Americans

[Prophet Tenebrae]

If you're excited about Scottish History then studying it is probably about the most efficient way of curbing said excitement.

I think that the reason America takes so much flak for things in the international sphere is simply that America *does* interfere, be it economically, diplomatically or militairily. Whether you see this as good or bad is a matter of opinion but for some people at least, it's always going to be a bad thing.

Additionally, as far as I know - a lot of that money for AIDS is basically to encourage absistence and other ineffective, religiously motivated means. It does rather smack of throwing money at the problem, which history should demonstrate doesn't really help much.

And it's hardly surprising America gave more money than anyone else to Afghanistan. It was America that bombed it back to the Stone Age.

I'm not one to criticise Americans for the sake of it and I certainly don't hold individuals responsible for the actions of their countries. I certainly think Tony Blair should actually spend some time in prison for willfully ignoring the will of the people that elected him to represent them (well, not directly elected but still) but I think that America has done rather dubious things of late but look on the bright side - everyone just wants to have the wealth, power and influence of America. That's at least one theory as to why the Middle East hates the US.

But anyway, I'd say that off the message board and in St. Andrews one is somewhat more hard-pressed to find anti-Americanism. Mainly because of all the Americans about

[exnihilo]

I'm not someone normally accused of being anti-american, and I don't much want to be. But I am anti-stupidity and anti-doing-stuff-wrong. And if America is guilty of either of those things, well, I'll say so. You're getting a lot of criticism now because a lot of people have woken up and seen the potential for harm a single superpower has when not checked by a second.

As to other things, I don't know about this year because I can't be bothered going to find the figures, but it certainly WAS the case that the UK gave more foreign aid in terms of % of GDP than any country on Earth. And, oldest unchanged in what sense? There have been umpteen changes to the constitution, a Civil War that tore you apart into two countries and so on and so forth. If changes to voting systems, for example, don't count then the UK has a longer continuous government straight away without even bothering to look at - for example - Iceland's Althing or San Marino or any of the other truly old governments.

Not an attack on you - again a general observation - but Americans are guilty of thinking that if it happened over 100 years ago its really, really old, we in Europe know better and tend to add another zero.

[Sean]

All valid points, I don't really know what made write that post, it was kind of out of charachter for me, i was kind of drunk... Most of the time I really don't care about people criticizing the US because I realize that the country has a huge effect on almost everyone in the world, but sometimes things just hit you harder than they should and you just feel like being a flag waiving patriot...

But hey! I'm really excited about Scottish History, I'm reading the New Penguin History of Scotland right now (edited by St. Andrews profs) and its fascinating! But then, I am a huge nerd when it comes to history...

[Miss Maryland]

speaking of annoying americans, i found it comforting when bush had a magnificent defeat from the supreme court recently over the guantamano bay prisoners. it shows that there are at least some high-ranking government officials (the supreme court) with common sense.

[hr]...and there was much rejoicing.

[MoJo]

[s]Miss Maryland wrote on 17:48, 20th Dec 2003:
speaking of annoying americans, i found it comforting when bush had a magnificent defeat from the supreme court recently over the guantamano bay prisoners. it shows that there are at least some high-ranking government officials (the supreme court) with common sense.

[hr]...and there was much rejoicing.


Hardly a magnificent defeat. It wasn't the Supreme Court Miss Maryland, rather the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. I'm assuming, by your name, you know the difference. It was also a purely political decision, as the Supremes agreed to hear the case last month.

[cberry]

Being American,

Off He Goes -

America did not sell to the Khmer Rouge. The Khmer Rouge was armed primarily with Chinese weaponry, with a few American artillery pieces supplied not from the Americans, but from the Thais.

Prophet Ten -

The AIDS money is not just going to religious-based programs. A focus of the program is to get anti-retroviral drugs to a greater number of poor AIDS victims, as well as support a wide variety of aggressive AIDS fighting programs. To quote from the actual Bill -

"provide that the reduction of HIV/AIDS behavioral risks shall be a priority of all prevention efforts in terms of funding, educational messages, and activities by promoting abstinence from sexual activity and substance abuse, encouraging monogamy and faithfulness, promoting the effective use of condoms, and eradicating prostitution, the sex trade, rape, sexual assault and sexual exploitation of women and children"

While there will be support of religious programs, I think it is wrong to attack them on two grounds - the first being that the US is not ONLY supporting religious-based programs, its supporting others as well, and the second is that religious based programs are EXTREMELY effective on religious populaces.

[Miss Maryland]

[s]Unregisted User MoJo wrote on 09:16, 22nd Dec 2003:
[s]Miss Maryland wrote on 17:48, 20th Dec 2003:[i]

Hardly a magnificent defeat. It wasn't the Supreme Court Miss Maryland, rather the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. I'm assuming, by your name, you know the difference. It was also a purely political decision, as the Supremes agreed to hear the case last month.



oops. my bad. i heard by word of mouth, which would explain my lack of accuracy. and i do believe it WAS a great blow to the head for bush, but that's just my opinion.

[:|]

[s]cberry wrote on 00:31, 23rd Dec 2003:
and the second is that religious based programs are EXTREMELY effective on religious populaces.


Not in Africa. The figures speak for themselves and that's with abstinence based programs having been run extensively for quite some time. In developing and poor countries it does not work.

[Andrew Cusack]

Not in Africa. The figures speak for themselves and that's with abstinence based programs having been run extensively for quite some time. In developing and poor countries it does not work.

Actually, I think you'll find that the only country in Africa which has managed any sort of victory in the war against AIDS is Uganda, where the government joined in and vigorously promoted an abstinence campaign.
It is really the only government in Africa that has run a large-scale abstinence campaign since the rest have pretty much fallen in line with the US/UK/UN line of shipping over condoms and ignoring the underlying problem.