America meddles too much!

[Naiwen]

Syrian War, Libya, Egypt, Ukraine and Tibet-China, Taiwan-China and other places in the world. Americans think they own the world. I myself hate talking to such Americans, they are too pro-America. I'm against what America stands for: meddling in other's internal affairs, causing deaths and casualties everywhere. I'm sorry to say, but I hate such Americans who live in their own bubble and who think America is number 1 and who live in Americaland (who think America is a holyland and etc). No, many people hate America just because it meddles too much in others' political affairs (like Mid-East and Russia and China). What's your views about the US's meddling in others' affairs? Should they have the right to or not? Are they impeding on our civil rights?

 

[The Man]

We do seemed to be involved in a lot of world affairs..from medicine to food for poor countries.
Sticking our nose in civil wars ...some I agree with some I dont..We may not have the bigger picture of what is going on.
Also we get a bad rap as we catch the most publicity as we are the largest to be involved.
Often several nations will be involved in a war..even dozens..but the only one you will hear about is America.

Its tough...for example if our govt here was openly executing citizens etc..I would probably be glad to see a dozen nations or so come to my defense to prevent the murders...Let em meddle lol.

But yeah I think we get to involved in to many world affairs...but the question is what would the world be like if the US said no more/ everyone is on there own...could be some real fruitcakes running some potentially dangerous nations.

IMO the world needs a super power to keep some of these in check...if not there would be alot of conquering going on after each conquer the strength grows as they then the increase the size of their military and flourish with the natural resources.

I guess if there is going to be a superpower out there calling the shots..the US is the best bet IMO.

 

[Stone]

Ironic........right now, Russia invades the sovereign nation of the Ukraine and the US seeks a diplomatic solution.

I type into Google News, "Russian Aggression"
https://www.google.com/search?q=Russian aggression&hl=en&gl=us&authuser=0&tbm=nws&ei=ciUXU5yuIaTuyQHwk4CYBw&start=0&sa=N
and it's rather obvious much of the world supports the US in their efforts to keep the Ukraine free and independent.

And it's not like this is new territory for Putin
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&authuser=0&tbm=nws&sclient=psy-ab&q=Russian aggression Georgia&btnG=


I type into Google News, "Chinese aggression"
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0&q=chinese aggression
And much of the world fears their 'expansionist destiny'.

While it's obvious the US has interfered in many nations, it's also obvious the US isn't alone in doing so.
And two of the nations you referred to, Russia ( which did exist as the major member of the now deceased Soviet Union and now lead by an officer of the defunct KGB ) and China also have a history of aggression and bloodshed.

Americans think they own the world.

It would be nice to live in a perfect world.
But as long China and Russia also 'think they own the world', I doubt there will be much drift in that direction no matter what the US does.
And I don't doubt much of the world hates them also, for it.

 

[Naiwen]

Ironic........right now, Russia invades the sovereign nation of the Ukraine and the US seeks a diplomatic solution.

I type into Google News, "Russian Aggression"
https://www.google.com/search?q=Russian aggression&hl=en&gl=us&authuser=0&tbm=nws&ei=ciUXU5yuIaTuyQHwk4CYBw&start=0&sa=N
and it's rather obvious much of the world supports the US in their efforts to keep the Ukraine free and independent.

And it's not like this is new territory for Putin
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&authuser=0&tbm=nws&sclient=psy-ab&q=Russian aggression Georgia&btnG=


I type into Google News, "Chinese aggression"
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0&q=chinese aggression
And much of the world fears their 'expansionist destiny'.

While it's obvious the US has interfered in many nations, it's also obvious the US isn't alone in doing so.
And two of the nations you referred to, Russia ( which did exist as the major member of the now deceased Soviet Union and now lead by an officer of the defunct KGB ) and China also have a history of aggression and bloodshed.


It would be nice to live in a perfect world.
But as long China and Russia also 'think they own the world', I doubt there will be much drift in that direction no matter what the US does.
And I don't doubt much of the world hates them also, for it.

What gives the US the right to meddle? No, China never invaded anyone in history. China has always been invaded by others, Japan, US and vietnam.

 

[Stone]

What gives the US the right to meddle? No, China never invaded anyone in history. China has always been invaded by others, Japan, US and vietnam.

What gives the US the right to meddle?

In the case of the Ukraine, the practically of peace through diplomacy.
Which is why it's ironic you chose this moment to bring up issues of 'meddling'.

No, China never invaded anyone in history.

Tibet seems to think otherwise
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Chamdo
Or is 'liberated' Chinese for invaded?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War
excerpt:

Unable to reach political accommodation on disputed territory along the 3,225-kilometer-long Himalayan border,[7] the Chinese launched simultaneous offensives in Ladakh and across the McMahon Line on 20 October 1962. Chinese troops advanced over Indian forces in both theatres, capturing Rezang la in Chushul in the western theatre, as well as Tawang in the eastern theatre.

http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2054325,00.html
excerpt:

Early in the morning of Feb. 17, 1979 , Chinese artillery batteries and multiple rocket launchers opened fire all along the Vietnamese border with protracted barrages that shook the earth for miles around. Then 85,000 troops surged across the frontier in human-wave attacks like those China had used in Korea nearly three decades before

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2318389/Two-Chinese-incursion-leaves-India-verge-crises.html

A two week Chinese incursion has left India on the verge of crises, it has today been reported.

India says Chinese troops set up a camp on its side of the ill-defined frontier in Ladakh region in the middle of April.

The platoon of Chinese soldiers slipped across the boundary into India in the middle of the night, according to Indian officials.

And historically, Mao was certainly no innocent in his quest to spread socialism.
And China did meddle in African affairs for their own benefit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Africa–China_relations#Military




So I'm calling BS on that claim.




Your thread is about 'meddling'.
This is the title of the thread:

America meddles too much!


And you presented this argument at a time when the freedom of the Ukraine depends upon US diplomacy.

Interesting.
The logic of your opening post can easily be seen as an argument in support of Russian aggression by pointing out the moral failings of the US in the past as an argument for cessation of an ongoing diplomatic settlement .
Is that your intention?

 

[Naiwen]

In the case of the Ukraine, the practically of peace through diplomacy.
Which is why it's ironic you chose this moment to bring up issues of 'meddling'.




Tibet seems to think otherwise
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Chamdo
Or is 'liberated' Chinese for invaded?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War
excerpt:


http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2054325,00.html
excerpt:


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2318389/Two-Chinese-incursion-leaves-India-verge-crises.html


And historically, Mao was certainly no innocent in his quest to spread socialism.
And China did meddle in African affairs for their own benefit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Africa–China_relations#Military




So I'm calling BS on that claim.




Your thread is about 'meddling'.
This is the title of the thread:

America meddles too much!


And you presented this argument at a time when the freedom of the Ukraine depends upon US diplomacy.

Interesting.
The logic of your opening post can easily be seen as an argument in support of Russian aggression by pointing out the moral failings of the US in the past as an argument for cessation of an ongoing diplomatic settlement .
Is that your intention?

Because the US is meddling in others's affairs, you haven't answered me yet, what right does the US have to tell people what to do, in the Ukraine' case, the Russians or Russia? And China didn't invade tibet, Tibet belongs rightfully to China, like Ukraine belongs rightfully to the Soviet Union.

 

[Stone]

Because the US is meddling in others's affairs, you haven't answered me yet, what right does the US have to tell people what to do, in the Ukraine' case, the Russians or Russia? And China didn't invade tibet, Tibet belongs rightfully to China, like Ukraine belongs rightfully to the Soviet Union.

Because the US is meddling in others's affairs, you haven't answered me yet

You just don't like my answer.

I posted:

While it's obvious the US has interfered in many nations, it's also obvious the US isn't alone in doing so.

That's called being honest to one's self and others.

what right does the US have to tell people what to do, in the Ukraine' case, the Russians or Russia?

You obviously don't recognize the free and independent nation of the Ukraine.
And you pretty much brought out what I suspected.
You advocate the Russian right of dominion over the Ukraine and have no issues with their aggression to achieve domination.
That's called 'hypocrisy'.

And China didn't invade tibet

I've shown otherwise and also shown China does have a history of aggression with only expending a few seconds of research.

Ukraine belongs rightfully to the Soviet Union

ahhh.....the Soviet Empire no longer exists.
So that claim expired with the Soviets demise.

 

[Stone]

Because the US is meddling in others's affairs, you haven't answered me yet, what right does the US have to tell people what to do, in the Ukraine' case, the Russians or Russia? And China didn't invade tibet, Tibet belongs rightfully to China, like Ukraine belongs rightfully to the Soviet Union.

I answered, but you have avoided my question in response:

The logic of your opening post can easily be seen as an argument in support of Russian aggression by pointing out the moral failings of the US in the past as an argument for cessation of an ongoing diplomatic settlement .
Is that your intention?

I'll be blunt: Yes or no. Are you arguing for Russian aggression in Europe?

 

[Naiwen]

I answered, but you have avoided my question in response:


I'll be blunt: Yes or no. Are you arguing for Russian aggression in Europe?

Yes, I'm all for it, since America can, why can't other countries? And Ukraine isn't in Europe, it's in Russia.

 

[porterjack]

Ukraine is not in Ruissia never has been it was once part of the soviet union but has been an independent soverign satte since the early 1990s

 

[Stone]

Yes, I'm all for it, since America can, why can't other countries? And Ukraine isn't in Europe, it's in Russia.

Yes, I'm all for it,

At least you're honest about your intentions.
But it took a lot of questioning to bring it out.
Please be more open in the future.

And Ukraine isn't in Europe, it's in Russia

You're mistaken.
Try looking at a modern map
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Europe-Ukraine.svg

Even parts of Russia are within the conceptual boundaries of Europe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_in_Europe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Europe-Russia.svg

Note how Russia and the Ukraine don't overlap?


You seem stuck in denial. You can't be helped until you begin accepting reality.

 

[Naiwen]

At least you're honest about your intentions.
But it took a lot of questioning to bring it out.
Please be more open in the future.



You're mistaken.
Try looking at a modern map
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Europe-Ukraine.svg

Even parts of Russia are within the conceptual boundaries of Europe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_in_Europe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Europe-Russia.svg

Note how Russia and the Ukraine don't overlap?


You seem stuck in denial. You can't be helped until you begin accepting reality.

It's you who needs to wake up to reality. Just because we disagree on some perspectives, it doesn't necessarily mean I need to wake up and sees reality, just means we disagree on things, that's all.

But Ukraine was part of the URSS (like Russia was part of it), and all shall be returned to mighty Russia in due time, like everything would be returned to China in due time. So America should stop meddling in other' internal affairs.

 

[Stone]

It's you who needs to wake up to reality. Just because we disagree on some perspectives, it doesn't necessarily mean I need to wake up and sees reality, just means we disagree on things, that's all.

But Ukraine was part of the URSS, and all shall be returned to Russia in due time, like everything would be returned to China in due time.

You can't even read a map correctly.

 

[Naiwen]

You can't even read a map correctly.

So, history says Ukraine was a part of the URSS.

 

[Stone]

So, history says Ukraine was a part of the URSS.

History 'says' a lot of things. Doesn't mean they all apply to the present in a legal sense.
The USSR does not exist now. Incredibly, the old Soviet Empire, a conglomeration of republics, was one of the bloodiest of all political machines as it ingested and kept control of those republics.
Stalin's purges surpassed the death count attributed to Hitler. All to keep the party line pure and himself in control.
That type of control ended.

Many of those Republics sought freedom unto themselves and are now recognized as independent nations.

In effect, you are actually arguing for a return of a new version of the Soviet Union.


Is that your intention?

 

[Naiwen]

History 'says' a lot of things. Doesn't mean they all apply to the present in a legal sense.
The USSR does not exist now. Incredibly, the old Soviet Empire, a conglomeration of republics, was one of the bloodiest of all political machines as it ingested and kept control of those republics.
Stalin's purges surpassed the death count attributed to Hitler. All to keep the party line pure and himself in control.
That type of control ended.

Many of those Republics sought freedom unto themselves and are now recognized as independent nations.

In effect, you are actually arguing for a return of a new version of the Soviet Union.


Is that your intention?

Yes, to balance out US's imperialism in the world.

 

[porterjack]

Yes, to balance out US's imperialism in the world.

regressive jingoism at its finest

 

[Stone]

Yes, to balance out US's imperialism in the world.

While you criticize the US for diplomatic efforts, you claim the right of aggression because of those peaceful gestures.
Amazing.


If this was a time at the height of the Bush's immoral war in Iraq, I could see some justification in your emotionalism.
But it's not. It's during a time where the US is attempting peaceful negotiations with an aggressor nation and you are using that conflict as an argument for Russian aggression and claiming it's all about US imperialism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperialism
excerpts>

Imperialism, as defined by the Dictionary of Human Geography, is "an unequal human and territorial relationship, usually in the form of an empire, based on ideas of superiority and practices of dominance, and involving the extension of authority and control of one state or people over another

Lewis Samuel Feuer identifies two major subtypes of imperialism; the first is the "regressive imperialism" identified with pure conquest, unequivocal exploitation, extermination or reductions of undesired peoples, and settlement of desired peoples into those territories.[3] The second type identified by Feuer is "progressive imperialism" that is founded upon a cosmopolitan view of humanity, that promotes the spread of civilization to allegedly backward societies to elevate living standards and culture in conquered territories, and allowance of a conquered people to assimilate into the imperial society, an example being the multi-cultural British Empire which gave their citizens many positive advantages.

Looks like you support the violent type of imperialism, yourself.

 

[Naiwen]

While you criticize the US for diplomatic efforts, you claim the right of aggression because of those peaceful gestures.
Amazing.


If this was a time at the height of the Bush's immoral war in Iraq, I could see some justification in your emotionalism.
But it's not. It's during a time where the US is attempting peaceful negotiations with an aggressor nation and you are using that conflict as an argument for Russian aggression and claiming it's all about US imperialism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperialism
excerpts>





Looks like you support the violent type of imperialism, yourself.

By funding anti-government protesters in Ukraine and the rebels in the Syria war? lol, you're just American who worships America.

 

[porterjack]

No, China never invaded anyone in history.

not true

may 1979 china invaded vietnam