[Duncan]

Quote:

To our Dutch friends, don't be angry. Just understand our dismay at the lack of public support from many of your leaders.

I'm from the UK, and this thread has got to me in a big way

 

[gloco]

Quote:

Originally posted by Tuberoller I forgot,soldiers get paid to die.Your attempt to not sound like an insensitive jerk has failed miserably.I'm really disappointed that you guys feel this way. If I must read your stats,read mine; 100hours: total time of allied assualt during Gulf war 128: number of US casualties 458: number of US wounded 11: number of female combat deaths 44,756: number of unexplained illnesses suffered by gulf war vets 533:number of deaths from unexplained illnesses. Also note that not only have most European countries refused to help us,Germany has refused to allow use of it's airspace.Three US military hospitals are located in Germany.This would prevent wounded troops from being flown to these hospitals.European support is mandatory in this conflict.

How should we feel then? Maybe people who join the military think they have nothing to fear, i sures hell would be worried if i was being shipped to some foreign country in a hostile region. I dont know what your trying to prove with those stats, i didn't post any stats on anything.

War is hell, its not a picnic and i sures hell would not want to be caught in a crossfire. We all have opinions Fred, you know mine, i know yours, there is no right or wrong answer.

 

[fredpb]

Quote:

Originally posted by Duncan I'm from the UK, and this thread has got to me in a big way

Why Duncan? The UK has supported the USA in a surprising manner. Very nicely.

USA and UK are inseparable. I feel, me anyway, that if the UK were in trouble, it would fight to the last American. America would back the UK no matter what the cost.


I lived in Scotland and England for many years. Those people there are no different to me than others in the States I have been friends with. They call for help...im going.

 

[gloco]

Quote:

Originally posted by Duncan I'm from the UK, and this thread has got to me in a big way

Don't take it personal, not every American has this anti-Europe sentiment (ok, well France could go, but thats a different story

)

 

[Duncan]

fredpb,

I'm not complaining overall about the fact that action is needed... but I am somewhat upset that because others in Europe won't back you, that everyone is now anti-europe...

At the end of the day, civilians, everyday folk... even if they really wanted to go to war, and make the world a better place could not over throw their own governments and administrations... You're taking the opinions of the press talking to the leaders, and mirroring that onto the civillians... THAT, is narrow minded

Anyway, the show must go on...

 

[Tuberoller]

Gloco,
I ain't meaning to jump on you man.You are cool by me.I know people who have died in combat.I really don't think you mean that soldiers are paid to die but the remarks you made smack of insensitivity and a general disregard.I posted the stats in response to another poster.I don't have to try to prove anything with those stats,they are facts published by the Veteran's Administration.Gulf War Vets associations sometimes publish different numbers but they are all depressing.

I will not offer any apologies to Euros who feel offended by anything said here.I feel we have been far more than betrayed by them.If it were not for us the native launguage of Europe would be German and every smart Euro knows this.

I hate how people regard this as a matter of what "we" should do in this matter.The only "we" are the troops.I am grateful to every soldier who has chosen to wear a uniform.I know some joined the military to get free or reduced tuition,learn a skill or to see the world but I am no less thankful.Before we make statements like the ones made here we should think about our fellow head-fier Audio & Me who joined the NAVY as a patriot and willing volunteer.it is not his job to die.

 

[Jeff Guidry]

Main Entry: jin·go·ism
Pronunciation: 'ji[ng]-(")gO-"i-z&m
Function: noun
Date: 1878
: extreme chauvinism or nationalism marked especially by a belligerent foreign policy

 

[DanG]

Tubes, maybe the point is that we need to consider the possibility that if we don't take the chance of losing a hundred American lives in Iraq and however many civilian casualites, then we'll have thousands or even tens of thousands of casualties in America, Europe, or Israel -- but probably all three. Our soldiers could always get killed in any conflict, that's why they're soldiers.

A rugby alum who was here for alum weekend (we have an alum game and then lots of partying, paid for mainly by the alums) is a captain in the Army Rangers. He's a burly guy and tackles like a mean bulldog on steroids.

Anyway, he says he, for one, is willing -- even almost happy -- to go to Iraq and fight in whatever war Bush tells him to. That's because he's a soldier. No, we shouldn't send soldiers off on meaningless campaigns, but we shouldn't be so afraid of our soldiers dying that we don't ever deploy them.

 

[DanG]

Quote:

Originally posted by Jeff Guidry Main Entry: jin·go·ism Pronunciation: 'ji[ng]-(")gO-"i-z&m Function: noun Date: 1878 : extreme chauvinism or nationalism marked especially by a belligerent foreign policy

Wherever you got that definition, it's not all that precise. Jingoism usually has a more racist connotation, especially considering that little 1878 you have in there, referring to the first usage. It was referring to the propaganda spread in Great Britain around that time to the common people, trying to convince them that they should be happy with their lives because they were white Brits living in the most powerful and most civilized country in the world. It also referred to the racism inherent in this propaganda of belittling foreign cultures and peoples.

In any case, it was a gibberish-type word made up by a guy whose trade was being angry and writing about it. Don't put too much damn stock in it.

And if you must bring in the belligerency aspect, it has little to do with the "belligerency" you might see in this thread. Those of us advocating war anre not doing so for the sake of war or for the sake of killing muslims, but for the sake of self-defense. If you think that any of us has a hidden agenda then you're very wrong.

 

[Jeff Guidry]

Merriam Webster:

The aforementioned definition.



Cambridge International Dictionary of English:

jingoism
noun
DISAPPROVING
the extreme belief that your own country is always best, which is often shown in enthusiastic support for a war against another country
Patriotism can turn into jingoism and intolerance very quickly.



Dictionary.com:

jin·go·ism Pronunciation Key (jngg-zm)
n.
Extreme nationalism characterized especially by a belligerent foreign policy; chauvinistic patriotism



bigdictionary.com

jingoism: belligerent patriotism



xrefer.com:

jingoism
A term derived from the expression `by jingo', used in a music-hall song written in support of Disraeli's stand against Russia in 1878.

Thereafter jingoism acquired a pejorative sense, meaning a belligerent and chauvinistic stance in matters of foreign policy.



American Heritage Dictionary:

SYLLABICATION: jin·go·ism
PRONUNCIATION: AUDIO: jngg-zm KEY
NOUN: Extreme nationalism characterized especially by a belligerent foreign policy; chauvinistic patriotism.




I don't envy you DanG for all the work you are going to have to do to contact all these sources and tell them their definition of jingoism is wrong.


We don't want to fight, but by Jingo if we do, We 've got the ships, we 've got the men, we 've got the money too.

 

[Jeff Guidry]

"It also referred to the racism inherent in this propaganda of belittling foreign cultures and peoples."

And racism, no matter how peripherally, has NOTHING to do with our perceptions of the Middle East? Considering how many Arab-Americans are living in fear of their fellow red-blooded American neighbors, I think it does, and the term jingoism takes on an even more meaningful connotation.

Two men were thrown out of a local movie theatre here in SoCal recently for speaking Pashto to each other in public.

Here's the link.

 

[DanG]

Just because some people are racist (probably very many Americans) doesn't mean that all of us are racist. I don't consider myself racist because I am not -- I'm not deeming Arabs to be inferior to anyone else or saying that their lives are inherently more worthless to me than the life of a European or of a South American or anyone else who does not live in my country and to whom I am not personally connected. What I was saying is that we have to look out for our needs first if we want to survive. We need to do it as carefully as possible and in such a way that as few Americans and as few civilians on the other side get hurt. But inevitably people will die and be wounded.

When I said that the definition you quoted was imprecise, what I meant was that it did not mention the very strong racist implications of the term "jingoism." Those definitions that do not include that aspect are not wrong, they're misleading and imprecise. The definition did have as its impetus the song about Disraeli's stand against Russia, but that's not where it was formulated -- it was formulated by the same British author of whom I wrote and whose name I still can't remember. I'll try to look him up tonight and see if I can find the original essay where the first recorded use of the word "jingoism" can be found.

And I really don't give a rat's ass about whether those dictionaries have the right definitions as I'm not employed by them.

 

[kerelybonto]

Tuberoller, you sound like Powell. (Terrible general; should have been SecState all along.) Do you really think our military's main goal is to protect itself? If we can't make use of it, why do we spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on it?

The terrible reality is that people die in wars. And that it's sometimes necessary. My dad fought in Vietnam, and I have many friends who will be military officers when they graduate from college in a couple years. I know a few other people who enlisted and are now in the Marines and Army. I have my Selective Service card in my wallet right now. No one wants to send anyone to be killed. But the rational people are willing to make that hard choice if it will prevent others from being killed in the future and make the world a hell of a better place.

Have to go to classs. I'll be back later.

kerelybonto

 

[kerelybonto]

Heh. It just occured to me that all of you Europeans are encountering rare criticism of your government's policies from the the people across the pond. Hmm ... humorously ironic.

So let's deal with the point Duncan brought up: does Iraq have the right to do what it wants within its borders? The correct answer, according to international law and the way the world's worked for the past couple hundred years is, of course, yes. The Iraqi government can pursue a nuclear weapons program. The Iraqi government can gas its Kurds. The Iraqi government can do whatever it wants, basically. (Well, technically, war was outlawed after the First World War, so maybe they can't invade anyone. But Iraq didn't sign that treaty, so you could make a case for that too. ...) But who cares about any of that? The real question is whether it is right for Iraq to do these things. Now, I know, people get frightened when we start throwing around concepts like 'right' and 'wrong' and diverge from the realm of realpolitik. (It is strange that those of you disagreeing with the invasion of Iraq are mixing in classic realist arguments, when on any other issue you'd probably say we're past all that.) But really. If it's not fairly obvious that Saddam Hussein is a menace to his own people and the rest of the world, and consequently should be removed from power, then we need a bit of philosophical enlightenment to be going on here.

Will some nations and some people hate us more for deposing President Hussein? Of course. But if we place higher priority on making people like us than on spreading the ideals of liberalism, pluralism, and basic human rights, then I give up.

kerleybonto

 

[Flasken]

Being european I feel I need to contribute to this thread.

In my eyes Duncan is VERY right.. I believe that if a war would start, it would start in europe. Also, "the war on terror" has nothing to do with a WAR.
In the 2nd world war every single person, including civilians, faced death, supression and poorness everyday. At least that was how the danish people felt when we were under German invasion.

In this thread some of you sound like you're saying that USA took care of everything during WW2. Like you took all the hits, made all the sacrifices. That is also partly true. And let me tell you, danes LOVE americans for helping us. Yes, you saved us. But I'll be damned if we weren't the ones who had the hardest time.

And then you say that the reason we don't stand 100% behind you in this "war", is that we don't know how it feels?? And what is it that you feel that we don't? Let me tell you: Anger. And then let me tell you what Europeans felt and still feel after 11/9: Fear. Tremendous fear of war! Yes, you might not have noticed, but Europeans are afraid of war! And I think we have plenty good reasons to be so...