Keep looking the other way ...

I was on a plane with a nimrod phD historian, whose central thesis was that he taught alternative thinking and analysis(not the search for facts). It was a long flight, and we had a vigorous discussion. At the end, he made the statement that I "hated" a certain group of people(not race or religion).

I told him that was an idiotic statement. I am/was worried about my family's children's future, and he was imposing an orwellian future on them.

My definition of hate includes the wish of ill will upon those people who it is pointed at. That is as far from the truth as can be imagined.

So, you categorize the wish to prevent a calamity being poured upon the heads of the younger peoples heads as hate. That says a hell of a lot more about you than me.

It isn't hatred, and it isn't unhealthy.

Our country is being ruined by people who think we ought to strive to be them. When I point out that the Germans, French, and Russians were the prime cause of most of the disasters of the 20th century, and their underylying culture hasn't changed since 1910, the retort is the same sort of "justification" and false comparison that you have proffered.

The behavior of the French and German governments while we were dealing with Iraq was despicable. They have the same level of trustworthiness as a middle eastern government.

The argument that we ought to emulate a culture that was responsible for 50+ million violent deaths in the last century is insane.

I have many relatives in Europe(and I travel a bit), and have had many discussions with continental Europeans. They are fascist to the core. I have not met one that believes that the individual is the root of society.

To repeat, it isn't hatred, and it isn't unhealthy. Originally Posted by kehaar

you'll have to clarify on what culture you're talking about.

I do get that the french & germans were corrupted by the progressive culture that pervaded them since the 1930s.

The Russians are a different animal, for that, you go back a bit further like the 1800's. Their thinking really hasn't changed that much except for their 70 year farce with communism.

Since the end of the Cold War and the threat of Russia (which may be coming back), I wondered why we continued our heavy support of NATO. Is/was it to defend Europe from outside aggression? Or just maybe to stop Europe, and Germany in particular from re-militarizing?

Germany spends 1.16% of its GDP, and 11% of its total expenditures on it's military. The US spends 3.3% GDP, 19% DOD, and 28% -38% total on military. Are we afraid for Germany to to spend more? I don't particularly fear the Russians militarily (besides nuclear), and I don't see them invading West again. So is the fear of a militarily strong Germany the reason for today's NATO? If we pay for defense, Germany won't rebuild theirs? And logically, neither will France, Great Britain, etc.? We're paying to keep the peace in Europe.

And the same with Japan. 1% of GPD, 5% of Budget. Do we want a strong Japanese military?

Perhaps we're spending too much.