Don't misunderstand the American character

The United States will do whatever it takes to win the war on terror

from JoeUser Forums

All over the blogsphere I'll see people say "You Americans need to start asking yourselves, 'Why did they do this to you.'"  It is a terrible misreading of the American culture. Americans don't care. You can argue all day that they should care. But they don't. I don't. There is nothing we have done that justified the events of 9/11. And those who try to justify the acts of terrorists will be ignored as sycophants and appeasers of evil.

After 9/11 the question is no longer "why did they do this to you?"  The question should be what is happening to the Islamic world as a result of their growing culture of death and violence towards the west.

Perhaps the Islamic world needs to start asking, why the US does this to them.  Because if the choice becomes us or them, Americans will choose us in a heart beat even if that means the Islamic world is a totally destroyed.  Make no mistake about that.  This isn't jingoism, far from it, it is the quiet knowledge of certainty.  The clear understanding of the American character that is saying this.

I don't say this because I hope that happens, I don't. I hope that the Islamic World can live in peace with the west and in particular the United States. I just don't think Europeans and especially the Islamic world understands American culture. We try to do the right thing. But if we feel we've been wronged (and we do) our history shows that we will do whatever it takes to secure ourselves.

Remember this: Japan bombed a military base to start its war against the United States.  The war ended with the United States vaporizing two of its largest cities after having used conventional weapons to flatten nearly every city in Japan with millions of civilian casualties.  It is one of those things about democracy - it is slow to anger but once angered, once motivated, it is hard to turn it off. So I say to you, for the sake of the Islamic world, they will not continue the path of folly in trying to convince us that the fault lies with us. That sort of argument is interesting in intellectual forums. But in the real world, when people are getting killed, those who would start killing Americans need to understand the full implications of their actions.

Blaming Bush is convenient. But I can say this: Any President of the United States would have done at least as much or would have faced riots.  The US federal government only has one job (the state governments do pretty much everything else): Take care of the personal well being of its citizens  It's not designed to build roads. It's not designed to build schools. It doesn't provide the police.  It doesn't run the water plant. It doesn't provide water or electricity.  It just takes care of individual citizens. And it does this in two ways: Killing non-citizens who seek to harm us and provide services to individuals. That's basically all it does (all but  less than 10% of the budget is dedicated to those tasks). It's not like a European government or the government in other countries in its design.  And it does those things remarkably well. And democracies can be scary things. The average person acts out of passion, emotion. The government is merely the tool of the citizenry. It doesn't rule the people, the people rule the government.  Blaming Bush for Kyoto or the International Criminal Court or the Iraqi invasion or whatever may make some quasi-intellectual feel better. But it's a delusion. It doesn't matter who the President was. Those things would have happened under any President one way or the other particularly after 9/11 in the case of Iraq.

So don't delude yourself into thinking that Americans are going to sweat about the "why" the terrorists murdered so many Americans.  Most Americans care about how its government will make the problem go away in as permanent a way as possible.  It's not the "Arab street" you should worry about, it's the American street people should worry about. Even 4 years after Pearl Harbor, poll after poll taken in 1945 showed that the vast majority of Americans supported the extermination of the Japanese as a people. Do you understand? The extermination of the Japanese as a race. It's not the terrorists that people should be afraid of. That is why the Islamic world needs to stop the terrorists. Why they need to do it on their own. They're not doing it to help us. They are doing it to ensure their continued survival.

politics
52,668 views 136 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
OK.. i am a non muslim living in a muslim country. First of all, the so called terrorist act cannot be generalized to muslims. Remember Timothy McVeigh? And those muslim terrorist are not the representative of the whole Islamic world. My country had been fighting muslim radicals for years, they are the minority that treaten the balance and peace in the muslim world. They are, like any terrorist group, are hard to track as they move in seperate cells. They ARE the enemy of the islamic country, and my country is doing what it can to stop them. My country however do not have the technology and wealth like American government have, there are homeless people to feed, children to educate and economy to rebuild. Thus it seems from US point of view, there are no progress in fighting terrorism

I lived in US for more than 6 years and love the country and i love it more than my motherland (not cause of religion issue). I do think the US government is doing 80% of the right thing to counter terrorism. Of the 20% wrong, is not helping other muslim country in their own fight against terrorism, they want to take the whole matter into their own hand, in another word, they do not trust muslim government in fighting terrorism.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Its very scary that the strongest army in the world is in the hands of people who are in favor of genocide.
Ashes of the Singularity II
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
play god and the fate of pharaoh will be yours . pharaoh indeed thought that he was the almighty .praise the lord . the might of the world is an illusion a speck of dust in the face of the love and mercy of god.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
What's ironic is that your attitude in this post is EXACTLY the type of attitude that inspires such desperate acts of terrorism.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
If you think there is war out there that you can win you are deluded. The reason there int a "real" war is that most people what evertheir religion dont want one - it is a shame that those who do seem to excercise a disproportionate amount of influence (on both sides). And by the way if that isnt jingoism I dont know what is?
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
I found this blog very alarming indeed... my opinion of americans has just hit rock bottom once again.

Thanks for the lesson on American Culture.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
Hopefully, things will progress in Libya and the world will see that cooperation and reform really is the best option. If Libya completely reverses itself, it can easily and welcomely go from one of our most hated enemies to one of our closest allies. This is not all about religion or cultures, its about mindsets.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
JeremyG: Don't shoot the messenger.

*I* don't support genocide or violence at all. Some of you guys would close your eyes and try to pretend that what I'm speaking isn't true. I wasn't even alive in 1945, what is "my" attitude that made Americans support exterminating every Japanese man, woman, and child?

I am not arguing whether these attitudes are right or wrong. I am only pointing out that they exist.

Orcneas: Bear in mind, Europe can't exactly get on a high horse. The European culture is arguably worse. They didn't just face these temptations, they carried them out on its own citizens to the tune of 12 million of its people (6 million of them being jews) exterminated in camps. Americans can be provoked to do very bad things, the Europeans have demonstrated that they'll do it on a whim.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
I merely found your article alarming.

I don't know where the European part comes into your arguement, might as well have talked about Stalin (after all he killed more of his own people and would have allow you an equally irrelevant number to shock and awe me with). Nice to see Europe is also a country and can be summed up as "Europe exterminated" instead of a country within. I especially like on the "whim" statement, really comes across like you know what you saying there, please in the future don't treat like an idiot unless I deserve it.

Interesting that its always good to justify actions by pointing the finger at others as well. Hell that way no one has to lead by example, everyone can add to the woes of the world guilt free. Probably would have been better to mention the treatment of the American Indians that at least aids you argument that Americans are full of bloodlust. But then again perhaps not, I find there is plenty of history in this world and its soaked in blood. I can only hope the average American isn't so ignorant to the world as you say.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
Orcneas: Your opinion hit rock bottem? My opinion of most of Europe has been at rock bottem for quite a long time. Europeans always feel that your morally superior to us upstart westerners because you've been around longer. You deplore our military and economic strength...even though it saved your asses. You decry us responding to the death of 3,000 of our brothers and sisters with military might, when you've done the same for less. France in the Ivory Coast? The Spanish in the New World? The English in China? Need I go on? Get off your damn high horse and realize that the Islamic countries aren't helping them selves, they aren't doing a damn thing to stop terrorism. Europe isn't doing anything to stop terrorism, your FUNDING it. America didn't have a great track record against that either, but atleast we're trying now. Thats more than the endless, useless words of a Europe that finds itself to be a secondary player.

Now, Brad, I can see why you write that. It was, disturbing, to see how many of my friends wished for our OWN holy war against the Islamic faith after Sept 11th. Its disturbing how many still wish for that kind of thing, and I thankfully say I'm not one of them. However, I do support the destruction of regimes that support and condone terrorism. I lost a friend in the Towers, my family lost a friend. The war isn't over, it may very well never be over, but atleast we're trying. Atleast we're doing something instead of that endless, pathetic talk.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
Eye for an Eye....ich kann nicht sehen.
Its ironic that through citing the events of Pearl Habour and 11/9 as a defence of the actions of the USA that you shoot your argument down in flames. Europeans and Muslims don't understand American culture because it is incomprehensible. A good example is the recent debacle of the contracts to rebuild Iraq: the countries that opposed the war were excluded, but this contradicts both the Neo-liberal economic policy of the USA but also contradicts the ideas of commerce and freedom expressed in the 'American Dream'. The intolerance of the Christian right in America is just as disgusting as the Islamists you speak out against. If the government is the tool of the citizenry then its no wonder everyone is bombing each other.
As for not doing any thing to deserve 11/9 its a touchy subject but hey freedom of speech:
*overthrowing numerous democratically elected goverments, eg Allende in chile who was suplanted by Pinochet a nasty, oppresive dictator.
*supporting israel in its war against palestinians
*maintaining a huge arsenal of the most deadly weapons in the world and denying the right for anyone else to have them
*implementing an economic system of privitization through out the world that has been proven to reduce the quality of life for the people of these countries.

The UK has had long history of terrorist attacks, but we never bombed the shit of Ireland. When the Falklands was invaded you did fuck all to help, but when the shit hits the fan you want a european poodle, so here we are.
The villifaction of France and Germany for not agreeing with the Iraq war is hardly freedom and democracy. Freedom Fries? What the fuck? Shallow simpletons. Then you have the hypocriscy to argue against a European Defence force. Rejection and Suppresion that the American Way.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
Draginol is right. Hate us or love us for it, but if you push us we will push back. Is it right? Maybe not..But I don't wake up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat that
France is going to storm the Atlantic coast. Or that the entire world rises up against the United States. I'm more worried about the problems IN my country to worry about OTHER countries. When was the last time Germany gave the US a loan to rebuild industry? Or any other country? You hate America, yet come to it when your government needs funding. A nessecary evil?..Could be.

Provoke us and we will strike out. Same as any country around the world. Only difference is we carry a bigger club.
How about this, if you don't like the United States..how about you stay out of it, how about you turn towards your own country and work on your own problems?
If YOUR problems spill into our country and causes American casualties, then it becomes OUR problem..And you're obviously not happy about how we deal with things..So don't make it our problem. Nowhere in the Constitution of the United States of America does it say "Must solve foreign problems, must be humanitarians and provide foreign aid"..Yet, we try. The rest of the world acts ingraciously in a child-like manner that befits jealous two-year olds.
I feel a rant coming on, I'll wrap it up now. ^_^
I'm not an 'intellectual' individual. I am a regular Joe using Joeuser.com. This is my voice.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
The naivete and ignorance displayed here is enormous.

Apparently Americans are supposed to be some sort of super beings? They're supposed to react differently than other countries and peoples have thorughout history?

I wasn't citing 9/11 or Pearl Harbor as "defenses" of US actions. I was pointing out that Americans, when faced with threats, react as humans have always reacted.

I always like how Europeans will try to argue that the holocaust wasn't a European problem. Oh, it was really the Germans. And not relaly them either, the Nazi's...or well the SS I mean.. And they accuse Americans of being ignorant of history. The holocaust required immense support of people from all over Europe.

But let's not pick on just the Europeans, nearly every continent has seen genocide at one level or another. It doesn't make genocide right. Don't shoot the messenger because he's pointing out hstorical facts.

Do you guys want to actually live in the real world or some sort of warm fuzzy Utopia? Because youcan argue all day that country X "had it coming". At the end of the day, it doesn't matter because when groups of humans feel threatened, they always react the same. They eliminate the source of the threat or die trying.

I am sure there are some neo-nazi's who would try to argue why the jews deserved the holocaust. But it doesn't matter. Humans, as groups, do some very violent things when they feel threatened.

But hey, if it makes you feel better that Americans are a bunch of blood thirsty simpletons, then you shouldn't be surprised if the next major terrorist attack that originates in the middle east is met with the annihilation of that part of the world. Right? So would it not make sense to try to work to keep that from happenign by discouraging those who would commit the acts that would lead to their destruction and that of their entire civilization?
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
Shooting the messanger implies that the message being delivered is factual and not someone's opinion. Your arrogance is astonding!
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
I wasn't aware that the posting of historical facts was now arrogance.

The United States, as a people, are likely to act better than the average group of people on the planet. But that's not saying much. Humans, as groups, react violently when they believe their well being is threatened. The difference is that Americans, as a group, can cause much greater harm to those it perceives as a threat to their well being than other countries.

I'm sorry if it sounds like this is "arrogance" but this should be common sense.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
Wardell, i understand ur point of view and agree with ur use of historical facts

however, u seem to have dismissed sumthing when u were quoting ur historical facts. We r not in the imperialistic ages any more. We r in a time when 2% of the world's population own 98% of the world's resources. The problem is not in the middle east, the problem is EVERYWHERE. If american foreign policy does not change, than u can mark my words that there will be another alqueda(i no i spelt it wrong), another terrorist network, and another attack. If we silence the middle east by force, there will only be another, and another. No matter how powerful we r, we cant silence them all through force. The only other time in history comparable to our current sitiuation is the Roman empire, and we all know how they ended up. Unless there is a fundamental change in the view of the american people and government, than america as a country is in big trouble. Dont forget the US has only been the most powerful nation for 10 years (since the collapse of the soviet union) we're not exempt from the lessons of history that were so brutally learned.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
First off, 2% of the world's population have always effectively owned nearly all the world's resources.

Secondly, you speak as if the issues I bring up were ancient history. The genocide in Africa is only a few years old. Ethnic cleansing in Bosnia is quite recent. The millions dead in Europe happened within the lifetime of many people.

When mankind can go a few centuries without slaughtering his fellow man enmasse then maybe we can start talking about times having changed.

BTW, the United States has been the world's most powerful nation since 1917 by any statistical measure. But that's besides the point.

You can replace the United States with any major power and it's still the same result. If any nation with significant capapbility to do mass destruction is put into the situation of it being "us or them" history has made it pretty clear what will happen. The only difference is that the United States is a bigger target than other countries with similar capabilities.

As for Orc's ignorant comments, I'll take advantage of my right as a blog owner to remove his comment. If he wants to spew crap, he can start his own blog.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
BTW, Machi, why not tell us what happened to the Roman Empire. It wasn't brought down from without. It was brought down from internal weakness.

In addition, you seem to have ignored the countless empires between 300AD or so and today.

You seem to refer to history lessons that no one is aware of. What lessons would that be? My arguemnt is that it is the world that seems to be ignoring the lessons of history -- that of basic human nature.

Replace the United States with say China or Russia or any other country with significant means. What do you think would happen to the middle east if terrorists kept attacking say Russia with it culminating in the use of nuclear weapons to destroy Moscow. Do you think the Russians would just turn the other cheek? Is there any evidence you can conjure up that lets you imagine that the Russians or any country with the means wouldn't just flatten the whole area that it believes was involved with the incident?
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
listen, i am not trying to attack america or ne thing, i brought up the roman empire as an example of no matter how powerful a nation-state is, it will eventually fall if the people and government become too arrogant. It is true that 2% has owned most of the worlds resources. however, these 2 percent were all previously distributed throughout the world, leading to more isolated incidents, eg the french revolution. with the development of globalization, we r no longer divided into isolated sections, where a polticial or economic splash in one country does not effect another, those 2 percent now r almost exclusively in the US and sum in Europe. Meaning all the hatred will be concentrated against us. Hence 9/11
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
"My arguemnt is that it is the world that seems to be ignoring the lessons of history -- that of basic human nature. "

Here in lies the basis of our disagreement. You concede that things will always be the same, as opposed to doing everything possible to change it. After all that's what the US is supposed to be....be an example....rise above.

You think about the facts as you see them in terms of economics, power and political might. I think in terms of possibility and compassion and hope. People like me see people like you as harsh and uncaring, and people like you see people like me as dreamers and unrealistic.
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
Jeremy: Certainly. But I tend to think that it is better to assume the worst and hope for the best. Human nature has gradually improved but it's all a matter of thresholds.

I am not willing to give credence to arguments of "why do they hate you?". There are always reasons why people hate things. It doesn't give them a license for murder. Repeat enough times and the victims will eventually reach the point where they think it's an us or them proposition.
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
Mac: The Roman Empire didn't fall because the government became too arrogant. If arrogance were a cause for governmental downfall France would have long ceased to be a nation state. ;)

Also, as individuals, we humans are capable of a great deal of enlightened thought. But as groups, we humans haven't changed all that much in the last few milenium. If Americans start getting killed wholsale, all cries for restraint will go right out the window.
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top

There was a plan to storm mainland Japan but after weighing the casualty projection which was in the hundreds of thousands on the American side Truman decided to drop the bomb. America nuked Japan, because imperial Japan was a fearsome enemy that crippled America’s naval fleet. Japan didn’t realize the significance of aircraft carriers and that was a big mistake of theirs, they took out all the battleships but neglected to destroy the aircraft carriers. The carriers ended up sustaining America through the war.


I get a charge out of Europeans that want to lay the blame for all societal ills on America’s shore. Visit Normandy and you will find rows of brave American soldiers that did battle with the Wehrmacht so that you could find a free voice to lambaste the US with bilge and drivel. The US is at war with extremism for survival, and along the road we found out that we can’t fully count on Germany or France to lift a finger to help. Germany, France and the UN were doing a brisk business with Hussein, so there was a conflict of interest. France and Germany wanted to bid for contracts in Iraq even though they didn’t lift a finger to liberate it.
If Chirac and Schroeder had their way, Hussein would still rule over twenty five million people with an iron fist, conducting his human rights violations that rivaled Hitler or Mussolini, the only difference between Hussein and Hitler was the numbers, Hussein killed less, but that does not minimize his legacy as a monster.


What was to become of Rome, when she should no longer have any state to fear?

--Cato the elder
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
Is there a nation out there that would simply surrender to terrorists and ask "Why do you hate us? We only wanted to love!" I can't honestly imagine any country doing that, and I'm sure that there are groups out there that feel justified to bomb any country that can be named.