My sympathy to all victims of bombs, violence, aggression and imperialism and US Global Domination

Posted onAuthorJose Mario de Vega71 Comments

Tweet
Share
Share
0 Shares

SUPPORT INDEPENDENT SOCIAL COMMENTARY!
Subscribe to our Substack community GRP Insider to receive by email our in-depth free weekly newsletter. Opt into a paid subscription and you'll get premium insider briefs and insights from us.
Subscribe to our Substack newsletter, GRP Insider!
Learn more

While doing my usual virtual activity to my surprise and amusement, I run across an article from the so-called The Society of Honor by Joe America maliciously entitled “Sympathy to the Boston Bomber?” criticizing my article “The Boston Bombing and the US government’s history of mass murder” posted by GetReal Philippines.COM on April 19th.

Bombing victims some people have forgotten about

Bombing victims some people have forgotten about

Let the Radical reply to Mr. America.

Here’s the opening statement of the said piece:

I read a Get Real Post article that expresses sympathy with the Boston bomber. Well, not with the bomber’s act, exactly, but with the motive that is likely behind the bomber: bring down US imperialism.

COMMENT:

For the information of all people who care to read any of the posts of this site, let me state for purposes of the records that:

I condoled and sympathized to all the victims of the Boston bombing, not only to the deceased but also to the score of people who were injured by this horrendous and animalistic act.

I have no sympathy whatsoever to the bastard perpetrator of this evil deeds. I condemn his or her or their acts, means, method and motive. They are not human but animals of the worst kind!

In the same vein that I also condemn to the highest possible degree the on-going violence being committed and continuously perpetrated by the US military to the people of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, etc.

The Boston bomber or bombers are terrorists for killing innocent people and spreading fear to the public and the world.

In the same vein, the United States of America through its military by virtue of the executive order of its president in ordering the use of drone attacks and allowing the dropping of bombs against civilians are also terrorists.

The piece continued and claimed that:

The article begins with a stark condemnation of the bombing and expresses condolences for the young boy who was killed. Then it turns the closing call: “DOWN WITH US IMPERIALISM!!!”

Yes, in caps, three exclamation points.

COMMENT:

Point one: I expressed condolences not only with the young boy but also to the other victims who died.

For the benefit of the world public, let me quote my own article to highlight this important matter:

My condolences to all the victims of this horrible event, namely 8-year-old Martin Richard, 29-year-old Krystle Cambell, and Lu Lingzi, a BU graduate student from China and so as the multitude of people who got injured due to the blasts.

I don’t know whether Mr. America read my article or if he truly read it, how could he missed to quote the other two casualties of this terrorist attacks? Is he blind or he does not want to honor the other two fatalities?

Point two: I also expressed my condolences to the multitude of people who got injured due to the blasts.

QUESTION:

Why Mr. America omitted or did not say so?

Again, I doubt Mr. America’s claim that he read my article.

The ‘critic’ continued and stated that:

In other words, this blog writer is sympathetic to the motives of the bomber. Make no mistake about that. It is not a call for understanding, or compassion. It is a clarion call of hate raised loud and clear on that bastion of blogging integrity Get Real Post.

COMMENT:

I do not know what is wrong with this writer! His accusation is not only preposterous, but utterly out of order.

I have no sympathy whatsoever to the motives or desires or design or methods used by the bomber! I consider that bastard as a mass murderer and an evil creature.

There is no difference with the Boston bomber from that of a US pilot dropping bombs and a US soldier stationed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, etc. — ALL OF THEM ARE TERRORISTS!!!

Make no mistake about that!

My sympathy and solidarity is with all the people (regardless of their nationality, sex, gender, religious creed, race, ethnicity and irrespective of whether or not they are American or not) who are victims of violence, aggression and imperialism.

It is on this great sense that I concurred with Professor Dr. Cornel West when he said that:

“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” — #MLK Praying for our brothers and sisters EVERYWHERE…from Boston to Baghdad.

Mr. America even accused my article for sowing misunderstanding and doubted my compassion.

It also charged my article as “a clarion call of hate raised loud and clear on that bastion of blogging integrity Get Real Post.”

My I remind him that the duty of the intellectual is to “speak the truth and to expose lies.”

On November-December, 2003, Professor Noam Chomsky was interviewed by David Barsamian of the Socialist Review (“Telling the Truth about Imperialism”); let us consider a portion of the said exchanges:  

Barsamian: TRADITIONALLY IF you used the word “imperialism” and attached the word “American” in front of it, you were immediately dismissed as a member of some far left fringe. That has undergone a bit of a transformation in the last few years. Let’s just take Michael Ignatieff, for one. Son of a Canadian diplomat, he’s at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard where he is Carr Professor of Human Rights Policy. He writes in a New York Times Magazine cover story on July 28, 2002, “America’s entire war on terrorism is an exercise in imperialism.” Then he adds, “Imperialism used to be the white man’s burden,” echoing Kipling. “This gave it a bad reputation. But imperialism doesn’t stop being necessary just because it becomes politically incorrect.” On January 5, 2003, in yet another cover story in the New York Times Magazine, he writes, “America’s empire is not like the empires of times past, built on colonies, conquests and the white man’s burden…. The 21st century imperium is a new invention in the annals of political science, an empire lite, a global hegemony whose grace notes are free markets, human rights, and democracy, enforced by the most awesome military power the world has ever known.” And he has a new book out, called Empire Lite.

Chomsky: OF COURSE, the apologists for every other imperial power have said the same thing. So you can go back to John Stuart Mill, one of the most outstanding Western intellectuals, now we’re talking about the real peak of moral integrity and intelligence. He defended the British Empire in very much those words. John Stuart Mill wrote the classic essay on humanitarian intervention. Everyone studies it in law schools. What he says is, Britain is unique in the world. It’s unlike any country before it. Other countries have crass motives and seek gain and so on, but the British act only for the benefit of others. In fact, he said, Our motives are so pure that Europeans can’t understand us. They heap “obloquy” upon us and they seek to discover crass motives behind our benevolent actions. But everything we do is for the benefit of the natives, the barbarians. We want to bring them free markets and honest rule and freedom and all kinds of wonderful things. Today’s version is just illustrating Marx’s comment about tragedy being repeated as farce…

I hate the US government specifically it’s racist, imperialist factions and its war monger military; but I do not hate the American people specifically its working class and those living at the lowest spectrum of its society.

My objective is to expose and oppose US imperialism and to counter it world domination through my writings, teachings and political activities.

I am not a lone voice in the wilderness that is critical of your country’s standing in the world.

Even Ron Paul, in his book, The Revolution: A Manifesto (2008) stated that:

“It is unreasonable, even utopian, not to expect people to grow resentment, and desirous of revenge, when your government bombs them, supports police states in their countries, and imposes murderous sanctions on them.”

I am also not alone in calling your beloved America the NUMBER ONE TERRORIST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD.

Consider the following individuals:

“In much of the world the U.S. is regarded as a leading terrorist state.”

— Professor Noam Chomsky

“Americans have been taught that their nation is civilized and humane. But, too often, U. S. actions have been uncivilized and inhumane.”

— Professor Howard Zinn

The US government is the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today…

— Dr. Martin Luther Kings

Why should they ask me to put on a uniform and go ten thousand miles from home and drop bombs and bullets on brown people in Vietnam while so-called Negro people in Louisville are treated like dogs and denied simple human rights?

— Muhammad Ali

Look at the American Revolution in 1776. That revolution was for what? For land. Why did they want land? Independence. How was it carried out? Bloodshed. Number one, it was based on land, the basis of independence. And the only way they could get it was bloodshed. The French Revolution — what was it based on? The land-less against the landlord. What was it for? Land. How did they get it? Bloodshed. Was no love lost; was no compromise; was no negotiation. I’m telling you, you don’t know what a revolution is. ‘Cause when you find out what it is, you’ll get back in the alley; you’ll get out of the way. The Russian Revolution — what was it based on? Land. The land-less against the landlord. How did they bring it about? Bloodshed. You haven’t got a revolution that doesn’t involve bloodshed. And you’re afraid to bleed. I said, you’re afraid to bleed.

[As] long as the white man sent you to Korea, you bled. He sent you to Germany, you bled. He sent you to the South Pacific to fight the Japanese, you bled. You bleed for white people. But when it comes time to seeing your own churches being bombed and little black girls be murdered, you haven’t got no blood. You bleed when the white man says bleed; you bite when the white man says bite; and you bark when the white man says bark. I hate to say this about us, but it’s true. How are you going to be nonviolent in Mississippi, as violent as you were in Korea? How can you justify being nonviolent in Mississippi and Alabama, when your churches are being bombed, and your little girls are being murdered, and at the same time you’re going to violent with Hitler, and Tojo, and somebody else that you don’t even know?

If violence is wrong in America, violence is wrong abroad. If it’s wrong to be violent defending black women and black children and black babies and black men, then it’s wrong for America to draft us and make us violent abroad in defense of her. And if it is right for America to draft us, and teach us how to be violent in defense of her, then it is right for you and me to do whatever is necessary to defend our own people right here in this country.

— Malcolm X

… the connection between imperial politics and culture is astonishingly direct. American attitudes to American “greatness”, to hierarchies of race, to the perils of “other” revolutions (the American revolution being considered unique and somehow unrepeatable anywhere else in the world) have remained constant, have dictated, have obscured, the realities of empire, while apologists for overseas American interests have insisted on American innocence, doing good, fighting for freedom.

— Edward W. Said

The “war on terror” is an absurd war against a tactic. It posits the idea of perpetual, or what is now called “generational,” war.  It has no discernable end.  There is no way to define victory. It is, in metaphysical terms, a war against evil, and evil, as any good seminarian can tell you, will always be with us. The most destructive evils, however, are not those that are externalized. The most destructive are those that are internal. These hidden evils, often defined as virtues, are unleashed by our hubris, self-delusion and ignorance. Evil masquerading as good is evil in its deadliest form. 

The decline of American empire began long before the current economic meltdown or the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It began before the first Gulf War or Ronald Reagan. It began when we shifted, in the words of the historian Charles Maier, from an “empire of production” to an “empire of consumption.”  By the end of the Vietnam War, when the costs of the war ate away at Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society and domestic oil production began its steady, inexorable decline, we saw our country transformed from one that primarily produced to one that primarily consumed. We started borrowing to maintain a lifestyle we could no longer afford. We began to use force, especially in the Middle East, to feed our insatiable demand for cheap oil. The years after World War II, when the United States accounted for one-third of world exports and half of the world’s manufacturing, gave way to huge trade imbalances, outsourced jobs, rusting hulks of abandoned factories, stagnant wages and personal and public debts that most of us cannot repay. 

The bill is now due. America’s most dangerous enemies are not Islamic radicals, but those who promote the perverted ideology of national security that, as Andrew Bacevich writes, is “our surrogate religion.” If we continue to believe that we can expand our wars and go deeper into debt to maintain an unsustainable level of consumption, we will dynamite the foundations of our society.

— Chris Hedges

Now, my question to Mr. America is: how about these notable individuals? Are they teaching hate? Are they liars? Are they manipulators?

My objective is in conformity with Professor Chomsky’s theses on his book Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Domination. The eminent professor’s arguments as lucidly illustrated by Wikipedia stated that:

“the socio-economic elite who control the United States have pursued an “Imperial Grand Strategy” since the end of World War II in order to maintain global hegemony through military, political and economic means. He argues that in doing so they have repeatedly shown a total disregard for democracy and human rights, in stark contrast to the U.S. government’s professed support for those values. Furthermore, he argues that this continual pursuit of global hegemony now threatens the existence of the human species itself because of the increasing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

“Drawing historical examples from 1945 through to 2003 to support his argument, Chomsky looks at the U.S. government’s support for regimes responsible for mass human rights abuses, including ethnic cleansing and genocide, namely El Salvador, Colombia, Turkey, Israel, Egypt, South Africa and Indonesia. He also discusses U.S. support for militant dissident groups widely considered “terrorists”, particularly in Nicaragua and Cuba, as well as direct military interventions, such as the Vietnam War, NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, Afghan War and Iraq War, in order to further its power and grasp of resources. In doing so, he highlights that U.S. foreign policy – whether controlled by Republican or Democratic administrations – still follows the same agenda of gaining access to lucrative resources and maintaining U.S. world dominance”.

QUESTION:

Is Professor Chomsky a teacher of hate? Is he a manipulator, too?

I wonder how would Mr. America categorize the good professor who is the leading critic of his own government’s foreign policy, world-wide abuses, global domination, violence, and naked imperialism!?  

Mr. America’s tirade continues and stated that:

So the author believes the gut-wrenching sympathy Americans feel about the Boston tragedy is sad because the media tells them to be sad. In other words, there is nothing about the incident on its own merits that calls for sadness. This reveals the author’s own fake condolence in the article, condolence that is merely aimed at posturing himself as a sympathetic man.

COMMENT:

First point: Who owns the media is America?

Second point: the author stated that “there is nothing about the incident on its own merits that calls for sadness.”

This pronouncement is an utter disrespect of Mr. America to all the victims of the Boston bombing.

I do not know whether he is a fake person or a fictitious entity or a stool pigeon of Yankee Imperialism, spokesperson and apologist of corporatist bourgeois US conservative media, but let it appear on the record of these exchange that:

My condolences and solidarity to all the victims of this horrible terrorist attack is true, pure and genuine and that it came from the bottom of my heart.

I extremely sympathize to all those victims of terrorism, not only from Boston but also to all those victims of terrorism from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, etc. — deliberately committed and continuously being committed by Mr. America’s beloved country.

To the other baseless accusation of Mr. America that I am not a sympathetic man, let me state categorically that:

I offer no sympathy whatsoever to all terrorists, colonialists and imperialists especially the government of the United States of America, England, etc. and now the emerging bully of Southeast Asia, China.

All of them can go to hell, but I am going to oppose, expose and counter them to the death through my writings, teachings and political activities.

I hate them all!

To the other charge that I am an angry manipulator, the question there is: what manipulation did I committed or concocted?

The source of my anger is my extreme hate of imperialism of whatever type, kind or form.

I will fight them all!

Assuming arguendo that I am an angry manipulator, then what the hell would you call your war freak Lyndon Johnson’s act during the so-called Gulf of Tonkin incident?

Speak the truth, who manipulated that fake event to justify the horrible, infamous and murderous Vietnam War?

How about your stupid Dubya’s claim in reference to Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction?

Where are the WMDs? Or probably, the precise question to ask should be: where’s now Iraq’s OIL? Ha? Mr. American accuser of manipulation?!

Your war monger country is so good at concocting dubious reasons and utterly impertinent explanations in justifying the continuous act of going to war; and then I am the one that you are accusing of manipulation?

Shame on you sir and shame on your country that nearly bombed almost all the known countries of this planet!

Nearing the end of the article, Mr. America introduce to the reader Dr. Zoltan Grossman “who originally compiled the list” of America’s History of Military Intervention.

Dr. Zoltan Grossman is a professor of geography at The Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington. His website is at http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz and can be reached at  grossmaz@evergreen.edu.  He is a civilian Member of the Board of G.I. Voice, an antiwar veterans group that runs the Coffee Strong resource center for soldiers outside Fort Lewis.   His list of U.S. military interventions since 1890 is at http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html.  (Source: Common Dreams)

The good doctor has made his mark writing and teaching about US racism and military interventions.  He is an advocate AGAINST war. But he at least appears to teach ideas, not anger.

COMMENT:

I am wondering why to Mr. America, Dr. Grossman appears to teach ideas, but when it comes to me: implied that I only teach hate?

This is preposterous! I do not see any difference from the position of the good doctor from that of my own views.

Nonetheless, let us quote the ideas of the good doctor himself in an article entitled “War and the New US Military Bases”, which appeared on the Weekend Edition of the Counter Punch site, dated February 2-4, 2002.

Here’s what the good doctor said about the beloved America of Mr. America:

Why War?

Geopolitical priorities may help explain why Washington went to war in all these countries, even as paths to peace remained open. President George Bush launched the February 1991 ground war against Iraq, even though Saddam was already withdrawing from Kuwait under Soviet disengagement plan. He also sent forces into Somalia in 1992, even though the famine he used as a justification had already lessened. President Clinton launched a war on Serbia in 1999 to force a withdraw from Kosovo, even though Yugoslavia had already met many of his withdrawal terms at the Rambouillet conference. President George W. Bush attacked Afghanistan in 2001 without having put much diplomatic pressure on the Taliban to surrender Bin Laden, or letting anti-Taliban forces (such as Pashtun commander Abdul Haq) win over Taliban forces on their own. Washington went to war not as a last resort, but because it saw war as a convenient opportunity to further larger goals.

Geopolitical priorities may also help explain the reluctance of the U.S. to declare victory in these wars. If the U.S. had ousted Saddam from power in 1991, his Gulf allies would have demanded the withdrawal of U.S. bases, but his continued hold onto power justifies intensive U.S. bombing of Iraq and a continued hold over the Gulf oil region. The fact that Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar have not been captured in four months of war also provides convenient justification for the permanent stationing of U.S. bases in Central and South Asia. All three men are more useful to U.S. plans if they are alive and free, at least for the time being.

Indeed, the good doctor is a teacher of ideas and I subscribed substantially to all the arguments that he advanced and explicated; yet still I am wondering: what is the difference of his ideas from mine?

Mr. America, what can you say about these words and brilliant ideas of the good doctor? Do you agree with them?

Consider further the good doctor’s analysis of the distinctive common themes of the U. S. military intervention in his A Briefing on the History of U.S. Military Interventions (October 2001) published by the Z Magazine:

COMMON THEMES

Some common themes can be seen in many of these U.S. military interventions.

First, they were explained to the U.S. public as defending the lives and rights of civilian populations. Yet the military tactics employed often left behind massive civilian “collateral damage.” War planners made little distinction between rebels and the civilians who lived in rebel zones of control, or between military assets and civilian infrastructure, such as train lines, water plants, agricultural factories, medicine supplies, etc. The U.S. public always believe that in the next war, new military technologies will avoid civilian casualties on the other side. Yet when the inevitable civilian deaths occur, they are always explained away as “accidental” or “unavoidable.”

Second, although nearly all the post-World War II interventions were carried out in the name of “freedom” and “democracy,” nearly all of them in fact defended dictatorships controlled by pro-U.S. elites. Whether in Vietnam, Central America, or the Persian Gulf, the U.S. was not defending “freedom” but an ideological agenda (such as defending capitalism) or an economic agenda (such as protecting oil company investments). In the few cases when U.S. military forces toppled a dictatorship–such as in Grenada or Panama–they did so in a way that prevented the country’s people from overthrowing their own dictator first, and installing a new democratic government more to their liking.

Third, the U.S. always attacked violence by its opponents as “terrorism,” “atrocities against civilians,” or “ethnic cleansing,” but minimized or defended the same actions by the U.S. or its allies. If a country has the right to “end” a state that trains or harbors terrorists, would Cuba or Nicaragua have had the right to launch defensive bombing raids on U.S. targets to take out exile terrorists? Washington’s double standard maintains that an U.S. ally’s action by definition “defensive,” but that an enemy’s retaliation is by definition “offensive.”

Fourth, the U.S. often portrays itself as a neutral peacekeeper, with nothing but the purest humanitarian motives. After deploying forces in a country, however, it quickly divides the country or region into “friends” and “foes,” and takes one side against another. This strategy tends to enflame rather than dampen a war or civil conflict, as shown in the cases of Somalia and Bosnia, and deepens resentment of the U.S. role.

Fifth, U.S. military intervention is often counterproductive even if one accepts U.S. goals and rationales. Rather than solving the root political or economic roots of the conflict, it tends to polarize factions and further destabilize the country. The same countries tend to reappear again and again on the list of 20th century interventions.

Sixth, U.S. demonization of an enemy leader, or military action against him, tends to strengthen rather than weaken his hold on power. Take the list of current regimes most singled out for U.S. attack, and put it alongside of the list of regimes that have had the longest hold on power, and you will find they have the same names. Qaddafi, Castro, Saddam, Kim, and others may have faced greater internal criticism if they could not portray themselves as Davids standing up to the American Goliath, and (accurately) blaming many of their countries’ internal problems on U.S. economic sanctions.

QUESTION:

Do you agree or concur with the analysis of the good doctor, Mr. America?

Finally, nearing the end of his counter-thesis to my article, Mr. America introduced me to the public and bewilderment, even quoted my resume.

COMMENT:

Sir, for the record, I am not the one who put my academic record or intellectual credentials to the said site, rather it is the administrator of the same.

Nonetheless, be that as if may, it is my considered view and so hold that my educational attainment has nothing to do with my firm conviction with regard to the issue under discussion.

Hence, highlighting the three degrees under my belt is unnecessary.

To conclude this rejoinder or answer to your counter to my article, let me state that I maintain the strong view, Mr. America that your country is the prime danger to mankind due to your greed, fear, paranoia and pride.

In the straightforward and categorical words of comrade Ernesto “Che” Guevara:

The main enemy of humanity is the United States of North America.   

DOWN WITH US IMPERIALISM!!!!

DOWN WITH ALL FORMS, KINDS AND TYPES OF IMPERIALISM!!!!

 

   

 

71 Replies to “My sympathy to all victims of bombs, violence, aggression and imperialism and US Global Domination”

  1. GRP; I can understand (though do not agree) with posting this authors previous article but this is just way beyond reason and logic. Is the GRP site now the official forum for Philippine Communists?

    To the author; You need to find a new hobby. Why not try looking at your own pathetic government and find out why things are so dire in the Philippines instead of passing the blame to someone else? Each and every country on the planet has skeletons! Get over it! One more thing… Try writing an article without 95% of it being “cut-and-paste”!

    Reply

    1. It’s a point of view just like all the others published by the rest of the authors here. To your question on whether GRP is now the “official forum” for Philippine commies? What do you think? Sounds like a dumb question to me.

      Reply

  2. The hypocricy of communism and/or the radicalism of islamists represent the twin terrors in many societies, feeding on the poor and the uneducated to further self promotion and not self-righteousness; appealing to the quasi-intellectual middle class who can have a voice for their frustration and also self promotion; appealing to the power brokers as a means of harnessing followers, and self agrandissment.
    Inevitably erroneous propaganda and a blinkered view fuel a distorted perspective of a world they don’t understand or feel they belong and to destroy is always easier than to build.
    A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, especially in the hands of the demented, the misguided, and religious zealots.

    America’s greatest crime against humanity is the export of its ‘culture’, and the philippines would be better advised to establish its own identity than be dependent upon, and envious of, its political master uncle sam.

    “America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between”
    Oscar Wilde
    but still far preferable to the likes of kim 1,2,3, hussein, pol pot etc.

    Reply

  3. /sarcasmmode on

    I already expressed my sentiments on this whole topic elsewhere.
    In a nutshell:

    The U.S. is FAR from being the best country in the world in terms of looking at what its done in the past century.

    That said, its a hell of a lot better than what some of the Philippines’ neighbors have been like. No we may not be the best country, heck, we may NOT even have the best GOVERNMENT (a lot of citizens like this Centrist-Libertarian leaning dude feel that way)but its certainly better than where many in the Philippines are reading this from.

    Its easy to scream “Down Down USA” and all that when you’re screaming from a position of comfort.

    But if the Philippines were to get into an armed conflict with, say… oh… big br0ther China, which country will they run to for military aid first?

    Let’s try Japan, oh no, they’re under the nuclear umbrella of the U.S. How about Taiwan, oops, ditto. Australia? Good luck. Malaysia? Singapore? Vietnam? South Korea? You can see where I’m going with this.

    And to quote Che Guevara?
    *smirk*

    That said, I DO agree with SOME of what the article says. I won’t bother stating which because it will be obvious with what I believe the U.S. SHOULD do.

    If I were President of the United States, on my second day of assuming the presidency (I gotta settle in on the first day you know?)
    I would categorically and completely APOLOGIZE to ALL the countries of the world the United States has fucked over since its inception.
    And I do mean that wholeheartedly. The U.S. should accept responsibility for some of the ill-will it has earned from ingrates over the years.

    On the third day I would pull out of the UNITED NATIONS (have the main headquarters in Manila instead of New York, I suggest) NATO and all these other international treaties/organizations which require American blood and bodies and money and all sorts of other sacrifices just to feed the Military-Industrial complex which has been allowed to run rampant. Basically, I would say to each country we are forced to fight for, “you’re on your own, we’re not going to get drawn into YOUR conflicts which have NOTHING to do with US. Handle YOUR business.”

    On the fourth day, I would (just to kinda make up for the third day) have free and open arms sales (minus the WMDs of course) to those said countries we have been bleeding our military dry for.
    South Korea? How about some Patriot batteries?
    Taiwan? Want an Aegis equipped carrier or two?
    Philippines? How about some hi-tech equipment to help hunt those pesky insurgents in the jungle.
    Japan? Re-arm yourself buddy! Build up the JDF and have a party. Yeah we DID drop a couple of nukes on you but hey, you gave us corn syrup and now look at all the fat people in America, I’d say you got your revenge.

    Anyway, you get the idea.

    On the fifth day, we close off our borders and stop being the free and open society we have always been known for. You want to get in to this country? BUY your citizenship in gold.

    On the sixth day, I would abolish ALL foreign aid. Foreign TRADE? Yes. Foreign AID? HELL NO.

    Nothing is for free now. We SHOULD stop being the world’s policeman as well as the world’s biggest nanny state and donor.

    And on the seventh day I would probably be impeached.

    /sarcasmmode off

    Reply

  4. OP I find you extremely naive in thinking that the average American will think about the destructive consequences of US foreign policy in your original article (it’s not even on their radar). Nevertheless, I will you defend you from those who criticize your alleged lack of sympathy to the victims of the Boston bombings.

    Your critics resemble those 2003 Iraq supporters who spew the nonsense of “defend the troops”. Those supporters don’t even think of the Iraqis whose land is being conquered and their institutions bastardized. Those who criticize you for your lack of compassion don’t even think about the consequences and radicalization of others when US interventionist policies kill and destroy those other people’s lands, institutions, and way of life.

    Reply

  5. @cardcrusher

    “Your critics resemble those 2003 Iraq supporters who spew the nonsense of “defend the troops”. Those supporters don’t even think of the Iraqis whose land is being conquered and their institutions bastardized. ”

    Iraq being conquered and their institutions bastardized?

    Care to cite the links where you got them. Then we can have a point of discussion.

    As for now, I can comment that Iraq was freed from a mass murderer who would have no compunction in using WMD in eradicating those who are non-believers.

    Reply

    1. And I can also comment that Philippines is now having a hard time protecting it’s shorelines because we are not anymore in the US 7th Fleet direct area of responsibility.

      Reply

    2. Tsorp
      The moment the US invaded Iraq, it violated its sovereignty and bastardized its institutions. The WMD you cite has been been proven to be false, and the sources that the Us and UK relied upon have been proven to be non credible. Heck, German intelligence repeatedly warned those two countries that the intel they based their WMD claims was bad.

      Reply

      1. @cardcrusher

        Let’s deconstruct your comment.

        According to you –

        “The moment the US invaded Iraq, it violated its sovereignty and bastardized its institutions.”

        The way I see it –

        An argument why invasion of Iraq is legal according to international lawyer –

        “Paul Schott Stevens, JD, Partner in Dechert, an international law firm, Andru E. Wall, Professor of International Law at the US Naval War College, and Ata Dinlenc, JD, Attorney with Kaye Scholer LLP, wrote in a 2003 essay titled “The Just Demands of Peace and Security: International Law and the Case Against Iraq,” published by the The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies:

        “In the widening international and domestic debate over Iraq, some insist that U.S. or coalition military action against Iraq today would be unlawful unless once again explicitly authorized by the Security Council.

        As a matter of international law, this clearly is not the case. A renewed Security Council mandate may be useful or desirable, but it is not necessary. The Security Council previously has authorized the use of force against Iraq, the Council has not rescinded but rather reaffirmed its position on numerous occasions since, and the circumstances justifying the Council’s conclusion that Iraq is a threat to international peace and the security of the Middle East region remain unchanged.

        The U.N. Charter contemplates that the Security Council may – as it has with respect to Iraq – authorize the use of force to remove threats to international peace and security. The Charter also recognizes that, in response to acts of aggression, states – such as the US and its coalition partners – have an inherent right to act individually and collectively in their defense.
        Further military action against Iraq may, we believe, be justified on either or both grounds.”

        The invasion of Iraq was even approved by the US Congress.

        According to you –

        “The WMD you cite has been been proven to be false, and the sources that the Us and UK relied upon have been proven to be non credible.”

        IMO –

        Saddam Hussein has been using chemical weapons against Iranians and Kurdish causing thousands of casualties. It’s not US miscalculation why Iraq was invaded. It was Saddam Hussein’s.

        No WMD found does not mean Saddam Hussein does not intend to use one.

        BTW, if the Bush administration lied about WMD so did these people to name a few:

        Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry, Al Gore, Arlen Specter, Wesley Clark, Jacques Chirac, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi.

        http://tinyurl.com/8zh6amo

        According to you –

        “Heck, German intelligence repeatedly warned those two countries that the intel they based their WMD claims was bad.”

        And how come they are part of Coalition of the Willing –

        Countries offering Conditional Support:

        France: Paris says it may help U.S. if Iraq uses biological or chemical weapons

        Germany: Despite opposition to a war on Iraq, Germany has chemical warfare decontamination specialists in Kuwait. Germany has also promises unhindered use of its airspace and U.S. and British bases, and will provide Turkey with AWACS and Patriot anti-missile rockets for protection.

        Oman: Base for U.S. planes used in Afghanistan, but says will play no role in a war against Iraq. Oman has sent one battalion under Gulf Cooperation Council mission to defend Kuwait.

        Reply

  6. LOOK, a thesis! What long-winded BS. How many people does the author think actually read the above explanation/article? I got through 4 paragraphs and after that..ugh!

    Saddamm may have had WMD’s and the Western forces just did not find them.Whether a War should have been fought, IDK and do not really care. Yes, that is correct, I do not care! The people waging war are going to do it whether I like it or not.and regardless of the author who HATES THE U.S.A..

    Reply

    1. “I got through 4 paragraphs and after that..ugh!”

      Just the poster’s name and it’s ugh! It’s him again, not the Superman, but the Superlative dude.

      I’m counter-commenting on the readers’ comments.

      Reply

        1. Ur a super-sleuth,Yes?…NOT!!! IDK who Jose Vargas and I do not care. He hates the USA’s domination of the world…that is his business, but if he wants to cry about it, OR defend himself from the critics he will no doubt attract, too bad.

          He would not like what the Emperor and his troops were going to do to the Filipino people and had the USA not come to the Filipino’s rescue he would be speaking Japanese or Chinese right now. and if it were Chinese he were speaking he would not have the freedoms he has now. Such as criticizing the very people that are responsible for the few freedoms the Filipino people have today! he sounds like an ingrate when I actually think about it, yes? Jose Vargas thinks his lot would be better if the USA did not come to his countries rescue? REALLY? or how about every time Manila is under-water? who are the first people the Filipino gov’t. calls? The USA, and they come to the rescue every time!!! so ,yes, he sounds like an ingrate! there, said it!!! tough shit if you do not like it.

          The admin wants more people to read his blog, it is a business! the way you make your comment sound is that its not for ANYONE WHO DOES NOT AGREE WITH THE AUTHOR. don’t like it? don’t read it.

          He has a short memory for a guy who claims to have the education he SAYS he has! superlative dude?

          You a funny guy! ( did you ever see that printed anywhere else? yeah, it was me!!!)

    2. Yep! A thesis! probably dusted from his old bookshelves from his UP days.. Its already 2013 not Vietnam War period and Liberalists-Dems in power already in the White House, is this guy some nostalgic 60s hippie? Akala ko tapos na time ni Esposo, may kakambal pa pala sya..

      Reply

  7. since no one’s mentioned it…the bombers weren’t even from Afghanistan or any other of those countries you sympathize with mainly,they’re from Chechnya, Russia, they’re russians,granted, russian islamic extremists.

    It’s nobody from the countries you defend, these are Russian Islamic extremists defending the dogma practiced from the same extremists in the Middle East.

    As for US and Russia’s ties expected to be strained,it looks otherwise,Russia sees this as an opportunity to mend ties, Russia wants the West to understand that the Islamist activity in the North Caucasus is a threat not only to Russia, but the US and Europe as well. But it remains to be seen if the Boston bombings offer an opportunity for U.S.-Russian cooperation.

    Now that you made this long-winded rant about the US,casting quick judgement on them in the wake of a bombing you assumed was caused by their war on terror, when it turns out US only ended up being caught in Russia’s conflict between it and Chechnya, where Chechnya venerates Islamist extremist dogma as well as Chechnya’s want of independence from Russia, Russia having its shares of massacres and atrocities committed by said extremists, Russia also responds to these atrocities with bombs and war, the same approach you claim only the US is capable of. With your assumptions and judgement said and done, should I expect another long winded rant about Russia? or is all this actually just singular to the US and US only, because you didn’t condemn the other countries that hand a hand in the wars such as the UK or Canada or France, at all, your assumptions and judgement now only paint you up to that of a racist.

    Btw,if you dislike America so much, go ahead and ask your government to not run to them for assistance concerning matters of the Abu Sayyaf and Jemaah Islamiyah, to not run to them when China treads on your seas, to not run to them for help on the Sabah crisis, as well as not accept their foreign aid, just tell your government to drop any helping hand from them, have your government go beg to another country thats ‘right’ in your narrow eyes for help and aid, and have your own armed forces defend your own sovereignty and lands and have your government officials solve its own crises and problems, why run over and over again to and benefit from a country for assistance that you loathe for?

    Reply

    1. The last paragraph says it all, Jose Vargas should tell his gov’t. to stop asking for or even accepting the aid the USA sends to his country.
      Vargas reply will no doubt be that the people the money is supossed to help never receive it, as if that is not his own corrupt gov’t.’s fault. The more I think about it the bigger the ingrate the author of the article sounds like. Filipino’s should send him to China and let him talk his dumb-shit over there and see what happens to him! There, I said it again trosp!

      Reply

  8. When people are enjoying life, and you bomb innocent people…it’s different from actual shooting war. Terrorists are scum of this Earth…

    Reply

  9. This hateful, unskilled writer is a blight on GRP. I’m not even going to waste time asking if he’s sure he supports democracy in the world, because this article is so obviously one-sided and the timing of its writing, before the victims who died have even been buried, speaks only of an unbridled disdain towards one nation.

    Reply

  10. Can the USA ever get credit for anything?
    How about just one?
    If the education system is not in English than you can not export your labor like you do now. You may not realize it but your most important advantage in the labor market of the world is the the fact that the OFWs speak English.
    I just saw a documentary about the difficult life of the Indonesian maids in Malaysia. Compare that to the Filipino maids. Night and day. It is all because they don’t speak English and the Filipinos do.

    Reply

  11. Jose Mario de Vega,

    If you plan on further elaborating on a reply to Mr. America, let me give you a bit of advice:

    It’s not worth it.

    Reply

  12. Jose Mario de Vega

    Your views are what they are and I support you right to those views. I encourage people to listen because this tells everybody exactly where you stand and its out in the open. This is an exercise in progressive thinking, it is amazing that there are comments available since the progressives do not want anyone questioning the wonder and enlightened knowledge they have.

    I like your picture of the unfortunate Japanese bombing victims and how these people are victims of the USA. You fail to mention the Rape of Manila, the Chinese, the Bataan Death March and the Nazi’s. How many Japanese surrendered during Sipan, Iwo Jima, Okinawa and Philippines? How many people on both sides would have died if the USA invaded (millions, tens of millions)? War is war but terrorism is not and specifically targets civilians where in war the target is combatants. So what does the USA do just sit back and let them plot and attack. Does the USA invade Pakistan? We all see how Pakistan is helping by hiding Bin Laden for ten years and stoping the Taliban. The USA goes thru great effort to minimize civilian injuries and deaths while terrorist go thru great effort to kill or injure civilians. It is funny the progressives hate Bush but they support his hit them first doctrine and then complain about the big bad USA.

    You need to stop reading Chomsky and Alinsky and read some other opinions and stop preaching to the choir. Progressive way is the biggest lie and is only believed because they now control most of the media and universities. It is a totalitarianism in thought and practice while all along preaching freedom (ala CCCP, Fascism, Nazi’s). Every progressive leader has done wrong by every group it says it helps. The simple statement ” I hate them for what they did but they did have a point”, that is pure stupidity. I think progressives learn so much that they forget how to think and fell. Stuff their heads full of useless information and out dated draconian thinking and then every few decades think they have a new idea.

    Lets put it out in the open and just say it. Islam is a religion in need of reformation and will continue to be backwards and preach hate of all who are not of said religion. It is a fact that all Islamic countries were polled and 60 to 80 percent hate western values and countries. On top of that they think it is ok to kill someone because they are not Muslim or converted to from Islam to another religion. If all the Muslims put down their weapons there would be peace, if the west and Asia put down their weapons there would be none of them left. The only reason they are given any pittance is because of oil. Just my two cents.

    Reply

    1. I respect America but it’s total ignorance to say much about the religion you hardly studied about. Not every Muslim person thinks the way these scums do who cause havoc among innocent people. Please, I’m not even Muslim and generalising their belief system makes one no better than those pathetic radicals. Indonesia has the biggest Muslim population in the world and yet majority think just as secular as the Americans. This is unfortunate it happened and it’s just incidental that they’re Muslims (think of the Sandy Hook massacre – was it because the kid’s beliefs were Christian/agnostic/atheist? Again stop judging the people who share such beliefs as a whole.

      Reply

      1. It is fact that the Muslim community does not believe in religious freedom. Indonesia has outlawed some religious groups, what about Banda Ache and East Timor not to mention the support for the Terrorist in Sulu and Jolo. Sandy Hook was by a mentally ill person that was drugged up, even columbine the attackers were kids who are mentally ill on drugs (drugs = prescription legal ones). It would be like saying Filipina’s are bad because McVeigh’s (Oklahoma City Bomber and atheist) wife was from the Philippines. Most (90%) faith based attacks have been by Muslims. Muslims even in the USA just tend to ignore and don’t speak out against these attacks. How many Muslims do you see in the media come out against attacks in the USA and around the world. All you see is lip service to show that at least they say something. Where are the mass demonstrations against the attacks from the Muslims… next to none. How many bombers and attackers are Christian, Buddhist, Hindi or Jewish, next to zero. The only mass Christian bombings are during the IRA attacks against the UK and they mostly targeted government sites

        Reply

        2. Well think about the Crusades then. Many people, even more so than how many terrorist groups under the name of Islam, killed many through the ages – all in the name of our Christian God! Then there were also those suffered through the Inquisition and all those witch hunts, and then there’s my dad who suffered abuse when he was still serving as an altar boy… should I go on to say that as a whole Christians or Christianity are hypocrites and well judged by many of atheists/ sceptics as evil? This is what I mean to say that you stop judging all people who share such belief as a whole.
          I’ll site you an example, Malaysia has a Muslim majority and yet they fared better than us (filipinos) economically and they don’t have such radicals killing their own population and here in the pinas, the church is just as indifferent as politicians in helping improving the nation’s well being as a whole and only a handful actually care to bring about improving quality education and making better social services.
          To add this, Indonesia doesn’t follow Shari’a law and they have in their constitution the ‘pancasila’ their code of ethics – I know this cause I’m studying Indonesian and you don’t know that not all Muslim majority countries are radicalised. Pakistan is not the same with Indonesia just as not all of us are as bigotted as those who carried out Crusades and Inquisition.
          Jews are not an exception here either. Before the formation of Israel, many of them participated in driving out Palestinian civilians as well as the British army through the use of weapons and such terror attacks- not that I don’t support the state’s existence I’m just letting you know that labelling one particular belief system as terroristic is sheer ignorance and narrow mindedness. You obviously haven’t known that some Jews even condemned their own who convert to Christianity and who go out of their way to preach the Gospel and there was even a reported bombing committed by some group of orthodox Jews on a place where they found Christianized Jews living. And yet they’re recognised as not representative of Jews in Israel. So why should you label other groups as such? Don’t be hypocritical because we are no better in our hasty judgments as they are.

      2. @christy

        “Not every Muslim person thinks the way these scums do who cause havoc among innocent people.”

        So how many do you think they are?

        More than 50% or less?

        I would say the number is more than 50%

        Why?

        I still have to read something that says killing innocent civilians is a justification for a Muslim cause from any Muslim websites.

        Reply

        1. Correction –

          “I still have to read something that says killing innocent civilians is a justification for a Muslim cause from any Muslim websites.”

          To read –

          “I still have to read something that says killing innocent civilians is NOT a justification for a Muslim cause from any Muslim websites.”

        2. Correction again –

          ““I still have to read something that says killing innocent civilians is NOT a justification for a Muslim cause from any Muslim websites.”

          To read –

          “I still have to read something that says INTENTIONALLY killing innocent civilians is NOT a justification for a Muslim cause from any Muslim websites.”

        3. Trosp,

          Maybe you should just re-write the sentence. I get your point but it’s getting a little confusing with you adding the changes bit by bit afterward.

        4. @J. Saint

          Thanks for getting the point.

          Perhaps, I should not have done it in installment basis.

          I’m just trying something.

        5. Again this is load of crock. Why don’t you go and live in Indonesia for some time and there you see for yourself whether or not every Muslim you meet is a potential terrorist. And take note there are many filipinos who work there in white collar jobs in contrast to other Asian nations such as HK, middle east and malaysia. Experience what their cultures are because Indonesia has various cultures that make up for what it is.

        8. Indonesians though Muslims are by far one of the most secular I’ve ever met. They don’t spew even as much hatred as some of these threads here who just bash Muslims and their beliefs. They even like to watch Hollywood films. You haven’t travelled to Indonesia yourself so why do you insist on such claims that they are all collectively bad. By the way, Indonesia’s economy is even faring better than Philippines, the supposedly Christian nation of Asia.

      3. Christy,

        For the record, Americans are clueless about a lot of things. But you shouldn’t be just as clueless about the Muslim problem that ALL non-Muslims face. When a religion’s primary teaching exhorts its adherents to subjugate non-believers and exact a tax (jizyah) upon subjugation we can pretty much surmise that living in harmony with other peoples isn’t their priority. When their response to a refusal to convert to Islam or the refusal to pay the tax is a violent war, we can be assured that the there was never any intention to practice tolerance but an explicit effort to subdue and humiliate those who do not share the same beliefs. It is a refusal to recognise non-Muslim communities other than as subordinates. By its very nature Islam tolerates no other state other than itself.

        Reply

        2. Why don’t you live there since its so great.Oh yea that is why millions want to com to the USA because it is so bad here. BTW the Muslims where the first to “crusade” across the middle east to Spain in 700AD where they killed those they could not convert and where only stopped in Europe by Charles (The Hammer) Martel of France. So you really need to read your history.

        3. And who killed more and longer? Sorry, you have to read through the history books again. And fox news isn’t the most reliable news, in fact it’s got the worst as far as journalism is concerned. I watch and read Al Jazeera, BBC, and ABC Australian news channels.

        4. What the deuce are you talking about?! What has mental incapacity got to do with this thread? Are you defending the Boston bombers as mentally ill? You’re claiming these brothers decided to go back to Russia (and quite possibly Chechnya) because they were mentally deficient? Built bombs with detonators because they were not in control of their actions? That’s foolish! And disingenuous. Their background, their online activity, all but indicated the time and place of their attack. And now you want to blame everyone else for what was their conscious act?! Don’t be absurd! It borders on offensive.

          The facts are that the Boston bombers were Muslim and that they committed acts that resulted in multiple deaths. By definition an act of terror. With the stated intention that they wanted to harm Americans. Why do you refuse to acknowledge this and the deeper problem it suggests?

        5. Ok Christy is just a Troll because she just waving her hands while showing no facts…really BBC and Al Jazzera that says it all. BTW the Muslim “crusade” lasted from 6th century until the 15th when the Ottomans took Constantinople in 1453.

        6. And the so-called Christians also took Spain which was once populated by Muslims. You see, you’re just so prejudiced against Muslims generally because your government steal their oil and make attempts to look good to everyone by saying that they’re heroic in everything they do.

        7. Because these terrorists were identified as muslims it should mean therefore that all are terrorists? I don’t defend these sorry excuses for human beings and fyi their uncle, a Muslim himself, even condemned their acts as disgraceful to their community. So why should you call out Islam as evil religion and all its followers as such just because of the few associated had done heinous crimes to your nation?

        9. Christy,

          Stop trying to confuse the issue by regurgitating slogans from the altar of political correctness.

          You still haven’t refuted the facts as they have been revealed:

          1. The bombers in Boston were Muslim;
          2. Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the elder of the two, created a YouTube channel in 2012 devoted to jihad;
          3. Tamerlan was against any suggestion of peace or any association with American figures, such as Martin Luther King;
          4. The Tsarnaev’s uncle expressed that their terrorist leanings go back at least as far back as 2009;
          5. In 2011 the Russian FSS warned the American FBI that that Tamerlan was a devoted follower of radical Islam and a strong believer, enough that they advised the US to watch the Tsarnaevs;
          6. Tamerlan is believed to be responsible for the murder of three Jewish men in Waltham, Massachusetts;
          7. The Tsarnaev brothers used homemade explosive devices to maim hundreds at the Boston marathon and murdered law enforcement officers in their attempt to evade authorities.

          Stop throwing up irrelevant bits of information you may have heard on television and snippets about past events that you have no control over (the Crusades? Really?) to avoid facing the fact that there is a Muslim problem.

          “Al Jazeera?” A creation of the Qatari government. (And recently Al Gore) The same government that has contributed heavily to Islamic charities to establish MADRASAs in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Indonesia that preach extremist Islam and churn out radicalized “soldiers” whose main purpose is the killing of non-Muslims. The one thing Al Jazeera does well is to convince the gullible that the public at large has no need to worry about the Muslim community.

          This “political correctness” trend the American left has popularized is just another term for appeasement. It speaks of a feeble minded refusal to confront evil when it presents itself.

        10. @Christy

          Simple question –

          Who are the people in Spain before the Muslim takeover?

          Well, I know you’ll refuse to answer that one.

  13. We (Hungarians) wish we had the USA as our colonial masters as oppose to the Soviet Union. We rebelled against the Communist and asked the USA in 1956 to come and stay but we got screwed by Vega’s commie friends the “Evil Empire”. We had no say in our fate we were not blessed with American protection so we got F**** by the Soviet Union. My message to those anti Americans in the Philippines is that you are all idiots.

    Reply

  14. It’s sad that many people here of Filipino descent are defending the imperialist and destructive behavior of the US gov’t. Many of you should know better. After all, the US gov’t cited the Christianizing mission as a main reason to subjugate the Philippines in the late 19th century. The pretext of democracy, threat of wmd, and anti communism have been thoroughly accepted by apologist of US imperialism in this blog entry. Shame on you Uncle Tomases.

    It should come natural for those apologists to have sympathy for the victims of Boston bombing, Do you even have sympathy to those victims of drone attacks by the US? Or the victims of US backed thugs like those who took over Afghanistan after the Soviets pulled out?

    Reply

    2. and look! not a single peep about Chechnya’s war for self determination and their abuse of human rights. Remember, these bombers are from Chechnya.

      If you’re going to bark about corruption, don’t just bark at just Arroyo, bark at everyone. If you’re going to bark about countries fighting against terrorists, bark. at. everyone.

      I wonder though, since if you don’t want to be ‘subjected to US’ ‘christianizing mission’ to subjugation Philippines’,would you rather prefer to be subjugated by the extremist terrorists instead?

      *btw, I thought Spain subjugated your peoples to a ‘christianizing mission’, and as far as ‘christianizing’ goes, I have yet to see nobody up in arms against the CBCP and other mitsubishops on their enroachment towards the law on the seperation of state, because I don’t see the US’ likes of the Westboro Baptist Church or the KKK picketing the dead on your lawns as far as I’m concerned*

      Reply

    3. Yes, I should know better. If US bases is still around in the Philippines. Chicom could not be doing what they’re doing now with our shorelines.

      “Do you even have sympathy to those victims of drone attacks by the US?”

      How many casualties are in your mind? You don’t even know that they’re being use as shields by terrorists.

      In Iraq, compare the numbers of people’s lives that are saved if Saddam Hussein is still around with the casualties of the US force friendly fire. Do the people that were freed by US invasion of Iraq have your sympathy? I can tell you that they’re hundred of thousand.

      And how many are your casualties of drone attacks?

      From you –

      “It’s sad that many people here of Filipino descent are defending the imperialist and destructive behavior of the US gov’t.”

      Be sad and if that’s the way your mind works, I will not even be sad for you. You only want your narrative to be the only correct one.

      Reply

      2. I don’t hate America as a whole but I don’t go on to make them out as saints either. It seems you share the same view as those in the Fox News channel who still pander to redneck mentality when confronted with issues such as the proposal of gun control laws.
        I don’t want to label Americans in the same way you label Muslims. Cheers.

        Reply

        1. Fox News is popular because they provide both sides of the story and not just the paid provides of the Left (CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS). Unfortunately for you but not me it is a right to own firearms in the USA. It is one of the few right that says” IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BARE ARMS”. I don’t label Muslims they label themselves.

        2. I don’t live in America thanks. I live in Australia where violence isn’t as rampant as your country because of effective gun control. I still don’t hate your country, though. Cheers.

        3. USA has 300+ million people and Australia has 23 million so Australia would be the 6th in the USA in population. No comparison. “I don’t want to label Americans in the same way you label Muslims. Cheers” or how Australia treats the Aborigines.

        4. Or how about how your ancestors treated the first nations, hmmm? The one thing though is that our government has apologised to our indigenous peoples officially on TV and there have been reforms to improve their way of life and those that keep it from happening don’t even represent Australia.

      3. Under Saddam, there was a thriving Christian minority population, when he was gone now all those left have exiled to other more prosperous countries. This is something you don’t know and by far shows how little you know about the other side of the conflict- this is from someone who have spoken to an Iraqi Christian refugee.

        Reply

  15. I see us getting tired of wars and dealing with Muslims and corrupt countries, with that said, trouble is that Liberals world-wide feel they should be compensated because they never reached their full potential and yet many that spit in the face of the American tax payer also collect social welfare as an immigrant, including the Pinoy.

    Where’s the outrage on China occupying Spratly Islands? US has already stopped worrying about countries that have kicked them out and maybe it’s time you get more funding from your Chinese bosses, the mega mall and condo builders, shipping companies that still get cosemetics and soaps laced with mercury and some how turn everything around and kick Uncle Sam once again. Reason China hasn’t left I am sure, there’s no will from US government to waste anymore time just to get kicked for making another corral reef blunder and once again your boss China gives money for two days of protest against the US, where’s the outcry now! case closed, how much money you get from SM mall Chinese dog to write this article, everybody knows, try to make it a Yellow Zombie thing again, not.. you all work and get paid well from China.

    Reply

  16. Actually Mr. Arndt I doubt whether you really know the story of the Australian Aborigine, particularly as it is today. I won’t be politically correct about it. Here are some snippets for you: Aborigines are entitled to additional and race specific housing, education and other entitlements. There are specific service delivery policies solely for aborigines. There are a set number of government jobs only open to Aborigines regardless of competitive merit.

    Most Australians would agree that historically the Aborigines were treated badly. In more recent times many Aboriginal leaders have admitted that the aborigine people have let themselves down by playing a game of shame the white man so we can get more freebies which has lead to more problems in the Aborignal community.

    An independent Aboriginal commission managed and operated by aborigines had to be shut down due to corruption after squandering billions of taxpayer money on cheap loans and rorts to their “cousins”. After years of allowing a dual legal system to operate (tribal law) in some areas on the basis of “white man” rule shouldn’t apply, the government again had to step in due to the ongoing physical and sexual abuse of women and minors. This included cases of murder that under tribal law was punished by a wound to the leg.

    Apologies to all for being of the topic on this page, but it was time to stop the bullshit about the aborigines particularly as it is today. If you are american then I can probably throw more crap about the native indians.

    Reply

    1. PS. The murder rate in the US is about 3 times that of Australia. Its based on murder per 100,000 of population, not raw numbers of murder.

      Reply

    2. David was just countering Christy utopia comments and never stated the USA was perfect. Just the opposite the USA has a very checkered past concerning minorities, i.e. slavery and the native Indians (I do know the story which almost mirrors the Australian Aborigines). As for crime when you have a free society things sometimes are not great but my point is if the USA is so bad why do people risk their life to come here or leave their entire family to be here? It is also harder to enforce laws in very high populations.

      Reply

Leave a Reply to Jim Arndt Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.