Comments on: WHAT’S IN A BOW?

By: funny man

funny man — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 22:23:41 +0000

MooseH,
the Russians lost more than 30 million in WWII. The United States around 500,000 in both Europe and the Pacific. Go to any cemetery in Germany and you’ll see that most soldiers died on the Volga or Don. So they didn’t just ‘play a major role’. It’s also true that Stalin didn’t give a rat’s ass about his own people or anyone else but that doesn’t diminish the sacrifice of the Russian people.

By: PaulinTexas

PaulinTexas — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 00:39:23 +0000

The U.S.A. doesn’t have a monarch to bow down to. However, members of both parties happily bow down to corporate wishes and that’s far more shameful than any president bowing down to a sovereign of any nation.

By: busboy33

busboy33 — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 22:44:48 +0000

@Karen H.

No — that would have made him a terrorist.

By: MooseH

MooseH — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 22:42:17 +0000

MR
I was not implying that fear was essential to survival,so your response was off topic. You have a habit of accusing people of what you do.
The person you were responding to said it is better to be feared and respected than liked because you came up with a statistic that said we have zoomed into first place of all countries being admired since Obama came into office.In your response to him you stated that 3 countries that were feared were deceased and 3 countries that were liked have survived, implying that being liked or admired is crucial to surviving - pure nonsense.
The Russians did have a major roll in defeating the Germans helped immensely by our supplying them with reliable trucks. Europe cooperated in NATO not because they “liked” or “admired” us but because they feared Russia.We formed an alliance with Turkey during the cold war not because we “liked” or “admired” the Turks but because we could keep close surveillence of the Russians with our bases in Turkey.Throughout the ages, countries formed alliances not because of admiration but because of mutual benefit to their existence.

You sound like a teenager when you say Communism is a “stupid” system.It doesn’t convey any information and is misused, people are stupid-like you, not systems.

By: Karen H.

Karen H. — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 22:04:02 +0000

Could have been a fist-bump…lol

By: michael reynolds

michael reynolds — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:05:31 +0000

MooseH:

Those three countries that were feared were destroyed by America’s military and financial superiority, not because of like or dislike.

I never implied they were destroyed because of like or dislike. The initial statement was that it’s better to be feared than loved. I countered that these were three nations that had been feared but had not done terribly well for themselves. In point of fact we weren’t talking about destruction.

So your response was off-topic.

But just to offer you some of the education you clearly did not receive in school, we did not destroy the 3rd Reich, the USSR destroyed the 3rd Reich with an assist from us and our British allies. The overwhelming majority of Wehrmacht killed were killed by the Red Army. The vast bulk of Hitler’s army was deployed in the USSR.

Part of the reason we were able to form a wide alliance — even including the Soviets — was that our allies did not fear us but trusted us.

It’s also why we were uniquely capable of building NATO and holding Soviet power in check. The Brits, French, West Germans — and even the common people in many enemy states — believed we were the model for freedom and tolerance.

We certainly did destroy the Japanese empire. No question about that.

The USSR was not spent into bankruptcy by Ronald Reagan, in fact by Reagan’s day we were spending far less as a percentage of our GDP than we had under Kennedy. Had it been possible to simply outsepnd them they’d have fallen over dead by the 1960’s.

The USSR fell because communism is a stupid system. (By the time they finally crumbled we’d been pointing that out to them for some time.) The case that communism was a stupid system was infinitely strengthened by the growth in freedom and prosperity of Western Europe. GRowth made possible by US tanks at the Fulda Gap to be sure, but also by the Marshall Plan, by our willingness to keep trade barriers low, by our enabling of capital to European countries — in particular you might want to recall, to our erstwhile enemies, Germany and Italy.

We acted generously, wisely and reliably. The Europeans knew they could trust us to position troops in their countries and that unlike more “feared” nations we would behave ourselves.

I don’t know what psychological quirk requires you to imagine that the whole world goes in fear of us, but I think that’s more about your personal needs than it is about history.

I would respond to the rest of your comment but it’s just incoherent rambling.

By: HughGReckshun

HughGReckshun — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:20:18 +0000

Get a life you loser - a bow? Mabey you should start bending over more and put you head between your legs and kiss your ass.

By: Ted Elisee

Ted Elisee — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:10:08 +0000

The bow is very simple in message - “I respect the spirit within you.” -Namaste - Look up the meaning of the word! The bowing is done rather than shaking hands. It is done in many asian cultures. How ignorant can people be? How arrogant can people be? Ugh - such idiots. No wonder we are laughed at around the world. Our education level compared to third world countries indicates so much.

By: Dave H.

Dave H. — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:03:22 +0000

Heads of Government may bow to Heads of State, 1.e. a Prime Minister may bow to a King or Queen. Only subservient Heads of State bows to another Head of State…. Kings bow only to superior Kings. Obama is our Head of State as well as our Head of Government.

The President of the United States is only, only, only subservient to the American electorate….never to another Head of State or Government. It was totally improper for him to bow to the King of Saudi Arabia, or the Emperor of Japan, or any other Head of State.

The President of the United States of American isn’t supposed to be anybody’s butt-boy. You’d think he’d have learned that by now.

By: MooseH

MooseH — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 18:47:41 +0000

Those three countries that were feared were destroyed by America’s military and financial superiority, not because of like or dislike.Denmark was not the reason we won.So M.R. stop your pontificating about nostrum etc.
This whole discussion about Obama bowing is silly as well as the subject of being liked.Being trusted is important but that is not the same as being liked.Foreigners and countries were buying our bonds and many people (including Canadians) came to America for first rate health care during the Bush years.Do you really think that someone living in a foreign country that has to have a serious operation, but has to wait too long to have it done in his country ,and can have it done in time in America is going to say, no i will not have it done in America and put his life in peril because he hates Bush.
:-)You liberal trolls are mental midgets.