69 million page views

The Greatest Country in the Entire World Part 3

Reader comment on item: [Symposium:] Why Does the World Hate America?
in response to reader comment: Some things to consider

Submitted by McCutcheon (United States), Jan 24, 2007 at 22:45

I want you people to know that I never denied the existence of other great countries in the world. Some of these include Great Britain, Canada, Australia, Germany, and Japan. I've been to Great Britain and I loved it; the people, culture, scenery, accents, architexture, history, etc. In my opinion, the second greatest country in the entire world, both past and present.

Yet I still firmly believe and know, that the United States of America is the greatest and most prosperous nation the world has ever seen. And I can back that statement up. We gained our independence from a Great Britain, defeating the world's greatest army at that time. We created a constitution, which uttered in a new era, and era where people governed themselves and were guaranteed life, liberty, and the pursuit of happyness. The United States started the spread of democracy, and none can deny it.

Now the United States has made mistakes. Slavery, the exploitation of the American Indian, the refusal to admit the jewish refugees during WW2, etc. But we have overcome these mistakes. One of the main reasons why the United States of America is the greatest country the world has ever seen is that we offer the most opportunity for people. If you took the time, you will find that the U.S. offers the most freedom to its citizens. Now don't bring up individual things like the frenchy did about being allowed to walk around naked, that is lewd behaviour, not freedom.

For instance, in Canada, it is illegal, or nearly impossible, to own a handgun, am I right? In the United States, we have the 2nd Amendment, guaranteeing the right to bear arms. Freedom. In the United States, you have the right to defend yourself. All the Canadian (and British by the way) government has done to its citizens is they have reduced the individuals right to self defense. Crime is literally unaffected by the outlawing of firearms, and once again, I can prove it.

Now, you talk of WW2. I don't think you understand. I am not saying that other countries didn't help, or were not vital to the war effort. Of course the big three in WW2 was the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union. Of course other countries contributed, but was there influence to the war that great? The answer is NO. Great Britain, all by itself against Nazi Germany, would have lost. Hitler's blunder of invading Russia (one of the classic blunders) saved the british from a one on one slugout, which they most surely would have lost.

For one, the United States had been supporting Britain with material aid from the beginning of the war. Another contribution that helped the british. Plus, U.S. destroyers had been escorting convoys to Britain (and lost one, along with about 150 men) before the U.S. entered the war. Another example of U.S. help.

Of course, when the U.S. entered the war, we provided approximately 5 million fighting men to the European theater, much more than Britain. The United States provided the British with most of their tanks (M4 Shermans). We invaded North Africa (operation Torch) to help take care of Rommel. The British refused to conduct daylight bombing because of high casualties, despite the higher damage inflicted upon german targets. The British conducted nightime bombing, far less accurate (plus they targeted, for the most part, civilians, not industrial targets). The United States provided many thousands of more aircraft than the british, and conducted a daylight bombing campaign.

This campaign brought german war production to a grinding halt, forcing the germans to go underground. The United States provided the bulk of troops in the invasion of france, and italy. Our destroyers provided a denser convoy protection grid, thus reducing allied shipping losses (most of this shipping was again, coming from America). Also, we send millions of tons of equipment, supplies, and goods to the Soviet Union through our lend lease program. Of course there is more, especially in an area I haven't covered yet, the PACIFIC.

The United States was the only country capable to deal with Japan in the pacific. The British had been beaten down by Japanese attacks and really had no strength to speak of. The Soviet Union refused to attack Japan. Australia was weak. The U.S. was forced to fight a two front war. Without major allied help, the United States nearly single handedly defeated the Japanese. Once again, I'm not trying to say that others didn't sacrifice. What I am saying is that the United States won the war. You cannot deny this fact. Just look at the statistics and facts. We were the determining factor. From 1939 to 1941, axis powers in both the Pacific and Europe, had been victorious, without a single defeat (major not minor). The United States entered the war in December 1941. From early 1942 till 1945 and the end of the war, the axis powers were in retreat. Once again, not entirely related to the U.S. (Stalingrad for example), but mostly.

(Just a note, don't try to talk about something that you really don't know too much about, especially when you are talking to someone who knows nearly all about it. Just some advice)

Now that I am done with WW2, let me get to Iraq. Your views on Saddam are correct. He was dangerous, a threat to peace in the MiddleEast. He did murder between 300,000 and 400,000 of his own people. I agree that Kim Jon IL is potentially more dangerous than Saddam. Yet the MiddleEast is more of a hotzone than northeast asia, for North Korea has Russia, China and Japan nearby, none of which will tolerate threats.

Were we justified to go into Iraq. Absolutely. Not only because of the threat of Saddam, his genocide of his own people, etc, but because he had weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). We know that he had chemical weapons, for he used it on his own people and the Iranians. The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) along with the intelligence agencies of several other countries, most notably Great Britain and Russia, concluded that Saddam had WMDs. Has it ever occured to anyone that Saddam made a deal and had his WMDs shipped to Syria? Syria would love to get their hands on them, and Saddam could make the U.S. seem incompetant by sneaking off his WMDs before the U.S. led coalition invasion.

This is not a quaint little world we live in, people break the rules, and secret sneaky stuff happens. Saying the Saddam didn't have WMDs is like saying the Iran isn't involved secretely in Iraq right now. There is no "hard" evidence to bring forth to support it, but all likely hood and surveillence and intelligence points to it.

Just to touch on incidents in the Congo, etc, where the U.S. and really nobody has done anything to stop the slaughter. The United States only gets involved in things if it is in our national best interests. Iraq was in our best interests, as was afghanistan. The Sudan isn't in america's best interests. That is just the way it is.

You mention the fall of the U.S., that we will eventually, even in a few decades, wither away. In a sense you are right. Our society is decaying, no doubt about that. Socialism, secular progressives, gangster rap, etc, all point to a decay in our society. I fear that the United States will collapse from internal implosion, not external intrusion. The United States can never be conquered conventionally, and our military can never be defeated (in a do or die situation of course). You say that there is some speculation on whether China could defeat the United States. Not a chance in hell. China has approximately 500 nuclear weapons. The United States has 10,000. Most of the chinese army is conscript, poorly trained peasantry.

The United States Army is the most highly trained and skilled army in the world. The displaced tonnage of our fleet is approximately 1.9 million tonnes. The displaced tonnage of the rest of the world's fleets combined is 1.4 million tonnes. Of the 25 aircraft carriers in service today, the United States has 12 of them, with 12 in reserve. China has 1, Russian made carrier. The Chinese Airforce has 2643 combat aircraft. The United States Airforce has 7,500 combat aircraft, and a total of 15,000 aircraft. The chinese aircraft are outdated, while U.S. aircraft are the most technologically advanced aircraft in the world.

In short, China's only advantage is its population, which is irrelavant in modern warfare.

Well, that is all for me for now. I hope you will read and learn and admit. I mean no disrespect to other countries or other peoples. I just mean for respect to my country and my people.


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2023 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)