|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
BS.Dos.
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 4:20 pm Post subject: Obama seeks stronger Europe ties |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| "If we're honest... we know that sometimes, on both sides of the Atlantic, we have drifted apart and forgotten our shared destiny," he said. |
Our shared destiny? I think our mutual interpretation of 'destiny' needs clarifying before we all start skipping off, hand in hand, into the sunset together.
| Quote: |
| Appealing for a renewed partnership with Europe, he identified terrorism, nuclear proliferation, trade barriers and climate change as global challenges. |
Funny, that's the same list of 'challenges' that the last administration put together.
| Quote: |
| "In Europe, the view that America is part of what has gone wrong in our world, rather than a force to help make it right, has become all too common," he continued. |
That's putting it mildly.
| Quote: |
| "In America, there are voices that deride and deny the importance of Europe's role in our security and our future. |
The use of 'our' is rather ambiguous. It sounds like he's saying 'our' as in America and Europe's but I actually think he means 'our' as in America alone.
| Quote: |
| "But the burdens of global citizenship |
What, like the Kyoto agreement? Yeah, it's a bummer isn't it.
| Quote: |
| He said that partnership and co-operation among nations was "not a choice". |
Really? So, we can choose who we trade and co-operate with, just as long as it's on your terms?
| Quote: |
| "It is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity," |
Once again, I like to think that Europe has different ideas about our 'common humanity'
Cynicism aside, he went on to say some other stuff, but as a European, I was rather hoping for a new, fresher rhetorical approach to the problems he's identified. Seems like he's using the same ' Idiots Guide to Presidential Candidate Promises' as his predecessor.
Source. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 5:31 pm Post subject: Re: Obama seeks stronger Europe ties |
|
|
| BS.Dos. wrote: |
| as a European, I was rather hoping for a new, fresher rhetorical approach to the problems he's identified. |
Meaning, he didn't give the fragile "European" identity a handjob? How arrogant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:05 pm Post subject: Re: Obama seeks stronger Europe ties |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| BS.Dos. wrote: |
| as a European, I was rather hoping for a new, fresher rhetorical approach to the problems he's identified. |
Meaning, he didn't give the fragile "European" identity a handjob? How arrogant. |
Western Europe needs US more than ever since they rely on Russia for oil now. Europe would be helpful to the US, but the US already has Japan, India, Australia, and Canada.
| Quote: |
Quote:
"But the burdens of global citizenship
What, like the Kyoto agreement? Yeah, it's a bummer isn't it. |
Kyoto is a failure in itself. Canada and Europe cannot enforce their Kyoto obligations on each other. Now what would have happened with China and India? Clinton would not ratify Kyoto because it had no mechanisms for enforcement between other states, whereas the United States would have been Constitutionally bound.
| Quote: |
Quote:
He said that partnership and co-operation among nations was "not a choice".
Really? So, we can choose who we trade and co-operate with, just as long as it's on your terms? |
No. It means that in a global economy, you might fight global connections, but you will probably lose. I guess you have a choice, but its not a real choice.
| Quote: |
| Cynicism aside, he went on to say some other stuff, but as a European, I was rather hoping for a new, fresher rhetorical approach to the problems he's identified. Seems like he's using the same ' Idiots Guide to Presidential Candidate Promises' as his predecessor. |
Many Americans feel that way about Obama's speeches, too. I really don't care overly much about his rhetoric as long as he's responsible and addresses some of our problems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BS.Dos.
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:21 pm Post subject: Re: Obama seeks stronger Europe ties |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| BS.Dos. wrote: |
| as a European, I was rather hoping for a new, fresher rhetorical approach to the problems he's identified. |
Meaning, he didn't give the fragile "European" identity a handjob? How arrogant. |
Fragile European identity? What are you talking about. I'm drawing attention to the fact that he's not saying anything new. If he wants to muster up stronger multilateral European support for those 'challenges' he speaks of, then he really ought to develop a new line of tact and one which departs from the tired old dialogue of the past. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:36 pm Post subject: Re: Obama seeks stronger Europe ties |
|
|
| BS.Dos. wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| BS.Dos. wrote: |
| as a European, I was rather hoping for a new, fresher rhetorical approach to the problems he's identified. |
Meaning, he didn't give the fragile "European" identity a handjob? How arrogant. |
Fragile European identity? What are you talking about. I'm drawing attention to the fact that he's not saying anything new. If he wants to muster up stronger multilateral European support for those 'challenges' he speaks of, then he really ought to develop a new line of tact and one which departs from the tired old dialogue of the past. |
Obama's speech was targeted at the American audience. Clamouring Europeans were just a backdrop. Obama can carry all of Germany and would not get a single vote. He's talking to Americans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Crikey, Gopher. I just read your link and didn't know whether to laugh or puke! What a load of w@nk.
There's so much silly stuff in there, starting with this kind of nonsense:
| Quote: |
| Banners decrying the attacks of 9/11 were nowhere to be seen. When Daniel Pearl was murdered there was no outcry from the left in Britain. |
Oh, whenever there is a terrorist attack in the world, we're all supposed to make up banners and run around in the streets? All my European 'lefty' friends and acquaintances were horrified by the attack on the Twin Towers. But now we were all supposed to run around with banners saying how nasty it was? What bollocks. And then this stuff about Daniel Pearl. How was this 'outcry' supposed to take place and where was it to be expressed? Again, 'lefties' would have been horrified at what happened to Pearl. But were they supposed to make up banners for this too? Or was the 'left' (whoever or whatever that is exactly) supposed to rent a full page in every major newspaper to announce their dismay at the crime? And then, should they do it for every innocent American who is ever murdered in a foreign country? That's a lot of decrying and banners then. What sheer codswallop.
There's so much more to laugh about in that article that I would never get anything done today if I bothered to address it.
Last edited by Big_Bird on Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:41 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| And yet you just expended the energy required to write and edit a paragraph in response to it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| And yet you just expended the energy required to write and edit a paragraph in response to it. |
Yes. And decided that that was quite enough. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BS.Dos.
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's a pertinently written piece that makes some very relevant points. However, it's 4-years old and the intervening years since it was published have hardly seen a dampening down of anti-American feeling in Europe. You may be able to convince yourselves that your administrations intentions are anything less than honorable, especially in respect of its foreign policy, but from the outside looking in, a large number of Europeans have chosen to vocalize their disapproval and distance themselves from supporting the practices and policies of your current administration.
And let's not forget that it's no coincidence that the rise of European anti-Americanism has coincided with the current Bush administration. Just because a large number of Europeans' find the polices of your elected government somewhat abhorrent, this should in no way be interpreted as a rejection of America per se. Most Europeans' are able to differentiate and recognize the distinction between the two. It's a shame that such a large number of Americans' consistently fail to recognise this and construct their defensive arguments under the bias of knee-jerk reactionary nationalism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Our shared destiny? I think our mutual interpretation of 'destiny' needs clarifying before we all start skipping off |
Let's see. This is 2008. The US and some of the Western European states became formal allies in 1917. Hmmm...9 decades. It would appear that leaders of the involved states see some kind of common destiny.
| Quote: |
Funny, that's the same list of 'challenges' that the last administration put together.
|
Perhaps you've been watching too much TV. In real life not all problems get wrapped up in 60 minutes.
| Quote: |
I actually think he means 'our' as in America alone.
|
What gives you this insight?
| Quote: |
Really? So, we can choose who we trade and co-operate with, just as long as it's on your terms?
|
It didn't occur to you to think about who he was talking to here? This is clearly a criticism of the present administration's lack of concern about what other countries think and want. All you can do is damn one administration for its actions and damn the next one for wanting to do better. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. If this is the typical European prejudicial thinking, why should the US gov't and American people care what Europeans think? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, BS.Dos, "you" may choose. All Europeans may choose all kinds of things. NATO, for one, remains wholly voluntary. Just leave if you please.
By the way, speaking of NATO: you are welcome for the Second World War, for the Marshall Plan, for a Europe-first postwar foreign policy that dragged us into the Eastern Med, the Middle East -- and especially into Southeast Asia because the French, refusing to leave, embarked on a foolish course of reconquest almost exclusively at our expense. You are welcome for the European Union as well -- and for a host of other generous things we Americans take credit and/or responsibility for 1945-present.
| BS.Dos. wrote: |
You may be able to convince yourselves that your administrations intentions are...
especially in respect of...
Just because a large number of Europeans'...
Most Europeans' are...
It's a shame that such a large number of Americans' consistently fail to... |
Crikey, you British struggle and struggle with English these days, no? No matter.
BS.Dos: many Europeans' smug version of antiAmericanism dates at least as far back as Graham Greene and Charles de Gaulle. And it probably has much more to do with their world-famous hypernationalism, their humiliation at losing the Eastern Med and South Asia, as well as Southeast Asia, and not even being able to play with Egypt and the Suez Canal as they pleased after 1945, than it has to do with any particular American president and his policies.
W. Bush serves as a nice, plausible pretext to justify its present manifestation, however. What a load of wank, indeed.
Last edited by Gopher on Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:30 pm; edited 5 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BS.Dos.
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| If this is the typical European prejudicial thinking, why should the US gov't and American people care what Europeans think? |
Exactly. Since when did European sentiment ever influence US policy. What Europeans have thought in the past hasn't seemed to have made any difference regarding what the US has chosen to do. The US doesn't appear to care who else comes along for the 'ride' just so long as it gets to wherever it is it's trying to get to, which kind of validates:
| Quote: |
| Our shared destiny? I think our mutual interpretation of 'destiny' needs clarifying before we all start skipping off |
While our common ideals may have been shared post WW2, it's naive to to suggest that those same values haven't changed over the subsequent decades. Why are European values so abhorrent to the US? Why is it so difficult to accept that we no longer share the same values and ideals? You're right, you shouldn't really care what Europeans' think about the US, but you seem to. It's almost as if you need validation for the trajectory you've put yourselves on and when, god forbid, Europeans' begin to question the ulterior motives for doing so, we're all labelled as being 'prejudice' and anti-American. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BS.Dos.
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| you are welcome for the Second World War |
Oh please, you can dispense with the patronising WW2 line. Do you really think it was in US interests to remain impartial? Do you really think that US interests would have been best served under a Nazi Europe? You're deluding yourself if you believe that US motives for entering the second world war were anything other than self-serving. The US would have had much more to fear, as we did, from a fascist European superstate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No American involvement in the Second World War = London evacuating to Canada and probably never coming back. So yes, you are welcome for that.
| BS.Dos. wrote: |
| Exactly. Since when did European sentiment ever influence US policy...[?] |
Question marks follow questions, BS.Dos. No matter.
FDR pushed the British and French hard to decolonize and grant real independence to their former colonies, especially in Southeast Asia and subSaharan Africa. But the British and the French pushed FDR right back. He in fact dropped the issue in order to keep the wartime alliance together.
Score one for your noble "European sentiment" over the pernicious "US policy."
Next, following Japan's surrender to us, the British and the French, after first rearming the Japanese there, embarked on a foolish course of reconquest. We backed them. Why? That was what they wanted, even the French Socialists and Communists, and we wanted to keep France happy. The British and the French even crafted the so-called Bao Dai Solution to make it easier on us. See? An "independent" govt!
Score another.
Next, Iran, 1953. British oil interests. Whose diplomats and intelligence liaison officers in Washington systematically sold the American govt on the concept that Mossadeq represented a serious Communist threat? We got into Iran and the Middle East, BS.Dos, for our own reasons, too. But we also got into the region for British reasons -- that is, nineteenth-century imperialist reasons, to be precise. Why? To defend an ally's interests in world affairs.
And another.
What, then, is so good, BS.Dos, about "European sentiment" in world affairs? Frankly, you Europeans fucked up with world for 450 years. And most of our problems from 1945 to the present, while they remain mostly our own problems, also came to us as your problems, problems that you had created and dropped into our laps after you self-destructed in two stupid continent-wide civil wars. Then you created your smug antiAmericanism to blame us for these problems. Nice.
What is so good about listening to "European sentiment," then? "Why are European values so abhorrent?" Would you like to commission Gallup to start asking people in places such as India, Southeast Asia, and subSaharan Africa, BS.Dos? Why not start in the Congo?
Last edited by Gopher on Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:52 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
