h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I haven't read (much) of the backlog but I read the first and last pages. The first few replies seemed to be Americans answering the question and the last load seemed to be the obvious Iraq and 9/11 based stuff. As far as I can see there are a lot of reasons for dislike of America and I'll start for now with Xenophobia. The USA is so big that many Americans never leave it and have a limited view of the world. Thus the way Americans act (and vote) reflects that.

Good evening to you all.

I expect this place to be back to normal come tomorrow morning (or whatever time it is where you are!)

Au revoir...

I never for a moment suspected that the soul-searching, readdressing of moral impact on the world would take place in the wake of 9/11. Either I'm too cynical, or I know my countrymen too well, or just know people too well. On 9/12 all the US flags came out, and I knew we were doomed.

The US, formed by reactionaries, is still one of the most reactionary nations in the world. Using force or the threat of force against this country would be stupid even if it wasn't the most powerful military force. The use of force against Americans only sparks one thought in the hive mind of the nation: vengeance.

It just so happens that the international terrorists are even more reactionary.

In my business, we have a word for similar situations: supercritical.

Here's hoping I'm just being more cynical then necessary as a long week (and month) draws to a close.

- JD

Hmm. Eagle, I hope we've shared enough odd moments on this site doewn the line for you to know that I hold no malice towards you or any of your fellow countrymen simply because you were born American. I remember very well, still, the reaction of my office to the news, as one co-worker read it off the BBC site of what was happening. We were sick, we were *silenced* (and for an office of our temprament to be silenced by anything is incredible), we were humbled by the magnitude of the attack.

Blathers. That's an interesting point. After those attacks, there were those that hoped for some kin#d of rethinking of Americn Policy . And we watched, and we hoped, and we waited. And I watched in revulsion as I saw the WWF response (easy to dismiss as theatrics, but a truer barometer of American thought I've yet to see), I watched U2 during the Superbowl half time show, and I wept inwardly as I saw where this was all going. O wish i could say that wwe were wrong, but we weren't.

O how I hate it when somebody posts the name of U2 on this site because U2 always comes up as a link and I think it's going to be some interesting and relevent site but it's just nobody's personal space.

(something should be done about this. Maybe somebody should force the issue with an entry in Peer Review on the Irish band.)

My, we are feeling edgy tonight....

So, have we finally decided that *What's* is too generic, *Wrong* is too judgemental, and *Americans* refers to too big of a group to define, yet?

Have you seen Jodan's Bolivian thread? He started out making fun of us, but now people are posting real complaints about Bolivians.

F19585?thread=289662

I have to ask-
Why do Americans say "taht's SO funny" without even smiling??

# 3179 Thank-you Anahga for that post!

It was what many (not enough) Americans had hoped for too
It was (is) a heartbreaker to be considered no better or kinder than the terrorists for disagreeing with the B. Administration.

There is so much to be done.

Thank you too, Eagle1 & Anahga for answering my tough question.

Elly I believe it is from a Saturday Night TV show skits.

It was a bad saying 20 years before that!
Teens in a skit~ Lisa luptner & Todd I think it was.
Gilda Radner & Bill Murray
It was teen sarcasm.

Can you answer mine, too?

Abbi:

I had to look back to figure out what your tough question was. I guess it could have been tough, but happily, it wasn't tough for me.

Elly:

I don't know. Sarcasm maybe.

Oh, no, they seem to really mean it.

Exactly! The only appropriate thing is an

Obviously I'm just a stupid, arrogant American, as I just can't see ANY attack killing 3000+ people in one fell swoop as a "so-called" atrocity. I don't care where the attack occurs, or who it kills. It's an atrocity.

If folks like the appropriately named Steve the Fool can condone that sort of violence, so be it. I've got better things to do with my time than listen to that kind of b******t.

You are correct, Researcher Eagle 1. (I think that's the first time I have been in total agreement with you, so hi!)

well, don't let the door smack you on the ass on the way out ranger...

Steve, if you're around, tell us: do you, as warrior ranger suggests, condone "that sort of violence"? Might as well make it clear.

(I didn't get the impression that Steve was condoning the violence; maybe trying to explain it which certainly isn't the same as condoning it. But maybe he'll tell us outright sometime.)

and while I'm sticking my nose in here - A few score posts back I commented that Canada accepted more immigrants per capita than anyone else, a brief disscussion of immigration followed and someone - I think it was Eagle1 - opined that "Canada would pay for its open immigration policy in the long run" (quote is not necessarily verbatim accurate but that was the gist of it)

ROTFALMAO!!! Gosh yes! I'm sure the toll will continue to mount as we become more and more ethnically diverse and cosmopolitan, gathering adventurous, ambitious people from the four corners of the globe to come here and fill up some of that empty space, create wealth and contribute to society. You're damn right immigration policy isn't altruistic, few things are. We do take an awful lot of refugees, but they tend to become self supporting quickly too!
Oh yes we will rue the day we started letting "THEM" in.
(chucklingheadshakingsmiley)