It's not as great since the liberals screwed it up
Those nasty liberals - perhaps they should be deported to Canada or somewhere even further, like Sweden.
Better:
Next The Economist explains: Where Islamic State gets its money
Jan 4, 2015 ... Instead the bulk of its money comes from oil revenues from fields under its .... " Levitt is a national expert on terrorism and its financing, working ...
The Economist explains | The Economist
LabeledBlogs
Financial sanctions: The pros and cons of a SWIFT response | The ...
Nov 22, 2014 ... Though most of the terrorist group's funding comes from local oil revenues, ransoms and shakedowns of businesses in territories that IS ...
Page Not Found - Debate Politics Forums financial-messaging-network-potent-measure
LabeledPrint edition
Well, if "his country" is Equatorial Guinea I can see your point. On the other hand, if it's the USA you have to count me among the afflicted.
I might call the Soviet Union a "great contributor" if it hadn't helped start WWII by signing the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact with Germany. I mean, if you start a fire and then sacrifice yourself to help put it out does that make you the greatest fireman?
On the first point, describing your country as the "best" in the world is good for a laugh but to do it seriously is evidence of huge vanity. Like I said, colonial Britain did this sort of thing in the past so I know the mindset. But it's a mindset worth shaking off if you want to cultivate good relations with other countries.
The British perspective has been that, in Western Europe, we stood alone against Germany after the rest of Europe had fallen (or remained neutral) between 1941 and 1943. We could say that we were alone while the USA was trying its best to find reasons to stay out of the war, given the very strong German ethnic influence in the USA. .
On the Soviet Union, they lost as many men every day in the Battle of Stalingrad as the USA lost in Pearl Harbour.
The USA was extremely reluctant to enter WW2 (understandably) and even losing a ship in an Arctic convoy was not enough for it to get involved. It was only when Germany declared war on the USA that they got involved. So there are some "what ifs" affecting contributions to the war on all sides.
There's no denying that America's contribution to WW2 was massive and began at a critical time, and we should be forever grateful to you, but to make a point about one country or another making the greatest contribution to it is always going to be very subjective, unhelpful and just annoying.
Are we still on about "who is the greatest country"? If this keeps up, then you'll be hearing from me with some examples of how the US is very much not the greatest country. Could be an interesting project.
I agree that colonisation was and is wrong and that Britain should never have done it. However, I don't claim that my country has ever been the "best" or "greatest" by any objective standard, which I am astonished to see that some Americans really do believe about their country.One reason Great Britain came so close getting overrun by the third reich is that their military forces were so spread out administering all of the colonies they still held around the world. Shameful.
Hmmm I understand what you are saying, but I will respectfully disagree on some points of yours, while maybe agreeing with your overall point.I tend to keep rather proactive company, so I don't see so much of the cynicism. But my point really was that "greatest" is simply so subjective and everyone's opinion would be based on wildly different criteria that it's not a very good question to ask. I would even dispute the character in the video's notion that this country used to be greater than it is sometime in the past. I also dispute the assumption that this was ever the greatest country in the world, because I don't think you can really tell. I don't like blind patriotism and I certainly don't like nostalgic views of the past that are almost always inaccurate.
I agree with this for the most part.The greatest country, to me, is the one that strives the hardest to be the greatest. Greatness is a process, not a status. And we certainly don't strive very hard, anymore. When it became public knowledge that our government tortured prisoners, and the reaction wasn't universal outrage, we weren't striving to be the most moral people in the world. When people actually argue that it's alright for police to perpetuate a culture of violence against blacks, we aren't striving to care for our own people. I don't know if we ever were the greatest in this regard. I don't know if we're really better or worse than anyone else. I do know that we're not doing very well, in some regards. We strive pretty damn hard towards personal liberty. The United States has some of the strongest free speech protections in the entire world. That's pretty great. Other countries make it a crime to deny the Holocaust. We would consider that unthinkable, and that's how I think it should be. Does that make up for all the black kids murdered by police every year? Or how we ration healthcare only to those with money? I don't know. Because I don't think greatness comes from your achievements. I think greatness comes from never being satisfied with your achievements. And right now, we are a people that is entirely too satisfied.
Does this not contradict your statement above? "The greatest country, to me, is the one that strives the hardest to be the greatest." "We certainly don't strive anymore" , America in past was a much more changing country, and the Cultural Powerhouse of the world, from The Independence, to the Civil War to end slavery, to the first to enter the Atomic Age to woodstock to the technological boom in the 80s... America was changing/adapting/and striving... The cultural impact of America can not be understated.So, I neither think that this is the greatest country, nor do I think it can be proved that it ever was, nor do I agree with Will McAvoy that we used to be greater and have lost something, and I certainly don't that mine is the worst.
Our problem isn't cell phones, nor sexual freedom, nor even cynicism (I would argue that a lot of that cynicism is well earned). Our problem is complacency. There are fools in this country who really do think that racism is over. Or who think that equality and egalitarianism really means tearing down white males or Christians or heterosexuals in favor of someone else. Or who think that our society already does that. Too many Americans think that we've already hit the ideal and now there's nowhere to go but down. Some claim that we're the world's superheroes because of World War II. Some claim that the lofty words of men who died two centuries ago make us experts in liberty who can do no wrong.
Seem to be contradicting yourself again, to you, greatness IS striving to be Great.... and complacency is the opposite of that. America was striving harder to be great in the past, was it not? .... though given, in the past, they had a longer way to go(since we have built ourselves on the past)I think we are not actually in decline as a nation. We're improving. But our rate of improvement has slowed because of this complacency. Maybe that's the cynicism you're seeing. I see some who have lost hope because they've been ground down by a system that squeezes every last drop it can out of everyone it can for the benefit of the wealthiest of this country. But it's complacency that makes us not do something about that system. We're complacent in our little tiny piece of the pie so we won't risk it to help those with even tinier pieces, or virtually no piece at all, and we make excuses for why a hundred million share an eighth of the pie while a hundred thousand have three quarters of it and the last eighth goes to two hundred million. We're complacent in the invisible privileges we enjoy because of being male, white, Christian, or heterosexual so we won't accept any discomfort for ourselves to help those without those privileges, and make excuses for why they really have the same deference and opportunities we have but squander them.
I think those are more reactionary statements rather than the true belief superiority and arrogance. What's wrong with a little nationalism? What's wrong with a little Pride? .... arguably, it actually motivates people to make America great.... otherwise if your always shooting her down, you just end up with bitter people arguing with you not recognizing what America IS great for. You hurt peoples feelings talking bad about any country they reside from, it makes them think you don't valuing the country like they do.If Americans could be a bit less self-absorbed and get off of our asses and expect better of ourselves, we could be pretty great. But we're too wrapped up in our own personal gain and wanting to feel superior to other people to risk making any kind of real difference that could change our country and society for the better. We can only become great when we actually realize that we aren't and decide to do something about it. Instead we pat ourselves on the back for past achievements and shout patriotic slogans and pretend that we're done with the process and greatness is a cushion we can sit on instead of a mountain perpetually to be climbed.
agreedIn short, "Great" is a thing you do and keep doing, not a thing you are.
The British perspective has been that, in Western Europe, we stood alone against Germany after the rest of Europe had fallen (or remained neutral) between 1941 and 1943. We could say that we were alone while the USA was trying its best to find reasons to stay out of the war, given the very strong German ethnic influence in the USA. The British were also in the Far East in WW2 though admittedly in much smaller numbers than the US and with little success. We also often forget the Eastern Front and Russia's massive contribution. But like I said to Ahlevah, the US's contribution to the defence of Britain and liberation of Europe was massive and we should be forever grateful for it.
I agree that colonisation was and is wrong and that Britain should never have done it. However, I don't claim that my country has ever been the "best" or "greatest" by any objective standard, which I am astonished to see that some Americans really do believe about their country.
Thank-you for the information. You write well and I enjoyed reading it.(List of conflicts in Europe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
Your points about USA's involvement in WW2, ending with:
"It was the moment that gave rise to the birth of a superpower."
You shouldn't be so astonished. At the height of the British Empire, Brits overwhelmingly believed that their country was the "best" and the "greatest" and many other such things. Rudyard Kipling even wrote poems about it. It's only in today's post-imperial Britain that the trend of multi-polarism has become somewhat fashionable. However, talk to many conservative Brits even today and they'll be happy to tell you all about how Britain is God's gift to the world.
I think it's normal for any superpower to be a bit cocky. I think America's cockiness is mild in comparison to that which preceded it.
On the first point, describing your country as the "best" in the world is good for a laugh but to do it seriously is evidence of huge vanity.
Like I said, colonial Britain did this sort of thing in the past so I know the mindset. But it's a mindset worth shaking off if you want to cultivate good relations with other countries.
As a Londoner, (and also a son of Glaswegians whose city was also bombed) thanks for this particular comment.Personally, I take great inspiration from Britain's defiance, e.g. during the London Blitz.
On Nobel Prizes, if the issue arises as to which country has won the most, then it's fair enough to quote the stats and leave it at that. But there's no need to induce that this is evidence of the USA's "greatness". Let non-Americans pay you that compliment, if they choose.If the description were only based on opinion, then I could see your point. But why can't we establish objective criteria to determine a nation's "greatness"? For example, if scientific achievement is a determinant of greatness, what's wrong with counting up the number of Nobel Prizes in Physics, Chemistry, and Medicine? In total, the U.S. has won more than three times as many Nobel Prizes (353) as the next largest winner, Britain (115).
Nobody likes a braggart. I get that. On the other hand, if you keep kicking a giant in the nuts no one should be surprised if he blows your eardrums out when he screams. Quite frankly, I'm getting a bit annoyed at this idea that the U.S. is all washed up, like Sylvester Stallone by the time he got to the fourth Rocky sequel.
From my experience of meeting Americans, you are very good at naturally showing respect to individuals in their diversity. Racism is hard to define well but, on gut instinct, I wouldn't say that the USA is more racist than England.As a side note, Americas racism is overblown in comparison to most of the world and even most of Europe, The Scandinavian countries are the only ones more racially tolerant. America is on the same level as Canada and the UK.THIS DOES NOT MEAN that racism is not something we should all actively fight and strive to improve, it's just a matter of perspective....I hear a fair amount of people from around the world, because of the media, think America is some rampant KKK powerhouse.... when in fact that is not the case, America is a extremely diverse and accepting country in comparison to MOST countries in the world INCLUDING Europe.
The only thing that jarred was your final sentence, about the birth of a superpower. But by common definitions of "superpower", if we must use the term, then I accept that the USA has been one since WW2. But why you should want to use the terms begs many questions.
Going back to the thread, it really is for history to judge if one country was the "greatest" or the "best" in any period and, even then, arguments are bound to rage because of the arrogance of any such claim. What I am picking up from this thread is that there is a strong current in American thinking that it is important that they acknowledge that they are the "best" or the "greatest" country. This is very worrying. As soon as this thinking starts to take hold, people move into an unreal world where they are the good guys and they must sort the good guys from the bad; it also makes it harder to accept mistakes humbly and learn from them. A nation that thinks this way about itself will cast itself as having the "burden" of resolving major world problems, according to some God-given mandate. Ultimately, these beliefs lead to thinking that the lives of the people in their country are more important than the lives of other people. As I say, this is an extremely familiar mentality for Brits and, by no means have we recovered from it. If any Brit made similar claims as to how we were ever the "best" or "greatest", he or she could expect a similar response.
America's cockiness is just as dangerous as that of Britain's of the past, perhaps more, because of sheer devastating firepower. You'll never find me harking back to the greatness of Britain's colonial past - though many Britons sadly still do. The Americans were right to insist that Britain relinquish the empire after WW2, but are wrong to copy this mentality, as though it was their turn. The chickens have long been coming to roost as a result.
Thank-you for the information. You write well and I enjoyed reading it.
I am sure the Canadians were heavily involved in WW2 but I don't know when their involvement started.
I'm really not doubting that the USA made a huge contribution to the defeat of the Nazis and it's something we should never forget. I don't know exactly what commemorations will take place for VE Day this week (70th anniversary) but I hope that the USA has a big role - they certainly should.
The only thing that jarred was your final sentence, about the birth of a superpower. But by common definitions of "superpower", if we must use the term, then I accept that the USA has been one since WW2. But why you should want to use the terms begs many questions.
Going back to the thread, it really is for history to judge if one country was the "greatest" or the "best" in any period and, even then, arguments are bound to rage because of the arrogance of any such claim. What I am picking up from this thread is that there is a strong current in American thinking that it is important that they acknowledge that they are the "best" or the "greatest" country. This is very worrying. As soon as this thinking starts to take hold, people move into an unreal world where they are the good guys and they must sort the good guys from the bad; it also makes it harder to accept mistakes humbly and learn from them. A nation that thinks this way about itself will cast itself as having the "burden" of resolving major world problems, according to some God-given mandate. Ultimately, these beliefs lead to thinking that the lives of the people in their country are more important than the lives of other people. As I say, this is an extremely familiar mentality for Brits and, by no means have we recovered from it. If any Brit made similar claims as to how we were ever the "best" or "greatest", he or she could expect a similar response.
I'll hold back on specifics as to how America's best" and "greatest" mentality has led to horror for many people around the world for now. But if the thread continues in this vein, then expect some reality checks along these lines.
Ok. Lots to chew over. I've never compared US patriotism with European fascism. I don't think Brits are inclined to think this way, though I have to speak for myself. I've never seen it anyway.I think another important point when distinguishing European-style fascism with American patriotism, and this one is important, is the question of blame.
When Hitler came to power in Germany, or when Mussolini came to power in Italy, etc, the attitude of the fascists in these countries was to blame outsiders for the trials and problems faced by their respective countries.
Hitler blamed the Jews, blamed the French, blamed everyone except the Germans for their failures. This led to a hatred of others, and justified, in their minds, violence against others.
Americans, while cocky as can be, don't blame anyone other than Americans for their woes. It's inconceivable to an American that we wouldn't be the masters of our own destiny. In fact, we're an open book.... dig through this forum and I challenge you to find many instances in which an American of any political persuasion blames a foreign country for what is going wrong in our country.
American liberals blame American conservatives. American conservatives blame Obama. There's a lot of finger pointing, but it's all internal. We believe that we are responsible for our own fate, and that, my friend, is a huge distinction from the fascists of Europe who blamed others and thus used this to justify violence against them.