We don't eat your bread. We don't want to eat your bread. Ours tastes better, even though we have less of it.
Why do you have less of it and what can be done to insure you have more of it?
Is it fair to blame someone who lives near a resource for having more of it? In the American South West water rights is a huge issue, everywhere else in the country it is not. If I take a ten minute shower should those in the SW blame me for wasting water when my water usage has no direct impact on the amount of water that is available to them?
We don't eat your bread. We don't want to eat your bread. Ours tastes better, even though we have less of it.
Why do you have less of it and what can be done to insure you have more of it?
Is it fair to blame someone who lives near a resource for having more of it?
Where is the "blame" thing coming from - I just made a passing comment! It's nothing to do with who has more and who has less - I'm just saying that we're not eating bread from the US - we grow our own wheat, we manufacture our own bread, and we eat it. As for what can be done to *ensure* I have more, I could move to the States. Overall we are a much smaller country therefore it follows logic that collectively, we have less bread.
A point of contention I have with American media portrayal is specifically that they create a false perception of the third world - when they do filming, they usually film in the deepest, darkest recesses and never in urban, built up areas, which reinforces false perceptions amongst their fellow Americans who actively watch the media.
This in particular is something that concerns me a great deal. There are a few really great TED talks in the feed that talk about and show videos and photos of urban areas and shanty cities in third-world countries. When I saw them, I was amazed that I had never seen images of these things before. We always hear about how overpopulated these countries are, but then when the media shows it it's some remote village out in BFE where there are 5 families and 2 goats living in the middle of nowhere.
As for consuming...you cannot judge based on total consumption, but per capita consumption (and pollution) is a great metric. Americans consume more and emit much more pollution per capita than most other countries in the world. Yes, we are large...unfortunately that tends to refer to our individual citizens as well as our land mass. It leads to people like me being told to go eat a sandwich. (The irony, of course, is that eating a sandwich will screw up my guts and make me lose more weight instead of gain it.) Moderation is often viewed with disdain, as if by limiting yourself you are saying you are too good for that...Or that you think there is something wrong with you that can be fixed by limiting yourself.
Why do you have less of it and what can be done to insure you have more of it?
I think we have a fundamental flaw in America; we seem to operate under the assumption that if you CAN get more, you SHOULD get more. I think the question we should be asking is not "what can be done to insure you have more of it?" Instead, why not ask "do you need more than what you have, why, and how do we make that happen"? Perhaps we would have less of a housing crisis if people had not decided they should buy expensive houses. Some of them were perfectly justified, but some of them were buying way more than they needed. Heck, even the apartment I rent is more space than I absolutely need (I operate a craft business, so I have a second bedroom that serves as a craft room). We rarely take the time to distinguish between what can be bought and what should be bought.
As for blaming those with resources for having them...it may not be fair, but we see this all the time. Most wars have been fought over resources. We may not think that they are bad for having resources, but we certainly seem willing to go take them for ourselves if we feel we need them. Globalization and trade has mitigated this problem a great deal, but I'm really not looking forward to what happens when the world realizes there's not enough water to go around.
While we're on the topic of food, here's an excellent Nature article with some facts about food aid: A smarter way to combat hunger. It certainly demonstrates significant hamfistedness on the part of the USA.
It is definitely true that the American media does not show Americans nearly any pictures of the modern and normal places in the rest of the world, except Europe, Australia, Japan, etc.
When they show China, it's always rice farmers. When they show India, it's always slums. When they show the middle east, it's always turbans in the desert. When they show Russia, it's always old busted soviet buildings. When they show South America, it's always rainforests. When they show Africa it's always bushmen and wild animals. Well, always is a bit of an exaggeration, but it's the vast majority.
I think that if Americans had seen more of what Iraq was really like, a fairly modern secular society, we might not have had such a war. If more Americans had seen Rwanda as a modern happening place, we might have done more to save them from genocide. I've even seen some people on the Internet who thought Hotel Rwanda was a work of fiction or satire because they didn't believe that modern suburban homes and fancy hotels existed there.
Nigerian scams alone should tell you that you are not seeing the complete picture in the media. Nigeria obviously has a lot of Internet connections to be sending so much span. It's not just a jungle full of natives. It has cities and towns just like where you live, just with some cultural differences.
Hey, a solution just came to mind. Why don't we just have mandatory student exchange programs for every high school student everywhere? I think the pros and cons of that idea are all pretty obvious, so I will end this post and not bother listing them.
-Most times when they catch someone having sex with a minor... he's from the US -Every time they discover someone trying to build a condo or a hotel in a protected area, the company is from the US -Every time they try to mine or drill for oil, the company is from the US -Every time they catch someone fishing illegally in our waters, it's the Chinese actually. -Every time forest is destroyed, its a company from the US -Every time forest is replanted or they build an eco-friendly hotel, its the Europeans. -The free trade agreement that was basically forced by the US government that basically ass rapes us isn't helping either.
-Most times when they catch someone having sex with a minor... he's from the US -Every time they discover someone trying to build a condo or a hotel in a protected area, the company is from the US -Every time they try to mine or drill for oil, the company is from the US -Every time they catch someone fishing illegally in our waters, it's the Chinese actually. -Every time forest is destroyed, its a company from the US -Every time forest is replanted or they build an eco-friendly hotel, its the Europeans. -The free trade agreement that was basically forced by the US government that basically ass rapes us isn't helping either.
The list goes on, but you get the picture.
I'm pretty sure this is because other places like China (and the only reason you hear about the illegal fishing is because another country is complaining), do not have a free media that can easily report on these things or do not have a culture that emphasises looking into these issues. America has a lot of problems, but we are open enough that everyone knows them unlike other countries that do their best to hide their issues.
-Most times when they catch someone having sex with a minor... he's from the US -Every time they discover someone trying to build a condo or a hotel in a protected area, the company is from the US -Every time they try to mine or drill for oil, the company is from the US -Every time they catch someone fishing illegally in our waters, it's the Chinese actually. -Every time forest is destroyed, its a company from the US -Every time forest is replanted or they build an eco-friendly hotel, its the Europeans. -The free trade agreement that was basically forced by the US government that basically ass rapes us isn't helping either.
The list goes on, but you get the picture.
I'm pretty sure this is because other places like China (and the only reason you hear about the illegal fishing is because another country is complaining), do not have a free media that can easily report on these things or do not have a culture that emphasises looking into these issues. America has a lot of problems, but we are open enough that everyone knows them unlike other countries that do their best to hide their issues.
I was just answering Nuri's question of how do we see "America" in other countries, in this case, Costa Rica, we have free media that easily reports on this things.
So the list is actually the image that we have of the US most of the time.
It is definitely true that the American media does not show Americans nearly any pictures of the modern and normal places in the rest of the world, except Europe, Australia, Japan, etc.
You should check out Globalpost.com. NPR did a story on it recently, and it's seems like a really awesome news outlet.
So the list is actually the image that we have of the US most of the time.
This is a fairly pretty skewed image because when companies aren't doing shady things, they don't usually need to go outside the country to do it. The companies that want to get around our domestic regulations go outside our jurisdiction, and those are the ones that you see. Again, it goes back to the mentality that you must get as much as you can rather than as much as you need. These companies care foremost about making as much money as they can. Corporations, while treated as an entity unto themselves, are not sentient and do not have morals and ethics. Only the people that make up those entities have morals and ethics, and when they are not being held solely accountable for the actions of the company, it is much easier to let the company do questionable things. Unfortunately, when a company goes multinational we can only regulate the operations that happen inside our borders.
I guess that's part of why we appear so bad...people trying to get away with shady stuff are much more likely to go do it outside US borders. The other part is that our educational system doesn't teach manners at all, and too many parents either were never taught or don't have time to teach manners to their own kids.
Does anyone have a link to information that shows not only consumption but also production? I always hear about how Americans consume a larger share of resources than others but I have never seen it compared to production numbers.
For example Champagne is only made in France. Therefor it is safe to say that France produces 100% of the Champagne in the world. If they produce 100% of that product how much are they allowed to consume before they are considered to be consuming more than their fair share?
It's tough to find any broad info. We mostly use GDP, which isn't a good metric for actual production. You generally have to narrow it down to a specific crop or product genre to get statistics like that. It is a very good point, though...are we using our own resources or dipping into the resources of others when we consume?
I don't think it's about who's getting a "fair share." I think it's more about the fact that we're using resources up faster than necessary. People aren't (all) complaining because they want our stuff...they complain that we waste our stuff. Which we do, because for now it's easier to get more than to save what we have. They complain when our wasteful consumption affects them, such as when we consume gallons of unnecessary gasoline and the pollution drifts to their country.
Champagne is a type of wine for which there are plenty of substitutes. It is also a luxury, not a necessity. If France made all of the wine in the world and wasted a good portion of it, then people might complain. However, I don't think anyone cares about one specific kind of wine. The same holds true for crops like rice. There are many different breeds of rice. No one cares if a country is the sole producer of Blue Stripey Rice and keeps it all to themselves as long as there is enough of other kinds of rice to go around.
I don't think it's about who's getting a "fair share." I think it's more about the fact that we're using resources up faster than necessary. People aren't (all) complaining because they want our stuff...they complain that we waste our stuff. Which we do, because for now it's easier to get more than to save what we have. They complain when our wasteful consumption affects them, such as when we consume gallons of unnecessary gasoline and the pollution drifts to their country.
I know we waste a lot of food in America (check the garbage bins behind any restaurant) but is it fair to lump waste of renewable resources in with non-renewable resources? Should we treat each differently? I don't think anyone would argue that the Earth is making more oil than we remove from the ground but what about food? Is there a limited amount of food that can be "extracted" from the Earth or is food production something that we have effectively mastered enough that we are able to over produce and waste it without hurting our long term needs?
Aside from oil, what other non-renewable "stuff" are Americans guilty of wasting?
Champagne is a type of wine for which there are plenty of substitutes. It is also a luxury, not a necessity.
Point taken. I used it as an example only because it is a well known product that only comes from one country.
Is there a limited amount of food that can be "extracted" from the Earth, or is food production something that we have effectively mastered enough that we are able to over-produce and waste it without hurting our long term needs?
Plants are carbon. They take it from CO2 in the air. As long as the soil gives them a solid base and sufficient nutrients, water, etc. we should be able to grow them indefinitely.
I'd just like to add that many of the countries above America on those charts are either noticeably hot or cold.
There are places in the U.S. that have extreme temperatures, as well.
Where I grew up in the Adirondacks, the coldest day on record hit 48 degrees BELOW zero. That's Fahrenheit, FYI. For those of you in lesser countries, that's -44 Celsius. A typical winter day could get as low as 25 F below (-30 or so C), and those temperatures would persist for a while.
Ok, I'll add another example as to why the general population thinks "Americans" are assholes:
-A friend in college is from the south of the country, Golfito, to be precise, and as the name states, its a small gulf in the Pacific ocean, Navy ships used to dock there when they needed to restock, when they had emergencies and when they were on leave. They went to convenience stores, took a coke, left without paying, when asked to pay they usually said "We are here keeping your seas clean of narcs, you should be thankful", or threatened with violence, at nights they trashed the local bars, looked for fights, etc. when the police tried to arrest them for assault (sometimes even beating up cops), the next morning they got visits from officers demanding them to be released stating that the soldiers answer to the navy and retaining them could post as taking them hostage and could encourage retaliation. It wasn't until a couple of years that the government prohibited the ships from docking, and could only do so in case of an emergency, now they have to send the request to restock and docks send a ship with the provisions.
Yes, it's skewed, but that's pretty much the way people think of the US down here, that is unless you are in the tourism business, it is obvious that you can never generalize an entire population in such a way, even with the navy guys, that was probably 5 or 10 guys in a ship with a 200+ crew. Unfortunately people only remember the bad things.
Americans like their climate control, and a lot of the energy that goes into that is wasted because of inefficient insulation and sealing of buildings. Cheap building has it's consequences, and many of us live in older buildings that haven't been updated. Supposedly that was going to be on the agenda for the stimulus.
I know we waste a lot of food in America (check the garbage bins behind any restaurant) but is it fair to lump waste of renewable resources in with non-renewable resources? Should we treat each differently? I don't think anyone would argue that the Earth is making more oil than we remove from the ground but what about food? Is there a limited amount of food that can be "extracted" from the Earth or is food production something that we have effectively mastered enough that we are able to over produce and waste it without hurting our long term needs?
Theoretically, no. It would not be a problem to use as much as we wanted if we could replicate it infinitely with no consequences.
However, there is no free lunch. Everything has consequences.
1) Food is not an infinitely renewable resource the way we are handling it. Yes, if we composted everything we took out of the ground back into it, it would be renewable. A large amount of the nutrients and elements that come out of the ground are not returned to it because the crops are taken elsewhere, used, and the waste from them is either thrown into landfills or goes into water-treatment as sewage. This stressed the land. It is what lead us to change our farming practices to crop rotation. Rotation helps, but does not replenish everything. It takes decades, even centuries, to build up a rich, healthy soil. There is a reason that most of the forests in the Southeastern US are pine forests...pine is a pioneer species that can grow on depleted soils. Make no mistake; just because it grows out of the ground instead of being dug up does not mean it is going to keep growing at the same rate with the same amount of input.
2) We already have to dump loads of fertilizer to make large-scale agriculture sustainable. We use energy to power the equipment that has to manufacture, transport, and apply that fertilizer.
3) Even if food was infinitely renewable, we would still have to expend energy to farm it, pack it, and ship it, which means the more food we waste the more pollution we cause.
By throwing plant waste into trash bags and sending it to landfills, we are both being wasteful and hurting our long-term needs. Many people are starting to compost because of this very issue, but compost is not necessarily feasible for large crop producers. It is very expensive to replace what is taken from the soil and shipped off to be used elsewhere.
It's a lot easier to remember the bad things than the good things, especially if you personally experience the bad and the good is abstract. That's true of all relationships, national or personal. Perhaps we should look at how troops from other countries with pervasive military bases around the world act in public as well. As soon as we can think of another country.
Any town/city near a military base hates Americans, and with good reason.
Yup. It's not true across the board, but a good number of people who are...er...the kind of people who would sign up for military service are not really great at public relations. They tend to be stupid, boisterous, and belligerent with an inflated sense of superiority.
There are a few people in military service that are absolute gems. I know quite a few. However, those same people are the ones that this opinion comes from. They know the people they trained with and work with better than I do, so I'm willing to take their word for it.
They also tend to break a lot of laws and get out of any punishment for being in the U.S. Military.
I have a friend that was an MP in Iraq. While he knew some decent people, he said that a lot of the military is made up of ignorant hicks who have no respect for any culture - including their own. That is his take on it, but that many not be accurate.
As for the military, often enlisted men are far more brash than their officer counterparts. Officers are college graduates while enlisted men usually are High School/G.E.D level. This is usually where you can draw the line between the two when it comes to social manners. Additionally, when saying that they are ignorant hicks who have no respect for any culture, you have to consider that is how the military wants them. When training men to kill other people, you don't want them to respect other cultures, you don't want them to think for themselves (completely); that's what officers are for. These men are trained to be killers, not diplomats.
As for the military, often enlisted men are far more brash than their officer counterparts. Officers are college graduates while enlisted men usually are High School/G.E.D level. This is usually where you can draw the line between the two when it comes to social manners. Additionally, when saying that they are ignorant hicks who have no respect for any culture, you have to consider that is how the military wants them. When training men to kill other people, you don't want them to respect other cultures, you don't want them to think for themselves (completely); that's what officers are for. These men are trained to be killers, not diplomats.
QFT.
My brother graduated from WSU and went through the ROTC program throughout college. He went into the army as an officer. He is going for Major soon. He has been to Iraq/Kuwait/Afghanistan more times than I can remember and would tell my family some stories about some of the people he had to command. They weren't the brightest people in the world, but my brother had to make sure they followed orders, or it was his ass that got in trouble. That's what you do in the military, follow orders.
Also, most of this recent talk about how our military and how some people receive them as hicks or ignorant people, it somewhat reminds me of when I read DMZ Vol. 4 It kinda gives a perspective on different roles in the military.
I will say that I live in an area that has an Army Base, Air Force Base, and the Naval Base within an hour of eachother. The whole area is diffuse with military and/or people who work with or for the military. Most of the community has high respect for the military and for the people who serve. There have been some recent events at Ft. Lewis in which a 19 y/o soldier was charged with manslaughter for giving a young teenage girl a lethal combo of Xanax and Oxymorphone as he snuck her on base in the middle of the night.
This does not bode well for the people who let her in with just a school ID or the soldier who gave her the drugs, however overall I do not look bad upon the military because I know there are some stupid people like the soldier who is charged with manslaughter and the personnel that allowed her in. People do stupid things. I think badly of those people and try not to think badly of the military. Also in the case, I think badly of the stupid teenage girl and her friend for getting themselves into that situation.
I just want to be clear with one thing, I do not hate US citizens nor your military, I don't think you are stupid, etc. I did hate your past government and the policies they pushed. There are hicks and jerks everywhere in the world, and it would be hypocritical of me to point out yours and not admit that we have them as well, the points I made are based on what I normally hear from people around me, and the fact that most people here deal with Americans through customer service call centers, thus adding to the hick, idiot, stupid stereotype.
Comments
Is it fair to blame someone who lives near a resource for having more of it? In the American South West water rights is a huge issue, everywhere else in the country it is not. If I take a ten minute shower should those in the SW blame me for wasting water when my water usage has no direct impact on the amount of water that is available to them?
A common thread in international discussions about America is American consumption compared to the rest of the world. That Is why I asked.
and because you mentioned "I said America consumes a lot of food relative to other countries" in your earlier post.
As for consuming...you cannot judge based on total consumption, but per capita consumption (and pollution) is a great metric. Americans consume more and emit much more pollution per capita than most other countries in the world. Yes, we are large...unfortunately that tends to refer to our individual citizens as well as our land mass. It leads to people like me being told to go eat a sandwich. (The irony, of course, is that eating a sandwich will screw up my guts and make me lose more weight instead of gain it.) Moderation is often viewed with disdain, as if by limiting yourself you are saying you are too good for that...Or that you think there is something wrong with you that can be fixed by limiting yourself.
List of countries by energy consumption per capita (2003)
List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions per capita (1990-2004)
I couldn't find one for food, but you get the idea. We're not the WORST, but we're pretty high up there. I think we have a fundamental flaw in America; we seem to operate under the assumption that if you CAN get more, you SHOULD get more. I think the question we should be asking is not "what can be done to insure you have more of it?" Instead, why not ask "do you need more than what you have, why, and how do we make that happen"? Perhaps we would have less of a housing crisis if people had not decided they should buy expensive houses. Some of them were perfectly justified, but some of them were buying way more than they needed. Heck, even the apartment I rent is more space than I absolutely need (I operate a craft business, so I have a second bedroom that serves as a craft room). We rarely take the time to distinguish between what can be bought and what should be bought.
As for blaming those with resources for having them...it may not be fair, but we see this all the time. Most wars have been fought over resources. We may not think that they are bad for having resources, but we certainly seem willing to go take them for ourselves if we feel we need them. Globalization and trade has mitigated this problem a great deal, but I'm really not looking forward to what happens when the world realizes there's not enough water to go around.
It certainly demonstrates significant hamfistedness on the part of the USA.
When they show China, it's always rice farmers. When they show India, it's always slums. When they show the middle east, it's always turbans in the desert. When they show Russia, it's always old busted soviet buildings. When they show South America, it's always rainforests. When they show Africa it's always bushmen and wild animals. Well, always is a bit of an exaggeration, but it's the vast majority.
I think that if Americans had seen more of what Iraq was really like, a fairly modern secular society, we might not have had such a war. If more Americans had seen Rwanda as a modern happening place, we might have done more to save them from genocide. I've even seen some people on the Internet who thought Hotel Rwanda was a work of fiction or satire because they didn't believe that modern suburban homes and fancy hotels existed there.
Nigerian scams alone should tell you that you are not seeing the complete picture in the media. Nigeria obviously has a lot of Internet connections to be sending so much span. It's not just a jungle full of natives. It has cities and towns just like where you live, just with some cultural differences.
Hey, a solution just came to mind. Why don't we just have mandatory student exchange programs for every high school student everywhere? I think the pros and cons of that idea are all pretty obvious, so I will end this post and not bother listing them.
-Every time they discover someone trying to build a condo or a hotel in a protected area, the company is from the US
-Every time they try to mine or drill for oil, the company is from the US
-Every time they catch someone fishing illegally in our waters, it's the Chinese actually.
-Every time forest is destroyed, its a company from the US
-Every time forest is replanted or they build an eco-friendly hotel, its the Europeans.
-The free trade agreement that was basically forced by the US government that basically ass rapes us isn't helping either.
The list goes on, but you get the picture.
So the list is actually the image that we have of the US most of the time.
I guess that's part of why we appear so bad...people trying to get away with shady stuff are much more likely to go do it outside US borders. The other part is that our educational system doesn't teach manners at all, and too many parents either were never taught or don't have time to teach manners to their own kids.
For example Champagne is only made in France. Therefor it is safe to say that France produces 100% of the Champagne in the world. If they produce 100% of that product how much are they allowed to consume before they are considered to be consuming more than their fair share?
I don't think it's about who's getting a "fair share." I think it's more about the fact that we're using resources up faster than necessary. People aren't (all) complaining because they want our stuff...they complain that we waste our stuff. Which we do, because for now it's easier to get more than to save what we have. They complain when our wasteful consumption affects them, such as when we consume gallons of unnecessary gasoline and the pollution drifts to their country.
Champagne is a type of wine for which there are plenty of substitutes. It is also a luxury, not a necessity. If France made all of the wine in the world and wasted a good portion of it, then people might complain. However, I don't think anyone cares about one specific kind of wine. The same holds true for crops like rice. There are many different breeds of rice. No one cares if a country is the sole producer of Blue Stripey Rice and keeps it all to themselves as long as there is enough of other kinds of rice to go around.
Aside from oil, what other non-renewable "stuff" are Americans guilty of wasting? Point taken. I used it as an example only because it is a well known product that only comes from one country.
-A friend in college is from the south of the country, Golfito, to be precise, and as the name states, its a small gulf in the Pacific ocean, Navy ships used to dock there when they needed to restock, when they had emergencies and when they were on leave. They went to convenience stores, took a coke, left without paying, when asked to pay they usually said "We are here keeping your seas clean of narcs, you should be thankful", or threatened with violence, at nights they trashed the local bars, looked for fights, etc. when the police tried to arrest them for assault (sometimes even beating up cops), the next morning they got visits from officers demanding them to be released stating that the soldiers answer to the navy and retaining them could post as taking them hostage and could encourage retaliation. It wasn't until a couple of years that the government prohibited the ships from docking, and could only do so in case of an emergency, now they have to send the request to restock and docks send a ship with the provisions.
Yes, it's skewed, but that's pretty much the way people think of the US down here, that is unless you are in the tourism business, it is obvious that you can never generalize an entire population in such a way, even with the navy guys, that was probably 5 or 10 guys in a ship with a 200+ crew. Unfortunately people only remember the bad things.
However, there is no free lunch. Everything has consequences.
1) Food is not an infinitely renewable resource the way we are handling it. Yes, if we composted everything we took out of the ground back into it, it would be renewable. A large amount of the nutrients and elements that come out of the ground are not returned to it because the crops are taken elsewhere, used, and the waste from them is either thrown into landfills or goes into water-treatment as sewage. This stressed the land. It is what lead us to change our farming practices to crop rotation. Rotation helps, but does not replenish everything. It takes decades, even centuries, to build up a rich, healthy soil. There is a reason that most of the forests in the Southeastern US are pine forests...pine is a pioneer species that can grow on depleted soils. Make no mistake; just because it grows out of the ground instead of being dug up does not mean it is going to keep growing at the same rate with the same amount of input.
2) We already have to dump loads of fertilizer to make large-scale agriculture sustainable. We use energy to power the equipment that has to manufacture, transport, and apply that fertilizer.
3) Even if food was infinitely renewable, we would still have to expend energy to farm it, pack it, and ship it, which means the more food we waste the more pollution we cause.
By throwing plant waste into trash bags and sending it to landfills, we are both being wasteful and hurting our long-term needs. Many people are starting to compost because of this very issue, but compost is not necessarily feasible for large crop producers. It is very expensive to replace what is taken from the soil and shipped off to be used elsewhere.
There are a few people in military service that are absolute gems. I know quite a few. However, those same people are the ones that this opinion comes from. They know the people they trained with and work with better than I do, so I'm willing to take their word for it.
I have a friend that was an MP in Iraq. While he knew some decent people, he said that a lot of the military is made up of ignorant hicks who have no respect for any culture - including their own. That is his take on it, but that many not be accurate.
As for the military, often enlisted men are far more brash than their officer counterparts. Officers are college graduates while enlisted men usually are High School/G.E.D level. This is usually where you can draw the line between the two when it comes to social manners. Additionally, when saying that they are ignorant hicks who have no respect for any culture, you have to consider that is how the military wants them. When training men to kill other people, you don't want them to respect other cultures, you don't want them to think for themselves (completely); that's what officers are for. These men are trained to be killers, not diplomats.
My brother graduated from WSU and went through the ROTC program throughout college. He went into the army as an officer. He is going for Major soon. He has been to Iraq/Kuwait/Afghanistan more times than I can remember and would tell my family some stories about some of the people he had to command. They weren't the brightest people in the world, but my brother had to make sure they followed orders, or it was his ass that got in trouble. That's what you do in the military, follow orders.
Also, most of this recent talk about how our military and how some people receive them as hicks or ignorant people, it somewhat reminds me of when I read DMZ Vol. 4 It kinda gives a perspective on different roles in the military.
I will say that I live in an area that has an Army Base, Air Force Base, and the Naval Base within an hour of eachother. The whole area is diffuse with military and/or people who work with or for the military. Most of the community has high respect for the military and for the people who serve. There have been some recent events at Ft. Lewis in which a 19 y/o soldier was charged with manslaughter for giving a young teenage girl a lethal combo of Xanax and Oxymorphone as he snuck her on base in the middle of the night.
This does not bode well for the people who let her in with just a school ID or the soldier who gave her the drugs, however overall I do not look bad upon the military because I know there are some stupid people like the soldier who is charged with manslaughter and the personnel that allowed her in. People do stupid things. I think badly of those people and try not to think badly of the military. Also in the case, I think badly of the stupid teenage girl and her friend for getting themselves into that situation.