# American vs. European Colonialism



## pattle (Dec 26, 2013)

The self righteous attitude of Americans towards British and French imperialism during the 20th century is way to much for me to swallow. Here we had a people who had colonised and completely taken over an entire continent in the process of which destroying almost its entire indiginous population. In addition to the conquest of these lands large numbers of slaves were kidnapped and taken against their will to help build this nation. For these reasons I find the American stance against imperialism to be hyprocritical as in reality the USA was imperialist in the most extreme and pure form of the word. 
No offence meant, just a blunt and sobering observation that a lot of people would like to make but dare not.

Reactions: Dislike Dislike:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## syscom3 (Dec 26, 2013)

Stick to the subject. WW1 and European colonialism.


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 26, 2013)

pattle said:


> The self righteous attitude of Americans towards British and French imperialism during the 20th century is way to much for me to swallow. Here we had a people who had colonised and completely taken over an entire continent in the process of which destroying almost its entire indiginous population. In addition to the conquest of these lands large numbers of slaves were kidnapped and taken against their will to help build this nation. For these reasons I find the American stance against imperialism to be hyprocritical as in reality the USA was imperialist in the most extreme and pure form of the word.
> No offence meant, just a blunt and sobering observation that a lot of people would like to make but dare not.


Actually, I beg to differ. The slave trade was introduced to the "new world" by British, French, Dutch and Spanish interests. Between 1778 and 1864, those slaves who were in North America were owned by Americans, roughly the span of a generation, perhaps a little more. The treatment of indiginous populations in North America were no different than in Asia, India, Africa, Australia, South America or the South Pacific over the centuries by European colonization.

So perhaps we had better stay focused on the topic here, shouldn't we?


----------



## fastmongrel (Dec 26, 2013)

I think pattle is saying the post war US attitudes to Imperial Europeans were a bit 2 faced especially as the US had only recently gone to war with Spain for control of Cuba and the Philippines. I dont think it was a criticism just an observation even if it has obviously ruffled some feathers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## syscom3 (Dec 26, 2013)

Cuba; never was a US colony. Nor occupied by US troops for long.

Philipines; by the eve of WW1, plans were in place to move the islands towards their own Independence if they desired it.


----------



## fastmongrel (Dec 26, 2013)

Hmm yes Phillipine independence was offered only after anywhere between 220,000 (US Office of Historian estimate) and 1,400,000 (Gen Bell USArmy estimate) Filipinos died. Even the bloody handed Imperialist British, French and Germans were a bit shocked by the Phillipine - American war.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## silence (Dec 26, 2013)

Gents, I can see this topic degenerating quickly into something unpleasant.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## pattle (Dec 26, 2013)

syscom3 said:


> Stick to the subject. WW1 and European colonialism.



What part of what I said is untrue?


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 26, 2013)

silence said:


> Gents, I can see this topic degenerating quickly into something unpleasant.


It would be nice to see a good thread keep going in the right direction...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## pattle (Dec 26, 2013)

GrauGeist said:


> It would be nice to see a good thread keep going in the right direction...



And it will, I was just throwing in what I believe to be a valid point that is all, because we all believe in free speech don't we. I was not having a dig at the Americans, the way I see it none of us can change the past but it is silly to let our national pride to stand in the way of denying our relevant countries indiscretions , particularly when they were made way before we were born. 
A lot of things such as torture, slavery, public execution, and the sacking of towns and cities with the killing of both prisoners and civilians during wartime were all social norms until questioned in the 1800's, there was no ideal model of civilisation where this didn't happen it was a very cruel world.

Going back on the World War One thread and how my earlier comment fits into it, the point I was trying to make was that the USA was being hypocritical about European colonialism and it proved wrong of the USA to use this as an excuse to isolate itself.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Dec 26, 2013)

".... the USA was being hypocritical about European colonialism and it proved wrong of the USA _*to use this as an excuse to isolate itself*_."

That is an oversimplification of the case. The American public wanted no part of entanglement in wars fought on European battlefields .... after the blood bath of the American Civil War .... the American public just wanted America to thrive and take on 'fights' that America could _win_ and who could blame them. The Spanish American war, for example, was exactly that kind of war.

That may or may not be 'hypocritical' but is a _realistic_ position.

France - on the other hand - learned _nothing_ from her overwhelming defeat by a newly unified Germany in the F-P war ..... nothing except a _blind desire_ for revenge. The conduct of France before, during, and after 1914-18 and Versailles is a major contributor to Act II in 1939, IMHO.

MM


----------



## pattle (Dec 26, 2013)

michaelmaltby said:


> ".... the USA was being hypocritical about European colonialism and it proved wrong of the USA _*to use this as an excuse to isolate itself*_."
> 
> That is an oversimplification of the case. The American public wanted no part of entanglement in wars fought on European battlefields .... after the blood bath of the American Civil War .... the American public just wanted America to thrive and take on 'fights' that America could _win_ and who could blame them. The Spanish American war, for example, was exactly that kind of war.
> 
> ...



Yes I think so as well, but I also think that even back in 1918 there was a global economy and that one country could not hope to become immune to it by isolating itself. Britain was drawn into WW1 to maintain the balance of power in Europe and in the same way America was drawn into the same war to maintain the balance of power in the wider world. An over simplification once again, but I can't spend all day on here.


----------



## stona (Dec 27, 2013)

syscom3 said:


> Cuba; never was a US colony. Nor occupied by US troops for long.



Apart from this bit

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Shortround6 (Dec 27, 2013)

The US did do a LOT of imperialistic/colonial things but managed to camouflage them better than some other countries. In many cases because it was companies/corporations doing it _instead_ of the government directly but with government assistance or at least government neglect. Check the History of the "United Fruit Company", they weren't called "banana wars" for nothing 

That being said you had individuals in ANY government/country who were idealistic and trying to steer things a certain way and you had individuals in the _same_ government/country at the _same_ time who were cynical and greedy and who tried to steer things another way. The ones who are idealistic are usually at a disadvantage even if they are in the majority.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Dec 27, 2013)

"....Check the History of the "United Fruit Company", they weren't called "banana wars" for nothing..."

Nothing _unique_ about corporate colonialism actually ..... The British "East India Company" _was _Britain in India for ages. The Hudson Bay Company _was_ The Crown in Canada for ages.

Banana Wars were just outbreaks of 'Monroe Doctrine-ism'  ... America, in typical American boldness and freshness, simply announced it's 'Imperial' position in the world - the Monroe Doctrine plus open oceans and commerce to the world.

Throughout history - business interests - $$$$ - have driven government. From the 'syndicates' of Carthage developing Spain, to the syndicates of Rome - sponsoring entertainment for the masses - business is the true force driving so-called colonialism and society, IMHO, 

MM

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Shortround6 (Dec 27, 2013)

Just saying you can have American diplomats saying and doing one thing ( and some of them believing it) and American companies/corporations (with the aid of other officials) doing the opposite. Substitute countries name of your choice for "American".

It took a lot of years ( and may not have happened yet) but the idealistic view of some some American (and a few European) politicians/diplomats/thinkers got us to where we are today despite the greed and/or parochial views/actions of other people in the same governments. While working such deals behind the scenes may be hypocritical it does allow the public face and discourse to shift to a point where such behavior is no longer tolerated when it is exposed. It takes a lot of time and a lot of people get rich in the mean time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## syscom3 (Dec 27, 2013)

Intellectual bankruptcy. A tiny base with a garrison of several hundred personell. Meanwhile the other 42,000 square miles of the island was and still is, devoid of any US colonial troops.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Dec 27, 2013)

"...you can have American diplomats saying and doing one thing ( and some of them believing it) and American companies/corporations (with the aid of other officials) doing the opposite ..."

Corporations - predominantly _American_ corporations - have been more effective transferring technology, knowledge, and, ultimately _wealth_, than the UN has every been.

Not surprising ... i_ron _kettles and axes, wool blankets, and yes, whiskey, were all reasons why white, anglo saxon Europeans were received favorably in N America 300 years ago.

Consumers always 'know' what they want ... when they _see_ it. 

MM


----------



## stona (Dec 27, 2013)

syscom3 said:


> Intellectual bankruptcy.



Symbolically important, just like a single battalion of British troops in Vietnam would have been had President Johnson been able to convince Prime Minister Wilson to provide it. Even Bundy's attempted blackmail failed. He counselled the President on 28 July 1965 that it made ‘no sense for us to rescue the pound in a situation in which there is no British flag in Vietnam ... a British brigade in Vietnam would be worth a billion dollars at the moment of truth for sterling’. It was Bundy who had upped it to a brigade, Johnson had told Wilson that a single battalion would be enough. 

The fact is that there are still US troops based on the island of Cuba. They may be the left over of the so called third occupation but they are still there. If you consider their presence to be irrelevant I'd love to hear why they are there.

Cheers

Steve


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 27, 2013)

You do realize that the same can be said of Gibraltar, right?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## michaelmaltby (Dec 27, 2013)

"...but they are still there. If you consider their presence to be irrelevant I'd love to hear why they are there..."

Not "irrelevant", my good friend, but, like _British _forces in Hong Kong, they will be _gone_ when Cuba has the gravitas and clout to negotiate their removal. _*Relevancy*_ .... is relevant. 

MM


----------



## stona (Dec 27, 2013)

michaelmaltby said:


> "...but they are still there. If you consider their presence to be irrelevant I'd love to hear why they are there..."
> 
> Not "irrelevant", my good friend, but, like _British _forces in Hong Kong, they will be _gone_ when Cuba has the gravitas and clout to negotiate their removal. _*Relevancy*_ .... is relevant.
> 
> MM



The British presence on Gibraltar is by treaty just as The US presence in Cuba is. There's no point in debating two entirely different treaties and circumstances. I would suggest that a significant difference is that both Britain and Spain are members of the E.U. and NATO and despite the current pettiness will sort out their differences eventually by negotiation. 

The treaties governing Hong Kong, Kowloon and the New Territories were different. When the 99 year lease on the New Territories expired Britain negotiated the return of all three to China. It was hardly practical, nor was Britain in a position, to do anything else. It was 1997, not the second half of the nineteenth century.

In the case of Cuba the US is maintaining a military presence in a country with which it does not even have diplomatic relations.

Treaties in perpetuity may seem like a good idea at the time and are normally signed with one party at a disadvantage. They can store up trouble for the future, just take a look at the Falklands/Malvinas.

The fact remains that there are US troops in Cuba, a place where they are hardly welcome. If you ask the average Gibraltarian whether he wants to be Spanish I can guarantee what he will reply. You will get the same reply from the average Falkland Islander if you ask him if he'd like to become an Argentinian. That is a fundamental difference and for us a matter of principal.

Cheers

Steve

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## fastmongrel (Dec 27, 2013)

GrauGeist said:


> You do realize that the same can be said of Gibraltar, right?



I think these days Gibraltar is guarded by the Royal Gibraltar Regiment which is a Gibraltar recruited regt though it is part of the British Army command.


----------



## syscom3 (Dec 27, 2013)

To correct some historical revisionism and colonial relativism; lets clear the record.

The Philipines:
After the US conquered the islands, there was a lot of public hand wringing over it and the PI was put on a path for self governance which was accomplished in 1934. Result - colonial period lasted 30 years or so. Compare that to the European colonies that were occupied for centuries.

Cuba:
US troops were out of the island fairly quickly with the US being granted a tiny piece of land in which to build a naval base. Result - no colonial activities can be inferred.

Latin America:
US business interests had the US intervening multiple times, but more for the protection of a small (but significant) chunk of their economy. US control for local and international affairs amounted to nothing. Result - no colonial activities can be inferred.

Columbian dispute:
The US acted as an imperial power in prying off the territory now known as Panama. But as a colonial power? NO! Result - no colonial activities can be inferred.

The stealing of the Native American lands:
True expansionism with some genocide along with it. But unlike the European powers, these lands were fully integrated, politically and economically with the US as a whole. No colonial activities can be inferred as the people were full up US citizens (on paper at least).

The impact on WW1 on this? Zero. Not even germane to the thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## stona (Dec 27, 2013)

You don't have to occupy a place to colonise it even by proxy. How would you characterise the terms of the 1898 Treaty of Paris regarding Cuba, the Philipines, Guam, Puerto Rico?

Many Americans at the time saw the results of the Spanish-American war as a colonial enterprise, and objected to it as such. A year later apologist were countering that it was only fit that these territories should be governed by the US, even trotting out one of the oldest colonial arguments of all, that the people were not fit to govern themselves.

The impact on both world wars of US expansionism which took place in this period, and the resultant increasing US economic and military dominance of the Pacific is very significant. It is one of the factors that led directly to a conflict with Japan less than fifty years later.

Cheers

Steve

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## michaelmaltby (Dec 27, 2013)

"....If you ask the average Gibraltarian whether he wants to be Spanish I can guarantee what he will reply. You will get the same reply from the average Falkland Islander if you ask him if he'd like to become an Argentinian. That is a fundamental difference and for us a matter of principal...."

And ... if you ask the average Cuban .... he will be unable to reply _honestly _....and _that_ is a "matter of principal".

".... It is one of the factors that led directly to a conflict with Japan less than fifty years later..."

But a _minor _factor compared to America's arrival in Japan fifty years before_ that_.


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Koi2KjpbkQY_


----------



## Njaco (Dec 27, 2013)

Wow, America caused WWI which brought on WWII. Never knew that?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## silence (Dec 27, 2013)

Something tells me that if this thread keeps playing tit-for-tat things are going to get unpleasant.

Let's face it: ALL our countries did bad things in the pursuit of power at one time, colonial or otherwise. This thread, however was supposed to be about a couple wars of which I seem to have lost track ...

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 27, 2013)

silence said:


> Something tells me that if this thread keeps playing tit-for-tat things are going to get unpleasant.
> 
> Let's face it: ALL our countries did bad things in the pursuit of power at one time, colonial or otherwise. *This thread, however was supposed to be about a couple wars of which I seem to have lost track ...*



Well said...


----------



## pattle (Dec 27, 2013)

Njaco said:


> Wow, America caused WWI which brought on WWII. Never knew that?



No that is not what was meant, all that was meant (by myself at least) was that America had colonial interests and that Americans were indeed themselves colonials. The exchange of population between Britain and America was a bit like Grey Squirrels and Red Squirrels just the opposite way around. 
My point of view is that the Americans were hypocritical to criticise Europe for colonialism when they were in actual fact colonials themselves, and also wrong to pretend they were not involved with widening their own sphere of influence. 
Why was it right for America to turn it's back on Europe after World War One but wrong for Britain to do the same? 
You have to remember that Britain is not part of main land Europe and still to this day doesn't like to get involved in it's affairs. Now keeping that thought in mind, it strikes me as unfair for America to blame Britain for not doing enough to prevent the rise of Nazi Germany when America did nothing itself. 
America being opposed to colonialism was a feel good myth, what was really the case was that America saw Britain in particular as a rival. The Americans even considered the possibility of war with Britain, a war which would have included another American invasion and the annexation of Canada.


----------



## pattle (Dec 27, 2013)

silence said:


> Something tells me that if this thread keeps playing tit-for-tat things are going to get unpleasant.
> 
> Let's face it: ALL our countries did bad things in the pursuit of power at one time, colonial or otherwise. This thread, however was supposed to be about a couple wars of which I seem to have lost track ...



Yes you are right about all countries having a dark past and I am not getting angry here about this, I remain perfectly calm. It does seem a bit one sided though that Britain and France can be criticised regarding the unfortunate events stemming from failures of the Treaty of Versailles but not America and that when we begin to spread the responsibility for the failures of the Treaty of Versailles to include the America we have suddenly departed from topic.

Reactions: Dislike Dislike:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 27, 2013)

I have no issue with pointing at myself or the actions of my country, but I am really lost as to how exactly the US was into Colonialism.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Lucky13 (Dec 28, 2013)

Hey, we (Sweden) have a few skeletons in our closet as well, those German troop trains, sending those poor people back to Stalin's Russia, being the most recent ones (WWII) and which I'm _not_ very proud of, but then again, I wouldn't like to swap with those, who made those decisions!
Don't think that there's _any_ country in Europe or elsewhere, that did _not_ try their ways in colonialism, some did it better or worse, more or less greedy, depends on how you look at it....



vikingBerserker said:


> I have no issue with pointing at myself or the actions of my country, but I am really lost as to how exactly the US was into Colonialism.



Oh cooome ooon.....isn't that obvious, you did it the McDonald's and Coca Cola way!


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 28, 2013)

Njaco said:


> Wow, America caused WWI which brought on WWII. Never knew that?


Right...and then we saved the world in WWII single-handedly...

Well, we let some of the other guys help because they were feeling left out.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## The Basket (Dec 28, 2013)

I would rather have Disney and Coca Cola and McDonald's than Nazism or Stalinism.

What have the Romans ever done for us....

Odd isnt it. Occupy a country and the natives dont like it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Lucky13 (Dec 28, 2013)

The Basket said:


> I would rather have Disney and Coca Cola and McDonald's than Nazism or Stalinism.
> 
> What have the Romans ever done for us....
> 
> Odd isnt it. Occupy a country and the natives dont like it.



There's ungratefulness(?) for you!


----------



## Shinpachi (Dec 28, 2013)

Commodore Perry made his biggest mistake in his entire life.
He had shot 4 cannons into the air to show his power to the Edo(Tokyo) people.
It sounded as if a signal to start building IJN to confront with the US 88 years later.
I think this should be remarked in the history.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## michaelmaltby (Dec 28, 2013)

".... Commodore Perry made his biggest mistake in his entire life."

Better Japan remain in self-imposed isolation, Shinpachi ....?

".... I would rather have Disney and Coca Cola and McDonald's than Nazism or Stalinism."

Agreed absolutely. And isn't it _ironic_ how the poor 'colonized' folks of the world seek out the cultures of those who colonized them to emulate ...? Perhaps a psychological disorder ...  .... let's call it Stockholm Syndrome shall we, eh Lucky.

Ironic too, that Britain could abolish slavery and justify the opium trade with China ....

As we count down to the last day of 2013 - the 200th Anniversary of the War of 1812 between Britain (Canada) and the USA, I see no enduring evidence of American colonialism against Canada, but then that is perhaps because the Americans didn't _win_ ... 

MM
Proud non-colonial


----------



## Shinpachi (Dec 28, 2013)

michaelmaltby said:


> Better Japan remain in self-imposed isolation, Shinpachi ....?



Japan was not necessarily isolated with Dutch and China but if I may dare to say Yes or No,
please let me say 'Yes', MM. That is what North Koreans still feel today as they hate threats from outside.
I can understand how they feel very well.


----------



## pattle (Dec 28, 2013)

What we are seeing today is economic imperialism. Why send in an Army to occupy a country when you can take a country over by putting it in debt and then calling the debt back.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Dec 28, 2013)

"...you can take a country over by putting it in debt and then calling the debt back."

What we have seen in Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain is consumers and countries living beyond their means .... no one was forced to buy a car they couldn't afford. A government that promises rewards and benefits it cannot afford is deceiving voters.

Germany has a strong economy because the country and culture encourages a strong work ethic.

"...economic imperialism"...?? 

Market share is more like it ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## yulzari (Dec 28, 2013)

The trick with colonialism is to have your colonies contiguous to your country. This worked for USA and Russia and is still working for China. 'No, we don't have colonies. They are part of our country'. France tried it with Algeria but it didn't work due to the Mediterranean.

The only difference between the British empire and it's predecessors was that it grew originally to make money, not gain power and influence. Hence the very real 18th century consideration of abandoning the American colonies as being loss making and keeping the Caribbean islands as profitable. Even the Raj was a company until the mid 19th century. Then the dirty money grubbers were elbowed aside by the righteous ponces like Cecil Rhodes as Britain started to believe it's own propaganda.

US foreign colonialism has been a colonialism by proxy. The British would move in and get the local leaders to rule the place for them. The US sought to get the same benefits without risking moving in. Hence their interference in Central and South America.

Lest it be thought that i am pointing the finger at anyone. I am pointing the finger at everyone. Every continent except Antartica has seen colonialism rampant for thousands of years and every nation/group/tribe has been guilty of it and been proud of doing so.

European colonialism is the (grubby and bloody) root of modern globalism which is raising the living standards of the world. As a Briton I welcome the growing wealth of the rest of the world. The more money the b*ggers have the more we can sell them! The global information revolution, from telegraph to mobile phones, means no bad deed goes hidden any more.

Modern colonialism is cultural but economically and politically enrichens all participants. Hungry peasants don't revolt against tyranny. The better fed and educated middle classes have been the ones to give voice to revolt and this is the growing future from mid 17th century England to 21st century North Africa.

BTW where is my bacon bar then?

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## yulzari (Dec 28, 2013)

Shinpachi said:


> Japan was not necessarily isolated with Dutch and China but if I may dare to say Yes or No,
> please let me say 'Yes', MM. That is what North Koreans still feel today as they hate threats from outside.
> I can understand how they feel very well.



Yes. Japanese isolation was well overrated. Certainly Japanese pirates were taking no notice as the mercenaries of choice in the South China Seas (employed by British east India Company amongst others.)

I am reminded of how Japan was a valuable ally of Britain and was seen as such by the Royal Navy against the US Navy in the Pacific until the later 1920's. Unfortunately Japan picked up the Imperial habit just as it was going out of fashion. I wonder how much oil Britain would have sold Japan had Japan entered WW2 early on Britain's side and agreed to restrict expansion into China to Manchuria and Korea? 

However, I digress from the thread and must put it up on another site as an historical what if.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Dec 28, 2013)

pattle said:


> And it will, I was just throwing in what I believe to be a valid point that is all, because we all believe in free speech don't we.



Free speech in a PUBLIC un-moderated forum. Understand that if we (the mods on this site) find comments insulting and/ or ignorant, we'll deal with it accordingly, up to and including banning the one making those comments. Stick to the facts and keep opinions to yourself, especially if they run the risk of pissing some one off!


----------



## yulzari (Dec 28, 2013)

michaelmaltby said:


> Ironic too, that Britain could abolish slavery and justify the opium trade with China ....



Trivia; but opium was perfectly legal in Britain if one cared to indulge and available in any chemists shop.


----------



## Shinpachi (Dec 28, 2013)

yulzari said:


> I wonder how much oil Britain would have sold Japan had Japan entered WW2 early on Britain's side and agreed to restrict expansion into China to Manchuria and Korea?



Interesting opinion, yulzari.
Thank you very much


----------



## fastmongrel (Dec 28, 2013)

yulzari said:


> I wonder how much oil Britain would have sold Japan had Japan entered WW2 early on Britain's side and agreed to restrict expansion into China to Manchuria and Korea?



It wasnt just Oil though I think it was also trade restrictions against Japan. No fan of the Japanese govt at the time but with hindsight it looked almost like the West was pushing Japan to attack.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Dec 28, 2013)

"...perfectly legal..."

Not so in China ... which had a long history with the stuff ... and where it was illegal.


----------



## pattle (Dec 28, 2013)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Free speech in a PUBLIC un-moderated forum. Understand that if we (the mods on this site) find comments insulting and/ or ignorant, we'll deal with it accordingly, up to and including banning the one making those comments. Stick to the facts and keep opinions to yourself, especially if they run the risk of pissing some one off!



If that is the case you must please let me know where I have not kept to the facts? Most if not all countries have skeletons in their closet, but it seems as though some people on here live in a playground world where it is acceptable for them to mention negative episodes in another countries history but unacceptable to hear of those in their own. A lot of what is written on here is opinion and indeed opinions are invited in most threads, am I to assume from your post that negative opinions regarding certain aspects of American history are not to be mentioned on here through fear of pissing people off? 
As this is a forum mostly dedicated to World War Two it may be difficult to avoid mentioning things that run the risk of pissing people off, namely the Germans and Japanese.


----------



## pattle (Dec 28, 2013)

yulzari said:


> The trick with colonialism is to have your colonies contiguous to your country. This worked for USA and Russia and is still working for China. 'No, we don't have colonies. They are part of our country'. France tried it with Algeria but it didn't work due to the Mediterranean.
> 
> The only difference between the British empire and it's predecessors was that it grew originally to make money, not gain power and influence. Hence the very real 18th century consideration of abandoning the American colonies as being loss making and keeping the Caribbean islands as profitable. Even the Raj was a company until the mid 19th century. Then the dirty money grubbers were elbowed aside by the righteous ponces like Cecil Rhodes as Britain started to believe it's own propaganda.
> 
> ...



It seems my bacon bar has also disappeared, I wonder if our opinions are being censored?

Reactions: Dislike Dislike:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Dec 28, 2013)

pattle said:


> If that is the case you must please let me know where I have not kept to the facts? Most if not all countries have skeletons in their closet, but it seems as though some people on here live in a playground world where it is acceptable for them to mention negative episodes in another countries history but unacceptable to hear of those in their own. A lot of what is written on here is opinion and indeed opinions are invited in most threads, am I to assume from your post that negative opinions regarding certain aspects of American history are not to be mentioned on here through fear of pissing people off?
> As this is a forum mostly dedicated to World War Two it may be difficult to avoid mentioning things that run the risk of pissing people off, namely the Germans and Japanese.



*"The self righteous attitude of Americans towards British and French imperialism during the 20th century is way to much for me to swallow."*

That's a broad brush and VERY opinionated in *MY* opinion and considering you're playing in my sandbox I suggest you choose your words wisely. No I'm not going to get into a pissing contest here so I'd advise you to carry on with facts instead of blatant unsubstantiated remarks.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Dec 28, 2013)

pattle said:


> It seems my bacon bar has also disappeared, I wonder if our opinions are being censored?


For the record no one to my knowledge is censoring anything...


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 28, 2013)

The Bacon feature is available once every 24 hours where likes and dislikes can be used in any amount during the same time period.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## pattle (Dec 28, 2013)

FLYBOYJ said:


> *"The self righteous attitude of Americans towards British and French imperialism during the 20th century is way to much for me to swallow."*
> 
> That's a broad brush and VERY opinionated in *MY* opinion and considering you're playing in my sandbox I suggest you choose your words wisely. No I'm not going to get into a pissing contest here so I'd advise you to carry on with facts instead of blatant unsubstantiated remarks.



Perhaps it is, but that is the way I have been made to feel by comments made regarding the British and French. I don't want to get into an argument over who started it but by natural law I believe I have a right of reply. I don't like to be threatened or have opinions forced on me so if you wish to ban me that is your choice.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Dec 28, 2013)

And for the record, both of my grandparents were "nationalized" as a result of living on Puerto Rico during the Spanish American War (they were citizens of Spain), my great grandfather committed suicide over it, so if you want some opinions of someone who's family actually had their destiny changed by "American Colonialism" fire away!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Dec 28, 2013)

pattle said:


> so if you wish to ban me that is your choice.



No, that will be your choice if this BS continues. I mentioned once, move on so now I strongly advise you to do so.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 28, 2013)

GrauGeist said:


> The Bacon feature is available once every 24 hours where likes and dislikes can be used in any amount during the same time period.



No we are tyrants here who are taking peoples bacon away.



pattle said:


> It seems my bacon bar has also disappeared, I wonder if our opinions are being censored?





Why would we do that? Seriously, just because you dislike me, and have a hardon for showing it you don't have to make childish statements like that. Statements that you know are not true.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 28, 2013)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> No we are tyrants here who are taking peoples bacon away.


Damn! That's just downright mean!!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 28, 2013)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> No we are tyrants here who are taking peoples bacon away.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





GrauGeist said:


> Damn! That's just downright mean!!



I like bacon, so I want yours too.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## pattle (Dec 28, 2013)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> No we are tyrants here who are taking peoples bacon away.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't dislike you and I have no bad feelings against you either, it is just that I don't agree with your dismissive attitude towards my opinions. 

I have been looking at how to close my account on here but there seems to be no way of doing so, if you could please close my account for me I would be grateful.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 28, 2013)

pattle said:


> I don't dislike you and I have no bad feelings against you either, it is just that I don't agree with your dismissive attitude towards my opinions.
> 
> I have been looking at how to close my account on here but there seems to be no way of doing so, if you could please close my account for me I would be grateful.



We do not close accounts. It is your choice to post or not.

Also NO one has dismissed your opinions. Everyone is entitled to them, and none are censored. We have a duty to keep threads on track. We moderators decided to split the threads. Both can be discussed. That is not censoring or dismissing.

Please show ME where (exact posts) I have dismissed your opinion. In fact I don't think have addressed your opinion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## pattle (Dec 28, 2013)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> We do not close accounts. It is your choice to post or not.
> 
> Also NO one has dismissed your opinions. Everyone is entitled to them, and none are censored. We have a duty to keep threads on track. We moderators decided to split the threads. Both can be discussed. That is not censoring or dismissing.
> 
> Please show ME where (exact posts) I have dismissed your opinion. In fact I don't think have addressed your opinion.



I'm not trying to be awkward but if you can ban me then obviously you can close my account. I don't want to go back over old ground and feel I have said all I have to say on this matter. I have nothing against you but with the best of will we only fall out again so it's best I go, if you don't ban me I am likely to get bored at some time and start using this forum again which would be a mistake.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 28, 2013)

It is your choice to post here or not. I will not ban you. You have done nothing to be banned. 

If our forum bores you, then just go and find one that is more stimulating.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 28, 2013)

Has anybody here ever watched "The Twilight Zone"?????

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 28, 2013)

Shinpachi said:


> Commodore Perry made his biggest mistake in his entire life.
> He had shot 4 cannons into the air to show his power to the Edo(Tokyo) people.
> It sounded as if a signal to start building IJN to confront with the US 88 years later.
> I think this should be remarked in the history.



You know, I've never looked it at that way. Very interesting thought Shinpachi.


----------



## Njaco (Dec 28, 2013)

ADHD - its a wonderful thing.


----------



## pbehn (Dec 28, 2013)

Njaco said:


> ADHD - its a wonderful thing.



US Imperialism? After 1000 yrs of fighting over sod all, Europe needed the USA to bang its collective heads together, we were lucky they were so benevolent.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Marcel (Dec 29, 2013)

Did not read all of this thread, but I do agree with Pattle on one thing. Many Americans play innocent and dismiss European colonialism as a bad crime while not looking at their own history. (notice how I *not* point the finger at anyone of you). The Philippines was just the US wanting to be a colonial power themselves. Their whole existence like it is today is thanks to European colonialism and actually all white Americans are actually of European decent, so European colonialism is also their colonialism. So actually the whole matter is a non-issue. 
Let me be clear: colonialism like it was practised by my own country is not something I am proud of. It was quite often criminal, arrogance and overall a very regrettable affair. But it is what made the world as it is today. I also think that other countries would have done the same, had they been in the position that the Europeans were in during those centuries. Japan, the US, Russia, all had their own shot at colonialism, but in different time and maybe less successful. 

Sorry if I stepped on anyone's toes...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Dec 29, 2013)

Marcel said:


> Did not read all of this thread, but I do agree with Pattle on one thing.* Many *Americans play innocent and dismiss European colonialism as a bad crime while not looking at their own history.



Many do Marcel and at least your words are put together with thought rather than a perceptive need of childish retaliation. No toes stepped on IMO!

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 29, 2013)

The fact remains that nearly all civilizations/nations throughout human history have demonstrated expansionism (a form of colonialism) at one point or another. The ebb and flow of European ancestry is a prime example as well as middle-Asian ancestry.

Why humanity feels the need to do this is anyone's guess...perhaps it is an underlying mechanism of survival left over from prehistory or what, but in this modern age, it's not nessecary.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Njaco (Dec 29, 2013)

So then the question is: Who is colonizing today?


----------



## michaelmaltby (Dec 29, 2013)

The Islamic World is colonizing Europe, for starters. The Chinese, Africa, for follow-up.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 29, 2013)

Overall, I really don't see colonialism as a bad thing, IMO it's more along the evolutionary path than anything.

A lot of really cool countries today would not be what they are without it, and I freely included the US, Australia, Canada and a number of other countries in this.

I think the point where I start to feel uncomfortable is when in the modern "civilized" times (say since 1900's) it's done by wiping out or trying to wipeout the indigenous people. I could be wrong but from what I read about the Philippine Insurrection that what the US did at times.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Njaco (Dec 29, 2013)

I apologize. I didn't realize this thread was in the 1800-1914 section. Hopefully my post will be ignored and we can stay in the proper time period. I hate when I do that!


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 29, 2013)

I think that was a valid question to ask.


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 29, 2013)

Njaco said:


> I apologize. I didn't realize this thread was in the 1800-1914 section. Hopefully my post will be ignored and we can stay in the proper time period. I hate when I do that!


Hand over the bacon and all will be forgiven...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 29, 2013)

GrauGeist said:


> Hand over the bacon and all will be forgiven...



His bacon has been censored...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 29, 2013)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> His bacon has been censored...


You know, I'd be pointing and laughing if it was someone else that lost their bacon!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 29, 2013)

GrauGeist said:


> You know, I'd be pointing and laughing if it was someone else that lost their bacon!



I will take yours.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 29, 2013)




----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 29, 2013)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I will take yours.


Hey now!!


----------



## Njaco (Dec 30, 2013)

But somewhat back on topic: Ok, so the modern colonizers are the Mid-East/ Arab countries. Didn't they do something like that around 1500 years ago and made it as far as Spain? History repeating itself?


----------



## michaelmaltby (Dec 30, 2013)

".... Didn't they do something like that around 1500 years ago and made it as far as Spain? History repeating itself?".... yes. And more recently, 1683, they made it to the Gates of Vienna.

History doesn't repeat itself per se, but it does _cycle_ - like tides, sunspots and ocean currents ... 

MM

ED:

"....I think that was a valid question to ask." Damn straight it is. This Forum must always be able to discuss such - within the guidelines .... you know, the 'P*****s' word .....


----------



## yulzari (Dec 30, 2013)

I am reminded that England was colonised by the Italians, English, Irish, Scandinavians and French and that my great grandparents were living amongst Turkish colonists until the Turks were overthrown and my great grandfather saw the last european slave market in his childhood.

The point is that colonialism, like slavery, has been generally practiced until frightening recently by most nations. History is never simple and rarely matches the received version. Such as the history of europeans taken as slaves to North Africa rarely gets mentioned whereas the (equally reprehensible and cruel) taking of Africans as slaves by Europeans is the received historical model.

Perhaps the differing characteristics of American colonialism is best illustrated by noting that 'American' covers everyone from Baffin Island to Tierra del Fuego not just USA and the long history of colonialism is demonstrated by the colonisation of the extreme north by the Inuit culture from the Dorset culture by 1500 AD.


----------



## The Basket (Dec 30, 2013)

Slavery is still practised. 

I suppose its hammer and nail. Do you want to be the hammer or the nail?
Choose hammer every time.
School ground bullies and all that. Just on a larger scale.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Jan 7, 2014)

So easy to blame America ...


----------



## Marcel (Jan 10, 2014)

What are you trying to say Michael?


----------



## michaelmaltby (Jan 11, 2014)

Marcel: "..... Did not read all of this thread, but I do agree with Pattle on one thing. Many Americans play innocent and dismiss European colonialism as a bad crime while not looking at their own history...."

Just a reminder of what at least one face of American colonialism looked/looks like .... that's all, Marcel. Has any other "colonial" power been as generous to the world that you can think of ..?


----------



## fastmongrel (Jan 12, 2014)

michaelmaltby said:


> Marcel: "..... Did not read all of this thread, but I do agree with Pattle on one thing. Many Americans play innocent and dismiss European colonialism as a bad crime while not looking at their own history...."
> 
> Just a reminder of what at least one face of American colonialism looked/looks like .... that's all, Marcel. Has any other "colonial" power been as generous to the world that you can think of ..?



What did the Romans ever do for us 


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9foi342LXQE_

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jan 12, 2014)




----------



## Marcel (Jan 13, 2014)

michaelmaltby said:


> Marcel: "..... Did not read all of this thread, but I do agree with Pattle on one thing. Many Americans play innocent and dismiss European colonialism as a bad crime while not looking at their own history...."
> 
> Just a reminder of what at least one face of American colonialism looked/looks like .... that's all, Marcel. Has any other "colonial" power been as generous to the world that you can think of ..?


Well, I guess that's a dangerous discussion. A bit like the "did the Americans save Europe" thread we had some years ago. 

Of course, we West Europeans have every reason to be thankful to our American friends. We know that very well and we are. One should only visit the war-cemeteries end see the lovingly maintained stones of the young US soldiers that died fighting for us. 

But does that mean that we cannot be critical of the US and it's past? And should we swallow all critique on us as it's been uttered by people form a nation that "saved us"? Quite often this will be interpreted as being ungrateful, which of course is simply untrue. This argument always put us Europeans in a disadvantage in these discussions. And while it has nothing to do with the discussion itself. It sometimes seems like the events of WWII gives the Americans free permission to be critical of others while they should never get any critique back as it would be 'ungrateful'. Still, WWII does not change the many Philipino's that died under American colonialism. Just as our own humanitarian attitude nowadays does not take away our own colonials past. ABout being generous, we Dutch try to be to the best of our capabilities. But we're just a very small country.

So yes, the US did help us in WWII and have been an important ally and friend ever since. But it has nothing to do with the discussion here in my opinion.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## michaelmaltby (Jan 13, 2014)

"....But does that mean that we cannot be critical of the US and it's past? And should we swallow all critique on us as it's been uttered by people form a nation that "saved us"? Quite often this will be interpreted as being ungrateful, which of course is simply untrue. This argument always put us Europeans in a disadvantage in these discussions. And while it has nothing to do with the discussion itself. It sometimes seems like the events of WWII gives the Americans free permission to be critical of others while they should never get any critique back as it would be 'ungrateful'..."

Marcel, as a Canadian, I see the matter from _both sides _.... Canada was not _saved_ by America in WW1 or WW2 .... Canada - as you well know - was in both conflicts from beginning to end, and Canadians aren't persuaded by any "we won the war" arguments. Nor can we be influenced by any "guilt trips". But - that said - the actions of America after WW2 - the Marshall Plan, the principal carrier of the cold war costs in Europe and Asia, these are not the actions of a typical colonial power. 

Much of what America has done has been done to defend itself with an understanding that Allies (Britain and Commonwealth excepted) will not/cannot do the job for themselves. I don't have any casualty figures for American "colonialism" in the Philippines (and I doubt you do either) nor any means of comparing American actions there with Dutch colonial activity in Java and elsewhere, but I do know that Americans have again and again put blood and treasure on the line to try and improve the living conditions and the fate of people in unfortunate situations from Afghanistan to (recently) the Philippines. Interesting that many in that country are wishing that the days of Scubic Bay and Clark AFB weren't over and done with.

No country on earth - no society on earth - is _easier to criticize_ than America, and that is why I used the food posters, as I did. Unless Holland, Belgium, Italy, France, Germany, Greece, Turkey, etc. etc. etc. are willing to step up with blood and treasure to combat events such as 9/11, then, the citizens of these countries are delusional (and I include my own country in that assessment) about the realities of peace and prosperity.

Defense is not free. Democracy is not a given. Free speech and free markets have to be fought for by every generation.

In my opinion, Marcel, you can't complain about those who sacrifice to defend your interests while freely accepting their services .... without being a hypocrite. And yes, America may very well be hypocritical about its colonial past, but, when push comes to shove America has responded with sacrifice. Contrast this response with the EU's impotence in the Balkans after Yugoslavia dissolved into tribalism ..... they had to get America involved when the matter should have been settled by the EU.

So I'll end the rant .... but the word colonialism is about as meaningful as the communist concept of peace or the Muslim concept of freedom of expression, IMHO.

MM
Proud Canadian

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## silence (Jan 13, 2014)

Actually, you can complain - rather criticize. We Americans often don't live up to our own ideals, but, then, that's the same for any country. 

When we make a mistake we should be criticized, but critiques should be positive if possible. I criticize my country frequently, but I do so because I love her. I am not one of those who believe the US is the end-all-be-all, but rather because to be that is something worth striving for. We fought a horrid Civil War to make ourselves better. We tried prohibition to make ourselves better, and when it failed we dumped it. When our politicians screw up we call them on it. We're very much a two-steps forward one-step back nation, but that still equates to one step forward. Even Cuba wasn't about colonialism - or else we wouldn't have had to keep sending the Marines in over and over. Its been said that we should have bypassed the Philippines in WW2, but we instead we kicked Imperial Japan out. Heck, if one considers all the territory we took in the Pacific in WW2, we could have had for ourselves what Japan went to war for.

Some in the US say Reagan won the cold war. I say it was Truman and the Truman doctrine because with that we stopped looking internally and started looking globally with the promise to help anyone who wanted to be free or maintain their freedom. Sometimes we went too far, and sometimes perhaps not far enough. But, BUT we didn't back down. And all the fighting we have done has not been about colonialism (though I admit to still being undecided about Iraq, but I was against that from the start). A lot of Americans feel we deserve more overt thanks, but maybe the simple fact that _countries_ are now - for the most part - behaving peacefully is a kind of thanks.

So I guess what I'm saying - kinda - is criticize but don't bitch and complain. Honest criticism can be very helpful since often times we (people and nations) sometimes overlook the obvious things. But if you want to criticize us, you're giving us the right to do the same to you.

(jeez, talk about rambling....)

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 13, 2014)

silence said:


> But if you want to criticize us, you're giving us the right to do the same to you.



The problem is that most Americans don't think like you. They believe that they have the right to criticize, complain and bitch about other nations, but don't dare do it to the USA.

It is the usual "God Bless Murica!" crowd that think that way.

I say this as an American. I feel fortunate to have lived over half my life in Europe. I get a good insight in both places. It gives me a good insight in our faults in our country, as well as the faults of Europe as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Like List reactions


----------



## silence (Jan 13, 2014)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> The problem is that most Americans don't think like you. They believe that they have the right to criticize, complain and bitch about other nations, but don't dare do it to the USA.
> 
> It is the usual "God Bless Murica!" crowd that think that way.
> 
> I say this as an American. I feel fortunate to have lived over half my life in Europe. I get a good insight in both places. It gives me a good insight in our faults in our country, as well as the faults of Europe as well.



The only other country I've been exposed to is Canada: love the beer and hockey, but vinegar on french fries? C'mon, man, that's just wrong in so many ways.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## michaelmaltby (Jan 13, 2014)

".. but vinegar on french fries? "

Not just any vinegar .... malt vinegar. A colonial legacy from the UK, IIRC.

To me, the travesty is _mayo_ on fries .


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jan 13, 2014)

Malt Vinegar on Fish and Chips, YUM!

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 13, 2014)

silence said:


> The only other country I've been exposed to is Canada: love the beer and hockey, but vinegar on french fries? C'mon, man, that's just wrong in so many ways.



And I should not have said "most" Americans, but "many" Americans.



vikingBerserker said:


> Malt Vinegar on Fish and Chips, YUM!



The only wsy to eat it.



michaelmaltby said:


> ".. but vinegar on french fries? "
> 
> Not just any vinegar .... malt vinegar. A colonial legacy from the UK, IIRC.
> 
> To me, the travesty is _mayo_ on fries .



I love mayo on fries. Must be the German in me.


----------



## nuuumannn (Jan 13, 2014)

I remember watching some US award show on the telly and Hugh Laurie was giving a speech about his performance in House after winning some award. His opening line was: "I'm from England, you know; we used to rule the world before you did." 

The problem with threads like "Y'know what grinds my gears..." is that without intent, invariably someone gets offended. Rabbiting on about US foreign policy on a US forum is bound to upset the apple cart. Best to keep opinions to ourselves on controversial issues like this.


----------



## silence (Jan 13, 2014)

michaelmaltby said:


> ".. but vinegar on french fries? "
> 
> Not just any vinegar .... malt vinegar. A colonial legacy from the UK, IIRC.
> 
> To me, the travesty is _mayo_ on fries .



Throw off those colonial chains, man!!

(Personally I think mayo is the ultimate condiment, but I still like catsup on my fires)


----------



## Marcel (Jan 14, 2014)

michaelmaltby said:


> Marcel, as a Canadian, I see the matter from _both sides _.... Canada was not _saved_ by America in WW1 or WW2 .... Canada - as you well know - was in both conflicts from beginning to end, and Canadians aren't persuaded by any "we won the war" arguments. Nor can we be influenced by any "guilt trips". But - that said - the actions of America after WW2 - the Marshall Plan, the principal carrier of the cold war costs in Europe and Asia, these are not the actions of a typical colonial power.


The Dutch pay more money per person to charity and development of 3rd world countries than many other nationalities. That is also not typical of a colonial power. We are also no colonial power anymore and haven't been fore many decades.



michaelmaltby said:


> No country on earth - no society on earth - is _easier to criticize_ than America, and that is why I used the food posters, as I did. Unless Holland, Belgium, Italy, France, Germany, Greece, Turkey, etc. etc. etc. are willing to step up with blood and treasure to combat events such as 9/11, then, the citizens of these countries are delusional (and I include my own country in that assessment) about the realities of peace and prosperity.
> 
> Defense is not free. Democracy is not a given. Free speech and free markets have to be fought for by every generation.


Oh we have and we do. We've been fighting in Afganistan too, you know. Young Dutch soldiers paid there with their lives next to the Americans. The GErmans are there, too and others. Is that so easily dismissed?





michaelmaltby said:


> In my opinion, Marcel, you can't complain about those who sacrifice to defend your interests while freely accepting their services .... without being a hypocrite. And yes, America may very well be hypocritical about its colonial past, but, when push comes to shove America has responded with sacrifice. Contrast this response with the EU's impotence in the Balkans after Yugoslavia dissolved into tribalism ..... they had to get America involved when the matter should have been settled by the EU.


So in other words, helping someone will make you free of all blame. I don't agree, Michael. A relationship goes both ways in every way. As I said, we're very grateful to the Americans. We also plunge into almost every war that they are involved in, even with our small army. We're also a good trading partner for the US, in that way helping their economy. So we're doing everything we can to return the kindness. But we're still free people and can have our complains and judgements. I guess the Americans would appreciate that more than any other. I believe we can and must be critical about the US. We must not blindly accept what they do or tell us. It would go against everything they fought for in WWII.


ps. the revolt against the US power in the Philippines cost more than 200,000 Philippine lives.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## michaelmaltby (Jan 14, 2014)

"...helping someone will make you free of all blame..."

I didn't say that, Marcel, and I don't believe that.

"...We are also no colonial power anymore and haven't been fore many decades."

Royal Dutch Shell, Philips Electronics (BP, Exxon, Toyota, BMW, Ford) is the new "imperialism" Marcel, and "colonialism" today, is brand loyalty and market share.

Interesting Philippine War casualties .... this was not a_ simple_ colonial war Marcel, this was a war that was a continuation of events that started under Spanish (catholic) occupation and it was first and foremost a war of cultures ....

There are_ still _Islamic guerrillas/terrorists operating in the Philippines.


----------



## Marcel (Jan 14, 2014)

michaelmaltby said:


> I didn't say that, Marcel, and I don't believe that.


Ah, sorry, then I misinterpreted what you were trying to say.



michaelmaltby said:


> Royal Dutch Shell, Philips Electronics (BP, Exxon, Toyota, BMW, Ford) is the new "imperialism" Marcel, and "colonialism" today, is brand loyalty and market share.


I agree, but all countries are guilty of that, or at least people in all countries.



michaelmaltby said:


> Interesting Philippine War casualties .... this was not a_ simple_ colonial war Marcel, this was a war that was a continuation of events that started under Spanish (catholic) occupation and it was first and foremost a war of cultures ....


 Aren't all colonial wars?



michaelmaltby said:


> There are_ still _Islamic guerrillas/terrorists operating in the Philippines.


Yeah, probably. They are also in Indonesia, and in most western countries.

Michael, I think I discussed this long enough, so I will stop here. Just want to say that I respect you and your views as you write them on the forum and always have. I'm actually not sure if were really disagreeing here or exchanging views 

To my American friends, in no way am I trying to put the US in a bad light. I'm just saying that we all make mistakes in the current situation and in the past. Being critical to others without recognising this is a mistake. In no way will I ever try to deny or try to talk good the mistakes that my country made when it was still a superpower. 

It's hard to imagine that the little Republiek der Nederlanden was a superpower about 400 years ago. We beat that other superpower called Spain and were competing to the superpower called Great Britain. These three countries 'ruled the world' so-to-speak. We had huge and very rich colonies in the east and were totally ruthless in our search for wealth, crushing everyone in our way. Even the British complained about our arrogance and ruthlessness. Because of this, I think between 1620 and 1680, we were the richest and arguably most successful country in the world. Once upon a time, the Dutch were the major slave-traders and earned a lot of money over other people's misery. So we have no great history in that respect. Nowadays we're but a small country, going with the flow. We need great allies like the US and our fellow European countries to survive. But it's still a great little country and we're still making our mark in the world, for the good and the bad.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## michaelmaltby (Jan 14, 2014)

"guilty" ....? of what. I read today that Wolverines are moving into bear country on the BC coast. And snowy owls have pushed as far south as Virginia thanks to recent cold weather and feeding opportunities. What gets referred to as colonialism is, in fact, nature and physical principles at play -- high pressures move (occupy) low pressure areas. I do not believe in "guilt" in most cases - I believe in _*progress*_, and so-called colonialism has rarely set a country "back" -- there are exceptions of course, Poland and the Eastern Bloc countries under the Nazis and Soviets for examples.

Marcel, I too think this has gone on long enough, but, when you speak of little Netherlands once being a super-power I smile. The House of Orange re-set the British Monarchy. And today, in these 'progressive' times, you may be surprised to learn that, by ethnicity/nationality, the Dutch are the largest land owners in Canada. Great farmers as we all know .... and I don't believe Canadians feel threatened ... 

MM

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Njaco (Jan 14, 2014)

nuuumannn said:


> I remember watching some US award show on the telly and Hugh Laurie was giving a speech about his performance in House after winning some award. His opening line was: "I'm from England, you know; we used to rule the world before you did."
> 
> The problem with threads like "Y'know what grinds my gears..." is that without intent, invariably someone gets offended. Rabbiting on about US foreign policy on a US forum is bound to upset the apple cart. Best to keep opinions to ourselves on controversial issues like this.



I think I'm gonna have to disagree on this one. We are not like other forums and its because of the diversity around here and the openness which we allow members to discuss topics that makes us unique. I can take some egg on my face from what America has or hasn't done in the past. What we really won't tolerate is a total disrespect for someones country or service. That is a no-no.

But _civilly _discussing what the USA, UK or any other country has or hasn't done is ok by me. Just don't get too political. As long as you're buying afterwards!

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Like List reactions


----------

