See, you're not getting my ORIGINAL point.

I have been asking since my OP......WHY and HOW COME that some American fellow members are so sensitive when someone is bashing upon....blablabla...read what I wrote before.

I am NOT denying it!!!! WHERE?

I was ASKING...am I now clear or what ?

How on earth can I ask WHY Americans are so sensitive if there is NO bashing ? Can't you read what I write or is my English that bad ?

I went back and reviewed all of your recent posts on this subject. Either you are not being honest, or your English IS that bad.

You have maintained that Americans are not being bashed on Thai Visa, but are overly sensitive and just take it that way.

I am obviously not the only poster to take what you are saying this way.

It's not so much the point of attacking, it's the point that so many (presumably) Americans react so itchy when it comes to their homeland.

America is the only country on this forum that if someone says something it's immediately considered as flaming/bashing upon the strongest nation on earth, the USA.

See, you're not getting my ORIGINAL point.

I have been asking since my OP......WHY and HOW COME that some American fellow members are so sensitive when someone is bashing upon....blablabla...read what I wrote before.

I am NOT denying it!!!! WHERE?

I was ASKING...am I now clear or what ?

How on earth can I ask WHY Americans are so sensitive if there is NO bashing ? Can't you read what I write or is my English that bad ?

I went back and reviewed all of your recent posts on this subject. Either you are not being honest, or your English IS that bad.

You have maintained that Americans are not being bashed on Thai Visa, but are overly sensitive and just take it that way.

I am obviously not the only poster to take what you are saying this way.

It's not so much the point of attacking, it's the point that so many (presumably) Americans react so itchy when it comes to their homeland.

America is the only country on this forum that if someone says something it's immediately considered as flaming/bashing upon the strongest nation on earth, the USA.

Maybe it's better if someone else answers.

You seem to doubt my integrity and honesty and maybe you've never read my signature, below.

If you do so, you really hurt me, so I refrain from answering since I consider my self to be VERY honest and sincere.

LaoPo

Anyway about country bashing. Lao Po bashes America in almost every thread he participates in. The when someone calls him on it , he does the Wha??. me??. Pussy.

Would it be better if lannabirth answers?

I had to actually laugh when I read your responses to the above abbreviated posts. THaibebop posts with a greeting and agreeing with you, and he is making an "thoughtful and intelligent" post. You even thank him for his personal message to you.

I make a post which disagrees with your basic premise and even if there really is a problem, and I guess that makes my post not as thoughtful and intelligent. And the fact that I feel you are lumping Americans together as being overly sensitive makes it sad that I am bringing you, personally into the discussion?

Seems a little ironic that you are posting about Americans being overly sensitive to criticism by calling that criticism USA bashing, but you react to a criticism in the same you way accuse Americans of reacting.

Hear, hear!

I do not think Bonobo's reply is fair or accurate. That is my opinion and the opinion of many others. You seem to think it is accurate but do not give any evidence and your "hear hear" comment hardly advances what was meant to be a sensible debate.

caf

Anyway about country bashing. Lao Po bashes America in almost every thread he participates in. The when someone calls him on it , he does the Wha??. me??. Pussy.

Would it be better if lannabirth answers?

I wonder why you picked a person that seems to have a vendetta against a certain member.

A fairer suggestion would be for an independent moderator to step in, review all these posts,and give warnings about these personal attacks where appropriate.

I would like to see this thread get back on track. It's fine for people to diagree. Let's all start debating the issue not the messenger. Personal and unsubstantiated attacks belong elsewhere.

caf

caf

I do not think Bonobo's reply is fair or accurate.

That is only your opinion and many of us would disagree.

I think that bonobo's post is so concise and eminently sensible that it does not need any further comment. I consider it a masterpiece of debate!

koheesti, post #20

Agreed, excellent post!

I disagree with both of you. But I am not getting into a slugging match

caf

I wonder why you picked a person that seems to have a vendetta against a certain member.

I don't think that lannabirth has a "vendetta" against anyone. In fact, I have never seem him attack anyone unfairly anywhere - even though he and I sometimes have differing opinions.

I think that - unlike many posters - he is being completely honest and that is why I am quoting what he has to say. He just makes the obvious perfectly clear.

I'm not an expert on WW2, but I don't think that most Americans think that we did all the fighting, but rather, that you would have lost without us. This means that we probably DID save your ass, even if you don't like it.

It was a team effort. And in a team you do not knock your fellow team members even if they are weaker than you or have not contributed as much as you have. ( By "we" and "you" I mean of course "one" but I am not using stilited language. )

Both the Americans and Russians made contributions. Without America WW2 may have dragged on longer but Germany had already lost the war before Hiroshima. I'm happy to debate more fully but this is really another topic. A good read is Allenbrooke's Diaries. Less biased than other memoirs and written from a Joint COS perspective.

caf

A fairer suggestion would be for an independent moderator to step in, review all these posts,and give warnings about these personal attacks where appropriate.

As far as I'm concerned, it all started when Naam refered to one of Thai Visa's most sensible, erudite posters - venturalaw - as a "simpleton" and it just went on from there. However, this is a branch of Bedlam and is supposedly only lightly moderated.

I'm not an expert on WW2, but I don't think that most Americans think that we did all the fighting, but rather, that you would have lost without us. This means that we probably DID save your ass, even if you don't like it.

It was a team effort. And in a team you do not knock your fellow team members even if they are weaker than you or have not contributed as much as you have. ( By "we" and "you" I mean of course "one" but I am not using stilited language. )

Yes, I agree. In fact, I said the same thing myself.

I have mostly heard it as a retort to someone bashing the USA, but as I strongly agree it was a team effort, I never use that one myself.

I wonder why you picked a person that seems to have a vendetta against a certain member.

I don't think that lannabirth has a "vendetta" against anyone. In fact, I have never seem him attack anyone unfairly anywhere - even though he and I sometimes have differing opinions.

I think that - unlike many posters - he is being completely honest and that is why I am quoting what he has to say. He just makes the obvious perfectly clear.

You have your view. I and other members have ours. "obvious" is not accurate as he has provided no evidence.

You quote only part of my post. Would you agree an independent review would be a better choice than your nomination.

I just want this thread back on track and not derailed.

caf

Obvious, means self-evident, so no need for any more evidence.

No I don't agree that there is any need for a review and I quoted the part of your post that I answered. That is how it is done.

I'm not an expert on WW2, but I don't think that most Americans think that we did all the fighting, but rather, that you would have lost without us. This means that we probably DID save your ass, even if you don't like it.

It was a team effort. And in a team you do not knock your fellow team members even if they are weaker than you or have not contributed as much as you have. ( By "we" and "you" I mean of course "one" but I am not using stilited language. )

Yes, I agree. In fact, I said the same thing myself.

I have mostly heard it as a retort to someone bashing the USA, but as I strongly agree it was a team effort, I never use that one myself.

Our posts are crossing so I wanted to send a pm but then realised you had of course blocked me.

"hi ulysses

some of our posts are crossing. i think because i am replying to a post when you have made a comment further along the thread.

and yes i see now your point about ww2. glad you see it as a team effort. do you have copies of allenbrooke, members may be interested in purchasing a copy to foolow this up."

caf

cheers caf

There's a sad shortage of right wing Australians here. I think soundman used to skirt around the fringes but he seems to avoid political threads which proves he's not as silly as some of his fellows.

Do we have any American lefties here? The Yanks don't really do left stuff well. Apart from Woody Guthrie I can't think of any worth consideration.

If annoys me when I hear the wishy washy US liberals referred to as "left". You should have met my grandfather, he'd show you what left wing meant.

And that's the problem with the American "Left". It isn't really left at all. If anything it's a bit right of center these days. I'd be a leftist if they didn't pussy foot around about it.

Anyway about country bashing. Lao Po bashes America in almost every thread he participates in. The when someone calls him on it , he does the Wha??. me??. Pussy. Not that America doesn't deserve bashing sometimes.

Sir, I've always respected you for what you wrote and didn't think you were the kind of man to bash upon another member; I'm surprised.

I kindly invite you to give me ONE link where I bash America, even the slightest hint. You just said I bash upon America in almost every thread so it shouldn't be too difficult.

If you do, I will sincerely apologize but don't you call me -well founded- an America basher because I'm not; but again: I'm waiting Sir.

Apart from that: if I'm such an America basher...why did I post praising topics about great Americans in the past?

Please read here: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Historical-A...71#entry3253871

Did you ever do the same (here on TV) about a great Frenchman, Australian or Scotsman, Italian (many great men!) or from any other country?

LaoPo

I'll not be searching your threads and posting links as it is just not that important to me. You have not harmed me or anyone I care about. I don't care that you do what you do, but I was just pointing out it seemed incongruous that you should do it so blatantly and prolificly and then make such an effort to deny it. I just can't understand why anyone would.

I had to actually laugh when I read your responses to the above abbreviated posts.  THaibebop posts with a greeting and agreeing with you, and he is making an "thoughtful and intelligent" post.  You even thank him for his personal message to you.

I make a post which disagrees with your basic premise and even if there really is a problem, and I guess that makes my post not as thoughtful and intelligent.  And the fact that I feel you are lumping Americans together as being overly sensitive makes it sad that I am bringing you, personally into the discussion?

Seems a little ironic that you are posting about Americans being overly sensitive to criticism by calling that criticism USA bashing, but you react to a criticism in the same you way accuse Americans of reacting.

First of all: may I assume that you post as a member in this thread, and not a Moderator?.... because I would feel a little tense if the latter would be the case.

If you say the latter than I will step out; I don't wish to put myself in danger.

Secondly, of course you're entitled to laugh about my posts. No problem; but you take it personal. And, yes, I thanked Thaibebop for his thoughtful and intelligent post and there's nothing wrong with since it was the FIRST answer. Do you object to his answer?

Oh...he didn't send me a personal message if you mean a PM. He did not.

Third, if you and I do not agree does that mean that I think you are NOT as thoughtful and intelligent ? Who says so? Not me Bonobo; you did. I think you ARE thoughtful and intelligent; never doubted so but that doesn't mean that this thread has to turn around in a debate about and against LaoPo for heaven's sake!

I'm sorry but you now make the same mistake as a few others: you attack me personally me instead debating my opinion and questions, since the topic STARTED with a question.

I'm sorry but I ASKED why some Americans - here on TV- sometimes act so overly sensitive when it comes to America.

Instead of receiving answers I get attacked; is that fair and really necessary ?

Is it so difficult for some to debate, rather than to attack?

LaoPo

And, aside, can you point me at ANY of MY posts where I attack another fellow member ?

Have I called you a pejorative?  Have I really "attacked" you?  I don't see any attacks myself. You asked the same question in the second quote above, and I don't see how that is any different from what you are accusing me of doing.

I pointed out the irony of you accusing others of being overly sensitive and taking things too personal, then taking criticism leveled at your posts as a personal attack (which you did here again.)

For the record, I have nothing against you as a person, and I have not read any posts made by you, to my recollection, which I would consider bashing the USA.  I have read quite a few critical posts by you, but no bashing.  I do think, however, that you might be coming across as overly sensitive to any responses which are not in agreement with your posts, and I really think your arguments in this and the other related threads are pretty silly.  For example, in the US at least, we make fun of people who use the "What do you mean I am prejudice against (fill in the demographic)?  Some of my best friends are (fill in the same demographic)."

Now don't get on your high horse about that last sentence.  I am not saying you are prejudice against Americans.  And I have already posted that I have not read from you anything I would consider US bashing.  But to argue that you couldn't possibly have bashed the US because you wrote good things about Armstrong and Fossett elicits a pretty strong and humorous reaction.

And as far as your first point, if I was moderating this, you would not see me giving my opinions here.  I would be simply taking action.  But as I am posting here, I think that should be pretty obvious that I am posting simply as a ThaiVisa member.  Any other implication is uncalled for.

I've had my run-ins with Lao Po, but in this case I agree with Thaibebop. I think it is harder to see other sides and other interpretations of written words once your hackles are raised, or once you have made your initial interpretation.

Step back and read his words again with an open mind.

I didn't read the original thread or click the link. I don't need to. I've read 100's of bashing posts from Lao Po. That's cool and fair enough though he makes himself look petty rather than thoughtful. hel_l, I don't like the British, but I'm not gonna take a poke at one and then pretend I didn't.

I answered your earlier post already and repeat my invitation:

Just sent me ONE link/post where I bash America; you don't need to send hundreds of posts where I bash upon America, just ONE.

If you don't come up with it we'll know you are attacking me personally, not debating in all fairness.

And, again, I don't understand since I had you high, respecting you. But I'm puzzled as why you attack me.

Let's debate, not attack.

LaoPo

Yes, I'm not debating whatever the issue of this thread is. I was making an observation about you as a poster. You can call it an attack if you like, but I don't see it that way at all. To me it is just self evident.

Our posts are crossing so I wanted to send a pm but then realised you had of course blocked me.

I have blocked you from sending PMs because I felt that you were not being honest in the same way that Lao Po is not being honest about what he has said in this topic.

I am used to posters stretching the truth in the forum - and all the people on the same side supporting them - but I see no reason to trade PMs with someone I am certain is blatantly lying about something that we have already discussed on-line. I just don't see the point.

I had to actually laugh when I read your responses to the above abbreviated posts. THaibebop posts with a greeting and agreeing with you, and he is making an "thoughtful and intelligent" post. You even thank him for his personal message to you.

I make a post which disagrees with your basic premise and even if there really is a problem, and I guess that makes my post not as thoughtful and intelligent. And the fact that I feel you are lumping Americans together as being overly sensitive makes it sad that I am bringing you, personally into the discussion?

Seems a little ironic that you are posting about Americans being overly sensitive to criticism by calling that criticism USA bashing, but you react to a criticism in the same you way accuse Americans of reacting.

Hear, hear!

I do not think Bonobo's reply is fair or accurate. That is my opinion and the opinion of many others. You seem to think it is accurate but do not give any evidence and your "hear hear" comment hardly advances what was meant to be a sensible debate.

caf

That is the pot calling the kettle black.

You lambast Ulysses G. for not giving a reason that he agrees with my post, yet you simply say the post is not fair or accurate but give no reasons.

No one here has to give a reason for liking or disliking a specific post, of course, but it seems ironic that you point fingers, but then do the same thing.

I missed the earlier "we saved your ass in WWII" post, of course it was to be expected though.

My patriotism extends to watching Football and Rugby. Sure Britain has done so much good (and bad) for the world but about the only contribution I made to that personally is through the taxes that I have paid and my tiny contribution to the economy through the work that I did when employed.

Of course I am grateful that I am British because being a Brit means that I had access to a modern infrastructure and one of the best educations available, asides from that though the only reason that I am British is the fact that I was born there. Being British, American, Australian or whatever is a title that is inherited and not earned through merit.

I will defend the Monarchy but that is more through wanting to defend a rich history that can be shared by the world rather really caring about the individuals concerned and I reserve that sentiment for all historical institutions across the world.

I think that what I am getting at as that I am not particularly bothered about what people might say about my country and for the most part much of it is good natured banter.

There are some things however that get under my skin and the "we saved you in WWII" argument is one of them. Allow me to illustrate:

Allied casualties:

Great Britain + Commonwealth 452,000

France 250,000

USA 295,000

USSR 13,600,000

Belgium 10,000

Holland 10,000

Norway 10,000

Poland 120,000

Greece 20,000

Yugoslavia 300,000

Czechoslovakia 20,000

China (from 1937 on) 3,500,000

Total 18,587,000

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/milit...f_world_war.htm

Obviously, the above table shows the approximate number of casualties of the Allied forces in WWII. The U.S. casualties amounted to less than 2% of casualties on the allied side. 2%, yet the standard response of "we saved your ass" seems to suggest that America saved the world almost singlehandedly.

Of course. America did save the world from the Nazi's, along with the Brit's, the French, the Russians, the Belgians, the Dutch, the Polish, the Greeks, the Yugoslav's, the Czech, the Chinese and any other nation that is not included in that list. It was a team effort and so to phrase America's involvement as though they were the sole saviours of the world is something that I find incredibly offensive.

I wonder what the Russians might have to say in response to such a claim? Over 70% of all Allied force's casualties were Russian. What if it was not for that extraordinary sacrifice from them fighting the Nazi's for so long and at such cost, whilst forcing the Nazi's to commit so many of their resources to the Eastern front. Of course it is only hypothetical but had Hitler been able to allocate those forces elsewhere then the Nazi war machine may have been simply unstoppable yet still the American's still want to stake a claim to the victory as though the world owes it's entire existence to them and them only.

I have omitted the axis casualties, although that is not to say that their losses should be forgotten either.

If American's want to stop being 'bashed', then they should stop making themselves targets with such ignorant and disrespectful claims.

Higher casualties are just a sign you are getting your ass kicked more. To quote General Patton,

"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his."

Now, I understand that this may not be racist in Australia and it would be understandable if in Australian company did this ad with Aussies for Aussies. However, this was an American company who was well aware of the negative view that Americans would have of the ad. So, it's a really shame on KFC, by American society. The Australians are not really apart of the agruement I think. Why would KFC take such a negative aspect of our culture and use it to sell their product in another? That is just wrong.

Okay, back on topic, sorry!

thaibebop,

As KFC is a fairly large multi-national company, I can imagine that it MAY BE possible that the Australian management of KFC came up with this ad perhaps without the knowledge of the American heavyweights (pardon the pun)

Of course! That is most likely what happened, but someone on the American side said Americans can't know about this. Let me make clear that I am not really poking at any group here. Yes, to American standards the ad was horribly racist, also it was never intended for American comsumers, and this is an important point for me. I hold that it is perfectly okay for something not to be accpected by one nation to be accpected by the another. If someone from one nation has a problem with what people do in another, well they shouldn't live there, this is of course simplified point.

I only brought this up because I think that TYT made it clear that they were attacking the ad and perhaps KFC yet many Aussies took it as TYT calling the Australian nation as racist, thus making direct attacks on all things Oz. Many Asutralian naitonals have bee responding with hate mail to TYT over this and the comments are very harsh on the video itself. I figured this might be an example of what LaoPo was talking about.

I personally would love someone handing me a bucket of chicken.

In this day and age, you have to be a complete moron to think that you can make a controversial/offensive TV commercial in one country and believe it will never be seen anywhere else.

A few years back, an advertising agency in Poland ran a print advert for Ford that depicted Ford employees. The agency replaced all the black faces in the photo with white ones. Whoops.

To get a little more to the OP, I have observed that some groups do get more than their fair share of bashing:  the US, Israel, the UK, Thailand,  China, women, and gays.

Of these, China-bashing gets pretty much ignored by most members.  US-bashing gets immediate reaction from whom I think are American members.  Israel/Thailand/women/gay-bashing gets immediate attention, but by a wide range of people, not just from members within those demographics.  And UK-bashing elicits very little response except for tongue-in-cheek agreement, usually by other Brits.  The Brits seem to treat it more as a joke than people from other groups getting bashed.

And the response to people objecting to the bashing is different as well.  Posts defending the US, Thailand, Israel, or women quite often become the targets of attacks themselves, although that comes with a caveat.  If the person taking issue with women-bashing is male, that seems to be better accepted than if that person is female.  A female who objects to a woman-bashing is often derided as being overly-sensitive or just plain wrong.

Being as this is a closed forum would it be in order to enquire why the bashing of some of these mentioned brings almost immediate intervention by moderators while some others are virtually ignored?

A fairer suggestion would be for an independent moderator to step in, review all these posts,and give warnings about these personal attacks where appropriate.

As far as I'm concerned, it all started when Naam refered to one of Thai Visa's most sensible, erudite posters - venturalaw - as a "simpleton" and it just went on from there. However, this is a branch of Bedlam and is supposedly only lightly moderated.

I did not see that. I was referring to those posters who seem to be having a go at some members, one in particular. That was my point of a review. You suggested Lanna . I suggested someone independent.

Agreed, venturalaw is a sensible poster of whom I usually take note. And he is no simpleton.

Like everyone; you, me, venturalaw - we all sometimes chose our words a little not too carefully sometimes. But this is only a forum and we all type and post. I do not draft a reply, consider it, redraft, sleep on it , redarft, post. And neither do most other people. But knee-jerk reactions to one poster is something I would have thought you would agree is not acceptable.

As I keep saying, let us debate the topic not the messenger. The op had a valid point, I assume he posted it in Bedlam to allow a fuller debate. Bonobo correctly said there was American bashing. And more pertinently said there was also uk bashing, Israeli bashing etc etc ... Bonobo also defined the differences between bashing and critical debate.

Lannabybirth is not searching the threads for an example of a certain poster s bashing because, like me, he can not find any. An apology would have been appropriate or at least just moving on and let those who want to debate debate.

Personally I think we should move on. Many here do not seem to want to.

------

My personal view is that there is little American bashing here though much criticism. The criticism is sometimes justified partly because of the American character of loudness, forcefulness...

These are strengths from a pioneering background which can be applauded. They can sometimes be weaknesses in the wrong hands. One American poster has already mentioned this.

The mods can deal with the bashing, baiting, and personal remarks.

Let us debate the issue. And I stress again I m only contributing my persoanl view of what may be a reason for this.

I genuinely would be interested in hearing other people s views. I am not interested in off topic posts.

caf

That's exactly my point of debating Bashing Upon Countries as the topic title is called, and we shouldn't merely talk America here, although the Americans, who feel attacked all the time, are indeed the cause of this topic.

My question was originally: why is that ?

***RANT ALERT!! RANT ALERT!!!***RANT ALERT!! RANT ALERT!!!***

You start a thread about bashing other countries and all people talk about is America. My question is: WHY IS THAT?

On just about any issue there are other countries deserving of bashing.

Why is that ? Because the topic just started; your post is on page 1 and post #20; more to come and I answered your question already, a few posts up.

And, you missed the point: this topic is NOT exclusively about America, of course it's not but my initial question was indeed about America and immediately used by some to attack me personally instead giving answers about the vulnerability of some of the American fellow members.

And, aside, can you point me at ANY of MY posts where I attack another fellow member ?

One can say what they want about me but I always try (do not always succeed; I agree) to stay polite.

You know Koheesti, what I think is amazing, and I mean that positive ?

That this topic seems to be overly fed by Americans whilst North American members, according to an Internet survey ordered by Thaivisa, are a 25,2% minority on that Thaivisa survey: 1001 North Americans versus 53,9% from Europe or 2,145 votes ; funny

But, that 25,2% is in fact amazing overwhelming, considering that American tourists on a yearly -2008- basis count for 5,63% of all inbound Thai tourism + Canada with 1,44% = total 7,07% and also taken into consideration that the Americas are much further away the Europe or Australia. But the latter has a smaller population

Question 3:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/sr.aspx?sm=zdy...KqE1qiDONL1A_3d

LaoPo

I don't think I was one of those singling you out for anything you wrote in the past. My post #20 was just trying to explain WHY America is talked about (bashed) more than other countries.

Lannabybirth is not searching the threads for an example of a certain poster s bashing because, like me, he can not find any. An apology would have been appropriate or at least just moving on and let those who want to debate debate.

I suggested lannabirth as a joke because he had made his feelings so clear, but I do not think that he is avoiding looking for posts for any other reason than he said.

People often insist that I produce certain posts and I don't feel like searching for them because I know - and I think that they know - they are there. If I let them badger me into finding absolute proof they are wrong, they will usually make up some jive and pretend that they are correct anyway.

I can see why lannabirth does not want to bother.

Being as this is a closed forum would it be in order to enquire why the bashing of some of these mentioned brings almost immediate intervention by moderators while some others are virtually ignored?

I was going to ask the same thing. In another thread here I was in a pissing match with someone

and the other poster had part of his post edited by a mod (hint: it was in reply to my "don't ask, don't tell" comment). I saw what the bit was before it was removed and was surprised that of all the shit we were saying about each other that little thing was what got deleted.

Higher casualties are just a sign you are getting your ass kicked more. To quote General Patton,

"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his."

And so going by that marvelous piece of partizan and ignorant logic, you got your asses kicked more than the French, the Belgiums, the Dutch, the Polish, the Greeks and the Czechs. Genius. Your fellow countrymen have accepted the point gracefully yet you still try to twist it in your favour.

Besides, you must have missed thaibebop's post #49. It is not about 'we' or 'us' or 'you', it is about 'them' and as such none of us have the right to take any credit for their lives.

Higher casualties are just a sign you are getting your ass kicked more. To quote General Patton,

"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his."

And so going by that marvelous piece of partizan and ignorant logic, you got your asses kicked more than the French, the Belgiums, the Dutch, the Polish, the Greeks and the Czechs. Genius. Your fellow countrymen have accepted the point gracefully yet you still try to twist it in your favour.

Besides, you must have missed thaibebop's post #49. It is not about 'we' or 'us' or 'you', it is about 'them' and as such none of us have the right to take any credit for their lives.

I think the Poles were the only ones you mentioned that actually fought. No matter how flawed my logic is/was, your is no better. It still holds true that losing more people doesn't mean you're doing a better job.

And who said post #49 made a valid point? When the World Cup starts will you refer to your country's team as "them"?

To quote General Patton,

"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his."

General Patton really should have been a Marine!