6 Years Later Iraq Better but Still Shaky

Huh? You are not misunderstood, when you say "in the last 1000 years" you are saying the last 1000 years are in the bag for America which means it's an American Millenium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Century).

ok, then you claim it as such, and i say to you what you said to me, we haven't been around for 1000 years hence it was not the american millenium, so your statement is false. My statement is still true. :)

The part where you seem to assume that only countries who were around for 1000 years qualify for discussion.

Oh wow, maybe, just maybe I was saying it is too premature to lay claim to the Millenium not that we're too young to lay claim to it. There's actually a real difference between the two. BTW, just because you lay claim to the Millenium doesn't make it so. The Brits, Moors, Italians, hell, even the French can put their names in the ring.

Sometimes one has to wonder if there is validity to people saying "stupid Americans, they think they're [already] the center of the universe."

let me re-phrase it Saden. if you rate every country that has existed since 1009AD, on a positive/negative effect on the world population, my claim was that the net + effects the US has had is the largest.
Britain, I would say could make a strong case as well, but in world wide context, i think my original statement is true. certainly countries have been around longer and if the US still holds about the same relative position in 2709 then some may call 1700 to 2700 the American Millenium, but I only spoke of the "societal footprint" (my term, but feel free to put a link behind it to a nice big sasquatch picture that'd be cool)
I am not claiming an American Millenium.

My problem is with making claims without doing the work required. if a Brit made the same claim I would have a problem with it too. I don't know how you can claim America made the biggest sociatal foodprint seeing how civil rights were assured for all Americans in the 60s.

My problem is with making claims without doing the work required. if a Brit made the same claim I would have a problem with it too. I don't know how you can claim America made the biggest sociatal foodprint seeing how civil rights were assured for all Americans in the 60s.CRedskins is right. You have shown no evidence to the contradict his statement.
"NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE LAST 1000 YEARS, has impacted in as positive a way, this world's course, as the United States of America....the ultimate belief that every person on this earth has sanctity and faith and merit solely because that person was born. We have fought many a good fight in order to protect the world from the tyranny of the few....."

I know you are non-religious, but the belief that the rights of people are endowed by their Creator and not a king, ruling class, or government is a major shift in thought. If you look specifically at the last 30 years the number of governments that have changed to democracies from monarchies / communism / etc. it should make any American proud that we led the way and had a hand in making this possible.

The founders created a country of freedom, and the U.S. has grown into a place for immigrants to make a better life for themselves and their families, we've led the world in technological and industrial advances in the last 200 years,we were the major factor in winning WWI, defeating Nazism, and Communism. We're now the leader in a struggle to defeat fundamentalist Islam. We could have easily taken over the strategic resources in the world anytime after 1990 and made most other countries do as we wished. But we didn't because we believe in their right to determine their own fate. Name another country that has had more power yet let others live free and done as much good. And I would also argue that we've worked to correct our own social injustices rather than they be corrected by an outside force.

C'mon saden wave the flag for once and acknowledge the accomplishments of our great nation. I mean you can even hang your hat on Al Gore creating the Internet.

My problem is with making claims without doing the work required. if a Brit made the same claim I would have a problem with it too. I don't know how you can claim America made the biggest sociatal foodprint seeing how civil rights were assured for all Americans in the 60s.

and maybe that's the difference, saden. I do respect your thoughts and opinions, but i think anyone who denies the rights and freedoms that the United States has brought about through out the world in such a short span of time as 200 years (even as we fought about it here at home), simply doesn't want to. (kinda like BHA and Campbell, or GTripp and DHall you just want to hate and no amount of discussion will change that)

Sure we struggle here as well but we have set ideals that are a pretty high bar, equality of man/woman white/black/hispanic, atheist/muslim/christian/jew, we strive towards the ideal that all are equal, and even as we strive, we acknowledge our flaws, we seek to re-define to allow for greater equality. And we take this throughout the world. and socially, women have greater say, blacks have greater say muslims have greater say, because we have said our ideals are that all are equal. I look at what America did after WWII and i say wow, show me a country that sacrificed it's empire for its ideal. Rome didn't, Russia certainly didn't - even Britain didn't. The caesar's ruled with their armies, Russia ruled with a secret police, britain used its navy. We do not rule with our military, although certainly it is a part of our political toolkit. Our army's might has been restrained by an ideal, that civil law overrules military might. Have oppressed Iraq, no. Did we oppress Europe after WWII no. Could we have, heck yes. America could impose far more military strength then we have ever shown. But we plead our case to the UN, we allow world leaders to have equal and independent thought, we restrain a force that could easily reduce our enemies because we show compassion for the innocent. Could we not carpet bomb afghanistan, and destroy iran's nuclear facilities? yes, but we restrain ourselves by civil laws and rules of war.

We have done the work, but that work is a forever evolving (hey i do believe in evolution -cool) landscape of cultural rules and societal ideals, that we as a nation have sought, imperfectly to uphold and promote. As no less a character than Superman would say:

TRUTH, JUSTICE AND THE AMERICAN WAY

ELuOUEmk7ZM&feature=related

"...we were the major factor in winning WWI, defeating Nazism, and Communism."

C'mon saden wave the flag for once and acknowledge the accomplishments of our great nation.

There's been a lot said in this thread since I last logged in. And to be honest, I've had this foreign policy argument so many times before that I've begun to tire of it. But the bolded statement above is one of the main examples of why many people need to brush up on their history of World War I. It really is the forgotten war, and much of what we see in the world today is a direct result of it.

Slingin Sammy 33 -- Nazism didn't begin to take hold until the 1920's. The Russian Revolution of 1917, which enabled the communists to take control was a response to WWI. Lenin was able to take over because he knew the Russians wanted to get out of it. The Russians, Germans, French, British and Austro-Hungarians had fought to a stalemate, with all sides seeing thousands of deserters who had had enough.

Only with Woodrow Wilson's dreadful decision to get the U.S. involved did the war continue on -- that lead to the annihilation of the German people thanks to the Treaty of Versailles, which gave rise to the Fuhrer. As Winston Churchill said years later:

"America should have minded her own business and stayed out of the World War. If you hadn’t entered the war the Allies would have made peace with Germany in the Spring of 1917. Had we made peace then there would have been no collapse in Russia followed by Communism, no breakdown in Italy followed by Fascism, and Germany would not have signed the Versailles Treaty, which has enthroned Nazism in Germany. If America had stayed out of the war, all these ‘isms’ wouldn’t to-day be sweeping the continent of Europe and breaking down parliamentary government, and if England had made peace early in 1917, it would have saved over one million British, French, American, and other lives."

So, as Americans we sometimes need to understand that we are a government of men. That men make mistakes. That there are unintended consequences. And yes, sometimes, it's better to step away, and let things take their natural course. We can't always be the hero.

On a side note, how is it that while we're so busy waving the flag, we can't stop for a minute and put ourselves into the shoes of other people across the world? I use this example all the time, and no one, especially the flag-wavers, ever has an answer for it -- if we're so great, so high and mighty, what were we doing in 1953 when we overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran and installed the Shah? Did we not think that this action might have unintended consequences? Do people ever stop to wonder just why those hostages were taken in 1979?

People, please for the love of God - put down the flag, read a history book and think for YOURSELVES.

sometimes going to war is the correct thing to do regardless of if you have a loved one in the military or not. thats what the military is for. thats their job, it's in their contract. if they're called upon to go to war then they go. i supported going to war in iraq , your jackass statement makes it sound like the only reason i and anyone else that supports going to war only support it because i/we do not have a loved one in the military.

War very rarely is "the correct thing to do" especially when the United States is concerned. And yes, too many people in this country think casually of it when proportionally speaking their loved ones weren't at risk of fighting it in the first place.

If more people actually had to face the prospect of seeing their son, daughter, wife or husband come home in a body bag or alive with their legs blown off, I think you'd see a much different attitude about war in general.

And that's not a "jackass statement" -- it's the goddamn truth.

There's been a lot said in this thread since I last logged in. And to be honest, I've had this foreign policy argument so many times before that I've begun to tire of it. But the bolded statement above is one of the main examples of why many people need to brush up on their history of World War I. It really is the forgotten war, and much of what we see in the world today is a direct result of it.

Slingin Sammy 33 -- Nazism didn't begin to take hold until the 1920's. The Russian Revolution of 1917, which enabled the communists to take control was a response to WWI. Lenin was able to take over because he knew the Russians wanted to get out of it. The Russians, Germans, French, British and Austro-Hungarians had fought to a stalemate, with all sides seeing thousands of deserters who had had enough.

Only with Woodrow Wilson's dreadful decision to get the U.S. involved did the war continue on -- that lead to the annihilation of the German people thanks to the Treaty of Versailles, which gave rise to the Fuhrer. As Winston Churchill said years later:

"America should have minded her own business and stayed out of the World War. If you hadn’t entered the war the Allies would have made peace with Germany in the Spring of 1917. Had we made peace then there would have been no collapse in Russia followed by Communism, no breakdown in Italy followed by Fascism, and Germany would not have signed the Versailles Treaty, which has enthroned Nazism in Germany. If America had stayed out of the war, all these ‘isms’ wouldn’t to-day be sweeping the continent of Europe and breaking down parliamentary government, and if England had made peace early in 1917, it would have saved over one million British, French, American, and other lives."

So, as Americans we sometimes need to understand that we are a government of men. That men make mistakes. That there are unintended consequences. And yes, sometimes, it's better to step away, and let things take their natural course. We can't always be the hero.

On a side note, how is it that while we're so busy waving the flag, we can't stop for a minute and put ourselves into the shoes of other people across the world? I use this example all the time, and no one, especially the flag-wavers, ever has an answer for it -- if we're so great, so high and mighty, what were we doing in 1953 when we overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran and installed the Shah? Did we not think that this action might have unintended consequences? Do people ever stop to wonder just why those hostages were taken in 1979?

People, please for the love of God - put down the flag, read a history book and think for YOURSELVES.

It seems you decided to pick someones opinion to make the US look like we caused the problems. I'm sure it had nothing to do with Germeny sinking our neutural ships or them trying to get Mexico involved which is known as the "The Zimmermann Note".

If I'm correct in 1917 the German army was advancing on the French and British and there was no signs of any peice.