Transterrestrial Musings

Comments

What did Einstein have to do with the defeat of Germany?

Posted by at March 30, 2007 05:22 PM

Payback for when the Germans Bombed Pearl Harbor.

Posted by Bluto at March 30, 2007 05:25 PM

"I'm fully confident that they'll blame America."

Plenty of people around here still blame America for the Civil War, but I guess if we take your beloved catchphrase to heart, "they're just on the other side." Or, like everything you say, is the standard entirely arbitrary and relative to wherever you happen to be standing?

Responsibility is valuable precisely it's uncommon anywhere, and I have yet to hear you give a single other country the benefit of the doubt for opposing US foreign policy. The most depraved realpolitk on our nation's part you excuse as natural and befitting a global superpower, but the slightest hint of independent interests from other countries you denounce as the basest corruption. In that your statements are no different than those you condemn, the deformed morality of narcissism.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at March 30, 2007 05:35 PM

So Germany was expressing its independent interests in WW2, and our response was depraved realpolitik? Just trying to understand what your comment has to do with Germany vs the US.

Posted by Jay Manifold at March 30, 2007 06:14 PM

I'm not sure whats more sad. This trash making it into Der Spiegel, or Mr Simberg basing his entire worldview on it.

Posted by Adrasteia at March 30, 2007 06:14 PM

Oh, and I blame America for the Civil War, too; both sides of it, in fact. Care to explain that bizarre little aside, as well?

Posted by Jay Manifold at March 30, 2007 06:16 PM

Explain why it is trash? It's a comfirmation of a popular if ridiculous European view of the US. France condemns us about Saddam while taking billions under the table from him and everyone thinks we're the bad guys. Our record as a world power is better than any country in history. I'm proud of that. I will take issue with anyone that says otherwise, ESPECIALLY Europeans. We have been the most generous, fogiving, reviled, envied, admired and stable country for the last 200 hundred years. Some Americans, it seems, can't stand success and other countries seem to be tired of ours.

Posted by Bill Maron at March 30, 2007 06:40 PM

This trash making it into Der Spiegel, or Mr Simberg basing his entire worldview on it.

My entire worldview is based on Der Spiegel? Who knew?

It's certainly a shock to me. Not to mention Der Spiegel.

Posted by Rand Simberg at March 30, 2007 06:40 PM

I see the same silly ideas about the USA in almost everyone under the age of 30 or 35 here in New Zealand as well.

I don't know why this is but I wonder if Hollywood has anything to do with it? The USA's cities, police, and military are not at *all* like those portrayed in movies. But how are people who have never lived there to know that?

Worse, I wonder from a number of recent events whether junior members of the US police and military are now in fact starting to believe their Hollywood image.

Posted by Bruce Hoult at March 30, 2007 07:23 PM

...your statements are no different than those you condemn, the deformed morality of narcissism.

Based on your many bigoted and blinkered comments here, I find this quite amusing in its unwitting (as many of your comments are) irony.

Posted by Rand Simberg at March 30, 2007 07:33 PM

Jay: "So Germany was expressing its independent interests in WW2, and our response was depraved realpolitik?"

How does the question follow?

Jay: "Just trying to understand what your comment has to do with Germany vs the US."

There is no "Germany vs. the US," that's my point.

Jay: "Oh, and I blame America for the Civil War, too; both sides of it, in fact."

There was only one American side in the Civil War. My point is that the same people who prattle on about the alleged "blame America first" crowd, and who whine and complain about anti-Americanism they reinforce on a daily basis, have nothing but sympathy for one of America's most despicable enemies.

Rand: "Based on your many bigoted and blinkered comments here, I find this quite amusing in its unwitting (as many of your comments are) irony."

I notice you never actually argue with anything I say, just deny it with an ego-saving putdown. Why is that?

Posted by Brian Swiderski at March 30, 2007 10:46 PM

The article - " Evil Americans, Poor Mullahs" is a wake up call for not only Germans but all Europeans. Following is the disaster that awaits the world if Iran obtains a nucleur weapon.

IT’S ALL ABOUT IRAN

We need to deal with Iran now otherwise the US could be left at one minute to midnight with no other option but to attack Iran. The longer the US waits to impose a meaningful sanction regime against Iran, the greater the necessity of military action will become – with all the potential disastrous political and economic consequences for both parties.

The Iranian Sanction Agreement just negotiated by the Security Council is an absolute joke. The US is allowing these countries to delay and obstruct sanctions against Iran.

THE REALITY IS THE US DOES NOT NEED CHINA OR RUSSIA TO INPOSE SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAN. THE US CAN IMPOSE DEVASTATING RECIPROCAL SANCTIONS

(Go to www.irandemocracy.net)

Lest we all forget one of the main reasons for the Iraq war was that China, Germany, Russia and France had been bought off by Saddem through the UN Oil for Food program. It is hard to believe that these countries by their present actions are again moving us in the direction of war with Iran. By their greed, they are totally blind to the very real danger Iran poses to the entire Middle East. There is an impending political and military catastrophe facing America, Europe, China and the World in the Middle East. This catastrophe will lead to a disastrous disruption of oil supplies that will force oil prices to $10.00/$20.00/gallon and throw the world economy into a massive recession affecting all world economies espically the developing economies of China and India. This could cause political instability on a world wide scale. The reality of the situation is that you can talk with the Iranian leadership until you are blue in the face - AND NOTHING WILL BE ACHIEVED. Iran is marching forward to obtaining a nuclear weapon and will not be stopped with endless talk. TIME IS NOT ON OUR SIDE.

The West faces the greatest strategic defeat in its history.

As described in this article - if the US is forced out of Iraq the following disaster will ensue.

The Iraqi government immediately collapses.

All Iraqis who supported the Government and US flee the country by the hundreds of thousands.

Iran immediately steps into the power vacuum supporting the seizure of Baghdad by their radical Shiite militia allies.

A radical Shiite Islamic government is imposed on Iraq.

A podium against the Sunnis begins with millions killed. The survivors are driven out of the country.

One million Hezbollah style fighters are enlisted into the radical Shiite Militias. (If Hezbollah can muster an army of fifty thousand fighters from a Lebanese population of 1.5 million Shiites – then in Iraq a Hezbollah style government would create an army of one million Shiite fanatics.)

This force in alliance with the Iranian army captures Riyadh within weeks and seizes the Gulf States.

They then march into Jordon creating a Shitte Crescent stretching from Iran to the Suez Canal and from the Mediterean Sea to the Russian Cossacks.

As previously mentioned - with 80% of the world’s oil, under Iran's control the price will soar to $10.00/$20.00 per gallon.

Israel is attacked with rockets on all sides effectively shutting down the Israeli economy and destroying the Jewish state.

After obtaining nuclear weapons, Iran unleashes terrorist forces worldwide attacking Europe and the US.

These terrorists smuggle nuclear weapons into London, Paris, Washington, New York and kill millions.

This nightmare does not have to happen.

Its time for Europe to wake up and realize that it is not US cities that will be within range of Iranian ballastic missles but Berlin, Paris, London, Madrid etc.

Written By,

Larry Houle

E-mail: intermedusa@yahoo.com
www.irandemocracy.net

Posted by Larry Houle at March 31, 2007 12:26 AM

The article - " Evil Americans, Poor Mullahs" is a wake up call for not only Germans but all Europeans. Following is the disaster that awaits the world if Iran obtains a nucleur weapon.

IT’S ALL ABOUT IRAN

The Iranian Sanction Agreement just negotiated by the Security Council is an absolute joke. The US is allowing these countries to delay and obstruct sanctions against Iran.

THE REALITY IS THE US DOES NOT NEED CHINA OR RUSSIA TO INPOSE SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAN. THE US CAN IMPOSE DEVASTATING RECIPROCAL SANCTIONS

(Go to www.irandemocracy.net)

These terrorists smuggle nuclear weapons into London, Paris, Washington, New York and kill millions.

This nightmare does not have to happen.

Its time for Europe to wake up and realize that it is not US cities that will be within range of Iranian ballastic missles but Berlin, Paris, London, Madrid etc.

Written By,

Larry Houle

E-mail: intermedusa@yahoo.com
www.irandemocracy.net

Posted by Larry Houle at March 31, 2007 12:26 AM

Larry: "The West faces the greatest strategic defeat in its history."

The Bush regime has nothing to do with the West.

"The Iraqi government immediately collapses."

Because there is no Iraqi government.

"All Iraqis who supported the Government and US flee the country by the hundreds of thousands."

There aren't that many, and sectarian identity is far more likely to determine one's danger.

"Iran immediately steps into the power vacuum supporting the seizure of Baghdad by their radical Shiite militia allies."

At which point al Qaeda begins attacking Iranian cities.

"A radical Shiite Islamic government is imposed on Iraq."

Whose mullahs, imams, and holy places are suicide-bombed practically every day by Sunni infiltrators from Saudi Arabia. I don't think you thought this scenario through very well.

"A podium against the Sunnis begins with millions killed."

Pogrom? Yes, that would be a work of genius--have the other 900 million Muslims in the world aching for their blood, and the entire world outside their borders condemning them. For a country that's never done anything like what you claim, you attribute an incredible amount of spontaneous stupidity to the Iranians.

"One million Hezbollah style fighters are enlisted into the radical Shiite Militias."

They would die fifty at a time with every Sunni sporting a C4 belt, and Shiites supposedly aren't allowed to retaliate with the same tactics.

"This force in alliance with the Iranian army captures Riyadh within weeks and seizes the Gulf States."

Now your scenario is just laughable. Please inform me how the Iranian army, which could easily be crushed by Israel acting alone, is going to destroy our ships and airbases in the region and take Riyadh in weeks. When their commander arrived to raise the Iranian flag, would he say "All your base are belong to us"?

"They then march into Jordon creating a Shitte Crescent stretching from Iran to the Suez Canal and from the Mediterean Sea to the Russian Cossacks."

ROFLMAO! Then they invade Africa, and the Stans, and India, and Turkey, and the Mediterranean, and Germany, and Scandinavia, and China, then they land on the Moon, and the entire world is overrun by a military that just barely fought Saddam to a stalemate over the course of a decade with weapons we sold them. Listen carefully--we would see the Iranian army massing, and we would annihilate it on the same day that it crossed the border. What you're saying is a joke.

"After obtaining nuclear weapons, Iran unleashes terrorist forces worldwide attacking Europe and the US."

They unleash their kryptonite death ray from their underground lair.

"These terrorists smuggle nuclear weapons into London, Paris, Washington, New York and kill millions."

So not only are your fantasy Iranians eager to send their military to a quick death for nothing, but also want to bring about the complete annihilation of their civilization and end 4,000 years of continuous history just to kill a few million Westerners. You are aware that Iranians are human beings, are you not?

"This nightmare does not have to happen."

Nor will it happen, ever, under even the worst of circumstances. Iran does not have the economy to build a military that could challenge even medium-sized NATO countries, nor will it ever, nor do the mullahs want their entire civilizaton to die just to destroy a handful of Western cities out of tens of thousands. If anything, I'd be more worried about Pakistan.

"that it is not US cities that will be within range of Iranian ballastic missles but Berlin, Paris, London, Madrid etc."

Their missiles are a joke. And when they're not a joke, they'll still be easy to destroy on the ground. But if some were hardened against conventional attack, and we suspected a nuclear launch was imminent, we or Israel would nuke all suspected launch sites. Iran isn't stupid; they want the theoretical leverage of nuclear force, not the actual weaponry per se or specific threat of using it.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at March 31, 2007 03:11 AM

"There was only one American side in the Civil War."

United States of America...Confederate States of America......one....two called America.

I paid attention in both math and history.

Posted by Mike Puckett at March 31, 2007 08:36 AM

"United States of America...Confederate States of America......one....two called America."

I don't care if the slaver traitors copyrighted the word America, they were despicable enemies of this country and everything it ever stood for, and some people here seem to think they were victims. Because apparently some people will accept any excuse for their own, and that's the lesson of the Der Spiegel article--it has nothing to do with Germans, or Americans, it's just some people are incurable hypocrites. Some people will blame America for their problems without cause, and some Americans will shrug off torture and murder committed by the government they voted for while portraying other countries as terrorist conspirators for not joining the gulag club. Some people are walking ids with a cup holder where their moral compass is supposed to be, so they can turn around and wonder at how the universe revolves around them. There is absolutely nothing at all they cannot excuse if associated closely enough with their self-image.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at March 31, 2007 11:42 AM

It is amazing that you cannot find the 'nuance' in the most nuanced situation in American History. Any reasonable and objective person can easily find heros and villians on both sides of the Mason-Dixon Line. I had ancestors fight on both sides in that conflict. While from the lens of the present, we and the world are much better off with the North winning the war, it certainly carried its full share of the sins for allowing things to get as far as coming to blows in the first place and the piss-poor job it did with reconstruction. But I know you are a fan of the US Army as a great occupying force.

I guess it is that whole lack of Wisdom thing you and Gorebot suffer from. Please, just keep on chasing that fast little bird, you will catch him eventually.....

PS, there still were two. Lincoln knew a tail was not a leg no matter how much you want it to be so. Again with that Wisdom thing. Try some and you too can join the rest of us in not being common sense challenged.

Posted by Mike Puckett at March 31, 2007 12:16 PM

Mike: "It is amazing that you cannot find the 'nuance' in the most nuanced situation in American History."

Nuance can be found in literally anything if you choose to be philosophical on an issue. The point is that some people only recognize nuance when the alternative is condemning a part of themselves, but don't hesitate to characterize the world in black and white terms for everyone else.

Listen to some defenders of the Iraq invasion waving off all other facts and arguments by saying "but Saddam was evil!" then trying to insinuate some kind of moral obscurity into a war against the enslavers, torturers, and murderers of a dozen generations of people, just because they have a cultural identity in common.

That essential narcissism is really a core characteristic of the conservative personality, bearing an infinite bounty of rationalizations for their own behavior and that of ingroups, and an impenetrable conviction in the fundamental unworthiness of all who obstruct or trouble them in any way. For some people, the man who raises their income taxes 2% is more of a villain than a brother who beats his children.

Mike: "Any reasonable and objective person can easily find heros and villians on both sides of the Mason-Dixon Line."

What the hell do "heroes" and "villains" have to do with reasonable and objective? There were heroes in the wermacht, in the Legions, in the hordes of the King of Kings, among the Turk, in dozens of murderous People's Liberation Armies; and there were villains among the Greatest Generation, among the doughboys, in La Resistance, in the bluecoats and continental militias.

All of human nature exists everywhere that people are, all the time, so you should choose what your standard is going to be: Are you going to recognize nuance or not? Don't just see complexity when personal sensitivities demand it and then revert to binary thinking elsewhere. The horrors of the plantations were surpassed only by 20th century concentration camps, so make your choice--are you going to see patriotism and moral nuance in the SS, or are you going to regard the slavers and the Confederacy they started as the villains they clearly were?

That isn't a loaded question either; you can find nuances in Nazi Germany, and they were just as true as nuances in anything else, but most of the time we choose to ignore them because the horror so greatly overwhelms them. Such is the case with the Confederacy, and I've concluded that the nuances are trivial by comparison.

Mike: "it certainly carried its full share of the sins for allowing things to get as far as coming to blows in the first place and the piss-poor job it did with reconstruction."

There was no "allowing" about it. The South valued not merely the continuation of slavery more than its country, but the *expansion* of it into new states in order to protect the institution from eventual failure. When said expansion was not to their satisfaction, they tore up their copy of the Constitution and seceded--real "patriots." Nor do I subscribe to the idea that the general populace wasn't responsible, because they were clearly supportive both of slavery and secession, and if any Southerners spoke out against either they were vanishingly rare and terrorized.

Secondly, Reconstruction was sabotaged by the Andrew Johnson administration, who hated black people with a passion and rejected the civil rights ideas Lincoln had formulated by the end of the war. His only reason for being on the Union side was loyalty to the United States, and all he wanted to do after the war was go back to the pre-war status quo.

Mike: "But I know you are a fan of the US Army as a great occupying force."

I am a fan of the US Army when it does its job of defending the Constitution.

Mike: "PS, there still were two."

No, there were not. Most of the South was never a free land, and never had any relationship with the principles that founded this country, it was just an endless cycle of predation, poverty, horror, and Russian-esque aristocracy. The landowners participated in the Revolution so they wouldn't have to answer to the British; then they seceded from the US so they wouldn't have to answer to the Constitution they had earlier agreed to abide by; and if they'd been let go, they would eventually have broken from each other, and the Deep South would finally have dissolved into petty feudal baronies ruled by local warlords and aristocrats. Numerous wars would have been inevitable, some involving the North, and the history of Europe would indeed have repeated itself as Lincoln warned.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at March 31, 2007 10:14 PM

Who wants to bet that the article is not available in the Speigel's print edition, and if it is available, its German version has nothing to do with its English version?

Posted by Pete Zaitcev at March 31, 2007 10:48 PM

> Responsibility is valuable precisely it's uncommon anywhere, and I have yet to hear you give a single other country the benefit of the doubt for opposing US foreign policy.

What have any of those countries DONE that justifies giving them the benefit of the doubt?

There's no shortage of problems in the world, and the best that they've done is nothing. (The Sudan is merely the most recent example.)

The Euros most significant accomplishments in the last 60 years are:
(1) They didn't manage to start another intra-Europe war.
(2) They didn't manage to surrender to the Soviet block.

Considering that the US occupied Europe during that time, I'm not convinced that they should even get credit for those meager accomplishments.

The US isn't perfect, but it's better than the alternatives.

Posted by Andy Freeman at April 1, 2007 09:19 AM

"No, there were not."

Again, from the real world...one...two. Just because you say it ain't so doesn't make it. Your arguing this point is as asinine as Rosie O'Lardass arguing Fire can't melt steel.

A bit of wisdom from a Democrat:

"Everyone is entitled to their own set of opinions but they are not entitled to their own set of facts."

DP Moynahan

Posted by Mike Puckett at April 1, 2007 10:06 AM

Andy: "What have any of those countries DONE that justifies giving them the benefit of the doubt?"

I could cite any number of actions I agree with, but the point is not my judgment of their worthiness--it's that Rand's criticism seems to stem from ideological hostility to foreign countries in general. Unfortunately, that isn't very unusual on the right--the standard mentality seems to be advocating actions on America's part they would never tolerate on anyone else's, and regarding other nations with an attitude they characterize as bigotry when mirrored by foreigners.

Andy: "There's no shortage of problems in the world, and the best that they've done is nothing."

That's absolute nonsense. Yes, there's no shortage of problems in the world, and every time a damn Republican is in control over here the problems seem to multiply like Gremlins in water. No, Europeans haven't intervened militarily anywhere except through the auspices of the UN or NATO, because they judge the cost of that caution much lower than getting caught in a quagmire. But they devote a significantly higher percentage of their GDP to solving world problems, and that's why most of the world now looks to them for leadership.

We are increasingly a fat, debauched joke in the free world; the former genius who's run out of ideas, the punchy ex-champ who now drinks too much and makes a fool of himself. And all the bitter, defensive losers on the right in this country can think to say are variations on "They're just jealous."

Andy: "The Sudan is merely the most recent example."

Isn't it just a tad ridiculous using Sudan against the people who've done the most to help it?

Andy: "The Euros most significant accomplishments in the last 60 years are:
(1) They didn't manage to start another intra-Europe war.
(2) They didn't manage to surrender to the Soviet block."

Those were our accomplishments. The most significant achievement of Europe has been relatively recent: Creating a stable, efficient, and evidently quite attractive unified economy, whose growth has recently begun to outstrip ours. The idea of money and people moving freely all across Europe without passports or tariffs of any kind would have been unthinkable not long ago, and the population shifts from East to West have just begun to gain momentum. While US commentators wax histrionic about Islamic immigration into the EU, the Polish are practically colonizing Western Europe. What the EU has done with its Common Market is an awesome achievement.

Andy: "The US isn't perfect, but it's better than the alternatives."

That depends what you mean by "better." Life is obviously easier for an American in America, where we understand the culture and expectations, but that doesn't mean there aren't objective criteria whereby other countries surpass us. Several other countries have universal broadband access and vastly superior cell phone networks, and all first-world countries other than the US (and even some bordering on third-world) have guaranteed health care. Brazil has a thoroughly developed, rigorous cane-based ethanol fuel economy, and is largely immune to oil price fluctuations as a result. Virtually all of the free and semi-free world has abolished capital punishment, leaving it effectively the province of Sharia countries and dictatorships.

We are no longer the cultural prodigy and technological marvel we once were, and people in other countries hearing Americans talk about ourselves like this is 1955 just proves to them we're ignorant and deluded. Yes, we have a lot more money than most people, but we piss it away on conspicuous consumption and the military instead of building infrastructure, and that's rapidly catching up with us.

Average Americans who travel to Japan or Western Europe stare goggle-eyed like country bumpkins at the cutting edge transportation and medical technologies, things they consider "science fictiony" because our hospitals and schools are decayed wrecks left over from the last epoch when we actually built things, well over 30 years ago. Doesn't that make you ashamed? Our flag is on the Moon, our countrymen stood on another world and stared up at the Earth, but now we can only stare in helpless admiration as other countries stroll past us because our politics and culture are so corrupt we're no longer CAPABLE of blazing trails on the large scale; because Reagan showed up and decided things were good enough, so let's just stop working for the future, cut taxes and spending, and enjoy our money here and now.

But there will never be any shortage of people in this country who, relying on TV and movies, will declare--sitting on their worn out couch in a trailer park--that America is the greatest country on Earth. And rather than the claim being a mission statement, it becomes a substitute for reality, sufficient in itself.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at April 1, 2007 12:17 PM

Yep, he lives in the Bizarro Universe.

"Average Americans who travel to Japan or Western Europe stare goggle-eyed like country bumpkins at the cutting edge transportation and medical technologies, things they consider "science fictiony" because our hospitals and schools are decayed wrecks left over from the last epoch when we actually built things, well over 30 years ago. Doesn't that make you ashamed? Our flag is on the Moon, our countrymen stood on another world and stared up at the Earth, but now we can only stare in helpless admiration as other countries stroll past us because our politics and culture are so corrupt we're no longer CAPABLE of blazing trails on the large scale; because Reagan showed up and decided things were good enough, so let's just stop working for the future, cut taxes and spending, and enjoy our money here and now."

Go to Virginia, North Carolina or Georgia if you want to see shiney new Hospitals, not the failing northeast where you are. You know, some place dynamic and vibrant where they haven't destroyed their tax base with expensive and corruptible socialist utopian nonsense.

Posted by Mike Puckett at April 1, 2007 02:49 PM

> No, Europeans haven't intervened militarily anywhere except through the auspices of the UN or NATO, because they judge the cost of that caution much lower than getting caught in a quagmire.

I didn't criticise the Euros for not intervening militarily. I pointed out that they hadn't solved any problems.

Sudan, Zimbabwe, the list just keeps growing. Too bad about all the dead people but at least the Euros worked through the UN. I hear that they're going to send another stern letter to Rwanda.

> But they devote a significantly higher percentage of their GDP to solving world problems,

Note that Swiderski ignores the bulk of the American money.

> whose growth has recently begun to outstrip ours.

On a relative scale, yes, but our base is so much higher that they're still slipping in absolute terms. And, we're still paying for their defense.

Their growth rate has been higher, for brief periods, in the past. Yet, somehow they manage to fall more behind over the long haul.

> and that's why most of the world now looks to them for leadership.

Yeah right. If you're looking for bribes, a place to run when the natives get restless, etc, the Euros are the place to look. If you've actually got a problem that requires actual work, you don't call the Toyota Taliban, you call Uncle Sam.

> have guaranteed health care.

Actually, so do all Americans, and anyone who manages to get across the border.

> Average Americans who travel to Japan or Western Europe stare goggle-eyed like country bumpkins at the cutting edge transportation

Giggle. They stare goggle-eyed at how the rats are packed together.

>Our flag is on the Moon,

Our flag is ALONE on the Moon. The Euros dream of putting up a GPS system.

Posted by Andy Freeman at April 1, 2007 03:58 PM

"Go to Virginia, North Carolina or Georgia if you want to see shiney new Hospitals"

Shiny new private hospitals for the rich aren't hard to find in most states, but I'm talking about what normal people have to use.

"You know, some place dynamic and vibrant"

If Virginia were any more crystallized, it would have to be packaged in bubblewrap. As for Georgia and North Carolina, your characterization is laughable--they're oth underdeveloped, shallow economies, with Atlanta being the only thing keeping Georgia from scraping bottom like Mississippi and Alabama.

You're also missing my point--I'm not talking about the facade of a building, I'm talking about the medical infrastructure. Most American hospitals haven't even figured out yet how to computerize their records departments, which has been technically feasible for nearly two decades.

"where they haven't destroyed their tax base with expensive and corruptible socialist utopian nonsense."

In the UN&WR hospital rankings for last year, in the top 14, THREE were in California, TWO in Massachusetts, TWO in New York, and exactly one in the entirety of the South--Duke University. Moreover, you've just buried your own case, talking about shiny new hospitals ordinary people can't use because they have no health insurance and their states have no programs.

If the ideological conservative regions of the country are so effective, why are they such dungheaps? Why is real estate still so available if it's such an attractive place? Why aren't businesses literally breaking down the doors to take advantage of this "wide open" business environment? Why do Dallas and Atlanta not even come close to New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago in terms of business? Not even CLOSE. Could it be because, in point of fact, businesses find it easier to operate in states willing to spend money on infrastructure and cultivating talent?

Posted by Brian Swiderski at April 1, 2007 04:55 PM

"hy aren't businesses literally breaking down the doors to take advantage of this "wide open" business environment?"

They are, ever heard of Greensboro or RTI?

Posted by Mike Puckett at April 1, 2007 05:52 PM

Andy: "I pointed out that they hadn't solved any problems."

The former Communist bloc countries admitted into the EU would beg to differ.

"Too bad about all the dead people but at least the Euros worked through the UN."

Yeah, that's what it's there for.

"Note that Swiderski ignores the bulk of the American money."

Money comprising a significantly smaller percentage of GDP than Europe gives.

"And, we're still paying for their defense."

No, we're paying to use their territory for our defense.

"If you're looking for bribes, a place to run when the natives get restless, etc, the Euros are the place to look."

Or if you're looking for food, or need medical supplies, or education, or health care, or help building shelters, or management of relief efforts, etc. But if you want your family barbecued by napalm, or carted off to be tortured for years, possibly to death, and then have the animals responsible tell you how grateful you should be, it's no mystery where to look. Maybe if you bribe the patriotic Texas evangelical guard with a gold tooth he'll tell your family you're still alive, but then again maybe he'll just take it and laugh in your face. Nothing to get worked up about, unlike that evil Kofi Annan.

"If you've actually got a problem that requires actual work, you don't call the Toyota Taliban, you call Uncle Sam."

If a democracy needs overthrowin', an elected leader needs a-killin', freedom activists need a-torturin', or a sovereign country with some nice property just plain needs a-stealin', call the professionals. But wait, there's more! Call now and we'll throw in free terrorist tactics training for your secret police, one free coup d'etat coupon, and a free pullover saying "I am the State, but all I got was this lousy T-shirt."

"Actually, so do all Americans, and anyone who manages to get across the border."

No, they don't. If going to a hospital means the bills will put them on the streets, that's called not having health care.

"They stare goggle-eyed at how the rats are packed together."

Tokyo is less densely populated than Manhattan, so nobody other than an actual ignorant bumpkin would be shocked by the crowds. What is shocking, however, is the degree to which technology, efficiency, and cleanliness pervade their society. Same with the Germans really, although more distributed in terms of density. The busier areas have dynamically programmed, computerized traffic routers that monitor the flow of cars and direct people accordingly with electronic display signs. Maglev bullet trains are also quite a sight to watch, traveling ridiculously fast and yet quiet inside the cabin.

Then there's the automated garages, automated dock operations, automated cargo handling at airports, etc etc. The US tried an automated airport cargo handling system in Denver a few years ago, but the code was so poorly written and hairy that it went insane and had to be euthanized, and the project was abandoned. Another stirling achievement for American ingenuity.

"Our flag is ALONE on the Moon. The Euros dream of putting up a GPS system."

And we dream of a train that goes faster than 100mph. Which do you think is more embarrassing to be incapable of building?

Posted by Brian Swiderski at April 1, 2007 06:22 PM

BTW, I don't live in the NE, I live in California.

"They are, ever heard of Greensboro or RTI?"

I've heard of Greensboro, but I've also heard of Cheyenne and Billings. While I'm sure that some level of growth is taking place, and to the people who live there it might seem significant, you should understand that it's microscopic compared to what routinely happens around the perimeter of Greater Los Angeles. You speak of "dynamic" and "vibrant" in relation to Greensboro, so I can only assume you're speaking relative to previous experience, because here's something to realize: Entire cities sprout on the shockwave of Greater Los Angeles as quickly as new office buildings likely show up in Greensboro.

I've watched it happen around me, several times over, and it is an awesome force of nature. Empty desert or chaparral is developed into homes that sell *immediately*, then a few businesses extend a tentacle into the area, then more land is developed into condos and single-story apartment complexes. Within ten years the six-figure real estate purchases are worth 7 digits, the initial fast food restaurants and big box stores have been surrounded by office buildings and dense retail, and the single-story apartments have been demolished and replaced with four-story courtyard complexes. L.A. has arrived, bounding a dozen miles at a time in every direction the geography will allow, leaving far behind the city and county that bear its name on maps. Each successive wave brings something new, each local iteration a new regional synergy, all surging in symphonic resonance like the ocean. THAT, my friend, is DYNAMIC and VIBRANT.

Then again, a lot of it is kinda ugly. Oh well.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at April 1, 2007 07:18 PM

Brian: "No, Europeans haven't intervened militarily anywhere except through the auspices of the UN or NATO, because they judge the cost of that caution much lower than getting caught in a quagmire. "

Well, that's a blatant lie. Although underreported, France is CONSTANTLY intervening in its colonies, err I mean in it's now formally- independent-but-still-considered-France's-backgarden countries in Africa. Helicopter gunship attacks on protesting crowds (Cote d'Ivoire)? Check. Repeated bombing of northern Chad by the French Air Force? Check. Press reports and international protests about it? Crickets chirping ... you know, because, after all it's France doing it and not the US. And as we all know, France is the very paragon of human civilization (cough...), so no need to suspect bad intentions on their part.

BTW, there was a somewhat subdued debate in Germany on why the hell German soldiers should defend French Tantal and other ressource interests in Kongo during the Presidential election there last year. I guess you never heard of that one. So it's all very nice to be self-critical and point your fingers on flaws of your own government, but just don't assume the others are any better. In fact France is much, much worse - only more subtle and a lot better at marketing (now who'd expected that.)

And no, I am not American.

Posted by WinterTom at April 2, 2007 02:57 AM

Pete: "Who wants to bet that the article is not available in the Speigel's print edition, and if it is available, its German version has nothing to do with its English version?"

I don't know if it was in the print edition, but the article featured prominently on the front page of Spiegel for at least two days. Also the content in the German and English versions are identical.

Posted by WinterTom at April 2, 2007 02:58 AM

"Well, that's a blatant lie."

No, it's a generalization.

"France is CONSTANTLY intervening in its colonies"

Well then, Andy was wrong. Thus I was right to say he was wrong, so thanks for the support.

"Helicopter gunship attacks on protesting crowds (Cote d'Ivoire)? Check. Repeated bombing of northern Chad by the French Air Force? Check."

Where are you getting that?

"Press reports and international protests about it? Crickets chirping"

That would also be the case if it never happened. Did it happen?

"And as we all know, France is the very paragon of human civilization"

Yes, one of several.

"BTW, there was a somewhat subdued debate in Germany on why the hell German soldiers should defend French Tantal"

What does peacekeeping have to do with "defending French Tantal," and what exactly is "Tantal"?

"but just don't assume the others are any better."

I don't, and nothing I've ever said indicates otherwise. I merely pointed out how the right in this country, and indeed any other, views the entire world outside its borders with hypocritical contempt and bigotry.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at April 2, 2007 04:47 AM

Brian: I looked up some English-language sources for your benefit

Ivory Coast intervention:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A31795-2004Nov7?language=printer
[Note the generally positive tone: the methods employed were not the least bit different from those in Fallujah, in fact worse; additionally, the "mobs holding the bridges" sounded rather civilian than insurgent in the French press]

There was a "nice" video by TSR (Swiss TV), showing the attack of the helicopter on the "mob". Unfortunately, I did not find a current link to it, but I am sure that I still have a copy at home, although it was published in 2004 already; If I find it, I might post it to YouTube.

Also note that this is only one example of the constant meddling of France in Cote d'Ivoire, just google "Ivory Coast" and "Hotel Massacre".

Bombing of Chad:
It is hard to find good English language sources for that one [see what I mean with underreporting], but here is one: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/africa/article2076138.ece

It also highlights the spin France wants to give to the events (so that nobody ever thinks of mentioning ELF/Acquitane's business interestes in Chad!). And if there ever was a manipulative headline, this one is ("... on Darfur's neighbors").

Again, this is not an isolated incident.

Another nice thing about 2 or 3 years back was a very interesting diplomatic conflict between Germany and France over Togo (which is both a former German and a former French colony), with one country backing its sock-puppet government and the other its sock-puppet insurgents.

Tantal: I am sorry, in English it is called "Tantalum". It's a metal with many uses in computer, telecommunication and defense technology. Kongo is a major exporter, and access to it is of strategic importance to France, not least since the French high-tech combinats are a major buyer.

Posted by WinterTom at April 2, 2007 05:49 AM

And Brian:

"I merely pointed out how the right in this country, and indeed any other, views the entire world outside its borders with hypocritical contempt and bigotry."

And the Left doesn't? I mean, all this "Under Saddam, everything was better"-nonsense is mostly uttered by the LEFT nowadays, at least in Europe. /sarcasm on/ Well, seems those half-apes are not capable of sustaining a democracy and they just need the iron grip, dont't they? But they're just so AUTHENTIC. /sarcasm off/ Isn't that essentially what retro-praising the relative calm (of the cemetery) under Saddam means? Are you more likely to hear a statement that amounts to that from a leftist or a neo-conservative today? And isn't neo-conservativism today carrying the very torch of freedom, liberation, and enlightenment that the original left was suppposed to carry? I am very much a liberal (in American terminology) but wouldn't want to have anything to do with the peacenics and cultural relativists and eco-esoterics of today that betray the very principles of their forbears.

Posted by WinterTom at April 2, 2007 06:00 AM

Squidward says: Moreover, you've just buried your own case, talking about shiny new hospitals ordinary people can't use because they have no health insurance and their states have no programs.

I have to call you on that one. Any person, of ANY income can use the Emergency room and may not be denied service. So, in short...shiny new hospital, anyone can use.

Posted by Mac at April 2, 2007 09:30 PM

Tom,
The article says French helicopters dropped tear gas and percussion grenades on crowds waving machetes, vowing to kill whites, and besieging French positions, which is pretty far from your accusation of "gunship attacks" on "protesters."

Tom: "Note the generally positive tone: the methods employed were not the least bit different from those in Fallujah, in fact worse"

I fail to see how the depopulation and general destruction of a city in a war of conquest is equivalent to standard riot control tactics being employed in a peacekeeping mission.

Tom: "google "Ivory Coast" and "Hotel Massacre"."

All I'm getting are blogs, and the few links to the video on the first five pages are all broken. One description calls it unclear, and the provenance and integrity of the film unknown.

Tom: "Bombing of Chad"

The key parts of the story are extremely vague in the article.

Tom: "Again, this is not an isolated incident."

But it's not clear exactly what the incident in question is, nor in the Cote d'Ivoire example. While I agree the subject might not be given as much exposure, it does rather strain credulity to suggest equivalence with the revenge-killing of entire families and people being tortured to death by an occupying army.

Tom: "Kongo is a major exporter"

Not that I'm terribly familiar with the French tech sector, but I have trouble believing their motive for peacekeeping in a former colonial territory with common cultural strains is to defend the supply of Tantalum.

Tom: "I mean, all this "Under Saddam, everything was better"-nonsense is mostly uttered by the LEFT nowadays"

It's mostly uttered by Iraqis.

Tom: "Well, seems those half-apes are not capable of sustaining a democracy and they just need the iron grip, dont't they?"

Isn't that what you're saying by insisting they need our presence?

Tom: "Isn't that essentially what retro-praising the relative calm (of the cemetery) under Saddam means?"

One thoughtful Iraqi compared Saddam's Iraq to being in a prison: Nothing under their control, no justice, no redress, and all aspects of life dictated by the psychotic warden and his henchmen. He then compared the present situation to being naked and alone at night in a jungle full of ravenous wolves.

Tom: "And isn't neo-conservativism today carrying the very torch of freedom, liberation, and enlightenment that the original left was suppposed to carry?"

No. They are the heirs to the moral philosophies of Nazism, mutated to corrupt democracies from within by use of schizophrenic doublethink. I usually avoid the term "neocon" so as not to undeservedly absolve mainstream conservatism, but there is a caste of psychotics on the right who do fit the description I give. They're fond of the word "freedom" for the same reason they're fond of the word "patriotism"--because it's just another button to push, and they've found that pushing it often makes the audience more receptive.

Generally they think and communicate in Newspeak: Aggression is "defense," empire is "liberation," torture and totalitarianism are "protecting freedom," etc etc. Whether it's art imitating life or vice-versa is anyone's guess, but they are the literal embodiment of the psychotic ideology depicted in 1984, as aptly described by the Inner Party leader during the torture of the protagonist (fair use rules apply, methinks):

"The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. [...]We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an end. [But] Obedience is not enough. Unless [a man] is suffering, how can you be sure that he is obeying your will and not his own? Power is inflicting pain and humiliation. [...]A world of fear and treachery and torment, a world of trampling and being trampled upon, a world which will grow not less but more merciless as it refines itself."

Such perfectly describes the evolution of the Bush regime up to the 2006 defeat. Not content with breaking the law and having its way on every issue, they wallowed in joy at the raw exercise of unfettered power, grinding it in the face of the entire world that they could commit the unspeakable, over and over, with no consequences whatsoever. Orwell's proverbial "boot stomping on a human face, forever."

But like all great literature, 1984 is a distillation of truth rather than a reflection. The psychosis that infected our institutions through the GOP carrier has proven unable to destroy the basic vitality of the American republic, choking on its own refuse before it could exterminate the light of freedom. The maniacs have left us with one hell of a headache on our hands, and we still have a long way to go bringing them to justice, but the long road back to America has begun--both for our troops, and for the citizens at home.

Mac: "Any person, of ANY income can use the Emergency room and may not be denied service."

Followed by bills that send them into poverty, which is an effective denial of service for any purpose other than life-threatening emergencies. That's not health care by any standard.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at April 3, 2007 12:28 AM

Brian: "[..] dropped tear gas and percussion grenades on crowds waving machetes."

Well, the Swiss TV report sure had a lot of tracer rounds, which are normally not associated with grenades, shot at the crowds; I really need to find that video...

And, BTW, it is not only Tantalum that is of interest to France in Kongo. As I already said: the former French and Belgian colonies are the main raw material suppliers to France and the relation between the regimes installed there and France is mostly every bit as disgusting as that of the US and, say, Saudi Arabia, or Guinea-Bizeau.

We should leave Orwell out of that since I could easily turn your argument around and use it against you; Hitchens, however, does this a lot better than I ever could.

Brian: "[...] it does rather strain credulity to suggest equivalence with the revenge-killing of entire families and people being tortured to death by an occupying army."

Brian: "One thoughtful Iraqi compared Saddam's Iraq to being in a prison: Nothing under their control, no justice, no redress, and all aspects of life dictated by the psychotic warden and his henchmen. He then compared the present situation to being naked and alone at night in a jungle full of ravenous wolves."

I, for one, would rather be alone and naked in the jungle than in a perpetual prison. In the jungle, I might die but still there's hope and it's up to me to improve. The prison that Saddams Iraq was very much resembles "the boot stomping on a human face, forever", to also cite 1984.

AFAIK these were isolated events AND the perpetrators are (mostly) tried. Which is a big improvement over the situation under Saddam where exactly the same things happened on a daily basis, only that they were not visible to you since no one was there to report; plus, since it was government policy, no one was ever persecuted.

Brian: "It's mostly uttered by Iraqis."

Before the economic boom of the 50s and immediately after the war "Unterm Führer hätte es das nicht gegeben" [This would never have happened under the Fuhrer] was a phrase often heard in Germany; does this make the Nazi regime better than the economic chaos and starving that persisted for a long time after? [does Godwin's law apply now? ;-)]

Also, don't assume that I am especially fond of the Bush administration. I am not. But I did/do not see any viable alternatives at the moment. Gore, unfortunately, has gone rather lunatic and Kerry, as you might admit, was a joke. Still, had Gore won in 2000 the situation today IMO would not look much different than it does now. On second thought, maybe Gore would have gone after the real culprits of 9-11, Pakistan and Saudi-Arabia, instead of Iraq...

Posted by WinterTom at April 3, 2007 03:41 AM

Sorry, the order got a bit botched up in my comment before, so the answer below is referring to this bit of your comment (corrected);

...

Brian: "[...] it does rather strain credulity to suggest equivalence with the revenge-killing of entire families and people being tortured to death by an occupying army."

...

Posted by WinterTom at April 3, 2007 03:51 AM

Mac: "Any person, of ANY income can use the Emergency room and may not be denied service."

Followed by bills that send them into poverty, which is an effective denial of service for any purpose other than life-threatening emergencies. That's not health care by any standard.

It may not be perfect, but it is a service, which you stated does not exist. Its that Clintonizing thing....redefine that which you got wrong to make it right for you.

Posted by Mac at April 3, 2007 11:18 AM

"It may not be perfect, but it is a service"

It's not health care.

"Its that Clintonizing thing....redefine that which you got wrong to make it right for you."

Actually, the issue here is Orwellianism--you claiming that a service is available to people even if the system all but guarantees they don't dare use it. Basically you're saying that having the military shoot every voter in the head at the polls would still be democracy, so long as it happened only after the ballot had been cast.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at April 4, 2007 02:34 AM

"It may not be perfect, but it is a service"

It's not health care.

No one said it was. Someone (you) said that ordinary people couldn't use the shiny new hospitals and I proved they can. That's all.

Squid: you claiming that a service is available to people even if the system all but guarantees they don't dare use it.

All but guarantees....nope. Anyone can use the ER. ANYONE, ANYTIME. You said the hospitals COULDN'T BE USED...they can.. That's all.

Posted by Mac at April 4, 2007 11:59 AM

"Someone (you) said that ordinary people couldn't use the shiny new hospitals and I proved they can."

Right, and you can also prove that North Koreans can criticize Kim Jong Il, because the guarantee of execution does not physically restrain them from doing so. But we (or I, anyway) are/am trying to discuss the facts of people's lives here, and the fact is that people cannot use facilities if they cannot afford the bills that would follow.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at April 5, 2007 04:05 AM

Brian says:...the fact is that people cannot use facilities if they cannot afford the bills that would follow.

I understand what you're trying to convey and yes, the bills are extraordinary...but the FACT is that anyone can use an ER. That's all I'm trying to point out to you. It is a simple FACT that anyone can use the ER, they cannot be turned away. Yes, the bills are terrible and poverty can rear its ugly head (a true POSSIBILITY) and even likely in some cases. But you used the word FACT, and the FACT is anyone can use an ER.

Posted by Mac at April 5, 2007 11:28 AM

"But you used the word FACT, and the FACT is anyone can use an ER."

Yes, I admitted as much. I also stated the fact that people in North Korea can criticize Kim Jong Il, and would add that anyone in this country can walk off the edge of the Grand Canyon. There's a whole lot of things people can do if they don't care about the consequences, but generally speaking people's options are limited by the anticipated outcome. Unless and until that fact is reflected in meeting people's human right to health care, those shiny new hospitals might as well be set pieces on a Hollywood back lot.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at April 5, 2007 06:17 PM

Brian says: Yes, I admitted as much.

Thank you, that's all I wanted.

Posted by Mac at April 5, 2007 08:39 PM

"Thank you, that's all I wanted."

Now you can reciprocate by admitting that those shiny new hospitals are a Forbidden City to most patients.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at April 6, 2007 04:12 AM

I did Brian...see?

Yes, the bills are terrible and poverty can rear its ugly head (a true POSSIBILITY) and even likely in some cases.

Posted by Mac at April 6, 2007 07:28 PM

Post a comment