Europeans need to ditch their increasingly bizarre obsession with the evil United States
A good one from Anne Applebaum on CATO Unbound…
…Sadly, we agreed that the Europeans who bash “wild†Anglo-Saxon capitalism, who believe America is an unregulated jungle, and who feel smug and safe within their secure welfare states are deeply, deeply deluded. They haven’t yet realized that the economic and social challenge presented by the successful societies of Asia is hundreds of times more dangerous to their way of life than the caricature they’ve created of the challenge presented by the United States, a country which is nearly as over-regulated as their own.
Finally, Europeans need to ditch their increasingly bizarre obsession with the evil United States. I realize that the current virulence of European anti-Americanism is in some senses an accident, the product of the election of George W. Bush (whom Europeans hated even before Iraq), the events of Sept. 11, the war, and truly terrible American diplomacy. But it’s becoming a problem for Europe now too. Relatively mild free-market reformsâ€â€privatization, lower taxes, de-centralizationâ€â€can be skewered, in Europe, if opponents simply refer to them as “too American.†Without a sense of solidarity among Western countriesâ€â€all of the Western countriesâ€â€it’s impossible to construct a coherent response to Islamic radicalism either.
Hat Tip to FinnPundit for the link!
“Hat Tip to FinnPundit for the link!”
No suprise there.
I think it’s more like “Finnpundit needs to ditch their increasingly bizarre obsession with the evil EU.”
It dissappoints me every time Phil publishes this “information” Finnpundit feeds him.
Comment by M — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 1:25 pm
time to ditch Georgy the Chimp and things will go back to normal!
Comment by conan — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 1:27 pm
Maybe you are reading too much political blogs as I don’t such a hatred anywhere else. Atleast ordinary Finns don’t actively bash Americans or even American politics because ordinary Finn is hardly interested in Finnish politics let alone American. So maybe this text should refer to the leftist politics or whoever is practising this bashing and not ‘Europeans’.
Comment by Jaska — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 1:29 pm
Offtopic. The official spelling of “Mohammed” is Muhammad
http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_25-7-2004_pg3_3
Comment by Anonymous — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 1:30 pm
Last days have been a celebration of pure anti-Americanism here in Finland. We just hate everything that comes from there.
Comment by M — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 1:30 pm
>It dissappoints me every time Phil publishes this “informationâ€Â
>Finnpundit feeds him.
This is very much a libertarian blog (though I doubt it sometimes).
You are free to leave this site forever if you want.
Comment by Anonymous — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 1:35 pm
maybe this text should refer to the leftist politics or whoever is practising this bashing and not ‘Europeans’.
Excellent point!
Comment by Joonas — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 1:42 pm
“This is very much a libertarian blog (though I doubt it sometimes).
You are free to leave this site forever if you want.”
Finnpundit is a hardly a libertarian, more like ultra-conservatist.
So, Phil should not critize EU or Finland, because he’s free to leave both any time?
Comment by M — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 1:47 pm
Last days have been a celebration of pure anti-Americanism here in Finland. We just hate everything that comes from there.
Comment by Phil — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 1:49 pm
After living in several countries, I can only agree
with this blog entry:
http://mibus.cgcommunity.com/index.php?id=350
Americans are the most indoctrinated nation, in a way even
more so than ex-CCCP and DDR, current North-Korea etc.
Lack of education, lack of culture and millions of people
who are quite rootless is a horrible combination.
Comment by Anonymous — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 1:51 pm
We don’t hate everything that comes from America.. We love Conan!
Comment by Anonymous — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 4:03 pm
Some people should seriosly ditch their increasingly bizarre obsessions with the evil welfare state.
“Without a sense of solidarity among Western countriesâ€â€all of the Western countriesâ€â€it’s impossible to construct a coherent response to Islamic radicalism either.”
US cowards certainly left Europe alone with the cartoon controversy.
Comment by Sale — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 4:03 pm
So if Europeans become increasngly dismayed by the belligerent policies of the Bush administration – thereby agreeing with an increasingly large proportion of public opinion in the United States itself – the problem is not the failures of US leadership, but rather a European “obsession”.
Such an attitude reflects a rather totalitarian mind set, and really does remind me of the 1970s in Finland, when “anti-Sovietism” was seen as a problem that had to be fought against.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 4:03 pm
“Atleast ordinary Finns don’t actively bash Americans or even American politics because ordinary Finn is hardly interested in Finnish politics let alone American.”
Hmmm, then why is it that when I am in Finland I hear so much bull from Finns about what my Government is up to? The only positive comments I get are from the Taxi Drivers who all seem to think that Bush is not doing enough in going after the terrorists.
Comment by Fred Fry — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 4:07 pm
“…why is it that when I am in Finland I hear so much bull from Finns about what my Government is up to?”
Perhaps it’s because your Government is up to so much bull.
Comment by issi — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 4:19 pm
geez… Every one missed the real point here. Lower TAXES, less Government.
Or
Continue on the high Tax path and continue to have less than 2% GDP growth. The evil in me wants you to stay hooked on high taxes. So please stay the course.
Comment by winter — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 4:29 pm
Of course, taxi drivers are extraordinarily bright folks, and an excellent barometer. You know what they say about them – when your cabbie tells you to buy stock, it’s time to get out of the market.
Comment by kuski tietää — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 4:34 pm
Sale
Change “US cowards certainly left Europe alone with the cartoon controversy”
to
EU cowards certainly left USA alone after 9/11
Question is: Where were you? Not why did we finally ignore you in your moment of glory. After being back stabbed… Right now I am in the mode of NEVER trust the EU again.
Comment by winter — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 4:37 pm
Of course we don’t hate US policy makers. It’s the best show in town. Just look at Cheney’s latest hijinks.
Comment by adynaton — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 4:37 pm
Hat Tip to Finnpundit, indeed. Everyone who has read Anne Applebaums columns in Washingtom Post knows she has some strange obsessions about Europeans herself.
(BTW, did you all see those new photos from Abu Ghraib?)
Comment by N. Siinistö — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 4:39 pm
Kimmo W. is right. Jari Tervo portrays this phenomenon really well in his novel “Myyrä”. All criticims considering USSR could lead to the label “anti-Soviet”, which of course at the time was most feared label one could get. Finnpundit tries to implement same kind of rhetoric now, and at least Phil seems to take him seriously, which saddens me. Because despite his criticism towards Finland and EU, I always wanted to believe in his “But I still love it here/people here” -speech.
Comment by M — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 4:46 pm
“They haven’t yet realized that the economic and social challenge presented by the successful societies of Asia is hundreds of times more dangerous to their way of life than the caricature they’ve created of the challenge presented by the United States”
I haven’t heard about challenges presented by US, all we talk about nowadays is the big ‘Kiina-ilmiö’ !
Comment by Repe — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 5:27 pm
Perhaps the most significant point of Applebaum’s article is this:
The first, and probably most serious problem Europe faces is a dearth of political leaders who have not only identified the source of the economic problemsâ€â€the regulation, the over-extended state, the absence of entrepreneurshipâ€â€but also have ideas about how to fix them, and know how to sell those ideas to the public. To put it differently: Most of Europe is still waiting for its Margaret Thatcher. Most of Europe still doesn’t have serious, economically liberal, center-right political leaders who win elections, and who present economic opportunity, economic choice, and economic freedom as positive, not terrifying.
There really isn’t a true pro-business right wing in most European states. Most conservative right wing parties wind up paying lip service to the concept of the welfare state, if simply because of their fear of taking a strong stand, and also because their ingrained nationalism is at odds with free-market principles.
Thus at times even the right wing winds up joining the standard anti-American chorus line in Europe, though in a more muted way, as they at least certainly know how dependent European economies are to the markets provided by the American worker-consumer
Comment by Finnpundit — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 5:43 pm
Winter:
“EU cowards certainly left USA alone after 9/11″
What the hell was the EU supposed to do about 9/11 but didn’t?
Comment by Kimmo W. — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 5:43 pm
“EU cowards certainly left USA alone after 9/11″
I didn’t say anything about EU. Even today, Danish troops are still courageously serving in Iraq!
Comment by Sale — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 5:46 pm
Appelbaum and Finnpundit are promoting the curious notion that the preference of European societies to hold on to their social models is primarily a reflection of a visceral distaste for the United States.
Many Americans really do seem to see their country as the center of the universe. Ms.Appelbaum would do well to consider the possibility that the European preference for their own social model is just that – a preference for something that works for them.
Although the red state people might find it a shocking notion, it’s not all about America.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 5:56 pm
The United States is in every way the jungle it is imagined as by Finns sitting in their safe, European homes. It is thoroughly American, which makes it akin to other large American nations like Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico.
Like those countries we have a founder population ruling class that trades leadership every four to eight years. We have large ethnic minorities that were brought in to act as cheap labor for economic projects that have long since gone belly up then left to fend for themselves.
Many of our cities are polluted and much of our infrastructure is rotting because America is not so much a nation-state as a get-rich-quick scheme. And we collectively deal with that fact.
That doesn’t mean the US is evil, but it does mean that it is fundamentally different from Finland. Finland is a nation-state, imagined in the 19th century, realized in the 20th century. It isn’t “American” in anyway. And sure, it’s ok to be suspicious of the Anglo-Saxons. If the French ran the world, everyone would be equally suspicious of their Gallic ways and love of snails as they are of Americans with their Anglo-Saxon ways and love of hamburgers.
Comment by giustino — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 5:59 pm
“Even today, Danish troops are still courageously serving in Iraq!”
And what the hell does 9/11 have to do with Iraq – other than providing a justification for the Bushies to go after Asians of the non-slanty-eyed variety, which were easy collective scapegoats in the overall hysteria?
Comment by Kimmo W. — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 6:00 pm
Finnpundit: “Thus at times even the right wing winds up joining the standard anti-American chorus line in Europe, though in a more muted way, as they at least certainly know how dependent European economies are to the markets provided by the American worker-consumer”
So now you’re sure the right in Europe agrees with your analysis of the situation. You’re bashing their policies, telling they’re not really right wing at all and then you’re saying they at least know what is right but they are somehow afraid of doing the right thing.
Anti-Americanism exists on both the left and the right regardless of your apologies for right-wing anti-Americans who somehow should know better. Anyway, perceiving the left and the right as unified blocks is an outdated way of seeing the world of politics.
Isn’t globalization about growing interdependence? Both these anti-Americans in Europe and anti-Europeans in America do not want to see that. We’re not just dependent on each other, we’re also dependent on the rest of the world (above all on Asia). Finnpundit, I thought you were a strong opponent of American alliance with Europe. Hasn’t your policy been to sever the ties that bind us no matter what it will cost to both America and Europe?
Comment by Helsinkian — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 6:04 pm
There really isn’t a true pro-business right wing in most European states. Most conservative right wing parties wind up paying lip service to the concept of the welfare state, if simply because of their fear of taking a strong stand, and also because their ingrained nationalism is at odds with free-market principles.
I actually have to agree with you on that one. This is especially the case in Finland which is, as Tarja Halonen put it during the election campaign, a sopimusyhteiskunta or “agreement society” (there’s probably a better translation for that). Everyone can decide for themselves if that’s a good or a bad thing…
EU cowards certainly left USA alone after 9/11
How very odd, as I remember it EU (and most parts of the world) were horrified by the ruthless attack against the U.S. and supported them in the actions against terrorism all the way through the Afghanistan conflict. It was the Iraq-part that most people didn’t like – and even there mostly the way it was done, not the obviously good thing of finally getting Saddam off the presidential post.
Sure, there are some people who seem to dislike everything that has the least bit to do with America but I would still argue that those people are a minority among todays Europeans. For most of us it’s more about certain policies of the current government, not about the country, it’s ideals or especially it’s people.
Comment by Joonas — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 6:14 pm
No, Helsinkian, you are twisting my words around, as usual. Try not to take such a facile approach: it resembles that of a Finnish Kommie Klutz Kid.
We’re not just dependent on each other…
I’ve said this often enough, but it seems to need repeating: we’re not dependent on each other equally: it’s been a one-way street for quite some time, with Europe freeriding on the markets created by the American worker-consumer.
As to globalization, the biggest drag to economic progress throughout the world is the hoarding conducted by the European welfare states (the hoarding being burnt up in softer, welfare-guaranteed lifestyles). If the wealth was put into greater circulation, through freer labor markets, then America would not have to be the only one pulling the developing economies of the world out of their poverty.
Comment by Finnpundit — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 6:20 pm
“Kommie Klutz Kid”…
Talking about facile approach…
Finnpundit, since you’re so anti-anti-anything, name one or two things that are good in Finland or EU. Come on, just for the sake of it.
Cause it seems to me that you’re the biggest bigot ever. A not-so-funny caricature of an american.
Comment by M — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 6:43 pm
Finnpundit, you and I have a different way of seeing the world. Simplifying matters for the sake of argument is something no-one can be totally innocent of. When I try to say America and Europe need each other equally, I tend to ignore the signs of a lesser dependence on each other on some areas. But your one-way street argument is an oversimplification. It is more than that, it sounds unrealistic to me. I think you’re overly fixated with your evil welfare state thesis. Your usual argument about the European welfare state as the global drag is exactly the same kind of misguided argument as the anti-American one saying the US model brings us all into destitution.
Both models have their good sides. Since to you everything is about the levels of taxation and the harmful effects of public services and so on, you have a worldview where all political developments boil down to these systemic differences. You think it is terrible that not every country has the same system as America. I think that to the contrary, it is good that different countries have different systems. There is no such thing as the one right model. I know to you the market is perfect – to someone else it is Jesus and to someone third it is communism. FYI, America is not a perfect free market utopia and America is not the only country in the world capable of creating markets. I believe in human imperfection and a healthy competition and co-operation between systems. America and Europe have a lot to learn from each other. That’s my view. Your view is that only Europe has something to learn from America and that’s a one way street. That’s pretty arrogant to me and if you feel I’m twisting your words, feel free to correct me where I had you wrong.
Comment by Helsinkian — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 6:51 pm
finnpundit, i doubt you’ve ever been in finland. fuckheads like you make being an american over here difficult. at the risk of being refered to as a “kommie klutz kid” as you usually so inanely do, suck my circumsized yankee dick…
Comment by jenkki immigrant — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 6:56 pm
Typical anti-European rethorics. A lot of it in the US. Both the conservatives and the libertarians can’t stand the idea that there are countries with high taxes and big government – and whose people are more content and have more opportunities than in more capitalistic societies. And whose economics grow faster despite of it all. It kind of destroys their fine theories.
Cato institute is a joke. Anything coming from there should’t be taken seriously.
Comment by TomiA — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 7:03 pm
jenkki immigrant: I believe Finnpundit is an anti-Finnish Finn living in America. His bigotry toward Finland is understandable for that very reason. People who move out of a country sometimes develop strong negative feelings toward their old countries. America is very tolerant toward newcomers and I’m sure Finnpundit has been accepted as just as American as those born in that country. I think that is great that our countries are in some regards different and Finns who don’t like it here can move out there and vice versa. That’s all cool to me. But America has also welcomed Finns who remain proud of being Finnish as Finland should welcome with open arms people like Phil who are proud of who they are and where they come from.
Comment by Helsinkian — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 7:07 pm
I already resent Finnpundit after one look at his blog and for being this articles source, never happened this fast with anyone. Must be prejudice towards pundits after a few visits to pundit sites, they are all possessed by the same view on absolutely everything, possibly every pundit is created by one man, they’re so identical.
Comment by A Finn — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 7:21 pm
sorry finnpundit, i meant to say “circumcised”. i guess after all those years in the american school system, my english ain’t that great. or perhaps its just the nuances of the language that bog me down. i still think you are a 1st class a-1 douchebag.
Comment by jenkki immigrant — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 7:29 pm
I doubt “Finnpundit” is a pure jenkki and has never been to Finland. I doubt he has ever been to Europe even, or he has, he held his eyes closed. Apparently he hates Finland because it didn’t join the USA in occupying Iraq, and will never admit that it was the right decision on Finland’s part. Perhaps the strangest thing about him is that he has decided to use Finland as the example of the rotten Europe. Finland is, after all, hardly particularly typical European country. Most of the American anti-EU rethorics miss the point here or result to paradoxes (how come these people with 45% tax rate are so happy with the system, for example).
Comment by TomiA — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 7:30 pm
Oh yes, jenkki immigrant: Circumsized? Ouch… Any negative consequences? How much do they actually chop off, and does it somehow improve hardness on the expense of maximum “excitement lenght”? I hear some people have been unable to achieve the waistend-corner (you know, when in the maximum of excitement and the thing gets some extra extra lenght possibly to reach further for the duration of ejection, rarely happens if you donate blood/bleed often, have a routine procedure with the usual partner, or practice master-debating all the time…) after loosing the skin included in the original version of the thing, but instead feel like it’s going to rip when excited to the max.
Comment by A Finn — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 7:35 pm
it is good that different countries have different systems. There is no such thing as the one right model.
Again, Helsinkian, you’ve blithely ignored the central thesis, – most likely because it is so strong. When one model is completely dependent on the free markets of another, it does not matter that the model is different. It is still a freerider, and not a viable model.
jenkki, as soon as someone resorts to profanities, it is a sure bet that the speaker has given up on rational argumentation, in favor of emotionally-based convictions. Such convictions, whatever they may be, can therefore be easily dismissed.
Comment by Finnpundit — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 7:44 pm
I agree that there are plenty of stupid anti american attitudes, but there are plenty of valid reasons to be afraid of American systems too. Due to personal interests, I see plenty of bad things coming from America, such as software patents, microsoft, etc.
I also find the common American ignorance rather frustrating. I can honestly say that plenty of Americans don’t seem to know anything about happening outside their country. Even basic cultural differences seem to be hard to grasp for some Americans. Most of them tend to think that all American holidays are global, many don’t know pretty much anything about metric system, and I have even talked to people who have hard time understanding that Finland is a country, not a state/region in America.
I also don’t agree with many common American views on many rights issues, such as gay rights, cloning, etc.
I’m not saying that EU is any better than America, but America is not superior by any means either. So we have perfectly valid reasons about being cautios about American systems. Let’s not try to combine the worst of the two into one.
Oh, and I agree totally that Asia is much bigger threath right now, and not just to EU, but to America as well. America is not a “threath”, really, just something to be careful about.
Comment by Rithiur — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 7:52 pm
Rithiur: I can honestly say that plenty of Americans don’t seem to know anything about happening outside their country.
The role a population of a free market economy winds up playing is crucial, though, to the entire world, – and that role is to make money. There is nothing more important to the world economy than that Americans continue to pay attention to that role.
So, no, it absolutely doesn’t matter if Americans don’t know much about the rest of the world, as long as they continue to do what they do best.
Comment by Finnpundit — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 8:00 pm
When one model is completely dependent on the free markets of another …
Is it possible that by free markets Finnpundit is referring to – as Applepuu put it – “the United States, a country which is nearly as over-regulated as their own [the EU countries]“? In fact, in some respects it is more regulated.
By the way, in absolute terms the US is collecting only a little less tax euros than Finland. The big difference is that in Finland you get free education and nearly free health care for the money. Where American tax dollars go is a bit of a mystery. Very costly private health care for the elderly is only part of the answer.
Comment by Anonymous — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 8:12 pm
It’s a simple equation for Finnpundit:
American criticism targeted towards any other country = constructive criticism from the Free World to the opressed
Any joke/criticism targeted towards the American way = anti-American bigotry
You need a healthy dose of good ol’double morals to make it in Finnpundit’s world
Thats how a lot of Americans read their Bible: First find a page that says something like, “…and then Abraham got ready to slice open the throat of his own son…”, flip a couple of pages forward or backward to find something like, “…and Jesus said, “Why don’t you all go home and do the same”. You can’t dispute it if it’s in the Holy Bible.
Now I’m not anti American or pro Finn. I just tell what I see around me.
Don’t try to tell me Finnpundit is the first individual you’ve “met” who thinks like this….
Comment by Anonymous — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 8:14 pm
Finnpundit’s ideas are so, well, strange and silly that one can’t help but wonder if he’s actually making a caricature of an “American intelligentsia”.
Comment by Anonymous — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 8:36 pm
in absolute terms the US is collecting only a little less tax euros than Finland.
In absolute terms, nothing is relative.
In terms of strange and silly ideas, it seems to me that the plethora of personal attacks seems to speak of two things: either Finns are completely unprepared for contrarian arguments, or they’ve never been exposed to them.
As Finnish educational standards in secondary schools is quite high, it seems to me that they’re not unprepared for rational argumentation. So the latter must be true, and we must ask why would Finnish academia and media not expose the population to any points-of-view that run counter to the welfare state orthodoxy? Could it be, simply, that the welfare state unconsciously knows it cannot contend as a viable model in a globalized world which demands freer labor markets, and greater dissemination of disturbing ideas?
Comment by Finnpundit — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 9:27 pm
Wow, now Americans are calling Europeans to help them, after they fucked up their economy for good. EU, despite or because of welfare state, still has a large trade surplus with USA. How is that possible? Maybe it is because Americans do not produce anything but hot air anymore.
When you let free markets to run amok, you’ll get one tiny superrich elite and everybody else is barely putting food on the table every second day. Exactly that is happening in the USA right now. Middle class is disappearing fast.
Libertarians fail to recognize that there is no natural market mechanism againts monopolies and all kinds of unfair competition practises. Somebody has to supervise those markets.
Comment by tim73 — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 9:29 pm
we must ask why would Finnish academia and media not expose the population to any points-of-view that run counter to the welfare state orthodoxy?
And we must laugh at this strange suggestion: hah hah. Don’t you realise how silly you look with these “punditisms” about things you apparently know nothing about
Comment by TomiA — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 9:51 pm
Finnpundit, I’ve always welcomed contrarian arguments. I’m not the one defending a fundamentalist position here. I feel a healthy debate is a good thing. There’s just this double standard to your freeriding argument. In whatever way Europe freerides, it happens because the rest of the world lets it happen. In the same way when America gets a free ride, it happens because the rest of the world lets it happen. The first option is always not viable in your world and the second option is something you say is ok because America is in a position of strength. It’s just that the position of strength is not eternal and when that position goes to Asia, the cornerstone of your worldview risks going with it. In the new situation America and Europe are going to have more to win by co-operating than by the confrontation advocated by Finnpundit.
Comment by Helsinkian — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 9:57 pm
“Finnpundit’s ideas are so, well, strange and silly that one can’t help but wonder if he’s actually making a caricature of an “American intelligentsia”
I wonder, did the taxman spoil his business here in the old country or what causes his sinister views and suggestions on abolishing the welfare model by force. Or is he just pushing everybodys buttons and having fun. Or is he forming a special interest group in Washington a la Ahmed Chalabi. Or did he know a person named Aarne Roiha, but that’s a whole different story…
Comment by Antti (the redneck one) — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 10:03 pm
M
It dissappoints me every time Phil publishes this “information†Finnpundit feeds him.
Facts piss me off too…
Comment by Mikko Sandt — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 11:06 pm
tim73
“When you let free markets to run amok, you’ll get one tiny superrich elite and everybody else is barely putting food on the table every second day.”
That must be why poor Americans have more money to spend and more control over their lives than middle-class Finns.
“Exactly that is happening in the USA right now. Middle class is disappearing fast.”
That must be why there’s more social mobility in America than in Finland. Here the poor stay poor and the unemployed become drinkers.
“Libertarians fail to recognize that there is no natural market mechanism againts monopolies and all kinds of unfair competition practises.
There’s only one unfair competition practice – a regulation on those practices.
“Somebody has to supervise those markets.”
Why? Because you don’t happen to like them? What if I come to your house and tell you what to do because I don’t like your values & morals?
Comment by Mikko Sandt — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 11:14 pm
Helsinkian: In the same way when America gets a free ride, it happens because the rest of the world lets it happen. The first option is always not viable in your world and the second option is something you say is ok because America is in a position of strength.
Wrong again, Helsinkian. America doesn’t freeride. Your facile relativism doesn’t hold, considering that America has to pay for almost everything in the world, including security and natural resources.
As to the rest of the world “letting it happen” because America is in a position of strength is also completely wrong. America only provides open markets. If America exercises any displays of strength, it is simply because it’s been attacked, – a different issue entirely.
Comment by Finnpundit — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 11:19 pm
That must be why there’s more social mobility in America than in Finland.
That’s a myth. Of course there is more social mobility in Finland where the education is free.
America only provides open markets.
Are those the same markets Applebaum called “the United States, a country which is nearly as over-regulated as their own [the EU countries]�
Comment by TomiA — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 11:26 pm
Incidentally, Newsweek International’s editor Fareed Zakaria has more thoughts on the same subject as Applebaum’s.
http://www.fareedzakaria.com/articles/articles.html
These two concurrent articles were prompted by the same OECD report.
Zakaria is even more explicit:
“But the conclusion is clearâ€â€Europe is in deep trouble. These days we all talk about the rise of Asia and the challenge to America, but it might well turn out that the most consequential trend of the next decade will be the economic decline of Europe.â€Â
Read the whole thing, as they say.
Comment by Finnpundit — Thu, Feb 16th, 2006 @ 11:36 pm
Social mobility? The US certainly does have a class system and, in spite of what the TV shows like friends might lead you to believe, it is rather firmly entrenched. Finland may have less of this so-called mobility if only because it is so small that if you fuck up in one job your chances of moving somewhere else and starting over again in Finland are pretty small.
Of course, if it was financial mobility that you meant, again, without the right connections and people you know, even in a country as large as the US your chances are limited. People don’t fork out the obscene amount of tuition for Harvard and MIT only because it has an education worthy of the pricetag…you meet the right people and opportunities are available to you that someone from a ‘lesser’ school just don’t have.
The poor stay poor in America, too.
Comment by hfb — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 1:17 am
“How very odd, as I remember it EU (and most parts of the world) were horrified by the ruthless attack against the U.S. and supported them in the actions against terrorism all the way through the Afghanistan conflict. It was the Iraq-part that most people didn’t like”
Yes, well I will also remember Germany letting go two terrorists recently because the US wouldn’t give up someone they wanted to testify for them, but when one was let go, he refused to testify against the other, because he would incriminate himself.
And lets all look with interest in what is going on in Afghanistan. Sure, Germany and others are they, BUT on the condition that they do not have to fight the taliban! Thanks for nothing!
Comment by Fred Fry — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 1:42 am
TomiA:
“That’s a myth. Of course there is more social mobility in Finland where the education is free.”
There’s less chronic poverty in the US than in Finland.
I’d appreciate if someone dug up some statistics showing how many undergraduate students we have from low-income families.
Comment by Mikko Sandt — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 2:03 am
I’m just saying listen, I’d like to have allies too. What’s happening in this world right now, we have a competency chasm. We are getting real good at what we do and the whole world is going to hell in a handbasket. As that gap gets wider, they’ll hate us more and more and more. We are simultaneously the most hated, feared, loved and admired planet  nation on this planet. In short, we are Frank Sinatra and you know something, the Chairman didn’t get to be the Chairman lying down for punks outside the Fountainbleu.
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 3:47 am
In the US, we didn’t shoot our Communists like they did in Tampereen Keskustori….
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 3:49 am
Europeans only hate Americans when it is convenient to their agenda. They certainly didn’t mind the US footing the majority of the bill for ousting Milosivic. Nor, did Europeans have a problem with America liberating Western Europe from the Nazis and standing up to Bolshivism either.
I believe a good deal of Europeans are not grounded in reality in this, the year 2006. Western Europe has had it so well over the past 30+ years that they seem to have lost sight of their own history.
While the US has made mistakes and will continue to do so, it is REDICULOUS to portray the USA as somehow perpetuating instability in this world. As I’ve said before, we are a big country and our mistakes have tremendous effects, however, any mistakes we’ve made we have certainly paid for them and then some. For instance, you American-haters need to look up the ‘Marshall Plan’ – The US-funded program to rebuild Europe after WWII.
The thing I most hate is that time and time again, the US policies are referred to as ‘imperialistic’. Hmm…. what puppet states do we control in Europe? Not sure, but it certainly isn’t the French 5th Republic, or as I call it – the French 5th Column. I adore Finland and I respect its people and culture. But what I cannot respect is a constant negativity towards my country that I love which has given so much in blood and treasure to allow people to voice these very opinions.
If we’ll give up thousands of young boys to free the French from facism, just imagine what we would do for decent people.
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 4:16 am
“I will also remember Germany letting go two terrorists recently because the US wouldn’t give up someone they wanted to testify for them…”
Yes, how completely unreasonable of a German court to insist on enforcing the rule of German law.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 5:01 am
“The thing I most hate is that time and time again, the US policies are referred to as ‘imperialistic’. Hmm…. what puppet states do we control in Europe?”
Yet US politicians and commentators like to refer to Latin America as their “back yard” – an expression that implies a perception of actual ownership.
Another blatant insult to the sovreignty of other nations is the disgustingly patronising American cliché of referring to the President of the United States as THE leader of THE free world. The only leaders that free countries have are those who are elected by citizens of that country in a free election.
Finns didn’t have a say in the election of GW Bush, therefore, he cannot be our leader; if he were our leader under those circumstances, we would not be a free country.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 5:12 am
“In the US, we didn’t shoot our Communists like they did in Tampereen Keskustori….”
A terrible event to be sure, which nevertheless happened during an actual war.
Furthermore, street massacres linked with labor unrest were not completely unknown in the United States during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 5:29 am
I’d appreciate if someone dug up some statistics showing how many undergraduate students we have from low-income families.
Richard Florida in his newest book: “… the USA, for decades seen as the world’s beacon of social mobility, is now doing worse in this regard than the world’s classic social democracies (Germany, Sweden, Finland, Canada).”
I’m not sure that “now” is right, though, social mobility must have been greater for decades.
Comment by TomiA — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 7:15 am
Hey Phil…why aren’t you posting some of the new pics Abu Ghraib pics from Salon? I hear the muslims aren’t very happy about them. Exercise your free speech….
Comment by hfb — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 8:36 am
Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist’s real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful.
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 8:40 am
– Theodore Kaczynski
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 8:59 am
“In the US, we didn’t shoot our Communists like they did in Tampereen Keskustori.”
But few decades earlier you put Sherman on them dixie rebels. It was your civil war and Tampere was ours.
Comment by antti (the redneck one) — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:07 am
Point well-taken….
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:25 am
Keskustori was a bad example….
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:25 am
The point I was trying to make is every country has its faults. Every country suffers from bad judgements, bad actions, or lack of action when the time called for it (i.e. Jewish gold in Swiss banks, Sweden selling massive amounts of iron ore to ze Germans).
We all have history we would like to change, however, when America is focused on with negative eyes, you will always certainly see a negative picture.
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:28 am
I’m a Finnish American and I currently live in the US, though I’ve lived in Helsinki and Jyvaskyla. I speak fluent Finnish and English.
I married an American. And, much to the deep chagrin of my Finnish relatives, he’s a Jew. I’d like to say that he’s been accepted – or even tepidly welcomed – into the fold of my family, but the cold stares and anti-semitic comments relatives have made have floored me. Never in my bucolic, mustikkamaa summers would I have imagined such an undercurrent of bizarre prejudice. Worse yet (to my Finnish relatives) he’s a Zionist, and (gasp) so am I.
The threads of anti-Americanism that run through Finnish and European political rhetoric are often justified, but they also smack of envy. The fact that the Bush administration has so wholly alienated a continent of allies is a testament to both its boldness and conceit. In that, they display the best/worst extremes of American spirit. But the fact that “intelligent” Europeans (via this blog and elsewhere) conflate the actions of the Bush administration with ordinary American citizens implies a deeper degree of hostility, and one which I find irrational. Not everyone loves Bush. Some of us admire his tenacity, but find fault with his strategy. I can’t stand his social conservatism and his fiscal policy stinks. I don’t live near a church and don’t ride an SUV, yadda.
But quit the mud-slinging, wouldya? With the rise of anti-western sentiment expressed by Muslim radicals, with a globe becoming increasingly pro-freedom/pro-repression, our resources (and minds) need to focus on protecting the liberties we’re all fortunate enough to know.
P.S. The entire editorial staff of the New York Post quit after their newspaper refused to print the Danish comic.Chalk one up for solidarity.
Comment by Anna — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:44 am
Anti-Semitism is and has been an almost unkonwn pehnomenon in Finland, and most certainly a smaller problem than in the USA. Finland, with its tiny Jewis population and a history of being labelled on racial grounds themselves, just dosn’t have that tradition. Most Finns don’t even know why the Jews are supposed to be hated. Anti-Zionism or anti-Israel sentiments are a totally different story, of course.
And one more time: there are quite storng anti-European sentiments (combined with amazing ignorance) in the USA, it seems to be a two-way street.
Comment by Anna — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 10:14 am
Well-said, Anna.. There is ignorance on both sides.. The big difference is, a good-ol’ boy in the States will admit his ignorance about other countries because he just doesn’t give a damn. Europeans, on the other hand, claim to have some enlightenment about US policy and intentions. For instance, there too apt to believe in every Freemosonite-conspiracy and will not concede that we support Israel because it is a DEMOCRACY.. or at least, a quasi one.
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 10:22 am
In general, of course… This does not pertain to everyone, especially my man Mikko Sandt here
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 10:24 am
Europe will never be like America. Europe is a product of history. America is a product of philosophy.
Margaret Thatcher (1925 – )
….and vice-versa… we should all learn to cherish common beliefs and respectfully disagree from time to time
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 10:28 am
Fred Fry: “And lets all look with interest in what is going on in Afghanistan. Sure, Germany and others are they, BUT on the condition that they do not have to fight the taliban! Thanks for nothing!”
Perhaps you should read the newspapers more carefully. After the stalemate of Operation Anaconda – who was deployed to that area? The Royal Marines. What country is currently deploying 3,300 more combat troops to Afghanistan so that the US can draw down its forces? The UK. Snide comments don’t seem a great way to communicate with what allies you do have.
Comment by Anonymous — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 10:39 am
Anonymous,
What’s your point? Everyone knows the UK has backbone.. I don’t think Fred was including the UK in ‘others’. So what, anyway? The British are a fine people who do understand their history and still maintain good relations with the USA. Fred, you have to say, ze Germans and le French. — Be specific
If the Spanish had hung around, the UK wouldn’t be needing to increase its strength. But, of course, the Spanish let Islamic radicalism make that decision for them.
“After the stalemate of Operation Anaconda” – hmm… was that before or after the two successful elections?
This is exactly my point.. two oppresive governments removed, 5 successful elections thus far, infrastructure being rebuilt — all that can be focused on is:
1) A 4-year old operation; that:
2) left an estimated eight U.S. and three allied soldiers dead, and an estimated 450 enemy personnel have been killed. — I’ll take that kind of stalling all day long
____________________
Are the citizens in Afghanistan better off than they were 6 years ago? To answer ‘NO’ is to completely delude yourself, buy I’m sure you’ll find a way.
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 11:19 am
At least the heroin is flowing freely again… that’s good isn’t it?
Comment by smackupmahbitch — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 11:27 am
Anonymous,
You can certainly misconstrue anything you like if you have the desire. It also helps when you try to associate a 4-year old operation with a recent troop deployment. Seems to me that your the one that needs to read the paper more clearly, especially up at the top where the date is.
The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance – it is the illusion of knowledge.
Daniel J. Boorstin (1914 – )
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 11:35 am
We can’t stop the heroin trade now.. Not enough resources.. The best long-term solution is to allow that society to be self-sufficient. That country has been at war since the late 70′s, so it might take more than a year or two to straighten everything out..
How about this? If you are so concerned about Afghanistan’s heroin, than start convincing Europe’s addicts to quit, after all, they are the major consumers. You Utopian idealists certainly understand the word ‘collectivism’ and ‘for the common good’
You Europeans won’t even come to the defense of your own drug problems. That is how weak Europe is. Since we are paying for the war and to rebuild infastructure, maybe Europe could pay these farmers to grow something else
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 11:41 am
Really, that is the attitude.. If it is not one thing it is another. If the Taliban is gone, then elections haven’t come quick enough. When elections take place, there is a heroin problem. If and when the herion production decreases, then it will be unemployment or alleged torture…. It will always be something negative with you guys..
The only way to soothe your collective guilt about being well-fed and living in a place with clean water is to constantly attack the epitome of an industrialized state. Your concerned about Afghani heroin, yet Europe was more than content to sit around and watch Muslims get sklaughtered in Kosovo..
Europe is so weak, taht it took Bill Clinton to go after Milosivic. Bill Clinton, a 60′s pacifist, had to rile up NATO and come to the rescue, that is complete weakness. You can’t even take care of your own region, and your upset over Afghani heroin. I think your animosities lie a lot deeper.
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 11:48 am
Kimmo says,
“Yet US politicians and commentators like to refer to Latin America as their “back yard†– an expression that implies a perception of actual ownership.”
Kimmo, if you had a better understand of American English you would know that this does not, in fact, imply ownership. It is a common American phrase that is spoken more in a geographical sense rather than pertaining to ownership or influence. Yes, it can mean influence, but generally the ‘back yard’ has to do with location.
For instance, in America, it would never be said that Cuba was in the Soviets “back yard” or the UK was in ours. Of course, this is just my opinion from sitting here for a couple minutes thinking about the contexts I typically hear this phrase in, but I think another American would agree.
I think you would only bring that up because if your interpretation was correct, than it’s obvious we have the biggest ‘yard’ around, and THAT IS A BAD THING… you know, the whole new imperialism mantra..
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 11:59 am
I think the US is an imperialistic nation for all practical purposes – not a colonial, though. Of course it’s in the interests of the Americans to deny this and come up with more pleasant ways to describe what the country has been doing for a couple of hundreds of years now, first on the American continent and the Pacific then, after the WWII, all around the world. Waging the war for the free world, for example, is such more nice-sounding a phrase, and indeed, that’s what it has been doing too – often with imperialistic methods. Unfortunately, all too often freedom has been sacrificed for all kinds of practical aims, like trying to secure this or that strategic interest. That’s why there are so many people who are very angry at the US, and I’m not talking about the kind of mild annoyance the Europeans show.
Anyway, how could a country become the world’s greatest power if it didnät have imperialistic tendencies?
Comment by Anonymous — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 12:47 pm
Jason,
My point was the British are Europeans, Fred was making incorrect generalisations. My point is from Anaconda until the present day, the US has been operating in Afghanistan with allies. Not just the British forces, but Danish, Norwegian and Canadian special forces have been carrying out combat operations against AQ/Taliban forces; The French airforce has flown combat mission there; etc. If you want to know why I called Anaconda a stalemate, there is a report from the US Army War College which is perhaps the most indepth open source look at the fighting, and that is basically his opinion having been their and interview US troops who were involved.
I really hope the Afghanistan is brighter than its past – improved governance suggests it should be. It’s people are probably no worse off now, but beyond Kabul its not apparent that they necessarily better off.
On the poppy crop, the Taliban basically stopped it in the space of year in the late 90s (corresponding steep rise in heroin prices in the west and increases of production in other parts of the world), but they did it by methods that would not be acceptable in the new Afghanistan. I tend to agree with you though, trying to cut supply for heroin isn’t going to do much. Its a demand led commodity.
Comment by Anonymous — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 12:59 pm
BTW Jason, you’re totally wrong about Spain. Aznar got kicked out because he blamed the bombs on ETA not al-Qaeda.
Comment by Anonymous — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 1:00 pm
To recap Finnpundit’s post 23: there’s an excess of democracy in Europe.
A government that tries to screw its people is in grave danger of becoming an ex-government.
So policies that would favour ulta-rich special interests do not get implemented as smoothly as Finnpundit (and A.Applebaum) would like.
This is indeed the problem with all functioning democracies: the people (demos) have to be pandered to
(to use the American code for actually giving people what they want).
But don’t worry, we seem to be on our way to US-style politics, where politics has no effect on policy.
One problem, though. Once all the people insignificant enough to have to work for their living
are paid in bananas or peanuts, who’s going to buy all the cool stuff they produce?
Will the heroic worker-consumer nation just keep printing green bits of paper forever?
Making money is what the US does best, according to Finnpundit.
COuld we start competing in that, printing bigger denominations faster than they?
The 500-euro bill (c. 600 bucks) is a good start…
Comment by prince of dorkness — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 2:55 pm
After reading several comments “Europe is so weak..” by Jason and others it seems that they miss one fundamental point. There is no country called Europe nor a president of Europe. European parliament exist, but its authorities are quite limited.
Europe parliament (much less the non-existent president) cannot make such decisions as US president or congress/senate.
Comment by Anonymous — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 3:12 pm
“Perhaps you should read the newspapers more carefully. After the stalemate of Operation Anaconda – who was deployed to that area? The Royal Marines. What country is currently deploying 3,300 more combat troops to Afghanistan so that the US can draw down its forces? The UK. Snide comments don’t seem a great way to communicate with what allies you do have.”
and:
“Fred, you have to say, ze Germans and le French.  Be specific”
Point well taken. Although as you suggested, that comment did not refer to those countries activly engaged in the fight against terrorism, like the UK, as well as other Western Powers. (I was a guest one time of a Royal Naval Vessel while in the middle East, and truly appreciate their efforts!)
what is a shame is the lengths that the UK has had to go to meet the NATO committment for Afghanistan. This is an operation that NATO approved and has the all-important Security Resolution “Seal of Approval” yet still the other Major Europen Powers; France, Spain, Germany have yet to step up to the fight.
“Spanish troops based in the west will rarely leave their compound.”
“German troops in the north will allow no other Nato troops to fly in their helicopters.”
“Major European countries such as France, Spain and Germany have refused to take part in operations that could involve fighting the Taleban.”
“Another (UK) officer accused the Germans of a complete failure in their mission to rebuild the country’s police force. He said German forces had trained little more than 200 officers in four years, and when the new police force was deployed in Kabul, they had promptly disappeared. “In many ways, Afghanistan is in a worse position now, four years on from the war there, than Iraq is,” he said.”
I have said it before and I will say it again:
America’s actoins would not have to be so extreme if other countries would contribute more to the fight on terror.
For your reading pleasure:
A tale of torture at the hands of an America-hating diplomat. – OpinionJournal
Comment by Fred Fry — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 3:17 pm
“two oppresive governments removed, 5 successful elections thus far, infrastructure being rebuilt”
Add Charles Taylor being removed as President of Liberia as a third Government change, without shots being fired.
Add Libya shipping their WMD program to the US as another success for the US. – Despite the French negotiating all the time for access to their oil fields. Even Momar had more integrety than the French by preserving the existing contracts with the US oil firms despite the longstanding embargo.
Comment by Fred Fry — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 3:23 pm
It’s pretty strange that all these applebaums don’t seem to understand that the American economy isn’t growing because its “capitalistic features”, let alone its leading role in globalization (in fact, the US is pretty “unglobalized”), but because they are loaning money from abroad (and then buying cheap Chinese stuff with the money). In a few years time they must start paying back and that means less consumption and thus – in the American economy in particular – slower economical growth. I predict that by 2008 if not earlier Finland’s growth figures will be bigger than those of the US. After all, these things tend to go in cycles – just take a look at the long-term growth figures here
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2005/02/data/dbcoutm.cfm?SD=1980&ED=2006&R1=1&R2=1&CS=3&SS=2&OS=C&DD=0&OUT=1&C=158-128-142-172-134-144-178-111&S=NGDP_RPCH&CMP=0&x=80&y=15
Things like high taxes, big governments or what not have very little to do with anything.
Comment by Anonymous — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 3:26 pm
Yet another yank frothing at the mouth about WWII on a Finnish blog. Yawm.
Read up and then come back, boy.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 4:16 pm
Be careful on Liberia, Fred – whilst the US paid for the ECOWAS force and flew some Harriers over Freetown at the height of the rebel offensive, it would not allow the USMC to actually land because of fears of the domestic (US) reaction to casualties. Lots of shots were fired – just not by the Americans, thousands dieds (including hundreds of West African peacekeepers), tens of thousands brutalised. Taylor is exiled but still causing trouble from outside. It’s hardly a success for anyone – the AU, the UN, ECOWAS, and less immediately the US and EU.
Comment by Toby — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 4:16 pm
TomiA:
“Richard Florida in his newest book: “… the USA, for decades seen as the world’s beacon of social mobility, is now doing worse in this regard than the world’s classic social democracies (Germany, Sweden, Finland, Canada).—
I need statistics for Finland. I do have statistics for America and Old Europe and America scores better:
OECD/Cowboy Capitalism:
…(American) students who completed high school in 2002: 44% percent of those who came from the fifth of households that had the lowest family income were enrolled in college the following October.
That means that the likelihood that the poorest American youth will attend college is, on average, greater than the likelihood that German youth from average-income families will do so.
Comment by Mikko Sandt — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 4:46 pm
Anonymous:
“Europe parliament (much less the non-existent president) cannot make such decisions as US president or congress/senate.”
That’s why America’s role as the global superpower is so essentially important – and not just for America’s interests but for the world’s. There’s no chance in hell Europe could have stopped the war in Kosovo/Bosnia or prevented Saddam Hussein from advancing beyond Kuwait.
Comment by Mikko Sandt — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 4:52 pm
Fred Fry
Look, they are cowards, period. When they have their own 9/11 we may see some action on the EU part. But I won’t hold my breath, see SPAIN.
The EU complains that Iraq and 9/11 are not connected. So what?? Iraq shot at USA aircraft —- An act of war… Iraq tried to kill an ex USA president — another act of war. Taking out Sadam was good for the world, and the USA is the only country (UK as well) doing good in the world.
Now will the EU join the USA on Iran, or will we see nukes on missiles pointed at the EU soon. Its the EU’s call. If I was in Europe, I would start digging the bomb shelter.
Heck maybe I should go into that business. Money to be made.
Comment by winter — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 4:54 pm
I think you would only bring that up because if your interpretation was correct, than it’s obvious we have the biggest ‘yard’ around, and THAT IS A BAD THING… you know, the whole new imperialism mantra..
I am sorry if I am a little worried about the likes of Finnpundit wanting to kill all Europeans to put an end to the evil freeriding. How silly of me.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin. — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 5:06 pm
I need statistics for Finland.
A working approach is to write “social mobility finland” into Google. The first result seems to be (or the report referred to in the first result actually)
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/about/news/IntergenerationalMobility.pdf
In the USA there is least social mobility while most in Norway followed by other Scandinavain countries. No big surprise there, I’ve seen similar results in other studies.
Comment by TomiA — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 5:22 pm
“Be careful on Liberia, Fred – whilst the US paid for the ECOWAS force and flew some Harriers over Freetown at the height of the rebel offensive, it would not allow the USMC to actually land because of fears of the domestic (US) reaction to casualties. Lots of shots were fired – just not by the Americans, thousands dieds (including hundreds of West African peacekeepers), tens of thousands brutalised. Taylor is exiled but still causing trouble from outside. It’s hardly a success for anyone – the AU, the UN, ECOWAS, and less immediately the US and EU. ”
Well the US did not fire a shot, and there was US boots on the ground, for a short while and warships on the horizon. It was Bush that demanded that Taylor go.
Sure there was a horrible 14 year civil war (8 years of while occurred during Clinton’s presidency)
The situation on the ground today is most peaceful and they just elected a new president, a woman which is a first for Africa. The country is on the fast lane to rejoin the civilied world.
If you have not seen the documentary “Liberia, an Uncivil War” you should.
“the USA is the only country (UK as well) doing good in the world.”
And Australia too! and…
Comment by Fred Fry — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 5:49 pm
If we’ll give up thousands of young boys to free the French from facism, just imagine what we would do for decent people.
Um…lend-lease tanks and aircraft to their enemies? (cough, cough)
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 6:54 pm
Winter – you don’t seem to be able to handle the concept that Aznar was voted out because he misled his electorate on the day of the bombings for his own domestic political purposes. If Bush had said on 9/11 “it was the Russians. We are certain of it.” do you think he would have been taken very seriously?
But never mind, you keep banging your drum fella.
Comment by Toby — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 7:00 pm
Freeridin’ Franklin,
Well, with the exception of the British, the Russians were the only ones fighting the Germans, so we pretty much had to support them. How long did the French fight? Two weeks.. and they had a bigger, albeit, inferior armed forces than ze Germans.
Which European countries actually fought the Germans collectively (not including resistance movements, some of which are dubious at best):
Poland – 1 Month
France – Two weeks
Holland, Belgium – They did fight, but too weak and overwhelmed
Norway – 2 months
Denmark – almost immediate surrender
All the while, the Germans received passive support from the so-called neutrals (Spain, Switzerland, Sweden).
So, yes, we sold weapons to the Soviets. It should be noted that they were deeply distrusted by the Americans but Lend-Lease was extended to the Soviets at the behest of Great Britain. If France, the Low Countries, and Scandinavia would ahve put up a better fight, then the whole course of history could have changed.
In 1940, Churchill wanted to occupy Norway, cut off iron shippments to Germany from Sweden and assist the Finns. In 1940, Hitler and Stalin had, by mutual agreement, worked together to occupy Eastern Europe. Stalin did not become an ‘ally’ until Germany attacked the Russians, and we had to support what we believed to be the lesser of two evils.
Even with documented German atrocities, it is still debatable whether that was the right decision, but we acted – that is the point. The USA back and judged the situation and then they did something about it – not observe with indifference as seems to be the case with most Europeans.
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 7:34 pm
“The EU complains that Iraq and 9/11 are not connected. So what?? Iraq shot at USA aircraft â€â€- An act of war… Iraq tried to kill an ex USA president  another act of war. Taking out Sadam was good for the world, and the USA is the only country (UK as well) doing good in the world.”
You really believe in this bullshit, winter? Let’s not forget, WHO THE FUCK SUPPORTED SADDAM during Iran-Iraq war? Maybe my memory is not that good anymore, but was it the goold old US of A? Saddam gassing the kurds…well, shit happens, Saddam is OUR good boy, just a little rough, it is in their culture blah blah… Even your current secretary of D-FENS, Donald Rumsfeld did shake hands with your very own buddy, Saddam.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/
The goold old slogan is still valid: In order to save the village, it was necessary to destroy it.
Comment by tim73 — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 7:34 pm
http://homepage.mac.com/cfj/.Pictures/saddam-and-chirac-75-01.jpg
And here’s a picture of Jacque Chirac (on the R) with Saddam at the nuclear reactor the French built for him….
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 7:37 pm
“If France, the Low Countries, and Scandinavia would ahve put up a better fight, then the whole course of history could have changed.”
I do not know how my father and his contemporaries could have done a better fight against the russians when they tried to invade our country.
Comment by Anonymous — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 7:55 pm
Well, Jason Ward, don’t be so cocky….
Foreign Assistance (of American war of independence):
“The warfare in the Middle Atlantic region settled almost to stagnation, but foreign aid was finally arriving. Agents of the new nationâ€â€notably Benjamin Franklin, Arthur Lee, Silas Deane and later John Adamsâ€â€were striving to get help, and in 1777 Pierre de Beaumarchais had succeeded in getting arms and supplies sent to the colonials in time to help win the battle of Saratoga.
That victory made it easier for France to enter upon an alliance with the United States, for which Franklin and the comte de Vergennes (the French foreign minister) signed (1778) a treaty. Spain entered the war against Great Britain in 1779, but Spanish help did little for the United States, while French soldiers and sailors and especially French supplies and money were of CRUCIAL importance.”
So without those pesky frenchies your little and dirty peasant army could have been crushed like a bug and you would be watching rugby on telly with the lads….shock and awe!
Comment by tim73 — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 7:56 pm
Because we did support Saddam during the Reagan Administration that is more of a reason for us to go into Iraq, not less. If the United States helped bring Saddam to that position of power, then we are absolutely obligated to go into Iraq and remove a tyrant we helped create.
I suppose you would have us take the European route:
1) Ignore the problen and pretend it does not exist
2) Tranfer all responsibility in this matter over to an ineffective international body
3) Appease the offending party so he gets out of the news headlines and start bribing the offensive party behing closed doors
While your route seems more humane and doesn’t run the risk of offensive bombing videos on the evening news, it certainly is not effective and only perpetuates autocratic regimes.
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 7:59 pm
“Because we did support Saddam during the Reagan Administration that is more of a reason for us to go into Iraq, not less.”
That’s one way of looking at it, but it is also belies the notion of the inherent moral superiority of the United States; it is an indication of Machiavelian self-interest, which should give other countries reason to think twice before acting like the trained circus dogs that American neocons want them to be and jumping through hoops held up by Uncle Sam.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 8:17 pm
“While your route seems more humane and doesn’t run the risk of offensive bombing videos on the evening news, it certainly is not effective and only perpetuates autocratic regimes.”
And your country have been successful cleaning up the mess since when? The whole muslim world more or less hates your guts because you did your ugly american thing once again. Iraq war is draining billions of dollars per month and going nowhere, war lords in Afganistan are producing more heroin than EVER BEFORE, South America is also very pissed off. Not a fucking thing is better because your stupid and arrogant warmongering and leader of the free world-shit.
Attack Iran and you can say goodbye for easy motoring: About 40 percent of the world’s crude oil shipments pass through the TWO-MILE WIDE channel of the strategic Straits of Hormuz.
Comment by tim73 — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 8:25 pm
OK.. the French.. hmm… well, 5 republics later and they’re a bunch of assholes. Look, they helped us in the Revolution, we helped free them twice from the ze Germans.
I don’t even really care about their indiffernce, quite honestly. However, the French try to undermind US policy at every chance they can possibly get. Oil for instance – Europeans constantly bring up this so-called ‘oil conspiracy’ as motive for the US invading Iraq. When it is absolutely clear that oil concerns prompted the French to oppose the war in Iraq.
Europeans, in general, don’t want to hear this. They focus on Abu-Ghrab, and other mistakes in an effort to make themselves feel better about ignoring the Middle East. Before the US invaded Iraq, I do recall many Europeans, and Janine Garafallo, on US news channels predicting:
1) Millions dead from a humanitarian aid collapse
2) Civil war among Iraqis
3) Broadened comflict among other Middle Eastern nations
4) Tens of thousands of US soldiers killed
5) Absolutely no chance of elections in the forseeable future
Well, none of this has panned out, to their dismay I’m sure. That is the entire problem with unchecked liberalism: The real issue is that they have no faith in the ability of the Iraqis to control their own destiny.
On Pt. #1 – What a arrrogant thing to say that only UN food aid will keep away a humanitarian tragedy. Two reasons: By saying this, the pundits are treating Iraqis as somehow completely ignoring their human instincts to survice and procure food, but rather insist that a bunch of beauracrats with light-blue nametags are staving of Iraqi starvation. Secondly, did you really think the USA would not feed the population? Are you so engrossed in your conspiracies that you would presume we would only feed oil workers and other Iraqis essential to the plundering of the country’s resources.
American anti-Europeanism is based on ignorance, but European anti-Americanism is based on peverting logic and buying into any conspiracy that somehow even infers to American involvement or influence. This is a sickness..
Be careful. If Russia coontinues down its path, Europeans will be faced with a stark reality in coming years. As Churchill once said, there is a gathering storm. Now, if Russia ever became aggressive towards W. Europe, who would you want backing you up? NATO or the EU defense policy?
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 8:27 pm
That’s scary… I guess we better leave Iran alone then..
1) If we can send a man to the moon, I think we can build a pipeline to the Red Sea
2) If we attacked Iran, we would control ‘the strategic Straits of Hormuz’. You assume we wouldn’t be able to capture that area… Heat and sand make glass, and when were done with Iran it’s going to look like Superman’s dad’s apartment on Krypton.
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 8:31 pm
Of course it is Machiavelian self-interest… That is why there are no Hessburgers in New York
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 8:33 pm
I really hope we don’t end up in conflict with Iran, but with Europe handling the dimplomacy the chances are growing more likely every day. I’d really like to see the Europeans stand up to the Iranians on this nuclear issue, but if history is any barometer, we better gas up the planes and tanks.
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 8:38 pm
“Of course it is Machiavelian self-interest… That is why there are no Hessburgers in New York”
Well, if that isn’t the mother of all non-sequiturs!
Comment by Kimmo W. — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 8:50 pm
Jason Ward…
Amazing..absolutely AMAZING. Do u see any fault in the workings of the U.S goverment…ever?!
It’s easy to turn a blind eye. Isn’t it?
Why do ppl turn a blind eye to human suffering? Do you honestly trust
your elected officials that much? It’s just so sad that people stand up for
goverments but not for other people. Just think who takes the worst beatings in these wars. It’s sure not the ones who make the decisions to go one of them..is it?
Comment by dalifemme77 — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 8:53 pm
Make no mistake about it, Finnish companies are profiting as well – http://www.hs.fi/english/article/Finnish+companies+operate+in+Iraq+with+help+of+local+intermediaries/1101979847597
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 8:56 pm
Amazing..absolutely AMAZING. Do u see any fault in the workings of the U.S goverment…ever?!
Yes, of course we make mistakes.. But we are not so afraid of making mistakes that we neglect people altogether. Giving lip service to UNESCO doesn’t mean your affecting positive change
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 8:58 pm
Are you American Republicans really that fucked up? First it was Iraq with WMD but there were none whatsoever, their army was basically ruined already AND NOW you fucking geniuses actually believe that Iran is just months away of having nukes and will attack one way or another againts the US?
I can see from your comments that you really believe in this shit, like Nazis did believe blindly in their ideology. Everybody is either with you or against you.
Newsflash! It is you guys that are causing all kinds of trouble, not so much the other way around. All those years of Fox News and other right wing propaganda are obviously starting to affect your thinking. Only through war we will be victorius and all that crap..Ignorance is strength, War is peace and Freedom is slavery.
Comment by tim73 — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:13 pm
I just feel inaction is much more dangerous than aggressive policies when dealing with Islamic radicalism and ruthless dictatorships…
20th Century history has shown the dangers of placating tyrants and its eventual consequences..
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:15 pm
“I do recall many Europeans, and Janine Garafallo, on US news channels predicting:
1) Millions dead from a humanitarian aid collapse
2) Civil war among Iraqis
3) Broadened comflict among other Middle Eastern nations
4) Tens of thousands of US soldiers killed
5) Absolutely no chance of elections in the forseeable future”
They were not much further off the mark than the bushie predictions that the war would be a “cakewalk”, with the main obstacles being those tons of flowers that the locals would be throwing, or those somewhat premature “mission accomplished” declarations, before the real mess had even started.
Not to mention the whole justification of the whole mess, based on “100% certainty” that the country was absolutely brimming with weapons of mass destruction. And although Bush was careful not to be caught actually claiming that Saddam was behind 9/11, the juxtaposition was stark enough to persuade a majority of the US electorate to imagine that this was the case.
The most insulting, however, is the suggestion that by disagreeing with anything that the United States does, Europeans are guilty of treachery or even insubordination, rather than exercising their rights as sovreign peoples.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:15 pm
BBC/NPR listener and registered libertarian here, sorry….I probably have seen 5 hours of Fox news coverage since its inception. I don’t care for it..
It’s quite obvious Iran is close to nukes.. Europeans should know this better than anyone since thay are ones consistently being lied to by the Iranians.
I don’t think Iran will attack the US. However, I believe Israel will attack Iran if weapons facilities start production and that possiblity will force action by Europe and/or the United States. Israel cannot be allowed to attack Iran, that will cause even greater problems than if the US acts.
Iran, with its dual-government system, is highly unstable. They should not, and can not be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons with the current autoctatic-theocratic regime in that country. Pakistan is also troubling, but Pakistan suprised everyone with their weapons before anything could really be done. The US has created ties with the Pakistani government and is in the process of mitigating that threat.
However, Iran is developing their program in full view of the ‘Internatinal Community’. The Community has a chance to stop this gathering threat before it materializes. I just hope they are up to the task. Once a weapon is obtained, all hopes of then ending that program are virtually nill.
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:25 pm
“20th Century history has shown the dangers of placating tyrants and its eventual consequences…”
The 20th century has also shown that the United States does not have any problems with tyrants per se, as long as they do America’s bidding geopolitical affairs and secure US business interests. The list is a long one: Augusto Pinochet, Anastasio Somoza, Ferdinand Marcos…
This sometimes ends up biting the US in the ass: much of Saddam Hussein’s power was based on US acquiescence (sure, other Western countries, including Finland, were in on it too).
US support for tyrants sometimes backfires seriously. When dictators become really obnoxious, they are overthrown, and replaced by the likes of Fidel Castro and the Ayatollah Khomeini.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:32 pm
Kimmo says: “The most insulting, however, is the suggestion that by disagreeing with anything that the United States does, Europeans are guilty of treachery or even insubordination, rather than exercising their rights as sovreign peoples.”
Good point and you are right. This is a problem on both sides of the Atlantic. We were wrong about the Vietnamese and now, I believe, Europe is wrong about Islamic radicalism.
The whole WMD thing is clear, though. Saddam kicked out the UN inspectors in 1998. Then, Saddam said he destroyed his weapons, but wouldn’t tell UN inspectors where he had destroyed them as to allow a verification. In this circumstance, it would have been highly irresponsible for Bush to believe Mr. Hussein. Something tells me if we hadn’t gone through the UN dance with Saddam and invaded in secrecy, we would have found huge stores of weapons.
I’m not saying that we shouldn’t have used the UN process, I’m just saying that this diplomacy did have its drawbacks. Just because the weapons weren’t found, doesn’t mean they never existed – they surely did. It doesn’t take a military genius to figure out all you need to do is move material on heavily cloudy days to avoid detection by satellites.
I don’t know what happened to the WMD, but Western society cannot gamble on their future security based on Saddam Hussein’s ‘word’.
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:35 pm
When dictators become really obnoxious, they are overthrown, and replaced by the likes of Fidel Castro and the Ayatollah Khomeini.
Are you implying that the USA installed Castro or the Ayatollah… That could not be farther from the truth.
Pinochet was a huge mistake of US foreign policy – no doubt.. But mistakes happen when you are the world’s biggest power player.
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:38 pm
“This is a problem on both sides of the Atlantic. We were wrong about the Vietnamese and now, I believe, Europe is wrong about Islamic radicalism.”
I wasn’t actually taking a stand on who was right and who was wrong over particular historical events. At issue here is American arrogance: the attitude that in order to be called part of the “free world”, other countries have some kind of a moral obligation to follow the lead of the United States.
“I don’t know what happened to the WMD, but Western society cannot gamble on their future security based on Saddam Hussein’s ‘word’.”
Recent history has shown that betting on George Bush’s ‘word’ would also be quite high-risk a gamble.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:44 pm
When there are two political movement, none paricularly attractive, the US needs to support someone. Inevitably, mistakes are made and our ‘horse’ turns out to be, or so it seems, the bad choice.
Kimmo… you metioned that I donot find fault in anything my government does. However, you are the one demanding perfection. This is impossible and will never be the case – ever. I know we’ve trampled on small countries to achieve geo-political results.
My question is? In the past 100 years, do you really belive that the USA has done more good than evil through its foreign policies?
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:44 pm
should have said, do you believe… that ‘really’ would have been fine if good and evil were switched around… sorry
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:45 pm
“Are you implying that the USA installed Castro or the Ayatollah…”
No, I’m saying that US support of Batista and the Shah caused the widespread discontent in their countries that large sectors of the public were willing to support anyone who would get them overthrown.
“Pinochet was a huge mistake of US foreign policy – no doubt.. But mistakes happen when you are the world’s biggest power player.”
A brutal regime that takes power with the help of the United States massacres tens of thousands of people, and someone in Washington says “oops”. Where are the reparations? Where is a simple apology?
Is it any wonder that people around the world tend to look at US projects around the world with a certain amount of suspicion, lest they end up neck-deep in a US foreign policy ‘mistake’?
Comment by Kimmo W. — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:52 pm
I’m done today — Buy Danish goods: http://buydanish.home.comcast.net/products.htm
Comment by Jason Ward — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:59 pm
“you metioned that I donot find fault in anything my government does. However, you are the one demanding perfection”
Actually, I it was dalifemme77 who made that particular comment.
“In the past 100 years, do you really belive that the USA has done more good than evil through its foreign policies?”
How do you quantify something like that? I would like to see you trying to explain to a Chilean torture victim that his suffering is somehow negated by the Marshall Plan?
Comment by Kimmo W. — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 9:59 pm
From wikipedia
List of United States foreign interventions since 1945
1940s
1945 – 1947 US Marines garrisoned in Mainland China to oversee the removal of Soviet and Japanese forces after World War II.
1947 US provides military aid to government battling communist insurgents in Greece in 1947.
1950s
1950 – 1953 Korean War.
1945 – 1954 US funding support of French Indochina War.
1955 – 1963 US sends military advisors to assist President Ngo Dinh Diem of South Vietnam.
1958 US sends troops to assist Lebanese Christian President Camille Chamoun in Lebanon crisis of 1958.
1960s
1962 Overflights of Cuba, followed by naval blockade as part of the Cuban Missile Crisis.
1964 Military coup in Brazil; support given by US is provided but not needed.
1964 – 1975 Vietnam War.
1965 Dominican Republic, US President Lyndon Johnson sends 20,000 US troops.
1968 US bombs the Ho Chi Minh trail in Cambodia and Laos.
1970s
1974 US marines recapture a ship off the coast of Cambodia.
1980s
1982 – 1984 US Marines are sent to Lebanon as part of the Multinational Force in Lebanon.
25 October 1983 US invasion of Grenada.
15 April 1986 US warplanes bomb Tripoli and Benghazi in Libya.
18 April 1988 strikes against Iranian naval and air forces.
1989 US invaded Panama and arrested Manuel Noriega.
1990s
1990s Intervention in Colombian civil war.
1991 Gulf War.
1992 US lead UN humanitarian relief for Somalia.
1995 NATO bombing of Bosnian Serbs.
1998 US-led bombing campaign against Iraq.
1998 US bombs Afghanistan and Sudan.
1999 NATO’s bombing of Serbia in the Kosovo Conflict.
2000s
2001 US invasion of Afghanistan. (See Operation Enduring Freedom)
2003 US invasion of Iraq. (See Operation Iraqi Freedom)
Covert operations
1940s
1948 CIA secret funding of politicians and related covert propaganda operations to prevent Italian Communist Party from winning Italian elections.
1950s
1953 CIA and British MI6 successfully orchestrate the removal of elected Iranian prime minister Mohammed Mossadegh.
1954 CIA-orchestrated overthrow of elected president Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán in Guatemala.
1956 CIA aids Chushi Gangdruk and Tensung Dhanglang Magar’s resistance movement.
1960s
1961 CIA involvement in the assassination of Rafael Leónidas Trujillo.
1961 US-sponsored failed invasion of Cuba.
1961 – 1962 CIA and Department of Defense covert plans and operations against Fidel Castro.
1962 – 1974 Secret War in Laos.
1963 US backs coup against South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem in 1963.
1963 – 1964 CIA involvement in riots and violence in Guyana in order to undermine the Marxist People’s Progressive Party and its leader, Cheddi Jagan.
1967 CIA-organized military operation ends in capture and execution of Che Guevara by the Bolivian Army.
1970s
1970 US supported coup against Salvador Allende
1975 US support for Mobuto Sese Seko, leader of one of the three liberation groups in Angola.
1979 – 1989 CIA support for the Contras.
1979 – 1989 CIA support of mujahideen rebels in the Afghan-Soviet War.
1980s
1981 US sends military advisors to El Salvador.
1987 – 1988 Escort of reflagged Kuwaiti oil tankers in the Persian Gulf.
1987 – 1988 Covert anti-Iranian operations in the Persian Gulf.
1990s
2000s
Other interventions
In addition to the operations listed above, the US has a very active foreign policy that uses various methods to influence events in other countries. These methods include
weapons sales
military advice and training (e.g. through the School of the Americas)
international loans
economic sanctions
development aid
foreign broadcasting (e.g. Voice of America)
grants to non-governmental organizations (e.g. the National Endowment for Democracy)
The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank have also been called agents of US foreign intervention, although the US does not set the policies of these institutions unilaterally.
Comment by Ugh — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 10:27 pm
“So without those pesky frenchies your little and dirty peasant army could have been crushed like a bug and you would be watching rugby on telly with the lads….shock and awe!”
Ha! The French were doing this out of self interest to kick the Brits out of the New World so that they could swoop back in and control from Canada to New Orleans. Read the book “The French War against America” which documents this well. I found it funny how the first two Ambassadors from France to the US both Defected once here.
*****
“Are you American Republicans really that fucked up? First it was Iraq with WMD but there were none whatsoever, their army was basically ruined already AND NOW you fucking geniuses actually believe that Iran is just months away of having nukes and will attack one way or another againts the US?
I can see from your comments that you really believe in this shit, like Nazis did believe blindly in their ideology. Everybody is either with you or against you.
Newsflash! It is you guys that are causing all kinds of trouble, not so much the other way around. All those years of Fox News and other right wing propaganda are obviously starting to affect your thinking. Only through war we will be victorius and all that crap..Ignorance is strength, War is peace and Freedom is slavery.”
- The jury is still out on the WMD. Even his own people thought he had them.
- We are not the only ones thinking that Iran is near a weapons. The French think so so much that Chirac threatened to use their nukes if anyone attacks them…..
Sure. Iran is right and we are wrong. North Korea is right and we are wrong. Syria is right and we are wrong. China is right and we are wrong. The Sudan is right and the US is wrong.
The world we live in today accepts crap judgements like “US the Cause for African Condom Shortage.” Forget that the US is giving a ton for Aids prevention in Africa. But we are trying to educate the population and that’s bad. Well where the hell is the rest of the world. Let them buy condoms! Sweden can blanket africa in blue and gold condom packets.
…
Comment by Fred Fry — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 10:31 pm
To dear Fred Fry:
from bash.org (really good):
#616340 +(56)- [X]
@redhook: I’m surprised california doesnt require large neon writing on handguns that say “WARNING: Bullet Comes Out Here ->>>” pointing at the barrel
So what was the cause and what was the effect?
Comment by tim73 — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 11:22 pm
“Sure. Iran is right and we are wrong. North Korea is right and we are wrong. Syria is right and we are wrong. China is right and we are wrong. The Sudan is right and the US is wrong.”
Hmm and I said quote and unquote: “Everybody is either with you or against you.”…and I rest my case your honor.
Comment by tim73 — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 11:32 pm
Oh, this must be one of those kodak moments… SO SMILE LIKE MOOSE CAUGHT IN THE HEADLIGHTS!
Comment by tim73 — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 11:39 pm
Wang Chung says: EVERYBODY HAVE FUN TONIGHT!
Comment by tim73 — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 11:48 pm
Jason
The unofficial count of FOUND WMD’s is 54.
Some were from the last war between Iran and Iraq, but they were there.
Now there was no big factory or big underground storage locker with thousands, but there were 54.
Now you need to listen to the just released Sadam tapes to figure out he was going to make them again after the pressure went away.
Comment by winter — Fri, Feb 17th, 2006 @ 11:59 pm
!So what?? Iraq shot at USA aircraft â€â€- An act of war…”
So what, USA shot Iran civil aircraft and killed about 200 people — An act of war?
Comment by Anonymous — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 12:34 am
Which European countries actually fought the Germans collectively (not including resistance movements, some of which are dubious at best):
You are omitting at least Greece, and of course Finland (under very different circumstances).
So, yes, we sold weapons to the Soviets. It should be noted that they were deeply distrusted by the Americans
I’m sure that comforted the Finnish infantry soldiers crushed by lend-lease tanks. And I see how we should be eternally grateful and never question any American policies, lest we be evil freeriders.
but Lend-Lease was extended to the Soviets at the behest of Great Britain.
So the evil Brits forced the mighty Americans to do this?
If France, the Low Countries, and Scandinavia would ahve put up a better fight, then the whole course of history could have changed.
Well, if the US of A would have given Finland a loan for some weapons in 1939-1940, we might have fared a bit better. Instead they gave them to the enemy.
Stalin did not become an ‘ally’ until Germany attacked the Russians, and we had to support what we believed to be the lesser of two evils.
You are deeply confused, my boy.
Operation Barbarossa: June 22, 1941
Pearl Harbor: December 7, 1941
The USA didn’t give a flying fork about Germany attacking the Russians before they were attacked themselves.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 1:15 am
““Sure. Iran is right and we are wrong. North Korea is right and we are wrong. Syria is right and we are wrong. China is right and we are wrong. The Sudan is right and the US is wrong.â€Â
Hmm and I said quote and unquote: “Everybody is either with you or against you.â€Â…and I rest my case your honor.”
Let me put this another way:
Europe can obtain it’s goal of a utopian society with this United States occupying part of the planet.
Europe cannot obtain it’s goal of a utopian society with:
- Iran Plunging ahead with a nuclear weapons program
At least the Iranians have plans to prevent Israel ever seeing Europe’s utopian society
(even the French and Germans know this about Iran.)
- North Korea starving almost it’s entire population as it spend’s its fortune on one of the world’s largest militaries.
Tens of thousands in forced labor camps
Selling weapons to anyone who wants
Smuggling drugs
Counterfeiting currencies
- Syria encouraging and shelterring islamic radicals who wreck havoc in other places.
- China – Well maybe there is room for china. At least they are on the path to reform.
- Sudan orchestrating genocide of a portion of it’s population.
Now don’t give me some lame excuse that I am lookng at these countries in a black and white way. When you look at things in shades of gray, then you can find a way to excuse even the worst behavior, unless committed by the US. Be a man. Grow a spine. Would you want to live an any of the countries above? (Not here. Be a real man in society.)
Europe needs to stand up and call this behavior what it is, crimes against humanity, and then do something about it. They have had enough practice scolding the US, now try it with a country that might strike back.
I have been to Africa, Asia, the middle east and Europe. I have never run into any problems, except in Europe. Nothing like having a person come up to you because they hear you speaking English to ask if your an American, only to tell you how much they hate Americans. My response is always the same. “Get in line.” I can care less about the hundreds of thousands of people who hate Americans. I only care about the thousands who might want to kill me.
Comment by Fred Fry — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 1:42 am
Sudan orchestrating genocide of a portion of it’s population
and
Kofi ask the USA again to bail him out on that one. (With troups and money)
we
said
NO (Its Europes turn…. Have fun)
Comment by winter — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 2:03 am
I have never run into any problems, except in Europe. Nothing like having a person come up to you because they hear you speaking English to ask if your an American, only to tell you how much they hate Americans.
Happens in Finland all too often.
By the way, it’s good to see Finns get so riled up as on this thread. The more, the better: it is so important to create more distance between America and Finland.
Finland, and what it stands for – freeriding – must be opposed. And the battlefield is not in Finland at all, but in the United States, especially in Congress and the State Department. No way should the American voter tolerate additional non-performing alliances with yet even more freeriding European welfare states.
The future is in Asia, and there we have the advantage of being the number one export destination for most of Asia’s product, while holding on to their own money as collateral against possible conflicts.
Comment by Finnpundit — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 3:24 am
“he future is in Asia, and there we have the advantage of being the number one export destination for most of Asia’s product, ”
and how is that with 90 percentage of ground water…what they call…contaminated!
Comment by tim73 — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 3:59 am
Bullets will be flying, do not fuck with me.
Comment by tim73 — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 4:03 am
Bottom line – The USA is called in to save the day.
Dam its good to be the cowboy, but it you EU folks would get a viable Military (At least the Finns have a nice Air Force),
and
get some balls
The world needs some fixin, with a little whip ass. Question is ? Will you play or just sit home and whine while the USA saves the day again, and again?
Comment by winter — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 4:28 am
For me, it is Taiwan. After that, I will get after you.
Comment by tim73 — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 4:35 am
Well it’s been a pleasure to see you European/American folks put the world to rights.
Us silly little brown and black fellas appreciate you guys taking the time out to explain our problems to us.
When you sleep tonight remember that you achieved on this site, you achieved.
None of it was pointless bellyaching, I promise.
Toodle Pip
Comment by Ammusedmoose — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 5:34 am
Freeridin’ Franklin,
I’m afraid you are the confused one…From Wiki, so you can check: “Lend-lease was a critical factor in the eventual success of the Allies in World War II, particularly in the early years when the United States was not directly involved and the entire burden of the fighting fell on other nations, notably those of the Commonwealth, and after June 1941 the Soviet Union”
Finnish soldiers were not attacked with American weapons in the 1939-1940 Winter War. In fact, many Americans and Canadians voluneteered with Finnish forces and a joint British-led plan to aid Finland with 135,000 troops fell through. Why? The Swedish government, headed by Prime Minister Per Albin Hansson, declined to allow transit of armed troops through Swedish territory fearing a German invasion.
To cap it off, you say:
“You are deeply confused, my boy.
Operation Barbarossa: June 22, 1941
Pearl Harbor: December 7, 1941
The USA didn’t give a flying fork about Germany attacking the Russians before they were attacked themselves.”
The first shipments of Lend-Lease equiment was sent to the Soviets in June of 1941, days after the German invasion had begun. Obviously, you have no idea about the nature of Lend-Lease judging by your Pearl Harbor notation. Lend-Lease was a program the US had begun running before we entered the war, precisely so we could aid the war against the Germans while ‘officially’ remaining neutral.
I will concede that Lend-Lease material probably was used against Finland in the ‘Continuation War’. However, Finland was allied with the Nazis at this point, so it is cleary understandable why we weren’t sending military equipment to the Finns at this point.
Besides, most of the Lend-Lease support to the Soviets was in the form of aviation fuel, support vehicles and locomotives. While neccessary for the execution of warfare, I doubt there were columns of Shermans rolling through Karelia guns a’blazin.
Freeridin’ Franklin, I noticed you said ‘we’ there in your post. I really hope that that is a typo and you are not from Finland. If you are, maybe you should study your own history before you critique my country’s policies and history.
Comment by Jason Ward — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 7:30 am
Indeed, I was not aware of the full nature of the lend-lease program (or had forgotten it). I assumed that it started with US involvement in the war. Shows how one should check ones facts before mouthing off.
Now, while it is true that no American weapons were used against the Finns in 1939-1940 (I definitely did not mean that they were), it is equally true that the USA specifically denied military aid to Finland during that period.
Besides, most of the Lend-Lease support to the Soviets was in the form of aviation fuel, support vehicles and locomotives. While neccessary for the execution of warfare, I doubt there were columns of Shermans rolling through Karelia guns a’blazin.
The Wikipedia article has a nice list of material shipped to the USSR.
I don’t know of any Shermans deployed to the front in Karelia. Not that it would matter much, since the Sherman was a toy* compared to Soviet tanks.
Of aircraft, at least P-38s and Mustangs were deployed on the Finnish front, althouh not in great numbers.
I still have to repeat my question: What precisely in WWII holds me in such deep gratitude that I am not allowed to voice any disagreement when napalm or WP is dropped on civilians in the name of freedom and democracy? Oh yeah, mistakes are made. We’re just not allowed to call them mistakes or you’re gonna KICK OUR ASS.
*The Germans nicknamed it Ronson after the lighter based on its tendency to spontaneously ignite when hit
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 3:25 pm
Ha! The French were doing this out of self interest to kick the Brits out of the New World
So, Machiavellian self-interest is just fine when Merkins do it, but pure evil when the pesky Frenchies do it. Go figure.
I’d really love to sell some used cars to the people capable of believing that the invasion of Iraq has nothing to do with control of oil reserves.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 5:46 pm
“I’d really love to sell some used cars to the people capable of believing that the invasion of Iraq has nothing to do with control of oil reserves.”
Franklin,
Perhaps the US would not have had ot invade if France and Russia weren’t so good at curcumventing the Oil-for-Food sanctions.
France and Russia Take full advantage of gray for personal gain. Both countries were racing to be the first to violate Sanctions against Iraq with direct flights to Baghdad in 2000. The spokesperson of the French delegation on the first flight that arrived in Baghdad stated “There is no need for permission from the United Nations” concerning France’s actions in the matter.
The French and Russians were elbow deep in self-interest first. The story would ring a little clearer if those against thhe US removing Saddam were not so tainted in this matter themselves.
The oil story falls apart when you consider that the US regained access to Libyan oil without a shot being fired. In fact the Libyans paid to get the US back in, even with the French willing to go in for free.
It falls apart further when you look at what France and Germany are doing to get more access to the Iranian oil. All the major powers are after controling oil. Why is nothing being done in Sudan? the Sudanese bought the Chinese SC veto with oil. So what other option is left in these cases? An American over-reaction.
If the US wanted Iraq’s oil, they would have taken the country over the first time.
And what’s wrong with used cars?
Your a good man Frank.
Comment by Fred Fry — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 6:14 pm
a joint British-led plan to aid Finland with 135,000 troops fell through.
Of course, the plan was initiated by the evil Frenchies, a fact that you have to omit due to your neocon ideology and fashionable francobashing.
Why? The Swedish government, headed by Prime Minister Per Albin Hansson, declined to allow transit of armed troops through Swedish territory fearing a German invasion.
This was irrelevant, as the troops would have arrived late anyway. Actually, the French were loading their transport vessels in the port of Cherbourg when the peace treaty was signed.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 6:17 pm
Jason Ward:
“you metioned that I donot find fault in anything my government does. However, you are the one demanding perfectionâ€Â
Kimmo W:
“Actually, I it was dalifemme77 who made that particular comment.”
Actually, it was in a form of a question. I was wondering wheter Jason found
anything wrong, with the workings of the US goverment. Obviously the answer is no.
And Jason, it’s not about perfection. It’s about playing it straight. Looking back in history, how many questionable actions have been made by USA? Ofcourse, all goverments make mistakes but how many try to cover up as much as the US does? I got a funny feeling that after “W” leaves the white house, shit will hit the fan. Americans aren’t stupid. They know they’ve been screwed over by the Bush administration. There’s already signs that the walls around the whole Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitch circle are crumbling down. It’ll be scary in a way to see what they find in the end.
Comment by dalifemme77 — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 6:27 pm
The story would ring a little clearer if those against thhe US removing Saddam were not so tainted in this matter themselves.
Why, isn’t this a classic case of tu quoque. I am certainly not suggesting that those who opposed the invasion were in any way cleaner or had nobler motives.
The oil story falls apart when you consider that the US regained access to Libyan oil without a shot being fired. In fact the Libyans paid to get the US back in, even with the French willing to go in for free.
I’m not quite sure what Libya has to do with this. Gaddafi has long been wanting to rebuild relations to the US. He’s not Saddam.
All the major powers are after controling oil.
Bingo. We are beginning to wonder why oil seems to be so strategically important. It might behoove us to trade that tank-sized SUV for a Prius or even *gasp* walk to places sometimes. Eventually just flexing some military muscle or dropping the occasional bomb here and there won’t keep that SUV a-runnin’. Mark my words, in the future driving is reserved to those in the Bush-Cheney income bracket. The circle closes, as cars were originally thought of as mere toys for the superrich.
If the US wanted Iraq’s oil, they would have taken the country over the first time.
I can’t, for the life of me, figure out why they didn’t. Maybe you can shed some light on the matter since you were there. OTOH, in early 1991 the price quickly dropped under $20 whereas it is about to crack $60 now. So, that might be a factor why the liberation of Iraq has gained new importance since.
And what’s wrong with used cars?
Nothing per se. It just sucks being sold one without an engine, as is the case with the invasion of Iraq (not that I’ve ever bought it).
Your a good man Frank.
Why, thank you! You’re swell yourself.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 7:07 pm
“If the US wanted Iraq’s oil, they would have taken the country over the first time.
I can’t, for the life of me, figure out why they didn’t.”
Perhaps it was because GB Senior had no faith-based illusions about the war being a cakewalk.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 7:30 pm
“Perhaps it was because GB Senior had no faith-based illusions about the war being a cakewalk.”
I think the first gulf war was a textbook performance in politics from Bush senior. Free Kuwait, as you promise, don’t get entangled with the occupation and return home with clear victory in the pocket just before the next elections.
Heck, reading this debate makes me long for the cold war. OK, I don’t want back that paranoid mental patient next door to the east, politics by Sylttytehtaankatu 1, Ronnie bringing A-bombs to the next town and Bush Sr. telling, what a private finnish shipyard company can and cannot produce, but at that time, someone was holding mirror to the west for checking the straightness of the tie, haircut and perhaps human rights. It was them, who had Pravda and biased media, Arhipelagi gulagi and soundproof cells at the KGB basement. Certainly not us. Now the mirror is gone and the west can go out wearing a swimming suit with an evening dress and one megavolt haircut.
Besides, the nuclear stockpile is still there. I think last time we tossed coin on survival of the civilization was when russians took that norwegian probe rocket as an ICBM around ’93..’94. So can’t we have the positive sides of the cold war back too.
Comment by Antti (the redneck one) — Sat, Feb 18th, 2006 @ 10:51 pm
Fred Fry:
“If the US wanted Iraq’s oil, they would have taken the country over the first time.”
If the US had wanted Iraq’s oil, they would have ended the sanctions and bought the oil from Saddam at a much cheaper price than what they have to pay for it now (including all military expenditures).
Comment by Mikko Sandt — Sun, Feb 19th, 2006 @ 2:00 pm
Jason Ward:
“Pinochet was a huge mistake of US foreign policy – no doubt.. But mistakes happen when you are the world’s biggest power player.â€Â
Not really. Replacing Allende was certainly justified and Chile is now the most prosperous nation in South America. That, of course, wasn’t all thanks to Pinochet but the US made the right call when they got rid off Chile’s communist rule.
Comment by Mikko Sandt — Sun, Feb 19th, 2006 @ 2:10 pm
Replacing Allende was certainly justified and Chile is now the most prosperous nation in South America.
Yes, the socialist president is certainly doing a good job. Perhaps we can thank Pinochet for her election, as people usually don’t like to be tortured and killed, even it’s all for the free market and thus for the common good.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Sun, Feb 19th, 2006 @ 2:21 pm
Mikko Sandt: “If the US had wanted Iraq’s oil, they would have ended the sanctions and bought the oil from Saddam at a much cheaper price than what they have to pay for it now (including all military expenditures).”
The Bush administration wanted a strategic foothold in the country, “boots on the ground” as they say, not just the oil. There was no saying what Saddam would do in the future, AND there was the off chance he could be overthrown by a islamic revolution masterminded by the Iranian clerics. This actually happened in one of Tom Clancy’s books, always a good indication of real neocon fears…
Buying cheap oil from Saddam would have been a great idea in the short term, but for the long term it was deemed important to invade and establish an Iraqi client state.
The future? US military will be kept in the country indefinitely, at least in the form of strong air bases even if the ground troops are mostly withdrawn. The new Iraqi regime has to be kept in check and dependant of American support, because this are the best way to ensure the safety of US interests… uups, of course I mean “the future of peace, democracy and stability in the region”.
Comment by Drakon — Sun, Feb 19th, 2006 @ 2:21 pm
Mikko Sandt,
I do agree that potential Chilian Communist rule was a problem. However, I would disagree that installing Pinochet was reasonable. Not that the socialist shouldn’t have been overthrown, but US policy experts should have been more discrimiinating about who they put in power. Thus, the Pinochet mess. While the intentions were noble, the result were not.
Comment by Jason Ward — Mon, Feb 20th, 2006 @ 1:04 am
Drakon,
Would you agree that Europe is more stable since US and NATO bases appeared on the Continent?
Comment by Jason Ward — Mon, Feb 20th, 2006 @ 1:06 am
“There was no saying what Saddam would do in the future, AND there was the off chance he could be overthrown by a islamic revolution masterminded by the Iranian clerics.”
Actually Bush’s Iraq quagmire is making this increasingly likely.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Mon, Feb 20th, 2006 @ 9:11 am
Drakon:
“The Bush administration wanted a strategic foothold in the country, “boots on the ground†as they say, not just the oil.
Of course.
The new Iraqi regime has to be kept in check and dependant of American support, because this are the best way to ensure the safety of US interests… uups, of course I mean “the future of peace, democracy and stability in the regionâ€Â.
And that is a bad thing?
Comment by Mikko Sandt — Mon, Feb 20th, 2006 @ 3:15 pm
Jason Ward:
“Would you agree that Europe is more stable since US and NATO bases appeared on the Continent?”
Well, if you are bringing large amounts of American troops into a country (or a region) I guess it will be more or less stable if the people in that country actually want those troops there. And in the 50s, Western Europe did. Although I suspect a big part of the stability in Western Europe since 1945 has also something to do with the process of European integration and the epiphany-like idea that Europeans will be more happy and well-off if they co-operate instead of fighting each other all the time…
Western European economic and political recovery after WWII was hugely aided by the heavy American involvement, I give you that. But again, the US policies towards Europe were not ONLY or even MAINLY about helping Europeans per se. The US did what it did because this was the best strategy for maintaining their own strong position in the world both politically and economically. A democratic, wealthy Western Europe would provide markets for American companies and products and allies for international politics. A third world-level Western Europe would not, and would probably fall into the lap of the Soviet Union sooner or later.
Mikko Sandt:
“And that is a bad thing?”
Am I saying it is a bad thing? If we forget all the lying and disregarding international law (not to speak of world opinion) that accompanied the invasion of Iraq, there is nothing inherently “bad” or “evil” about it. This is what leading sovereign nations do to maintain their interests, have done for centuries.
But it is not “good” either, it is not JUST or even MAINLY about “defending freedom and democracy”: it is just the politics of looking out for number one. This is why it really gets on my nerves when the proponents of US policies tell me that the Europeans should do “the right thing” and support the US or that we are either “with them or against them”. Every sovereign nation has its valid political interests and in that regard US is -or does- nothing special. If you are the strongest nation, push your own agenda and make controversial decisions, do not get offended if you are critisized or opposed: you had it coming.
Comment by Drakon — Mon, Feb 20th, 2006 @ 4:01 pm
Europe’s Last Dictator –
While Europeans are quick to criticize the United States for its capitalistic short-comings, few seem to be bothered by the modern-day dictatorship that thrives in Belarus…..
Read the rest @ http://arktinenjenkki.blogspot.com/
Comment by Jason Ward — Mon, Feb 20th, 2006 @ 6:47 pm
While Europeans are quick to criticize the United States for its capitalistic short-comings, few seem to be bothered by the modern-day dictatorship that thrives in Belarus….
Many Europeans entertain the idea that the US is a democratic open society that might actually somehow react to worldwide public opinion, unlike a Stalinist dictatorship such as Belarus.
Does this shock you?
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Mon, Feb 20th, 2006 @ 7:14 pm
Freeridin’ Franklin says, “Many Europeans entertain the idea that the US is a democratic open society”
This is exactly my point. You are so caught up in every concveivable conspiracy and negative bit of news that all you can do is ‘entertain’ the idea. It’s obvious to me that I do live in an open, democratic society. Even with its flaws, Americans have much more freedoms that the socialist systems of Western Europe.
Comment by Jason Ward — Mon, Feb 20th, 2006 @ 7:30 pm
Yes, I believe in American exceptionalism. I don’t think we should be part of the United Nations, a corrupt bureaucracy that does everything possible do decrease American sovereignty.
Were not the so-called ‘fairest’ country in the world. We don’t prop up the welfare state to the degree Europe does, and on the flip side, we don’t punish people for making a success of their life.
No system is perfect, but for European socialism to exist, it must do so partly at the expense of teh American consumer (ie. prescription drug controls). So next time you feel like bashing American policy, think about the geopolitics and how American capitalism makes the economic engine run and allows your ‘Utopia’.
Comment by Jason Ward — Mon, Feb 20th, 2006 @ 7:36 pm
Jason,
Do us a favor an tell us what exactly are those numerous freedoms that an American has vs. what a Finn has? Pls educate us.
Comment by The Dude — Tue, Feb 21st, 2006 @ 10:48 pm
Yes, I believe in American exceptionalism. I don’t think we should be part of the United Nations, a corrupt bureaucracy that does everything possible do decrease American sovereignty.
I don’t understand all this bitching and whining about the UN. If it’s such a huge problem, just resign. Hey, it’s been done before with the League of Nations by all those countries who worked so hard to make the world a better place back in the 1930s.
While you’re at it, why don’t you do away with that useless diplomacy hippie BS. If some lesser country fails to comply with your demands, just threaten to nuke ‘em. It works! Think of all the taxpayer dollars you could save and use for
education and healthcaremore cruise missiles and cluster bombs.Once you’ve done away with useless diplomacy, it’s time to do some cleanin’ up on your back yard. Have a problem with illegal immigrants? Roll the tanks into Mexico and round up the chicanos in specially designed camps. There’s just so many maids that the top 1% needs. Then continue south and take Colombia to make sure that the
right people are making a profit with the colathe drug cartels are smashed once and for all. Then it’s time for Venezuela. Time to finally take care of the Chavez situation. And so on…No system is perfect, but for European socialism to exist, it must do so partly at the expense of teh American consumer
OMG! Finnpundit has been cloned!
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Tue, Feb 21st, 2006 @ 11:51 pm
So, Jason, expecting the United States to abide by international standards is a violation of American sovreignty. At the same time, Americans of your ilk expect deference, subservience, and obedience to US whims from other sovreign countries. Can you say “double standard”?
Comment by Kimmo W. — Wed, Feb 22nd, 2006 @ 2:11 am
Do us a favor an tell us what exactly are those numerous freedoms that an American has vs. what a Finn has? Pls educate us.
I think he has this right-wing idea that higher taxes mean less liberty. That again has to do with the age-old disagreement wether freedom should be “negative” or “positive”. That again has to do with the disagreement wether “I” is more important than “we”. Every society puts limits to “I” as well as to “we”, so in the end the whole question revolves around where exactly the limits should be. Because of historical reasons Finland tends to lean a bit more towards “we” than “I”. Many Americans call this socialism and think it’s wrong. That’s why they want to bash Finland, or Europe, telling us that we are not really free (not knowing that their own society is in many ways more “socialistic” than many European countries).
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Feb 22nd, 2006 @ 11:14 am
Do us a favor an tell us what exactly are those numerous freedoms that an American has vs. what a Finn has? Pls educate us.
I think he has this right-wing idea that higher taxes mean less liberty. That again has to do with the age-old disagreement wether freedom should be “negative” or “positive”. That again has to do with the disagreement wether “I” is more important than “we”, or more precisely, wether “I” should be part of “we” only if “I” wants to be part of “we”. But because every society puts limits to “I” as well as to “we” the whole question revolves in the end around where exactly the limits should be. Because of historical reasons Finland tends to lean a bit more towards “we” than “I”. Many Americans call this socialism and think it’s wrong. That’s why they want to bash Finland, or Europe, telling us that we are not really free (not knowing that, in fact, their own society is in many ways more “socialistic” than many European countries). The frustrating thing – in their view – is that many “we-ish” European countries clearly function better than the more “I-ish”, capitalistic countries – not because they are socialist but because voluntary cooperation tends to work better than any other form of organization. Just ask any firm.
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Feb 22nd, 2006 @ 11:48 am
Great comments, Anonymous!
Yeah, I totally agree with you. Ever since I moved to the US, I’ve had problems understanding what hell is it that drives Americans to try so hard to monopolize the concept of freedom and pretend like they are the only truly free country in the world. That is just such bullshit. I’ve never met a single American whos lifestyle or quality of life has been somehow better or more “free” than mine has ever been. Don’t get me wrong, I love my life here and would definitely leave if I didn’t. Its just these 100% black-and-white people like Finnpundit and Jason Ward who after spending their life in a closet simply pick a side and then try and justify everything that their “pick” stands for because its “if you’re not with us, you’re against us” or “you can’t get a little bit pregnant”. Its especially hilarious when you get to spend some time in the US and objectively observe the American lifestyle, which to me doesn’t remind me of freedom when, for example, you see people work 6-7 days a week 10-15 hours a day and never question why. A 1 week vacation a year is bliss. Sure, you are free to work your ass off because your employer is free and doesn’t have to grant your 5 weeks of vacation every year. You are also free join live under a bridge, smoke crack, join a street gang, and rob gas stations….. and please don’t tell me this is a “cultural thing”, not an issue of poverty (and I’m not saying poverty is the only reason, just that it is the main contributor). Finnpundit and Jason Ward, if your system is so great, why is there so much fucked up shit going on in your country? Why is there so much less fucked up shit going on in the modern Scandinavian welfare states? How can it possibly be that a little country like Finland excels in so many areas over the great US?
Interestingly, I happen to work for a professional services company that I would consider very advanced in terms of technology adaptation, HR policies, etc. My employer is one of the few companies in the US that offers a fixed 25 days of paid time off…. which OMG sounds to me like adapting welfare state kommie klutz kid policies!!! To quote Finnpundit, “Americans should continue to do what they do best and that is to make money”. Sure, go ahead….. but cut this sorry assed freedom rap.
Comment by The Dude — Wed, Feb 22nd, 2006 @ 7:52 pm
Great comments, Anonymous!
I was pretty impressed myself, putting the whole modern political controversy into – what? – 200 words. I’m pretty sure I could trim it down to 100 if I really tried.
Trying to monpolize the concept of “freedom”, the way certain “pundits” do, is a strange pursuit indeed. Wannabe dictators have such amibitions.
Anyway, now that I’ve explained how politics work I’d like to expand towards economics: laissez-faire works only if markets are able to internalize all extrnalities. You don’t believe me? Well, try to refute neo-liberalism in 12 words yourself!
Comment by Anonymous — Thu, Feb 23rd, 2006 @ 11:10 pm
The USA is an evil nation that should be shot by their own atom bombs.
Comment by Phil mcracken — Thu, Nov 30th, 2006 @ 11:57 pm
In Iran, Putin Warns Against Military Action:
http://salihome.info/show/index.html
Comment by sali — Fri, Oct 19th, 2007 @ 7:04 am