Nice post. I think this is the first time I run into someone on this forum who doesnt live in the world that the media have createt for them. If you havent, go see some George Carlin and Bill Hicks on youtube - you will find that they share many views of you and I.

Is that a trick question? Stop participating in terrible crimes. For example, are you aware of the U.S. participation in the atrocities in Indonesia, beginning in 1975 and enthusiastically continued by the Clinton administration? Approximately 200,000 people died, if anyone's interested.

I'm guessing you didn't know about it, but also that now you do, you are highly unlikely to do any further reading about it because i) you don't simply don't care and ii) because it conflicts with what you desperately want to believe about the U.S. govt.

The U.S. government either participates in, or turns a blind eye to grave crimes against humanity committed by its allies or other strategically important countries. When it is not the one who initiated the crime in the first place, that is. Why is this so hard to acknowledge?

Come on guy, why so stubborn? I'm not criticising you, and I'm not even criticising the American people. I am criticising the U.S. government.

So, to clarify your position, a champion of human rights is a country that has:

Codified the right to indefinitely detain its own citizens without right to a trial or lawyer (NDAA) and spy on them (PATRIOT Act); and overseas has overthrown democratically-elected leaders; bombed; invaded; supported dictators; suppressed movements for social change; organised assassinations; carried out murderous sanctions; trained death squads; conducted and facilitated biological and chemical warfare and torture... all that constitutes a champion of human rights? Nice.

This seems like a pretty comprehensive list of atrocities to me. Do explain how this list is deficient in highlighting rampant human rights abuses. I'm "dying" to hear it...

I mean, is there literally nothing that the U.S. govt could do for you to change your mind? What about if Obama himself put on a blindfold, faced a world map, and proceded to throw a dart. The objective of the game is that the closest country to where the dart lands will get nuked! Would you be defending the U.S. govt if that happened?

Thanks, glad to hear you found it interesting. Will check out Carlin and Hicks.

The US probably is the best superpower with respect to freedom and human rights in the history of the world. That is damning with extremely faint praise though.

Like the US beats, the Soviets, the Nazis, the British Empire, the Spanish Empire, the Roman Empire, the Mongol Horde, etc. Good job!

Haha that was going to be my next point - that because some people ITT may have realised (but refuse to acknowledge) that the postion of the U.S. being the best country for human rights and freedom was becoming increasingly untenable, the focus seems to have shifted to a comparison with other superpowers.

Like, let's substantially reduce the number of nations we can compare the U.S. with, and let's make sure that each of them are absolutely appalling to assure ourselves of a victory!

The sad thing is that those other empires that you mentioned have engaged in some of the worst acts of cruelty and barbarism in the history of humankind but if the U.S. somehow "wins" by comparison, I'm not sure whether it would necessarily be an easy win...

Do not forget that US Bankers (and some european) investet in the nazi warmachine. And actually I would argue that the Soviets werent that bad. Sure they were pretty terrible, but literally every american is born with the brainwash about "socialists" and "communists" are the worst kind of human beings possible.

Lets cut the crap. All form goverment eventually lead towards a allmighty goverment with powers to control their people however they want, the only diffrence is in retorik, essentially both kommunists, nationalists, socialists and capitalists are just diffrent sides of collectivism, and collectivism allways finds some excuse to break civil rights and liberty (like patriots act).

You're joking right?

And US killing 100.000 people in Iraq isent as bad? What about the 78 days and nights of bombing in yogoslavia? What about removing a democratically elected leader in Pakistan and then replace him with A dictator (musharaf)? What about Chile and Pinochet? What about Omar Torrijos or Jaime Roldos?

Yall so good at pointing fingers, but never looks inward. Your last goverment Startet two wars that accounted for several hundred of thounsands dead based on a lie. Good job with the WMD in Iraq. nice excuse to remove former CIA mr. Saddam just because he doesnt wanna sell you oil real cheap. Good job with the Taleban, since you got rid of them the opium fields break record production every year.

You guys have seen way too many american properganda movies where its about the american heroes fighting the bad communists.

Take a look at this 6min long video, which is a congressional hearing about Iraq http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELjgVq6GtPA with Dr. Dahlia Wasfi

quoted for current affairs.
remind me too never take any of your posts seriously ever again.

If we could eliminate nationalism, we could have a world with no major wars. Suppose if we only had a unified defense. The United States spends like 4.7% of gdp, yet most of our allies pay less than 2%. If we could have a unifed defense, the United States could probably drop that number to 1.5%. Furthremore, we could break the united states up into districts of about 1 million people. Thus, we would have about 300 different states or countries. The allies would do the same, and possibly china and russia could be added as allies as they were once out friends. Techincally, it would all end as a one world defense where the 1.5% could be lowered to 1%. The goal of this one world defense would be to stop genocide and other crimes of the majority of the other countries. Thus, for this defense to invade a country, it would need a 95% majority.

But, the goal of this system, is you could move anywhere in the world you like. As a citizen of this world military protection, you could say move to Chile and have a free 1/4 acre land lease. You could give up your citizenship and then take up citizenship there and pay their taxes. Some state might hav eno taxes other than defense and some might have high taxes. Each state can have their own currency or maybe allow competitve currencies.

Just, an idea we really don't need to live with 80% total taxes, but they could be lowered to 1%.