Now to say that you would wish the "hawks" would die first when you are relating to the U.S., if you would ever say that here I can guarantee you would not be seen again.
Just curious, whom did you say that to? My brain is boiling in futile attempts to unveil the secret meaning of this sentence.
It is just that certain individuals all around the world love to hate the American Imperialists. :lol:
You know hate is generated by jealousy and envy. Many countries wish that they could be just like or similar to the United States of America. Although all my family lives in Brazil and Italy, I am an American citizen and take pride in that. I love my heritage of Portuguese, Italian, and German, but those countries will never be like the U.S. Same thing with my mom. She lived 17 years in Brazil and 9 in Italy. She is more American and wants to be more American than anything else. She is fluent in 6 languages and is working on her Masters degree in International Relations.
I appreciate the work that MY military does for our country and I am saying it is neither easy or simple. You on the other hand are criticizing everything about the U.S., but you know how bad Germany is too? Don't even start with that.
Okay, look... I believe you are trying to picture me a revenge-seeker. If you mean that I regret breaking up of the SU, the you partly are correct. I want some of the past its capabilities back, because much of the baby was thrown away with the bathwater, so to speak - and now every sane person has to admit that (which is, for example, best evident when you compare the old Soviet space industry with today's Russian one). My preference, however, is building things anew rather then restoring them, and this, together with my appreciation of the universal Human Rights, makes me a progressive thinker - at least, in my own eyes.
And, come on, I wouldn't even dislike the idea of the Global Pax Americana - it might not be the worst of possible worlds. But from historical observation it becomes obvious that bloodless establishing of such thing is impossible. The US army is the busiest fighting force in the world, and no one got involved in more conflicts and "police actions" throughout the 20th century. It's natural when muscle growths with proper training.
But my problem with it is when your muscle thinking overwhelms your realization of how the world is geared and why it is not always right to disturb a fragile balance. Somehow a forced spreading of democracy had become a long living foreign policy for the USA. However, I have no idea why, and I never seen a justification if this idea. Shall the USA feel more comfortable if only democratic countries are left around? Is the democratic form of government supposed to guarantee that a country with it would never have conflicts of interest with the USA? Does it automatically make people to honor human rights, money flow right ways, roses grow and birds sing?
Whatever the justification is, the idea of active intervention in the world's affairs means intervention, and quite often, by using force. You can say it's really necessary for a power that represents itself as the world's cop, but a cop has to abide to law and guard justice, otherwise he is no different from a bandit. A work of a cop is meaningless when there is no a judge and a law accepted by all. This is by far is not looking like what we have in the international politics. The only working international justice institutions have only developed in Western Europe and effective range of their decisions is quite limited. The UN could pretend to be the universal lawmaker and judge, but in fact it's a discussion club of adversaries with contradictory views.
So in fact, every nation is still on its own in the current international environment and must seek its own way of adaptation to it. The large disturbances the USA tend to create on the international arena make some others oppose. Opposition produce America haters who (you are right) in plenty across the countries which are not on the same camp with yours (or not in everything). I had years of experience arguing with our own hawks, but very often I can produce no arguments to align with simple facts. If I ever have to choose between American and Russian hawks, I'd pick Russian, because they at least pledge to protect me (often from the dangers I don't deem to be ones). This is how a mature sane person must make her or his choice. I might not like it, but I have to make it. And by the way, we live in free information exchange age, and all what American ultra-patriots write in Washington Post or similar papers, publish on their blogs and discussed on forums becomes immediately available to international community - and fuels America hatred very well. A source reading something like 'We consider Russia our strategic enemy' and tougher things is just an unbeatable argument for them.
It's interesting, however to see why 'hawks' appear at all. I can understand and even appreciate when a man who have seen an actual action and killed people retains a part of the aggressiveness that helped his survival in the critical situations and transfer this aggressiveness to the peaceful life. But how often such people have problems with law or have their lives destroyed some other ways? Do you really believe that being aggressive can be positive everywhere?
What I don't appreciate is a young male's lust for violence, being trigger happy without even trying to imagine yourself to be shot at, and feeling of a superhuman pumped up with cheat power. If it's a technology that drives you into these dangerous illusions, perhaps you need to consider that wars are not fought and won with superior *fighting* technologies, but rather through strategic planning. Often, you must learn it from tyrants of the past, no matter how you despise them. This art is thousand years old and I can see no ground to believe that US planning is going to be superior to everyone's to the end of time. Relax, and fail. Quite oppositely, I can observe the USA is driving themselves deeper in the thickets of various costly conflicts, not even matter the opinion or intentions of the current governing office. This is more and more looks like losing control over situation and here (yay, I'm finally back on topic! :lol: ) in North Korea there's a chance a straw might break the camel's back.
My recommendation: don't attack NK or provoke it to attack. Just let them rot on within their borders. Whatever tantrums they can make, they'd be empty, like many times in the past.
Ok, 'nuff said...
would eventually win the battle.
