While not for a moment diminishing the impact the actions of that particular organisation has had, effectively they've done nearly nothing compared to say just one year during the cold war.

I'm certainly NOT saying they don't need dealing with once and for all, but realistically, they're a relatively minor player in the grand scheme. It seems from this side of the world they just got lucky with the world trade centre, etc - virtually nobody had heard of them before, and they don't appear to have done very much since.

*dons flame retardant suit*

Perhaps the best way to look at the future is to see a multipolar world much like the pre-WW2 world. The US, EC, CIS, PRC, and India all will be major players on the world stage going into the future. I, for one, look forward to a multipolar world. We Americans might learn to keep our best qualities while altering some of the ones that keep tripping us up.

That would be an admirable future. But only if Americans can learn from history.....

Oh, wait....

History is an ELECTIVE in some school systems. And the versions of history now taught can be very (COUGH COUGH) enlitening.

Case in point, I remember about 20 years ago, my youngest step daughter asked me the question....

"Who won the Second World War"?

And She WAS SERIOUS!!!!!!!

My $0.02

Mike

Heh. When I was a recruiter I did a lot of high school visits. While in one of the local "good" schools, I overheard two students talking about a class they had, in which they learned that we ended WW2 by nuking the North Korean capital. I stopped, and asked, where did you learn this? They gave me a 3 year old text book that said in it - amongst other things - that is how it happened. Brought it up to the principle, and he looked blank. Even the history teacher there was certain of it, after all, it was published. Of course, thankfully, the assistant principle blew her top, and had the book replaced. But they was teaching this for 3 years and *no one* noticed.

Sheesh.

What?

What school district was this?

I'm a high school history teacher and this is hard to believe. I can see students being confused and mixing up a couple of events, but an error that egregious in a textbook and a teacher who didn't know any better?

Was this a private school or some kind of alternative or charter school?

A public High School in NW Ohio. To be.. for the lack of a better word.. fair, this teacher felt also that teaching the history of war mongering periods to be counterproductive, and instead focused on the more uplifting social miracles that lift humanity over its barbarous past... etc etc etc.

There is a similar school of thought in British education.

We are slowly but surely airbrushing our our more militant past in favour of a fluffy bunny focus.

I wonder if the british governemnt would of been so keen to go into Afghanistan if the previous two wars he have fought there would of been more prominent in the classroom over the past few decades.

This thread requires a reaction pic.

http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/5...2692250002.jpg

Back on subject:


The US made another statement about the whole Chinese Carrier issue: For the second time, The USS George Washington escorted by the USS John McCain, made a port visit to Danang, where they took aboard a passel of high ranking military and governmental visitors. A little trash talking ensued: Basically saying that the US has been doing carriers for a hundred years, ours is bigger, and we got 11 of them.

But the most interesting bit to me, is this is the *second* visit.

Don't be that mean about your own school system. Of course, you know that the French school system has been superior by far and for years.;) Here is an exemple of it:

A few years ago as I was a staff assistant in one of the good Paris school (pre-college level) I had a great conversation with an entire class about Nazi Germany. The kids had just done a terrific argumentation on how bad Nazi thesis were and I was impressed (truly):cool:. Obviously, I started to talk about Adolf Hitler and realized that the entire class was looking at me, puzzled. The least shy of them, then, asked whom I was talking about.:confused:

They were perfect at describing how bad nazis were, they simply didn't know who Adolf Hitler was.:D

That reminds me of something from about fifteen years past. My brother Mark and I were having a merry discussion about Tet and I insisted it was a military victory for the US and South Vietnamese, but a political defeat for us.

My nephew, James, was confused. He told us he had no idea where Vietnam was, or what happened there.

I imagine he knows better now, since he's been in the Army for about 4 years and had a couple of tours in Afghanistan now.

I get what you are saying.

But my step-daughter knew the US was in WWII. But who else? What sides? Nada. Needless to say, a quick and accurate history "refresher" was administered.

My $0.02

Mike

At least she was lucky enough ta have you around Mike.:)

You should have been proud. US spent almost as much time to forget about the Vietnam War than we did about the Algerian War. The only reason we know where Algeria is comes from the number of french citizen of Algerian descent.;):D

On the subject of trash talk....

We Brits invented aircraft carriers and ours had steel decks so kamikazes kinda bounced off, just saying :p

Being British means being arrogantly proud of past military triumphs, mostly becuase the current British military sucks due to cost cutting.

Not to mention you brits figured out angled decks, the landing light/mirror thing, and I want to say steam cats. After all, in 1914 the HMS Ark Royal (2nd of the name) was if I recall correctly, the first British Carrier. Granted, it was technically a seaplane tender, but it was equipped with a flight deck and from what I read fixed wing aircraft did operate off of it once or twice. It even saw service as the HMS Pegasus as a carrier for Fighters till it was decommissioned in 1946.

Which makes one wonder: You all had every advantage to being *the* carrier navy, you came up with all the good ideas before anyone else, yet...

RN aviators are temping on US carriers in order to preserve naval aviation skills till you all get one again. Someone needs to explain to the powers that be that the QE class of carriers needs to get done in jig time, and kept in commission full time the both of them!

Carriers brings up another side of the military and the public. Carriers are all about force projection. Other countries love to hate the US, until they need help; then they love us. Until they've gotten the help they need -- then they hate us again. American soldiers are great to have around to contribute to the local economy and do the heavy fighting and heavy-lifting humanitarian work -- but otherwise, they're just good targets for rocks and insults and IEDs.

The American public loves its military at the beginning of the war, but when it gets a little expensive, they don't like us so much anymore. And when you retire or go out on disability or simply come home from the military, they'd rather just forget about us. Even the military only likes its troops when they're working well for them. If you're injured or have some kind of personal problem, your superiors just want you to shut up and get back to work. And the government at large might find their soldiers useful, but if you are disabled or retired, they'd prefer to simply forget about you. Use you up and throw you away.

I hear that. It's not just the Americans either, same things happen all around the world in supposedly civilised countries. Sometimes I think the poorer countries treat their ex-soldiers MUCH better that the west. At least they have a great retirement plan - if you manage to accumulate enough power to stage a successful coup anyway! ;)

Kipling said it best:

*snippage*


Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind",
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind.

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool -- you bet that Tommy sees!

Warning: Controversial Political Statement Follows
 

Over the years, I have become increasingly Heinleinic in my outlook on politics. Only those who serve should be eligible for Congress or President. The non-serving elected officials can cluck sorrowfully about how awful war is, but only those who have carried the rifle understand what it means. Yes, many fine people will be left off the roster. But the authority to start a war should belong to those who have placed themselves in a position to fight. Decisions about how to treat veterans should be made by people who are capable of balancing bean counting with membership in the brotherhood. Policy on pay and privileges should be determined by people who have as deep a connection to the fighting men and women as to the paid representative of the defense contractor in the district. The Greeks obligated every property-owning man to stand in the phalanx with his fellow citizens. Later, free men could make their contribution by rowing aboard the fighting ships. The theme of political power stemming from a willingness to place one's life in jeopardy for the well-being of the state has a direct application to a modern American society far more focused on personal liberties than on personal responsibilities and contribution.

There is something about the British that makes us abandon innovation as soon as we win a war.

In the wars against the French in the early 19th century (the first truly world war) we pioneered naval sciences and technologies, we developed the rifle into a true weapon of modern warfare and kick-started the industrial revolution.

50 years later we had forgoteen almost everything we learned.

In WW1 we invented the tank, after the war british pioneers developed the principles of armoured warfare that the Germans would turn into Blitzkrieg. yet we thew it all away and developed insanely incompetent theories of cruiser and infantry tanks.

Today the British military is a joke. It's been an interesting British trait that whenever we go to war we lose in the first six months. We then go home, have a think, sort things out and come back to kick the over guy's arse halfway across Europe. It happened against the French in 1793 when the British expeditionary forces where soundly beaten then by 1815 we had proved ourselves to be masters of war in Europe (and good at burning presidential homes in Washington :D ).

In WW1 the initial British forces took a pounding but we came back fighting, same in WW2. The Falklnads garrison was overwhelmed in the course of a day but we built a force in record time and took them back.

I think we have a perverse pleasure in making the other guy think he's won before bitch slapping him.

No no no no.

It takes 6 months to gather the intell for the SAS and also sober up the Irish and Scottish divisions to fight the war.

You have a point, takes a while to explain to the paddies and scots that they need to stop fighting the English for a bit and fight some other poor bastard.

It all comes to politics and, still I disagree. Why would you hate US? Governments do and people often follow there governments but US is a great people (It's on purpose that I don't say country) with great qualities and several drawbacks or weaknessess. With US people might have been disappointed about the late political directions. In 1989, the Berlin Wall fell and we all hoped for a world without war. It didn't last a decade. I'm not saying US is guilty of anything but I defend the idea that for over 20 years our politicians (from all our countries) repeteadly missed several occasions to do better than bellow average. As you said, people wait too much from US while they should do it for themselves. However, I'm 40 and don't forget that my parents have been raised with that idea and that US governments where the first one to imply it.

About US soldiers, they are the visible part of the politics and it's why they get targeted. Too bad too few more often think about truly blaming the true responsibles: politicians.

I'm happy with what is happening at La Haye. I might not agree with the way it was done but I was glad to see Saddam being trialed, I'm equally satisfied to see Mubarak facing justice. I found it a pity not to have seen any charge being retained against Ariel Sharon or François Mitterand. I have seen Rumsfeld is going to be sued on the Charge of Torture. DSK being sued on the Charge of Sexual Assault... I'm not bringing up any judgement on these (only a court can do so) but it is a progress.

If people get a feeling of justice, it might release a bit of the hatred directed at those only carrying up orders. Of course, I'm an idealist.:)

Actually it takes the six months to brew the booze that bribes the Scots and Irish as they are sobering them up, then doing the 'carrot' effect to convenice them into going and fighting the damn war!

I think the training goes something like this...

"Oh.. ah git a hangover... gimme a damn beer!"

"We can't <insert bady guy name here> stole all our booze, why do you think you've sobered up."

"Da Bastaards.... get 'em!"

Takes six months to ship all the booze away from Ireland and Scotland to the war zone, thereby encouraging their normal behaviour to be relocated to the "zone of destruction".

There's a saying that us Americans are always fighting our last war instead of the war we're fighting now.

Oh that's a good one.. :)

That particular shortcoming is widespread, though we're especially good at it. The analogy is especially applicable to what's happening now in Afghanistan and Iraq. Shock and awe, indeed. It takes more than a very strong single at the beginning to make a classic album.