> Vampman14 wrote:
Because it was Britain who had the largest empire of any european or indeed any other country in the world a hundred years ago. We try to help countries who used to be part of those empires stand on their own two feet so they don't have to rely on us to protect them. Unless by that you admit that America has an imperial agenda. In which case, we Euros are the ones who come in and clean up when America makes a mess of things. We try to smooth shit out, and we get tarred with the same brush.>>>
No, you help them because you feel guilty. You're afraid to be self-interested and to do what's necessary. You look at history, and focus on the bad side of Colonialism and think to yourselves how horrible your ancestors were. You ignore the development of these empires and how it often turned about better for the subjects in the long-run. Furthermore, you completely ignore the genius of Hans Kohn, a once popular and titantic Historian who illustrated the stupidity of this thinking. He clearly showed how Western values were created by Westerners, that Western empires fell mainly because of internal pressures stemming from your stupid values. Furthermore, he correctly identified that the West has many competitors to its ruthlessness, because throughout human history the rule has been big fish eats small fish; small fish eats smaller fish. Asian and African states have historically been just as ruthless, even more so, than Western colonial empires. Through he praised Western morals, I find them degenerate nonsense that fosters costly projects in the name of a hypersensitive sense of empathy.
There is often no strategic benefit to the things you do. You actually are idealists and believe what you espouse. From stupid commoner to politician, who actually believe it and base foreign policy around it. America still has an empire and though not as realpolitik as it was under Kissinger, it is way more pragmatic than you idealists on the continent. The American people may search for moral absolutes, but our leaders are at least willing to do what's necessary. We still control an empire, and our empire is very profitable. Its profitability adds to Kohn's conclusion that you guys on the continent gave up yours for internal reasons - you abandoned power and profit for the sake of morality - the most degenerate culture ever.
<It should be, because then Mugabe and the government of Burma would have been technically illegal long ago, justifying invasion and liberation, and we know how much you love that Justinian.>
As much as an idiot and tyrant that Mugabe is, this doesn't make natural law real. Rights come from humans, they aren't natural. Provide me proof otherwise, show me the location, weight, and length of these rights. There's no empirical evidence for your crap theory, but there is for mine.
Note: Most Americans believe in natural rights, especially our stupid liberal journalists, but our top leaders definitely don't act that way.
>Ah, the hypocrite speaks. Whose country invaded Iraq with the pretense of liberating it and giving it a democratic government, dragging Britain in with you when your government was really after oil.
And you wonder why some European countries are sick of having forces in Iraq and Afghanistan? It's the arrogant and self-righteous attitudes you are displaying here which we can't stand. You should be bloody grateful we're bothering to help you know, if all the European countries pulled out tomorrow, America would be [tree]ed.>
Granted, American leaders aren't brilliant. We try to advance our self interest while still looking good, but then fail miserably at it. Bush has also demonstrated himself to be a poor diplomat and practical handler of the situation in Iraq. However, you continental Euros have your priorities in reverse, as I have already stated.
>