• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is America the greatest Country anymore? Or do you agree with Will?

Is America the greatest Country anymore? Or do you agree with Will?

  • Total voters
    57
mpg said:
The US might not be the best country in the world, but it's easily the best of the big countries. Which big country is better?
Click to expand...

That's the point that always springs to mind. If not the US, who?
 
mpg said:
The US might not be the best country in the world, but it's easily the best of the big countries. Which big country is better?
Click to expand...

The small countries live in peace only because of the protection and forbearance of the big countries.
 
Jack Hays said:
They do not have the capabilities, the equipment, or the personnel. Other than that, they'll be fine.
Click to expand...

They would have to commit to gaining those capabilities and give up some of the entitlement spending.
 
Jack Hays said:
Oil money from the US is a negligible source of terrorist support.
Click to expand...

the first world's reliance on fossil fuels as a primary transportation fuel is a huge source of money for the Middle East.

Jack Hays said:
A large role for that oil money is just a myth. It is also a myth that the ME has been embroiled in holy war for centuries. There have been conflicts to be sure, but there have been longer periods of calm. A strong US presence actually gives regimes there the confidence to not act with hair-trigger responses.
Click to expand...

and most of those conflicts in recent decades happened after the US acted in the region : the Shah in Iran, backing the Mujahideen in a proxy war against the Soviets, backing Saddam and then fighting him, and now IS in Syria, Iraq, and Libya.

it's time to get out of the region and build our own country instead.
 
ObamacareFail said:
I am at least partially with you on that one. I think we need to maintain our abilities and logistics, however it is time for Europe to step up to the plate.
Click to expand...

they haven't been completely absent, but the US has been expected to carry the bulk of the load. my preference would be Saudi Arabia handling its own region. however, yes, if the first world wants an army, it needs to build and fund one. the costs of always having to take the lead role are unsustainable.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Is America the greatest Country anymore? Or do you agree with Will?

Click to expand...


We have the largest economy, and have more GDP per capita than most other countries in the world. The only countries with larger GDP per capita are usually small and many just have a lot of oil. We lead the world in science and technology. We have more freedom, more democracy, and less pollution than most countries. We have the most powerful military.

So I think that all around we are still the best although I am not sure how long we will still hold this.
 
Helix said:
the first world's reliance on fossil fuels as a primary transportation fuel is a huge source of money for the Middle East.



and most of those conflicts in recent decades happened after the US acted in the region : the Shah in Iran, backing the Mujahideen in a proxy war against the Soviets, backing Saddam and then fighting him, and now IS in Syria, Iraq, and Libya.

it's time to get out of the region and build our own country instead.
Click to expand...

Almost none of the first world's transportation fuel money goes to terrorists. And no, the US presence has in fact been a source of stability in the ME. The Shah would have come to power with or without us, and led a relatively progressive regime for 25 years. The Muj whom we backed against the Soviets were not/are not just the Taliban. ISIS is a creation of our premature departure from Iraq, and our failure to act in timely fashion (early 2012) in Syria.
 
Well, y'all are certainly world champs at one thing; I don't think anyone measures a dick quite as enthusiastically as you guys. :lol:
 
Jack Hays said:
Almost none of the first world's transportation fuel money goes to terrorists. And no, the US presence has in fact been a source of stability in the ME. The Shah would have come to power with or without us, and led a relatively progressive regime for 25 years. The Muj whom we backed against the Soviets were not/are not just the Taliban. ISIS is a creation of our premature departure from Iraq, and our failure to act in timely fashion (early 2012) in Syria.
Click to expand...

oh, FFS.

WikiLeaks cables portray Saudi Arabia as a cash machine for terrorists | World news | The Guardian

How ISIS Uses Oil To Fund Terror

United States Seeks to Strangle the Islamic State's Funding - The Atlantic

don't waste my time, Jack.

and IS is the spawn of Al Qaeda, which had its beginnings with the Mujahideen.

The 1990s are a transitional period between the Mujahideen outfits forming part of the proxy wars between the Cold War superpowers and the emergence of contemporary jihadism in the wake of the US "War on Terror" and the "Arab spring".

Al-Qaeda saw its formative period during this time, and jihadism formed part of the picture in regional conflicts of the 1990s, including the Yugoslav Wars, the Somali Civil War, the First Chechen War, etc.

Mujahideen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...



it's time to get the **** out and let the Saudis handle their own region.
 
Andalublue said:
Well, y'all are certainly world champs at one thing; I don't think anyone measures a dick quite as enthusiastically as you guys. :lol:
Click to expand...

Yea, but we smile broadly when they hit the ground! :mrgreen:
 
Jack Hays said:
They do not have the capabilities, the equipment, or the personnel. Other than that, they'll be fine.
Click to expand...
lulz

This is an almost profoundly uninformed comment.
 
Jack Hays said:
The small countries live in peace only because of the protection and forbearance of the big countries.
Click to expand...
And another one.

You're on a roll, Jack.
 
Helix said:
oh, FFS.

WikiLeaks cables portray Saudi Arabia as a cash machine for terrorists | World news | The Guardian

How ISIS Uses Oil To Fund Terror

United States Seeks to Strangle the Islamic State's Funding - The Atlantic

don't waste my time, Jack.

and IS is the spawn of Al Qaeda, which had its beginnings with the Mujahideen.





it's time to get the **** out and let the Saudis handle their own region.
Click to expand...

The amounts of oil and money cited in your links are mere decimal dust in the global oil trade. Al Qaeda was a group formed from foreign fighters who went to Afghanistan to fight alongside the Muj. They were not themselves Muj. By 2009 they were largely suppressed in Iraq, but the safehaven offered by a lawless Syria allowed a comeback.
 
Jack Hays said:
The amounts of oil and money cited in your links are mere decimal dust in the global oil trade. Al Qaeda was a group formed from foreign fighters who went to Afghanistan to fight alongside the Muj. They were not themselves Muj. By 2009 they were largely suppressed in Iraq, but the safehaven offered by a lawless Syria allowed a comeback.
Click to expand...

another example of instability in the wake of decades of interventionism.

and oil funds terror.

Fueling Terror

The Economist explains: Where Islamic State gets its money | The Economist
 
Jack Hays said:
Your first link is a significantly outdated advocacy piece aiming to cut US oil consumption.

Your second link merely documents the outlier status of ISIS, which gets its oil the old-fashioned way -- by conquering it.
Click to expand...

yeah, if you're going to do your usual "dismiss the source / skim and ignore the source" routine, it's not worth my time. that isn't debate. have a good Sunday night.
 
Helix said:
yeah, if you're going to do your usual "dismiss the source / skim and ignore the source" routine, it's not worth my time. that isn't debate. have a good Sunday night.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you can't pretend non-evidence is evidence. The advocacy piece was worthless from a factual point of view, and the ISIS/oil piece actually made my point, not yours. Your problem is not my debating tactic but your assertion unsupported by any factual foundation.
 
Jack Hays said:
Sorry, but you can't pretend non-evidence is evidence. The advocacy piece was worthless from a factual point of view, and the ISIS/oil piece actually made my point, not yours. Your problem is not my debating tactic but your assertion unsupported by any factual foundation.
Click to expand...

like i said, believe whatever supports your worldview and automatically dismiss any challenges to it if that makes you happy. i'm not going to waste another second on dishonest shortcuts.
 
Helix said:
like i said, believe whatever supports your worldview and automatically dismiss any challenges to it if that makes you happy. i'm not going to waste another second on dishonest shortcuts.
Click to expand...

Your attitude mystifies me. I never "automatically" dismiss challenges, but I dismiss assertions readily shown to be false and I like to see evidence.
 
Anglo-scot said:
I think we have a long and dishonourable history of claiming to be the best in the world for many years.
Click to expand...

It's not dishonorable if it's true. The question isn't which country makes the best washing machines or sitcoms. It is whether the U.S. is the greatest country, and, while opinions may vary, on some of the most important measures of a country's "greatness" I don't think the U.S. has any peer. If not for the U.S. all of those French chefs would be cooking Apfelstrudel while pomp and ceremony in Britain would revolve around the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers goose stepping and perfecting their "Sieg Heils."
 
It's a crappy poll and crappy speech because it asserts the good-old-days were wonderful - and they were not.
 
This is the movie speech:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom