AT his WH press briefing today, that is what Gibbs said and reason for more delay is that there are still inter/(intra?) agency discussions on what should and what shouldn't be redacted.

First, I think that the world's view of the US is pretty schizophrenic. That's especially true in South East Asia, which by all rights should hate our guts--if anyone had a good reason to knock down one of our skyscrapers, it was Cambodia or Vietnam. But yet, nary a peep.

How is that schizophrenic? Do Vietnamese people say, "I should hate America, and I want to, but yet I just can't bring myself to, and it's tearing me apart?"

I think it's more likely that they mostly say the same things we say: "That was all a long time ago, and now they just want to sell us some rice."

When Clinton went to Rwanda to apologize for the US not having intervened, people said that at least he'd come to apologize — nobody else had bothered.

I'm not saying that makes us (or Clinton) a "light unto the world" or what have you. But it demonstrates that the American character has some meaning, and points to the risks we run in thinking that it doesn't.

I think in general, our institutions are admired but sort of like the way a poor man looks at the millionaire, thinking that the rich can't appreciate wealth.

Well, part of what I'm trying to say is that the shape of the modern world has more "made in America" stamped on it than we in the US are sometimes able to clearly see. Maybe people elsewhere in the world have trouble seeing it, too, but somehow I don't think so — I think that's kind of what you're getting at here, inadvertently.

And I agree, if admiring McDonald's because it's a symbol of the world economy was all there was to it I'd say forget about it.

But consider the internet. Different cultural values would have produced a different kind of internet — maybe a radically different one, with centralized control and content protection and monitoring all built into it from the ground up.

Instead we got a scheme that reflects some of the most ardent libertarian values of our society. It's been a struggle for repressive governments and greedy commercial cartels to control it — a struggle they continue to lose (so far).

We can say, "Oh, well, the internet doesn't matter compared to Honduras or Angola or whatever," but before we do, let's at least consider that it might be easy to say when we're not about to lose it.

...natch.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124646314864280681.html

I had actually included something more that I deleted because I didn't want it to be based so much in the past. But there is a lot to indicate that out of a sense of survival, Vietnamese didn't really teach the next generation about the full extent of the war. There are a few articles I've read in that regard, will link to them, if I remember where I saw them.

Along those same lines, many Japanese Americans that I've met in my life, or have listened to speak about their experiences--people who were interned as children or whose parents were interned have a very ambivalent attitude about the experience. One of these, whose parents were interned, confided in me that her parents were encouraged by the US government not to speak very deeply of the experience to their children. And not to even teach their children Japanese language or traditions; as a result, there is almost a complete lack of collective memory of that period in time among Japanese Americans of subsequent generations.

So I think one element that's not explored in the debate about whether the world hates us or loves us, is how the experiences of the past are taught to subsequent generations.

Did the Vietnamese and Cambodians teach--out of a need for their own sanity and a wish to move on from horrible times--their children little or nothing? Are those countries that have the most antagonism towards us, the ones that we meddle with most frequently over a long period of time--such as the Middle East and Latin America? And how clear are those feelings, positive or negative? And maybe even more importantly, how durable?

Thanks for the links.

Can you not read? I never asked for isolationism.

No, I can't read. Stay classy, heur-ur.

No, you did not ask for isolationsim, but you did not specify non-invervention either. Since it was specified in many other posts, I won't argue the point. However, let us look at what you did say:

The first solution is to dismantle the Empire and stop pretending that only "supper smart" Americans can run the world. Bring all the troops (yes every damn one) home and leave the world alone. Be friends with all, and trade freely with all.

You're suggesting the U.S. can implement and maintain successful foreign policy throughout the world based on "be friends with all" and you can't even operate on the same basis here in UT with other bright and generally well-intended people? If you can't do it here, how in Horace's name (to borrow your phrase) can you expect it to work on a global basis?

If you can't do it here, how in Horace's name (to borrow your phrase) can you expect it to work on a global basis?

BECAUSE RON PAUL SAYS SO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What planet do you observe us from? You say the most inane things I have ever heard.

The USA military crushed the legal government of Afghanistan in a cake walk. We had demonized the legal government of Afghanistan for some time, almost as if we knew the excuse was coming to crush them. Regardless, we sure thought we were dealing with the legal government of Afghanistan when we demanded that they turn over bin Laden to us even though we were offering no proof at all that he did 9-11.(*)

Since then, we or our proxies have had military control of the country. That is commonly referred to as war or occupation. If we are not occupying the damn place; then why are Americans being killed there and a f'ing fortune being spent there?

And if we are not at 'war' or 'occupying' the place, then why do military experts refer to the war in Afghanistan? Are they all in possession of a vastly inferior knowledge compared to your vision of reality? Every damn one of them?

Do you not understand that every people want the right of self-determination? Does freedom not mean any damn thing to you at all? Is liberty a completely foreign concept. Do you want to remake the whole world in your vision as the French nation wanted to do after their revolution?(**)

----------

(*) I can say that right? It is not a post on that forbidden topic.

(**) I will be out for a while due to pressing matters, but I will be very glad to pound this theme all summer with you.