4 ms·

Many Americans seem to believe that, but it doesn't actually seem to be the case. For instance, when Yemen was falling apart, countries like China, India, Pakis

by bnralt 5y ago

Many Americans seem to believe that, but it doesn't actually seem to be the case. For instance, when Yemen was falling apart, countries like China, India, Pakistan, Russia, and Indonesia all worked hard to evacuate their citizens, many using their military to do so[1]. The U.S. response was to tell American citizens they were on their own[2]. The U.S. embassy even recommended that Americans seek assistance from India if they needed to evacuate[3]. So if anything, I'd say America is worse than other countries at getting citizens out of bad situations. But there seems to be a tendency for people to not look at what other countries actually do and just assume that America is the best. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-32162364 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-32162364 [2] https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/04/21/washington-to-americans-stuck-in-yemen-youre-on-your-own-evacuation/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/04/21/washington-to-americans... [3] https://twitter.com/SMedia4/status/585286801968893954 https://twitter.com/SMedia4/status/585286801968893954

madengr 5y ago
As a US citizen, you are less likely to be tortured in a foreign prison. This book is a good read: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Acid_Gambit https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Acid_Gambit
- ljf 5y ago
  (you seem to have been shadow banned, might be working asking dang why - I couldn't see anything in your history from a mod)
  - maxerickson 5y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23559004 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23559004
    - aerostable_slug 5y ago
      If non-PC thoughts are against the rules, post those rules in the acceptable use policy. I don't think it's hateful to critically discuss BLM. I do think it's hateful to say "x group is bad", but that's not what I read. I believe BLM to be led by Marxists and that is backed up by objective evidence. I'm not sure why that's controversial. It's also objectively true that George Floyd had a criminal record. Again, I'm not sure why that's controversial. One can be very socially aware and also recognize those two facts. It is indeed problematic that Floyd pointed a gun at the abdomen of a woman whom he thought was pregnant during a home invasion robbery, or that he had significant amounts of narcotics in his system when he died. That doesn't make his death justifiable, it's just the real life complications of a real life case (which tend not to be overly clean). When did we get afraid of objective facts? EDIT: Downvoters: explain why. Simple Q. What is it about facts you don't like?
      - angrais 5y ago
        I don't have the feature to downvote you, but it I did then I would. Here's why: what is an "objective fact"? Are those statements you made relevant to the death of George Floyd? The answer is no. He was a criminal who made mistakes - for which he served his time. Stating your "objective facts" appear to diverge attention elsewhere and in particular to paint George as the guilty party that warranted the police response that he received. Did he deserve that? He begged for his life while being kneed to the throat for over 10 minutes. He then died on the floor by a police offer. There's some objective facts for you pal. Further, there was no "real life complications of a real life case" he was literally murdered. That's the point and is why the police office is serving jail time! Please take some time to consider what and WHY you wrote what you did. Do you think that he deserved death? Why?
        aerostable_slug 5y ago
        > Are those statements you made relevant to the death of George Floyd? The answer is no. They were in the judgement of a coroner. Not enough to mean murder wasn't called for, but it's obtuse to not observe that Floyd's drug load was past the lethal level for most people. > Stating your "objective facts" appear to diverge attention elsewhere and in particular to paint George as the guilty party that warranted a cold bold death sentence. Did he that? No, and when did I argue that? I never said he deserved to die. He should have been transported to jail and then tried for his crimes, not killed. > He begged for his life while being kneed to the throat. There's an objective fact for you pal. Anyone with any experience with corrections finds statements by suspects like this laughable at best. With him it was perhaps true (you physiologically can't speak if you can't breathe, but I don't deny he was killed). With someone else, it was because their wrists hurt because of those shiny bracelets they earned by committing crimes. I believe essentially nothing that a suspect says about their comfort, because the majority are accomplished liars. This is what they do. It is literally their occupation. I also believe Floyd was killed. Can you fit those two concepts in your head? > Further, there was no "real life complications of a real life case" he was literally murdered. That's the point and is why the police office is serving jail time! His drug consumption was absolutely a complication with his trial. Why would you think it wasn't? > Please take some time to consider what and WHY you wrote what you did. Do you think that he deserved death? Why? I don't think he deserved to die. I wrote what I wrote to illustrate that Real Life is hardly clean. There's nothing class-, race-, or otherwise-based in what I wrote. Objective facts.
JumpCrisscross 5y ago
> I'd say America is worse than other countries at getting citizens out of bad situations I last saw data through the UNDP about ten years ago. It's very possible that the situation has degraded. And no country has 100% coverage, far from it. At the time, however, the U.S. government was exceedingly good at exfiltrating citizens from disaster zones. Granted, it has had more experience doing this because, well, empire. The situation was starker for low-level assistance, in which many diplomatic missions will not get involved.
- bnralt 5y ago
  If you come across the data please share it, it would be worthwhile seeing what exactly they're talking about and if the data matches your memory of it. I didn't come across it in my (very limited) search, but I did find this analysis that suggests U.S. citizens fare worse than citizens of many other countries[1]: > According to a database compiled by New America from public sources, since 2001, American hostages taken captive by terrorist, militant, and pirate groups have been more than twice as likely to remain in captivity, die in captivity, or be murdered by their captors as the average Western hostage. Forty-three percent of American hostages died, remain in captivity, or remain unaccounted for, compared to an average of 19 percent for all Westerners. [1] https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/policy-papers/pay-ransom-or-not/ https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/policy-pap...
  - qwytw 5y ago
    It's because USA has a policy of not paying any ransoms or making concessions to the hostage takers (unlike most other western countries). I'd assume this might also result in Americans being targeted less often than people from other countries (I haven't see any data on this).
matttproud 5y ago
Don’t forget the poor responses at home to disasters natural and unnatural. Katrina was only 15 years ago, and that was before mainstream myths of omnipotence were broken. Such a travesty. Such a failed social contract — esp. for common security, welfare, and wellbeing.
beezle 5y ago
The US is also very good at issuing travel warnings that are very explicit about the risks [1] I am not aware of the DoS ever going from 'its all ok' to 'see ya, y'all on your own now!' Anyone that was in Yemen prior to 2/15 had (or should have) a very good idea of where things were going. [1] https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/traveladvisories/yemen-travel-advisory.html https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- throwaway2037 5y ago
  UK embassies are also quite good about publishing updates on their websites.
lionhead 5y ago
At the early onset of the Covid-19 pandemic started, many countries sent special planes to repatriate their citizens either from the Wuhan region, or from other countries where they got stuck because of a sudden borders close. The US also organized flights, but I was personally very shocked to learn that they charged close to $1,200 for those trips, although it was clearly a case of force majeure. That was the moment I thought that Americans don't actually get their tax money worth in terms of government support, while being subject to taxation on their worldwide income even when not residing in the US. To be clear, most if not all countries chartered special flights for free. Later on, some more flights were organized with the help of airline companies, but those were paid.
- realityking 5y ago
  At least Germany, which came up upthread, also charged those they helped return: https://www.euronews.com/2020/12/28/german-passengers-sue-government-over-94m-repatriation-bill https://www.euronews.com/2020/12/28/german-passengers-sue-go... Apparently they charge the price of a one way Economy ticket. The difference in cost was paid by the Government. Seems quite reasonable to me.
nicolas_t 5y ago
Likewise in China, I had Italian friends whose embassy helped arrange covid vaccines for Italians living there while the US embassy was no help whatsoever to their citizens. At least among expats, the US embassy has the reputation to be the least helpful embassy to their citizens.

by bnralt 5y ago

madengr 5y ago

As a US citizen, you are less likely to be tortured in a foreign prison. This book is a good read: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Acid_Gambit https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Acid_Gambit

ljf 5y ago
(you seem to have been shadow banned, might be working asking dang why - I couldn't see anything in your history from a mod)
- maxerickson 5y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23559004 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23559004
  - aerostable_slug 5y ago
    If non-PC thoughts are against the rules, post those rules in the acceptable use policy. I don't think it's hateful to critically discuss BLM. I do think it's hateful to say "x group is bad", but that's not what I read. I believe BLM to be led by Marxists and that is backed up by objective evidence. I'm not sure why that's controversial. It's also objectively true that George Floyd had a criminal record. Again, I'm not sure why that's controversial. One can be very socially aware and also recognize those two facts. It is indeed problematic that Floyd pointed a gun at the abdomen of a woman whom he thought was pregnant during a home invasion robbery, or that he had significant amounts of narcotics in his system when he died. That doesn't make his death justifiable, it's just the real life complications of a real life case (which tend not to be overly clean). When did we get afraid of objective facts? EDIT: Downvoters: explain why. Simple Q. What is it about facts you don't like?
    - angrais 5y ago
      I don't have the feature to downvote you, but it I did then I would. Here's why: what is an "objective fact"? Are those statements you made relevant to the death of George Floyd? The answer is no. He was a criminal who made mistakes - for which he served his time. Stating your "objective facts" appear to diverge attention elsewhere and in particular to paint George as the guilty party that warranted the police response that he received. Did he deserve that? He begged for his life while being kneed to the throat for over 10 minutes. He then died on the floor by a police offer. There's some objective facts for you pal. Further, there was no "real life complications of a real life case" he was literally murdered. That's the point and is why the police office is serving jail time! Please take some time to consider what and WHY you wrote what you did. Do you think that he deserved death? Why?
      - aerostable_slug 5y ago
        > Are those statements you made relevant to the death of George Floyd? The answer is no. They were in the judgement of a coroner. Not enough to mean murder wasn't called for, but it's obtuse to not observe that Floyd's drug load was past the lethal level for most people. > Stating your "objective facts" appear to diverge attention elsewhere and in particular to paint George as the guilty party that warranted a cold bold death sentence. Did he that? No, and when did I argue that? I never said he deserved to die. He should have been transported to jail and then tried for his crimes, not killed. > He begged for his life while being kneed to the throat. There's an objective fact for you pal. Anyone with any experience with corrections finds statements by suspects like this laughable at best. With him it was perhaps true (you physiologically can't speak if you can't breathe, but I don't deny he was killed). With someone else, it was because their wrists hurt because of those shiny bracelets they earned by committing crimes. I believe essentially nothing that a suspect says about their comfort, because the majority are accomplished liars. This is what they do. It is literally their occupation. I also believe Floyd was killed. Can you fit those two concepts in your head? > Further, there was no "real life complications of a real life case" he was literally murdered. That's the point and is why the police office is serving jail time! His drug consumption was absolutely a complication with his trial. Why would you think it wasn't? > Please take some time to consider what and WHY you wrote what you did. Do you think that he deserved death? Why? I don't think he deserved to die. I wrote what I wrote to illustrate that Real Life is hardly clean. There's nothing class-, race-, or otherwise-based in what I wrote. Objective facts.

JumpCrisscross 5y ago

> I'd say America is worse than other countries at getting citizens out of bad situations I last saw data through the UNDP about ten years ago. It's very possible that the situation has degraded. And no country has 100% coverage, far from it. At the time, however, the U.S. government was exceedingly good at exfiltrating citizens from disaster zones. Granted, it has had more experience doing this because, well, empire. The situation was starker for low-level assistance, in which many diplomatic missions will not get involved.

bnralt 5y ago
If you come across the data please share it, it would be worthwhile seeing what exactly they're talking about and if the data matches your memory of it. I didn't come across it in my (very limited) search, but I did find this analysis that suggests U.S. citizens fare worse than citizens of many other countries[1]: > According to a database compiled by New America from public sources, since 2001, American hostages taken captive by terrorist, militant, and pirate groups have been more than twice as likely to remain in captivity, die in captivity, or be murdered by their captors as the average Western hostage. Forty-three percent of American hostages died, remain in captivity, or remain unaccounted for, compared to an average of 19 percent for all Westerners. [1] https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/policy-papers/pay-ransom-or-not/ https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/policy-pap...
- qwytw 5y ago
  It's because USA has a policy of not paying any ransoms or making concessions to the hostage takers (unlike most other western countries). I'd assume this might also result in Americans being targeted less often than people from other countries (I haven't see any data on this).

matttproud 5y ago

Don’t forget the poor responses at home to disasters natural and unnatural. Katrina was only 15 years ago, and that was before mainstream myths of omnipotence were broken. Such a travesty. Such a failed social contract — esp. for common security, welfare, and wellbeing.

beezle 5y ago

The US is also very good at issuing travel warnings that are very explicit about the risks [1] I am not aware of the DoS ever going from 'its all ok' to 'see ya, y'all on your own now!' Anyone that was in Yemen prior to 2/15 had (or should have) a very good idea of where things were going. [1] https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/traveladvisories/yemen-travel-advisory.html https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/...

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
throwaway2037 5y ago
UK embassies are also quite good about publishing updates on their websites.

lionhead 5y ago

At the early onset of the Covid-19 pandemic started, many countries sent special planes to repatriate their citizens either from the Wuhan region, or from other countries where they got stuck because of a sudden borders close. The US also organized flights, but I was personally very shocked to learn that they charged close to $1,200 for those trips, although it was clearly a case of force majeure. That was the moment I thought that Americans don't actually get their tax money worth in terms of government support, while being subject to taxation on their worldwide income even when not residing in the US. To be clear, most if not all countries chartered special flights for free. Later on, some more flights were organized with the help of airline companies, but those were paid.

realityking 5y ago
At least Germany, which came up upthread, also charged those they helped return: https://www.euronews.com/2020/12/28/german-passengers-sue-government-over-94m-repatriation-bill https://www.euronews.com/2020/12/28/german-passengers-sue-go... Apparently they charge the price of a one way Economy ticket. The difference in cost was paid by the Government. Seems quite reasonable to me.

nicolas_t 5y ago

Likewise in China, I had Italian friends whose embassy helped arrange covid vaccines for Italians living there while the US embassy was no help whatsoever to their citizens. At least among expats, the US embassy has the reputation to be the least helpful embassy to their citizens.