America Haters, Bitchers, And Complainers

[treelizard]

Gosh, I seem to remember reading something about the U.S. giving the UK 32 million dollars in military assistance in 1995... This isn't to mention the 155.9 million dollars in outstanding loans as of 2004. Not that the aid wasn't appreciated, but it's not really a one-way street.

And hopefully mentioning something from 1995 isn't going back too far for you, especially since you yourself had to go all the way back to the 17th century!

Thank you for illustrating the whole point of the original article, by the way, which is that there will always be whiny nitpicky kvetches who will bend over backwards to try to come up with examples "of what get's [sic] up peoples noses about America" while ignoring the numerous contributions provided. From food to aid to disaster relief, and those are just a few of the ways this country provides opportunity to the rest of the world.

This is a damn fine place to live. I love this country. And I'm very thankful that I'm here.

And you still haven't answered Mike's question.

[Troll Virus]

Look, can we put the pins back in the grenades for a minute here.

I just said;

It's not offensive to me, but another example of what get's up peoples noses about America.

Simply trying to let you see that what is essentially bragging about having done this, that and the next thing for other countries is in itself what's irritating to them.
True charity is a gift, not a pin for a lapel.

Thank you for illustrating the whole point of the original article, by the way, which is that there will always be whiny nitpicky kvetches who will bend over backwards to try to come up with examples "of what get's [sic] up peoples noses about America" while ignoring the numerous contributions provided.

LOL, that IS the point I'm making, but you have it back to front.
If you weren't bragging, then nobody would be kvetching?

Now instead of jumping down my throat for saying this;

It's nothing new, goes back a heck of a lot further than 30 years, but if you really wanted to impress the world, then didn't a little ole town of yours get flooded lasr year?
We sat and watched the pictures over here, of people with nothing to eat, and no aid forthcoming IN America.
According to OUR government, WE, the lowly UK sent YOU aid!

Don't take this as a slight on America by me because it isn't.
I'm merely highlighting how the worlds media portrays America abroad.
I personally never make judgements based on press reports or popular opinion.

Hey Troll Virus,
In all fairness, you and your thick European skin shouldn't be bashing Treelizard for posting a 33 year old article when most of what you and I have been discussing is more than twice that old. Let me ask you this:

Forgetting for a moment that the article is 33 years old, is it any less true?

It's all relevant to the thread topic, but we could all pull statistics.
For the record, I've made a few points myself, which have been conveniently ignored.

[GQchris]

What I can't stand more than American liberals, are European ones..

[Troll Virus]

This is not meant to be argumentative - at least, not mean-spirited argument - but I need to directly address some of what you said.

I'd expect no less.

And if you want to say it isn't charity if someone brags about it, fine.

It's a very relevant point though, and one which you acknowledged yourself when we talked about who won what detracting from those who died doing it.

Do me a favor, though, and go ask the people who received the money, food, medicine, and whatever else if they give a tinker's damn whether or not we talk about what we gave.

In most cases, they won't even know where it comes from. They're just happy to survive another day.

Chances are, the people who needed that stuff were happy to receive it, and chances are even greater that they are bragging about it on our behalf. It's only people who envy the contributions of others and attack their charity that would try to diminish the gift and its effect on those who needed it with bullshit like "It's not real charity if you brag about it."

I must take issue with you there.
Why would someone envy a good deed rather than applaud it?
Why would someone need to brag about a charitable act?
It's a bit like self-proclaimed christians believing they are better than others just because they attend church, when before they get there, they are cutting other people up trying to get a parking space closest to the church.

Besides, obviously there's not nearly as much bragging going on as you may think, since so many people still say we're selfish bastards....

This kind of bamboozles me.
To me, America is still a collection of a variety of cultures and nations.
There is no royal WE in terms of American identity, and attitudes to everything vary tremendously from state to state.
The bragging is largely a Hollywoodesque/childish searching for a collective national identity that I don't think will ever cohesively materialise in my lifetime.

So you're saying that the only reason people don't like America is they feel like we are after credit for the good deeds we do?

Not at all.
It's the volume level if you like.
Of course America is going to be splashing around huge amounts of cash!
It's the biggest capitalist nation in the world.
Just because the numbers/statistics show $7 billion of generosity, does not mean that the typical American citizen per capita is any more generous than a rug salesman in Bombay.
Then of course, you get on to the 'bad deeds' America does.
Highest Polluters of the environment.
Largest (?) arms manufacturer.
etc?

Because we brag, others don't like us? Nonsense.

All I can say Mike, is; 'ask around'.
It's just a personal observation of mine which you are free to ignore.
I'm over here, and you're over there though.
I hear from Non-Americans, how about you?

If that were the case, then by your logic, we could stop making such hefty contributions to those in need, we could quit forgiving debt from countries that owe us hundreds of millions of dollars, we could quit bailing other nations out when they were in trouble, and we could sit back and watch troubled nations fold while we reaped all the benefits.

You could, but I doubt it would be in the financial best interests of America to do so?

So long as we didn't brag about being on top, that is. In my own personal opinion (and that's all this is) people will find a reason to dislike us because we are on top. No matter what we do, no matter how quiet we are, and no matter how "true" our charity might be, people would find a way, an excuse, or a reason to hate us. If they hate us now because we make public the fact that we do more for the international community WITHOUT EXPECTING THEM TO RETURN THE FAVOR than any other nation on Earth, I guess I can live with that.

I've twisted that paragraph around a few times, and I struggle to apply any logic to it Mike.
If you are doing the right thing, and you know in your heart of hearts you are doing the right thing, then what anyone else thinks is irrellevant?

Never? You made your own assumptions about how America was handling that disaster when you said we weren't receiving aid from within.

Read back Mike.
That's how it was 'reported'.

And I'd imagine there are plenty of other opinions you've voiced here that are not from your own experience, but from your take on other people's statements, news articles, etc.

I'd like to think I've been clear on where that's been the case.

That's just a silly thing to say. Media in one form or another has at least some influence on some of the things you believe.

I'd say it has an influence on what interests me, and nothing more.

You ended your post by saying that you've made points that were ignored. Please repost them. I'd like to re-read them and address them.

I did.
One, was the issue of the 'Kyoto' agreement, which I've already posted as a seperate discussion in the 'Open Access' section of the forum, titled, the end of the world is nigh.

http://www.defend.net/deluxeforums/showthread.php?t=20104

The other was about the true WOMD in the middle East, which is of course Opium/Heroin.

Likewise, I'd like a simple, straight answer as to whether or not all of the things in the articles published and re-printed here by Treelizard are true and correct. If you agree, then that's fine.

I don't have the means, nor see the need to go verifying statistics from ancient third hand media releases.
They could be 100% true for all I know, but that doesn't have any relevance to what I was saying.

I for one promise that I won't pull the old "I told you so" routine. All I'm looking for is for you to either conceed that the facts printed by Tree are true, and that this is indeed a land of plentiful opportunity and great compassion.

Every land holds opportunity and compassion, not just those of the rich or statistically fluent.
I have never contested the statistics presented by TL, but I do find them lacking in context.

Not a better country or a worse country - but a great country that may hold company with other great countries for many of the same reasons. If you disagree, that too is fine, and I won't hold it against you.

It's not even about that for me.
Countries, indeed MA are full of people.
Is one less human because of a point of origin, or code of practice?

What I will do is ask you to prove some of the fallacies. I for one am tired - truly weary - of people sticking out their toungues and saying "Nuh-Uh!" without providing a lick of evidence to support their opinions. Criticism is fine. Disagreeing is fine. But passing judgement on others who will provide (and have provided) mounds of evidence for their own point of view without extending similar effort and courtesy is, well, rude. At least as rude as handing out hundreds of millions of dollars and then bragging about it...

OK, I've spent a lot of time on this post already, so I hope I've been thorough.
Personally, my re-birth on this forum has seen me having to endure much of what you seem to accuse me of.
I don't sit in judgement on anyone, with the exception of Nutter & Co, who I know to be worthless.
Now to be fair, you personally, haven't been handing out hundreds of millions of dollars.
When you and others mention such things, you deign to speak for your country.
Me personally, I'm more interested in what you do as individuals for others.
If you rate personal contribution as requiring receipt tokens with a value at the pearly gates, then I'm afraid I have little time for you.
A good deed is a reward unto itself.

Good discussion.
I'm happy to continue, but people who don't know me, please lose the personal insults and distractions.
If you've nothing to offer, you've nothing to offer.

[treelizard]

The first article was written to an American audience. It is a side of the story that is NOT often portrayed by mainstream media, and yet is just as relevant. It provides balance to the story.

The second article could hardly be called bragging. It was written by a Canadian!

I am curious, though, as to whether your (real or imagined) list of contributions the UK has made to the US is also bragging. Whether the UK government publically stating who they provide aid to is bragging. In fact, I believe just about every country makes that information public.

As far as charity, I took the liberty of looking the definition up. I even looked it up in the Oxford English dictionary. It says

1 an organization set up to help those in need.
2 the voluntary giving of money or other help to those in need.
3 help or money given in this way.
4 tolerance in judging others.

Nowhere does it say, money given secretly.

I certainly hear you on the levels of charity, however. This is a concept I've thought about a lot. In fact, I even have a poster somewhere about the different levels of charity from the least to most meritorious. The list starts with those who give begrudgingly, moves up to giving less than one should, but cheerfully, giving before or after being asked, etc. The second highest form of charity is giving when neither party knows the other's identity. I believe this is what takes place when U.S. citizens give money to organizations, not individuals, during tsunamis and hurricanes, locally and abroad. Most people I know who gave money after the hurricane gave to organizations like the Red Cross. They did not know the identity of the recipient and certainly did not expect the recipient to know who they were.

The highest form of charity, by the way, is enabling the recipient to become self-reliant. One more thing the U.S. does extremely well, I might add...

[treelizard]

Me personally, I'm more interested in what you do as individuals for others.

But if we told you, wouldn't that be bragging?

[Troll Virus]

I am curious, though, as to whether your (real or imagined) list of contributions the UK has made to the US is also bragging.

I posted a list?
Maybe the best contribution is the people?

Whether the UK government publically stating who they provide aid to is bragging. In fact, I believe just about every country makes that information public.

Well you were pretty keen on categorizing any nay-sayer as being a *kvetch (*jewish word? 40,000 would be jewish immigrants were turned away by the US in the 1920's).
I'm not one for statistics.
Maybe you could look it up and give us some comparative data?

As far as charity, I took the liberty of looking the definition up. I even looked it up in the Oxford English dictionary. It says

1 an organization set up to help those in need.
2 the voluntary giving of money or other help to those in need.
3 help or money given in this way.
4 tolerance in judging others.

Nowhere does it say, money given secretly.

Nor about boasting how generous the country you hapen to reside in is statistically.

I certainly hear you on the levels of charity, however. This is a concept I've thought about a lot. In fact, I even have a poster somewhere about the different levels of charity from the least to most meritorious. The list starts with those who give begrudgingly, moves up to giving less than one should, but cheerfully, giving before or after being asked, etc. The second highest form of charity is giving when neither party knows the other's identity. I believe this is what takes place when U.S. citizens give money to organizations, not individuals, during tsunamis and hurricanes, locally and abroad. Most people I know who gave money after the hurricane gave to organizations like the Red Cross. They did not know the identity of the recipient and certainly did not expect the recipient to know who they were.

The latter is a fortunate position to be in.
To have disposable capital that you can give away without concern or responsibility for it's destination.

The highest form of charity, by the way, is enabling the recipient to become self-reliant. One more thing the U.S. does extremely well, I might add...

That's not charity, it's fascillitation, and it was invented long before the US.
Moreover, it built the US.

[Troll Virus]

But if we told you, wouldn't that be bragging?

You're being facetious.
You don't need to tell me, as I can observe for myself, and that really IS the point as regards yourself.

[treelizard]

Well you were pretty keen on categorizing any nay-sayer as being a *kvetch (*jewish word? 40,000 would be jewish immigrants were turned away by the US in the 1920's).
I'm not one for statistics.
Maybe you could look it up and give us some comparative data?

Yes, go ahead and kvetch about Jewish immigrants turned away by the US almost a century ago, and neglect to mention that the US is Israel's strongest ally. Last I heard, the U.S. is willing to get it's own people killed to help Israel. The US gives Israel billions of dollars in aid. The US gives Israel access to intelligence it denies its NATO allies and access to top-drawer weaponry. The US also gives Israel diplomatic support. And I don't believe for a second that you are kvetching about US treatment of Jews because I just posted all the good things the U.S. does for Israel. You brought it up first...

Incidentally, you may want to look into the British barring entry to the land of Israel to Jews fleeing the Holocaust, even when the full scope of the Holocaust was known, and thousands of Holocaust survivors were stranded in refugee camps (DP camps).

You may want to read about the refugee ship, Exodus, that the Royal Navy intercepted in 1947. There were 4500 Jews aboard, Holocaust survivors, who the British forcibly transferred to another ship, and returned back to Germany. Here's the account of Abba Eban, the then-liason to UNSCOP, who convinced UN representatives to witness the brutality of the British agains tthe Jews.

"[In Haifa] the four members watched a 'gruesome operation.' The Jewish refugees had decided 'not to accept banishment with docility. If anyone had wanted to know what Churchill meant by a "squalid war," he would have found out by watching British soldier using rifle butts, hose pipes and tear gas against the survivors of the death camps. Men, women and children were forcibly taken off to prison ships, locked in cages below decks and set out of Palestine waters.'

"When the four members of UNSCOP came back to Jerusalem, Eban recalled, 'they were pale with shock. I could see that they were pre-occupied with one point alone: if this was the only way that the British Mandate could continue, it would be better not to continue it at all.'"

But I didn't start this thread to enlighten you on British history. I started it to talk about how the U.S. is one of the best countries to live in, in the world. Innit.

[Troll Virus]

Yes, go ahead and kvetch about Jewish immigrants turned away by the US almost a century ago, and neglect to mention that the US is Israel's strongest ally.

Why?

Last I heard, the U.S. is willing to get it's own people killed to help Israel.

Why?

The US gives Israel billions of dollars in aid.

Why?

The US gives Israel access to intelligence it denies its NATO allies

Why?

and access to top-drawer weaponry.

Why?

The US also gives Israel diplomatic support.

Why?

And I don't believe for a second that you are kvetching about US treatment of Jews because I just posted all the good things the U.S. does for Israel. You brought it up first...

Good, we're clear on that then.
You don't deny that 40,000 jews were refused entry into the US when their alternative inevitably may have been Nazi Gas Chambers.
Your posting about all the good things the US did for Israel must have been tremendously re-assuring while they choked on their own lungs.

N.B. The above posted pre- Treelizards massive post edit.

[Troll Virus]

Incidentally, you may want to look into the British barring entry to the land of Israel to Jews fleeing the Holocaust, even when the full scope of the Holocaust was known, and thousands of Holocaust survivors were stranded in refugee camps (DP camps).

You may want to read about the refugee ship, Exodus, that the Royal Navy intercepted in 1947. There were 4500 Jews aboard, Holocaust survivors, who the British forcibly transferred to another ship, and returned back to Germany. Here's the account of Abba Eban, the then-liason to UNSCOP, who convinced UN representatives to witness the brutality of the British agains tthe Jews.

"[In Haifa] the four members watched a 'gruesome operation.' The Jewish refugees had decided 'not to accept banishment with docility. If anyone had wanted to know what Churchill meant by a "squalid war," he would have found out by watching British soldier using rifle butts, hose pipes and tear gas against the survivors of the death camps. Men, women and children were forcibly taken off to prison ships, locked in cages below decks and set out of Palestine waters.'

"When the four members of UNSCOP came back to Jerusalem, Eban recalled, 'they were pale with shock. I could see that they were pre-occupied with one point alone: if this was the only way that the British Mandate could continue, it would be better not to continue it at all.'"

But I didn't start this thread to enlighten you on British history. I started it to talk about how the U.S. is one of the best countries to live in, in the world. Innit.

OK, so this is about Yeah, US was naughty, but so was everybody else?
Where's your moral highground?

[Troll Virus]

P.S.
lose the 'innit'
Despite what you obviously think, you are not talking to who you think you are....cobber.

[treelizard]

You don't deny that 40,000 jews were refused entry into the US when their alternative inevitably may have been Nazi Gas Chambers.
Your posting about all the good things the US did for Israel must have been tremendously re-assuring while they choked on their own lungs.

My list of all the good things the US did and continues to do for Israel was simply to provide some balance to your kvetching.

The Jews who tried to flee Nazi Germany were turned back from Britain as well. Many were sent back to Germany ended up in death camps where they were systematically murdered. Pot. Kettle. Black.

[treelizard]

OK, so this is about Yeah, US was naughty, but so was everybody else?
Where's your moral highground?

Pretty interesting that you feel the need to point the finger at the US instead of looking at your country. Innit.

[Troll Virus]

Pretty interesting that you feel the need to point the finger at the US instead of looking at your country. Innit.

Nope.
You've dragged what was possibly a productive discussion down a good few notches, seemingly with your own agenda in mind.
Kvetch much?