Top 10 Shameful Events in American History

[emceeemcee]

No. America the nation has nothing for which an apology is warranted. More American blood has been shed in the protection of the rights and freedom of other nations than any country that has ever (or likely ever will have) existed.

wow, not only is America the greatest defender of freedom that has ever been so far, it most likely will be forever! :1orglaugh

That doesn't sound like hubris at all....

Has the American government done things for which apologies are warranted? That is a whole other issue and debate.

When voters sanction policy they are just as culpable. Anything less demonstrates you struggle with concept of responsibility.

However, out of the ones you bring up (and your sources are certainly less than authoritative on a couple of them, MC ), only the downing of Iran Flight 655 warrants an apology as far as I am concerned. I felt Reagan was wrong not to issue one at the time. The CIA/Sherpa thing is completely subjective and unverified by any reputable source but, even if it were...the CIA involved in covert ops? :eek: You've got to be kidding. That's what they do and that's what the intelligence community of every nation does so I'm not apologizing for it, no.

Part of being a grown-up involves moving past the idea that bad behaviour can be excused 'cos others do it too'.

The other events you mention occurred during war and, unfortunately, the very nature of armed conflict itself engenders such tragic outcomes. If you want to discuss the moral justification for war itself, I would argue that mankind owes itself an apology, not just the USA.

So apologies should only be issued on the basis of whether they are an act of war and not depending how much suffering they create. That's some great ethics ya got there. Much of what the US has done foreign policy wise qualifies as state terrorism rather than war.

It's amazing how indignant and outraged certain Americans can be whenever 9/11 is bought up , change the topic to some of the atrocities America has committed (which far outweigh the destruction of 9/11) and it's dismissed with a shrug of the shoulders "oh well, that's just war".

OK. Since we're just speculating here, I'm also pretty sure that if Venezuela or some other country that had a dictatorial power-mad lunatic running the show possessed the military power that the USA does there would likely have been a lot more unspeakable acts perpetrated by them than the ones you are calling me out on.

Or we'd have less. I can speculate too.

 

[monicasilver]

Boothy what I get is Germany was in the process of routing western Europe during WWII. Holland claimed neutrality and the Germans invaded them anyway after they said they wouldn't.

After the invasion I don't think Holland ever officially surrendered....commendable but so?:dunno: You don't get a cookie for not giving up. I suspect the Germans felt they had bigger fish to fry.

The Dutch didn't like being occupied by the Germans, The US with it's allies were coming to beat the Germans. Had we failed, I doubt the fall back plan would have been the Dutch Resistance.

Of course the Dutch Resistance aided in many circumstances by husbanding Allied soldiers in dire straits at times....but why not?? The Allies led by the US beating the Germans means no more German occupation of Holland. What were they supposed to be doing?? Sitting on their hands acting like Georges' forefathers??

On behalf of our forefathers here in the great US of A, you're welcome Boothy.:hatsoff:

Well, we should thank the Dutch for loaning John Adams some money...after we already beat the Brits.

...don't they make cigars or something? ( :2offtopic )

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

and shitty art.

 

[Boothbabe]

It's amazing how indignant and outraged certain Americans can be whenever 9/11 is bought up , change the topic to some of the atrocities America has committed (which far outweigh the destruction of 9/11) and it's dismissed with a shrug of the shoulders "oh well, that's just war".

Don't you know America is the greatest country on Earth, it never does anything wrong :1orglaugh

 

[PlasmaTwa2]

Of course the Dutch Resistance aided in many circumstances by husbanding Allied soldiers in dire straits at times....but why not?? The Allies led by the US beating the Germans means no more German occupation of Holland. What were they supposed to be doing?? Sitting on their hands acting like Georges' forefathers??

Y'know, I just have to say that you aren't really helping to disprove the theory that Americans believe they won the war single handedly. Like Drik said earlier, it was Canada that liberated the Netherlands, not the US. Just because they were on the same team doesn't really mean you can just call them the "US and others." In this case it is "Canada and others."

 

[ragincaucasian]

those racist southern folk started it dont ya know

the succeeded from the union so they can continue to live in hypocrocy

But most white Northerners did not believe in racial equality and had no interest in Negroes being anywhere near their society. The Free State of Oregon made it illegal be a Negro in the state. Total bannage of Blacks.

Following the Emancipation Proclamation the US Army had the greatest epidemic of desertion it ever experienced.

Clearly, if the South was fighting to keep slaves and the status quo, the North was NOT fighting to have racial equality or change the status quo.

But to suggest "states rights" meant anything other than "states rights to own slaves" is really stretching it. "States rights" is simply an abstraction to make it sound better. However, it is impossible to seperate slavery and States' Rights circa 1860. Slavery was THE largest single issue being fought over between D.C. and the individual States. However, there were also protectionist tariffs that benefitted northern mercantilism at the expense of Southern agriculture and the agrarian way of life. These tariffs hurt ALL Southerners, not just slave owners. So,yes, I would say that slavery was the largest issue under the umbrella of States' Rights and, therefore, an easy pick for the central gov't when trying to portray themselves as moral crusaders rather than invaders. I believe that it is also important for students to understand that the South did NOT want to take over the Federal gov't. They only wanted to be seperate from it and left to their own affairs.

South fought over primarily slavery.

North fought for re-unification.

 

[monicasilver]

Y'know, I just have to say that you aren't really helping to disprove the theory that Americans believe they won the war single handedly. Like Drik said earlier, it was Canada that liberated the Netherlands, not the US. Just because they were on the same team doesn't really mean you can just call them the "US and others." In this case it is "Canada and others."

Yes, that is why there are so many books about all of the countries that lead the war effort on both theaters of action. ...oh wait, there aren't.

You could make a good argument that the Russians had more to do with the destructions of Nazi Germany than the Americans. The Russians folded on Japan though.

Americans do have inflated egos. It is warranted. The discussions on WWII are a good example. For you to make an argument for Canada, you have to be very specific. Simple fact is, without the US, the allies do not win. Without any other country (I'll make an exception for Russia...although I think it still holds) other than the US, the Allies win.

So us folks from the USA are arragant, egocentric, and often wrong...but our attitudes are well deserved.

 

[monicasilver]

But most white Northerners did not believe in racial equality and had no interest in Negroes being anywhere near their society. The Free State of Oregon made it illegal be a Negro in the state. Total bannage of Blacks.

Following the Emancipation Proclamation the US Army had the greatest epidemic of desertion it ever experienced.

Clearly, if the South was fighting to keep slaves and the status quo, the North was NOT fighting to have racial equality or change the status quo.

But to suggest "states rights" meant anything other than "states rights to own slaves" is really stretching it. "States rights" is simply an abstraction to make it sound better. However, it is impossible to seperate slavery and States' Rights circa 1860. Slavery was THE largest single issue being fought over between D.C. and the individual States. However, there were also protectionist tariffs that benefitted northern mercantilism at the expense of Southern agriculture and the agrarian way of life. These tariffs hurt ALL Southerners, not just slave owners. So,yes, I would say that slavery was the largest issue under the umbrella of States' Rights and, therefore, an easy pick for the central gov't when trying to portray themselves as moral crusaders rather than invaders. I believe that it is also important for students to understand that the South did NOT want to take over the Federal gov't. They only wanted to be seperate from it and left to their own affairs.

South fought over primarily slavery.

North fought for re-unification.

I can't say I would put it the way you did, but yes, as I understand is in 2011 States Rights = Economic Freedom = Slavery for the Confederacy. Now that is from my academic perspective 150 years later. I would think that there were deferent mores and emotions on these topics back then. (...and I think slavery was bad then as it is now. ...even if I do enjoy being in chains some times and tortured a bit.)

 

[PlasmaTwa2]

You could make a good argument that the Russians had more to do with the destructions of Nazi Germany than the Americans. The Russians folded on Japan though.

It's not actually an argument that the Soviet Union had more to do with Germany's defeat than the Americans; it's fact. Just ask any historian. The Soviets didn't fold on Japan. They beat them during the border wars in 1939 and their complete & utter destruction of the Kwantung Army in 1945 had as much to do with Japan's surrender as the bombs did.

Americans do have inflated egos. It is warranted. The discussions on WWII are a good example. For you to make an argument for Canada, you have to be very specific. Simple fact is, without the US, the allies do not win. Without any other country (I'll make an exception for Russia...although I think it still holds) other than the US, the Allies win.

Problem was we were being rather specific. We were talking about the liberation of the Netherlands. I'm not arguing America's leading role in the war, but in the case we were talking about Canada's role was more important. :dunno:

 

[CunningStunts]

But most white Northerners did not believe in racial equality and had no interest in Negroes being anywhere near their society. The Free State of Oregon made it illegal be a Negro in the state. Total bannage of Blacks.

Following the Emancipation Proclamation the US Army had the greatest epidemic of desertion it ever experienced.

Clearly, if the South was fighting to keep slaves and the status quo, the North was NOT fighting to have racial equality or change the status quo.

But to suggest "states rights" meant anything other than "states rights to own slaves" is really stretching it. "States rights" is simply an abstraction to make it sound better. However, it is impossible to seperate slavery and States' Rights circa 1860. Slavery was THE largest single issue being fought over between D.C. and the individual States. However, there were also protectionist tariffs that benefitted northern mercantilism at the expense of Southern agriculture and the agrarian way of life. These tariffs hurt ALL Southerners, not just slave owners. So,yes, I would say that slavery was the largest issue under the umbrella of States' Rights and, therefore, an easy pick for the central gov't when trying to portray themselves as moral crusaders rather than invaders. I believe that it is also important for students to understand that the South did NOT want to take over the Federal gov't. They only wanted to be seperate from it and left to their own affairs.

South fought over primarily slavery.

North fought for re-unification.

That's one take... but many Southerners knew it slavery as an economic system was eventually doomed anyway, and many also wanted to end slavery, just not all at once (RE Lee included). Looking back, I think the South was right legally, there was nothing in the COnstitution to force states to stay in the union against their will.:2 cents:

The most shameful thing America did was to lie, cheat and steal the land of the native Americans IMHO.

 

[Bearded_Menace]

That's one take... but many Southerners knew it slavery as an economic system was eventually doomed anyway, and many also wanted to end slavery, just not all at once (RE Lee included). Looking back, I think the South was right legally, there was nothing in the COnstitution to force states to stay in the union against their will.:2 cents:

The most shameful thing America did was to lie, cheat and steal the land of the native Americans IMHO.

:yesyes: No argument there.

 

[Boothbabe]

So us folks from the USA are arragant, egocentric, and often wrong...but our attitudes are well deserved.

Do you think that maybe, just maybe that's the reason America isn't well liked in many parts of the world. I mean, America claims to be the defender of freedom and democracy but in the meantime it has installed and supported dictators around the world and more recently it has even started a war against a country wich didn't even attack it. America's foreign policies have caused more suffering around the globe than any other western country's foreign policies. Your attitudes aren't well deserved because of the complete and utter hipocrisy and are the reason there are so many anti American sentiments around the world.

 

[Bearded_Menace]

Do you think that maybe, just maybe that's the reason America isn't well liked in many parts of the world. I mean, America claims to be the defender of freedom and democracy but in the meantime it has installed and supported dictators around the world and more recently it has even started a war against a country wich didn't even attack it. America's foreign policies have caused more suffering around the globe than any other western country's foreign policies. Your attitudes aren't well deserved because of the complete and utter hipocrisy and are the reason there are so many anti American sentiments around the world.

Sorry lady, I beg to differ. How soon we forget European colonialism and the fucked up impacts it has had on other nations which are still felt today. France, for example, completely fucked over Haiti, parts of Africa, and Southeast Asia. The English, the Dutch, the Spanish, and the Portuguese also all followed the same formula of conqueror and fuck over for centuries. The Dutch and the Portuguese were the ones who started the Atlantic Slave Trade. As an American, I can't even begin to tell you the amount of residual backlash that exists in this country today with that shit being at the focal point of it all. Not trying to downplay America's role in it, but lets not forget where the practice came from. Lets also not forget our friends King Leopold II, Napoleon Bonaparte, and the great Adolph Hitler which is an indirect reason why this thread exists in the first place.

America has its hands soaked in blood no doubt, but Europe has had its entire body covered in it long before America even existed. American foreign policy isn't great, but Europeans should be the last people pointing fingers about the history of fucked up foreign policy.

 

[monicasilver]

It's not actually an argument that the Soviet Union had more to do with Germany's defeat than the Americans; it's fact. Just ask any historian. The Soviets didn't fold on Japan. They beat them during the border wars in 1939 and their complete & utter destruction of the Kwantung Army in 1945 had as much to do with Japan's surrender as the bombs did.

LOL. Good job. I was being antagonistic on this point just to see what push back I would get. I've done quite a bit of reading about the Soviet's (nobody pushed back on that name) invasion of Manchukuo and other places.

(btw, I have actually spoken to historians about it. I'm on my way to my Masters in History)

Problem was we were being rather specific. We were talking about the liberation of the Netherlands. I'm not arguing America's leading role in the war, but in the case we were talking about Canada's role was more important. :dunno:

Pherhaps I was making a seperate point and not being restricted.

I find the " :dunno: " icon to be humorous. If you "dunno", why bother making any comment unless if it is a question.

Seriously, you get props for jumping right away. I apologize if me amusing myself on the porn board offends. It is only mean to amuse.

 

[monicasilver]

Do you think that maybe, just maybe that's the reason America isn't well liked in many parts of the world. I mean, America claims to be the defender of freedom and democracy but in the meantime it has installed and supported dictators around the world and more recently it has even started a war against a country wich didn't even attack it. America's foreign policies have caused more suffering around the globe than any other western country's foreign policies. Your attitudes aren't well deserved because of the complete and utter hipocrisy and are the reason there are so many anti American sentiments around the world.

No doubt, but I gave you all that in my remark anyway.

"You take the good, you take the bad.
You take them both and there you have
The facts of life..."

 

[Zolf J. Kimbly]

And I think you read too many pages and need to get out more

another twisted pov post by zolf.......I say black on white racism exists and he's gotta try to justify it somehow.

first get yo facts straight before you attempt to discredit me

the death toll of the civil war didnt exceed 700,000 on both sides

so millions of people didnt die to free slaves no matter how you try to slice it

the south lost so it is reasonable to think that they took the brunt of the casualties

i doubt they were fighting to free slaves

plenty of people who fought in the war fought cause it was their duty to fight for their country

they didnt necissarily agree about the reason it was fought

same as today

also Zolf said black on white racism exists

i didnt try to justify it or condone it

i simply pointed out that there is a reason why it existed

that black people didnt just wake up and decide to hate white people for being white

its seems that way on the reverse side though

but that is another story

and we havent even talked about the indians

 

[Hot Mega]

Y'know, I just have to say that you aren't really helping to disprove the theory that Americans believe they won the war single handedly. Like Drik said earlier, it was Canada that liberated the Netherlands, not the US. Just because they were on the same team doesn't really mean you can just call them the "US and others." In this case it is "Canada and others."

Holland was liberated by US, British and Canadian forces.:2 cents: The Supreme Commander of Allied forces in Europe was U.S. Gen. D.D. Eisnehower who decided among other things when D Day was going to happen. Ergo, the U.S. did in fact lead the allies to victory over the Nazis. The US may not have 'single-handedly' liberated Europe but Europe would have been under German rule without the U.S.

Don't you know America is the greatest country on Earth, it never does anything wrong :1orglaugh

Do you think that maybe, just maybe that's the reason America isn't well liked in many parts of the world. I mean, America claims to be the defender of freedom and democracy but in the meantime it has installed and supported dictators around the world and more recently it has even started a war against a country wich didn't even attack it. America's foreign policies have caused more suffering around the globe than any other western country's foreign policies. Your attitudes aren't well deserved because of the complete and utter hipocrisy and are the reason there are so many anti American sentiments around the world.

The U.S. is a great country, which is undeniable. That doesn't mean we're perfect.

Get over your hatred, disdain or penis envy you have for the U.S. It will only make you bitter.

Again on behalf of our forefathers, you're welcome.:hatsoff:

 

[ragincaucasian]

Why would there be a niche to fill by the author of the article to even examine introspection into American history?

Why aren't there tons of articles listing the top 10 shameful acts of Nigeria?


Probably because Nigeria isn't endlessly forcing a distortedly positive narrative of itself as a world hegemon superpower.


Why do mass-beer manufacturers keep pushing the idea that the COLDER the beer, the better it is, even though that isn't so? Is it because cold beer masks flavor (defects)? So they push false qualifiers by being the "coldest", having the better "drinkability", or bottle shapes, or talking frogs.

So after decades of this type of dogshit PR (propaganda) it takes someone to call BULLSHIT and reframe the discussion by stating the truth of the subject (that many of the qualities of America are myths).

 

[Trident1]

Holland/Netherlands was largely bypassed by the Allies after the failure of Market Garden in Sept. '44.

From October'44 to April '45 that country was starved to death by the Nazis. More Dutch civilians died in those months than any other time during the entire war.


As for Japan we..........the U.S. basically defeated them on our own.

 

[STDiva]

Jesus H. A good thread ruined by anti American whining and Americans false sense of entitlement.