Why does the world hate the U.S.?

[Great Nepal]

Fair enough, but USA is also waging war in several nations, which is devastating those nations. Doesn't really make them moral when they are destroying several foreign nations..

The Taliban and Gaddafi's regime were devastating and oppressing the people, but ok, it is fine leaving people who intentionally do that stuff in power, ya know?

1. Yes. If people dont want that regime anymore, they will revolt and throw them out. USA has no right to intervene in foreign politics.
2. So, how come USA is not in war against China and North Korea?

Well, considering that Germany was actively racist as well, that would be considered pretty hypocritical.

And?
USA was racist and USSR was a murderous regime as well, doesn't stop anyone calming how USA and USSR helped to stop evils of Nazism.

Afghanistan was harboring and training the terrorist group that claimed responsibility for the terrorist attacks on the Twin Towers. Yeah, totally not justified.

Except, the attack was because of American presence in Saudi. Oh, and lets not forget that Americans are the ones who supported those terrorist and helped them get momentum in first place.

---

Slavery ended way before WWII so I don't see what you're saying there.Also, segregation in America during the time period was horrible but it pales in comparison to the Holocaust.

What about mob lynching? Oh, and it is pale because we see it as such.
Would you like being cut off from rest of society, and risk being hung in tree just cos some person from another race wanted it or would you like being in gas chamber?

Again, even if everyone believed it, it doesn't make it true (rambles about the earth being flat or stars being gods, etc.).

But, morality is nothing to do with "truth", it is all subjective. Which is more moral: Hanging a person by tree for no offense just for being of other race or gassing him?

And the attacks on America were ideological and not just about past sins IMHO. Many Islamic extremists cite things such as East Timor being allowed to exist and Kashmir not being part of Pakistan completely, etc. as reasons for their terrorism, so even if we helped to fund some horrid institution I do not see how that warrants us taking the blame for an attack based on ideologies that hate the West for simply existing and for being infidels. What the hell does the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have to do with Afghans, really? Nothing. It's all religio-political b.s. But they wrap it all up as justification for terrorism.

So, how come USA was attacked just after 5 years of Gulf war, when the terrorists existed there in strong position since Cold war?
Oh, and I did not say US support was reason for attack - but more like, USA was one who supported them with money and weapons which helped them grow to position they are in today. So, yea USA should take responsibility for their growth and current power.

[Grave_n_idle]

who said anything about someone deserving to die?

Looks like evasion to me. If you're attempting to argue that the unemployed DON'T deserve healthcare, it would certainly seem that you're arguing they 'deserve' to suffer the consequences of a lack of care.

[North Calaveras]

who said anything about someone deserving to die?

Looks like evasion to me. If you're attempting to argue that the unemployed DON'T deserve healthcare, it would certainly seem that you're arguing they 'deserve' to suffer the consequences of a lack of care.

If you can't afford healthcare you don't have it, tough shit, BOO HOO

BTW when someone can't get healthcare they don't deserve to die, that means that people WANT them to die.

[Grave_n_idle]

If you can't afford healthcare you don't have it, tough shit, BOO HOO

BTW when someone can't get healthcare they don't deserve to die...

Does not compute.

That seems to be exactly what you're saying.

[North Calaveras]

If you can't afford healthcare you don't have it, tough shit, BOO HOO

BTW when someone can't get healthcare they don't deserve to die...

Does not compute.

That seems to be exactly what you're saying.

Really, exactly? show me EXACTLY where i say that those people deserve to die.

[Grave_n_idle]

Does not compute.

That seems to be exactly what you're saying.

Really, exactly? show me EXACTLY where i say that those people deserve to die.

Are you serious?

"If you can't afford healthcare you don't have it, tough shit, BOO HOO"

[North Calaveras]

Really, exactly? show me EXACTLY where i say that those people deserve to die.

Are you serious?

"If you can't afford healthcare you don't have it, tough shit, BOO HOO"

No, are YOU serious

tough shit and YOU DESERVE it are two entirely different things.

[Jeffeyyah]

U mad cause I'm stylin' on you.

-America to the World

[Grave_n_idle]

Are you serious?

"If you can't afford healthcare you don't have it, tough shit, BOO HOO"

No, are YOU serious

tough shit and YOU DESERVE it are two entirely different things.

In the same way that di-hydrogen monoxide and water are 'entirely different', perhaps.

[North Calaveras]

No, are YOU serious

tough shit and YOU DESERVE it are two entirely different things.

In the same way that di-hydrogen monoxide and water are 'entirely different', perhaps.

omg

look tough shit implies " That sucks but its the way its gotta be" Deserving it would be like saying " You should die!"

can you see the difference?

[Grave_n_idle]

In the same way that di-hydrogen monoxide and water are 'entirely different', perhaps.

omg

look tough shit implies " That sucks but its the way its gotta be" Deserving it would be like saying " You should die!"

can you see the difference?

"Deserve" suggests that it's the fitting reward. I'm not sure how that differs from "tough shit for being poor".

[North Calaveras]

omg

look tough shit implies " That sucks but its the way its gotta be" Deserving it would be like saying " You should die!"

can you see the difference?

"Deserve" suggests that it's the fitting reward. I'm not sure how that differs from "tough shit for being poor".

Your wrong, period, if you can't tell the difference then perhaps you should ask some other people for there "interpretation"

I'll give you one last chance

Deserve means that they earned it somehow, tough shit means that they just didn't have what it took.

[Grave_n_idle]

"Deserve" suggests that it's the fitting reward. I'm not sure how that differs from "tough shit for being poor".

Your wrong, period, if you can't tell the difference then perhaps you should ask some other people for there "interpretation"

I'll give you one last chance

Deserve means that they earned it somehow, tough shit means that they just didn't have what it took.

Which is nonsense, anyway, since "what it takes" to provide healthcare even to the indolent, is paying half as much as America's 'free market' model demands. Indeed, you could argue that healthcare for the unemployed is actually costing less than nothing, since it still fails to compensate for the huge saving.

[North Calaveras]

Your wrong, period, if you can't tell the difference then perhaps you should ask some other people for there "interpretation"

I'll give you one last chance

Deserve means that they earned it somehow, tough shit means that they just didn't have what it took.

Which is nonsense, anyway, since "what it takes" to provide healthcare even to the indolent, is paying half as much as America's 'free market' model demands. Indeed, you could argue that healthcare for the unemployed is actually costing less than nothing, since it still fails to compensate for the huge saving.

Moving to another topic eh? alright

how does government paying for someone's healthcare who doesn't provide for society cost nothing?

[Grave_n_idle]

Moving to another topic eh? alright

No point bashing heads. You have your own unique approach to the language, I'm not going to beat my head against it.

how does government paying for someone's healthcare who doesn't provide for society cost nothing?

The American model costs twice as much, per capita, as the British version.

America switching the the UK model would cosy every person less, and cover more people. Saving money for more coverage? Sounds like costing (less than) nothing.

[Daemonicai]

People hate the USA because hating China would be racist, hating the Middle East would be Islamophobic and hating Russia would be cliche.

[North Calaveras]

People hate the USA because hating China would be racist, hating the Middle East would be Islamophobic and hating Russia would be cliche.

This ^

[Shadow25]

as an Arab i hate USA for: bullying on us
invading our land
killing civilians
torturing our brothers,
Guantanamo,
abuses in Iraq and Afghanistan,
random drone attacks which kill more and more civilians
backing Arab dictators who have been fucking us for a long time
supporting that apartheid state next door which is called Israel in ethnically cleansing the Palestinians
supporting Israel almost blindly in any thing it does
double standards
etc.......

[North Calaveras]

as an Arab i hate USA for: bullying on us
invading our land
killing civilians- happens in every war, be happy we try to avoid civilian casualties
torturing our brothers, ?
Guantanamo, ?
abuses in Iraq and Afghanistan, what abuses?
random drone attacks which kill more and more civilians random?
backing Arab dictators who have been fucking us for a long time Well grow some balls and take care of it like most of you are now
supporting that apartheid state next door which is called Israel in ethnically cleansing the Palestinians: Wow, just wow, if Israel wanted to wipe out Palestine they could have by now.
supporting Israel almost blindly in any thing it does: You mean supporting a nation that has freedom? yeah
double standards Double standards, every nation does this.
etc.......

[CREEEEEED]

Deserve means that they earned it somehow, tough shit means that they just didn't have what it took.

"Didn't have what it took" to get healthcare?

Are you serious?

You're coming off like a right sociopath. However, on to the rebuttal I was actually planning -

Bottom line - the system we have in the UK means that a portion of everyone's tax goes towards funding the NHS, which is free (or at least heavily subsidised) for anyone that needs or wants it. Naturally, for any such system, there are negative points - waiting times tend to be fairly long, although that is something which has been improving dramatically the past few years. Choices as to treatment are provided - although hospitals here are starting to specialise in certain fields of medicine, particularly if there's a group of them close together, so exactly where you end up kinda depends on what you have. Having said that, it's a positive because you can always be damned sure that the best doctors in the region for the problem you have are at that hospital, working to help you.

And, you know - using the NHS is not mandatory, so you can always get private healthcare if you want. We have freedom of choice, but we've also got a fallback. In america, if you lose your job, chances are you've lost your health insurance, so if you get cancer you're fucked. Here, you can get treated on the NHS if you need it. Your system is seriously, seriously flawed, and it sickens me that people defend it.

Finally, I have fun facts for you - the American people spend 16% of their GDP on health insurance that most of them never use. Thats $7,290 per person, per year. Assuming there are ~308 million people in the US, that's just over $2.24 trillion per year. In the UK, with our dual NHS/private system, we spend 8.4% of our GDP on healthcare, equating to $2992 per person per year, or about $185 billion per year in total (assuming approx 62 million people).


And we get pretty much the same quality of healthcare. Looking at life expectancy statistics, we might actually be better - the UK has the joint 20th highest life expectancy, and the US is down at #36. For the most powerful economic superpower of the past century, thats a really, REALLY poor showing.

If we can make a system like this work as cheaply and effectively as we do, then there's no reason America can't. Other than the fact that the insurance companies wouldn't like you realising how badly they're fisting you with healthcare bills, obviously.

(Sources for the statistics above - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... per_capita ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... expectancy )

Edit: I'm not done yet, just noticed the below. I am going to split it up so people can see what was said by who (North Calaveras will be bold, Shadow25 not), and number them -

as an Arab i hate USA for:
bullying on us
invading our land
1. killing civilians happens in every war, be happy we try to avoid civilian casualties
2. torturing our brothers ?
Also 2. Guantanamo ?
Also 2. abuses in Iraq and Afghanistan what abuses?
3. random drone attacks which kill more and more civilians random?
4. backing Arab dictators who have been fucking us for a long time Well grow some balls and take care of it like most of you are now
5. supporting that apartheid state next door which is called Israel in ethnically cleansing the Palestinians Wow, just wow, if Israel wanted to wipe out Palestine they could have by now.
6. supporting Israel almost blindly in any thing it does You mean supporting a nation that has freedom? yeah
7. double standards Double standards, every nation does this.
etc.......

1. It's true, it does happen in every war, but America has been invading and attacking more places than anyone else lately, so you are gonna take shit for the resulting increase.

2. The CIA used waterboarding (a method defined by the UN as torture) to interrogate terrorist suspects, supposedly saving lives by doing so, but since they won't release the files I have my doubts about it. Guantanamo Bay is a US naval base/military prison in Cuba where the US has been illegally imprisoning people without trial for offences they may or may not have committed, usually via kidnapping them from countries where the US has no legal jurisdiction. Obama does seem to be trying to sort this out, but unconvincingly. As for the abuses he's referring to, I think he means Abu Ghraib - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib ... oner_abuse - US military personnel torturing (physically and mentally) people held as prisoners of war, against the Geneva Conventions, to which the USA is a signatory. By rights (not to mention international law) everyone involved in that should have been tried for war crimes and, if found guilty, executed like any other convicted war criminal.

3. The drone attacks, while not being random, could certainly be more precisely applied to avoid civilian casualties.

4. What are they supposed to do? Throw rocks at the tanks us westerners have been selling the dictators they're trying to fight? Think before you type next time.

5. While I agree that Israel could wipe out the Palestinians if they wanted, and yet have not done so, you can't deny that their policy towards them is at best over the top, and at worst genocidal. On the war crimes front again, a good portion of the israeli military should be tried for war crimes against civilians (numerous reports of physical assaults by IDF troops on news reporters exist, as well as opening fire on Palestinian children trying to go to school [see "The Circuit", by Bob Shepherd]. Additionally, their (well publicised) lethal raids on boats carrying food, water and medical supplies to the Gaza Strip last year are inexcusable. I'd understand if they'd approached the boats in daylight, examined the cargo, then let them through (or turned them away if the cargo was anything other than what was stated), I wouldn't mind. But a night-time, helicopter-borne commando raid on unarmed, civilian vessels in international waters? Too far.

6. Sure, Israel has freedom for itself, but they're also violently opposed to the freedom of neighbouring states. In the case of Iran, whose president has stated that he wants to wipe Israel from the face of the earth, I can understand, but Palestine and Lebanon are ridiculous. A couple of Israeli soldiers get kidnapped and some idiots fire a couple of (ineffectual) rockets across the border, so Israel levels half the country? The idiots are just pouring gasoline on a bonfire - if they decided to cut the shit and actually sit down, work out a 2-state solution with the Palestinians, and generally be reasonable, they'd achieve a lot more than they will with bombs. Bombs can destroy a nation, but words can make friends out of enemies, allowing both to prosper. Takes longer, and is harder to achieve, but it ends up cheaper, in money and lives.

7. Yeah, every nation has double standards, but again you've got to admit that it's more high-profile with the US. And it matters more with you - if the US condemns human rights abuses in one nation but ignores them in another, it opens doors for dictators to do shit like that. If you cared at all about the rest of the world, you'd be critical of anything that deserves criticism.

Obviously you can argue that any nation in your position would face the same criticism under the circumstances, but that isn't relevant. YOU'RE "top of the heap". YOU'RE the self-proclaimed "leaders of the free world". If you're so damned righteous, act like it for once, and do something for legitimately humanitarian reasons, rather than thinking "what can I get out of this?". Might not sound pragmatic, but fuck it! You're $14 trillion in debt anyway, which you're probably not gonna be able to pay back this century.

[Grave_n_idle]

Deserve means that they earned it somehow, tough shit means that they just didn't have what it took.

"Didn't have what it took" to get healthcare?

Are you serious?

You're coming off like a right sociopath. However, on to the rebuttal I was actually planning -

Bottom line - the system we have in the UK means that a portion of everyone's tax goes towards funding the NHS, which is free (or at least heavily subsidised) for anyone that needs or wants it. Naturally, for any such system, there are negative points - waiting times tend to be fairly long, although that is something which has been improving dramatically the past few years. Choices as to treatment are provided - although hospitals here are starting to specialise in certain fields of medicine, particularly if there's a group of them close together, so exactly where you end up kinda depends on what you have. Having said that, it's a positive because you can always be damned sure that the best doctors in the region for the problem you have are at that hospital, working to help you.

And, you know - using the NHS is not mandatory, so you can always get private healthcare if you want. We have freedom of choice, but we've also got a fallback. In america, if you lose your job, chances are you've lost your health insurance, so if you get cancer you're fucked. Here, you can get treated on the NHS if you need it. Your system is seriously, seriously flawed, and it sickens me that people defend it.

Finally, I have fun facts for you - the American people spend 16% of their GDP on health insurance that most of them never use. Thats $7,290 per person, per year. Assuming there are ~308 million people in the US, that's just over $2.24 trillion per year. In the UK, with our dual NHS/private system, we spend 8.4% of our GDP on healthcare, equating to $2992 per person per year, or about $185 billion per year in total (assuming approx 62 million people).


And we get pretty much the same quality of healthcare. Looking at life expectancy statistics, we might actually be better - the UK has the joint 20th highest life expectancy, and the US is down at #36. For the most powerful economic superpower of the past century, thats a really, REALLY poor showing.

If we can make a system like this work as cheaply and effectively as we do, then there's no reason America can't. Other than the fact that the insurance companies wouldn't like you realising how badly they're fisting you with healthcare bills, obviously.

(Sources for the statistics above - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... per_capita ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... expectancy )

[Therasea]

People hate the US because we're the current superpower (Or Hyperpower, I suppose). Either we use this power, and thus become hated for using our power in a manner that some disagree with, or we refuse to use our power, and thus become hated for not doing anything to improve the world.

+1

I just have to say that you hit it on the nose. I have heard many foreign people say that they like Americans, but don't like America. LOL Wat?

[CREEEEEED]

People hate the US because we're the current superpower (Or Hyperpower, I suppose). Either we use this power, and thus become hated for using our power in a manner that some disagree with, or we refuse to use our power, and thus become hated for not doing anything to improve the world.

+1

I just have to say that you hit it on the nose. I have heard many foreign people say that they like Americans, but don't like America. LOL Wat?

It's quite easy really. We like the american people on an individual basis, but as a nation you are a right bunch of cunts. Doesn't make sense really, but there you go.

While I'm typing, I remembered something else that I hate about the USA - your immigration forms have the following question (not necessarily in these exact words, but it's something along these lines) -

"Are you now, or have you ever been, part of a foreign intelligence agency or terrorist organisation?"

Seriously, if the answer to that question was "Yes", then whoever answered the question is obviously too bloody stupid to be a legitimate threat.

[Sceral]

So you guys will stop arguing.

Brazil is the best. Glad you all agree with me. I knew i had a point.

[The Anti-Cosmic Gods]

No one with a clue "hates" America. Its just cool/trendy/political correct in any country or social setting to pick on America, in the same way picking on the dominant culture in a society is always socially acceptable.


You can always throw rocks at the big kid on the block.