Where is great big Tidal wave when you need one?

[blzrul]

In the video tape of the anti-US protests that happened there two weeks after 9/11, it looked liked hundreds of thousands people. There goes that theory.

342660[/snapback]

That's not what's under discussion here.

 

I wouldn't expect this narrow-minded group to be rational. Anything but a bigoted, knee-jerk reaction would be a big surprise. I happened to see and hear lots of people express tearful gratitude for the help we sent - however you folks like the glass half empty, go for it.

[SilverNRed]

That's not what's under discussion here.

342724[/snapback]

Yes, it would be tragic if a poster went completely off-topic in the middle of a thread trying to prove his (or her) point.

[Campy]

In the short run, no. Long-term -- forcing them to be self-sufficient, yes.

 

Hawaii's part of this country. Panama, I can see, but it'sn not like we're getting resources for free. I'm not saying we should stop all business with third world nations, just end the handouts.

 

Especially to countries that are publicly hostile to us.

342714[/snapback]

Giving them aid and teaching them skill will make them self-sufficient, not denying them of all aid. That will only make the situation worse. Sub-Saharan Africa is a case-in-point to demonstrate what I'm talking about.

 

Hawaii wasn't always a state. In fact, it was a soveign nation before the US ordered the Marines to take it over at the request of American business.

 

In Panama, we made a token payment and knocked the Columbians back (Panama had been part of Columbia for years) so we could install a puppet government. Panama was essentially cut in half as the canal area was US territory until recently.

[/dev/null]

however you folks like the glass half empty, go for it.

342724[/snapback]

 

only if its full of beer

 

and i drank the other half

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Giving them aid and teaching them skill will make them self-sufficient, not denying them of all aid.  That will only make the situation worse.  Sub-Saharan Africa is a case-in-point to demonstrate what I'm talking about.

 

Hawaii wasn't always a state.  In fact, it was a soveign nation before the US ordered the Marines to take it over at the request of American business. 

 

In Panama, we made a token payment and knocked the Columbians back (Panama had been part of Columbia for years) so we could install a puppet government.  Panama was essentially cut in half as the canal area was US territory until recently.

342734[/snapback]

 

Giving them aid will make them self-sufficient? One would think that the 50+ years following WWII would have been plenty of time to get them up and running.

 

Hawaii was a British colony at one time, was it not?

 

Well, duh. It was one of the best investments our country ever made, Panama.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Yes, it would be tragic if a poster went completely off-topic in the middle of a thread trying to prove his (or her) point.

342732[/snapback]

 

[Alaska Darin]

I don't recall our people marching in the streets by the thousands, killing people, and burning stuff, every time we think Christians are being wronged, like you know, like a church is blown up. Something small like that.

 

Check this out:

It is really funny, because it was from the same country that a whole US Carrier group went to help out after the big wave hit:

 

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABPub/200...9/403092165.jpg

 

Heart warming

342692[/snapback]

Like I said, if our "news" was as limited as theirs and our religious/political leaders were given carte blanche to do what they wanted...

 

In one of the other threads I cited a couple of movies by Pierre Rehov that have a ton of clips from Palestinian television. Rent it and get back to me on why they think what they do.

[Campy]

Giving them aid will make them self-sufficient?

As I said in the same sentence, in addition to aid, if they are taught skills it would certainly help.

 

One would think that the 50+ years following WWII would have been plenty of time to get them up and running.

Like Israel? It's not like it can't be done.

 

Hawaii was a British colony at one time, was it not?

The UK attempted to establish a profitable colony there but their efforts were repelled and Hawaii was still a sovereign nation, one which prohibited foreigners (including the English) from owning land. That doesn't sound like the usual traits of an English colony to me, but that's just me. The Hawaiin monarch (I can't recall her name) tried to raise tariffs on exports, especially sugar, and was subsequently toppled at the request of American business.

 

Well, duh. It was one of the best investments our country ever made, Panama.

That "investment" certainly worked out to be lucrative for the US but let's not call it an "investment." Let's call it what it was, an unprovoked imperialistic military action against an independent sovereign nation executed to exploit the resources of the same -Which was pretty much my point before I had to stop and give history lessons.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Let's call it what it was, an unprovoked imperialistic military action against an independent sovereign nation executed to exploit the resources of the same -

342944[/snapback]

 

France?

[Campy]

France? 

342950[/snapback]

The French were to build it orignally but sold the rights to the US after something like 22K people died building it. The problem was that it wasn't France's to sell, it was Columbia's.

 

In sweeps the US to "assist" the junta rebels against Columbia in much the same manner we would later "assist" General Diem in Vietnam.

 

We then required the newly-created Panama to deed us the land rights around the canal. We made a fortune on fees, but the real goal was to allow the Navy to deploy any vessel on either coast to either the Atlantic or Pacific because imperialism has always required control of the seas.

[Alaska Darin]

The French were to build it orignally but sold the rights to the US after something like 22K people died building it.  The problem was that it wasn't France's to sell, it was Columbia's. 

 

In sweeps the US to "assist" the junta rebels against Columbia in much the same manner we would later "assist" General Diem in Vietnam.

 

We then required the newly-created Panama to deed us the land rights around the canal.  We made a fortune on fees, but the real goal was to allow the Navy to deploy any vessel on either coast to either the Atlantic or Pacific.

342968[/snapback]

We also made Panama uber-rich for quite awhile because it became the banking capital of the hemisphere. Well, until Mr. Carter gave the Canal back and completely destabilized their government in the process. Whoops!

 

Now it's back to the banana republic it was destined to be...

[Campy]

We also made Panama uber-rich for quite awhile because it became the banking capital of the hemisphere.  Well, until Mr. Carter gave the Canal back and completely destabilized their government in the process.  Whoops!

 

Now it's back to the banana republic it was destined to be...

342971[/snapback]

Couldn't resist a shot at Carter eh?

 

General Herrera started that process long before Carter arranged for control to be finally turned over in '99. He put Panama in severe debt by overspending on public works projects which granted, made him very popluar with Panamanians, but they (the Panamanian gov't) weren't exactly rolling in money.

[Alaska Darin]

Couldn't resist a shot at Carter eh?

You know me.

 

General Herrera started that process long before Carter arranged for control to be finally turned over in '99.  He put Panama in severe debt by overspending on public works projects which granted, made him very popluar with Panamanians, but they (the Panamanian gov't) weren't exactly rolling in money.

342984[/snapback]

Which certainly explains why everything they did pretty much fell apart as the turnover became closer. I think they honestly thought the banking industry would be enough to keep that mess afloat. It wasn't.

[Pac_Man]

I wouldn't have given them fifteen cents of aid. That is how little I feel for those who hate us.

I am not proud of my stance on this issue but hey, that's just me.

342609[/snapback]

I once felt as you do; until I put myself in the shoes of the average citizen of an Islamic nation. What things has this person seen over the last 15 - 20 years? They've seen an American president bomb the Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and (by accident) Pakistan to distract attention from a domestic scandal. Many in the Muslim world might reasonably conclude that innocent Muslims died because the American president had an affair.

 

Muslims have also seen their ancient culture undermined by the likes of Hollywood, American television, etc. Instead of whatever cultural richness and depth they've achieved in the past, young people are being offered something as shallow as it is sexual, as unfulfilling as it is glamorous. The American mass media represents the cultural equivalent of a nuclear bomb. Its epicenter was this country. Having wiped out much or most of the local American culture that once existed, the effects of this cultural bomb are now spreading globally.

 

Muslims see the soulless multinational companies; the same companies whose efforts have created an anti-American immigration policy in this country. Perhaps such companies are equally predatory in Muslim nations.

 

Muslims have seen the U.S. continue its aid to Israel, despite the latter's human rights violations. In the 1980s, Israel bombed and shelled the homes of innocent Beirut civilians, because there were terrorists hiding amongst the civilians. Ronald Reagan described the resulting murder of civilians as a "holocaust" in his autobiography. And yet, the political pressure for continued aid to Israel was so strong, that despite the subsequent election of a war criminal to Israel's highest office, Israel remained far and away the largest recipient of American foreign aid.

 

Muslims are familiar with American bombs, both those dropped on them directly and those which proceed through the Israel conduit. Muslims are familiar with the amoral and anti-moral American mass media (including Hollywood). Muslims are familiar with predatory multinationals, many of which originated or are based in this country. What Muslims are not familiar with is the honest Midwestern farmer, the regular guy blue collar factory worker, the woman who stays at home and raises her kids. They are unfamiliar with the tens of millions of people who make this country great, who represent the true American heartland. And yet it's not the Hollywood film studio directors or the rich multinational heads who are over in the Middle East putting their lives on the line. Instead, it's the good Americans who are dying because of the hatred which, all too often, has been inspired by this nation's deeply flawed (and, ironically, often anti-American) elite.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

That "investment" certainly  worked out to be lucrative for the US but let's not call it an "investment."  Let's call it what it was, an unprovoked imperialistic military action against an independent sovereign nation executed to exploit the resources of the same -Which was pretty much my point before I had to stop and give history lessons.

342944[/snapback]

 

And what's wrong with that? The world was a better place when we were less afraid to flex our muscle. We're not like the Nazis or Japanese or even the British were. If we had been, we would have dominated our hemisphere.

 

You know, one British scholar (his name eludes me) believes that we're not imperialistic enough. I tend to agree. Nature abhors a vacuum.

[philburger1]

 

Muslims see the soulless multinational companies; the same companies whose efforts have created an anti-American immigration policy in this country.

343487[/snapback]

 

 

Huh? Wal-Mart was found guilty of trying to sneak people in to work at low wages.

If anything, big companies sell our country down the river by not enforcing the weak immagration laws we have.

[blzrul]

Our biggest mistake is being so un-Christian in our giving. If one's truly Christian about it, one gives in the spirit of giving, not expecting anything back. Getting PO'd because people accept gifts and then don't lick out boots is our problem, not theirs. I thought America was supposed to be a big Christian country but I guess I was wrong. The act of giving made it appear so but the backlash here because a not everyone falls down at our feet in grateful response at our sharing of our largesse belies that.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Our biggest mistake is being so un-Christian in our giving.  If one's truly Christian about it, one gives in the spirit of giving, not expecting anything back.  Getting PO'd because people accept gifts and then don't lick out boots is our problem, not theirs.

 

I don't see anyone here claiming their attitude is a proper Christian one.

 

I thought America was supposed to be a big Christian country but I guess I was wrong.

343631[/snapback]

 

See Debbie. See Debbie overgeneralize the attitude of a vocal few to an entire country. Overgeneralize, Debbie, overgeneralize!

[Bill from NYC]

Our biggest mistake is being so un-Christian in our giving.  If one's truly Christian about it, one gives in the spirit of giving, not expecting anything back.  Getting PO'd because people accept gifts and then don't lick out boots is our problem, not theirs.  I thought America was supposed to be a big Christian country but I guess I was wrong.  The act of giving made it appear so but the backlash here because a not everyone falls down at our feet in grateful response at our sharing of our largesse belies that.

343631[/snapback]

 

Debbie, it is about self preservation. Many of these people were cheering after 9/11 when the dead bodies of the firefighters that YOU worked with were still warm.

You can be as forgiving as you choose. Perhaps you are a better person than I am for feeling this way, or even a better Christian.

I would rather the money would have been spent on giving tax breaks to parents who struggle to pay for the education of their children. They are FAR more deserving, but again, that's just me.

[blzrul]

Debbie, it is about self preservation. Many of these people were cheering after 9/11 when the dead bodies of the firefighters that YOU worked with were still warm.

You can be as forgiving as you choose. Perhaps you are a better person than I am for feeling this way, or even a better Christian.

I would rather the money would have been spent on giving tax breaks to parents who struggle to pay for the education of their children. They are FAR more deserving, but again, that's just me.

343663[/snapback]

And my point is that it's inaccurate to paint the entire populations of multiple continents based on a proportionately small populace.

 

The average joe in those areas is about as answerable for the actions of idiots as we are for the actions of American extremists. Like the rest of us, they're just trying to survive. It's just as wrong to come down on them as it was to come down on us.