I don't think many of us would ever deny the imperialism and
brutality of many past super powers, it simply is history. I think
the relevant question might be--is it happening now? Hey,
give us a chance these foreign countries have had a huge head start
on us. Geez, we are only around for a few hundred years and
we have a little history too. Don't worry guys we can catch up.
brutality of many past super powers, it simply is history. I think
the relevant question might be--is it happening now? Hey,
give us a chance these foreign countries have had a huge head start
on us. Geez, we are only around for a few hundred years and
we have a little history too. Don't worry guys we can catch up.
the answer is NO
USA in its current form would not even exist but for the Manifest Destiny policy - i.e. it is our destiny to wipe out an entire race of people. Not too different from Nazi theory about the Jews.
I suppose it is inevitable that the power of being No. 1 goes to your head and brings on daft expansionist policies. As you rightly point out Britain went mad with power lust in the late 19th century. The country that supposedly brought civilisation to most of the world turned out to be the first country to use concentration camps, during the Boer War. No exceptions for women & children.
Does this mean that we Brits should be proud of this passage in our history? Well I for one am ashamed of this kind of stuff.
One thing we can be proud of is that just about every country we once controlled and now don't - USA, Aussie, India, Canada, Eire, much of Africa, Hong Kong - now get along pretty well with us. For the most part we managed to hand them back to their true owners with a bit of style and class, though in the case of Ireland I can't really say we did this.
I hope I live to be able to say the same about the USA. Vietnam was a bungle, Afghanistan is not clever and Iraq is shaping up to be worse than either of those adventures. Current US foeign policy appears to desire to create as many martyrs and revenge-thirsting folk as possible.
USA in its current form would not even exist but for the Manifest Destiny policy - i.e. it is our destiny to wipe out an entire race of people. Not too different from Nazi theory about the Jews.
I suppose it is inevitable that the power of being No. 1 goes to your head and brings on daft expansionist policies. As you rightly point out Britain went mad with power lust in the late 19th century. The country that supposedly brought civilisation to most of the world turned out to be the first country to use concentration camps, during the Boer War. No exceptions for women & children.
Does this mean that we Brits should be proud of this passage in our history? Well I for one am ashamed of this kind of stuff.
One thing we can be proud of is that just about every country we once controlled and now don't - USA, Aussie, India, Canada, Eire, much of Africa, Hong Kong - now get along pretty well with us. For the most part we managed to hand them back to their true owners with a bit of style and class, though in the case of Ireland I can't really say we did this.
I hope I live to be able to say the same about the USA. Vietnam was a bungle, Afghanistan is not clever and Iraq is shaping up to be worse than either of those adventures. Current US foeign policy appears to desire to create as many martyrs and revenge-thirsting folk as possible.
PP, Manifest Denstiny?
What about Manifest Destiny - that was an American reaction to the worldwide expansion of British Empire. The Brits were taking over most of the world - the War of 1812 still frsh on their minds, the US wanted top protect itself from British Imperialism!
What's next, the Monroe Doctrine?
You Brits throwing aspersions on the US are the worsst kind of hypocrite!
What about Manifest Destiny - that was an American reaction to the worldwide expansion of British Empire. The Brits were taking over most of the world - the War of 1812 still frsh on their minds, the US wanted top protect itself from British Imperialism!
What's next, the Monroe Doctrine?
You Brits throwing aspersions on the US are the worsst kind of hypocrite!
i dont agree
I don't agree that what I said was hypocritical, since I said:
"Does this mean that we Brits should be proud of this passage in our history? Well I for one am ashamed of this kind of stuff."
I quite agree that all major powers were acting poorly then, it was little better than blood lust.
But that does not alter the fact that without the elimination and iin some cases extermination of the Indians from large parts of the States the USA in its current form simply would not exist.
For that reason America cannot be portrayed as a major power with no blood on its hands which was the point this thread was arguing.
I don't agree that what I said was hypocritical, since I said:
"Does this mean that we Brits should be proud of this passage in our history? Well I for one am ashamed of this kind of stuff."
I quite agree that all major powers were acting poorly then, it was little better than blood lust.
But that does not alter the fact that without the elimination and iin some cases extermination of the Indians from large parts of the States the USA in its current form simply would not exist.
For that reason America cannot be portrayed as a major power with no blood on its hands which was the point this thread was arguing.
PP - while you're discussing what the US did to the Indians, why don't you go into a little detail on what the Brits did to the Irish!
On one hand you point your finger at the US and then you forgive your own countries history by saying that you don't condone that either.
Guess what buddy - your soldiers are in Iraq right next to ours - and Bush didn't send them there!
And, yes, it's all about oil!
Deny it all you want - you're a hypocrite!
On one hand you point your finger at the US and then you forgive your own countries history by saying that you don't condone that either.
Guess what buddy - your soldiers are in Iraq right next to ours - and Bush didn't send them there!
And, yes, it's all about oil!
Deny it all you want - you're a hypocrite!
you talk crap
I agree that I would be a hypocrite if I supported what Britain did in Ireland or Iraq. Since I do neither I don't see how I qualify.
Next year we get our chance to vote. I for one will not be voting for any party of which Tony Blair is the leader. I am not especially a fan of the Tories, but as their leader Michael Howard has publicly stated that he will not be ploughing any furrows set by Bush, this makes him at least viable.
It is interesting that Howard, as the natural ally of the GOP, has sought to distance himself so clearly from the current misguided regime. One advantage Britain does have over the USA is 1,000 years plus of independent foreign policy, in a situation where we have been on the doorstep of more powerful neighbours for something like 850 years of that.
This gives Mr. Howard at least a more mature and wider view of international politics than you currently find in the White House. Apart from Blair, Bush has no-one much in the world who doesn't see him as a closed-minded and incompetent leader.
I agree that I would be a hypocrite if I supported what Britain did in Ireland or Iraq. Since I do neither I don't see how I qualify.
Next year we get our chance to vote. I for one will not be voting for any party of which Tony Blair is the leader. I am not especially a fan of the Tories, but as their leader Michael Howard has publicly stated that he will not be ploughing any furrows set by Bush, this makes him at least viable.
It is interesting that Howard, as the natural ally of the GOP, has sought to distance himself so clearly from the current misguided regime. One advantage Britain does have over the USA is 1,000 years plus of independent foreign policy, in a situation where we have been on the doorstep of more powerful neighbours for something like 850 years of that.
This gives Mr. Howard at least a more mature and wider view of international politics than you currently find in the White House. Apart from Blair, Bush has no-one much in the world who doesn't see him as a closed-minded and incompetent leader.
PP - In a year, the elections will have been held in Iraq, A future supply of oil and a reliable military base in the mid east will have been secured by Tony Blair. The insurgents will have been minimized; Peace will start it's reign in Iraq, and Tony will be a shoo-in for re-election.
