America's Relationship with the World

[Mr Spinkles]

America has emerged from the 20th century as the sole superpower in the world. The influence of the U.S. is huge, and American culture is spreading fast as well. The youth of many other nations embrace American culture, and other coutries understandably resent this invasion of a foreign culture.

Also, the majority of the world appears to hate our President, and the religious right wing in general. What I find amusing are the similarities between our religious right and the religious conservatives of many Middle Eastern nations....they hate each other, yet have some things in common.

The main problem, I think, is fear. Fear leads to resentment, resentment leads to mistrust, and mistrust leads to hostility. No matter what actions the U.S. may take, it will make mistakes (as all countries do), and nations will always envy the power of other nations. This situation is a direct result of the fact that the democracies of the world no longer face a clear and common enemy (i.e. the Soviet Union).

What do you feel about America and its relationship with the world? Let's hear some criticism!

 

[Bastet]

Ok, here's some criticism. Bush should stay the hell out of the politics of other countries where he has no business to be. He's trying to undermine our election this year, because his yes-man John Howard is looking like losing the top job. http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=5830 Howard is so far up Bush's ***, he could brush his teeth from the inside...he's Bush's Mini-Me. And it makes more people than just me, sick to see it. :roll: Bush should take a look in his own freaking backyard.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Mr Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell said it would be disastrous if Australia pulled its troops out of Iraq by Christmas if Labor wins the federal election later this year.

Bush and Powell have every right to say this, just as other foreign leaders have every right to criticize Bush and meet with his opponent right before our elections....it's called politics, not 'undermining an election'.

The only thing I learned from that article was that Bush made comments designed to help one of his supporters win re-election. This is neither illegal nor immoral--it's politics, plain and simple.

This Lawrence fellow has very foxily taken Bush's comments (which may have helped his opponent) and spun them in such a way as to suggest to voters that Bush is somehow 'undermining' Australian politics (which will hurt his opponent). It would not surprise me at all if there are foreign leaders/governments working to get him elected as well.

Ah, politics! Perhaps humanity's greatest pasttime. :lol:

 

[painted wolf]

I think that America is too proud at the moment, we are currently the sole 'superpower' but this will not last. Other nations will fill the void. China seems to be a good bet, they have the economy, determination and at least for now a leader who is internationally popular, which is giving them diplomatic power.

We seem to be exuding a lot of arrogance (mostly due to the current administration) that is simply rubbing the international comunity the wrong way. We like to think that because we are the sole 'superpower' we can justify whatever we want to do. Breaking treaties like the ICBM ban treaty, Kyoto Proticol and the ban on land mines to name a few makes us look bad in any light. Telling long time allies that we didn't need thier help or opinion wasn't smart either.
The biggest problem with our current 'we're number one' attitude is that we depend on other nations for our prosperity and our place as a 'superpower', if the international community REALY wanted to knock us down a peg or two and could work together on it they could do it. And I'm not talking about militarilly either.

so I guess to sum up I think Americas biggest problem right now is that we have to remember that we ARE part of an international community and that we can't just ignore that fact.

wa:do

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I definitely agree with you, painted wolf, though I will add a couple of things. First of all, I would like to point out that roughly half of America agrees with you that we need to obey more international treaties and be less domineering in the world. Not all Americans fit the imperialist stereotype.

I would disagree a little with "Telling long time allies that we didn't need thier help". If you are referring to the Iraq war, we certainly did ask for help from our allies, but in some cases this help was denied.

I think part of the problem with America's self-absorbtion is geography. America is a very large, diverse region with a large, diverse population. Americans have plenty of things within their own nation with which to occupy their minds, and unlike many European nations for example, there is no immediate economic or political motivation to familiarize oneself with the cultures and interests of neighboring countries. Americans are a bit self-absorbed, and this is understandable, though not excusable.

But painted wolf we definitely agree that Americans need to do a better job of recognizing the value of the rest of the international community and behaving in a manner that reflects this. After all, with great power comes great responsibility.

Let's hear some more criticism/commentary! I would love to hear what you all have to say on this topic.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I have a question, for anyone interested in responding: why were so many Europeans unwilling to support military action against Saddam Hussein?

 

[Alaric]

I think there were lots of different reasons - I think for a lot of the general populace, it was a mix of not wanting the US to act unilaterally, not wanting civilians to be hurt, hatred of Bush, not wanting to antagonize Muslims, and general distrust of any argument for planes dropping bombs on cities. The better arguments were more along the lines of the need to respect the will of the UN, that countries can't just unilaterally attack some country without undermining the whole principle of the UN. And the governments who opposed were also very nervous about stirring up a hornet's nest in the Middle East. Europe is a lot closer to the ME than the US, and especially France and Germany have large Muslim populations. This is just another example of the US pushing Muslims around and telling them what to think.

 

[anders]

I agree with Alaric.

For Sweden, one more fact giving the US bad will is that a Swede was kidnapped by US troups in Afghanistan, and has now been held at Guantanamo Bay for more than 30 months, without any charges being pressed and without telling him, his family or the rest of Sweden why he is there. The only tangible facts known are that the young boy was studying Islam and that he was labelled a "terrorist". Why that label is used has never been explained. It seems that he was not using or possessing arms at the time of capture (or at any other time). We think this is in clear violation of international laws concerning prisoners of war - which he isn't, according to the US... Why isn't he given a (preferably fair) trial?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Of course, one can study Islam anywhere, and I would think ANYWHERE would be preferred to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan....why exactly was this person in Afghanistan, then?

Alaric-- good points, all. One thing though: it doesn't make much sense to say I won't support someone because I don't want them doing something without my support. I doubt if the U.N. security council had passed a resolution to use force on Iraq the U.S. would have refused simply because the U.S. wanted to "go it alone".

 

[anders]

Mr_S, You would think that anywhere else would be preferable, and so would I. He choose Afghanistan. Visitors are not allowed, so we can't ask him why.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

anders-- why do you think he is being treated this way? Any ideas?

 

[anders]

Nobody knows; nobody has any ideas. He has not been accused of anything. The general feeling is that the US army just thought that he shouldn't have been there.

 

[LCMS Sprecher]

"I have a question, for anyone interested in responding: why were so many Europeans unwilling to support military action against Saddam Hussein?"
- Mr. Sprinkles

My main theory is that Europe was trying act against the United States diplomatically speaking. France and Germany don't have any amnesty towards us so they oppose rather than going after Saddam. It is petty and foolish, but extremely European. If they weren't being protected by their great shield, the United States, they would probably be more forthcoming in dealing with world threats. However, at this moment, we are the world's enforcer having to enforce all these treaties and foreign policies because their militaries can't do it. I think the Europeans think that they can maintain political equality with the United States even though they can't match us in any area of national economic, military, or diplomatic power. The only country I'm afraid of is China. Now with their booming economy, I would look for them to be the next superpower in the next fifteen to twenty years.

 

[Allan]

i live in New Zealand which is in the southern hemisphere.
20 or even 30 years ago Interviews on the radio would often have an American voice explaining as they were forced to be the policemen of the world it was straining their economy.
Why should they be that policeman?

Then free market theory developed into our new government strategy for the economy.Telecom was sold off and to date $25 billion has gone to America in profits, railways was sold off and the rails are now bad enough to be alarming, with the Govt buying in to maintain them.
New zealanders 4 million of them are not to badly off but just like America only a small % hold all the wealth and 80% exist in varying degrees of impoverishment.
When people lack wealth or Jobs it is said to be their own fault and we have a new wave of education focus that isn't the whole answer.

I would not like to live in this world without America, But America Gives and America takes and seems to be leading everyones morality.

Our present leading politicians seem to be more focused toward Asia or Europe, but don't really have majority support its a case of just who do you vote for.

We buy a lot of clothing from China and I think it funny as its a bit like dressing the peasants. We used to have all our own industry in almost every area to cover what we needed. Now it is all about debt management.

I am reasonably well off, but I dont need much.

I would be wealthier if I could make do with less, or share.

Europe is more of a threat than China I believe because there are people who would like to be more powerful. The middle east is on their doorstep and is a way to discredit or change perceptions toward America.

Perception of the cowboy shooting himself in the foot, dishonesty corruption, it is as though there is an adgenda to undermine the integrity of the relatively young powerful nation of the United States of America.

In New Zealand we are isolated geographically but generally seem to take more interest in what goes on outside our country than within it.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

New zealanders 4 million of them are not to badly off but just like America only a small % hold all the wealth and 80% exist in varying degrees of impoverishment.

I don't know what things are like in New Zealand, but that is definitely not true in the U.S.

 

[Irenicas]

Relationship.... hahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.... *snort*.

 

[civilcynic]

The United states has become nothing more than a 'Big Bully' and this administration's arrogance has damaged our relationship with other countries in the world.

Many countries refused to go along with the US attack on Iraq because it was an unprovoked pre-emptive attack. Yes, Hussein is an awful dictator and has been known to have butchered many of his own people (ironically using sarin gas provided by the US...Cheney to be exact years ago) but there are many other countries whose leaders are just as murderous. I believe that many countries saw through Bush's rhetoric and realized that Bush's committment was based upon his own personal agenda not because of any imminent threat by Saddam.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

What was his own personal agenda, civilcynic? What was the evil motive behind all the 'rhetoric'?

 

[Allan]

I don't know what things are like in New Zealand, but that is definitely not true in the U.S.

In New Zealand there would be a denial that there is any impoverishment but if people live from pay packet to pay packet to just supply the basics that makes the situation tight. We have an aging population so we are told we have to save or invest for old age.

A new wave of property, land investors from overseas seems to be the cause of substantual increases in valuation. More people are tending to rent rather than own and rents are taking a high proportion of income.

What percentage of the population would be living from pay packet to pay packet in the USA?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I'm not sure as to your specific question...however, according to the U.S. census of 2002, about 12.1% of Americans live in poverty (according to money income excluding capital gains) see http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/poverty02/r&dtable5.html