I still wonder how generalizing over 300 million people by the actions of one tourist makes sense. There are a lot of things that would be easier to point at, like the Christian extremists and the alt-right (although from my experience many of them don’t actually leave the country very often). Still, sweeping generalizations like this cause much more harm than good.
Americans tend to be pushy and, well, stupid in foreign lands.
Unpleasant people stand out, so they’re the ones we notice. They make an impression, so they’re the ones we remember. This is true of tourists from all over the world, from America to China.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it turned out that most are respectful, but end up either unnoticed or forgotten.
I’m sorry man, but from what I’ve heard in the tourism industry yanks run third place of worst tourists. Second? Germans. First? The English. It’s always the goddamn English.
Maybe, but Americans aren’t all “pushy” and “stupid”. Noting a trend is one thing, making a generalized statement is another. The person in the article is Jewish-American. Try replacing “Americans” with “Jews” in your original comment and see how that reads.
The common part in the loud and obnoxious is the American not Jewish though. Also (non-native-)Americans haven’t suffered several attempts of genociding them over the centuries so the generalization is nowhere as dangerous.
Police identified the suspect as a radical 40-year-old Jewish American tourist and said initial questioning suggested he smashed the statues because he considered them “to be idolatrous and contrary to the Torah.”
I can tell you the common part of this is not the “American” in them. Similarly, it wouldn’t be fair to call this common to Jewish people either, the vast majority are decent human beings with some level of respect from my experience.
As for loud and obnoxious, having visited many countries, the “loud and obnoxious foreigners” vary from country to country. I’ve seen it used to describe British, French, Chinese, Australians, and in some countries anybody who isn’t from that country.
The attack did not occur because of his nationality, it happened because of his religion, because of his bullshit superstitious religion… ya got that…? The guy could have been a sweedish muslim and I bet you 100% and he’d have attacked for some reason based on Islam…again religion. He Could have been an Egyptian Christian and had a beef for the Romans being the executioners of christ…once again religion.
It’s Embarrassing for any nationality when this kind of mindless bad behavior happens, but you can stop debating its about anything but that persons own barbaric, irrational dogmas.
The article doesn’t mention air supply issue. But it says the women had no health problem.
The truck was just 6 degrees Celsius (43 degrees Fahrenheit) inside, said Francart, Villefranche-sur-Saône’s prosecutor. The women were all wearing thick coats and had no health problems, she said.
It sounds like they called for help because they realized the truck was going in the wrong direction, not so much because of health concerns.
This is a scare tactic and it’s a stupid one. If there were any advantage whatsoever to a nuclear powered cruise missile, the U.S. and U.S.S.R. would have already cranked out thousands of them instead of conventional rockets.
We could just rewrite the headline as:
Putin says, “Booga Booga!!! Have nuclear shit!! Am scary asshole!!”
Iirc the USA did investigate making them during the cold war but concluded that the (very real) benefits - such as the ability to recall a missile after launching - weren’t worth cooking US citizens and allies with radiation from an unshielded nuclear reactor flying at mach 3 just above the surface; they planned to fly as low as 150m!
Their initial plans basically were to build a nuclear-ramjet “missile” that could fly for several days straight carrying dozens of nuclear warheads, autonomously dropping them on “enemies”. The big problem was that it’d have to fly over the USA and/or western Europe in order to reach the USSR.
he smashed the statues because he considered them “to be idolatrous and contrary to the Torah.”
followed by
The man’s lawyer, Nick Kaufman, denied that he had acted out of religious fanaticism.
If you say so! Its horrible that someone who isnt even from an area thinks they have the right to destroy another place’s cultural heritage and history because they feel it goes against their religion.
While I genuinely feel bad for economically disadvantaged workers with long commutes in used vehicles, I can’t help but notice most of the complaints about fuel prices come from people who: A. Shout down anyone trying to improve public transportation infrastructure by saying it can’t work in rural areas (it can, and has), and B. Own outrageously large personal vehicles that guzzle gas and houses with 2+ stall garages.
I’ll listen to complaining from anyone who doesn’t fall into one or both of these two groups.
Gas should be prohibitively expensive. It’s price should reflect its impact.
Unfortunately this would crumble the entire US and possibly western economy. It works in most of the rest of the world because the commutes are smaller and the alternative transit is plentiful.
The only times I see people like me, who prefer owning a car “shouting down” people adcovating for better public transport, is when people suggest I should get rid of my car and ride a bus instead. A good public transportation system is a net-good for everyone, and in no way inconveniences me especially if I never even use it. It’s not busses and trains I have an issue with - it’s the naive city dwellers who thinks that because they get around just fine without a car then anyone would.
apnews.com
Active