|
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 |
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:44 pm Post subject: The latest poll... |
 |
|
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060414/ts_alt_afp/uspolitics
More Americans feel US should mind its own business: poll Fri Apr 14, 9:50 AM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Nearly half of Americans believe their government should mind its own business internationally and only one third approves of how US President George W. Bush is handling Iraq, a USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll said.
Bush's rating, which rose from 32 percent in September to 39 percent in the ensuing months, has fallen back to 32 percent in the latest survey, the USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll said.
Amid growing opposition to the US-led war in Iraq, the number of Americans who think the United States "should mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along as best they can on their own," has risen from 33 percent to 46 percent over the past three years, the poll said.
The pollsters said their April 7-9 survey reflected similar results during the Vietnam War, when only 20 percent of Americans said their country should mind its own business in 1964, one year before the war began, compared to 40 percent who thought so in 1972, when the Vietnam War was in full swing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Isolationism is as much a self-defeating policy as ill-conceived foreign intervention is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well-said, Bulsajo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What has this to do with isolationism? I think the poll has more to do with military actions than economic policies, but what would an "insane" person like me know about it? quien sabe? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[deleted]
Last edited by Gopher on Sun Jun 11, 2006 6:44 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 7:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Isolationism...as I have always thought of it means avoiding international trading and imposing high tarrifs and things to restrict the flow of goods from other countries. I guess I may be confusing this with protectionism.
In any case, I posted an article about a poll. What has any of this to do with my opinions on things (however misguided they may be) anyway? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bulsajo wrote: |
| Isolationism is as much a self-defeating policy as ill-conceived foreign intervention is. |
That is ridiculous. Isolationism is fine as long as commerce isn't included. Switzerland is doing just fine.
America ought to trade with the world. Culture, goods, money and people ought to be flowing both in and out of America as free as possible.
Perhaps, and maybe I'm crazy here, but just perhaps, America should keep her army at home. No Clinton wars and conflicts for democracy or human rights (Yugoslavia and Somalia, for example) and no Bush wars for Democracy or against terrorism. Just keep the army at home.
America should be a symbol of liberty and wealth. Not a symbol of war after war.
Give it a try, and lets see what happens. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[deleted]
Last edited by Gopher on Sun Jun 11, 2006 6:44 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
America only got involved in WW2 when it suited her interests. Hitler was running around Europe for quite some time before the altruistic Yankees decided to kick some arse. And Japan was allowed to do what she pleased unti she attacked the USA.
And, even if I am wrong about the above, you warmongers have to stop comparing ever bloody conflict that you choose to get involved in to the freakin Nazis.
Where was America when the real thugs were (are?) running around? Mao? Pol-Pot? Mugabe? Hussein was hit cause it was an easy thing to do (so they thought). There was no larger benevolence guiding the policy.
It is possible to let others sort out their conflicts. America has no god given place to police the world. Just stay home. Let other countries find their own way.
Jeez, it isn't like America didn't have a rough path to liberty.
BTW, America isn't a villain in my eyes. It is, by far and away, the greatest nation on this planet (but really, that is akin to be valedictorian of summer school). I would just like her to act as an example of peace and prosperity rather than a nation to fear. I really like the USA, and I plan to make my home there after Korea, but I do fear for the path she is on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[deleted]
Last edited by Gopher on Sun Jun 11, 2006 6:44 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 9:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[deleted]
Last edited by Gopher on Sun Jun 11, 2006 6:45 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 10:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
gopher, forget it, you don't deserve consideration. What an arrogant, condescending... Shut the hell up before people start believing you represent typical Americans.
First, isolationsism can take many forms, not just one. The poll never used the term isolationism, so you're all making a huge leap. If anything, and you English teachers (yeah, right) should know this, the wording in the poll would much more accurately be describing interventionist policies, not isolationist.
BJWD, you're more than welcome. Gopher, on the other hand, is welcome to relocate. We've got enough Dumbyas already. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 10:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
Where was America when the real thugs were (are?) running around? Mao? Pol-Pot? Mugabe? Hussein was hit cause it was an easy thing to do (so they thought). There was no larger benevolence guiding the policy.
. |
Most of the greatest killers in the history were against the US.
The US was against the three greatest killers in history.
Hitler Stalin Mao.
And Hussein was worse than Mugabe , indeed Saddam Hussein was just as bad or worse than Idi Amin.
| Quote: |
Question: Who was the Bloodiest Tyrant of the 20th Century?
Answer: We don't know.
That's probably the saddest fact of the Twentieth Century. There are so many candidates for the award of top monster that we can't decide between them. Whether it's Adolf Hitler, Mao Zedong or Iosif Stalin is, quite frankly, anybody's guess.
For now, let's just skip over the whole margin of error thing -- reasonable people have studied the evidence and come up with wildly differing numbers. You're free to check my sources, but for now, trust me. I've studied the matter at great length and decided that the most likely death toll for these three are:
TYRANT DEATHS
Mao 40Million
Hitler 34M
Stalin 20M
Well, that certainly looks like Mao is our man, but wait. Mao's largest crime is the Great Leap Forward, a bungled attempt to restructure the economy of China which created a famine that killed some 30M. If we confine our indictment to deliberate killings, we get this:
TYRANT KILLINGS
Hitler 34M
Stalin 20M
Mao 10M
So it's Hitler, right? Except that most of the deaths on his head were caused by the Second World War. Sure, he started it, but our society does not blanketly condemn the starting of wars (after all, we reserve the right to do it ourselves in a just cause), and we certainly don't consider killing armed enemy soldiers in a fair fight to be a crime against humanity. If we therefore confine ourselves to the cold-blooded murder of unarmed non-combatants, our table rearranges itself again:
TYRANT MURDERS
Stalin 20M
Hitler 15M
Mao 10M
This brings Stalin floating to the top. So it look like once you reduce their crimes to the unjustifiably lowest common denominator, then Stalin is worst; however, you might want to argue that dead is dead so it really doesn't matter if you give your victims a chance to fight back. Fighting an unjust or reckless war is certainly a crime against humanity, so our numbers should go back to:
TYRANT KILLINGS
Hitler 34M
Stalin 20M
Mao 10M
... and these are just the problems we'll encounter if we accept my numbers without debate. If we want to use the estimates of other scholars, we can pin up to 50 million murders on Stalin, enough to push him to the top of the list regardless of definition. Or we can whittle him down to 10 million murders if we use the low end of the margin of error, and scrounge several more tens of millions for Mao, or away from him.
So, the answer to the question of "Who is roasting on the hottest fires in Hell?" is "Well, that depends..."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Secondary Level of Mass Murderers:
Obviously, we're going to run into the same vagueries and uncertainties when we try to rank numbers 4 through 10 on the list of the 20th Century's worst killers, but at least we can nominate the candidates. A pretty good case could be made that each of the following rulers (listed alphabetically) were responsible for over a million unjust, unnecessary or unnatural deaths by initiating or intensifying war, famine, democide or resettlement, or by allowing people under their control to do so:
Chiang Kai-shek (China: 1928-49)
Enver Pasha (Turkey: 1913-18 )
Hirohito (Japan: 1926-89)
Hirota Koki (Japan: 1936-37)
Ho Chi Minh (North Vietnam: 1945-69)
Kim Il Sung (North Korea: 1948-94)
Lenin (USSR: 1917-24)
Leopold II (Belgium: 1865-1909)
Nicholas II (Russia: 1894-1917)
Pol Pot (Cambodia: 1975-79)
Saddam Hussein (Iraq: 1969- )
Tojo Hideki (Japan: 1941-44)
Wilhelm II (Germany: 1888-1918 )
Yahya Khan (Pakistan: 1969-71)
Here are a few of the century's rulers who could easily be indicted for causing hundreds of thousands of unnatural deaths. Although some might be acquitted due to inadequite evidence or mitigating circumstances, it might be a good idea to not build statues to them.
Idi Amin (Uganda: 1971-80)
Ion Antonescu (Romania: 1940-44 )
Ataturk (Turkey: 1920-38 )
Francisco Franco (Spain: 1939-75 )
Gheoghe Gheorghiu-Dej (Romania: 1945-65 )
Yakubu Gowon (Nigeria: 1966-76 )
Radovan Karadzic (Serbian Bosnia: 1991-96 )
Babrac Kemal (Afghanistan: 1979-87 )
Le Duan (Vietnam: 1976-86)
Haile Mengistu (Ethiopia: 1974-91 )
Benito Mussolini (Italy: 1922-43)
Ante Pavelic (Croatia: 1941-45 )
Antonio de Salazar (Portugal: 1932-68 )
Hadji Suharto (Indonesia: 1967-97)
Tito (Yugoslavia: 1945-80) |
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/tyrants.htm
By the way BWJD what policy changes do you think the US ought to make.
I mean Saddam Hussein , Bin Laden and Khomeni all want/ wanted to conquer the mideast. Just on the self interested side if they were to do so then they would have a lot of influence over the US economy.
And they would not accept any US relations with those that were in their sites.
The US might be able to get free from the mideast but not as long as the US buys oil. And I don't think the US ought to set its foreign policy just to appease fascists like them. And in the case of Al Qaeda they are intent on going after the US cause they want the Caliphate so even if the US were not in the mideast it would still be Al Qaedas' sights. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 11:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, Bush did a great job of keeing Al Qaeda out of Iraq!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 11:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| There would be no Al Qaeda if mideast governments killed the organization's supporters. |
|
| 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
