The USA

Irish Praetorian

Zaniyah Refined Fumble wrote: »

I will start off with an easy one, as an alternative course of action to locking people up and torturing them in Guantanamo they could have used any other legal means like trial by jury for example.

And I might be inclined to agree with you - my argument is not that the US can do no wrong, its that just because the US does something doesn't mean its wrong. Someone says Guantanamo is a blotch and a crude attempt to evade the rule of law, my reaction is...yeah that sounds about right.

Kermit.de.frog

Zaniyah Refined Fumble wrote: »

I will start off with an easy one, as an alternative course of action to locking people up and torturing them in Guantanamo they could have used any other legal means like trial by jury for example.

Does not address the valid point.

Where are the Claire Daly's and Rich Boy Barrett's going ape on China over Hong Kong?

Where are they?

Oh it's only when the US does something, I forgot.

ShatterAlan

Experience_day wrote: »

Well if it hadn't provided a counterbalance for most of the second half of last century then the Soviets would have ****ed over the rest of Europe..

The Americans have ALWAYS been the aggressor, not the Russians.
Maybe if you stopped listening to US propaganda and stepped back and examined the whole global situation for yourself from a neutral standpoint you might actually see that.

Kermit.de.frog

ShatterAlan wrote: »

The Americans have ALWAYS been the aggressor, not the Russians.
Maybe if you stopped listening to US propaganda and stepped back and examined the whole global situation for yourself from a neutral standpoint you might actually see that.

ShatterAlan

GY_1980 wrote: »

It’s the most diverse place I’ve ever been in my life. Like one resident said above, it’s like 50 individual, different countries. Even cities within States have different characters and cultures. One constant is that the people everywhere are welcoming and polite. (Much more polite than the average Irish person)

We read about the race issues here in Ireland everyday but the reality on the ground in most cities is that people of all races live, drink, talk, work, etc together. I’m not denying that racial inequalities exist just the idea that whites, blacks, Hispanics, Arabs, Asians, etc hate each other. They don’t.

If your interested in history, Washington DC is an amazing city. The museums (Smithsonian) are free, you can visit the White House, Congress, Supreme Court, etc - all free. The memorials capture all aspects of American history. Alluding to the Vietnam memorial the way you did was disingenuous. It’s specifically designed to represent a scar in the ground highlighting the divisiveness of the war.

San Diego is beautiful - one of the most beautiful cities I’ve ever been. Las Vegas is crazy but fantastic. Nashville and Memphis are unbelievable cities - a couple of hours apart, different, but amazing. If you walk down Bourban Street in New Orleans, you will never forget the atmosphere. People from everywhere on the planet partying and enjoying themselves.

I could go on but you probably understand my opinion better now.

I'll agree with you on New Orleans. It's a smashing city though I did get a bit sick of eating poboy sandwiches. They could improve on the bread. I lived in New York for 7 years and have been to about 20 states. I have to disagree with you that it's like visiting a different country going from state to state. The only difference I could tell between Pennsylvania and Ohio was the colour of the taxis. If you were standing in Vermont and were picked up and dropped 50 miles east in New Hampshire you mean you could tell the difference?


I've been to Nashville. Thought it was an ugly city. Seattle and New Orleans were the only two that stood out for me.



People harp on about the US like it's beyond compare and they talk about amazing cities like Vegas, San Diego, Boston. Do you really think these places are so much more impressive than Stockholm, Barcelona, Lisbon, Edinburgh, Copenhagen, Florence, Amsterdam, Bangkok?

Kermit.de.frog

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Do you really think these places are so much more impressive than Stockholm, Barcelona, Lisbon, Edinburgh, Copenhagen, Florence, Amsterdam, Bangkok?

Yes. They actually are far more impressive.

utyh2ikcq9z76b

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Someone says Guantanamo is a blotch and a crude attempt to evade the rule of law, my reaction is...yeah that sounds about right.

A deliberate policy of torture and detention without trial is far from a 'blotch' or 'crude attempt'.

I guess you see their invasion of Iraq as 'misguided'
Support of the Apartheid state of Israel as a 'necessary evil'
Thousands of Drone strikes as 'unavoidable'

As for America's numerous wars I leave you with this quote from the Nuremberg trials

"To initiate a war of aggression is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

Irish Praetorian

Zaniyah Refined Fumble wrote: »

A deliberate policy of torture and detention without trial is far from a 'blotch' or 'crude attempt'.

I guess you see their invasion of Iraq as 'misguided'
Support of the Apartheid state of Israel as a 'necessary evil'
Thousands of Drone strikes as 'unavoidable'

As for America's numerous wars I leave you with this quote from the Nuremberg trials

"To initiate a war of aggression is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

We could go down the route of effusive hand-wringing and chest thumping exhortations of the evils surrounding that policy, but what exactly does it buy us? The only purpose I can see it serving is displaying a flag of self-righteousness to like minded individuals, which is fine, but I see it as unnecessary and frankly a trite treatment of a serious topic.

Now as to my own views on the issues you raise, lets look at them in term;
Yes I would regard the Iraq War as misguided, would you regard it as a well informed decision?
Israel, I've gone on at length previously, but it's perhaps the ideal demonstration of my 'compared to what' argument.
And as for drone strikes, again, compared with what, strikes from jets or sending in ground troops? Is it the use of such weapons you oppose or the targets they are sent against or indeed the collateral damage that can arise, because we might agree on one of those points but not all.

As to your Nuremberg quote, you'll have to forgive me if I am of the view that our society has advanced to such a point that a declaration of aggressive war is no longer a prerequisite for unleashing the evils of the world. The September 11th attacks were not a hostile act committed by a foreign state, and yet they killed more Americans than Pearl Harbour. The Dafur genocide, the mass oppression of the Uighyurs, the expulsion of the Rohingya, all of these have occurred within state borders, without a declaration of war and I would argue, have caused no shortage of misery regardless. Yet again and again I find myself looking at outrages around the world which seem to arouse (at best) little more than the mildest expressions of indignation, whilst the actions of the US arouse a near constant din of protest and anger. This is an unwise double-standard to hold and I do not care to see it prosper.

NSAman

threeball wrote: »

Chicago is a great city once you stick to the Mag mile and Lakeshore drive. Head too far off the beaten path and you would be as well off in Honduras.

Chicago is a dump even in the “Mag Mile”, it has a completely unstable feel all the time... that is why I left.

Notmything

ShatterAlan wrote: »

The Americans have ALWAYS been the aggressor, not the Russians.
Maybe if you stopped listening to US propaganda and stepped back and examined the whole global situation for yourself from a neutral standpoint you might actually see that.

Can't believe I forgot about the Americans annexing the Crimea.

NSAman

Gonna chime in here.

The cost of education here and level of education is terrible. How do you get an education? Join the military. Supposedly they look after you.

So they send you off to learn how to shoot a gun and fight. Under-educated kids, no chance of making a money unless they go into the military. They then get dumped back into society. Little or no back up education and one of the main jobs is the police. You get these uneducated kids thinking they are fighting a war against the citizens of the USA.

The USA is a police state IMHO

This country has many, many fantastic things to offer. YET, it has massive social, societal and human issues that are being swept under the carpet.

Workers have no rights.

Employers hold all the cards.

Power is held by the rich and by useless politicians on Local, State and National levels. Yet, people hold the vote?

Justice here is a joke. There is none it all comes down to who has the best lawyer and the most money to make a case. Things that are SO evident can be overturned and take on “points”.

So much of this country annoys me.

YET..... what is good about the place... the people. The fact that they still help each other, the fact that they live with this crap above, the fact that they can still survive with all the invasion into their lives and be “happy”, the fact they still hold what family they have (despite not seeing them for log periods of time) in their hearts, the fact they work their asses off for low pay and conditions and they can STILL be warm and welcoming ... says all you need to know.

What needs to change... LOTS!!!

utyh2ikcq9z76b

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

As to your Nuremberg quote, you'll have to forgive me if I am of the view that our society has advanced to such a point that a declaration of aggressive war is no longer a prerequisite for unleashing the evils of the world.

I guess when your point of view is International law doesn't matter anymore you can justify the most heinous of crimes

Irish Praetorian

Zaniyah Refined Fumble wrote: »

I guess when your point of view is International law doesn't matter anymore you can justify the most heinous of crimes

And pray tell at what point in our history did we have a world where International Law was universally obeyed and we were without the most heinous of crimes?

EDIT: Come to think of it this really sounds like the story of Pandora's box rehashed - all the worlds evils contained away until the US decides to open the box - if only reality were so simple.

Flickerfusion

joe40 wrote: »

I think that is a great assessment of American society and American politics at the moment.

It is a contradiction but for one of the most powerful countries in the world there seems to be a lot of naivety and lack of modern thinking.
Eg,an obsession with the military and veterans, taking God into everything, "God bless America" is a constant refrain which you don't get in other countries.

I have no doubt that the majority of Americans are fine but the national image that is projected seems to be a country that hasn't modernised in the same way as Europe
Lack of gun control, clinging to the death penalty, militarised police force are just a few examples.

Well in some ways it’s like Europe, particularly the U.K., if WWII and the big social-democratic reforms had never happened.

In many respects, the US politically looks very like 19th century Europe.

Europeans had no choice but to modernise systems that evolved around the development of various flavours of social democracy and also had to create a society that would never lead to the conditions that caused WWII.

The US, other than for a brief period after the crash and the New Deal, was able to just plough on with a much rawer society and a far older and cruder form of democracy.

It’s not by accident that most of Europe (the U.K. and France being exceptions) have some form of proportional representative democracy. It’s there to ensure deliberative, consensus forming, stability driving decision making that brings in as much of the population as possible.

Our own PR-STV system was introduced effectively to avoid civil war in an independently administered Ireland that couldn’t have functioned with unionist vs nationalist or Protestant vs Catholic ethnic divides (or, if it had gone that way, socialist va capitalist) arguments.

We built these systems to correct problems and resolve vicious conflicts democratically. They’re not just accidental and they come from painful, hard experiences.

The US coasted along without ever going through that and now has many of the divides that would probably warrant something like PR multiparty democracy and the curtailing of presidential and gubernatorial executive powers, in favour of congress or state legislative powers held by much more people.

There’s a massive over concentration of power in the hands of one individual and that’s always prone to instability.

America could be great, if it created a fairer society, removed the obstacles to social mobility - access to healthcare, educational opportunities etc and seriously dealt with democratic deficits in their systems that are creating horrible degrees of instability and lack of representation.

Unfortunately, when you look at the list of countries that use US style full executive presidents, it’s far from great company to be in. It’s a rather unsophisticated form of early republican democracy, and it can and should be evolved to something far better.

[url] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_system[/Url]
Afghanistan
Angola
Argentina
Benin
Belarus
Bolivia
Brazil
Burundi
Chad
Chile
Colombia
Comoros
Costa Rica
Cyprus
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
El Salvador
Gambia
Ghana
Guatemala
Honduras
Indonesia
Kenya
Liberia
Malawi
Maldives
Mexico
Nicaragua
Nigeria
Palau
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Senegal
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Somaliland
South Sudan
Turkey
Turkmenistan
United States
Uruguay
Venezuela
Zambia
Zimbabwe

Mr. Karate

ShatterAlan wrote: »

People harp on about the US like it's beyond compare and they talk about amazing cities like Vegas, San Diego, Boston. Do you really think these places are so much more impressive than Stockholm, Barcelona, Lisbon, Edinburgh, Copenhagen, Florence, Amsterdam, Bangkok?

Depends on where you're from. I was born and raised in NY so I wouldn't find Vegas, San Diego, Boston all that impressive. While I would be in awe of Stockholm, Barcelona. Lisbon, Edinburgh,etc.

coinop

Irish people who travel to America stick to the major cities for some reason. Even in the 1800s, Irish immigration to America was remarkable for their tendency to gather in urban slums in New York and Boston. Up to that point, the whole point of moving to America for German, Dutch and Scandinavian immigrants was to claim some land out in Ohio or Pennsylvania and homestead it to create a living and enjoy the freedom of self-sufficiency.

I'm laughing at some of the posts on this thread despairing about witnessing a cup of fecal matter outside on the sidewalk while trying to enjoy their expensive meal inside the restaurant. Here's a secret the guidebooks won't tell you: all major American cities are the same. Starbucks, Subway, Macys, Barnes & Noble...globalisation and amalgamation of chains has rendered US cities carbon copies of each other. Cleveland is no different to Columbus, Indianapolis is no different to Minneapolis. Of course the climate and natural scenery changes as you head West and this is where the awe-inspiring natural beauty of America lies, outside of the McCities.

Similarly, Canada is the second biggest country on the planet yet young Irish kids going over on their two year visa won't set foot outside Toronto and Vancouver. Go figure.

Flickerfusion

Shocking stuff, people moving to and visiting large, prosperous, busy urban areas. Something that’s never happened before and is another “only in Ireland” phenomenon, like putting water in glasses, walking with their feet, eating chips and bus stops.

coinop

Flickerfusion wrote: »

Shocking stuff, people moving to and visiting large, prosperous, busy urban areas. Something that’s never happened before and is another “only in Ireland” phenomenon, like putting water in glasses and bus stops.

Lol, sorry if historical facts offend you. Instead of getting your feelings hurt on Boards.ie research the history of Irish immigration to the US. Prior European immigrants settled rurally, taking advantage of the vast expanses of land in the New World. The Irish however moved from rural, agricultural societies in the old country to urban ones in America. The waves of Italian and Jewish immigrants that followed also settled in urban areas but the Irish were the first.

Irish immigration was also noteworthy due to the number of females that came over to work as housemaids. Until then, emigration was mainly a man's game.

utyh2ikcq9z76b

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

And pray tell at what point in our history did we have a world where International Law was universally obeyed and we were without the most heinous of crimes?

EDIT: Come to think of it this really sounds like the story of Pandora's box rehashed - all the worlds evils contained away until the US decides to open the box - if only reality were so simple.

I was making the point that you don't believe in international law so it's easier for you to justify heinous crimes.

Gradius

Fill a place with un-like people and the inevitable result is chaos.

Each group will vie to take control and have the country run for their convenience.

As the demographics of the ruling "group" in America shrink versus the growing numbers of other smaller groups, the chaos will increase. It's biology.

I'd guess that something unprecedented is incoming for that country very soon.

PCeeeee

Gradius wrote: »

Fill a place with un-like people and the inevitable result is chaos.

Each group will vie to take control and have the country run for their convenience.

As the demographics of the ruling "group" in America shrink versus the growing numbers of other smaller groups, the chaos will increase. It's biology.

I'd guess that something unprecedented is incoming for that country very soon.

Where do you get a enough 'like' people to achieve harmony?

Irish Praetorian

Zaniyah Refined Fumble wrote: »

I was making the point that you don't believe in international law so it's easier for you to justify heinous crimes.

I see, in which case I think you've been slightly missing the thrust of my argument - it's not that I cannot believe in ideas of international law or a more robust attitude in defence of human rights, but rather I cannot take these ideas seriously when they are wielded by despotic and terrible regimes as a stick with which to attack less problematic countries like the US.

I believe there is something called the Moynihan Principle in international politics, which contends that you hear most about human rights abuses in places where human rights tend to be going in the right direction. I've found that to be disturbingly prescient in many cases.

Flickerfusion

coinop wrote: »

Lol, sorry if historical facts offend you. Instead of getting your feelings hurt on Boards.ie research the history of Irish immigration to the US. Prior European immigrants settled rurally, taking advantage of the vast expanses of land in the New World. The Irish however moved from rural, agricultural societies in the old country to urban ones in America. The waves of Italian and Jewish immigrants that followed also settled in urban areas but the Irish were the first.

Irish immigration was also noteworthy due to the number of females that came over to work as housemaids. Until then, emigration was mainly a man's game.

It could be something to do with the fact that the majority of immigration generally after the turn of the 19th century was to urban areas due to the industrial revolution and rapid urbanisation. All I'm saying is that there's nothing particularly unusual about that. Most immigration into the USA was to those areas.

By the 1840s and beyond the famine era, the majority of Irish emigrants would not have been able to afford to setup in rural areas even if they'd wanted to. There were considerable costs involved and they simply did not have the means. You're also talking about extremely impoverished people moving from largely very rural areas and seeking a new life. I would assume many were not really very keen on seeking out the rural hardship they had just left behind. I can't imagine if you'd just come from poverty in some far flung part of the West of Ireland you would have been rushing to head out to the prairies.

Also when urban communities were established, people tend to stay within that network of supports.

Norwegian immigration to the midwest largely came down to the fact that they were very used to dealing with extreme climate, particularly long harsh winters, Irish people wouldn't have had a clue how to deal with that kind of climate.

It's nothing to with hurt feelings, rather that your previous post seemed to be implying that it's something about the character of the Irish who went rather than their circumstances and the timeframe during which Irish immigration peaked.

The majority of them went to the US, fleeing dire poverty in the UK (as Ireland was then), rather than on some adventure seeking mission to the new frontier, although there was some smaller element who did.

coinop

That's a long winded way of saying I was right and you agree with me. You're welcome for the history lesson.

Cabletiesfix

coinop wrote: »

Irish people who travel to America stick to the major cities for some reason. Even in the 1800s, Irish immigration to America was remarkable for their tendency to gather in urban slums in New York and Boston. Up to that point, the whole point of moving to America for German, Dutch and Scandinavian immigrants was to claim some land out in Ohio or Pennsylvania and homestead it to create a living and enjoy the freedom of self-sufficiency.

I'm laughing at some of the posts on this thread despairing about witnessing a cup of fecal matter outside on the sidewalk while trying to enjoy their expensive meal inside the restaurant. Here's a secret the guidebooks won't tell you: all major American cities are the same. Starbucks, Subway, Macys, Barnes & Noble...globalisation and amalgamation of chains has rendered US cities carbon copies of each other. Cleveland is no different to Columbus, Indianapolis is no different to Minneapolis. Of course the climate and natural scenery changes as you head West and this is where the awe-inspiring natural beauty of America lies, outside of the McCities.

Similarly, Canada is the second biggest country on the planet yet young Irish kids going over on their two year visa won't set foot outside Toronto and Vancouver. Go figure.

Did Seattle for 3 days. Got into the Washington State countryside. Was amazing. Finished with American cities. Your exactly right about them. Nearly every city in the world is the same now though

threeball

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

We could go down the route of effusive hand-wringing and chest thumping exhortations of the evils surrounding that policy, but what exactly does it buy us? The only purpose I can see it serving is displaying a flag of self-righteousness to like minded individuals, which is fine, but I see it as unnecessary and frankly a trite treatment of a serious topic.

Now as to my own views on the issues you raise, lets look at them in term;
Yes I would regard the Iraq War as misguided, would you regard it as a well informed decision?
Israel, I've gone on at length previously, but it's perhaps the ideal demonstration of my 'compared to what' argument.
And as for drone strikes, again, compared with what, strikes from jets or sending in ground troops? Is it the use of such weapons you oppose or the targets they are sent against or indeed the collateral damage that can arise, because we might agree on one of those points but not all.

As to your Nuremberg quote, you'll have to forgive me if I am of the view that our society has advanced to such a point that a declaration of aggressive war is no longer a prerequisite for unleashing the evils of the world. The September 11th attacks were not a hostile act committed by a foreign state, and yet they killed more Americans than Pearl Harbour. The Dafur genocide, the mass oppression of the Uighyurs, the expulsion of the Rohingya, all of these have occurred within state borders, without a declaration of war and I would argue, have caused no shortage of misery regardless. Yet again and again I find myself looking at outrages around the world which seem to arouse (at best) little more than the mildest expressions of indignation, whilst the actions of the US arouse a near constant din of protest and anger. This is an unwise double-standard to hold and I do not care to see it prosper.

The whatabouterry is strong in this one. How about the US stay the hell out of the ME, all those drone strikes don't need to be replaced by ground troops. Stay the hell out of Africa too. Theres not a single good reason for them to be there bar modern day colonialism and a pillaging of resources. Of course it also helps create a boogeyman which increases the ability of their arms manufacturers to make a profit.

September 11th was brought on themselves by their policies in the ME over the preceeding decades. They then doubled down going after countries who had zero to do with it whilst ignoring their "allie" where most of the perpertrators and their leaders came from.

Gradius

PCeeeee wrote: »

Where do you get a enough 'like' people to achieve harmony?

You start off with extreme violence and war. Let that brew for a few thousand years and it all calms down and people are happy.

Simple.

With the United States it's a lesson in how to undo all of that and go back to the beginning

Flickerfusion

You could say exactly the same about modern parts of most European cities. The historical cores can be impressive and varied but, there’s always functionality to cities that tends lead to the same stuff appearing again and again.

If you want to see France for example, spend a day or two in Paris and then visit France and get lost in the countryside and the small towns.

The Netherlands is not actually entirely in Amsterdam and there’s a hell of a lot more to Spain than Barcelona and the Costa del Sol.

If you want to see Norway, drive or take a train to Bergen and then get way out into the spectacular parts in a car. If you wandered Oslo for weekend, you’d have a completely different view of the place to most people’s reality.

Go to Eastern Europe - and actually explore,

A lot depends on your budget and available time though.

I know plenty of Irish people who’ve done coast to coast trips across the US as part of J1 trips and holidays.

One of my friends did her J1 in the Deep South! She had read a lot about the places and wanted to explore them for real.

My folks did the whole Shenandoah Valley trail a few years ago and ended up in all sorts of small places.

I did a trip that took me from Vancouver right down the whole US Western seaboard.

There’s huge spectacular scenery to be checked out and it’s all very accessible.

It very much depends what you’re into though.

ShatterAlan

Manic Moran wrote: »

It probably helped that they joined NATO 16 years ago.

Ukraine did not. Georgia did not. Both have been losing territory to Russia.

It may be interesting to inquire with the Baltic nations (and Poland) why they have been quite happy to host US Army units in recent years. One may also observe the reintroduction of conscription in countries like Lithuania and Sweden or the expansion in Norway. They are looking East.

For all the issues the US military has, it's still quite good at conventional warfare, what NATO was set up for.

Russia is not interested in territorial expansion. They do not pose a threat to anyone.
They have ZERO aspirations to just march west and gobble up Europe and anyone twit who thinks or says so ought to go back to the corner with their crayons.


Russia is a prize that the western European powers have coveted from Napoleoan to Bismarck to Hitler and in between all British, French and American financial interests.


They are not a threat. They are there to be exploited. That's what it's about.

Mr. Karate

Gradius wrote: »

Fill a place with un-like people and the inevitable result is chaos.

Each group will vie to take control and have the country run for their convenience.

As the demographics of the ruling "group" in America shrink versus the growing numbers of other smaller groups, the chaos will increase. It's biology.

I'd guess that something unprecedented is incoming for that country very soon.

It will happen here too.