Why the alienation after America bailed out Europe twice in world wars? You would think that our nation with its historical foundations rooted in the tenets of individual liberties, freedoms and rights would be cheered around the world. But we are not. We are scorned; indeed hated and today, Europe is forced to deal with American hypocritical international interventionalist foreign policy. America's shallow embrace for "peace" around the world is nothing more than a cloak to spread an Empire.
"But that is a lesson the Europeans - despite their experience with Nazism, fascism, and communism - refuse to learn. Which is why the gulf between us is only going to widen." -- article
Here we have the author implying that the Europeans are too stupid to recognize a threat to western freedom when it blows up half of New York. I submit they are not that conveniently stupid. They see our problems with Islamist terrorists to be largely caused by our support for Israel and therefore largely self inflicted. They are saying in effect, do not endanger us with your scrap in which we deliberatly take no part. They are really afraid that the Arab Israeli conflict will become a world war when the problem would be contained between the parties if the US would not mix in. This is not appeasement as the author suggests but aloofness of a sort.
One can take issue with their position, and to a large degree I do, but the perception remains and drives a wedge between us. But at least the European position is arguable as contrasted to this Mist:
Europe is forced to deal with American hypocritical international interventionalist foreign policy. America's shallow embrace for "peace" around the world is nothing more than a cloak to spread an Empire
Sir, from San Juan Hill to Bagdad America has sought no empire. As Colin Powell said, we asked only for a place to bury our dead. Go sell your Mist to the three thousand children who died every month until Saddam was deposed. Go sell your wares in Afganistan where people can breathe again. Peddle your smarmy crap to the Muslims of Jugoslavia who were not ethnically cleansed. And then bring back the crown and sceptre of our empire as proof of your point.
But don't peddle this Mist here - you won't find a single buyer.
Nonsense. America doesn't rule over any conquered nations or exploit for their natural resources as if they belong to us.
Rather we rescue people around the world from dictators and tyranny...and give them back their own land and their freedom.
Unlike other major world powers, it can be said that America has NEVER sought to spread an "empire" around the world.
Not to belabor the obvious, but American foriegn policy can never be consisnt, much less avoid hypocracy, because we changed governments on a regular basis. How could one expect Reagan to continue Carters policies, or Bush to continue Clintons? Granted, many countries are far more consistant than us in their foriegn policy, like North Korea, for instance, although a dictatorship tends to be pretty predictable.
America's shallow embrace for "peace" around the world is nothing more than a cloak to spread an Empire.
Peace? I thought the idea was freedom. Slaves live in peace, this is hardly a desirable state without liberty. There is no less noble concept than that of 'peace at all costs', and no more reliable way to ensure your own demise.
Empire? An empire of the willing, that abandons its outposts in Panama and the Philippeans, that defends others on request, levies no taxes or tribute on the conquered after war, and rebuilds their lands better than before? You mean to say that we're going to be colonizing Iraq and forcing them to learn English? Do you, by chance, have any idea what the word 'empire' means?
Because Europe chose fascism in the 1930s and 1940s, and we took it away.
Now, they finally have the chance to get it back, and this time thay have a better than 50:50 chance to take Britain, as well.
No wonder they hate us for spoiling their dreams.