• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

Is US an aggressive, militaristic, and imperialistic power?

Is the United States an aggressive, militaristic, and imperialistic power?

  • Could not agree more

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Rather agree

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • There are arguments pro and contra

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No, but some elements of American police are indeed aggressive

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Absurd. US is a peacefull, pacifist power, a defender of human rights

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
#3
Is option 4 Police or Policy?
Aggressive,yes,sometimes but often relies on diplomacy.
Militaristic,what with all the hippys and CO's,you're having a laugh.
Imperialistic?They put up with so much bollox from tin-pot Hitlers like CHAVez,again you're having a laugh :cuddle: Septics ok
 
#5
As a American my answer is HELL YES we are!

Aggresive
Yep you mess with us and well come halfway across the planet just to mess you up.

Militaristic
Have you seen the size of are defense budget?

Imperialistic
Yep were democratic imperialists to the core we intented to conquer the world for democracy.

You arnt implying any of the above is wrong are you?
 
#6
Why stop there comrade? Surely these folks want to see the rest of what I said,no?

I would say that you have indeed posted in line with goal #2.

I simply suggested that you are perhaps one of said agents listed below. No need to subvert the messenger or the message. We are among friends and I'm sorry if this puts a spotlight on your activities.

ghost_us said:

Crash Course in KGB/SVR/FSB Disinformation and Active Measures


"On the other hand -- and this is the other side of the Soviet intelligence, very important: perhaps I would describe it as the heart and soul of the Soviet intelligence -- was subversion. Not intelligence collection, but subversion: active measures to weaken the West, to drive wedges in the Western community alliances of all sorts, particularly NATO, to sow discord among allies, to weaken the United States in the eyes of the people of Europe, Asia, Africa, Latin America, and thus to prepare ground in case the war really occurs. To make America more vulnerable to the anger and distrust of other peoples."

Quote:
"In that sense, the Soviet intelligence [was] really unparalleled. ... The [KGB] programs -- which would run all sorts of congresses, peace congresses, youth congresses, festivals, women's movements, trade union movements, campaigns against U.S. missiles in Europe, campaigns against neutron weapons, allegations that AIDS ... was invented by the CIA ... all sorts of forgeries and faked material -- [were] targeted at politicians, the academic community, at [the] public at large."

"It was really a worldwide campaign, often not only sponsored and funded, but conducted and manipulated by the KGB. And this was again part and parcel of this campaign to weaken [the] military, economic and psychological climate in the West."...

The below goals of Soviet Communist disinformation and active measures was published 22 years ago in "Dezinformatsia: Active Measures in Soviet Strategy" by Richard Shultz and Roy Godson, 1984, page 44. It is interesting to note how certain groups and organizations (influenced by foreign intelligence services or other foreign entities?) in today's world continue these goals against the US.

1. To influence America, European and world public opinion to believe that US military and political policies are the major cause of international conflict and crisis.
2. To demonstrate that the United States is an aggressive, militaristic, and imperialistic power.
3. To isolate the United States from its friends and allies, and to discredit those states which cooperate with the United States.
4. To discredit US military and intelligence establishments.
5. To demonstrate that the policies and objectives of the United States are incompatible with those of the under-developed nations.
6. To confuse world public opinion concerning Soviet global ambitions, creating a favorable environment for Soviet foreign policy.


KGB active measures techniques included the use of agents of influence, forgeries, covert media placements, and controlled media to covertly introduce carefully crafted arguments, information, disinformation, and slogans into the discourse in government, media, religious, business, economic, and public arenas in targeted countries. These operations were characterized as "black" because the Soviet role was totally concealed. These KGB operations were carried out by members of line PR (political intelligence) in Soviet residencies, the KGB units in Soviet embassies in foreign countries. According to Gordievsky, line PR officers were supposed to spend about 25 percent of their time on active measures operations.
 
#7
Siddar said:
As a American my answer is HELL YES we are!

Aggresive
Yep you mess with us and well come halfway across the planet just to mess you up.

Militaristic
Have you seen the size of are defense budget?

Imperialistic
Yep were democratic imperialists to the core we intented to conquer the world for democracy.

You arnt implying any of the above is wrong are you?
God no!!! Heaven forbid.

However, if you want to be viewed with any credibility, might I suggest you improve your command of the written ENGLISH word?

A few commas and apostrophes might help.

It's amazing what you will read when you are bored on night shift.
 
#8
sapperbraindead said:
Is option 4 Police or Policy?
Aggressive,yes,sometimes but often relies on diplomacy.
Militaristic,what with all the hippys and CO's,you're having a laugh.
Imperialistic?They put up with so much bollox from tin-pot Hitlers like CHAVez,again you're having a laugh :cuddle: Septics ok
Oooops! Oh my poor English. Of course I meant policy. But now it looks as a game of words.

On a separate note I would like to add that some elements of both Russian police and policy are aggressive.
 
#11
ghost_us said:
Why stop there comrade? Surely these folks want to see the rest of what I said,no?

I would say that you have indeed posted in line with goal #2.

I simply suggested that you are perhaps one of said agents listed below. No need to subvert the messenger or the message. We are among friends and I'm sorry if this puts a spotlight on your activities.
Mate, we are among our friends who have brains and are able to elaborate own views, to analyse facts, to make conclusions.

The Soviet union collapsed almost 20 years ago but still World public opinion is not 100% positive toward the USA, far from it. But what is the main cause? Activity of the propaganda or the American policy?

Am I an 'agent' as you mean? In real life - no. But why not to play this role here? It would be funny to comment Current Events exactly in style of Soviet propaganda. And I'm well aware about its methods, wording and so on.

Just wait.
 
#13
Is US an aggressive, militaristic, and imperialistic power? On balance of probabilities, not - although it does display some traits of all of these.

Has it behaved in an 'aggressive, militaristic, and imperialistic' fashion at time. Hell, yes. Very few countries haven't and then mainly because they didn't have the opportunity.

Does the US attract more flak than any other country? Nah. Nowhere near. Look at the pummelling in the public opinion stakes the likes of Milosevic's Serbia, Saddam's Iraq, Iran and North Korea got/get.

It does set itself higher than any other nation and is judged accordingly. If you go around telling everyone that you're the last best hope for humanity, you ought to expect a wee bit of critical analysis of your behaviour as a matter of routine.
 
#14
smartascarrots said:
Is US an aggressive, militaristic, and imperialistic power? On balance of probabilities, not - although it does display some traits of all of these.

Has it behaved in an 'aggressive, militaristic, and imperialistic' fashion at time. Hell, yes. Very few countries haven't and then mainly because they didn't have the opportunity.

Does the US attract more flak than any other country? Nah. Nowhere near. Look at the pummelling in the public opinion stakes the likes of Milosevic's Serbia, Saddam's Iraq, Iran and North Korea got/get.

It does set itself higher than any other nation and is judged accordingly. If you go around telling everyone that you're the last best hope for humanity, you ought to expect a wee bit of critical analysis of your behaviour as a matter of routine.
Spot on. If anyone would care to look at Bush's 8 months prior to 9/11, it is possible to argue that he was returning America to a semi-isolationist position regarding Foreign Policy. After the Clinton humanitarian interventions of the '90s, all Bush cared for was to allow the world to run itself, and when major issues arose that concerned the US strategic interest, to intervene. However, once 9/11 did occur, the Executive hired a bucketful of neo-conservatives and everything went a bit Pete Tong.
 
#16
Funny how the US is so popular in those East European countries that were formerly dominated by the USSR, eh, Sergey?

Yep, Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Czech Republic, all absolutely gagging to get US bases on their soil ASAP.
 
#19
Jungelism said:
smartascarrots said:
Is US an aggressive, militaristic, and imperialistic power? On balance of probabilities, not - although it does display some traits of all of these.

Has it behaved in an 'aggressive, militaristic, and imperialistic' fashion at time. Hell, yes. Very few countries haven't and then mainly because they didn't have the opportunity.

Does the US attract more flak than any other country? Nah. Nowhere near. Look at the pummelling in the public opinion stakes the likes of Milosevic's Serbia, Saddam's Iraq, Iran and North Korea got/get.

It does set itself higher than any other nation and is judged accordingly. If you go around telling everyone that you're the last best hope for humanity, you ought to expect a wee bit of critical analysis of your behaviour as a matter of routine.
Spot on. If anyone would care to look at Bush's 8 months prior to 9/11, it is possible to argue that he was returning America to a semi-isolationist position regarding Foreign Policy. After the Clinton humanitarian interventions of the '90s, all Bush cared for was to allow the world to run itself, and when major issues arose that concerned the US strategic interest, to intervene. However, once 9/11 did occur, the Executive hired a bucketful of neo-conservatives and everything went a bit Pete Tong.
You both have good points, but I think your just scratching the surface. Prior to 911 I don't think the US was isolationist, I feel it was more a case of the lights were on but no one was at home. Bush and Powell had no effective FP on the Mid East, and they were seriously caught napping with China with the Hainan Island debarcle. Colin Power was prior to 911 one of the least traveled Secs of State since the invention of the 747, a very dubious honour for the chief diplomat of the USA!

The US is highly interventionist, but then again so are the Russians and their predecessors, the Soviets. It's the way they do it that has thrown most people in the thread. You're looking at things in a literal sense, and that is largely due to KGB's crafy use of words :) Both have been aggressive in persuing their so called interests by covert operations and by the use of proxys. If you look at any part of the world post 1945, they have both had their hands in it, and yes, 9 times out of 10 they have made a right dogs breakfast of it. Here are a few examples, South America (proxys/covert), the Whole of Africa (ditto), SE Asia (covert/proxy), and the Mid East (prior to Gulf War I, covert/proxy, oh with Kissinger threatening to drop the N bomb, once). Apart from Vietnam, where the US did have a significant military presence, oh and I suppose the bombing of Cambodia and Laos where they cast a shadow at 20,000 feet, they have conducted their affairs in a clandestine fashion. The CIA have always been the US 'crack troops'.

KGB, the title of the thread is good spin, I like it :lol: But then again you are Russian, and you guys have always been rather good at the diplomacy game :)
 

Latest Threads