Why does the Third World hate us?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Aimster

Lifer
Jan 5, 2003
16,129
2
0
people hate people that do better than them in life. That simple.
Why do you think a lot of minorities are hated in a lot of countries? Because they do better than the majority....
Look at Hitler and what he did, look back to Rome, the country that does the best is always hated.
 

Klixxer

Diamond Member
Apr 7, 2004
6,149
0
0
Originally posted by: Aimster
people hate people that do better than them in life. That simple.
Why do you think a lot of minorities are hated in a lot of countries? Because they do better than the majority....
Look at Hitler and what he did, look back to Rome, the country that does the best is always hated.

But... i am German and i don't hate the US, i am Jewish and i don't hate Christians (or Muslims).

You are talking about envy and you are wrong.

Fvck your neighbours wife or destroy his home and act surprised when he hates you for your actions, talk about envy or that he hates your freedom, anything but admitting your own wrongdoings will work.

The US has fvcked the third world countries for decades and with the current invasion of Iraq for no good reason they are wondering WHY they are hated.

OPEN YOUR EYES for fvcks sakes, the US is hated for the actions of the US, nothing more, nothing less.
 

kogase

Diamond Member
Sep 8, 2004
5,213
0
0
Originally posted by: XZeroII
How are we kicking the world in the face with those actions we took over 40 YEARS AGO!???

I find that particular comment interesting. I don't know about you in particular XZeroII, but you seem to be a pretty hardcore right-winger. Anyway, how then do you justify bashing France for their surrender to Germany 60 years ago?
 

XZeroII

Lifer
Jun 30, 2001
12,572
0
0
Originally posted by: kogase
Originally posted by: XZeroII
How are we kicking the world in the face with those actions we took over 40 YEARS AGO!???

I find that particular comment interesting. I don't know about you in particular XZeroII, but you seem to be a pretty hardcore right-winger. Anyway, how then do you justify bashing France for their surrender to Germany 60 years ago?

I am not a hard core right winger. It just seems that way when everyone else is so far left and closed minded. Basically, the left thinks that anyone who supported the war in Iraq is a hard core Bush kisser. This is not even close to true. I know us non-lefts have our misconceptions about the left as well, but I don't notice that as much since I am not a leftie.

I don't bash France for WW2. I bash them for their actions a couple years ago when we decided to go after Iraq.
 

Klixxer

Diamond Member
Apr 7, 2004
6,149
0
0
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Originally posted by: kogase
Originally posted by: XZeroII
How are we kicking the world in the face with those actions we took over 40 YEARS AGO!???

I find that particular comment interesting. I don't know about you in particular XZeroII, but you seem to be a pretty hardcore right-winger. Anyway, how then do you justify bashing France for their surrender to Germany 60 years ago?

I am not a hard core right winger. It just seems that way when everyone else is so far left and closed minded. Basically, the left thinks that anyone who supported the war in Iraq is a hard core Bush kisser. This is not even close to true. I know us non-lefts have our misconceptions about the left as well, but I don't notice that as much since I am not a leftie.

I don't bash France for WW2. I bash them for their actions a couple years ago when we decided to go after Iraq.

So basically you are bashing France for being right?

That makes no sense.
 

GreatBarracuda

Golden Member
Mar 1, 2004
1,135
0
0
Originally posted by: mwtgg
The rest of the world couldn't react to a man who gassed his own people. You think they'd react to someone who is Commander in Chief of the United States Military?

What a **** load of hubris! What do you think the U.S. President is .. God?
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,789
6,348
126
Originally posted by: GreatBarracuda
Originally posted by: mwtgg
The rest of the world couldn't react to a man who gassed his own people. You think they'd react to someone who is Commander in Chief of the United States Military?

What a **** load of hubris! What do you think the U.S. President is .. God?

Yup, add in that the World wanted to do something about it and the US's Reagan Administration protected Saddam from any actions and you've got not only Hubris, but Historical Revisionism as well.
 

Drift3r

Guest
Jun 3, 2003
3,572
0
0
Originally posted by: mwtgg
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: mwtgg
Originally posted by: BBond
That description fits Bush perfectly.

The world's arch terrorist. It's either his way or face the wrath of the U.S. military.

Like I keep pointing out -- terrorism is in the eye of the beholder.

If he was his way or face the wrath of the US Military all of the Middle East would be rubble.

So far Bush is having a tough enough time turning just Iraq into rubble. Let's wait on the entire Middle East.

But if George can't wait, what rogue action of the Bush administration do you think will finally force the rest of the world to react?

Do you really want to go down that path?

The rest of the world couldn't react to a man who gassed his own people. You think they'd react to someone who is Commander in Chief of the United States Military?

Oh you mean the Kurds who sided with Iran during the Iran/Iraq war ??? Yeah you mean the Kurds who deaths the US Army at the time tried to pin on Iran instead of Saddam ? Please no more crocodile tears for the Kurds. If neo-con's truly cared about the Kurds we'd would of also invaded Turkey who has killed about 30,000 Kurdish fighters.

 

kogase

Diamond Member
Sep 8, 2004
5,213
0
0
Originally posted by: Drift3r
Originally posted by: mwtgg
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: mwtgg
Originally posted by: BBond
That description fits Bush perfectly.

The world's arch terrorist. It's either his way or face the wrath of the U.S. military.

Like I keep pointing out -- terrorism is in the eye of the beholder.

If he was his way or face the wrath of the US Military all of the Middle East would be rubble.

So far Bush is having a tough enough time turning just Iraq into rubble. Let's wait on the entire Middle East.

But if George can't wait, what rogue action of the Bush administration do you think will finally force the rest of the world to react?

Do you really want to go down that path?

The rest of the world couldn't react to a man who gassed his own people. You think they'd react to someone who is Commander in Chief of the United States Military?

Oh you mean the Kurds who sided with Iran during the Iran/Iraq war ??? Yeah you mean the Kurds who deaths the US Army at the time tried to pin on Iran instead of Saddam ? Please no more crocodile tears for the Kurds. If neo-con's truly cared about the Kurds we'd would of also invaded Turkey who has killed about 30,000 Kurdish fighters.


Aye, it's hard to feel sorry for "his own people" when "his own people" were actively fighting for independence. Now, you can argue as to whether or not they should have been fighting for that. But to say "he gassed his own people" as if those people were just sitting around minding their own business is a little misleading. Very misleading. I would put down resistence in my borders.
 

miketheidiot

Lifer
Sep 3, 2004
11,060
1
0
I think the reason we are hated is quite clear, we have earned it. Begining in the very early 1900's, we have systematically imposed governemnts for the sake of our financial interests. We had invaded central and south americans countries over and over again when they so not abide by our economic policies or don't allow access to "free markets". In fact, any country that does not abide by our economic policies is subject to invasion or opposition. The CIA has spent money financing right wing parties in weathly, prosperous, and peaceful scandinavian countries, who are dedicated to privatization and the like.
 

Klixxer

Diamond Member
Apr 7, 2004
6,149
0
0
Originally posted by: kogase
Originally posted by: Drift3r
Originally posted by: mwtgg
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: mwtgg
Originally posted by: BBond
That description fits Bush perfectly.

The world's arch terrorist. It's either his way or face the wrath of the U.S. military.

Like I keep pointing out -- terrorism is in the eye of the beholder.

If he was his way or face the wrath of the US Military all of the Middle East would be rubble.

So far Bush is having a tough enough time turning just Iraq into rubble. Let's wait on the entire Middle East.

But if George can't wait, what rogue action of the Bush administration do you think will finally force the rest of the world to react?

Do you really want to go down that path?

The rest of the world couldn't react to a man who gassed his own people. You think they'd react to someone who is Commander in Chief of the United States Military?

Oh you mean the Kurds who sided with Iran during the Iran/Iraq war ??? Yeah you mean the Kurds who deaths the US Army at the time tried to pin on Iran instead of Saddam ? Please no more crocodile tears for the Kurds. If neo-con's truly cared about the Kurds we'd would of also invaded Turkey who has killed about 30,000 Kurdish fighters.


Aye, it's hard to feel sorry for "his own people" when "his own people" were actively fighting for independence. Now, you can argue as to whether or not they should have been fighting for that. But to say "he gassed his own people" as if those people were just sitting around minding their own business is a little misleading. Very misleading. I would put down resistence in my borders.

However, to say he gassed his own people by using chemicals provided by the US and with the support of the US is not misleading.

The US meddling in the ME usually leads to disasters, starvation, wars.

One would think they might learn but nuh-uh, they refuse to learn from their mistakes.
 

GrGr

Diamond Member
Sep 25, 2003
3,204
1
76
It is not so much mistakes as the result of a very deliberate American strategy to destabilize the Middle East. A unified pan-Arabic movement has always been a nightmare scenario for the US and the West. This has been the American geopolitical strategy for the ME since at least WWII.
 

miketheidiot

Lifer
Sep 3, 2004
11,060
1
0
Originally posted by: GrGr
It is not so much mistakes as the result of a very deliberate American strategy to destabilize the Middle East. A unified pan-Arabic movement has always been a nightmare scenario for the US and the West. This has been the American geopolitical strategy for the ME since at least WWII.

after WW1 the turkish regions were promised to arabia, but after we got involved that never happened.
 

RobCur

Banned
Oct 4, 2002
3,076
0
0
because america is powerful, corrupt and our government is run by a private organisation for their self gain. the things we eat, the clothes we wear, the toys we buy, the computer we buy are all imported by our evil corporation using them as cheap labor. they sell to us cheap because it exploits us into buy buy buy but the real horror is what's been done to other nation for this to happen. they are treated like peasants and have a gun pointed to them at all time to keep them scared shi^less.
When you work for your own gain, it's freedom. when you work for others because you don'thave much of a choice and get paid little, that's slavery.
slavery is slavery, nuff said.

today's product is all about cheapness, low quality piece of crap. you get what you pay for, it is nothing more then peasants product for higher standard of living peasants in America.
most of them break easily and don't last long, like disposable diaper for the grownup to use.


 

RobCur

Banned
Oct 4, 2002
3,076
0
0
Originally posted by: Klixxer
Originally posted by: kogase
Originally posted by: Drift3r
Originally posted by: mwtgg
Originally posted by: BBond
Originally posted by: mwtgg
Originally posted by: BBond
That description fits Bush perfectly.

The world's arch terrorist. It's either his way or face the wrath of the U.S. military.

Like I keep pointing out -- terrorism is in the eye of the beholder.

If he was his way or face the wrath of the US Military all of the Middle East would be rubble.

So far Bush is having a tough enough time turning just Iraq into rubble. Let's wait on the entire Middle East.

But if George can't wait, what rogue action of the Bush administration do you think will finally force the rest of the world to react?

Do you really want to go down that path?

The rest of the world couldn't react to a man who gassed his own people. You think they'd react to someone who is Commander in Chief of the United States Military?

Oh you mean the Kurds who sided with Iran during the Iran/Iraq war ??? Yeah you mean the Kurds who deaths the US Army at the time tried to pin on Iran instead of Saddam ? Please no more crocodile tears for the Kurds. If neo-con's truly cared about the Kurds we'd would of also invaded Turkey who has killed about 30,000 Kurdish fighters.


Aye, it's hard to feel sorry for "his own people" when "his own people" were actively fighting for independence. Now, you can argue as to whether or not they should have been fighting for that. But to say "he gassed his own people" as if those people were just sitting around minding their own business is a little misleading. Very misleading. I would put down resistence in my borders.

However, to say he gassed his own people by using chemicals provided by the US and with the support of the US is not misleading.

The US meddling in the ME usually leads to disasters, starvation, wars.

One would think they might learn but nuh-uh, they refuse to learn from their mistakes.
if you are so convinced why do you spend most of your time here? why? if you believe otherwise.
or are you here to influence others that what you see on television si the truthand only truth?
amazingly, who is paying you do to this? to spread lies from their propaganda like a disease...

edit: what is there to learn from conquering another nation? destroying peace and their existence all in the name of profit and domination over another weaker nation.

If I am forced to go to war against my will, then once I am over their my loyalty will change because I will not mass murder people in the name of freedom so corporation can get richer by using rest of the surviver in that nation as slaves who will work for food and not get paid a dime.

America practices slavery and flourishes by doing so it does not respect individual rights to happiness and freedom. to say we fight in the name of freedom is absurd. maybe I should nuke my neighborhood in the name of peace! they make too much noise, the world is too crowded, true but is destruction the only solution?
 

athithi

Golden Member
Mar 5, 2002
1,717
0
0
American media likes to pretend the whole world (and the "third world" makes a significant portion of the whole world) is obsessed with America. Third world administrations may hate the U.S administration for being more powerful. Third world terrorists may hate the US Military for being more powerful. Third world everyman is too busy with his life to be thinking of GWB and yllus and American dispensation of capitalism :roll: I think you've simply heard Georgie say "They hate our freedoms" one too many times. If you really believe that, you need to get out more.
 

RobCur

Banned
Oct 4, 2002
3,076
0
0
Originally posted by: athithi
American media likes to pretend the whole world (and the "third world" makes a significant portion of the whole world) is obsessed with America. Third world administrations may hate the U.S administration for being more powerful. Third world terrorists may hate the US Military for being more powerful. Third world everyman is too busy with his life to be thinking of GWB and yllus and American dispensation of capitalism :roll: I think you've simply heard Georgie say "They hate our freedoms" one too many times. If you really believe that, you need to get out more.
I don't think they hate our freedom, not that we have any of it to begin with. Our nation wants to think we are free but why is taxes a mandatory thing? why can't I drive without seatbelt, if I die who does it hurt? its a dumb law for the mass idiots who think being controlled is a good thing.
America wants to rule other nation too, their greed have not only made them rich it made them powerful as well, militarily and economically. The only poverty we see in America is "we the people." No government is poor if they are, they wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

seatbelt may give you a higher chance of survival but it is not guaranteed that you will surivive and even at all if you have a serious accident such as direct hit, high impact or you run off the side of the road and hit a tree trunk. even princess diana could not survive at over 100mph, she has her seatbelt on right?
most idiotic laws like this are not to protect us from harms but rather to control the dumb masses who cannot choose what's best for them in the name of fines and extortion to enrich the law makers themself.
the seatbelt law assume that everyone is going to have a accident, they use people that died in a wreck even with seatbelt to justify their law forced against me and you.
so a few is going to forget to put it on or refuse to because it's inconvenient, they will be fined 75.00 plus pay a higher insurance premium. is this dumb or what?

in short, we are being punished for something that was voluntary, it now becomes mandatory. hmm next comes 1 child policy just like china.
many people still die from accident these day even with sealbelt on proving that idiocy is every where by design. huge fines and arresting drunk driver is ineffective because the root of all this is alcohol beverages that are sold legally. its like giving a child a gun and not expect him to do harm to anyone.
What really ticks me off is how fvcked up this is, the beer drinker is a victim, he pays good money for this shi+ then when caugh even smelling bear while driving not drunk yet, he will be royally fvcked beyond anything even worse then running someone over by accident. some 4-5k in legal fees, some 9-10k in legal fees. who benefits? cops, government, laywers and judges.
those a$$holes need to go suck on a tree or eat cow dungs. they're milking us everyday the easy way, effortlessly, it's insane. It's like holding a child for ransom. real criminals here whois living in luxury through others misery.




Rather then focusing on third world, why not focuse on domestic matter? who cares about third world? they are unimportant yet our government is mingling with them as some inferior being who is useless and do not deserve a fair chance at life, freedom, equality, and pursuit of happiness.
They want us to hate them and they want them to hate us as well creating a conflict leading to war.
I can talk two people into hating each other if I make some effort, can you?



 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
Originally posted by: athithi
American media likes to pretend the whole world (and the "third world" makes a significant portion of the whole world) is obsessed with America. Third world administrations may hate the U.S administration for being more powerful. Third world terrorists may hate the US Military for being more powerful. Third world everyman is too busy with his life to be thinking of GWB and yllus and American dispensation of capitalism :roll: I think you've simply heard Georgie say "They hate our freedoms" one too many times. If you really believe that, you need to get out more.
I think you may have glossed over my original post in favour of reading what others have written in response. The key sentence I've highlighted above is exactly what my original post stated.

They don't hate our "freedoms". To think that is true is to give ourselves and our countries far too much credit in the eyes of others. A non-Western individual doesn't waste the time to think about arbitrary notions like respective freedoms, but instead preoccupies himself with the immediacy of friends, family and a normal working life.

So then: Where do Third World terrorists come from? TRY READING THE ORIGINAL POST. "The working class of the Third World does not hate the West; it is the pseudointellectuals."
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Originally posted by: kogase
Originally posted by: XZeroII
How are we kicking the world in the face with those actions we took over 40 YEARS AGO!???

I find that particular comment interesting. I don't know about you in particular XZeroII, but you seem to be a pretty hardcore right-winger. Anyway, how then do you justify bashing France for their surrender to Germany 60 years ago?

I am not a hard core right winger. It just seems that way when everyone else is so far left and closed minded.
It also seems like it when you say untrue crap like "We have been giving our money away to them for decades and they have just been spitting on us for it. " Why do people have to lie like this if they have a valid point in the first place?
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Us?? Aren't you a Third Worlder living in Canada?
:confused: My skin colour is not white, but I was born in Canada and call myself a Canadian, much like many Irish immigants came to America and had children who call themselves American.
Sorry Bro, I thought you were a Pakistani or Indian national.
An enemy to one country is an enemy to both. What does a person have to do to be allowed to speak for "us" as so many here do?
Well to speak for Americans it's usually customary to be an American. Nice to know that you are with us though!:):thumbsup: