OT: US President (US Dom Players only)

[chrispedersen]

[quote=llamabeast;652267I think this is a pity. The US makes a far bigger deal about its history of freedom and equality than in Europe while actually being not especially good at it. [/quote]

Llama, your post continue to bother me far after I had logged off.

So, I did some thinking:

League of Nations.
United Nations
Nato
Breton Woods
World Bank
IMF
GATT
the Internet
the Marshall Plan
the Outer Space treaty (non militarization)
the Red Cross
Kosovo

And I could continue with quite a few more. These were all instituted either by American lead or with significant american participation.

And I think they showcase American idealism. Frankly, I think they stand as markedly superior to the examples set by Europe or Britain. Very rarely I think has any state been more generous in promoting the general welfare - or promoting institutions which might circumscribe its own power.

The idea that there should be a forum for countries to get together and discuss matters. America, following the example of our European forbears could have claimed the moon - but *did not*. The outright gift of billions of dollars in aid in Europe.

Consider the treaty of Versailles - Wilson had tried to insist upon a 'peace without victory' provision - it was *europe* that insisted on ruinous reparations. Considers Russias rush to claim the under ice seabed.

Perhaps I *am* being parochial llama. America was a world player oh probably since WWI - Call it 100 years. Show me a similiar pattern of disinterested generosity by the British over 100 years.

Also, bringing up the nazis is hardly fair. That is very much in the past and their behaviour is universally reviled, most especially in Germany.

it was you who said "I would say that Guantanamo is a horror inconceivable by most Western European countries".

Inconceivable is it when it occured in the lifetimes of many people still living?

Inconceivable when the East German secret police were some of the most feared and abusive secret police 30 years ago killing *thousands* of people - including people that whose only crime was trying to flee to a better land.

Italy gave us Fascism - and Yugoslavia's Tito murdered gypsies.

And in fact there were noted secret police in Rumania, Bulgaria and albania even later.

To roughly quote the Princess Bride.. are you sure that word means what you think it means?

Is guilt really assumed until proven innocent in France? That sounds very unlikely, but I confess I know nothing about it.

There are two primary standards for justice in western civilization. One based on the Anglo-American model and one based on the Roman model.

Serious crimes in the Roman model feature a remand (incarceration) until proven innocent - and it led to an inquisitorial style of court used in France and elsewhere.

http://books.google.com/books?id=yjG...um=3&ct=result

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_Code

[Agema]

[quote=chrispedersen;652310]

Originally Posted by llamabeast;652267I think this is a pity. The US makes a far bigger deal about its history of freedom and equality than in Europe while actually being not especially good at it. [/quote

Llama, your post continue to bother me far after I had logged off.

So, I did some thinking...

Many of those are erroneous, a few examples... NATO is not a Human Rights organisation: It's a military defence pact founded to stop Communism. Although Woodrow Wilson worked hard on the League of Nations, the USA Senate actually declined to ratify it. The Red Cross was invented by some Swiss guy in the 19th century, and the founder signatories were only European nations.

Furthermore, American dominance and lead in many of these is not a reflection of American moral superiority, but a reflection of its economic, military and political dominance. Western European nations were just as enthusiastic for some of these endeavours. War-shattered nations of 5-60 million people don't take the lead over largely unscathed nations of 200+ million. Especially when the smaller owes the bigger a vast amount of money and needs more to rebuild.

Not only that, but "disinterested generosity" is not entirely true. Many were simple sensible or active self-interest. The UN was because of the importance of setting up a talking shop rather than risk another world war. The World Bank and IMF are very controversial organisations - you need to read up on the controversies and see why and how they've unwelcomely advanced capitalist ideologies that benefit the West, and in some cases have damaged nations. NATO was a mutual self-defence pact where all benefitted.

America has also done a lot of dark things. If funded guerrillas and coups, often against democratically elected leaders (eg. Chile). It propped up a lot of vicious dictators (Korea, Vietnam). Blacks only got the vote in the late 60s. It has invaded sovereign nations (eg. Panama, Grenada, bombed Yugoslavia as you mentioned earlier) when convenient, but not necessarily under UN rules. There's a lot more.

For all that, I think America does have a strong moral heart, in its population if not always its leaders. But there's a lot of worldwide cynicism about America, and there are an awful lot of cracks in any US claim of moral superiority.

[Tifone]

You continue to cast stones around but you ignore me. Sob, sob.

Originally Posted by chrispedersen

League of Nations.
United Nations
Nato
Breton Woods
World Bank
IMF
GATT
the Internet
the Marshall Plan
the Outer Space treaty (non militarization)
the Red Cross
Kosovo

And I could continue with quite a few more. These were all instituted either by American lead or with significant american participation.

Woo! I wanna play this too!

In random order:

2 Nuclear Bombs on civil targets in Japan
1 near Bassora
One atrocius pointless war which costed the lives of an entire generation against a sovereign country, in which you used the Geneva-forbidden agent Orange (know the effects?)
Cluster Bombs
Bombardment of Tripoli and Bengasi
Bombardment of Amiria
Support to murderer dictators in Cile, Gautemala, Nicaragua
Among the few (only?) western democracies with death penalty
From 2001, refuting any treaty or convention for the control of war weapons (chimical, bacteriological, mines)
Ku Klux Klan

And of course this:

Sorry, you asked for this to come.

USA invented or were part of very idealistic, nice things. You've done great good. Europe owns you much. I'm sure the USA have a strong, moral heart.

But it's childish to play a "moral superiority game". Every nation has its dark points, and USA as well has very big ones.

Originally Posted by chrispedersen

There are two primary standards for justice in western civilization. One based on the Anglo-American model and one based on the Roman model.

Serious crimes in the Roman model feature a remand (incarceration) until proven innocent - and it led to an inquisitorial style of court used in France and elsewhere.

http://books.google.com/books?id=yjG...um=3&ct=result

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_Code

Of course, wrong.

The Roman model which is the base of civil law has the presumption of innocence. Reverted in the dark ages due to the Inquisition, but Inquisition is surely not the base of modern civil codes.

The Napoleonic Code gave inspiration to the most of the European codes due to its high idealism (together with the German one, for its precision in framing cases into schemes). Anyway, it ended in 1890. Why you take it as example, is beyond my comprehension. In France there's, obviously, presumption of non-culpability.
Also, I wish to remind you that every code or jurisdictional system is son of the history, ideals and people of its nation. You should be much more careful than that in judging procedural laws and systems without deep knowledge. Common sense isn't enough.