part of the actual cost of the missions. BTW I am willing to bet we have more than 40 americans involved in peace keeping missions right now even if it isnt UN sponsered.

* * * * *

Myth: Serving in UN peacekeeping operations means that Americans are serving under the command of the UN or a foreign government.

Reality: As Commander-in-Chief, the President never gives up his command authority over American troops. Although the U.S. sometimes allows temporary operational control to be given to the UN or a trusted ally, the President always retains ultimate command authority over our troops.

For the record on 14 "important issues" in 2002, even the UK differed from the US in 8 votes (6 opposite and 2 abstains).

for the record name one US citizen who is in charge of any UN program. (not to be confused with un ambassadors) Nice representation we have for our money

Puke · « **Reply #27 on:** August 13, 2003, 12:06:55 PM »

Fishu, I think you miss the point. This thread isn't about who is more generous. If I give you $10,000 and earn $100,000, that $10K will seem no more or no less to you than if I earned only $50,000 or $1,000,000. Did that make sense? Anyway, though the article doesn't break down in what form the aid is received, it is an eye opener to see how much we donate to countries who probably really do not need and who probably aren't very good friends of the USA.

Dowding · « **Reply #28 on:** August 13, 2003, 12:32:05 PM »

Engage your brain Saudauker. Ripsnort's quote is erroneous and here's why:

1) Ripsnort's post claimed Pakistan hates the US.

I pointed out Pakistan has been of valuable help to the US in Afghanistan, including the sacrifice of Pakistani lives.

2) Ripsnort's post claimed India was a 'Arabic/Islamic' state.

I pointed out it is a majority Hindu. It is not by any stretch of the imagination Islamic.

Now that I've flagged the points for you, put down the popcorn and dispute those points. Thanks.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #29 on:** August 13, 2003, 12:37:07 PM »

Just a trivial aside, although India is majority Hindu, it is second behind Indonesia as the country with the largest population of Muslims.