You forget that nobody asked America to save the World:).

Oh well, you know WW1 wasn't about saving the world from the back-then not so evil Germans, but about American loans to the Entente powers. After defeating them, who just wanted a bigger slice of the cake - I note, German imperialism was the same like British or French- the British and the French received even more colonies, while Germany got nothing, nay - they've got to pay for the whole war! Same for Austria-Hungary, which was destroyed wholly. You don't know what destroying the Habsburg Empire did in Central-Europe.. maybe a bad comparison but the Habsburgs were quite like Saddam in Iraq.. they stabilized a region which would be the puppet of the great powers because their tensions were uncontrollable and unsolvable. After some 15 years these countries all fell under the influence of Hitler, who played with them like marionette-puppets.

Then came WW2. You once again didn't save the world, your idiot Roosevelt loved Stalin so much, that he found no problem with Communist states in Trans-Europe. Thanks to Churchill, for example my home country Hungary became on the famous piece of papers 90% Soviet 10% Western. About 100 million people fell under the Soviet boots.. do you think they love America for its role? You could have done much more if you wanted.

Don't say me you couldn't risk WW3. You have had nukes, the Soviets didn't. The Soviets lost 20 million people. The U.S lost 400.000 men. In percentages, 13.77 vs. 0.32. Your economy was intact, nay, prospering. The Soviet Union? A devastated country. And this is the worst scenario, war! What if at least you try? Just try. That's all.

But of course I see saving the world is not an universal viewpoint. If you do something good, it is saving the world. If not, then no problem, it happened, you cannot save everyone. The reality is, that America acted as they saw fit in their interests. I don't blame you for it, this is political reality. But then don't say please you saved everyone.

Then came 1956, Hungarian revolution. U.S promised help, but not had even in mind to intervene. No problem, some 10.000 Hungarian died, 200.000 escaped to the West. You accepted, that Trans-Europe is a Russkie playground, and that's all. You did nothing important and good in this region.

I could go on. Now you think you liberated Iraq. Why don't you see that American troops brought nothing but death to this country? They are on the verge of a civil war, even with American troops present. What do you think, what will happen after you go out? Do you think they will love you? Eventually Saddam would have died. Then these tensions, which you can't handle, wouldn't be connected with your American intervention.

You are losing another war, because you don't understand the region. You don't know what you want, you make half-work. And when you go out, it will be the symbolic defeat of America in the "war on terror". It will be the first domino, which will destroy American superpowership, quite like what Afghanistan used to be for the Soviets. BTW.. Afghanistan.. there you also didn't make any progress. In the same second NATO troops and American troops go out, Taliban power will be reestablished.


As a final consequence:
You should really know better not to say that you saved everyone. America is generally a good power with positive people and positive intentions. America is(was?) an advancing force in history. But you are not just the big bright sun. You have also your dark side. This dark side is, what I described above. Your pride changes to vanity, and vanity is the gravest sin.

IMHO, Iraq should be America's last mission. Then you should withdraw, and try to not get boggled down in the conflicts of the world.

You forget that nobody asked America to save the World:).

--kdgergo

You didn't have to....we're always willing to help. Can the World say the same? I wonder if you'd be so snarky if we hadn't acted as we did. We'd probably be disliked much worse than we are, because we COULD have helped, but didn't. But then, it wouldn't have mattered; Geobbel's Propaganda Ministry would have long since expunged the US from the history of the world by now.

German imperialism was the same like British or French- the British and the French received even more colonies, while Germany got nothing, nay - they've got to pay for the whole war!

---kdgergo

Which Wilson opposed, saying it would breed hard feelings in the postwar world. He was right; it paved the way for Hitler, and we had to go do it all over again, only on a much worse scale.

You don't know what destroying the Habsburg Empire did in Central-Europe.. maybe a bad comparison but the Habsburgs were quite like Saddam in Iraq.. they stabilized a region which would be the puppet of the great powers because their tensions were uncontrollable and unsolvable. After some 15 years these countries all fell under the influence of Hitler, who played with them like marionette-puppets.

I know exactly what it did, just as the collapse of the USSR had a similar effect there. Some people simply can't govern themselves and have to live under the thumb of a greater power. The Iraqis might be that way, too, but they at least deserve the chance to try...which, even given their immensely long history, they've never, ever had.

Then came WW2. You once again didn't save the world, your idiot Roosevelt loved Stalin so much, that he found no problem with Communist states in Trans-Europe. Thanks to Churchill, for example my home country Hungary became on the famous piece of papers 90% Soviet 10% Western. About 100 million people fell under the Soviet boots.. do you think they love America for its role? You could have done much more if you wanted.

Oh, we saved the world, just not your little piece of it. Roosevelt was a Democrat; even then, it would seem, Democrats admired dictators. But.....in 1980, along came Ronald Reagan, a Republican, the greatest since Lincoln. He, using American wealth, military and economic power, rectified Roosevelt's self-blinded error and freed all of Communist Europe. You're welcome.

Don't say me you couldn't risk WW3. You have had nukes, the Soviets didn't. The Soviets lost 20 million people. The U.S lost 400.000 men.

One reason for this was because Stalin was a paranoid psychopath who purged his military of all relevant talent, which left his vaunted Red Army virtually leaderless. He also wasted the lives of his men, not letting them retreat when faced with overwhelming opposition, and irrationally throwing them in to grind away against superior forces.

Your economy was intact, nay, prospering. The Soviet Union? A devastated country. And this is the worst scenario, war! What if at least you try? Just try. That's all.

We sent them 40%-50% of their war machine, a fact of which Stalin was so ashamed that he told his propagandists to tell the people and the military that the "USA" stamped on all their equipment was short for "Get the Sonofabitch Adolf", in Cyrillic. They also benefitted more than a little from the Marshall Plan, unless memory suffers. Stalin repaid us by spying, shoring up defenses in Eastern Europe, closing off Berlin and stealing plans for the A-bomb.

But then don't say please you saved everyone.

Everyone in the world has benefitted from the existence of the USA. Some ways more tangible than others, but the positive effect is palpable.

Then came 1956, Hungarian revolution. U.S promised help, but not had even in mind to intervene. No problem, some 10.000 Hungarian died, 200.000 escaped to the West. You accepted, that Trans-Europe is a Russkie playground, and that's all. You did nothing important and good in this region.

You're right here....and it's sad. But, we were still blinded by the Russian Bear. "We Will Bury You...." rung very loudly in the 50s.
Of those 200,000, though....I have to wonder how many eventually came to America, found undreamed success, and sent money back to their relatives to bring them here?

I could go on. Now you think you liberated Iraq. Why don't you see that American troops brought nothing but death to this country? They are on the verge of a civil war, even with American troops present. What do you think, what will happen after you go out? Do you think they will love you? Eventually Saddam would have died. Then these tensions, which you can't handle, wouldn't be connected with your American intervention.

So, we should just have continued to let Saddam rape and pillage his own nation, extort money from the UN (much of which was given freely, however), terrorize and murder his own people in droves, and just maybe, start up his WMD programs again, after he saw that we wouldn't do much to stop him? And you call Roosevelt an idiot.

You are losing another war, because you don't understand the region. You don't know what you want, you make half-work. And when you go out, it will be the symbolic defeat of America in the "war on terror". It will be the first domino, which will destroy American superpowership, quite like what Afghanistan used to be for the Soviets. BTW.. Afghanistan.. there you also didn't make any progress. In the same second NATO troops and American troops go out, Taliban power will be reestablished.

I agree with you, here. Now....if it was up to me and many Americans, there would be burned, bombed-out, flattened cities all over Iraq...wherever the insurgents held a stronghold. Burned, shot-up mosques, that had been used to store weapons and hide/abet insurgents.
It's the self-loathing America-haters in our midst who sap our determination; who convince us we have to be "nice" in fighting our wars. It's why we lost in Korea and Vietnam and why we're having such a hard time in Iraq. Hard to fight a war with one hand tied back, you know?

As a final consequence: You should really know better not to say that you saved everyone. America is generally a good power with positive people and positive intentions. America is(was?) an advancing force in history. But you are not just the big bright sun. You have also your dark side. This dark side is, what I described above. Your pride changes to vanity, and vanity is the gravest sin.

Maybe not everyone, but billions of people the world over owe what freedoms they have to us...to our Capitalist economy, to our willingness to help, and to our general determination to stand against evil and oppression when we can.

IMHO, Iraq should be America's last mission. Then you should withdraw, and try to not get boggled down in the conflicts of the world.

Okay; sure, but tell you what....Remember that. You'll be on your own from then on.
Don't even come here, then, looking for help against some enemy power, if/when you need it. We're trying not to get involved in the conflicts of the world.

We need to hold ourselv es to a higher standard, and not stoop to the level of those terrorists who do such horrible things.

Stoop to terrorist levels? I have yet to see an American strap a bomb to himself and kill himself and as many Muslims as possible in a terrorist attack. I have yet to see Americans record themselves cutting Muslim heads off while having their faces covered. I have yet to see Americans, by the millions, wanting the complete destruction of all Muslims. Funny how you think we should hold ourselves to higher standards yet the reason we are not getting anywhere in the war is because we do our best to follow the rules of war while fighting an enemy that cares not for the rules. While we try to kill as little innocent people as possible when attacking the enemy, they try everything possible to kill as many innocent people, including their own, while attacking us. Higher standards? Our men and women are dying because of these rules of war they follow so proudly.

The idiots, if you wanna call them that.

Let's see, they know it's against the law yet they did it anyways and got caught. Hmmm, if that's not an idiot I don't know what is.

So, tell me, the news....from many sources, that there was torture....and the like...are wrong?

Was there ever proof that any torture, allowed by the US Gov't, ever took place? Cause again, if you wanna focus on what a few "idiots" did, then our Police force (example) sucks cause of all those people who constantly break the laws when driving. You use the Media as if they have a reputation of telling the truth, as if they never twist stories to their liking, as if they have never lied before. But I guess drmiller already set you straight on this:

Try again Lucas: Link

LOL.

Tell me, how can it be that so many news agencies were wrong?

Hmmm, I don't know, maybe because the story sells? Maybe cause they are all in it for the fame and glory? I don't know about you, but after seeing that link that drmiller posted I would not be asking that question anymore.

I can blame a government for not doing anything to stop it, for allowing it to happen.

Sure you can, that doesn't mean they are guilty of it happening. If the police could actually keep an eye on every person in this country, crimes would never happen. The reason we have laws is because people can not be trusted to do the right thing at all times. How does the Gov't stop people from committing crimes with 100% accuracy? It's impossible.That, however, does not mean the Gov't condones the crime, what matters is what is done with the criminal, a proper punishment.

Yes, yes...a slap on the hand compared to what those individuals when through.

So what you are saying is that these soldiers deserve to be tortured as well? They deserve a punishment equal, if not worse, than what these individuals went through? How can you advocate against torture while wanting criminals to be punished severely? I will never understand people who contradict their own arguments.

Oh, you know what...some of them weren't even terrorists!

They were punished, what exactly did you want happen to them? What exactly would have been a harsher punishment enough? No food? Solitary confinement for years? Embarrassment? And what difference does it make if they weren't terrorist? Should terrorist be treated worse than non-terrorist? Torture is torture regardless to who it's done to. If you wanna blame the US Gov't for the actions of these soldiers, then Islam is responsible for the acts of the terrorist and insurgents who claim to do it in the name of Islam.

Ahh, and please, consider global warming as a serious threat. American pollution makes up the bulk of the pollution in the Earth, and everyone else sees non-compliance of the U.S to the Kyoto Treaty as irresponsible arrogance.

I love it when people ignore the pollution the rest of the world creates simply because we are considered to make more pollution. The problem to solving global warming is making the US make less polution, everyone else? They can continue.

I know exactly what it did, just as the collapse of the USSR had a similar effect there. Some people simply can't govern themselves and have to live under the thumb of a greater power. The Iraqis might be that way, too, but they at least deserve the chance to try...which, even given their immensely long history, they've never, ever had.

It seems quite easy for America (the whole continent), with it's mighty 400 years of history, to critize countries who have hundred, no, Thousands of years of past cultural warring, grudges, and others..

You just don't realise the luck of america (and canada) of being a "new" country, with not huge past to hold on it's shoulders.

Until you can prove it, or i find it. I'm calling BS.

Get a copy of the June 1 2006 issue of Time Magazine. Local library has one on file or they should. Then get the issue two weeks later where they printed the retraction.

"Waterboarding is not a mean of torture"

It is uncomfortable but since we use it on Americans I don't count it as tortuer. It is not that bad unles you are prone to panic. Yes, it was done to me.

But, they can do something by doing what they can to make sure it doesnt happen. Yes, it may happen...but they can try to make it happen less.

Silent Poet,

There will always be law breakers. The people in the military are forced to go through these classes every year they are in the military. It is put in their record that they took the class as proof they knew they were doing wrong should it ever happen. So far you have one instance of people being tortured out of the thousands captured. Once it was known the people responsible were arrested, tried convicted and sentenced to jail. I ask again what more can the government do?

Oh well, you know WW1 wasn't about saving the world from the back-then not so evil Germans, but about American loans to the Entente powers. After defeating them, who just wanted a bigger slice of the cake - I note, German imperialism was the same like British or French- the British and the French received even more colonies, while Germany got nothing, nay - they've got to pay for the whole war! Same for Austria-Hungary, which was destroyed wholly. You don't know what destroying the Habsburg Empire did in Central-Europe.. maybe a bad comparison but the Habsburgs were quite like Saddam in Iraq.. they stabilized a region which would be the puppet of the great powers because their tensions were uncontrollable and unsolvable. After some 15 years these countries all fell under the influence of Hitler, who played with them like marionette-puppets.

I might add that America got nothing as well. The debts that Germany had to pay was paid to the European powers. The terms for surrender was written up by the French without the US being involved. At that time the US was not considered a super power and had little say in what happened with that war. The President of the United States did not like the terms for surrender but could not change it because he had not seen it until it had been agreed to by the Germans. I agree it was bad what the French did to Germany and it was the reason for WWII. America did not take a back seat that time and you see the difference.

Maybe you don't see, but Europe and America are natural allies, a strong European Union would be better for the U.S than some loose group of countries. A weak E.U cannot defend itself against the hordes of Muslims immigrants, and if we got destroyed you will remain pretty much alone on the world scene. If we are doomed, you will be doomed too.

I disagree with you here. Europe has been using America as an ATM since WWII Every EU nation state has been getting money from America yearly since the end of WWII. America was dragged into the cold war created by the European nations with its creation of NATO which caused the USSR to come up with the WTO Warsaw Treaty Organization. America has spent trillions of dollars providing protection to Europe over the last 55 years. Whenever it was advantageous to Europe we were best buddies but if America wanted to protect its interest we stood almost alone. Only the UK suppored us without complaint. The mess in the Middle East was a creation of Europe before WWI. Look around the world. What countries has America taken as its own? Other than the North American continent which we colinized America has not taken any other land or people. We bought Alaska from Russia. Oops we took Hawaii. We took the Philippines from Spain for the Spanish/American war then we offered them freedom or statehood. They choose freedom and we have been friends ever since. Contrast that with Lybia, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait; Europeans created those nations, treated the people like crap and see what America has to deal with? When America freed the slaves America bought land in Africa called it Lyberia and rounded up all the African slaves and those that wanted to go back could go back to Africa and try to find their homeland or live in Lyberia or say in America. Has any other nation done this? So please don't tell me how great Europe is to America, we have dead Americans that paid the price of European freedom from the Nazis and the USSR. Every European Nation we "loaned" money to promised to pay it back when they could. When America was going broke in the 70's fighting the cold war did any of those nations even offer to help us out? NO! Did any of those nations say hey, you don't need to give us our half billion dollars this year? NO! They got upset becaue Congress was hinting about cutting funding. America gets attacked and only the UK offers militay assistance we had to ask everyone else. The first time America has asked for help since the revolutionary war and the lackluster response we received is shameful. Did the President of the United States call in favors, call in IOU's demand that Europe help because they owe us? NOPE! We did and do what we think is right and if you want to join us fine if not that is also fine. And when Europe asks for help again we will be there to help agian because we are stupid.

KdGergo wrote: You forget that nobody asked America to save the World:).

You are correct, European powers begged us to save them when they were losing WWI, WWII, the Cold War, Korea, Vietnam, and Kuwait.

WWI the French begged us for help.

WWII the French begged us for help, the UK asked us for help.

Europe created NATO making the USSR think they were going to attack Nato begged us to join. We had to keep whole divisions of troops there since the end of WWII as your body guards.

The Korean Conflict the United Nations begged us to go in there and help, then they demanded we stay and protect the South Korean people, it is supposed to be on a rotation but all of Europe forgot to replace us the last 50 years. But thats ok since the UN is supposed to reimburse us for our troops there. oops the check bounced in 1955.

Vietnam the French again begged us to come in and help. We said thanks but no thanks. Then Kennedy decided to make nice to the French and sent in troops. oops we got hosed again!

Iran was invaded by Iraq, and even Iran begged us for help!

Iraq invaded Kuwait and Europe cried that they needed the oil. The Kuwaiti government split and ran straight away to the US begging for help to find out that they were second in line to Europe. Now all of Europe was our best friend and wanted to help us beat the 4th largest army in the world. Yeah they stood behind us like a wall of feathers in a hurricane.

But when it came to enforcing the surrender agreement, the United Nations did not want to do that. Europe said it was too soon to tell if Iraq was in violation. Oh right those same nations that said don't go were being paid by Iraq to say don't go into Iraq. But America is the bad guy in the world.

You are right nobody asked, they BEGGED US!

Thanks for your support.

But of course I see saving the world is not an universal viewpoint. If you do something good, it is saving the world. If not, then no problem, it happened, you cannot save everyone. The reality is, that America acted as they saw fit in their interests. I don't blame you for it, this is political reality. But then don't say please you saved everyone.

My Friend, you and your nation had three choices, You could speak Russian, You could speak German, or you could take the example of the United States and declare independence and fight for your own freedom. You seem perfectly happy to let Americans fight and die for you but unwilling to fight and die for yourself. Is America perfect? No! Not even close. President Dubcek (not sure of spelling) Set the example for you and only 10,000 people tried to win your freedom. When we declared our independence we went in with an all or nothing mindset. Victory or death. We pledged our lives, land, and family fortune to winning the war with England. Had your nation joined the fight I have no doubt your people would have won; your nation did not and lost. The reason Iraq was so easy to beat was because the people wanted us to win they wanted to be free. But just like your country they expect us to do the hard work as well as the easy stuff.

Please understand when I use the word YOU I did not mean you personaly.

I have to apologize to everyone I made a mistake. It happens because I do this from memory and don’t spend time looking up my facts. Being old I erred and I am sorry.
It was not TIME MAGAZINE it was NEWSWEEK. It was not June first it was May 9th I am so sorry!


(CNN) -- Newsweek magazine issued a retraction Monday of a May 9 report on the alleged desecration of the Quran at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Paladin, you twist our arguments. Twisting is changing the meaning as well as the facts. Aside from that you make up facts, based on your own perception. Then in support of those facts, you don't provide anything which helps you conclude those ideas, no websites, no books I can look up in the librbary, no digital media, nothing. Just well this is why I think and it's fact. So there. Basically I'm calling you a liar. Mmmmmmm k?

Mr. Greene,

That is hate speech! I should sue! lol

I don't lie. I did not twist anything you wrote I copied it and quoted that is why it is highlited in yellow; so how can it be twisted? I am new to this site and I have yet to learn how to post links and all that fancy stuff. I have told you to look at the actual reports from the EPA and the UN which should not be hard to find since you are much better at surfing the web than I am.

It seems quite easy for America (the whole continent), with it's mighty 400 years of history, to critize countries who have hundred, no, Thousands of years of past cultural warring, grudges, and others.. You just don't realise the luck of america (and canada) of being a "new" country, with not huge past to hold on it's shoulders

---Cikomyr

No, it wasn't luck; it was hard work and determination. This, coupled with persoanl freedoms, that is to say, the minimized involvement of government in people's affairs, during the first 150-200 years or so, led to our emergence as an economic power.
Left to their own devices, people will find ways to succeed, significantly buoying the tax base and the economy. It's only when government gets involved on a large scale, with increased taxes, legislation and overregulation, that major growth is impeded. We've seen most of this in the last 40 years. It's something the European nations, with their oppressive castes, arrogant, "Divinely"-imposed monarchies and later, subsequent fascination with Socialist ideals, never seemed to have learned. I should count our own modern Democratic Party among the unlearned, then, too.


Paladin---I'm not sure you know, but you don't have to make individual replies to each and every point and person. You can just go up and down the thread, highlighting and quoting each point, and it'll put it all into one reply.

It seems quite easy for America (the whole continent), with it's mighty 400 years of history, to critize countries who have hundred, no, Thousands of years of past cultural warring, grudges, and others.. You just don't realise the luck of america (and canada) of being a "new" country, with not huge past to hold on it's shoulders.

Yup we are a new country only 230 years old not 400. In those 230 years we surpassed the thousand year old governments in every thing except cruelty and stupidity. France is much older than America. They can barely feed themselves and are fast working their way to third world status. America created a way of living that is much different than the rest of the world and between 1950 an now we became a world power then a super power and now the only super power. Why? Because we did not do what they did. We did not try to colonize the world we tried to be good neighbors and when a bully stepped on the world scene we tried to do what was right. Any nation can do what we did. China is trying to do what we did. Japan tried to do what we did and failed and is trying agian. The magic we did was we choose not to hold a grudge longer than one generation. there was 70 years of the Soviet Union and as soon as it fell apart people started to hate the guy next door because their great grandfathers did not like each other forgetting the fact that it was in the past and not worth killing someone over. They lived in peace while under the thumb of the Soviets but now free they go back to hate. It was their choice.

Paladin---I'm not sure you know, but you don't have to make individual replies to each and every point and person. You can just go up and down the thread, highlighting and quoting each point, and it'll put it all into one reply.

Yeah but this way I can keep to one point rather than answering with a shotgun. It is harder to lose a point in the mix this way.

You didn't have to....we're always willing to help. Can the World say the same?

Your willingness to help is appreciated, but nobody likes armed prophets. I am referring to Iraq.

We'd probably be disliked much worse than we are, because we COULD have helped, but didn't.

That's right. This is what I am talking about. This is why America is not liked here - you COULD have done a much better job if you wanted.

Which Wilson opposed, saying it would breed hard feelings in the postwar world. He was right; it paved the way for Hitler, and we had to go do it all over again, only on a much worse scale.

Wilson opposed it, but that means nothing in itself. What did he to enforce his ideas? His country financed the war from 1916 on. It was his army which saved the French, thus the Entente from collapsing. There were there the famous Fourteen Points of him.. Results? He let loose a new barbarian era in Central and Trans-Europe. Opposing means nothing in itself. And you seem to forget, it was not just you who had to go over again, the whole Trans-Europe region had to pay dearly for Wilson's idiotic mistake.

I know exactly what it did, just as the collapse of the USSR had a similar effect there. Some people simply can't govern themselves and have to live under the thumb of a greater power.

No, this is not true. You don't know the circumstances here, don't judge hundreds of millions of people for the fault what they did not commit themselves. Basically, had the Entente a reasonable peace in mind, and not some kind of a Trans-European colonization, this region would be peaceful and prospering. Have a look at Cikomyr's comment, it explains the problem much better.

Ronald Reagan, a Republican... freed all of Communist Europe.

America did much to "free" us. Why have I to ".."? Have a look on Hungarian prime ministers of the past 16 years! Three of them was in the Party before the "transition". One of them fought against 1956, one of them was an internal secret agent to stomp down dissenters, one of them was a Party youngling leader.
Their connections didn't cease to exist in the transition, and the first goverment swam in debts. The economy had to be changed rapidly, the country almost drown in the debts, so the only "solution" was massive privatization, selling a factory for the hundredth of its worth was not an option, but a neccessity. Guess who got these factories.. Economic power soon translated to political power, they bought up the media. Nowadays Hungary is the same corrupt, backward and full-of-fear country what it used to be in the Communist era. If you want yourself good, you shut up your mouth and don't say a word about politics, or else you will be fired. No, I'm not saying that this is all of your fault. It is just the logic course history followed because America doesn't like finer points.

Also, your political leadership likes these communist, but actually bootlicker band more, because it can be handled easily and are always disposable. So even this rectifation of Roosevelt's self-blinded error wasn't such a bless.. not to mention the lost 45 years, and going back after WW1 the another 35 lost.

Everyone in the world has benefitted from the existence of the USA. Some ways more tangible than others, but the positive effect is palpable.

True. Pity is you never looked at finer points, never thought of consequences. Complex problems require complex answers. In all of the three case I mentioned, if you behave with a little more responsibility, with a little more caution, you could have shapen history to a better course.

I have to wonder how many eventually came to America, found undreamed success, and sent money back to their relatives to bring them here?

Finding undreamed success part is true, that is what is great about America.
Second part is quite a nonsense, we lived behind the Iron Curtain, remember? There was no such a thing after 1956 like emigrating to the U.S. The borders were closed, till 1970 Hungarian citizens were not allowed to go even in Yugoslavia, not America!
Even in the 80s, when finally you were sometimes allowed to go to Austria, you were allowed to bring just a limited amount of cash with you.
I cannot be sure, but Americans don't seem to realize what it is to live without basic liberties and freedoms. Past 90 years in this region was a very unhappy one. You blame us for not having the could do mentality.. why don't you see that history played not nice with us? We weren't and aren't in control for a moment,it's quite hard not being doom and gloom here..

So, we should just have continued to let Saddam rape and pillage his own nation, extort money from the UN (much of which was given freely, however), terrorize and murder his own people in droves, and just maybe, start up his WMD programs again, after he saw that we wouldn't do much to stop him? And you call Roosevelt an idiot.

You shouldn't have fucked up things first place. Since the Gulf War there was an embargo against Iraq, people starved and lacked medicine. You used depleted-uranium , napalm.. of course they blame this on you, and they are right! It wasn't Saddam who decided on the embargo and on the the American weapon choice.

Then in 2003 you invaded Iraq, as you put it, didn"t let Saddam to rape and pillage his own nation, terrorize his own people and restart his WMD programs again. But you seem to fail to realize, the current state of Iraq is worse than it was four years ago. You brought chaos with yourselves, because you were unable to handle the region. And your prestige has been hit, thanks to the false WMD threat, which was made up. The "evidence" sublimated. Yeah, Saddam could have started another program, but fact is, he didn't. Now you make things worse. Your domestic jesters(Democrats, largely) want to pull out, and American people approved it. Another unfinished job. Great work, America!

It's the self-loathing America-haters in our midst who sap our determination; who convince us we have to be "nice" in fighting our wars. It's why we lost in Korea and Vietnam and why we're having such a hard time in Iraq. Hard to fight a war with one hand tied back, you know?

That kind of liberalism is a plague which infected all what was susceptible for it.
You can believe me, I'm not glad America's backbone has been deformed by this. But we are after Vietnam, planners could have considered this domestic sickness. They didn't, and thanks to them, you are losing another war.

Okay; sure, but tell you what....Remember that. You'll be on your own from then on. Don't even come here, then, looking for help against some enemy power, if/when you need it. We're trying not to get involved in the conflicts of the world.

I have had a reason to say that: America is weakened by such unfinished journeys. If you cannot finish a war, don't begin it. It is your interest not to have such pointless wars. America should redefine its foreign policy: isolationism or considerate interventionism. One mustn't go to a war without plans.

I might add that America got nothing as well. The debts that Germany had to pay was paid to the European powers. The terms for surrender was written up by the French without the US being involved. At that time the US was not considered a super power and had little say in what happened with that war. The President of the United States did not like the terms for surrender but could not change it because he had not seen it until it had been agreed to by the Germans. I agree it was bad what the French did to Germany and it was the reason for WWII. America did not take a back seat that time and you see the difference.

This is not true. America loaned money to the Entente Powers, in case the Germans won, this money would be wasted. So America was interested in an Entente victory, and as a the final chain, could have dictated his own terms on the European powers. So the President of the United States could have changed the world, he even got a program for this, the Wilsonian Ideals.. Shame he forgot to make his ideals come true.

My Friend, you and your nation had three choices, You could speak Russian, You could speak German, or you could take the example of the United States and declare independence and fight for your own freedom. You seem perfectly happy to let Americans fight and die for you but unwilling to fight and die for yourself. Is America perfect? No! Not even close. President Dubcek (not sure of spelling) Set the example for you and only 10,000 people tried to win your freedom. When we declared our independence we went in with an all or nothing mindset. Victory or death. We pledged our lives, land, and family fortune to winning the war with England. Had your nation joined the fight I have no doubt your people would have won; your nation did not and lost. The reason Iraq was so easy to beat was because the people wanted us to win they wanted to be free. But just like your country they expect us to do the hard work as well as the easy stuff. Please understand when I use the word YOU I did not mean you personaly.

Dubcek was a Czech, not a Hungarian. Our controversial hero was called Nagy Imre, you will know his name if you know it at all as Imre Nagy. Your choices seem also a little bit whacky, especially that we did number 3 and have been defeated. This was 1956(we use here this date as a phenomenon).
And it is easy to say that win your freedom, but England is not the Soviet Union, the Atlantic is not a land border, and the redcoats are not tanks. And BTW please don't belittle 10.000 men(210.000 if emigrants counted), we were a nation of 9 million people.. Now your country wants to pull out because of the loss of 3000 troops.. Don't you think it is a little bit ironic to lecture us about losses? Hungary alone lost more people than America in WW2 too...

Wilson opposed it, but that means nothing in itself. What did he to enforce his ideas? His country financed the war from 1916 on. It was his army which saved the French, thus the Entente from collapsing. There were there the famous Fourteen Points of him.. Results? He let loose a new barbarian era in Central and Trans-Europe. Opposing means nothing in itself. And you seem to forget, it was not just you who had to go over again, the whole Trans-Europe region had to pay dearly for Wilson's idiotic mistake.

There was this thing called the League of Nations started by President Wilson, That was where all world disputes were supposed to be handled until they got bogged down in politics and buddy fucking. Sounds like the UN. What happened to the LN? They made rules that nobody enforced and it fell apart. Just like the UN is doing now.

No, this is not true. You don't know the circumstances here, don't judge hundreds of millions of people for the fault what they did not commit themselves. Basically, had the Entente a reasonable peace in mind, and not some kind of a Trans-European colonization, this region would be peaceful and prospering. Have a look at Cikomyr's comment, it explains the problem much better.

As I said before, The USSR fell and instead of forming a nation that works they chose to piss on each other. You want us to stay out of peoples business and you want us to ride in and save you. Save yourselves or at least try and we will help.

America did much to "free" us. Why have I to ".."? Have a look on Hungarian prime ministers of the past 16 years! Three of them was in the Party before the "transition". One of them fought against 1956, one of them was an internal secret agent to stomp down dissenters, one of them was a Party youngling leader. Their connections didn't cease to exist in the transition, and the first goverment swam in debts. The economy had to be changed rapidly, the country almost drown in the debts, so the only "solution" was massive privatization, selling a factory for the hundredth of its worth was not an option, but a neccessity. Guess who got these factories.. Economic power soon translated to political power, they bought up the media. Nowadays Hungary is the same corrupt, backward and full-of-fear country what it used to be in the Communist era. If you want yourself good, you shut up your mouth and don't say a word about politics, or else you will be fired. No, I'm not saying that this is all of your fault. It is just the logic course history followed because America doesn't like finer points.

Unless I misunderstood, your people voted for these people. We elected Clintion, this is proof that America is not perfect. If you don't like the corruption, never mind I can't help you. I understand your bitterness but I can't deal with people that choose not to help themselves.

True. Pity is you never looked at finer points, never thought of consequences. Complex problems require complex answers. In all of the three case I mentioned, if you behave with a little more responsibility, with a little more caution, you could have shapen history to a better course.

A true pity that at no time in your history have you as a people bothered to free yourelves. All America can do is show you what we did and help if asked. We are not a people that believe we need to spoon feed each and every nation on the planet. The finer points are not that fine the complex is not that complex if you follow the simple rules. Do not allow corruption, do not restrain capitalizm, do not hate.

I cannot be sure, but Americans don't seem to realize what it is to live without basic liberties and freedoms. Past 90 years in this region was a very unhappy one. You blame us for not having the could do mentality.. why don't you see that history played not nice with us? We weren't and aren't in control for a moment,it's quite hard not being doom and gloom here..

This is why you don't make it as a nation. Get up out of the mud and build a nation. If your leaders won't do it then get rid of them. enough people will make a change but if you don't try you will never win.

You shouldn't have fucked up things first place. Since the Gulf War there was an embargo against Iraq, people starved and lacked medicine. You used depleted-uranium , napalm.. of course they blame this on you, and they are right! It wasn't Saddam who decided on the embargo and on the the American weapon choice.

First it was the UN that ran that mess not America and I believe your nation is a member of the UN. Second, the last time we used napalm was WWII the new stuff in Vietnam did not have any napalm in it but they called it napalm, and none was used in Iraq to my knowledge.

I have had a reason to say that: America is weakened by such unfinished journeys. If you cannot finish a war, don't begin it. It is your interest not to have such pointless wars. America should redefine its foreign policy: isolationism or considerate interventionism. One mustn't go to a war without plans.

I agree with you here. Each time we pull out of a country with the job unfinished it hurts us deeply. What you fail to understand is that the group that wants to pull out is saying so to gain power and when they have it they will still have to stay and fight only then they will blame it on President Bush. Don't confuse US politics with US policy they are not always the same.

You are correct, European powers begged us to save them when they were losing WWI, WWII, the Cold War, Korea, Vietnam, and Kuwait. WWI the French begged us for help. WWII the French begged us for help, the UK asked us for help. Europe created NATO making the USSR think they were going to attack Nato begged us to join. We had to keep whole divisions of troops there since the end of WWII as your body guards. The Korean Conflict the United Nations begged us to go in there and help, then they demanded we stay and protect the South Korean people, it is supposed to be on a rotation but all of Europe forgot to replace us the last 50 years. But thats ok since the UN is supposed to reimburse us for our troops there. oops the check bounced in 1955. Vietnam the French again begged us to come in and help. We said thanks but no thanks. Then Kennedy decided to make nice to the French and sent in troops. oops we got hosed again! Iran was invaded by Iraq, and even Iran begged us for help! Iraq invaded Kuwait and Europe cried that they needed the oil. The Kuwaiti government split and ran straight away to the US begging for help to find out that they were second in line to Europe. Now all of Europe was our best friend and wanted to help us beat the 4th largest army in the world. Yeah they stood behind us like a wall of feathers in a hurricane. But when it came to enforcing the surrender agreement, the United Nations did not want to do that. Europe said it was too soon to tell if Iraq was in violation. Oh right those same nations that said don't go were being paid by Iraq to say don't go into Iraq. But America is the bad guy in the world. You are right nobody asked, they BEGGED US! Thanks for your support.

France or the United Kingdom do not represented Europe, they represented themselves. They were a warring party, making France and the UK identical to Europe is a grave mistake. In WW1 they didn't want to save the world, they wanted to save their oppressive colonial systems, and America lend a hand to them. If saving the world is to help to maintain colonies, then yes, you saved the world.

WW2 was the same, except that by this time Germany was led by someone, who represented a real danger to America. That's all. You once again didn't save the world, and once again helped to maintain European imperialism. Nay, you let half of Europe fall under the Red Menace.

In the Cold War you once again didn't do else than protected your own interest. If the whole of Europe falls to Communism, America would have fallen too. That's obvious, the balance of power would be so much in favour of Communists.

Korea? European powers? European powers, even the British of the French had nothing to do with Korea..

Vietnam. The French wanted to maintain their colony, you didn't help. I praise that, that was the right decision. But the situation wasn't so simple, the Vietcong was communist, and America wanted to stop the expansion of communism even there. Do you think it wasn't your interest to stop it in Europe, if you took the trouble to save such a non-important place like Vietnam from Communism?

Kuwait. I will look after that one, but my humble knowledge whispers me that this war was initiated by the U.S, not European powers.

And please, let's have a look at your own comment! If America is always just the one, who is content with itself, and doesn't want to take part in wars, because it doesn't need it, your leaders would be the biggest idiots on Earth if they went to war for the interests of other countries..

Dubcek was a Czech, not a Hungarian. Our controversial hero was called Nagy Imre, you will know his name if you know it at all as Imre Nagy. Your choices seem also a little bit whacky, especially that we did number 3 and have been defeated. This was 1956(we use here this date as a phenomenon). And it is easy to say that win your freedom, but England is not the Soviet Union, the Atlantic is not a land border, and the redcoats are not tanks. And BTW please don't belittle 10.000 men(210.000 if emigrants counted), we were a nation of 9 million people.. Now your country wants to pull out because of the loss of 3000 troops.. Don't you think it is a little bit ironic to lecture us about losses? Hungary alone lost more people than America in WW2 too...

You are correct of course I have not been to bed and I have class in a few hours. The example still hold true. Once a nation breaks away from the parent nation and sustaines itself a bit then asks for help we can go in and assist openly. Covertly we can do a lot as well but your rebelion did not last long enough for either to happen. Look at Poland, we supplied them with all kinds of stuff during the cold war and they came out of it standing taller than Russia. My point is the help was there for those that asked for it. True some presidents like Mr. Carter did noting to help anyone and Mr. Eisenhower did not do anything that I can find that helped you. Mr. Reagan and Bush did everything they could to help people behind the iron curtain until our Democratic Congress cut their funding.

A true pity that at no time in your history have you as a people bothered to free yourelves.

Knowing Hungarian history you would not think that. We fought against the Ottomans for 300 years, we fought against and opposed the Habsburgs for hundreds of years, we fought again the Soviets.. From 1526 on Hungary spent 90% of its energies fighting against a bigger and stronger enemy. It's false we didn't bothered. We bothered.. Always just bothering, fighting an uphill battle makes you feel desperate. But it's rather useless explaining this to an outsider. An American is unable to see this.

What you fail to understand is that the group that wants to pull out is saying so to gain power and when they have it they will still have to stay and fight only then they will blame it on President Bush. Don't confuse US politics with US policy they are not always the same.

I don't fail to understand that. But it is a well-known circumstance. When you plan to go to war, you should calculate this too.

Korea? European powers? European powers, even the British of the French had nothing to do with Korea..

Korea was the first time the UN had ordered troops into combat to enforce one of their resolutions. I believe it was the one dividing Korea in half.

Knowing Hungarian history you would not think that. We fought against the Ottomans for 300 years, we fought against and opposed the Habsburgs for hundreds of years, we fought again the Soviets.. From 1526 on Hungary spent 90% of its energies fighting against a bigger and stronger enemy. It's false we didn't bothered. We bothered.. Always just bothering, fighting an uphill battle makes you feel desperate. But it's rather useless explaining this to an outsider. An American is unable to see this.

You say you fought for 300 years against the Ottoman Empire but you fought how long aginst the Soviets?