Saddam Hussein

[Darth Mandarb]

The American mind is so corrupted.

I'm not 100% sure exactly what you meant by that ... but I'm sick and tired of the rest of the world lumping all Americans under the same umbrella.  Just because our President is destroying our country and our mass media exploits that fact doesn't make us all war-mongering capitilist pigs, I assure you.

If I were to make an ignorant statement lumping all of a people [non Americans] together based off the actions of a few of them; I, as an American, would be hammered down for saying it.  It's no different when a non-American does that to the American people.

As for Saddam ... I don't really care.  Once they handed him over to the Iraqis they could have executed him or locked him in a cell for the rest of his life, makes no difference to me as long as he's not calling the shots anymore.  I don't really see how him being detained or dead is really going to change things but I'm not on the ground there, I can't know that.

Ever thus to tryants I suppose.

[Akatosh]

The American mind is so corrupted.

I'm not 100% sure exactly what you meant by that ... but I'm sick and tired of the rest of the world lumping all Americans under the same umbrella.  Just because our President is destroying our country and our mass media exploits that fact doesn't make us all war-mongering capitilist pigs, I assure you.

There must've been someone who voted him into the office.
-> That means, he must've got at least 51% of the votes.
-> -> 51% support for George Bush II.
-> -> -> 51% of the americans are stupid.
-> -> -> -> Rounded: 100% of them are 

No, in reality, Americans aren't that bad. I've got some friends who were in Texas last year, on a student exchange, and only one of them ended up living in the same house as a sort-of-redneck family! In general, americans are all right. Russia is doing much worse things these days, especially Gazprom. But nobody pays as much attention because Russia doesn't claim they'd be the most democratic country ever.

America does claim that, and your citizens are really, really patriotic. Good thing. But on the other hand, the "most democratic country ever"...

...still has the death penalty. Even for teenagers.
..."frees" countries all over the world... no matter if they want it or not.
...don't even ask the citizens about that.
...doesn't care about cruel dictators in Africa, but always rushes if a country with oil has a dictator problem.
...exports weapons like crazy.
...is ruled by extremly right redneck racists. (ERRR  :)

So, the world is watching you! Better up, or you'll lose your good reputation!

That was the AGS political report. 

(just to clarify things, I'm a german. Try speaking to Americans or French people with a german accent once and you first thing you'll think will be "oh f*ck, we have to stop getting a bad reputation)

Oh, and for Saddam: Congrats, Iraq has a martyr now. It'd have been better if they let him rotting in a cell for the rest of his life.

[ildu]

If I were to make an ignorant statement lumping all of a people [non Americans] together based off the actions of a few of them; I, as an American, would be hammered down for saying it. Ã, It's no different when a non-American does that to the American people.

I guess that's what all of us 'non-Americans' are objecting to. The ridiculous and extremely arrogant notion that the world is divided into Americans and non-Americans. It wouldn't be the same if you lumped the rest of the world together into one, as it would for us to lump Americans together, because you're simply just one country. As a non-American, I'm lumped together with South America, Canada, Russia, Europe, China, Japan, India, Africa, etc.

I'm sure FSI for example isn't happy that the rest of the world regards his home country, Russia, and his countrymen as decadent, corrupt and poor. At the same time, I'm sure a Chinese member here isn't exactly thrilled that his people are regarded as backward, communist sheep, or a French person being thought of as pompous, selfish and rude (a stereotype enforced quite strongly in North America, I might add). So basically the contrast here would be the division of Russians and non-Russians, Chinese and non-Chinese, Americans and non-Americans, etc. as all equally ridiculous.

So yes, it is very different if you were to lump the rest of the world together as non-Americans to us lumping together the people in your particular country.

P.S.
I don't want to start or contribute in a fight, and I rarely post on these threads, because of the obvious vanity of Internet-based debate, but I wanted to say this just to clarify. I'm not trying to enforce any stereotypes or anything, and I'm definately not siding with Ishmael on that statement.

[veryweirdguy]

51% support for George Bush II.

That's debatable. Let's ask Florida about that one shall we?

*This post brought to you from 5 years ago*

But anyway, let's not open up a can of worms on Bush.

[DGMacphee]

The American mind is so corrupted.

I'm not 100% sure exactly what you meant by that ... but I'm sick and tired of the rest of the world lumping all Americans under the same umbrella.  Just because our President is destroying our country and our mass media exploits that fact doesn't make us all war-mongering capitilist pigs, I assure you.

And to show that Darth is consistant with this view, he's even gone on the record defending the French against people who criticised them for not getting involved in the War on Terror. And it's something that I appreciate.

I guess that's what all of us 'non-Americans' are objecting to. The ridiculous and extremely arrogant notion that the world is divided into Americans and non-Americans. It wouldn't be the same if you lumped the rest of the world together into one, as it would for us to lump Americans together, because you're simply just one country. As a non-American, I'm lumped together with South America, Canada, Russia, Europe, China, Japan, India, Africa, etc.

I think you're missing Darth's point... He's not lumping all non Americans together and distinguishing one group as Americans from another that's non Americans. He's trying to say that no matter what criticisms have been targeted at one country's government or history, you can't lump the whole nation at current like that. And the example I posted above where Darth defended the French is proof.

Please don't confuse the issue. You're making Darth out to be arrogant when he's actually trying to promote good cultural attitudes that're NOT based upon stereotypes.

Anyway...

I don't think all Americans are corrupt. Perhaps the system or the government, but I don't think the people are. I think essentially they want to do good.

The problem I think is they were misguided by a lot of false information. Stuff that tried to verify things like "Iraq has WMDs" or "Iraqis will great us a liberators" or "Mission Accomplished" or "We're winning the war".

US Citizens are starting to realise things aren't working in Iraq and in the War on Terror. There's a growing disillusionment in the government's ability to fight such a War. Consider the resignation of Rumsfeld... whoa hold on...

AAAAAAHHHHH

Sorry, I just get so giddy when I mention the resignation of you-know-who...

Anyway, consider that and the recent midterm elections. Clearly America is looking for a better way to try and do right.

Let's hope they do. I'll say this: I'm feeling a little more confident about this year.

[Darth Mandarb]

So yes, it is very different if you were to lump the rest of the world together as non-Americans to us lumping together the people in your particular country.

Perhaps you missed my point?  I wasn't talking about the rest of the world vs. the US.  I was saying that if I made a comment that all Germans were Nazis because of Hitler ... something like that.  I'd be lumping all Germans together unfairly.  In that regard it's NO different from non-Americans assuming that all Americans are like our government. edit - Thanks DG

As DG just pointed out ... I really think the American people had the "wool" pulled over their eyes for a long time.  And I'm really hoping for a change soon.  I don't like the path we're currently on.

[Akatosh]

Let's hope the ERRR  won't get their opinions through like recently (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. act, "War" on drugs, "War" on terror, actually War on Americans). I like America, and I like the Americans, but I don't like the ERRR  ruled government.

And to the lumping-together thing: Saying all germans were Nazis would be lumping together. Saying all americans were ERRR would be lumping together. Referring to a group as "non-americans" is like saying "non-europeans" or "germans" or "french" or... you get my point. It's not lumping together; it's more clearifying what group of people he's referring to - the people who aren't living in / from America.

NOTE: Probably I should stop using the term ERRR

[DGMacphee]

I think it's also a bit of a falacy to say American is controlled by "extremly right redneck racists". I think it's more accurate to say America is (or at least was until last year) controlled by neoconservatives.

Now you have the Democrats controlling both Houses of government, and most of the neocons who were authors of the War on Terror doctrine are now not in charge of US foreign policy or are trying to distance themselves from it. Rumsfeld resigned (AHHHH), Wolfowitz isn't involved in US Defense anymore (though he is in charge of the World bank), Richard Perle has criticised Bush in Vanity Fair... And consider the "The Project for the New American Century" is now dead.

All that has to happen now is Cheney gets involved in a self-inflicted hunting accident and I can rest easy in 2007!

[ildu]

As I said, I'm not gonna get into an argument here. I wasn't specifically directing that towards you personally. It's just something I've noticed from said population, having traveled and lived around the globe (including 4 years in said country). Your remark just brought about the observation. I guess our posts both had the same point.

[LimpingFish]

I don't hate America. Far from it. I just think it has some serious problems at the moment. The concept of Freedom of Thought/Freedom of Expression has become corrupt. The politics of the Christian right, which in some cases could be termed "fundamentalist", has become so intertwined with the current Bush agenda as to be almost indistinguishable.

I don't lump all americans together, but I do think a large precentage of them are simply apathetic to what the role of the last political Superpower should be in the world.

I don't blame americans for voting Bush into two terms of office. I blame the Democratic party for not stepping up to the plate, for being politically weak twice in a row and for not being able to convince the american public that there might be an alternative to the War on Terror, and an alternative to US soldiers and their allies dying in foreign countries for a cause nobody can agree on.

America was built by people of all nationalities, and founded on the idea that every man is equal. It should be a country where everybody has a right to speak out against injustice, regardless of religion or creed.

I don't hate America. I just don't like what it has become.

[ManicMatt]

There's an online American friend of mine, who has a livejournal. I have previously read of how his German associates who he used to know in person decided to stop writing to him 'cos of USA invading (Or if you prefer, liberating) Iraq. What was stupid was that my friend was 100% OPPOSED to USA invading Iraq! But his German friends asked why he wasn't doing anything to stop it! He explained the freaking obvious to them, but they didn't want to know. Pathetic attitude, and a good example I feel, of what you guys are talking about.

[Darth Mandarb]

As I said, I'm not gonna get into an argument here. I wasn't specifically directing that towards you personally. It's just something I've noticed from said population, having traveled and lived around the globe (including 4 years in said country). Your remark just brought about the observation. I guess our posts both had the same point.

Maybe I'm missing your point then

I must confess I'm a tad confused ... wouldn't all people who are not Americans be considered "non-Americans"?  What am I missing?  I wasn't lumping the rest of the world into one category as a bad thing (or wasn't meaning too ... that'd be slightly hypocritical) it's just that, technically, the rest of the non-American world are non-Americans?

I don't lump all americans together, but I do think a large precentage of them are simply apathetic to what the role of the last political Superpower should be in the world.

I don't blame americans for voting Bush into two terms of office. I blame the Democratic party for not stepping up to the plate, for being politically weak twice in a row and for not being able to convince the american public that there might be an alternative to the War on Terror, and an alternative to US soldiers and their allies dying in foreign countries for a cause nobody can agree on.

America was built by people of all nationalities, and founded on the idea that every man is equal. It should be a country where everybody has a right to speak out against injustice, regardless of religion or creed.

I don't hate America. I just don't like what it has become.

Again though ... I think you're throwing us all under the same umbrella.  As far as I'm concerned American's didn't vote Bush into office twice.  The first time was all fucked up (I firmly believe it was fixed, duh?) and the second time he lost the popular vote and still got voted in due to some antiquated bullshit called the electoral college.  That's only the third time in our history that that's happened.  Should never happen even 1 time.  That's not "by the people" to my way of thinking.

I know quite a lot of people ... and VERY few of them voted for (or would vote for) Bush.  A lot of them are damn close to taking up arms against him because they are so against what he's doing to our country.  And I live in Florida where our governor is the President's brother and most people I know STILL feel this way.

I understand people's distaste for our President and our Government ... but please, stop thinking that we're all like that just because they govern us.  That's a true injustice to the American people.

[Rui 'Trovatore' Pires]

People from the outside should be understanding enough to realize it, Darth, but their "default" stance, the one they're almost expected to take from their outsider's view, is "They've got a democracy, and they keep on saying how good it is, so somewhere along the line they must have supported this government and are as guilty as said government is". And if you say to those people that it's not so, they'll reply that in that case the system is flawed somewhere, and it's a damn big flaw if it allows something like this to happen.

No, it's not fair, but it's perfectly logical, makes perfect sense, and like every other situation like this it stinks and people just have to live with it. Some people will understand, others won't.

[Darth Mandarb]

People from the outside should be understanding enough to realize it, Darth, but their "default" stance, the one they're almost expected to take from their outsider's view, is "They've got a democracy, and they keep on saying how good it is, so somewhere along the line they must have supported this government and are as guilty as said government is". And if you say to those people that it's not so, they'll reply that in that case the system is flawed somewhere, and it's a damn big flaw if it allows something like this to happen.

People thought Hitler was okay at first ...

Stalin ...

Julius Ceasar ...

History repeats itself.  Sure the people may have supported it at some point.  That's how it happens.  Promise one thing or project a certain "image" to gain the power, then abuse it once you have it.  Time and again this happens and there's really no way to prevent that. (or just cheat the system like our current president did)

No, it's not fair, but it's perfectly logical, makes perfect sense, and like every other situation like this it stinks and people just have to live with it. Some people will understand, others won't.

I couldn't disagree with that more!!

I certainly won't "live with" people thinking I'm one way because of incomplete facts and speculation based on the actions of those who govern my nation.  If somebody makes a blanket statement (which includes me) because of my government I will inform them (as I did in this thread) that it's not proper to do so.

I could find a flaw in any government of any nation on the globe and quickly come to some assumption about a person from that nation based off that.  No government is perfect and I'd like to think (especially here on the AGS boards) that most would realize this and not do the "lumping" in the first place.

But to say that I must live with it?  Nah ... just don't agree with that at all!

[Rui 'Trovatore' Pires]

People thought Hitler was okay at first ...

Yeah, I was gonna bring that up, but I thought it was a bit too much. But it's my point exactly - a lone madman won't get far, or anywhere. He needs support. He won't get to power without a lot of support.

And as you say - it happens. The trouble is, for instance, the way Hitler gave the world a nasty image of the German people. Sounding familiar? History repeats itself, indeed. And all things must pass.

But to say that I must live with it?  Nah ... just don't agree with that at all!

*You* don't have to, thank goodness, especially since you can hold your end opf an argument (so many people seem incapable of that these days...). You can make a change in the people you talk to. That's fine and proper and as it should be. But *you* in the plural, the Americans, pretty much have to live with it, because when we're talking collectively... well, all things must pass. As far as the "image" issue is concerned, Time can indeed bring justice, thankfully. And in this day and age, it doesn't take a lot of time, either. So be patient, is my advice. I'm not saying it's easy, not saying it doesn't hurt to see your people slandered so. But overall it's just... not worth it. Being stressed over such things is inviting an aneurism, a heart attack or a stroke later in your life - nowadays, stress just piles up, piles up, piles up. You don't want to contribute to it, not like this.

[ildu]

People thought Hitler was okay at first ...

Stalin ...

Julius Ceasar ...

I'm already kicking myself for getting involved, but I must object. Again, nothing against you personally, just to inform.

Hitler - He was seen as a very unstable, inflammatory and hate-motivated zealot from the very beginning. The nationalist socialist party was very different party until Hitler got in. He rised as a leader of one branch of the party gathering support from extremist conservatives, who had been against the Weimar republic since it's establishment in 1919. He took over the party by force and he was jailed after his first attempt at overthrowing the government in 1923. Due to a great depression and overall unsatisfying conditions for the middle and lower class people, leading up to racism, the nazi party gained a lot of support up until in the elections of 1932, when it received the majority of seats in the parliament. Hitler pretty much named himself chancellor of Germany the next year. Now, they had had chancellors for a long time already. Hitler wasn't a dictator yet. During the following 6 years, the nazi party became a lot more powerful and offensive. That time was a gradual progression from a democratic state into a supressive dictatorship. Fear of getting killed for opposing the regime, propaganda and control of the press were among reasons why he could keep the power.

Stalin - He pretty much inherited power from Lenin. When Lenin died in 1924, the leaders of the party where Stalin, Trotski and Buharin, of which Stalin took over. He continued in pretty much the same way as Lenin. While Stalin did a lot of bad things, he did make a lot of advancements in industry, politics, welfare, etc. The people were split from the middle in his favor. Furthermore, the immense amounts of propaganda, sparseness of settlements, great poverty and the very justified fear of getting killed if you oppose the regime did their part in keeping Stalin in office. As for Lenin, he seized power from the Czar and greatly advanced the roles of the middle and lower classes. The same reasons as with Stalin helped him keep office.

Caesar - He was not a dictator per se (well he was, but not in as negative way as one might think). He was elected by the senate to have a leading role in proceedings. His role grew gradually and he became Emperor, but the Senate was kept the same. Rome was still an elected democracy and Caesar it's 'president'. Caesar did a great lot of good for Rome, in most areas, and he was a very liked and respected leader. The senate eventually saw how the Roman public was dividing into people who opposed Caesar for bringing back dictatorship and into people who supported Caesar. They took action and killed him, and had a hard time getting the people behind them after that.

Lenin seized power from pretty horrible leadership already, Stalin continued that regime, and they both did a lot of good for the nation to gain support. Hitler was a hate-monger and was able to suppress the majority of the population with a very extremist conservative group. In the cases of Lenin and Hitler, the downward welfare of their nations were the greatest asset for them. As for Caesar, he should be cut out from this analogy, since he didn't do a lot of unpopular damaging things. he was an elected official, who was assassinated by a bunch of jealous aristocrats, when his popularity was quite stable.

So basically what I'm saying is that the consequences are very different with Bush. There was no desperation, no suppression, no force involved with Bush. When Bush was elected, the economy was doing fine, there was a surplus, everything was grand. If he even got the majority of votes, he got them from the evangelists, people on the right and normal everyday people. Nothing else there, but a result of a two-party system.

Comparing Bush to these people creates a very flimsy case. Rather compare him to people who are actually in relatively the same consequences, like the new Il Duce, Berlusconi or the overwhelming support of Le Pen in the last French presidential election.

[Darth Mandarb]

Yeah, I was gonna bring that up, but I thought it was a bit too much. But it's my point exactly - a lone madman won't get far, or anywhere. He needs support. He won't get to power without a lot of support.

And as you say - it happens. The trouble is, for instance, the way Hitler gave the world a nasty image of the German people. Sounding familiar? History repeats itself, indeed. And all things must pass.

It's not how many people you know ... it's who you know that's important.  We now have a sitting president who more than 1/2 the voters didn't vote for.  He obviously knew the right people.

And yes, people shouldn't have a bad opinion of Germans because of Hitler.  It's basically the same thing here.  I'd like to think people could actually learn from the past.  Yes, obviously, Hitler was "bad" ... but since we learned afterwards that not all Germans were ideological murderous Nazis shouldn't we now, in this day and age, realize that not all Americans are war mongering big-oil lackeys?

But *you* in the plural, the Americans, pretty much have to live with it, because when we're talking collectively... well, all things must pass.

I see what you're saying ... However, I don't think the average American should have to live with the ignorance of others who form opinions based solely off the American government.  To my way of thinking that simply isn't right.  I don't think that kind of ignorance should be tolerated in any form from anybody.

You are correct in that there is very little *we* can do to change this ignorance ... but that doesn't mean we should roll over and take it either.

Comparing Bush to these people creates a very flimsy case. Rather compare him to people who are actually in relatively the same consequences, like the new Il Duce, Berlusconi or the overwhelming support of Le Pen in the last French presidential election.

I wasn't trying to "compare" Bush to them ... just simply pointing out the fact that sometimes a "bad" person(s) gains the power seat and it's ignorant to assume a nation's people all carbon copies of their leader(s).

I'm already kicking myself for getting involved, but I must object. Again, nothing against you personally, just to inform.

On that point, I'm in total agreement

[ildu]

Comparing Bush to these people creates a very flimsy case. Rather compare him to people who are actually in relatively the same consequences, like the new Il Duce, Berlusconi or the overwhelming support of Le Pen in the last French presidential election.

I wasn't trying to "compare" Bush to them ... just simply pointing out the fact that sometimes a "bad" person(s) gains the power seat and it's ignorant to assume a nation's people all carbon copies of their leader(s).

Well, let's be frank. You were comparing the consequences of his getting into power to the dictators you mentioned, and the history of such situations. Of course the leader isn't the absolute representation of the people, but didn't the whole debate stem from the argumented inability of the people to affect this leadership? In that respect these situations are totally different. Legally, Bush could've been impeached for a number of issues already. It does say something about the people, in a time when the ability of public input is at it's highest. Although all the tools of alleviating this problem are there, not so many use them.

I'm just saying that if there was a president that had screwed up as much as Bush has, in most European (democratic) countries, that president wouldn't be in power for very long. But then again, in most European countries, single persons or small groups of people wouldn't be granted as much selective power as in the USA, in the first place.

But as happens with absolutely every Internet debate, were left arguing about what were talking about rather than the content of our arguments . So just to clarify, Americans aren't all bumbling condescending rednecks (in fact, most are not ), but for one such person to rise to such lengths of power, there must be something wrong with the system. Maybe the representatives are at fault, maybe the people aren't aware and active, or maybe the system just needs a complete jumpstart.

I'm already kicking myself for getting involved, but I must object. Again, nothing against you personally, just to inform.

On that point, I'm in total agreement

What, are you kicking me?

[i k a r i]

I didnt read anything from this thread because my glasses are broken xD, and the other ones are being fixed...
I just wanted to say how disgusting I find the USA government, first of all they attacked Iraq saying they had Nuclear power to steal petroleum from them. A country with nuclear power and with "so much hate" for USA could have used that technology to blow them all long time ago, or at least at the time they attacked them, second of all, the propaganda they do by putting irak people supporting them, that's so fake it hurts, people buy what they see, the war winners write history. Did you all see how many people were celebrating the dead of Saddam Hussein?, 50, maybe 60?.
Bush and Saddam Hussein should be killed both to make a better world, Bush is a #â,¬#@ Nazi. He uses fear and weak minded people to get what he wants.
I dont want to sound very esceptic, but did anyone see the execution of Hussein?, there are only photos and a cutted tape, they didnt even pass the whole execution at Irak.

Well, anyway, sorry for my bad english, and I dont mean to sound hateful but I really hate this damn Nazi, I have nothing with the rest of USA...

[m0ds]

I dont want to sound very esceptic, but did anyone see the execution of Hussein?, there are only photos and a cutted tape, they didnt even pass the whole execution at Irak.

A full version of his execution can be watched at YouTube, captured on mobile phone. I watched it earlier today, it may be gone now.