US prepared to go it alone - allies warned.

[Velociryx]

Hiya Roland! Always glad to pick the debate thread back up, so here goes:

It wasn't intended as a troll, and if you'll re-read my post, I said "about the two biggest things...were WWI and WWII." In looking at your list (which included both items I mentioned), I don't see anything that can even begin to compare with the bloodshed and world impacting events of two world wars happening within a fifty year span. I realize that's somewhat subjective, but c'mon? Nationalism and the Labor Movement? Abolition of slavery....yes, in your little corner of the world. That's hardly a universal truth, even today. Imperialism? And this is supposed to be a positive trend for the ol' list? (by that I mean, something to detract from the horrors of the World Wars?).

I'll grant you, the Modern State and industrialization (you started it, we finished it, then rebuilt a good portion of Europe's Industry after two world wars knocked most of it down....I know that probably chaffes at you, but whether it does or not doesn't change the truth of it), but compared to two world wars, the Modern State is ummm....a tad weak, don't you think?

So really, it's not a question of balance. There *isn't* much balance, IMO. You guys like to fight. We like to fight. We come by it honestly.

The difference is, you guys haven't had to put your heads (and troops) together to come over here and save us from ourselves, *despite* the variety of wars we've been in...Or did I miss that somewhere? If I did....If several European nations got together and sent troops here to help us against some dastardly enemy of our own creation, tell me! Sounds like I mighta missed that history class!

Favorable geopolotical position? Yep. And thank you for that! If not for kicking us out of your countries a good while back, we'd never have had it!

Good try, but I'm hardly convinced, and I'll say again, despite the fact that we piss each other off now and again, the truth of the matter is, we need each other.

-=Vel=-

[Roland]

"Nationalism and the Labor Movement?"

Make it two packs: nationalism-imperialism, and industrialisation-labor movement. Which leads to:

"And this is supposed to be a positive trend for the ol' list?"

A complete picture. What do you think shaped WWI ? English longbowmen ?

"industrialization (you started it, we finished it"

I wouldn't be that pessimistic. US manufacturing is in a crisis, but not really finished.

"then rebuilt a good portion of Europe's Industry after two world wars knocked most of it down...."

A nice little financing. Helpful, but not even decisive. Far from "US rebuilt europe". LOL.
Btw: If so, how do you explain GDR output growth in the 1950s?

"The difference is, you guys haven't had to put your heads (and troops) together to come over here and save us from ourselves"

Only for your coming-into-existance. And you did that only in WWII, not in WWI. Saving your own ass in the process, I may add.

"Favorable geopolotical position? Yep. And thank you for that! If not for kicking us out of your countries a good while back, we'd never have had it!"

How would you think that position would look for 50 sovereign states ? And what do you think the geopolitical position of the European Union of 15 or 27 is like ?

"we need each other."

We can gain from cooperation. We can also gain from being at loggerheads (sp?) from time to time.

[Velociryx]

GAAAHHH! LOL....Roland, are you *reading* or just skimming? I already said, and gave Europe FULL CREDIT for spawning this country. My post asked the question, *since the formation of the USA, what were the real BIGGIES to come from Europe?* Far overshadowing anything else is....WWI and WWII.

You can live in denial if you wanna, but it's true, bud.

And btw, just so we're clear, I never said anything about the US rebuilding Europe. We restored your industrial capacity and you rebuilt yourself. In that regard, yes it was decisive.

-=Vel=-

[Roland]

Thos poly ****-ups are getting annoying. Ok, short version:

"I already said, and gave Europe FULL CREDIT for spawning this country."

Ugh.

"Far overshadowing anything else is....WWI and WWII."

Why ?

"In that regard, yes it was decisive."

How ?
How do you explain the GDR performance under much more difficult circumstances ?
How big was the western european capital stock in 1948 ?

[Velociryx]

Hmmm....why? WHY? Well....let's see....if you can point me to one thing since 1776 that even BEGINS to compare to two world wars inside a fifty year span that comes close to that in it's social and geopolitical ramifications (redrawing of European power structures and alliances, a dash of good ol' fashioned genocide and the almost complete destruction of industrial capacity in the whole of Europe), you might be able to change my mind.

As to helping Europe rebuild its infrastructure after the second world war, you don't think that's decisive? The Marshall plan represented a HUGE departure from accepted post-warfare norms that saved an untold number of lives by speeding the redevelopment of your own infrastructure and helping to ensure that WWIII didn't occur some fifty years after the second round (based on the fact that WWII occurred only a single generation after the first one).

Nahhh...what was I thinking....that was no biggie.

-=Vel=-

[macaskil]

Over on the civ3 forums I never agree with Vel but here I am on his side.

In am

1. European
and
2. a Lefty

However I regard the USA (on the whole) as a positive influence on the World in its 200 years existence, whereas Europe spent the 19th century building up huge empires, and the 20th killing each other.

Of course the US has had slavery, the KKK and the "ethnic cleansing" of Native American culture, but at least have confined their sins to their own backyard, until forced into joining WWII and the Cold War. Vietnam was a mistake but should be seen in its context. The US thought it would be a replay of Korea. Had it lasted a couple of years and been followed by a cease-fire and partition as in Korea....

Europe in the last 50 years has relied on the US to keep it safe from the Soviets, and now to secure its oil supplies by propping up the Saudi regime. Until we either

- have our own powerful military - which God forbid
- have a UN peacekeeping force worthy of the name

we're stuck with it.

I'm proud of being European but for us Euros to criticise the USA's record is a little hypocritical.

[Velociryx]

Hiya mac! Just cos I'm a curious sort, do you not agree with me on the civ3 section cos I uninstalled the game/my current views on it, or do you disagree with stuff like my ideas in the strat. threads?



-=Vel=-

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Sikander
It is meant to show that the policy of nation states is driven by self interest. It might put a cheerleader like Giancarlo into a tizzy, but I have no illusions about this and have not had any for decades. It does say something about your naivete that you are still so angry about it. Now you are going through the cynical phase of understanding the world. This may or may not pass for you, but remember that just because something or someone is selfish doesn't mean that it or they are always wrong. Taking a gun away from a murderer might be done for self-preservation, but it might also save the lives of others.

You always want to have it both ways. As I see it, there are two consistent, mutually exclusive ways to look at international policy.

-Either we interpret it from a moral viewpoint, then we have to judge our own (including your beloved USA) acts by the same standards we use in judging others; and yes, in that case Turkey deserves to be bombed at least as much, if not more so, than Afghanistan. Btw, Israel deserves to be bombed, too: No one has ever ignored a larger number of UN resolutions.

-Or you think like Shaw: 'Everyone has the right to fight, no one has the right to judge.' Alright with me, but why then the whining about 9/11 and AlQuaida?