Are you critical or negative about the United States of America? - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

Are you negative or critical of the United States of America?

Yes, I am negative or critical of the United States of America
22
65%
No, I am not negative or critical of the United States of America
4
12%
I am neither negative nor positive about the United States of America
8
24%
#15191164
US does lots of terrible stuff which is open for criticism. Unfortunately, so does any country that has any kind of influence in international affairs. International relations is a dirty bloody game not made for the timid, just ask Jimmy Carter. The system (or lack thereof) is the main problem and nothing will change until it does:

According to Hobbes (Leviathan, 1651), the state of nature was one in which there were no enforceable criteria of right and wrong. People took for themselves all that they could, and human life was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” The state of nature was therefore a state of war, which could be ended only if individuals agreed (in a social contract) to give their liberty into the hands of a sovereign, on the sole condition that their lives were safeguarded by sovereign power.


https://www.britannica.com/topic/social ... t#ref97022
#15191165
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

Ad hominem. Ignored.


Nope, the issue is that you have no arguments to provide to justify the double standard.

Oh and by the way, the ones who historically started to play that game were actually the communists by launching a coup against the democratically elected government of Czechoslovakia on February 1948, with (of course) Soviet support. From then onwards, the US simply realized those would be the rules of the game during the Cold War and they played it accordingly.
#15191167
QatzelOk wrote:One of the objectives of the CIA's MK-Ultra program, was to invent a chemical product that could attack specific "genetic combinations" that could be found in Banana Plantation countries (like Cuba and Guatemala) and make these people stupid, passive, and easy to boss around.

Experimenting with chemicals that make entire nations in Central America braindead stupid is an act of extreme racism and oppression.

It speaks volumes about the attitude that American Money has regarding the less rich peoples of Latin America. Even if you know and read nothing about Latin American history, read about MK Ultra and its intended victims.

By the way, MK ULtra was the first project that the CIA worked on after it was created.

Unforgivable.

Only a degenerate, uncivilized, shithole country could even contemplate such a thing.

Horrible.
#15191184
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

Since a person can be a hypocrite and still be correct, this criticism of yours is illogical.

You are literally claiming that the US did not and does not meddle in Latin America just because I refuse to condemn Cuba for you. This is a stupid criticism to make.


So I assume you also have a negative and critical view of Cuba?
#15191190
Rugoz wrote:The US doesn't oppress the people of Central America. It exercises very little authority. Not at all comparable to China on its terrority.

I don't think it's fair to compare one country's imperialism to another country's domestic rule especially in a thread that's supposed to about one country only.
#15191205
Pants-of-dog wrote:Yes and no.

For example, Colombia is essentially a democracy and it is even looking into, and seeking justice for, atrocities committed during the dictatorship and rebellion.

But leftists are still being targeted by paramilitary groups that were initially set up and trained by the USA.


My previous argument applies then. US meddling is not the major cause of oppression because there are deeper causes at work. On top of that, to the extent US meddling actually prevented a Marxist-Leninist revolution, it prevented oppression. Would Colombia today be freer as a FARC-dictatorship? I doubt it.

Pants-of-dog wrote:I do not think it is possible to make any sort of informed statement about relative levels of meddling since we do not have a transparent method of knowing how much meddling each country is currently involved in.


Nice try.

How about using common sense instead?

Colombia has its own military, trade policy (unless Mercusor restricts it), controls its own border, i.e. controls what people and goods are allowed to enter, it is not subject to regulation and laws passed by Congress in Washington. It does not extradite its own citizens for crimes committed in Colombia. The US does not shut down newspapers in Colombia because they say bad things about Washington nor does it order the arrest of pro-democracy protesters there.

Unlike China in Kong Kong, it doesn't have that kind of authority.

AFAIK wrote:I don't think it's fair to compare one country's imperialism to another country's domestic rule especially in a thread that's supposed to about one country only.


Potemkin made that comparison and for some reason PoD is trying to defend it. :lol:
#15191252
Rugoz wrote:My previous argument applies then. US meddling is not the major cause of oppression because there are deeper causes at work.


There is no hierarchy of causes.

The original claim you made was that all claims of US meddling were nonsense. You then changed your argument to colonialism, and I pointed out that colonialism was one of the reasons why the US was able to meddle.

You now seem to he changing your argument for a third time and are how arguing that some vague and unspecified causes of oppression were more important.

And like colonialism, these other unspecified reasons may also have helped US neoimperialism.

On top of that, to the extent US meddling actually prevented a Marxist-Leninist revolution, it prevented oppression. Would Colombia today be freer as a FARC-dictatorship? I doubt it.


Speculation and an ad hominem all rolled into one.

And yo are agreeing that the US meddled, by the way. You are merely justifying all the atrocities and humans rights abuses by insulting socialists and saying we are all evil.

Nice try.

How about using common sense instead?

Colombia has its own military, trade policy (unless Mercusor restricts it), controls its own border, i.e. controls what people and goods are allowed to enter, it is not subject to regulation and laws passed by Congress in Washington. It does not extradite its own citizens for crimes committed in Colombia. The US does not shut down newspapers in Colombia because they say bad things about Washington nor does it order the arrest of pro-democracy protesters there.

Unlike China in Kong Kong, it doesn't have that kind of authority.


If you want to believe that all Us meddling is overt and legal, i.e. not covert or illegal, feel free.

Please note that the evidence I already presented to you concerning Honduras disproves that assumption.

Potemkin made that comparison and for some reason PoD is trying to defend it. :lol:


No. You made the claim that the oppression suffered by Latinos under US neoimperialism was nonsense.

I disproved that claim.

I also pointed out that comparing the US to other countries is a whataboutism.
#15191278
Pants-of-dog wrote:There is no hierarchy of causes.


There are certainly more and less important causes. Colonialism created the societies in Latin America.

Pants-of-dog wrote:The original claim you made was that all claims of US meddling were nonsense.


I never made such a claim. Shove your straw man up your ass.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Speculation and an ad hominem all rolled into one.


Facts, not speculation.

Pants-of-dog wrote:You are merely justifying all the atrocities and humans rights abuses by insulting socialists and saying we are all evil.


Another straw man to shove up your ass.

Pants-of-dog wrote:If you want to believe that all Us meddling is overt and legal, i.e. not covert or illegal, feel free.


It's not all overt and legal, but it's still a matter of international relations. It's not comparable to the authority a nation state exercises in its own territory.

Pants-of-dog wrote:No. You made the claim that the oppression suffered by Latinos under US neoimperialism was nonsense.


I never made such a claim. Shove it up your ass. Must get really tight up there.

Pants-of-dog wrote:I disproved that claim.


Which is all you manage. Disproving your own retarded straw men.

Pants-of-dog wrote:I also pointed out that comparing the US to other countries is a whataboutism.


Do you want a medal? I didn't start that comparison.
#15191286
Rugoz wrote:There are certainly more and less important causes. Colonialism created the societies in Latin America.


To assume that one can stack the causes in order of importance requires the ahistorical assumption that these causes were isolated from each other.

In truth, these causes helped, supported, and led into each other.

I never made such a claim. Shove your straw man up your ass.

I never made such a claim. Shove it up your ass. Must get really tight up there.


Then please explain why you dismissed the claim that the US has oppressed Central Americans as “nonsense”.

Facts, not speculation.


When you speculate that the ebil socialists were going to kill everyone else and that this justifies US oppression of Central Americans, you are doing three things:

1. Making non-factual speculations about what would have happened in the event of a socialist government,
2. Making an ad hominem that all socialists are evil oppressors, and
3. Justifying human rights abuses and oppression.

Another straw man to shove up your ass.


Then please explain what you meant when you said that US meddling prevented a socialist government and therefore prevented oppression.

It's not all overt and legal, but it's still a matter of international relations. It's not comparable to the authority a nation state exercises in its own territory.


Since I did not make this comparison (while I believe you, @Patrickov, and/or @wat0n did), this criticism is not relevant.

Which is all you manage. Disproving your own retarded straw men.

Do you want a medal? I didn't start that comparison.


Then we agree that it is unfair “to compare one country's imperialism to another country's domestic rule especially in a thread that's supposed to about one country only”, as @AFAIK noted.
#15191300
AFAIK wrote:Why don't you make a poll @wat0n?
This thread is for USA.


Yet my point is relevant: If his issue with the USA is a matter of foreign policy, then it's quite evident one has to look at the behavior of the USA's adversaries to evaluate the merits of the argument. After all, there is plenty of otherwise immoral behavior that is not unethical if done under specific circumstances (e.g. killing in self-defense), and as such it doesn't make sense to whine about USA foreign policy when its adversaries were doing exactly the same (such as destabilizing Latin American governments).

And no, it's not whataboutism either, which (it should be noted) was a response to criticism of Soviet internal politics and not a response to criticism of Soviet foreign policy.
#15191316
@wat0n

viewtopic.php?p=15191314#p15191291
viewtopic.php?p=15191314#p15191170
viewtopic.php?f=44&t=180977&start=40#p15191156
viewtopic.php?f=44&t=180977&start=40#p15191137

These posts all explain that your argument is nothing more than an attempt to justify US human rights abuses because “what about the ebil socilsists!!1!”.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 19
Even our shoes are racist.

@Unthinking Majority Okay. Please note that t[…]

Colin Powell....

It goes against my upbringing to throw rocks at th[…]

Tibet. And of course the China Sea. Bro, 'ca[…]

A just 5 min. video about how wages are too low, s[…]