American Patriotism

[Bushmustgo]

America has done some great things but, it also has many skeletons in the closet.

From the Indians, the Mexicans, blacks and slavery, Vietnam, Atomic bomb on cities as a non-military target, giving WMD to Saddam and Osama in the 80's to fight off the Iranians and Russians, respectively.

[FastNed]

Hello, Bushmustgo - welcome to the Forum - from the tone of your postings, however, that may be the last nice thing I have to say to you.

Please describe and identify the "WMD" you state were 'given' to Saddam & Osama in the 80's?

Obviously, Nova, you were taught to have 'shame' for the version of American History you learned. What you call "World Opinion" is simply the views of self-selected Elitists and we could care less for their opinions.

[nova_satori]

Ok, Professor. Educate me. When did we try to conquer the entire continent we live on?

Do the American-irish armies of the US (400 men per) that invaded canada, and the real armies of the war of 1812 ring any bells? Btw, the US got its butt served to it on a silver platter in both invasions.

Mexican war before the civil war?

How about our chasing the violent Mexican bandit that killed 50+ american civilans? We sent ALOT of troops after him, in full violation of the law.

I also missed the part where America exterminates 6 million people based on religion.

Not religion. Diamonds and other resources.

Belgium King Leopold's colonial rule in Congo was funded partially by the US. Throughout the colonization, 6-7 Million congonese were butchered for their lack of cooperation in exploting the land. The US and Belgium are directly and indirectly responsible for 6-7 million dead congonese. They didn't teach you that in school did they?

America did nothing in comparison to what Hitler did. You are crazy to think otherwise.

You'd be suprised how many people the US has directly or indirectly killed.

Obviously, Nova, you were taught to have 'shame' for the version of American History you learned. What you call "World Opinion" is simply the views of self-selected Elitists and we could care less for their opinions.

No, they didn't give us any leaning. They simply gave us the facts. And the book we used was pro-right. Also, the US was one of the first countries to start using Biological warfare. Let's infest blankets with SMALL POXs and give to the Indians! hehehheeheh. it worked. WELL.

Please describe and identify the "WMD" you state were 'given' to Saddam & Osama in the 80's?

Other then anthrax cultures I don't know of any others.

[FastNed]

Refined down to the bare essence, Nova, if you can conceive of any connection of any evil to America, it's America's fault. To connect the colonial policies and actions of Belgium to America is demented, to put it mildly!

[Hugo]

Exactly, Ned, and I also find it interesting that these people decry the actions of America's proxies and allies in conflicts and trouble-spots during the Cold War, but have absolutely nothing to say regarding worse atrocities committed by the Soviet Union directly during the same period. They demand America apologise for war crimes their allies committed, but they are either unaware or uncaring that Japan has never, ever apologised for directly massacring 13 million Chinese POWs and civilians.

Quite simply, these people see what they want to see, because they are bigoted anti-Americans. In their eyes, America can do no right, while states as egregious as the USSR, Imperialist Japan or Saddam's Iraq are so harmless as to be unworthy of their attentions.

[nova_satori]

Refined down to the bare essence, Nova, if you can conceive of any connection of any evil to America, it's America's fault. To connect the colonial policies and actions of Belgium to America is demented, to put it mildly!

So someone who helps fund a slaughter and supports the main power doing it has NO CONNECTION WHATSOEVER AND IS TOTALLY BLAMELESS?

So thus, any one who knowingly helps another commit a murder is absolved and is innocent?

They demand America apologise for war crimes their allies committed

I never said that. Stuff happened. Yet you people still think America is noble. America will never apologize. Governments don't do that. But that doesn't stop you from learning about what they have done. "When you have stopped learning, you are dead." Using that logic, a huge portion of the US population should be dead.

Quite simply, these people see what they want to see, because they are bigoted anti-Americans. In their eyes, America can do no right, while states as egregious as the USSR, Imperialist Japan or Saddam's Iraq are so harmless as to be unworthy of their attentions.

Wow, you're an ignorant fool who's missing the whole point. Everyone has come to the conclusion that those states were bad. However, a few of you blind faith pro-americans think that America hasn't done anything wrong. I've met typical blind faith pro-Americans like you, who deny any wrong doing America has done, and say that anyone who looks at those is horrible.

Yet in truth, you are the horrible ones for ignoing it. Those who fail to understand the mistakes of the past, will commit those with far greater consequences. Know what happened, why and make sure it doesn't happen again. You people seem perfectly fine with letting the world fall apart. Sad

[Nuclear]

Nova, I replied to each of your comments for me:

Ok, we were in Canada when we were under British rule.

In the Mexican War, the president of the time was in violation and was quickly voted out of office for what he did.

The US had no part in the Congo butcherings. If murders happened, it happened at the hands of the Belgians.

As far as being surprised how many people the US has directly or indirectly killed, how many of them that were killed had hostile intentions to America or her civillians? Innocent people always die, it's a shame, but if you counted all the innocents who died in say WW2, The US, France, England, Russia AND Germany and Japan would have a lot of blood on their hands....all because of accidents(not always accidents when it came to the SS and Japanese) Accidents happen and it's a shame. Other than that, those people were a threat to the country.

Nova, every text book I've ever read in school was a bunch of liberal propaganda. I even saw one that MISQUOTED NEIL ARMSTRONG so the phrase was politically correct. You pretend it's right winged so as to cover what the liberals have done.

I recommend you read Treason by Ann Coulter. She does a very good job of exposing the past crimes of the liberals...you may want to second guess your affiliation. I wasn't even aware of how many things they pulled that they've managed to hide from us....

[Bushmustgo]

I wasn't even aware of how many things they pulled that they've managed to hide from us....

Let's not forget recent lies by our right wing administration:

WMD in Iraq are of an imminent threat..........NO WMD FOUND.

Uranium from Africa................

Saddam/9-11 link.........

The War was over........

I can go on and on and both sides lie but, the conservative lies have come with a greater price and burden, period!

[nova_satori]

Ok, we were in Canada when we were under British rule.

So the US was under british rule when the war of 1812 started?

The US had no part in the Congo butcherings. If murders happened, it happened at the hands of the Belgians.

You say that because you have no idea what happened.

Reseach it before you even try to comment. That is if you are willing to accept the truth and stop following the simple path of ignorance.

Innocent people always die, it's a shame, but if you counted all the innocents who died in say WW2, The US, France, England, Russia AND Germany and Japan would have a lot of blood on their hands..

Are we talking about the rest of the world? The US killed plenty of people not in the context of war. Did u take ANY us history?

Nova, every text book I've ever read in school was a bunch of liberal propaganda. I even saw one that MISQUOTED NEIL ARMSTRONG so the phrase was politically correct.

Almost every book at the time misquotes him, right, left, neutral. I love how you simply write off everything that doesn't follow your opinion as "liberal propaganda." That's just pathetic. You minus well stop reading. You seem to have learned nothing from any history.

I recommend you read Treason by Ann Coulter. She does a very good job of exposing the past crimes of the liberals...you may want to second guess your affiliation. I wasn't even aware of how many things they pulled that they've managed to hide from us....

Then i suggest you read "the best money democracy can buy," and "the lies my teachers told me: Everthing your history book got wrong." Those will really show you what your side has done. Have you even researched your affiliation? You have no idea how much stuff remains undiscolosed in government offices that would incremnate thousands of right-wingers.

[Nuclear]

I've taken more history than you probably have, but instead of sitting here quizing each other like middle schoolers, why don't we discuss the topic. For your silly response that you want:

During the war of 1812, we entered Canada to repell invaders.

As for the Congo, I prefer to get my history from facts, not www.liberalnews.com

The US has done more for the innocents and the rest of this world than any other country on earth. We risked our own American soldiers to minimize Iraqi civillian deaths. Had I been President, I've have turned the country into a glass factory. Every American who has died over there died to defend 'innocent' Iraqis. We have the technology to not risk American lives, but we didn't use it to help them.

As for you, O'Educated One, why read about democracy...The United States of America is NOT A DEMOCRACY. It's called a REPUBLIC.

Your anti-American views are really starting to annoy me. You wouldn't risk breaking a fingernail for this country let alone your life. You have no love of this country or of the freedoms you have that many others paid for with their lives. You are very selfish and annoying.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Nuclear,

Please forgive me, for I am jumping into this thread after reading only your's and Nova's posts.

During the war of 1812, we entered Canada to repell invaders

One cannot enter a country to repel invaders.

I think one of the important lessons that came from this war was the killing of Tecumseh, to establish (for the US) that killing those who possess what you covet, is OK, even if they had it first.

Another quote, from the history pages,

Push on, brave boys, Quebec is ours!

Dying words of Richard Montgomery, Brigadier-Gerneral of the invading American forces, killed during a futile attempt to take Quebec, Dec.31, 1775.

Might I remind you that the (now) USA seceded from the British, using what is now described as 'terrorist tactics' to achieve independence.

Might I also remind everyone that the (now) USA used ruses such as 'false white flag' tactics to capture the leader of the Seminoles and genocide against it's peoples to secure the lands that are now considered 'Florida'.

Before one can cry 'No Fair', I suggest one look at the 'glass house one resides in'. Besides, in the 'War of 1812' Britain(and what would be Canada, or Kanata) soundly whooped the Americans, burning the 'white' house in the process. We could do it again, easily.

[nova_satori]

During the war of 1812, we entered Canada to repell invaders.

Where the Fu*k did you read that? That is preposterous.

As for you, O'Educated One, why read about democracy...The United States of America is NOT A DEMOCRACY. It's called a REPUBLIC.

Wrong. It's a representative Plutocracy. 60-80% of all senators are millionares. Less then 10 congressmen and senators can say their assets are less than $100k.

The US has done more for the innocents and the rest of this world than any other country on earth. We risked our own American soldiers to minimize Iraqi civillian deaths. Had I been President, I've have turned the country into a glass factory. Every American who has died over there died to defend 'innocent' Iraqis. We have the technology to not risk American lives, but we didn't use it to help them.

LOL. More damage. Possibly only the Soviets/Russians have done more. No, we risked American soldiers to miminze loss of civlians because the rest of the world would hammer us for negligance.

Had you been president, the rest of the world would have been calling for war crimes on the grounds of genocide. The Right wing supports Genocide without understanding the alternatives or why it happened in the first place. We are doomed to oblivion if right wingers control the world.

Many troops went because they can't afford the loss of pay. Should you refuse to go, you are docked a rank, a 2/3 of a year's pay. The average grunt is paid at the poverty level. Their families simply cannot afford that. Didn't think about that alternative did you? Wait, you're right wing, alternative has no meaning to you.

That technology would have brough the world down on the US faster then the US is already doing.

Your anti-American views are really starting to annoy me. You wouldn't risk breaking a fingernail for this country let alone your life. You have no love of this country or of the freedoms you have that many others paid for with their lives. You are very selfish and annoying

Your right wing, shoot first, shoot second, shoot third, never ask a damn question, anyone who disagrees with me is wrong, might make right, ethics and morals are useless, and bush is our god views are lowering the average IQ of the human race.

You are completely missing the whole point. You refuse to see the problems of America. By neglecting the problems you will let them grow to huge towering infernos that cannot be contained. You refuse to see the atrocities commited, and do nothing to stop them from happening again. You refuse to see America purge itself from the horrors it has commited. You refuse to see the history and learn from it. You refuse to see anything that doesn't clash with your beliefs. You remind me of ashcroft, one so dedicated to flawed beliefs, that you cannot even see the fractures in the logic.

It will be those who refuse to see the past and the problems of America who bring her down.

. You have no love of this country or of the freedoms you have that many others paid for with their lives. You are very selfish and annoying.

You have no love for your country if you wish to see it fall by neglecting the lessons of history. You, and those like you will be responsible for her fall. You are willing to waste millions of Patriotic americans, (you are a nationalist, not even close to a patriot) by not rushing to fix the problems while you still can.

I am selffish and annoying by taking the first steps and acknowleding the problems and spreading the word?

Or you are not self-fish and annoying by contriubing to the fall of America?

[Luigi71585]

Please welcome Senator "Boss" Tweed...?

I disaggree with America being defined as a " representative plutocracy." There is no such thing as a representative plutocracy. Either its controlled by the wealthy or its representatve (republic).

Plutocracy-controled by the wealthy

Representative-controlled by the masses

It cant be a combination of the two. The majority of americans are not wealthy.

Indeed, our senators are rich, but its only a plutocracy if they use this money to CONTROL THE GOVERNMENT, more spicifically in bribes. We dont elect the wealthy. We elect whom we feel is the best, for the most part. If you research the true meaning of a plutocracy it goes back to Roman senators who became men of power because of their wealth. The one possible example of ths would be campaign finance.

We may not be the most honest society around, but this isnt the 1860s and Tammany Hall isnt using its vast wealth to push along bills. America may have been a plutocracy in the past, but not today. The issue of their wealth is in HOW they use it.

But thats MY humble opinion as an AMERICAN who participates in this system.

[nova_satori]

Representitive in that we elect people. Those who spend the most money, almost always get elected. Thus, those who are rich can essentially buy a vote.

Plutocractic in that almost everyone that is in power is rich, rich in a heavy disparity between them and the average American.

It cant be a combination of the two. The majority of americans are not wealthy.

The majority in power are.

We elect whom we feel is the best, for the most part.

And how does one do that? By spending money on ads to tell you what they plan to do and never actually do. Who do you pay attention to the most? The one who has the most ads. The one who has the most ads often has the most money. The average voter votes for the person he remembers, regardless of their message.

America may have been a plutocracy in the past, but not today. The issue of their wealth is in HOW they use it.

No, they just hide it better.

But thats MY humble opinion as an AMERICAN who participates in this system.

My opinion is from one who has researched the system and the socialology that most people use in voting.

[Luigi71585]

As i stated the only argument is in campaign finance. Sire of course, the one with the flashy ads may get the vote. If we only elect the rich as you say, its not representative. The difference is in the interpretation of the definition of plutocracy. Just because they use money to get elected doesnt mean that theyre using wealth to get bills passed. Thats the difference.

Lets not get into an argument about the shadiness and underhandiness of American government. Its foolish to believe that corruption is running rampant and that the Senators are paying off Officer McIrish to cover themselves.

Just because they have wealth doesnt mean it plays any part in their governmental decisions or actions. Its a salary. An incredibly to high one in my opinion.

Researching a system doesnt mean you know anything. I could research how to hit a baseball 450 ft but until i get out and practice, it wont happen. Oddly enough, its in the footing. But anyways...

By the way are you Canadian or American?

[nova_satori]

If we only elect the rich as you say, its not representative.

Ok, a sham representive.

Just because they use money to get elected doesnt mean that theyre using wealth to get bills passed.

However, we are still being "ruled" by a group of wealth people regardless of whether or not they use that wealth to their advantage during their terms.

Its foolish to believe that corruption is running rampant and that the Senators are paying off Officer McIrish to cover themselves.

A plutocracy isn't always bad. Tyranny can be preferable to democracy. True communism would be better then them all. A alturistic anarchy....now that would a utopia for a moderate to small group of humans.

Just because they have wealth doesnt mean it plays any part in their governmental decisions or actions. Its a salary. An incredibly to high one in my opinion.

Neither the less, we still have a plutocracy, rule by the wealthy. The average salary was $117,000. However, many reported their wealth before their salaries.

An American. Not proud of what my country has done. Not at all. Thus, if you don't want more atrocities on America's hands, you seek to wake the rest of the population.

Sociology actually does help in voting. Pyschology too. But both can be used for "questionable" purposes.

[Nuclear]

Louis, some good points. It's interesting how things can be redefined depending on the circumstances. I've recently been studying the Mexican WAr through the Civil War and that period of US history and the idea if the south had been victorious, it would have been the Confederate Revolution as opposed to the Civil War is very contemplating.

Nova, a lot of the actions you question you probably don't understand. None of us do because there are deeper reasons. The people in this country who know the most about what is going on in the world are the Preisdent of the United States and the CIA. What the President doesn't know, someone in the CIA(possibly some military also) probably do.

The CIA may take part in 'illegal' actions as you would call it but there is a reason for it. They can see threats we can't.

For example, going into Iraq. Not all the WMD evidence we have was shown to the UN because it was too classified. Why you ask? Cause if we were to show some things, we could expose contacts in Iraq and could get allies killed.

There is a lot none of us know. For example, in the Congo, the assassination to which you reffered, probably happened for a reason. So unless you were in any Presidential briefings or on the CIA team that went into the Congo, you know about as much as I do and as the media does. There are always a lot of facts that are never revealed....I'm still curious what really happened at Roswell. :-p

And with the US going into Canada in the war of 1812, I do not know a lot of the details of Canadian involvement but it makes sense for England to attack from Canada as well because if memory serves, Canada was more tied to England than they are now at the time. So the British used Canada as a staging point.

Why did we go into Canada? Probably the same reason the Russians went into Poland in WW2. You stop the invasion and then push the enemy back so as to discourage any further attacks. As for the general's dying words: Not every general in US history expresses the mindset and ideas of the Government and Country. MacArthur wanted us to go into Korea and China forseeing a potential problem with them. Patton wanted to go after Russia while we still had the army there.(Ironic that both, mostly Patton, were correct in that we then fought a Cold War against the Soviets for the enxt 50 years)

Strangely, both those generals died shortly after the war in 'accidents'. My point is that, right or wrong, not all generals see eye to eye with their commanders.

[Dax552]

Nova, I actually took the time to read through this entire thread and was impressed by your posts. I actually participate in a different forum where I have experienced similar resentment like you received in this thread. The only difference is that in my regular forum I get a lot of help from other members where as you had maybe one or two people support your position. I'm glad you kept at it. Sad how a 17 year old understands our history better than the older crowd here.

Can you even think of one non-progandist reason for why 9/11 happened.

The shooting down of two Libyan planes in 1981; the bombardment of Beirut in 1983 and 1984; the bombing of Libya in 1986; the bombing and sinking of an Iranian ship in 1987; the shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane in 1988; the shooting down of two more Libyan planes in 1989; the massive bombing of the Iraqi people in 1991; the continuing sanctions and bombings against Iraq; the bombing of Sudan and Afghanistan in 1998; the habitual support of Israeli belligerence and torture, and condemnation of Arab resistance to it; the double standard applied to Israeli terrorism, such as the willful massacre of 106 Lebanese at the UN base at Qana in 1996; the continued persecution of Libya, now nearing the end of its second decade; the abduction of wanted men from Muslim countries, such as Malaysia, Pakistan, Lebanon and Albania; the large military and hi-tech presence in Islam’s holiest land, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere in the Persian Gulf region… these are some of the American actions that can turn an Arab or a Muslim into a fanatic, into a terrorist, into a decrier of “America, the Great Satan”.

[nova_satori]

I wouldn't call America the "great satan." Insatiable resource demon is far more appropiate.

I actually participate in a different forum where I have experienced similar resentment like you received in this thread.

I have actually convinced more or less an entire forum somewhere else by listing the LONG list of atrocities America has commited. However, I have met plenty of ignorant Americans who flame me because they simply cannot understand that the US is a unethical and immoral country (but then again, almost every other country is anyway). I met one guy who would rather flame then look at the problems that America has. Idiot he was.

The only difference is that in my regular forum I get a lot of help from other members where as you had maybe one or two people support your position.

When the right-wing destroys the world, I will be laughing at all of them, and will be shouting, "I TOLD YOU SO!" For their ignorance and arrogance, they will be paying in their children and grandchildren's blood. I told them, do they ever listen? The right wing loves to ignore the best teacher they will ever have: The past.

Sad how a 17 year old understands our history better than the older crowd here.

The average American knows nothing about their own history and the history of their country. Very few college freshmen have taken any US history in highschool.

Why did we go into Canada? Probably the same reason the Russians went into Poland in WW2. You stop the invasion and then push the enemy back so as to discourage any further attacks

Do you understand that Irish DON'T like brits? Small Irish-America armies were invading Canada before the war of 1812, flanting America's neutrality treaties. the UK constantly verbally attacked the US on this.

For example, in the Congo, the assassination to which you reffered, probably happened for a reason. So unless you were in any Presidential briefings or on the CIA team that went into the Congo, you know about as much as I do and as the media does.

The media never touched on this. I wonder why! They were not assissinations. They were slaughering non-cooperating civilians. By the thousands at times. However, it wasn't mainly the CIA or the President in charge of this, but companies seeking resources in the Congo. The Congonese got so angry, they went on a murderous rage, killng any foreigners. That is when Belgium Colonization ended. 6-7 Million dead by the Belgium-America alliance in expolition of the Congo.

You would so like to write this off as "lies" then actually accept that America has done horrible things.

Nova, a lot of the actions you question you probably don't understand. None of us do because there are deeper reasons.

You don't understand what happened in the first place. Did you take AP US? Did u take AP Euro? Did you take any college recongized US history?

[Nuclear]

Dax, nice to have ya. Good thing you're here because I apparently know nothing about history....to think all those classes I took and studying I did and I know nothing about history.<sarcasim regarding history as I considering it one of my fortes, serious about the welcome though>

Oh, and Nova, I didn't take AP courses in HS. I went to college to take those courses. I did everything but major in history. I'm serious. You may not like my interpretation because it gives your party a bad name, but libs have been distorting history for over 70 years, so why should you stop. <anxiously awaiting reply a silly...>

[nova_satori]

Let's get this straight first.

History as we know it is bogus. It is simply a mismatched puzzle made from pieces that "historians" use to make meaning from raw data. No history is entirely correct.

Good thing you're here because I apparently know nothing about history

No one knows anything about history, we simply BELIEVE what we think is true about history. Your bias aganist everything I say is your belief that liberals (and often conservatives) are warping history to their advantage. Of course, EVERYONE does this. On a higher level, no one knows anything. We simply believe much. Truth exists independently of us.

Oh, and Nova, I didn't take AP courses in HS. I went to college to take those courses

And that college would be....

. I'm serious. You may not like my interpretation because it gives your party a bad name, but libs have been distorting history for over 70 years, so why should you stop.

I don't like your interpretation because it leaves out critical parts most historians agree on.

Like I said before, it matters not what party you belong to, everyone distorts history. To say that conservatives don't distort history is ridiculous.

[nova_satori]

Lies right?

The American wing mounted two short-lived invasions of Canada in 1866 and 1870 and the Irish Fenians launched a small rebellion in Ireland in 1867. The American Fenians faded out of prominence after the last unsuccessful assault on Canada.

In Gallery III, Canadians are still fighting for survival. During the American Revolution and War of 1812, a single major defeat could have wiped Canada off the map forever, and reduced it to a northern extensionof the new American republic. In each case, a coalition of English and French-speaking militia, First Peoples, and British regulars, all supported by the Royal Navy, won the crucial engagements that preserved Canada as a distinct North American entity. Even after the War of 1812, the American threat persists and generations of Canadians live out their lives behind a shield of fortifications, naval bases, communications links, and garrisons provided by the British. Even when relations with the United States began to improve, that nation provided a haven for minor incursions into Canada by Canadian rebels in 1837-38 and Fenians in the 1860s and 1870s.

More lies right?

[Nuclear]

To be honest, I have never heard of an Invasion of Canada at that time. It was right after the Civil War ended and the country wasn't exactly up for another war...then again the President at that time would later be impeached...It was also during Reconstruction so there would have been a lot of policing in the south to protect the newly founded rights of the former slaves. The only reason I could see why we'd go into Canada, aside from the fact the president would later be impeached for doing something wrong (can't remember what though off hand) is that the British aided the Confederacy in hopes of messing up our country in hopes of a future reconquering of it or something like that. With Canadaians at the time be strongly allied with Britian, we might have retalliated. I had never heard of this though.

My problem with your interpretation of history is you seem to view it that America should give up all that it has worked for and be Santa Claus to the rest of the world. The US owes the rest of the world nothing and only has the obligation of defending it's own security and prosperity. After the US has filled that obligation, our allies our next. What we have left over should be given to other country in trouble.

We provide a heck of a lot of the humanitarian aid in this world provide a lot of food. We give like $4 billion to Egypt for some reason that is beyond me....maybe to keep them off the Israelis.

We waste a lot of money on other countries and all we ask in return is to be able to live our lives peacefully. But we can't even get that.

[Whistler]

Easy there Dax, I’m pretty sure those ‘atrocities’ was not simply a result of US jock itch.

[nova_satori]

To be honest, I have never heard of an Invasion of Canada at that time

Much of history remains absent from the world's mind.

The only reason I could see why we'd go into Canada, aside from the fact the president would later be impeached for doing something wrong (can't remember what though off hand) is that the British aided the Confederacy in hopes of messing up our country in hopes of a future reconquering of it or something like that.

The British knew that their lifeblood was in the North. HUge amounts of grain flooded from the North, something Britain badly needed. They have more then enough cotton since the good harvests prior to the war. The UK fully knew that they had little choice but to side with the North. The Brits did not have the military power to win a war aganist the North, nor did they condone the South's slavery, something they had abolished many years ago.

The reason Irish went aganist Canada is because the Irish HATE the brits.

With Canadaians at the time be strongly allied with Britian, we might have retalliated. I had never heard of this though.

The Canadians recieved their indepedence relatively shortly after the war via the British North America Act of July 1, 1867. It was highly doubtful that they had strong ties with Britain if indepedence came within 2 years.

My problem with your interpretation of history is you seem to view it that America should give up all that it has worked for and be Santa Claus to the rest of the world. The US owes the rest of the world nothing and only has the obligation of defending it's own security and prosperity. After the US has filled that obligation, our allies our next. What we have left over should be given to other country in trouble.

Hardly. I simply acknowledge the problems and atrocities that America has commited, and I bring those to the light. Often this is intepreted as anti-US propaganda. Those who see it that way are ignorant to criticism's way of acting as a vessel for englighentment and ability to stop future acts of violence. The US owes the world a huge apology. it should apolgize and give money to the countries it has seriously screwed up. it should try to fix the problems it has created, all while not creating more. It should fix itself before becoming the world's police.

We provide a heck of a lot of the humanitarian aid in this world provide a lot of food. We give like $4 billion to Egypt for some reason that is beyond me....maybe to keep them off the Israelis.

That $4 billion is a bribe to Egypt to stop fighting with Israel. That is the sole reason they aren't still fighting.

The US does provide large amounts of grain to the world. However, percentages of GDP away as aid does show how much you care. We give less than 1%.

We waste a lot of money on other countries and all we ask in return is to be able to live our lives peacefully. But we can't even get that.

Perhaps. However, the US needs to put the leashes on several companies, and should have done to others in the past.