Discuss and talk about any general topic.
...Because it has a land border with Mexico!
Speaking seriously, Americans are lucky in that we are the only Anglo country to have a land border with a decent country. Canadians only have a land border with the United States and have to go through the US to get to Mexico; the UK and Ireland are located on islands, and Australia and New Zealand are very isolated; I feel really bad for the New Zealanders who to get anywhere first have to take a five-hour flight to Australia just to connect to Asia or Eastern Europe or wherever it is they are going.
Due to this land border we have a situation where an American guy could easily live in Mexico and work in the United States, enabling him to live on an American salary in Mexico and still get good Mexican women instead of American women. No other Anglo country provides such freedom. Of course, in the southwest the chicana is an ever present danger; chicanas are not Mexicans and should not be treated as such; they should be avoided like any other woman in the Anglosphere. (For those of you from outside the USA who do not know what a chicano/a is, it's a person born and raised in the United States but of Mexican descent).
LOL come on, you can't be serious in the era of globalisation and cheap flights. Borders have no meaning, besides reminding us how much pain we might have inflicted neighbouring populations to reach that particular geopolitical setting. You US are lucky the Mexicans haven't beaten your arses off a century ago, since you stole a few states off them. What I find ironical is, what they never got by military action, they are getting by pure and simple demographics.
I remain neutral in the whole "US stealing a few states" argument, as you should too since the issue is not as clear-cut as people make it out to be. For example, fighting on the side of the United States were many Mexicans who felt isolated from their government in Mexico City and wanted to be part of the United States instead. I once saw a tejano man go crazy when a white American told him he should hate the Alamo and what it stands for; the tejano man told the white man "I'm a tejano, not a Mexican, it's my Alamo too". So you see, the issue isn't as clear cut as you might think.
I am not defending either side in the war; rather, I am acknowledging that we live in 2012 and have to deal with the present-day borders (which do matter and very much; the US-Mexico border is not like borders in the EU where you can just cross easily and have a dandy-old time; the US-Mexico border is very heavily guarded and the guards on both sides can be extremely rude). My ancestors had nothing to do with the conflicts; my earliest ancestors to the United States arrived in the 1920s from France, closely followed by my Polish ancestors a few years later. As Catholics, my family also did not fit in to the predominant Anglo-Protestant hierarchy. So telling me that "we stole a few states off of them" is a waste of time since I had absolutely nothing to do with it, especially considering that Italians were responsible for their own set of atrocities in their history, but to say "I wish the Somalians, Libyans, Ethiopians, Albanians, and Croatians would beat your arses off" would be rude and totally uncalled for.
This is true. One third of rebelling Texans were Latin. They don't teach that in Mexican schools -- or U.S. schools.
Plus other parts of Mexico were trying to leave at the same time. And some areas, like Utah, were plain empty.
ANyway, if not for that pompous, treacherous idiot Santa Ana, Mexico would today be as big and powerful and advanced as Brazil.
I am sorry that the Americans annexed a few loyal Mexican areas like Los Angeles and New Mexico, but it should be remembered that there was no deportation of existing residents. With a couple of small exceptions, it was not an ethnic conflict. And after a few lengthy court battles, even the big hacienda owners got to keep their lands. We were not particularly villainous.
Way to kick some EURO-ASS!
Not to mention the Gauls, the Britons, the Carthaginians, and the Jews.
PS to PublicDuende and other Euro-types: please pardon the vestigial American patriotism... just 'cause I'm in AA (Americans Anonymous) doesn't mean I've stopped drinking... or something like that... whatever...
As far as work goes, Britain and the US have fairly equivalent careers tracks, in terms of IT, finance, and trading. The exception right now is energy, where the US and Canada are booming like there's no tomorrow. Thus, it's possible to make an equivalent American salary in the UK and then use one's free time to trek around continental Europe. Many flight times are like the Boston to DC shuttle or at worst, Boston to Chicago, mainly within 2.5 hours. I could deal with that.
If you're an American, living in the southwest (or was it called Southlands), then sure, the Mexican option is a great thing. Otherwise, many locations are not exactly a short hop to the enclaves in Mexico.
Actually I have no problems with Europeans at all; I have European family and I have lived in the UK (just like publicduende currently does) I just think publicduende's comment was totally uncalled for since all I was trying to do was point out that we Americans are lucky compared to other Anglos since we can easily drive to Mexico whereas everyone else has to fly. He also doesn't seem to realize that here in the United States (and in most of Latin America too) airline tickets cost far more than in Europe. He talks about an era of "cheap flights" but I don't see any cheap flights anywhere.
Tijuana has flights to Japan and China with no U.S. refueling stop -- if you're very very careful when you arrange the flight, and ask a lot of questions.
Mexico City and Yucatan (seasonal I think) have flights to Europe.
No TSA, no U.S. Customs, no U.S. no-fly lists, no U.S. warrants, no U.S. laptop searches.
Otherwise you can't get out of the Americas at all, without kissing Uncle Sam's ass, except through a Chertoff/NWO radiation-scanner airport in Brazil, Argentina, Chile, or Canada.
Actually there are a few direct flights between NZ and major Asian cities now, but the point is valid.
The Southwest is all of the states located along the US-Mexican border whereas the Southland is a term used to describe the Los Angeles metropolitan area. If I had citizenship of an EU country I would attempt the European option (especially since Polish girls seem so nice) but I'm a US citizen so I have to make lemonades with the lemons I was given.
I am originally from the East Coast too and after my Marine Corps service was almost tempted to move back but got smart and moved to Arizona instead. You say that many locations are not exactly a short hop, but most Americans live within a 10-hour drive of either Mexico or Quebec, the two best places in North America to find women. I do feel bad for the people who live in places like Seattle or Kansas however.
You forgot to mention as well that we cannot go to Cuba directly from the United States and have to either go through Canada (much harder now since I've been told that Canada now due to an agreement with the United States checks passports of people going to Cuba to ensure that no US citizens board the flights) or Mexico. I've met men who have gone to Cuba and told me that Cuban women are probably the nicest women on the entire planet (probably the one good thing that came out of the US embargo). As usual, I've been given the caveat that Cuban-American women are not the same as Cuban women and should also be avoided.
I don't feel AS bad anymore, but I still feel bad since it's probably still highly expensive to get anywhere from New Zealand. What major cities in Asia can you get to directly from New Zealand?
Thanks for clearing up the "Southlands" confusion. Now, I'll can specifically avoid offending anyone from Texas to Arizona
Yes, you know me well, I normally make that 5+ hr drive to Montreal for R&R
I couldn't imagine living in Kansas.
Oh, come on. Publicduende was obviously just funning, on what generally traffics as an anti-American site. To the extent he wasn't, bear in mind that when Europeans think of American enormities, the first thing that comes to mind is the durability of American imperialism (as opposed to, say, that of the UK and Italy), which generally is thought to have started with the Mexican War. Ralph Waldo Emerson, among others, thought we were way out of line at the time. Am I remembering correctly that you were a Marine? They, of course, don't seem to share that viewpoint -- "From the halls of Montezuma...." -- but it's pretty universal through Europe and much of the rest of the world.
I absolutely agree.
I just got back from a weekend outing in Tijuana, and had met a cute, chubby 20-year-old woman from Guerrero. She's a single mom with a toddler girl. She was also with a female friend in her mid-30's, also a single mom. I invited them to eat at McDonald's. For them, it was a luxury treat that they absolutely loved. The woman in her 30's was trying to hook me up with her friend. The woman in her 20's told me, "No, I'm single, currently looking," and then her friend exclaimed, "Here he is! You've already got yourself a chino guapo!" - pointing at me. Next she pointed at the daughter, and said, "Here's your papi." They all laughed. It was just so easy-going and natural.
That 20-year-old woman ended up really hitting on me and really wanted me to call her back after I leave for the U.S. I ended up kissing her hand and blowing her a good-bye kiss.
Yes, they're working-class single moms and probably not the best women to date, but still. The point is that they're so naturally friendly and flirtatious, which is a tremendously welcome change from the zero attention and flirting we get in the U.S. From my personal experience, single moms in the U.S. are much more difficult to approach and are much more unfriendly than single, childless college women in their early 20's. And, since when would U.S. women be tremendously impressed by a McDonald's meal?
I was so relieved to have been able to kiss that Mexican girl's hand the other day, which she really liked. In the U.S., there was no way I could do that to a girl I just met. If I tried doing that at school, the girl would freak out even if she was apparently giving off (mixed) signals, and might actually call the campus cops. Then I might ultimately end up on the California Sex Offender Registry. No kidding.
Yes, you remembered correctly. One of the reasons I got out was because I enlisted to DEFEND the United States, not to ATTACK other countries and thereby create more enemies. My time in Iraq was what really opened my eyes to just how bad the United States had become. The so-called greatest country in the world which is filled with sexless men, unfair divorce laws, barbaric police, and overly entitled women felt it had the right to go into other countries which never attacked us and tell them how to run their country instead of fixing ours first. Being the first country to have a successful republican form of government does not make us magically the "bringers of freedom" to the rest of the world.
Unfortunately, most of my fellow Marines did not see the world the same way. The military is filled with neo-cons who are absolutely convinced that Americans are always right in everything. I actually had a platoon sergeant who told us "the Iraqis are finally being smart and trying to do things our way, it's about time they started listening to us". That comment sums up the American mindset perfectly. The mindset is basically "my wife took half my income in alimony after having filed a false domestic abuse allegation against me, but we're still the greatest country in the world even though thanks to these draconian laws I now live in poverty and have a spousal abuse charge on my record! Other countries need to be exactly like us!"
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], MSNbot Media, yick and 9 guests