I have followed some of the argumentation on the list in the We're-better-than-you-discussion. I decided to get some real numbers and sources into the conversation instead of some of the mumbo-jumbo, I've seen earlier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Crime Rates: The statement that US-crime rates are lower than those in Europe isn't quite true. Apparently there are more burglaries and auto thefts in, say, England than in the US. However the murder rates of the US is six times that of other industrialized nations (Source: http://members.aol.com/gunbancon/Frames/WSJ.html ). Although other crimes such as rapes, assaults, robberies, etc. are comparable to those of Europe (in fact in many cases lower), this might have something to do with the low percentage of the crimes in America which is actually brought to the attention of the police: "... The real crime victimization rates in the US may be much different. Certainly, the rate at which crimes are reported to law enforcement is much lower than that shown in the ICVS. The US Justice Department conducts its own annual Crime Victimization Survey (for which "In 2001, 43,680 households and 79,950 people age 12 or older were interviewed. For the 2000 NCVS data presented here, the response rate was 93.0% of eligible households and 89.3% of eligible individuals." Criminal Victimization 2001, p. 13) According to it: "Forty-nine percent of all violent victimizations and 37% of all property crimes were reported to the police during 2001. Of the violent crimes in 2001, 39% of rape/sexual assault, 61% of robbery, 59% of aggravated assault and 45% of simple assault were brought to the attention of the police. Motor vehicle theft continued to be the property crime reported to the police at the highest percentage (82%). Fifty-four percent of burglaries and 30% of theft were reported to the police, 2001." Source: Rennison, Callie, PhD, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Criminal Victimization 2001: Changes 2000-01 with Trends 1993-2001" (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, Sept. 2002), p. 10. ... " (Source : http://www.drugwardistortions.org/distortion13.htm ). In short: Many crimes are not recorded by the police, and this may have a significant influence on crime rates. About the issue about packing citizens, there is no conclusive evidence for or against. The recent years' drops in crime rates in the US may very well be a result of more arrests, more prosecutions, more convictions and more years spent in prison by criminals. A pattern I would very much like my own country to follow. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Talking about crime. ICC-issue: Toxins in Vietnam: At this time I've not yet set about digging into this issue in detail, however I don't believe that ignorance is an excuse to be a criminal. The sort irresponsible decision-making which brought Agent Orange and similar substances into use in Vietnam might arise from the same mentality which makes American commanders decide to test nuclear and chemical weapons on its own soldiers. As for who is guilty, I don't know any names, but somewhere out there somebody made that decision. That someone ought to face the ICC in my opinion. I'm sure the jury will cut him some slack for not knowing that the herbicides were dangerous. In the best Colombo-style I do, however have one last consideration: This website ( http://www.lewispublishing.com/orange.htm ) states that herbicides were brought into use in the early 60's and topped 67-68 to finally be discontinued in 1971. At the same time the US-government states that some diseases (Chlorache for example) should be diagnosed no later than one month after exposure. Weird. So: While the US-government might not know of the risks of putting the herbicides into use. On the other hand, it obviously didn't care to do follow-up research on possible side-effects (or it *did* but chose to ignore the results). My Lai: As stated in an earlier mail, a prime example that even US soldiers occasionally get out of control is the My Lai incedent in which a US-force massacred 504 citizens of a Vietnamese village. Apparently this operation was part of an even greater scheme, namely CIA's Phoenix Program. (Source: http://free.freespeech.org/americanstateterrorism/vietnamgenocide/Mylai.html ). As a note to that blessed law-system you have, I should like to point out that the captain of charlie company and his second-in-command were aquitted of all charges (The captain of killing more than one hundred civilians). Great system. The man later admitted to have withheld evidence and neglected to inform about key witnesses. Use of illegal weaponry: Also during the Vietnam conflict as well as various other conflicts, the US has made use of napalm as an anti-personnel weapon. This was at that time (I don't know about today) expressly forbidden by international law, ratified by the US. The USAF claimed that the napalm was used as "tactical illumination" and only hit enemy personnel unintentionally (the last conclusion is my own - the first part can be verified in SIPRI's "Anti-Personnel Weapons", 1976 edition). Although not as such a crime, many countries have had concerns about the US employing the M-193 5.56mm munition as the projectile has a tendency to completely break apart upon entering the body and thereby causing large explosion-like wounds (like the expressly forbidden "dum-dum" explosive munitions types). Again SIPRI "Anti-Personnel Weapons", 1976 edition. There is also the issue of Depleted Uranium munitions. I find it odd, that the US (and its allies) can engage in a war to prevent a country of having nuclear weapons, when the US ifself has chosen to use nuclear material in its war effort. Although DU-munitions may not be classified as nuclear weapons, the projectiles are in fact radioactive and as such very toxic. So, if they don't fall under the category "nuclear weapons" they most certainly fall under the category of "chemical weapons". Finally on the weapons-issue: During the first world war several complaints were filed by the Germans that US-troops made use of shotguns as personal weapons which was also, at that time forbidden (as it caused unnecessarily ferocious wounds and pain). The source for this statement is also SIPRI's "Anti-Personnel Weapons", 1976 edition. War crimes, the bigger picture: During the second world war (again I refer to an earlier mail) the US-government chose to forcibly round up its own citizens of Japanese background and isolating them in special camps. Lately the pattern has been repeated at the prison camp at Guantanamo where Afghan (and other) POWs are being held captive. Many have not been trialed and noone knows when they will be sent home. It is expressly forbidden by international law to keep POWs captive after the end of a war. These are two examples of the US using what resembles concentration camps to achieve their goals. Highly despicable to some. --------------------------------------------------------- The pollution-issue: Some numbers on energy usage: - OIL - 1999 USA- oil consumption in quadrillion BTU - 37.706 (share of world total usage = 25.5%) - NATURAL GAS - 1999 USA - natural gas consumption in quadrillion Btu - 22.096 (share of world total usage = 26.9%) - COAL - 1999 USA - coal consumption in quadrillion Btu - 21.698 (share of world total usage = 25.5%) - NUCLEAR ENERGY - 1999 USA - 197.7 million tonnes oil equivalent (30.4% of world total usage) - HYDROELECTRIC - 1999 USA - 25.8 million tonnes oil equivalent (11.4% of world total usage) Note that in every single category (except hydroelectric), the US stands for at least a quarter of the consumption, despite only inhabited by something like 1/12th of the World's population. Who said that the US don't use more energy (or pollutes more)? Source: http://www.nef1.org/ea/eastats.html Note: *the* final conclusive evidence of the malignant effects of pollution may be an irreversibly ruined Earth. Makes one think. Just how conclusive must the evidence be? By the way: The US is supposed to have a good environment. Can all Americans drink water straight from the tap? In Denmark we can. And it doesn't even taste like chlorine. ---------------------------------------------------------- The fledgling-federation-issue: I noticed that you called the EU a fledgling federation. And that despite all odds, the Americans built the most technologically advanced, multiculturally successful (as the South Central riot of '96 (or was it ?95?) clearly demonstrated to the rest of the world) and free nation ever. Congratulations on a job well done. But talking about fledgling, I live in the oldest remaining nation in the world. We have experienced almost 1100 years of monarchy. In fact your first president is removed further from our first king in time than Cleopatra of Egypt. So who's the fledgling? We build on peaceful coexistence. I recommend it. During that time many great nations have risen and fallen as is so often the case with aggressors. I support the US for what it has done in the past and for providing stability to the world, but I also think the US should beware not to build their greatness on conquest and aggression. This has invariably proved to the cause of downfall. First it was Germany, then the Soviet Union, now it's the Middle East - who know who's next in line? -------------------------------------------------------------------- I may be helpful with further documentation than what has already been included, should you feel the need for more proof, regarding the above statements. Med Venlig Hilsen / Sincerely Martin Malmkvist [Sponsored by:] _____________________________________________________________________________ The newest lyrics on the Net! http://lyrics.astraweb.com Click NOW!
