The meter is running: Obama's first year

[Dave]

Oh and Dave, don't worry about NR - he's just mad cause I laughed at his summer hovel in the woods I'm a big boy and can take the slings and arrows. Plus, you know me - when someone melts down like that and degenerates into slinging vitriol like that, it just confirms in my mind that he knows he's got nothing. I take it as a sign of capitulation, kind of like when a feminist can't win a logical argument with a man, so she tries to "trump" him by calling him a misogynist.

It had nothing to do with how well the target could take it but is instead a measure of decorum. I know you can take it. But you shouldn't have to.

 

[Seraphyn]

Must've been moron voting day to be honest. A strong US is what gives NATO (thus most of the important EU members) and to a large extent the UN it's power.

I'd hate to see a weak US, but I'd like the US not to be an ass that's only thinking of itself in the world politics setting. With Obama we get at least the idea that he's actually listening and cares about our issues/situations. We had little of that with Bush. On that alone, many EU citizens will always prefer people like Obama over people like Bush.

 

[Krisken]

Must've been moron voting day to be honest. A strong US is what gives NATO (thus most of the important EU members) and to a large extent the UN it's power.

I'd hate to see a weak US, but I'd like the US not to be an ass that's only thinking of itself in the world politics setting. With Obama we get at least the idea that he's actually listening and cares about our issues/situations. We had little of that with Bush. On that alone, many EU citizens will always prefer people like Obama over people like Bush.

That impression was largely the fault of Yosemite Sam (John Bolton), who famously said "There is no such thing as the United Nations. There is only the international community, which can only be led by the only remaining superpower, which is the United States."

What a diplomat!

 

[North_Ranger]

Oh and Dave, don't worry about NR - he's just mad cause I laughed at his summer hovel in the woods I'm a big boy and can take the slings and arrows. Plus, you know me - when someone melts down like that and degenerates into slinging vitriol like that, it just confirms in my mind that he knows he's got nothing. I take it as a sign of capitulation, kind of like when a feminist can't win a logical argument with a man, so she tries to \"trump\" him by calling him a misogynist.

Anyway, closest thing I can find right off the cuff is this 2004 report on page 9, where it shows overwhelming support for the EU being as strong as america (read: America weakened on the global stage to the level of the EU) would be a good thing for the world.

It also MIGHT have something to do with you bundling up an entire continent into one big Obama-lovin' ball and then spitting all over it. I merely answered your essentialist bovine byproduct in the level of maturity that seemed equal to your statement. "In America."

Also, congrats on finding outdated evidence that you misinterpret to suit your own political agenda. *golfclap*

As for the "hovel"... your loss, bub, if you can't enjoy peace and quiet. "In America."

 

[North_Ranger]

Must've been moron voting day to be honest. A strong US is what gives NATO (thus most of the important EU members) and to a large extent the UN it's power.

I'd hate to see a weak US, but I'd like the US not to be an ass that's only thinking of itself in the world politics setting. With Obama we get at least the idea that he's actually listening and cares about our issues/situations. We had little of that with Bush. On that alone, many EU citizens will always prefer people like Obama over people like Bush.

I just think it's funny that GB needs to put his own spin on his own evidence. What I read as wanting to strengthen the position of the EU as a political entity, he reads as wanting to chip away US power.

 

[tegid]

Anyway, closest thing I can find right off the cuff is this 2004 report on page 9, where it shows overwhelming support for the EU being as strong as america (read: America weakened on the global stage to the level of the EU) would be a good thing for the world.

Yeah, if you read whatever you want then fine. But in the report I read, it said, and I quote

'Moreover, half or more of the public in each of the five European nations surveyed say it would be a good thing if the European Union becomes as powerful as the United States.'

Which has the obvious interpretation of the EU rising in power, as opposed to what you are saying. More so if you read about the consequences, etc.

[EDIT: NR put it better than me.
I also find it funny that apparently Americans are more reticent of a powerful EU than Europeans are of a powerful US]

And then terrorism successfully grabbed the reins of Spain's political system with the train bombings 3 days before the election, and they cast off their spines faster than the french ever have in the entirety of recorded history.

Erm... except that the then governing party fucked things up trying to twist the bombings in their favor saying they had been done by local terrorists when the investigation was clearly giving other leads.

So yeah no bending over to terrorists. We have our own history and experience on dealing with terrorists, and we don't give in to their aspirations.

 

[@Li3n]

Anyway, closest thing I can find right off the cuff is this 2004 report on page 9, where it shows overwhelming support for the EU being as strong as america (read: America weakened on the global stage to the level of the EU) would be a good thing for the world.

You sir are the funniest person on this forum... i almost choked laughing. 10x man.



And remember kids, whenever GB says he wants America to be strong what he really means is that he wants the rest of the world to die of hunger.

 

[WolfOfOdin]

With the way this thread is going, next GB's going to say the Spanish have no idea how to deal with Fascism or oppressive governments. I'm slightly worried about how something like that would go though.


(I am aware the nightmare Spain went through in the past and in no way imply that the nation is anything but a group of die-hard fighters who know what it is to sacrifice for Freedom)

 

[TommiR]

Anyway, closest thing I can find right off the cuff is this 2004 report on page 9, where it shows overwhelming support for the EU being as strong as america (read: America weakened on the global stage to the level of the EU) would be a good thing for the world.

It could also be taken as the EU citizenry expressing support for a beefing up of european militaries and defence co-operation to the level of the US, not necessarily as indication of a desire to bring US capabilities down. Given that the world seemed to develop towards a less internationally safe place post 9/11, and the foreign policy posture of the US shifting towards a more belligerent stance overall, I'm not sure it is unreasonable for the EU public to express desire to be more capable of looking after their own defences.

EDITED TO ADD: Um, yeah, what the above posters said... Missed the continuance of the discussion.

 

[GasBandit]

I just think it's funny that GB needs to put his own spin on his own evidence. What I read as wanting to strengthen the position of the EU as a political entity, he reads as wanting to chip away US power.

Given that (1) the poll was given in context of "how do you feel about the US?" being the question right above it, and (2) since strength is all relative, an EU "as strong" as the US is a de facto weakening of the US (with france wanting it 90%, they being the most Ameriphobic of the lot), it's really hard how NOT to see it as a desire for a weaker US.

 

[crono1224]

The parasite wants to weaken the strong to his level, the strong wants to increase their power to the levels of their betters. Not really even an half ass quote from Atlas Shrugged, but the generalities remain the same. There is two ways of looking at it, A) EU wants to becomes stronger and match the level of the US, or B) the EU wants the US to degrade to the power of them. Now you gotta decide which do you think they are, I tend to think they think more along the lines of option A where their is no benefits of them not improving themselves except they look better in comparison to an arbitrary country.

 

[GasBandit]

The parasite wants to weaken the strong to his level, the strong wants to increase their power to the levels of their betters. Not really even an half ass quote from Atlas Shrugged, but the generalities remain the same. There is two ways of looking at it, A) EU wants to becomes stronger and match the level of the US, or B) the EU wants the US to degrade to the power of them. Now you gotta decide which do you think they are, I tend to think they think more along the lines of option A where their is no benefits of them not improving themselves except they look better in comparison to an arbitrary country.

Given the socialist nature of Europe, I dare say they're closer to the parasite than the strong, in reference to that quote. However, unlike economies, national political strength on earth is a closed system with no absolutes and all relatives. the strengthening of one in direct relation to another is the de facto weaking of the other. If an emergent union wants to be as strong as the global hegemon, by its very nature it desires to break the hegemony, thus weakening the hegemon. It's not rocket surgery.

 

[@Li3n]

Given the socialist nature of Europe, I dare say they're closer to the parasite than the strong, in reference to that quote. However, unlike economies, national political strength on earth is a closed system with no absolutes and all relatives. the strengthening of one in direct relation to another is the de facto weaking of the other. If an emergent union wants to be as strong as the global hegemon, by its very nature it desires to break the hegemony, thus weakening the hegemon. It's not rocket surgery.

Yeah Gas, by becoming someone's equal that someone is no longer the strongest... and next week we'll be learning about algebra.

 

[crono1224]

The parasite wants to weaken the strong to his level, the strong wants to increase their power to the levels of their betters. Not really even an half ass quote from Atlas Shrugged, but the generalities remain the same. There is two ways of looking at it, A) EU wants to becomes stronger and match the level of the US, or B) the EU wants the US to degrade to the power of them. Now you gotta decide which do you think they are, I tend to think they think more along the lines of option A where their is no benefits of them not improving themselves except they look better in comparison to an arbitrary country.

Given the socialist nature of Europe, I dare say they're closer to the parasite than the strong, in reference to that quote. However, unlike economies, national political strength on earth is a closed system with no absolutes and all relatives. the strengthening of one in direct relation to another is the de facto weaking of the other. If an emergent union wants to be as strong as the global hegemon, by its very nature it desires to break the hegemony, thus weakening the hegemon. It's not rocket surgery.[/QUOTE]

That would almost be true if the only two powers at play were US and EU and no other powers existed, and we were in direct competition of each other.

 

[@Li3n]

You forgot the part where his statement is stupid because no one wants to be weak... so by his logic everyone wants to weaken the US, whether or not the actions undertaken benefit the US in other areas besides the global hegemony thing too.




Oh, and btw Gas, a long time ago you said somethign about the US being the 1st superpower... fun fact, the guy that coined the word explicitly said the British Empire was the first one, i thought you should know, so people will maybe stop calling you uneducated.

 

[tegid]

it's really hard how NOT to see it as a desire for a weaker US.

Weell... Try not to hurt your head but please put some effort into it.

'Among those favoring a more powerful EU,
majorities in every country say they would
continue to take this position even if it means that
Europe would have to pay the costs of taking
greater responsibility for international problems.'

This does sound much more like europeans who wanted the EU to be as powerful as the US wanted just that and not what you are infering. You say the USA would become weaker as a consequence? Fine. The people answering the poll either wanted to 'take the power' from other nations or much more probably, just didn't realize/think about that.

At the very least, the US' favorability ratings are incompatible with all the people who want a more powerful EU wanting a less powerful US.

Also, I guess the third of Americans who don't think a more powerful EU is a bad idea are just anti americans who want to see their country striped of power.


That is, supposing you are right and our rising in power inevitably means you'd lose some. I also question that, since that power can be mesured against non-allied countries, for instance, and the US is, at least somehow, regarded as an ally.

EDIT: re: Europe tends to be parasitic: :lol: those're some prejudices you've got there, cowboy! You really don't get us. Can't you understand that we are a different culture with different aspirations?

 

[Denbrought]

One of which was Spain

And then terrorism successfully grabbed the reins of Spain's political system with the train bombings 3 days before the election, and they cast off their spines faster than the french ever have in the entirety of recorded history.[/QUOTE]
Yeah. In fact, Spain's populace was overwhelmingly in favour of invading Irak and only started protesting en masse against the war after those bombings. Furthermore, the party that rose to power after those elections only started promising to get us out of the war after the bombings happened.

Man, I love reinterpreting history.

 

[GasBandit]

You forgot the part where his statement is stupid because no one wants to be weak... so by his logic everyone wants to weaken the US, whether or not the actions undertaken benefit the US in other areas besides the global hegemony thing too.

You're starting to catch on. Everyone *does* want to weaken the US, even if only to make themselves comparatively stronger.

Oh, and btw Gas, a long time ago you said somethign about the US being the 1st superpower... fun fact, the guy that coined the word explicitly said the British Empire was the first one, i thought you should know, so people will maybe stop calling you uneducated.

Hm, I don't think I ever said that. You might be confusing me with someone else. I did, however, call the US the world's LAST superpower.

The parasite wants to weaken the strong to his level, the strong wants to increase their power to the levels of their betters. Not really even an half ass quote from Atlas Shrugged, but the generalities remain the same. There is two ways of looking at it, A) EU wants to becomes stronger and match the level of the US, or B) the EU wants the US to degrade to the power of them. Now you gotta decide which do you think they are, I tend to think they think more along the lines of option A where their is no benefits of them not improving themselves except they look better in comparison to an arbitrary country.

Given the socialist nature of Europe, I dare say they're closer to the parasite than the strong, in reference to that quote. However, unlike economies, national political strength on earth is a closed system with no absolutes and all relatives. the strengthening of one in direct relation to another is the de facto weaking of the other. If an emergent union wants to be as strong as the global hegemon, by its very nature it desires to break the hegemony, thus weakening the hegemon. It's not rocket surgery.[/QUOTE]

That would almost be true if the only two powers at play were US and EU and no other powers existed, and we were in direct competition of each other.[/QUOTE]It doesn't matter how many slices are cut from the pie, if one slice is made bigger, even the slices that stay the same size are comparatively smaller. And don't fool yourself, we ARE all in competition with each other, directly and indirectly.

Yeah Gas, by becoming someone's equal that someone is no longer the strongest... and next week we'll be learning about algebra.

So you agree with me. Glad we had this little chat. The reasons why Europeans (and Chinese and Russians and Iranians and North Koreans) like Obama is the same reason why foxes like old, blind, deaf dogs to guard henhouses.

 

[tegid]

It doesn't matter how many slices are cut from the pie, if one slice is made bigger, even the slices that stay the same size are comparatively smaller. And don't fool yourself, we ARE all in competition with each other, directly and indirectly.

That's your problem there. You have this mentality of wanting to be strong in spite of others, and can't understand some of us may want to be strong alongside others and even (omg!) for others.

So you agree with me. Glad we had this little chat. The reasons why Europeans (and Chinese and Russians and Iranians and North Koreans) like Obama is the same reason why foxes like old, blind, deaf dogs to guard henhouses.

Refer to my response just above. Also, you are truly delusional and paranoid. Seriously, not everyone's out to get you. We just like him BECAUSE HE'S NOT AN ASSHOLE. Is it that hard to understand?

 

[Seraphyn]

Man, you make it sound like we want America to burn to the ground or something. This is going nowhere, I'm out.

 

[tegid]

You mean you don't want that????

 

[GasBandit]

Much as you would like to think otherwise, the earth is a closed system and its nations and peoples are, for want of ability to escape to other planets, locked in competition for finite resources. In a competition, say, a race, it is only natural to want to win. Thus, it is not an attack on your morality or your character when I say you want to comparatively weaken the united states by comparatively strengthening yourself. It's an acknowledgment of human nature, natural law, physics and fact. We cooperate and ally for common interests, defense, that sort of thing... but if you believe we are not economic and political competitors, you have lulled yourself into a fantasy world.

 

[tegid]

I don't care if it's an attack on my moral character or not from your point of view. It's just untrue. Maybe Europeans are delusional but we don't want a weakened US, and the report you brought doesn't show that.

We're natural competitors? Fine. The United States have a much better grasp on that and want the other countries to be weak because that means they'll be better off? Fine. Do European citizens want that? No.

 

[makare]

Hey not all people in the US are like Gas.

 

[North_Ranger]

Wow... after reading some of GB's responses here, I now hear him as Bandit Keith from Yu-Gi-Oh the Abridged Series: "In America."

He takes a five years old poll done in five of the twenty-seven EU member states, reads the results through a skewed lense to fit his notion of that the EU/Europe - which he apparently thinks are interchangeable - wants to weaken the US, whose hegemonic position must not be challenged in GBverse. "In America."

And then he has the balls to go and insult the Spanish for drawing out of the war, the French by painting them as America-haters and the whole flippin' continent by labeling Europe as a whole as socialist, never mind the fact that there's 50 sovereign states with widely different cultural and political traditions. It's all bloody Ruritania for him. "In America."

Dude, I'm sorry but until you stop smoking whatever crazy weed you have there, I can't take you seriously anymore. "In America."

 

[Troll]

N_R, just give up. He doesn't listen to logic, he has zero compassion or empathy for other people, and he's an all-around loon. Arguing with him does nothing. Just sit back and watch him spin and spit, for entertainment's sake.

 

[tegid]

Hey not all people in the US are like Gas.

I know, I know. It was for the sake of the argument. I just meant that if he thought that, fine, I wasn't going to discuss it. Only the europeans thing.


To Gas: I thought you liked serious discussion, not just discussion for the sake of it and without ever reaching to a conclusion?

 

[North_Ranger]

N_R, just give up. He doesn't listen to logic, he has zero compassion or empathy for other people, and he's an all-around loon. Arguing with him does nothing. Just sit back and watch him spin and spit, for entertainment's sake.

Well, I thought I just said I can't take him seriously anymore.

"In America."

 

[GasBandit]

I don't care if it's an attack on my moral character or not from your point of view. It's just untrue. Maybe Europeans are delusional but we don't want a weakened US, and the report you brought doesn't show that.

We're natural competitors? Fine. The United States have a much better grasp on that and want the other countries to be weak because that means they'll be better off? Fine. Do European citizens want that? No.

Poll results show otherwise, even if those who are polled don't understand the ramifications of their desires.

Hey not all people in the US are like Gas.

Yeah, most of them are a lot dumber.

Wow... after reading some of GB's responses here, I now hear him as Bandit Keith from Yu-Gi-Oh the Abridged Series: "In America."

Dude, I'm sorry but until you stop smoking whatever crazy weed you have there, I can't take you seriously anymore. "In America."

I haven't seen the work you reference, so I'm afraid the comparison is lost on me. You'll also pardon me if I'm not particularly concerned that you "can't take me seriously"/"are done with me"/"etc" for what, the 8th time?

 

[North_Ranger]

Wow... after reading some of GB's responses here, I now hear him as Bandit Keith from Yu-Gi-Oh the Abridged Series: "In America."

Dude, I'm sorry but until you stop smoking whatever crazy weed you have there, I can't take you seriously anymore. "In America."

I haven't seen the work you reference, so I'm afraid the comparison is lost on me. You'll also pardon me if I'm not particularly concerned that you "can't take me seriously"/"are done with me"/"etc" for what, the 8th time?[/QUOTE]

Don't flatter yourself, bub. Second time, at best. And if you can't see what I'm referring to in the same thread, you might want to check your reading comprehension "in America".

 

[WolfOfOdin]

Bandit Keith's an over the top parody of how Japan views the stereotypical American, a blustering loudmouthed idiot who believes in his country's superiority no matter what truth is staring him in the face.

Anywho, having been to France and spent some time in Lyons, I can say that France generally isn't full of anti-american lunatics. That would be Paris, which a great many people in France view as a festering hole full of the most smug, self-obsessed asses on the face of the planet. The reason Europeans in general took a dim view of America during the Bush years wasn't, as you proclaim, because America was strong, but because of a distaste with Bush more or less throwing political temper tantrums whenever the world didn't coalesce exactly with his view of things.

Politically that's idiotic, and one must learn to play to the crowd instead of shrieking that everyone is your enemy if they don't agree with you 100%.

 

[tegid]

Gas, for God's sake: DO EUROPEANS AS A WHOLE DESIRE A WEAKENED US? No. Do some of them desire something that may, without them realizing it, have that as a consequence? Maybe. I don't care.

An over the top example: you want this nice new car model, and you are going to buy it next week. What you don't know is that thay make the tires with bones of these kids they kill to make them. Do you want the car? Sure! Do you want them to kill kids? NO (Maybe you do, but for the sake of the parallel, we'll say you don't )

 

[Silver Jelly]

EDIT: oops, frustration induced words. I don't want to start a flamewar. Just flames that will burn the US to the ground. Because I'm a SOCIALIST.

 

[TommiR]

The EU beefing up their military capabilities and co-operating more in the military sphere would restrict the US room to maneuver in Europe through making the EU states that are a part of NATO (and EU states in general) less reliant on US and NATO support for their defensive needs, which might lead to them taking more independent actions vis a vis the US position on any particular issue. As a result, the US influence in europe would be curtailed somewhat, leading to a loss of options there which is generally considered to be a bad thing in foreign policy. Am I getting close to what you mean by your relative weakening of US power, GasBandit?

If so, then it seems to me that in essence you are saying you want the US to be the only nation that has a gun in a knife fight, to remain a military hegemon. Historically speaking, that has never been possible in the long run. Regardless of your views on the Balance of Power theory, a unipolar world has been an unstable arrangement as smaller powers begin to arm themselves and ally with one another to balance the strength of the hegemon, out of fear of otherwise being dominated by it. Now the hegemon can do things to forestall this development such as adopt a conciliatory diplomatic tone to allay their fears and through international institutional arrangements designed to limit the returns to power (in essence convincing others that it's more advantageous for them to work together with the hegemon rather than set up a competing system), or hasten it by beginning to throw it's weight around. But the period of military ascendancy has not lasted forever. Or at least that's the theory as far as I know.

So, if your view on the foreign policy goals of the US is that you should limit everyone else into having knives, I'm afraid you're fighting an ultimately loosing battle.

Just my unqualified two cents.

EDIT: Spelling check

 

[tegid]

Some interesting two cents you got there!