al Qaeda slaughters Muslims

b95000 wrote: Whisper wrote: I agree and respect your point, Jenni. This situation would not have been there if that country was allowed to develop institutions instead of being dictated by short fuse / short sighted army men for all these years. If army rule is such a good thing why not appy it in the US? Oh, let's guess, it's another day and Whisper is blaming ALL the world's ills on the (230 year young) US...whatever happened to the ancient ways and taking responsibility for oneself (or a country) and one's actions? Has anyone ever heard Sasha Whisperer critique Russia or China and their contributions toward global destabilization in the past 50 years? No, his is the obsession that the US is pure EVIL and responsible for all EVIL.  He fashions himself as reasonable and intellectually vigorous..

Yes, but if we criticized Russia and China you wouldn't fire back, and then where would all our fun go?

Well in your initial post on the subject you claim that violent crime rates have dropped over the past 15-20 years. Here are the stats for homicides over the last 20 years:

1985	8.0	18,976
1986	8.6	20,613
1987	8.3	20,096
1988	8.5	20,675
1989	8.7	21,500
1990	9.4	23,438
1991	9.8	24,703
1992	9.3	23,760
1993	9.5	24,526
1994	9.0	23,326
1995	8.2	21,606
1996	7.4	19,645
1997	6.8	18,208
1998	6.3	16,974
1999	5.7	15,522
2000	5.5	15,586
2001	5.6	16,037
2002	5.6	16,204

So as you can see, they do not drop steadily at all, but rather increase until 1993, when they do in fact drop to a low by 2000, at which point they remain stable.

You use generalizations that do not accurately reflect the reality of the situation to promote your simplistic, jingostic ideology. Even your response, after having seen the data, distorts the actual data to attempt to prove your point.

My point is that you are a dishonest individual.

Furthermore, you still communicate in an immature fashion.

Edited by Yusuf.

And as always your assertion is false:

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/totalstab.htm

Yusuf. wrote: Jenni wrote: Whisper, can you do math? 2% of 160 million is about 3.1 million people.And I have been to Pakistan twice, and the 2% that scare me are not just the religiously intolerant folks, but the gangsters, drug addicts, tribal lords who order murders and rapes ect. I think that could add up to 2% of the country. The rest of the 98% are very good and that is a better % of good people than we have in America which is probably only 70%. Drive around south central LA at night and I guarantee you that you will find an environment that makes the worst Pakistani neighborhoods seem quite safe. It's amazing the Americans are so ready to point the finger at other nations' shortcomings while their own citizens are subjected to such horrible conditions.

If Americans, of hundreds of ethnic, political and national backgrounds, can get along, generally in 2005, with some nominal levels of violence internally (violent crime has dropped consistently in the US for the past 15 to 20 years) then how is this pointed to as a 'bad model?'

Conversely, if much of the rest of the world's nation states, with relatively fewer racially diverse backgrounds or large racially diverse communities (probably more tribalism, etc, or perhaps you could compare the ethnic diversity of the US with tribalism) has internal troubles in their conditions, just like or worse than the US with its greater racial diversities - how does this somehow reflect poorly on the US?

It just isn't reality or factual to say so..


Edited by b95000