Parts of France especially are no go zones. Even the police don't want to go there. As such, it is no surprise you would not be aware of it. Most Governments try to present a positive picture to the tourists, the residents, and the citizens.
Far from being at odds with reality my comments are spot on. To ignore them is to ignore reality. Unfortunately I think the views you hold are simillar to those held by Mr. Obama, Mr. Bush, and their inner circles. We can ignore reality because facing up to it is inconvenient. Unfortunately reality has a way of catching up to us. By the time it does I pray it is not to late.
Not only does our culture need defending but the lives of our citizens need to be vigorously defended as well. It makes no sense to invite people in here who wish to harm us and it seems clear the immigration system needs to be fixed. Also, there is the cost of social services for both legal and illegal residents that needs to be considered. A ten yeare moratorium on all immigration should give us sufficient time and breathing space to address these issues. If we need foreign laborers we can implement some type of guest worker program. It has worked well for other nations. I think it could work for us as well.Comment Posted By B.Poster On 22.01.2010 @ 15:43
To imply that we are the OPEC of culture implies a power that does not exist for American culture. OPEC is able to dictate terms of trade. Countries don't cooperate them and there are serious consequences for their economy. Failing to cooperate with American culture costs one nothing and in fact often results in net gain for the person or entity as they get a public relations boost or financial gain for "standing up to America" or something to that effect.
With the examples you bring up "OPEC of culture" is not the best description. A better description would be that "other nations have adopted those aspects of American culture that serve their interests and that work for them while categorically rejeting those aspects of American culture that don't work for them. Furthermore it is costing them very little to reject those aspects of American culture they choose to reject."
I'll takke each of the regions you mention one at a time and discuss them briefly. Europe - It is being over run by Islamists and it is dependent upon Russian oil to make it go. It generally sees America as a strategic competitor and will stop at nothing to undermine America or its interests if it sees an opportunity to gain.
Japan - We've adopted many things from them as well. One is example has been just in time inventory systems to make manufacturinng more efficient. At least this is when we used to actually manufacture things. Those of us over thirty were taught in public schools to be as industrious as the Japanese.
Inida - We are increasingly dependent upon India for many back office functions within American business. They use this to their advantage in a number of ways. With our masive national debt, struggling economy, and worn down military we are going to be increasingly dependent upon countries like India in coming years.
South America - Venezuela is the dominant country there now. Venezuela is backed up by Russia. As such, Russia is essentially the dominant country in this region. China is increasingly active in places like Panama. They have had a large presence in the Panama Canal region. Russia and China are the dominant countries in South America not the United States.
China - This country has tremendous influence over America. As our countries largest bank, they are in a position to dictate terms to us any time they wish. As such, our political system and economic systems have drifted more towards them than they have drifted towards us.
If our political system is the most workable one, which one would that be? We've become more like the rest of the world than they've become like us.
"Worrying that we are not protecting our culture is like absurd." No its not. When you invite vast hordes of people from other nations into your country who don't hold your unique cultural values, you are inviting trouble. This is what has happened. As a result, our country and its unique heritage is being eaten up from within. Perhaps you don't like our nation's heritage that has been based to a degree on Judeo-Christian principles.
"we're selling it to everyone on earth." To an extent, this is true. Other nations are selling their cultures to us as well. Other nations will purchase the aspects that work for them and serve their interests while rejecting the parts that don't work for them. Due to certain tenets of political correctness we end up accepting aspects of the foreign cultures that might not be in our interests to accept. As a result of this and other factors, our culture is losing ground while others are gaining ground.
To a large extent, we seem to lack the moral confidence in our culture to defend it. Unless this changes, we will continue to lose ground. Reversing this begins with realizing we have a culture that is worth defending and that we have at least as much a right to defend our culture as they have to defend their cultures.Comment Posted By B.Poster On 21.01.2010 @ 23:55
Who said any thing about a drawbridge and no this isn't the 1930s. The problems the country faces today are far more complicated than then, I think. What I propose gives us a reasonable chance of solving them. In any event, what I propose is far more likely to solve the country's problems than any thing currently being done or proposed.
It seems clear that we have no control over our borders and the immigration system is a mess. As I recall, at least two of the 911 hijackers were here on expired visas.
We have little to no coherent energy policy. The only ones we have are beg OPEC and suck up to enviro-whackos.
Our military is being worn down and is engaged in fruitless operations elsewhere that do virtually nothing to further American interests. Not only that but it risks unwinable conflicts with the two most powerful countries on earth which are Russia and China.
Our deficit is massive and getting bigger. Opening up our oil and gas reserves for domestic drilling and building more refineries should create a large number of high paying jobs. Whats more, they would all be high paying union jobs.
An additional step that I neglected to mention above, is to closely monitor the mosques. We know who the people most likely to be terrorists are. It makes perfect sense to watch the groups from where they are most likely to come more closely than say 60 year old Swedish women. It certainly makes more sense than positioning large numbers of troops and other equipment in the Middle East.
What I propose, while it may not be perfect, has a much better chance of solving the nation's problems than any thing being currently proposed.
Rather than refer to draw bridges, what ever that is supposed to mean, it might be better to address the issues on their merits. Other countries protect their cultures. We should do the same. We have every right to do so. Also, by failing to protect your culture you lose respect. I think the policies I propose, in addition to considerably advancing our national security interests, would gain us considerable respect around the world.
Finally, we need to begin to rebuild our manufacturing base. Right now we don't even have the capacity to manufacture some of our most basic goods. Doing this would result in large numbers of jobs being created and they would likely be high paying union jobs. At least we hope so. In any event, it beats depending on China. Again, every thing I suggest is far better than what any of our politicians are suggesting.Comment Posted By B.Poster On 21.01.2010 @ 16:12
"We are convinced that he is not strong enough to confront his enemy. We are concerned that he is not strong enough to support his friends." Which major leader said this to you Mort? If you are going to criticize the Presidnet, at least have the deceny to tell the readers who actuall said this. Other wise shut up!!
Given the massive deficits run up during the Bush years which seem to have been made worse under Obama's term, the worn down nature of the military from ongoing operations aroud the world, and the military upgrades made by countries like Russia and China the "unipolar" world was over, assuming it actually existed in the first place. Obama's policies simply attempted to reflect this reality.
As for the "special relationship" with Britian, the British have been backing away from this for some time. It is hardly as if Obama initiated this or it operating in a vacum on this. The "special relationship" does not serve British interests. Why would they want to be closely related to a washed up has been world power. They need close relations with oil suppliers in the Middle East. Also, they need to have as cordial as possible relations with Russia. As a major oil supplier to Europe, it closer proximity to Britian than America, and the fact that Russia is far more powerful than America right now, the British need to have a working relationship of some type with the Russians. A "special relationship" with America does not benefit Britian and is, in fact, a liability. As such, it makes perfect sense for them to downgrade this relationship. In this area, Obama's policies simply reflect the geo political realities of the situation. Why maintain a special relationship with someone who does not want it?
What was supposed to happen when Obama changed the way America related to the world was other nations were supposed to pitch in and assist us in solving problems. So far this seems to have met with only limited success. Time will tell, if the Obama approach will work.
Had I been present when the world leader made the quote Mr. Zukcerman says was made, I would have been asked this person are America's friends strong enough to support America? If by "his enemy" we mean Islamic terrorism, a resurgent Russia, or an expanding China, then this is correct. America is not strong enough to confront these alone. We are going to need help from our friends. Instead of criticizing I would suggest this leader and others lend the Obama Administration and America a helphing hand here. We need their help.
The new approach was supposed to help us enlist the assistance we need. Hopefully it will work but I'm not optimistic. Anti-Americanism simply runs to deep. To expect such assistance was going to be a long shot at best. I could have told Mr. Obama and his team this approach probably would not work.
I would suggest a change in our foreign relations. I would suggest the following.
1.)Remove all troops, military assets, and intellegence assets from Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the Middle East. This means ALL of it and it should be done as soon as our transport vehicles can get them out. Do it post haste. The same thing should be done every where there are Aemrican troops outside of the United States.
2.)Redeploy these troops, intellegence assets, and military assets to defensible positions along the American borders. This makes more sense than wearing them down in fruitless efforts to do things like bring "democracy" to the Iraq or Afghanistan, halt Russian expansion, halt Chinese expansion, or the other missions they are being used on. Given that most of these men and women signed on to defend America, once this is done they will be doing what they signed up to do. I would expect morale to increase substantially.
3.)Cancel all foreign aid to everyone for a minimum of three years. This means ALL foreign aid. A top down review of all foreign aid needs to be done to determine what serves our interests and what if any of it can we afford. Three years should be enough time.
4.)Place a moratorium on immigration from all countries for a minimum of ten years. This will give us breathing space to fix our immigration system and it will give those already here time to assimiliate into American culture. The immigration moratorium on immigration from Islamic Middle
Eastern countries should be indefinite. It makes little sense to invite people here who want to destroy America. If we need the expertise of foreigners in some areas, we can probably utilize some type of guest worker program. This seems to have worked well for some countries. Perhaps it can work for America.
5.)Open up all of our own oil and gas reserves for domestic drilling. This means ALL of it. Build more refineries and make extensive use of coal to oil technologies. Doing this will give us more leverage when trying to negotiate with OPEC, with Venezeula, or any other oil producing country. Right now we have little leverage over any of them.
Doing these 5 things alone will give us more leverage for our national security interests than any thing we are currently doing ever would have or likely ever could. Unfortunately I'm not expecting much, if any of this, to be implemented by either major political party in the United StatesComment Posted By B.Poster On 21.01.2010 @ 14:04
I meant I hope this documentary will be a fair treatment of American history.Comment Posted By B.Poster On 9.01.2010 @ 14:26
I do hope this documentary will be a treatment of American history. Like any civilization America has its flaws and its good points. Unfortunately right now the American people suffer from a form of amnesia. Our flaws are well known by all in every part of the world. They are well documented and chronicled. They can be recited by every American from 5 years of age and up. The amnesia comes into play becuase we seem to have forgotten the good things our country has done.Comment Posted By B.Poster On 9.01.2010 @ 14:26
The Birchers, Birthers, CPAC, and Glenn Beck have no real influence within the American political system. They never had and unlikely ever will. That is unless Democrats and Republicans really, really, manage to screw things up very, very badly. Even if this happened they still would be unlikely to ever gain any real influence, as someone else would simply step in to fill the gap left by the Democrats and the Republicans.
It would be far better to focus on coming with constructive solutions to America's problems and to focus on the people who real influence. Spending time focusing on CPAC, Birchers, Birthers, and Glenn Beck who have no real influence over public policy seems to me to be a waste of time.Comment Posted By B.Poster On 23.12.2009 @ 12:46
Drilling for more of our own oil and building more refineries is a good place to start. It can be started relatively quickly, as we already know how to do it and we already know where the oil is. In other words, no costly research and development.
And yes, close down the United Nations in the United Nations. The UN really only does two things well. 1.)Undermine America's just interests. 2.)Undermine Israel's just interests. I think the argument for keeping the United States in it over the years probably goes something like this: while the UN is hostile to America, it would continue to exist even without American support and it would continue to be hostile to America. By having it in the United States and by the United States being a member of it we are at least able to have some input. If we were not a member, we would have no input. While I understand and can empathize with such an argument, I think any benefits of the Untied States being involved in this are outweighed by the negatives.Comment Posted By B.Poster On 21.12.2009 @ 09:29
Actually China will surpass the United States in less than 20 years at the current rate. In fact, not only has China largely surpassed the United States in many important areas so has Russia. To a large degree Russia and China are the dominant powers on earth right now with the United States a distant third and falling further behind as this is being typed.
It is very difficult to predict what will unfold over the time period of a century. The dominant power of the 21st century could end up being Russia, China, India, or perhaps someone we have not even heard of or even a country that does not currently exist. With that said, all indications are right now indicate the 21st century will probably be the Russian century. If things continue on the current trajectory, Russia will dominate the world like no country has ever dominated during this century.Comment Posted By B.Poster On 17.12.2009 @ 14:10
Palin cannot "mainstream" this issue as she is not "mainstream" herself. She has a small but vocal following. She currently holds no political office nor does she hold a position of influence within the RNC. In other words, her overall influence on American politics is minimal at best.
She has no chance of winning election to any office any where right now. She quit in mid term as governor of Alaska. Any opponent she might have in either a primary or a general election would be certain to have a field day with this. If she quit in mid term as Governor of Alaska how can we be sure she won't quit again when the going gets tough? She has no defense against this. Her candidacy to any office would be over before it got started. As such, the RNC will never give her the nomination.
It is somewhat bewildering why the media and main stream Republicans such as this site spend so much time analyzing such an insignificant individual. I suppose assigning more power to something or someone than it actually has makes it easier to vilify that which you hate. Personally I think it would be more productive to analyize the positions of someone like Mitt Romney. He actually has a chance to get the Republican Presidential nomination. Sarah Palin does not.Comment Posted By B.Poster On 5.12.2009 @ 10:49