The Summer of Love

[Plane]

Danes are members of NATO , pledged to help us if we are attacked.

We also are pledged to assist them if they are attacked , so in which direction is this pledge more meaningfull?

*sigh*

Irrelevant to the discussion. NATO was never used for defense and only fought one war in which it was the aggressor (whether that was justified or not is again irrelevant to the discussion). Denmark would have been just as safe had it been in a pact with the Swedes.

Now, care to try for a more relevant approach?

You don't see the point?

Europe has grown under the US umbrella for sixty years, our protection has allowed them to spend less on defense than they would have without us , and for the first time in all recorded history Western Europeans have not invaded each other for a space of sixty years.

We don't need them so we don't object when all of Europe spends less than half as much on defense than do we , and we offer our protection in a realistic manner , what would Europe really do for us if we were hard pressed?

Europe may indeed be great , but a lot of that is our fault.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I'm all for calling Denmark great.

The Danes have just one colony, Greenland, which costs them a bundle, and refuse to cut it loose because neither the Danes nor the Greenlanders consider themselves to be ready for independence.

[Amianthus]

The Danes have just one colony, Greenland, which costs them a bundle, and refuse to cut it loose because neither the Danes nor the Greenlanders consider themselves to be ready for independence.

They also have the Faroe Islands.

[_JS]

You don't see the point?

Europe has grown under the US umbrella for sixty years, our protection has allowed them to spend less on defense than they would have without us , and for the first time in all recorded history Western Europeans have not invaded each other for a space of sixty years.

We don't need them so we don't object when all of Europe spends less than half as much on defense than do we , and we offer our protection in a realistic manner , what would Europe really do for us if we were hard pressed?

Europe may indeed be great , but a lot of that is our fault.

Ah yes, the "Europeans should thank us everyday" response.

But it doesn't hold water. There are a great deal of arrogant assumptions you make in that statement that are baseless beyond the surface. Did the nations of Western Europe have armies, air forces, navies? Of course. Did the US care what sort of governments she dealt with? No, look at Fascist Spain.

It is a false argument, notably you have nothing to back it up. Sweden was no member of NATO, they bordered a Soviet-friendly state and they were never invaded. Nor did they have to build a massive military. Your "umbrella theory" is dubiously arrogant

[Michael Tee]

<<Go back to your post which includes the enumeration of American Crimes thru history, is it no9t the case that the British Empire is also guilty of each one of those?>>

Why not go ALL the way back, to when everyone was guilty of cannibalism?  I didn't say the British Empire committed no crimes.  I said the U.S. government isn't fit to shine its shoes, meaning that England committed far less crimes than the Americans.  It gave up slavery in the 1830s and outlawed the slave trade long before then.  It wasn't BUILT on genocide and slavery.  They took in 100,000 refugees from Nazi Germany at a time when the U.S. and Canada virtually slammed the door in their faces.  Everywhere they went, they left behind a legacy of law courts, public service administrations, railways, post offices, police services, etc.  Contrast that with the absolutely pathetic and even criminal record of the U.S.A. and it becomes painfully obvious which is the greater country.

Also, if you pay a little more attention to the present, to our own lifetimes, instead of the distant past, the criminal activities of America dwarf those of any other nation, the pain and suffering, the human devastation caused by American crimes and atrocities are in a class all by themselves.  What is the point of digging up the ancient past?  That was then, this is now.   Plain and simple:  America is run by criminals and monsters and they gotta be stopped.  Either by the American people themselves or by others if the American people won't step up to the plate.  Either way, they aren't gonna get away with  that shit forever.

[Xavier_Onassis]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faroe_Islands

It seems to me as though the Faroe Islanders are pretty happy with the current arrangement. In independent nation of under 50K people is a difficult thing to handle in today's world.

Greenland has only 56K people, but the people of Greenland do not have as great a European heritage.

I suppose when global warming really gets going, Greenland could become a net exporter of agricultural products. Perhaps not coconuts, but maybe wool, dairy and winter wheat. Then the population will become large enough to become economically viable.

It will be a while before Nuuk becomes a tourist destination. Perhaps they could import some penguins, or breed hardier puffins.

[BT]

It will be a while before Nuuk becomes a tourist destination. Perhaps they could import some penguins, or breed hardier puffins.

They can always sell bottled water.

[Plane]

You don't see the point?

Europe has grown under the US umbrella for sixty years, our protection has allowed them to spend less on defense than they would have without us , and for the first time in all recorded history Western Europeans have not invaded each other for a space of sixty years.

We don't need them so we don't object when all of Europe spends less than half as much on defense than do we , and we offer our protection in a realistic manner , what would Europe really do for us if we were hard pressed?

Europe may indeed be great , but a lot of that is our fault.

Ah yes, the "Europeans should thank us everyday" response.

But it doesn't hold water. There are a great deal of arrogant assumptions you make in that statement that are baseless beyond the surface. Did the nations of Western Europe have armies, air forces, navies? Of course. Did the US care what sort of governments she dealt with? No, look at Fascist Spain.

It is a false argument, notably you have nothing to back it up. Sweden was no member of NATO, they bordered a Soviet-friendly state and they were never invaded. Nor did they have to build a massive military. Your "umbrella theory" is dubiously arrogant

Fascist Spanin didn't join NATO.

Sweden stayed Nutral through WWII and sold Iron to the Germans , I don't know why they stayed Nutral in the cold war , or the Finns , but our umbrella over Norway probly helped keep them dry.

[_JS]

And the argument continues...

So Denmark isn't great because the U.S. has a massive military? Because they need us?

Bullshit.

Your argument, at its most basic level, is that the military makes the US "great". How pathetic is that?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Your argument, at its most basic level, is that the military makes the US "great". How pathetic is that?

==============================

We should remember that Plane maintains military aircraft. It is the reason for his professional existence.

Old T'aoist saying: "To a man with a hammer, everything resembles a nail".

[Plane]

<<Go back to your post which includes the enumeration of American Crimes thru history, is it no9t the case that the British Empire is also guilty of each one of those?>>

Why not go ALL the way back, to when everyone was guilty of cannibalism?  I didn't say the British Empire committed no crimes.  I said the U.S. government isn't fit to shine its shoes, meaning that England committed far less crimes than the Americans.  It gave up slavery in the 1830s and outlawed the slave trade long before then.  It wasn't BUILT on genocide and slavery.  They took in 100,000 refugees from Nazi Germany at a time when the U.S. and Canada virtually slammed the door in their faces.  Everywhere they went, they left behind a legacy of law courts, public service administrations, railways, post offices, police services, etc.  Contrast that with the absolutely pathetic and even criminal record of the U.S.A. and it becomes painfully obvious which is the greater country.

Also, if you pay a little more attention to the present, to our own lifetimes, instead of the distant past, the criminal activities of America dwarf those of any other nation, the pain and suffering, the human devastation caused by American crimes and atrocities are in a class all by themselves.  What is the point of digging up the ancient past?  That was then, this is now.   Plain and simple:  America is run by criminals and monsters and they gotta be stopped.  Either by the American people themselves or by others if the American people won't step up to the plate.  Either way, they aren't gonna get away with  that shit forever.

Thirty years ahead of us eh? That is good and I don't discount the English influence on our Christian community and Abolilition movement , but you are bringing up the crimes of the distant past as reason that we will never do well and then saying that I am dwelling on the past?

"I guess where it all starts to fall apart is when one takes a good look at the "blips," the big "blips" being the genocide of the American Indians and slavery, either one of which by itself would permanently disqualify the U.S. from being the greatest anything anywhere.  "

Keeps you from being taken seriously when you say

"Also, if you pay a little more attention to the present, to our own lifetimes, instead of the distant past, the criminal activities of America dwarf those of any other nation, the pain and suffering, the human devastation caused by American crimes and atrocities are in a class all by themselves.  
"

 You set the terms that you are objecting to.

You havent found a crime that is unique to Americans yet?

May I take it as resolved that the British Empire at one time or another committed each of the crimes you enumerated as being crimes of the USA?

So instead we will consider diffrences in scale , did more Indians suffer in India or the American Indian wars?

Was China wrong to resist the British sales of Opium , or were the Chineese hurt worse by immagration restriction in California?

[Plane]

And the argument continues...

So Denmark isn't great because the U.S. has a massive military? Because they need us?

Bullshit.

Your argument, at its most basic level, is that the military makes the US "great". How pathetic is that?

When did I say that Denmark isn't wonderfull?

How do you say that Denmark is holding off invasion ?

[Xavier_Onassis]

How do you say that Denmark is holding off invasion ?


=================================================
If there were an attempt to invade Denmark by anyone outside the EC, the EC would intervene. No member of the EC would invade Denmark.

No one has invaded Denmark (or Finland, or Sweden) since WWII. I hard;ly think the US is the major preventative factor.

The fact that Denmark could not prevent by itself alone an armed invasion from a much larger country does not mean that Denmark is not great.

Is Hulk Hogan greater than Nelson Mandela? Is "The Rock" greater than Woody Allen?

[Plane]

Your argument, at its most basic level, is that the military makes the US "great". How pathetic is that?

==============================

We should remember that Plane maintains military aircraft. It is the reason for his professional existence.

Old Taoist saying: "To a man with a hammer, everything resembles a nail".

Do you see all the worlds problems as solvable with your speciality?


I think that more bilingual people would be a good thing , for business as well as for interpersonal understanding across national boundaries .

Military Power has a proper role , I will let you disccuss what this role should be even though you have an abysmal ignorance on the subject.

[_JS]

And the argument continues...

So Denmark isn't great because the U.S. has a massive military? Because they need us?

Bullshit.

Your argument, at its most basic level, is that the military makes the US "great". How pathetic is that?

When did I say that Denmark isn't wonderfull?

How do you say that Denmark is holding off invasion ?

Denmark need not bother to hold off an invasion because no one is going to invade it. This is not a video game. I don't think that Otto von Bismarck is going to challenge the Danes for some of their land. Nor are the Swedes going to conquer the Danes and execute the royal family. The Nazis are not likely to march into Denmark again. And even if they were, Denmark could have spent 99.99% of her GDP on military and the German Army would have still crushed the country like a tin can, though it may have taken an extra couple of days mind you.

If holding off invasion is the best you have then surely the Romans are still the greatest nation ever known. If that is the true test of "greatness" then China and India have it in the bag because no country can conquer and occupy those countries.

But, to be honest, I'd cede you "greatness" if you'd cede morality. It is the bewildering obfuscation of the two that amazes me most.