The US, full of its ideas of democracy and freedom throughout the world, has been very hypocritacal at many times in its history, especially recently.

The US wants to spread peace throughout the Middle East but will BREAK ITS BACK for countries like Saudi Arabia and to some degree Kuwait.

The US supported the coup in the 1960's-1970's that overthrough the Government of Greece.

The fact that Lebanon still faces aggression from Israel which wants Syria to be treated as a pariah state; or that Iran and Syria are accused of possession of weapons of mass destruction while Israel is permitted to protect its arsenal of WMDs is all part of the hypocrisy that characterises US foreign policy.

It is very hypocritical for the US government to claim to promote democracy and freedom throughout the world yet when it comes to the nation of Cyprus expediency and a double standard takes precedence over the lofty ideals of liberty.

There are many other examples which can be talked about, but I guess this goes for many countries. But I expected the great nation of the US to start to live up to these ideas of freedom and democracy, and not bow down to hystaria and the "oil kingdoms."

Wait, does the US have or had any involvment in Cyprus? I mean there might have been, but I haven't really heard about it. If not, how does that come to mind when their are other countries in the world that need help, one continent comes to mind, Africa. Which some US politicians have been pushing for to help parts of Africa.

Anyways, like said above, a country does whats best for it's own good, even if that means double standards. Sometimes if you practice what you preach, you just screw yourself in the end.

For a minute there I thought I was reading another editorializing bit of news from some CNN reporter!

Excellent.  I agree with you.

Its not like this is all America does, to all you liberal do-gooders out there.  America bends over backwords and forks over way to much money and resources in charity and relief to the rest of the world.  It is never enough and all we get in return is a bunch of ungrateful and spiteful attacks through the world (inlcuding the US media) media.

Difference is the media doesn't it do it to show opinion, but instead to make money. After all, scandal sells. I think it's good though, because if there was no criticism this country would be mindless zombies, like much of the red states. 

It's a joke, they aren't zombies.

Ha ha, yeah, it is good for the entertainment value. 

I can't stand idiots like Wolf Blitzer and Christiana Amanpour!  It is so apparent that their only motive is to portray the president in as negative of a light as possible.  They could care less about informing the public or just providing the news.  To them its all a big game and they try to "one-up" each other in their Bush-hating and America-hating editorials.

Ya, but its better than the presidential ass-kissing handed out by Fox News on a nightly basis. I used to pick the lesser of two evils and watch CNN, but i dont even watch news on t.v. anymore...it became redundant for me.

Yeah, it is pretty redunant; I just watch it mainly for the entertainment value nowadays.

Fox is a big Bush boot-kisser organization.  However, every country I am assuming, has its own propaganda machine that props up its leaders.  CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, and PBS on the other hand are by far the worst evils.  They are practically sister-stations of and extensions of al-Jazeera and act as the enemy's propaganda machine.  They and their "news" is directly opposed to the well-being and preservation of the USA as a country.  Their single monolithic focus is to smear Bush's image and to cause another Watergate and get another "big-bad" Republican presidency out of the White House.

About america  supporting the military coup in greece...why dont you blame your own military for instigating the coup?

and lets talk about your own exploits on crete.

There was a study from some university that said Americans who watch Comedy central knew more about whats going on then watching Fox. I don't know if it was posted here or if I read it someplace else, but I couldn't find the study, so I can't say if it's true or not, but funny anyways.

I don't think CNN is all that biased, they tell it how it is. But then again I don't watch any of their shows, maybe Lou Dobbs, but all he talks about is securing the borders and trying to make America safer. While he brings up good points I'm getting alittle tired of hearing it.

I'll watch Wolfe Blitzer tomorrow.

Anyways there's nothing wrong talking down a president, all those you named even talked down on Clinton and still do with his wife and talk about all their Scandals. Like I said they only put up stories that will cause the most interest to cash in and beat their competitors.

-I couldnt agree more. Other countries are always talking about how they get the short-end of the stick or how the US did them wrong or could have done better in this aspect or that aspect...............as if their particular interests were the ONLY interests. It is a very political world and no other country is involved in so much and helps and is expected to help as much as the US. You cant always satisfy everyone and just like what was stated earlier, a country is going to look after its interests.

I think the point is that if you are Americas ally, you have certain benifits.  It is a goods incentive to get more allies!

But seriously, did you expect us to be perfect?

All politicians must behave like their constituencies in order to pander to them.  It is the same if you are a republican or a communist.

You don't seriously believe that all the news stations that criticize the president are the enemy of the country, do you? This is exactly the line fed by state propaganda in fascist and communist countries.

"directly opposed to the well-being and preservation of the USA as a country" WOW!!! Been listening to a bit too much Ann Coulter, have you?

Seriously, how can you possibly make such an affirmation? You know what? To be honest with you, seen from Canada, all these stations seem rather mild on Bush. And they were major boot-lickers until a year or two ago. While it may be true that the media in general is sensationalist, form there to go and say that they have an agenda directly opposed to the survival of the USA is complete nonsense. Actually, it's worse than that. If all Americans thought like you, America would be a fascist country that Hitler could be proud of. Whatever happened to free speech and differing opinions, which are the pillars of the democracy that Americans are so proud of? I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and pretend that perhaps that came out wrong. If it didn't and you seriously believe that, then I suggest you take a long look at your own convictions.

Well, I agree with your attitude, but free trade is the best thing for us to do, regardless.  I'm for it for selfish purposes though, free trade benefits America so I support it.

US hypocrisy?! US?!

Why US? It's not a country that is hypocrite.  Maybe some senator, the President, some secretary or whatever, not the whole US! A few morons that by some chance are US citizens and are hypocrites doesn't neccessary leads to the conclusion that US citizens are hypocrites! Does, it?

There are hypocrites everywhere, in US as in every other countries.

Go for it US guys, show that US hypocrisy is the same as any other country hypocrisy!

*I hate unaccurate statements!!! Mostly when I say something and people think I'm hypocrite!

Now that you mention it, Lou Dobbs is about the only one on CNN who seems to stick it to both sides and tries to hold both Demicans and Republicrats accountable for their outrages.  However, even he seems to slip into the Leftist party line that CNN touts after a while.  If he were to show his good sense all of the time, he would probably be fired!

Yes definitely.  I am by no means a Republican boot-licker who sticks up for Bush.  I think he has become a liberal in his second term.  The true Conservatives, who are not to be confused with the phony conservative Republicans, were cheated in the election by Bush.  He has turned his back on the base that elected him.

Yeah, they are all jealous of his parents' wealth and think that it should be given to their parents, since the rich kid's parents probably didn't earn it in an honest way. [/sarcasm]

He isn't capable of acting "big and bad" and neither are the whiny little sophist Republicans in Congress!  I WISH they would act big and bad for once and put the Leftists in their place.

Yes, I do believe most of the stations are extensions of the socialist Left-wing in the US.  All other cares and interests are subordinated to their hatred of the Bush dynasty and the Republicans.  Most of the newscasters and the executives of these organizations are still stuck on that 60's era mentality of wanting to bring down a Republican White House.

And no, I do not listen to Anne Coulter!  She is way too nice for my liking and plus she is a fence sitter like most of the "conservative" talk show hosts - they waffle in between kissing Bush's butt and outright liberalism. 

Don't you sit there on your self-rightous tail and lecture me!  The "Hitler fascism" argument is straight out of Air America (or should I say Air Canada) and leftist talking points.  Don't try to pull that crap on me, you will not win with it.  When did I ever deny anyone their right to free speech?  I am criticizing the media and giving my own opinion about what I think they are all about, just like they give their tired old opinion about Bush and conservatives every stinking day on their programs!   Maybe you just don't like what I said because I am a Conservative; in which case, why don't you just come out and say it!  NO, what I said DID NOT come out wrong.

Well said.  I can't argue here.

its about time someone set it straight! good job man! go US and all of our policies.

Originally posted by Mila "Yeah, they are all jealous of his parents' wealth and think that it should be given to their parents, since the rich kid's parents probably didn't earn it in an honest way. [/sarcasm] " Oh, Byzantine. Blasphemy. I am not jealous nor do I want them to give their money to my government. I'm frustrated and I want them to give it to me. Gimme, gimme gimme! Americans are so unfair.

I knew what you were getting at with that analogy.  I apologize if I was having a bit of fun with it!

If Americans are unfair Mila, then become one. Then you'll be on equal ground with us unfair people. THe more citizens we have the better.

Like they always say,"If you can't beat them, join them."

Byzantine Emperor:

I commented on you being opposed to freedom of speech by your general attitude towards the media, and especially the following statement:

"They and their "news" is directly opposed to the well-being and preservation of the USA as a country"

To me, as someone who has grown up in one of the most repressive autocratic regimes of the 20th century (Ceausescu's Romania), this is eerily reminiscent of the type of language that that government used to employ.

I don't necessarily mind conservatives, but you seem to be far to the right of the American political spectrum, which is itself quite a bit shifted to the right compared to most countries in the world. This makes you to my mind an extremist, not a conservative. I've met plenty of level-headed and reasonable conservatives, and those I respect. Based on the comments I've seen so far from you however, you are not one of them.

Anyway, I don't think that I should really argue with you, because I've found that arguing with extremists will get me nowhere.

The US has involvement everywhere, and anywhere it wants.  It has more than than Greece, Turkey, and even the EU.

The US has increasingly supported Turkish ambitions on Cyprus, and seemingly supports the invasion. The US actually gave the OK to Turkey to invade Cyprus and has had a pro Turkish view since(and they helped you guys right back in the War in Iraq..)

Am I? Or I misquoted you?

Just to note:

This was not an attack on the Us on my part. I like the US.

My point is the US needs to start "practicing what they preach." Perhaps this asks too much, though.

*The US has the choice to be the "big brother protector of the world" or not.

Well, I am sorry that you had to endure such hardship, seriously.  However, I still do not really see how my criticisms of the American media really compare with the words and actions of Adolf Hitler.  As a Bible-believing Christian I respect the Jews as God's chosen people and I am a supporter of Israel.  In no way were my comments racist or anti-Semitic.  Nor were they "fascist" for that matter, unless you believe that sincere nationalism (not the violent or racist kind) and a critical opinion are fascism.

Yes, I am probably more right on the spectrum than most.  In my mind an "extremist" on both sides of the spectrum is one who advocates violence and racism in the attainment of their political goals.  I have never done this so I don't believe I am an "extremist" in that sense.  Maybe because I am far right of what you believe, and of what you think many Americans believe, I am an extremist.  When you come right down to it, I love my country and I have a very strong opinion about those whom I think threaten the country and its freedoms.

Well I am sorry you still feel this way.  Maybe I did overeact a bit, but likening conservative or right-wing thought as it is in America to Hitler and the Nazis is not going to get you a response in moderation in my book.  As us midwest country-bumpkins would say, "Thems is fightin' words!"

By the way, I have been able to see eye to eye with Maju and hugoestr (who are most likely on the left side of the spectrum) on some issues in other topics, so its not like I am blinded by my Conservatism or anything.  I recognize good sense when I see it.

Yes I do know the meaning of the terms.  But I like throwing them around because it makes you guys mad!

-Could not have said it better myself. And as for the critiques on the US, it seems that people are getting more ignorant in economics, politics, and government. America never said that they would only takes strides to better America if it benefited every other country as well, rather the case is a lot of the times the opposite. Its as if non-Americans have this implication that America has devoted its power and influence for their benefit, a service that is reserved for only Americans. I quote Illuminati "In America.....Americans first, foreigners second". That is a perspective that every country should take, their own peoples interest first.................except for the US of course, we have everybody else to worry about. I dont disagree with the fact that if America is in a position to help than they should. After all the signers of the Declaration believed that if a man sees something that is wrong and has the ability to do something, he has the responsibility to do something. But like stated before, In America......American interest takes precedence. I also believe that a in a lot of cases foreigners dont want American help.

Byzantine Emperor,

When I made the comment about Adolf Hitler, I did not in any way mean to imply that you are an antisemite, or racist, or anything of that nature. I did make the comment though, because your attitude seems to imply that a strict control of the media is preferable, and that is a hallmark of a totalitarian society. You also said that Ann Coulter is too nice, and a few other such comments, so I decided that your political views border quite close to fascism. Hence the Hitler reference. Saying Benito Mussolini would not quite have had the same effect you see.

Anyway, my comment was that if all Americans shared your views, America would be a fascist state. I don't see what else you would call a country where the media is state-controlled, where intense nationalism is the norm, and dissent would be stifled. I didn't say that they would necessarily massacre anyone like Hitler would, but that such views run contrary to the principles that the US has claimed to uphold since its independence.

That's right wing authoritarianism, not fascism.

The definition of fascism is rather loose, as people haven't seemed to be able to agree on it. However, there are certain characteristics that people agree on.

From Wikipedia:

More generally, fascism, uncapitalized, is typified by attempts to impose state control over all aspects of life: political, social, cultural, and economic. The fascist state regulates and controls (as opposed to nationalizes) the means of production. Fascism is typified by this selective state control imposed through use or threat of force; by exaltation of the collective (or other entity, State or nation) above the individual, often taking the form of explicit populism; and by loyalty to a single leader, often to the point of a cult of personality.

Note that we are talking about control of the means of production, not nationalization, so an economy where large corporations associated with the state control the means of production is not incompatible with fascism. An authoritarian nationalistic America, where the leader is demanded undisputed loyalty, would be in my opinion dangerously close to fascism.

-------------
What is history but a fable agreed upon?
Napoleon Bonaparte

Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi

Will you and Decebal please stop reading what you want into my comments?  You are like a couple of CNN "experts" who give their analysis in Wolf Blitzer's "Situation Room", but their analysis only ends up being a bunch of random sound bytes taken out of context in order that they might make them say what they want.

I never said that the President should bring in the Marines or order local SWAT teams to come in and shut down the news agencies by force so as to silence them.  Nor did I say that I advocated the use of force to silence the opposition.  I just gave my heavy critical opinion of the American media, saying that by far I think they are doing more bad than good and have other motives besides presenting the news and "informing" the public.  I don't know how I can make it more explicit.  In the end, I like having CNN and the New York Times and others around, it puts a blatant and naked face on the "ultra left wing" (which I would say is farther to the left than I am to the right) in this country for everyone to witness and to form their own opinion about.  That's if they can first tell that it is more than just plain "news."

I dont agree with you at all. Your post is rather ran-together so I only picked up on a few of your points. As far as having everybody believe in our campaigns? And whats with comparing the US to Nazi Germany? The US doesnt have to have the entire world buy into their campaigns. And you say that that the US hasnt had to use military power since WWII?? Korea and Vietnam were supposed to be for communism, either way it was a campaign for the people of Vietnam and Korea as well as for the security of the US and all other free countries against the threat of global communist takeover. Panama, mogadishu..etc..etc.. ya maybe youre right maybe the US didnt neccesarily have to get involved.....but what would the world think if we didnt??

There's nothing that says a country with a democratic system of government has to have a nice, idealistic, human rights promoting foreign policy.

At the expense of others? At the expense of International laws? At the expense of world peace?

Yes, the world is a dog eat dog place, the only thing that keeps people from bullying you is bullying them.

International Law and World Peace are just useless buzzwords, they sound nice but in the end they don't mean anything.

Originally posted by strategos International law is nonsense. Many countries can get away with many things as long as they do not try to interfere with the US. Most other countries will not take serious actions. So for all nations: Avoid the US, and you can do mostly what you want(to some degrees of course)

-That is if you dont receive US interference, in which you probably will depending on what you mean by "do mostly what you want".

The US is always under intense scrutiny for their actions, but yet are by far the most generous country in the world. I will remind everyone that the US does not have to do anything for any other country, but does for the well-being of these countries. The USA's image never changes no matter what we do. I honestly believe that we would have the same image whether or not we helped anyone at all...... Makes you think......

-Now, of course I believe in International aid for countries that can not support themselves. I believe in fair trade and good standing relations amongst other countries. The USA has no obligation to support other countries, but want to help those in need. The US is not the selfish materialistic country we are portrayed as (some people are), but ordinary people who care about others. We give financial support through donations and charity work all across the world. The people donated personal funds very generously to the tsunami relief(example), and many Americans are by no means rich. Everybody makes mistakes, the difference, if America does it the whole world points their finger. I know this goes along with the territory though.........

Americans, in general, are more generous toward the poor and suffering because the United States, as a whole, is the most affluent country in the world.  The world has, for decades, benefitted from American aid, and the American effort to relieve povery, hunger, and disease around the globe is tremendous

One cannot neglect the large collection of humanitarian organizations that are based in the United States and stocked with good hearted American volunteers.

But, that is because Americans are humans, and any humans with a heart would donate some excesses to the poor and needy. 

But the United States as a geo-political entity has no obligation nor real motive to help the truely needy.  The goal of the American government and its associated institutions is simple: to enrich and reap benefits for AMERICANS and their way of life, even if it comes at the cost of lives and livelihoods of people in other countries. 

Every time I see a spoilt American teenager driving a brand new SUV playing the latest music from MTV, I shake my head in disgust.

But that is the way of life: the rich finds ways to get richer.  The rich is only rich because somewhere down the line, there is someone poorer and less fortunate.  Everything revolves around some degree of comparision and relative status: the rich derives his status and gratification of richness from the knowledge of that there exist those with less fortunes. 

The SUV driver may externally and verbally show compassion for the poor in Malaysia or Ethiopia, but deep down, his very essence compells him to support whatever it takes to ensure that gas prices will not rise above a certain level. 

It is unfair to blame Americans for all the ills in the world.  Americans do what they do because they, like everyone else, are humans, and humans are selfish, self-centered, and complex creatures: on one hand they demand the idealistic and beautiful, on the other, they would sell their ideals the moment their interests are endangered.

Depends on what you mean by "interests". You say that humans through out morals and ideals the minute their intests are endangered. When I think of interests I think of my family. Anything that hits my pocket-book, hits my family. I think America is a very family-oriented country. So in retrospect I would agree that most Americans will be financially conscience as opposed to giving the bulk of their income to people they will never see. Having said that I have donated a fair share of money to the less fortunate and I believe people that can help, should help. The main point of this post I guess is the obvious fact that most Americans have families and would consider them their "interests", and would be more prone to worrying about their "interests" first.

All in all....Charity is a blessing.