The "Obama Girl" finally came to her senses.

[ApolloBalboa]

I just thought I'd jump in for second.

I just finished working with a woman from Iran, she was coming to my clinic for several months and recently left because she got better. She was a very nice lady, in her early 60's, always very polite and it brought a smile to my face when I'd see her on the schedule for the day. Over the course of many visits, she told me about growing up in Mashhad and how after she finished earning her degree there she had the opportunity to visit America for a scholarship or something of that sort. Mind you, this was back in the 1970's, the time of the energy crisis, Watergate, the Vietnam War, and not too long before the Iranian Revolution. She told me how amazing she felt when she visited here and how much she loved the experience, the freedom, etc. When she went back to Iran she began speaking out on behalf of women's rights, started dressing down instead of wearing the traditional religious garments, and went, as she put it, "a little bit crazy." She made several trips back to America over the course of the next ten years and finally immigrated here in 1991. She speaks perfect English in addition to Iranian and Farsi.

Anyways, getting to the point I was trying to make. One thing I found especially fascinating about her was how she spoke so avidly about the opportunities America provided her with and how she was amazed that people living here, immigrant or otherwise, could complain about how horrible it was and yet continue to stay. She told me how she stopped people from Iran and Afghanistan on the street and asked them why they were still keeping up with having their women covered all the time and the strict religious laws if America allowed them the freedom to not have to do that, to do as they pleased (to some degree) without fear of government repercussions. I can't say I admired her being so forthcoming, but I had to admit that she had a point. No one can force anyone to stay anywhere, and if you don't like the government of the land you're currently occupying, how you feel they're corrupt or not supportive of their people, whatever, then just leave. If you're content to be undermined, oppressed, ignored, then stay. If it's that horrible and you're from another country, go back there and complain. If you're from here, learn another language (or don't and look like a complete asshole living in Italy asking people to explain things in English), move away and never look back.

It's that simple.

 

[Mayhem]

Yes , it is hard to be awesome. Very difficult. If you think it's easy, go ahead and provide your list of countries who have been awesome. Remember, taking the lead in world affairs is a prerequisite.

And I'm not missing any point. You said there are democratic countries that work great. I agreed with you provided that we all agree that these "awesome" countries are the ones you never hear about in the grand scheme of things. That was the point. That remains the point. And the point remains, if you or any other 3rd tier country would step up and be the first that the world turns to in a crisis, you just might find that things aren't as easy as you assume.

 

[Rattrap]

If you think it's easy, go ahead and provide your list of countries who have been awesome. Remember, taking the lead in world affairs is a prerequisite.

Why?

 

[Deepcover]

Re: The "Obama Girl" finally came to her senses.

She's no Lady Godiva that's for sure

 

[bobjustbob]

Re: The "Obama Girl" finally came to her senses.

She's no Lady Godiva that's for sure

True. Lady Gadiva was a freedom rider. She didn't care if the whole world looked.
Joan of Arc with the Lord to guide her, she was a sister who really cooked.

 

[mongo18]

Re: The "Obama Girl" finally came to her senses.

Yes , it is hard to be awesome. Very difficult. If you think it's easy, go ahead and provide your list of countries who have been awesome. Remember, taking the lead in world affairs is a prerequisite.

And I'm not missing any point. You said there are democratic countries that work great. I agreed with you provided that we all agree that these "awesome" countries are the ones you never hear about in the grand scheme of things. That was the point. That remains the point. And the point remains, if you or any other 3rd tier country would step up and be the first that the world turns to in a crisis, you just might find that things aren't as easy as you assume.

You never made a point. You still haven't made a point. You made an extremely opinionated observation that countries that have successful democratic governments are unimportant and/or tiny. Ever since then you've been harping about America's international obligations. To which I would counter that America has far more resources than any other country to fulfill these obligations, many of which we all know America has brought on itself with a history of intervening when nobody asked and maintaining a military presence in most parts of the world, not to mention the biggest military in the world by a long, long way. If you're the only guy in the neighborhood with a truck, people are going to ask you to help them move first.
Now, what is this point you keep claiming to have made? That a successful, representative government is too hard because of these external pressures? That America gets a pass because of it? That nothing can be learned from more successful systems of government because circumstances are not exactly the same? Go and look up double dissolution for a start, just implementing something like that would shake the shit out of US congress.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes , it is hard to be awesome. Very difficult. If you think it's easy, go ahead and provide your list of countries who have been awesome. Remember, taking the lead in world affairs is a prerequisite.

And I'm not missing any point. You said there are democratic countries that work great. I agreed with you provided that we all agree that these "awesome" countries are the ones you never hear about in the grand scheme of things. That was the point. That remains the point. And the point remains, if you or any other 3rd tier country would step up and be the first that the world turns to in a crisis, you just might find that things aren't as easy as you assume.

You never made a point. You still haven't made a point. You made an extremely opinionated observation that countries that have successful democratic governments are unimportant and/or tiny. Ever since then you've been harping about America's international obligations. To which I would counter that America has far more resources than any other country to fulfill these obligations, many of which we all know America has brought on itself with a history of intervening when nobody asked and maintaining a military presence in most parts of the world, not to mention the biggest military in the world by a long, long way. If you're the only guy in the neighborhood with a truck, people are going to ask you to help them move first.
Now, what is this point you keep claiming to have made? That a successful, representative government is too hard because of these external pressures? That America gets a pass because of it? That nothing can be learned from more successful systems of government because circumstances are not exactly the same? Go and look up double dissolution for a start, just implementing something like that would shake the shit out of US congress.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes , it is hard to be awesome. Very difficult. If you think it's easy, go ahead and provide your list of countries who have been awesome. Remember, taking the lead in world affairs is a prerequisite.

And I'm not missing any point. You said there are democratic countries that work great. I agreed with you provided that we all agree that these "awesome" countries are the ones you never hear about in the grand scheme of things. That was the point. That remains the point. And the point remains, if you or any other 3rd tier country would step up and be the first that the world turns to in a crisis, you just might find that things aren't as easy as you assume.

You never made a point. You still haven't made a point. You made an extremely opinionated observation that countries that have successful democratic governments are unimportant and/or tiny. Ever since then you've been harping about America's international obligations. To which I would counter that America has far more resources than any other country to fulfill these obligations, many of which we all know America has brought on itself with a history of intervening when nobody asked and maintaining a military presence in most parts of the world, not to mention the biggest military in the world by a long, long way. If you're the only guy in the neighborhood with a truck, people are going to ask you to help them move first.
Now, what is this point you keep claiming to have made? That a successful, representative government is too hard because of these external pressures? That America gets a pass because of it? That nothing can be learned from more successful systems of government because circumstances are not exactly the same? Go and look up double dissolution for a start, just implementing something like that would shake the shit out of US congress.

 

[mongo18]

Re: The "Obama Girl" finally came to her senses.

Yes , it is hard to be awesome. Very difficult. If you think it's easy, go ahead and provide your list of countries who have been awesome. Remember, taking the lead in world affairs is a prerequisite.

And I'm not missing any point. You said there are democratic countries that work great. I agreed with you provided that we all agree that these "awesome" countries are the ones you never hear about in the grand scheme of things. That was the point. That remains the point. And the point remains, if you or any other 3rd tier country would step up and be the first that the world turns to in a crisis, you just might find that things aren't as easy as you assume.

You never made a point. You still haven't made a point. You made an extremely opinionated observation that countries that have successful democratic governments are unimportant and/or tiny. Ever since then you've been harping about America's international obligations. To which I would counter that America has far more resources than any other country to fulfill these obligations, many of which we all know America has brought on itself with a history of intervening when nobody asked and maintaining a military presence in most parts of the world, not to mention the biggest military in the world by a long, long way. If you're the only guy in the neighborhood with a truck, people are going to ask you to help them move first.
Now, what is this point you keep claiming to have made? That a successful, representative government is too hard because of these external pressures? That America gets a pass because of it? That nothing can be learned from more successful systems of government because circumstances are not exactly the same? Go and look up double dissolution for a start, just implementing something like that would shake the shit out of US congress.

 

[Mayhem]

I've made my point, I've made it clearly and I've gotten quite the positive response for making it. I'm not going to engage is the same repetitious bullshit that has had to be used too many times before. If Australia or anyone else thinks they can do a better job and keep your own house in order while doing it, I'm waiting for you to get off your fat, fuckin' ass and show us how it's done.

 

[mongo18]

Repetitious bullshit is all you've got. Australia and a bunch of other countries ARE showing you how it's done EVERY FUCKING DAY. Showing you how affordable education is done, how health care is done, how equality is done, how freedom is done, how functional, democratically elected representative government is done, how environmental and industrial regulation is done, how social welfare is done, how sensible gun laws are done, etc etc. You know, all the stuff that is not blowing shit up in foreign countries that America struggles with.
And your point that you claim to have made is what? That none of that shit matters, because those countries don't blow up enough shit in other countries (even though many commit just as many or more forces to foreign aid as the USA as a proportion of their total)? That those countries couldn't actually be doing those things well, because they don't blow up enough shit in foreign countries? Or maybe that America just doesn't even need to worry about those things, because of the sheer amount of shit we blow up in other countries? Or maybe those countries are doing those things better than America, it would just be foolish of America to pay attention until those countries blow up enough shit in other countries?
Are you sure you're not a republican? Because you certainly have the requisite lack of logic and inability to stay on point "Murica" is not a defense of your country's atrocious track record when it comes to taking care of its own people, no matter how much positive feedback it gets you.


(apologies for all those posts up there, freeones just can't seem to get its shit together lately)