6 ms·

Wow... there's actual documentary evidence of this... they have officially [on paper] crossed the line where they instead of just being perceived to being the b

Wow... there's actual documentary evidence of this... they have officially [on paper] crossed the line where they instead of just being perceived to being the bully are actually officially bullying nations into doing their bidding. This is... I'm officially speechless. Are they trying to pen themselves into a corner where the entire world ends up standing against them? After I heard yesterday about Russia's plans for their nuclear program and now this... ...did I fall asleep and wake up in an alternate universe. This behaviour is ridiculous. The U.S. got caught with their hands in the cookie jar and they're threatening other countries with huge diplomatic consequences because they're willing to stand up and protect the guy who embarrassed them? How about they just say, "Hey, yeah, we fucked up, we'll fix it. Sorry guys" and be done with it. They're walking down a very bad diplomatic path. If you want to win the war on terror, try making friends instead of enemies; your current path is not leading in that direction. I'm actually astonished given Germany's strength in Europe that they didn't just say GFY! We're not going to be seen to be bullied by you in front of all of Europe. You don't make the rules here and if you want to play that game, it goes both ways. You already have a significant portion of the middle east unhappy with you - we stood by you on that; you have Russia against you - we stood by you on that too; do you really want to turn Europe, your only remaining ally against you too? Because that's where this path is leading. As mighty as your military is, it would not stand against the rest of the world if you keep up this idiotic behaviour.

13 12y ago
> Are they trying to pen themselves into a corner where the entire world ends up standing against them? http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/media/50646/us_vs_world.gif http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/media/50646/us_vs_world.gif There's not many outcomes to that scenario if you look at the budgets involved.
- balabaster 12y ago
  That may be the case, but if you cut off America's access to oil, food and other things they're a net importer of, you'd pretty soon restrict their military abilities regardless of their military spending - they can't let their non-military population starve and go homeless. A huge expensive military with billions of dollars worth of machinery isn't going to run very long without food/water for its personnel, supplies and fuel - even if they have almost half of the global military spending. The first rule of a fight is never fight someone at their own game. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. At some point you have to say "Hey, enough of this bullshit. You may think you run this planet, but you're one country of 196. The rest of us are tired of your shit, we all deserve to be treated with respect. If you want to be part of the team, step up and be part of the team, but you're not going to dictate to the rest of us how you want it to be."
  - happyscrappy 12y ago
    > if you cut off America's access to oil, food and other things they're a net importer of Not sure where you got that idea but the US is a net exporter of both. > The rest of us are tired of your shit But apparently not tired enough to actually do anything.
    - balabaster 12y ago
      Except make pissed off assertions on Hacker News :P
  - vondur 12y ago
    I believe that the US is a net exporter of food and could probably be self sufficient in oil too if need be. Also, with that huge military the US could pretty much take whatever we want from whomever we want. It reminds me of a scene from the Rome TV series when Caesar is in Alexandria trying to collect the money owed to Rome (Pompey the Great). He is explaining his calculations to the Egyptians when the minister of Egypt protests that is based on Roman law, and Caesar replies "Is there any other?"
    - ojbyrne 12y ago
      That whole "take whatever we want from whomever we want" has failed a few times. Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, etc.
      - cookiecaper 12y ago
        It hasn't failed. If you disrupt the balance of power in a tribal state, you're going to have a lot of contingencies making power plays. The U.S. accomplished its short-term goals at least in Iraq and Afghanistan. "Changing hearts and minds" is good propaganda but everyone knows it's eminently unrealistic, and not why we invade countries.
      - EpicEng 12y ago
        if we suddenly stopped caring about human rights and political consequences (I.e., we're starving), it's a different approach completely. It's not like we unleashed the full force of our military (our came anywhere near). Of course, your entire premise is flawed as we could support ourselves Not sure where you got your numbers from, but they're wrong.
pjc50 12y ago
For "officially bullying", see e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States - invade Nicaragua, be ruled against by the UN, block payment of reparations and then glare at Nicaragua for a decade until they agree to just drop it. The US has long believed that might makes right and they're not going to submit to anyone else's idea of justice. There's a long list of such instances. As for Europe, sadly Ukraine is reminding us all that the choice is between being American client states or Russian client states. At least as American client states we get rock and roll and blue jeans, right comrades?
- balabaster 12y ago
  > At least as American client states we get rock and roll and blue jeans, right comrades? There is much truth in jest... :-/
- balabaster 12y ago
  and http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-01/29/antigua-legitimate-piracy http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-01/29/antigua-legit...
- mike_hearn 12y ago
  > As for Europe, sadly Ukraine is reminding us all that the choice is between being American client states or Russian client states That's an absurd statement.
binarray2000 12y ago
> I'm actually astonished given Germany's strength in Europe that they didn't just say GFY! Germany isn't a sovereign country. Having foreign (US) troops on your soil makes you dependable on the policies of that foreign country. There are many other reasons why Germany cannot (and doesn't want) to "say GFY" to the US.
- Zigurd 12y ago
  And yet you will continue to see people, invariably Americans, argue that the Germans do not want to see US bases close, because they are dependent on the jobs. The 1960's called and they want their economic argument back. If the German economy was capable of taking on re-unification costs, Germany could easily handle greater autonomy w.r.t. the US.
  - Xylakant 12y ago
    I'm actually german and I'll take the bait. Ramstein, one of the largest US Airbases in Europe is in a pretty desolate area of Germany. A lot of american troops pass through there (to and from Iraq and Afghanistan). The soldiers bring money and jobs - it would be political suicide for the local politics to demand a withdrawal. Heidelberg and Würzburg have large deployments as well. It's not like we could not shoulder the economic impact, in terms of the gross domestic product that's a tiny amount, it's rather that in terms of how the political landscape looks like we don't want to. (It would probably also require to sift more budget to the military etc.). However, I doubt that the US military would give up its Airbases in Ramstein and Frankfurt over Snowden. They're far to important in the current conflicts in the middle east.
- rwissmann 12y ago
  A countries sovereignty has exactly zero to do with whether or not the are foreign military bases on their soil...
  - ojbyrne 12y ago
    I don't see how you can possibly argue "exactly zero."
msabalau 12y ago
I'm sure the Greeks will be so happy to learn that "official bullying" is considered ridiculous.
otoburb 12y ago
>I'm actually astonished given Germany's strength in Europe that they didn't just say GFY! Consequences are playing out in other arenas, weakly evidenced by Germany (and other close US allies)[1] joining the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB)[2] which is an organization similar to the World Bank or IMF spearheaded by China. [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourdoukoutas/2015/03/18/by-the-time-china-launches-aiib-america-will-have-lost-count-of-its-true-allies/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourdoukoutas/2015/03/18/by... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Infrastructure_Investment_Bank http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Infrastructure_Investment...
jobu 12y ago
> I'm actually astonished given Germany's strength in Europe that they didn't just say GFY! We're not going to be seen to be bullied by you in front of all of Europe. Even more astonishing is they're openly admitting it (and thereby admitting weakness). My guess is they have ulterior reasons for admitting it now - perhaps to gain sympathy or be seen less as bullies during negotiations with Greece (http://www.businessinsider.com/germany-poll-kick-greece-out-eurozone-europe-grexit-2015-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/germany-poll-kick-greece-out-...)
- eternalban 12y ago
  It could just be theatre (just like Apple complaining about NSA and Xcode ..).
  - coldtea 12y ago
    And that's theatre because?
    - balabaster 12y ago
      Who doesn't like theatre? There's no business like show business... jazz hands! :P

13 12y ago

> Are they trying to pen themselves into a corner where the entire world ends up standing against them? http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/media/50646/us_vs_world.gif http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/media/50646/us_vs_world.gif There's not many outcomes to that scenario if you look at the budgets involved.

balabaster 12y ago
That may be the case, but if you cut off America's access to oil, food and other things they're a net importer of, you'd pretty soon restrict their military abilities regardless of their military spending - they can't let their non-military population starve and go homeless. A huge expensive military with billions of dollars worth of machinery isn't going to run very long without food/water for its personnel, supplies and fuel - even if they have almost half of the global military spending. The first rule of a fight is never fight someone at their own game. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. At some point you have to say "Hey, enough of this bullshit. You may think you run this planet, but you're one country of 196. The rest of us are tired of your shit, we all deserve to be treated with respect. If you want to be part of the team, step up and be part of the team, but you're not going to dictate to the rest of us how you want it to be."
- happyscrappy 12y ago
  > if you cut off America's access to oil, food and other things they're a net importer of Not sure where you got that idea but the US is a net exporter of both. > The rest of us are tired of your shit But apparently not tired enough to actually do anything.
  - balabaster 12y ago
    Except make pissed off assertions on Hacker News :P
- vondur 12y ago
  I believe that the US is a net exporter of food and could probably be self sufficient in oil too if need be. Also, with that huge military the US could pretty much take whatever we want from whomever we want. It reminds me of a scene from the Rome TV series when Caesar is in Alexandria trying to collect the money owed to Rome (Pompey the Great). He is explaining his calculations to the Egyptians when the minister of Egypt protests that is based on Roman law, and Caesar replies "Is there any other?"
  - ojbyrne 12y ago
    That whole "take whatever we want from whomever we want" has failed a few times. Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, etc.
    - cookiecaper 12y ago
      It hasn't failed. If you disrupt the balance of power in a tribal state, you're going to have a lot of contingencies making power plays. The U.S. accomplished its short-term goals at least in Iraq and Afghanistan. "Changing hearts and minds" is good propaganda but everyone knows it's eminently unrealistic, and not why we invade countries.
    - EpicEng 12y ago
      if we suddenly stopped caring about human rights and political consequences (I.e., we're starving), it's a different approach completely. It's not like we unleashed the full force of our military (our came anywhere near). Of course, your entire premise is flawed as we could support ourselves Not sure where you got your numbers from, but they're wrong.

pjc50 12y ago

For "officially bullying", see e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States - invade Nicaragua, be ruled against by the UN, block payment of reparations and then glare at Nicaragua for a decade until they agree to just drop it. The US has long believed that might makes right and they're not going to submit to anyone else's idea of justice. There's a long list of such instances. As for Europe, sadly Ukraine is reminding us all that the choice is between being American client states or Russian client states. At least as American client states we get rock and roll and blue jeans, right comrades?

balabaster 12y ago
> At least as American client states we get rock and roll and blue jeans, right comrades? There is much truth in jest... :-/
balabaster 12y ago
and http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-01/29/antigua-legitimate-piracy http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-01/29/antigua-legit...
mike_hearn 12y ago
> As for Europe, sadly Ukraine is reminding us all that the choice is between being American client states or Russian client states That's an absurd statement.

binarray2000 12y ago

> I'm actually astonished given Germany's strength in Europe that they didn't just say GFY! Germany isn't a sovereign country. Having foreign (US) troops on your soil makes you dependable on the policies of that foreign country. There are many other reasons why Germany cannot (and doesn't want) to "say GFY" to the US.

Zigurd 12y ago
And yet you will continue to see people, invariably Americans, argue that the Germans do not want to see US bases close, because they are dependent on the jobs. The 1960's called and they want their economic argument back. If the German economy was capable of taking on re-unification costs, Germany could easily handle greater autonomy w.r.t. the US.
- Xylakant 12y ago
  I'm actually german and I'll take the bait. Ramstein, one of the largest US Airbases in Europe is in a pretty desolate area of Germany. A lot of american troops pass through there (to and from Iraq and Afghanistan). The soldiers bring money and jobs - it would be political suicide for the local politics to demand a withdrawal. Heidelberg and Würzburg have large deployments as well. It's not like we could not shoulder the economic impact, in terms of the gross domestic product that's a tiny amount, it's rather that in terms of how the political landscape looks like we don't want to. (It would probably also require to sift more budget to the military etc.). However, I doubt that the US military would give up its Airbases in Ramstein and Frankfurt over Snowden. They're far to important in the current conflicts in the middle east.
rwissmann 12y ago
A countries sovereignty has exactly zero to do with whether or not the are foreign military bases on their soil...
- ojbyrne 12y ago
  I don't see how you can possibly argue "exactly zero."

msabalau 12y ago

I'm sure the Greeks will be so happy to learn that "official bullying" is considered ridiculous.

otoburb 12y ago

>I'm actually astonished given Germany's strength in Europe that they didn't just say GFY! Consequences are playing out in other arenas, weakly evidenced by Germany (and other close US allies)[1] joining the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB)[2] which is an organization similar to the World Bank or IMF spearheaded by China. [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourdoukoutas/2015/03/18/by-the-time-china-launches-aiib-america-will-have-lost-count-of-its-true-allies/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourdoukoutas/2015/03/18/by... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Infrastructure_Investment_Bank http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Infrastructure_Investment...

jobu 12y ago

> I'm actually astonished given Germany's strength in Europe that they didn't just say GFY! We're not going to be seen to be bullied by you in front of all of Europe. Even more astonishing is they're openly admitting it (and thereby admitting weakness). My guess is they have ulterior reasons for admitting it now - perhaps to gain sympathy or be seen less as bullies during negotiations with Greece (http://www.businessinsider.com/germany-poll-kick-greece-out-eurozone-europe-grexit-2015-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/germany-poll-kick-greece-out-...)

eternalban 12y ago
It could just be theatre (just like Apple complaining about NSA and Xcode ..).
- coldtea 12y ago
  And that's theatre because?
  - balabaster 12y ago
    Who doesn't like theatre? There's no business like show business... jazz hands! :P