1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Why Do They Hate Us?

Discussion in 'Issues Around the World' started by ethics, Jul 22, 2007.

  1. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    Most asked post 9.11.01 question in foreign policy? Why not ask them?

    And they reply:

    The above was/is still mentioned here and the above applies to not only Middle East but throughout the world. America is the Jew of the world (small as far as population, but powerful and rich) which is why hatred for America/Israel goes hand in hand many times.

    The best part of the column is reserved for another reason why "they hate us" and this has more to do with our foreign policies. The author, a Pakistani, writes how small gestures around the world by the US thinks it is sending ripples, but it's sending tidal waves.

    Probably one of the best and most honest look at the question and the answer give. Read the whole thing.
     
  2. Greg

    Greg Full Member

    I completely reject the "envy" theory or the "they hate us for our freedom" theory.

    Your second version is more what I believe. I'm nearing completing my reading of Chalmers Johnson's "Nemesis" followup book to his "Blowback" book (companion volumes IMO) and I support Johnson's ideas that the cause of terrorism is the asymmetric power relationship of America vs. the third world, that in a war the third world cannot respond militarily one-on-one and thus assymetric warfare is their only option. Johnson would describe this as more or less "our chickens coming home to roost" in the sense that the huge negative consequences of our meddling in the affairs of smaller, undeveloped or disadvantaged countries is their fighting back in the only way they can: terrorism.

    I don't see any end to terrorism until we address American imperialism and the effects and consequences of our imperialism on the undeveloped and underdeveloped world (i.e. those who cannot address us militarily).

    I'm not for or against anything here, and I have no agenda. I'm just calling the shots the way I see them, and Johnson's writings support (in my own mind) what I believe.

    Our chickens are coming home to roost.
     
  3. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    Not mine. It's from a person who knows a bit more than me about "why". I can tell you that this holds true in Eastern Europe though. Whether you accept or reject is up to you.

    Terrorism is and will be always with us.
     
  4. Greg

    Greg Full Member

    Please excuse me for personalizing my reply. I meant, "I reject the theory [not necessarily yours] of "they envy/hate us for our freedom." (Actually I'll be surprised if you believe that.)

    I don't understand the Eastern Europe connection or why they would feel differently.
     
  5. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    That's fine, many Americans reject "they envy us" theory.
     
  6. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    "American imperialism"? Care to give some examples?

    SM
     
  7. Violet1966

    Violet1966 Stand and Deliver Staff Member

    The envy is there, but I don't feel it's the primary reason for the hate.

    I've heard some America bashing in Muslim households in my time. Pre 9/11. Most notably from my one of my best friend's husband who was born in Turkey and was in the Turkish military. He loved this country, but at the same time he hated it when it came to world issues. His complaints would be that the United States meddled too much in things that shouldn't concern them. They give money to bad people too.

    I've also seen this same opinion on another forum I go to, that has maybe 3 American members, the rest all foreigners. We meddle too much they say. We help this one who hates that one, who has helped this one and it made bad things happen, etc.

    We have our own ideas of what makes a country great and humane, they have their own ideas. Different laws, cultural practices. We go in and do something and we're called meddlers with our hands in things that's pissing someone off somewhere. They think we think we own the world and are the police of the world and we're at fault for thinking we should interfere in anything. We should worry about our own country and butt out, they say. They hate us because we reach out and affect things outside of our own country. We give money to certain places, while not giving to others who could use it too.

    I think a good example of this is in this story. The story of Soviet occupation in Afghanistan. How we, through the cia actually encouraged militant cell formation and it drove the country backward, simply because we felt the need to help them. Instead of backing off and letting the S.U. do it's thing, we helped and it made things hell after that.
     
    1 person likes this.
  8. Greg

    Greg Full Member

    I feel so inept here. Chalmers Johnson's book is so chock full of examples and I'm reading it right now, yet I'm just not good at this. Okinawa in Japan and our bases there, 50 years after WWII is over. Our bases in South Korea. Our bases in Iraq/Afghanistan. Hell, our bases anywhere except on US territory. Do you believe that all our military bases on foreign soil are there because their people want us there? Or even their governments?

    I'm over my head here. Anybody else read Chalmers Johnson's books? Can I get a bit of help here?

    It should come as no surprise that politics and history were my worst subjects (outside of P.E.). Why can't this be simple like electronics, computers, and embedded microcontrollers? I could type volumes on that subject...
     
  9. Biker

    Biker Administrator Staff Member

    If the government didn't want us there, we wouldn't be. Prime example.. The Phillipines. The bases pump far too much money into the local economies and while there tends to be the odd bad press release every now and then, it's been my experience that most folks enjoy the presence of the military bases.
     
  10. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    You know, if you're over your head and don't want to answer tough questions, there is a way around that. ;)

    We're in the places you and your idol Chalmers likely goes on to mention by existing treaties, not by forceable occupation or hegemonistic imperialism. I would think an American might know the difference.

    SM
     
  11. Arc

    Arc Full Member

    They do envy us. It is human nature. But to put it has the primary or leading and sustained cause of hate is a terrible mistake IMO. There are many other reasons and they are deeper and more dangerous or motivational than envy. To focus on envy is to unintentionally recognize or obscure the other and IMO more important reasons.
     
  12. Sacchiridites

    Sacchiridites Banned

    I agree wholeheartedly on this one. Too many kids and adults do NOT like history, don't pay attention to it, could care less. But! Thank America for journalists and reporters that keep the living history of the US alive and the freedom of speech to do it.

    Was sitting with my wheelchair-bound neighbor and daughters talking about just this thing this afternoon. What I had to say about it was this: IF 'they' (the collective 'haters') can infuse the American people with enough negativity and hate amongst ourselves, then it is their best weapon against us. I also said that as in past history, the people of the US will rise above complacency and TAKE a lesson from history (or just ignorantly repeat it) and use this to best rule their own nation, regardless of whether they individually 'feel' powerless or not, because the collective citizens of the US WILL be heard and will be heeded if only from the desperation of the majority that screams, not the minority. And THAT is what makes the US a wonderful country to be envied.

    Best,
    Cie
     
  13. Arc

    Arc Full Member

    Who runs Saudi Arabia, the Royal Family or the people?

    Who is the Royal Family "closer" to, the Saudi peoples or the United States government?

    What is UBL's clear cut main gripe against us?
     
  14. Violet1966

    Violet1966 Stand and Deliver Staff Member

    Yup...we're friends with someone's enemy. That's where the hate comes from in a nutshell.
     
  15. Swamp Fox

    Swamp Fox Veteran Member

    As far as I'm concerned, it's not just envy, it's also finding a convenient scapegoat - it's no longer fashionable (for some) to blame Jews, so blame the US.
     
  16. rowd

    rowd Spark Maker

    global electronic mastery and exporting the American dollar "Hegemony" and culture is imperialism.
     
  17. joseftu

    joseftu ORIGINAL Pomp-Dumpster

    To call the US an empire now, or refer to current US imperialism, is a bit anachronistic--like calling someone a "whig" or a "commie." We're living in a post-imperialist age.

    But in the past, American imperialism as a conscious policy and as actual behavior is absolutely real, and has absolutely had lasting effects on the US and on the perceptions others now hold about the US.
     
  18. ravital

    ravital Banned

    Ab-So-Lutely.

    It is really commendable to satisfy one's curiosity by studying history, yet I would be careful and not limit my source to a single author. Especially about a topic as complex as current geopolitics, history, and the role the U.S. plays in the world. I'm sure you can see the wisdom of expanding your sources to different perspective, particularly those who might challenge your own views, then submit them to your own rational scrutiny; If you can disprove their arguments, you have gained a stronger footing for your own perspectives, and if not, then you've learned something new.

    Studying history in this manner has taught me, for instance (and you might find this hard to believe, so I sincerely encourage you to obtain your own sources on this), that the first country that insisted on a sustained and prolonged massive American military presence on their own soil after WWII was - drumroll - none other than France. And it wasn't for fear of a Soviet invasion, it was to keep their old Nemesis in check - Germany. Since then, through the decades of the Cold War for which America paid so much, all of Western Europe was able to develop thriving and successful economies, productive peaceful diplomacy, prosperity, excellence in education and civil services, precisely because the U.S. was keeping the peace for them, so they didn't have to invest so much on their own military machinery, which allowed them to avoid conflict that might have resulted from arms-races of their own. Loud and colorful demonstrations on the streets by chauvinist sheeple aside, they never wanted Yankee to go home, they wanted Yankee to stay put. Please show me an empire in history that has done that.

    Even better, we provided armament to the same, when they couldn't afford their own - in 1951, the decommissioned U.S.S. Langley, an aircraft carrier, was re-commissioned and handed over to the French Navy (which renamed it La Fayette), which enabled the French to use her in combat operations off Indo-China - another mess we inherited from France. Please show me an empire that would have done the same, to assist an ally involved in REAL imperialism for which the so-called empire suffered more consequences than said ally.

    As to the other parts of the world you've mentioned as examples of American imperialism, you are completely ignoring the simple, basic fact that, no matter what our own interest was, these American military bases were created and kept there for as long as they have, either at the request of, or with the complete agreement and permission of, the host countries. When any such country asks the U.S. to leave, we may discuss the matter with them and try to dissuade them, but the bottom line is, if the host doesn't want us there, we pick up our toys and leave. Please show me an empire that has ever done that.

    In all these cases of so-called American imperialism, we do not strip the hosts of their natural resources, tax them for our own enrichment, or draft their population into our own military. Please show me an empire in history that has not bothered to exploit its conquests in such manner.

    Excellent questions.

    The French Fifth Republic is run by the French people who elect their government, which is (more or less) answerable to the people. We deal with the elected government, whoever that might be. Same for Germany, South-Korea, Japan, etc.

    The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is run by the Saudi Royal family, which is not elected by the Saudi people (if there even is such a thing), and is not answerable to the people. We deal with the government.

    The curse of the entire Middle East, is that it is run by governments that are not answerable to the people they govern. Why is that our problem? And if it is our problem, have you noticed that we are equally, if not more, resented when we try to fix the problem and create a democracy in the heart of the Middle East?

    Western powers are not innocent, and certainly the U.S. is not. What everybody fails to notice is, that intrinsic and even endemic problems such as perpetual tyrannies in the Middle East are the problem of the people who live under them, not the problem of the countries that deal with the tyrannies. The entire Middle East was drawn up as it is today by Western powers attempting to secure a reliable source of industrial energy - and no, not just the U.S., not even in large part the U.S., but in large part the other powers dividing up the world at the end of WWI (LoveHound, I sincerely and warmly recommend Margaret MacMillan's Paris 1919 - six months that changed the world). This arrangement of then relatively benign dictatorships happy to profit from their own oil and doing absolutely nothing for their people (most of them at least), had consequences. How are the same Western nations bearing the consequences? The French sell weapons to an adventurist, insane, brutal dictator (along with the Soviets and the Chinese, making up some 85% of Saddam's conventional weaponry before 2003), and the U.S. suffers attacks on its embassies, on its forces engaged in humanitarian aid, and on its own soil.

    The bottom line is, they will keep resenting us as long as they are poor, oppressed, and brainwashed to look the other way for the source of all their ills to the benefit of their leaderships who do not answer to them and do nothing for them.

    As to OBL - How quickly everyone, including him, forgets that when it suited his purposes, the U.S. gladly helped him. So we are the devil, according to him, because he was not too proud to soil himself by accepting the help we offered when it suited us?

    Beyond that, as long as these are the precarious footings for resentment of the U.S. around the world, I have no idea why we should concern ourselves with that. What do we need to be, a painted whore that satisfies everybody? There are very valid reasons for us to examine our actions and mend our ways. "A culture of Imperialism" is not it.
     
  19. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    Come on, Arc...that's patently ridiculous. The Saudi royals have the ball in their court. They deal with the US for the monetary compensation--that's hardly "imperialism" by any stretch. SA is not nor could it ever pass for a possession of the United States of America.

    As far as bin Laden's gripes against the U.S., they change according to his needs. He flip-flops as much as John Kerry ever did.

    SM
     
  20. Swamp Fox

    Swamp Fox Veteran Member

    Come on, Arch - if the US was really imperialistic, why're the Saudi Royal family so rich? Why're the Gulf states so rich? In fact, why haven't the US annexed the oil fields?
     

Share This Page