Secretary Carter: Russia and China Threatening Global Order

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.americanpress.com/sports/lsu ... er-Defense

"Defense Secretary Ash Carter on Saturday accused Russia of endangering world order, citing its incursions in Ukraine and loose talk about nuclear weapons, and said the U.S. defense establishment is searching for creative ways to deter Russian aggression and protect U.S. allies."

Seriously?!

It isn't Russia that threatens the national governments of various countries across the globe with 'regime change' when they don't do what is expected of them, or that invades countries simply because they have oil, or tries to 'spread democracy' by force. Russia is, if anything, the surest guarantor of peace, mankind's last hope against American imperialism, perceived exceptionalism, violence and lawlessness.

This.

America has been nosing around in the middle east since they figured 9/11 was a good excuse to f**k s**t up in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Russia does one strike against ISIS and suddenly they're the bad guy.

It's simple: They, that is the supposed interest of America, want to defeat Assad and take over the Syrian government. They too, need some "democracy". Then, Iran is next on the list for "democracy". The guys who have enough nukes to destroy the world many times over, who you can't say anything bad about by they way, hate the fact that Iran has any defense at all.

The "war on terror" facade crumbled like a house of cards long ago. At this point it is just pathetic to see them try to justify nosing around in the middle east.

So let's look at Ukraine. The population had enough of their president being a corrupt puppet of the Kremlin so they got rid of him which anger Russia and wage war on Ukraine without officially be at war with Ukraine and sending troops without officially sending troops. So Russia is not better that USA, it might well be worse. The Russian imperialism also extend to the protection of Syria dictatorship to protect access to their oil reserves; it's Russia that prevented intervention in Syria when the population revolted against Bashar al-Assad oppression, a dictator who didn't hesitate to use chemical weapons against his country civilians populations to protect his power. Without the military intervention of the great powers the war kept going allowing the rise of radical factions like ISIS.
As for China it's playing with fire by trying to extend their reach on the sea by their military manoeuvres and the building of artificial islands; they consider their "natural" place as the most powerful nation in the world and they do everything they can to make it true, even if it mean risking WW3.
The US made some very bad things for "imperialist" reasons, not the less of it the war in Iraq for God know what reason, but because they made bad things don't mean that the countries playing against their interests are better, far from it.

Yes, let's look at it. V. Yanukovych may have been corrupt, but which politician isn't corrupt to at least some extent? It's just a matter of degree, and some are better at hiding it than others. Our own Prime Minister (who is a Pentagon puppet, not a Kremlin one) in Australia has a hidden bank account in the Cayman Islands. No one is asking any questions about it, our pathetic mainstream media remaining silent.

Victor Yanukovych at least was elected to office, and when he decided to do a deal with Russia rather than the E.U., those demonstrators we all saw on our T.V. sets just happened to appear virtually overnight. Coincidence? I think not. He was then, in response to allegations that he had shot a few of them (but we don't really know who, or why, the order to shoot was given) that he was forced to flee. We now have a compliant puppet in charge (Poroshenko), and he has the stamp of approval from the E.U. and U.S. The whole thing, when it happened, had the stench of yet another coup.

Russia is "better" than the U.S. in the sense that they haven't invaded as many nations since 1945. It has its faults (which nation doesn't?), but they don't take it upon themselves to proclaim to the world that they are "indispensable" and "exceptional", and that the rules of civilised conduct simply don't apply to them. Bashar al-Assad is the only one, in the absence of which, the nation of Syria would be overwhelmed by I.S.I.S. and al-Qaida thugs. If there is a viable alternative to Assad, what is his name? Where is he?

I agree with you on China though. Building artificial islands in international waters, and then planting one's flag upon them and telling others to stay away because the waters within which they were built now belongs to you, is just plain wrong.

Victor Yanukovych was found out to be funded by the Kremlin and allowing Russian agents in Ukraine to force Russia's will.
The people rose up because his "party" violated the Ukrainian constitution by giving him almost complete power to run the country and to crack down on the opposition.
He also refused to sign the agreement with the EU that previous governments had negotiated because His boss aka Putin told him he had to do what Russia wanted in order to keep him and his party funded.

The majority of the people of the Ukraine want to join the EU and be freed of Russian influence.

Since 1945, Russia has invaded more countries than any other country on record.
They invaded and imposed their control on Eastern Europe, took Czechoslovakia too by force in the 1950s.
They tried to take Yugoslavia as well and push into Greece but failed.
They tried to annex Finland after the WWII ended, after 3 years of heavy losses, they accepted defeat.
They also fought a war in the early 50s with China over communism.
They also annexed some Asian countries in the early 50s and 60s.
etc...

Russia also tried to annex Afghanistan in the 1970s and failed miserably.

U.S. only invaded Afghanistan in October 2001, because the Taliban was supporting Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda.
The UN Security Council approved the NATO lead invasion of Afghanistan, so it was very much legal.

Iraq was also in violation of 17 UN Security Council resolutions and refused to full disarm and let the inspectors do their work.

Though you can debate the language of Resolution 1441 on whether or not the coalition had the authority to invade Iraq.
Everyone knew that Saddam was up to no good and killing his own citizens in violations of UN resolutions and the treaty ending the first gulf war.

Russia has never been a responsible global citizen and nor has China.

I don't suppose I can ask from where you got these erroneous ideas. V. Yanukovych certainly was pro-Russian, but I don't think that such a fact on its own therefore made him indebted to V. Putin in any way (unless, of course, you have evidence ready to present that would demonstrate that I am wrong about this).



That's quite a claim. Why should I believe it? It's certainly plausible that the majority of Ukrainians do, or at least did, want to join the E.U., but... again, where's the evidence? If you could provide such from an unbiased source, I might take this claim more seriously.



According to this source - http://thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/US_I ... BlumZ.html - the U.S. has interfered with the following nations:
1. China, 1945 - 1949
2. Italy, 1947 - 1948
3. Greece, 1947 - 1949
4. Philippines, 1945 - 1953
5. South Korea, 1945 - 1953
6. Albania, 1949 - 1953
7. West Germany, throughout the 1950's
8. Iran, 1953 (perhaps one of the most infamous cases of 'regime change' on record)
9. Guatemala, 1953 - 1990's
10. ...the list goes on, and on, and on...

I myself recall well the invasion of the tiny island of Granada in 1983, because Mr. Reagan thought there were Cuban commies there. Also the overthrow of Noriega after he had served the C.I.A. so well as dictator of Panama. There was also the arming of the Contras who fought against the legitimate government of Nicaragua. The arming of the mujahadeen in Afghanistan, which directly led to the growth of Al Qaeda, who then turned against their former masters by crashing planes into New York. Then of course there is the ongoing, unconditional support for Israel... need I provide any further examples, or will this suffice? Your claim that the U.S.S.R. invaded other states at close to the same level of frequency is patently false.



They did not try to 'annex' Afghanistan, and their reason for intervening was not as straightforward as many in the West seem to believe. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nur_Muhammad_Taraki
and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Afghan_War

Yes, I know, it's 'Wikipedia', but even so it's surprisingly unbiased and accurate.



Which nation was it again that actively encouraged the mujahedeen and bin Laden during the 1980's? Can you guess?



The inspectors tried to do their job, but they weren't finding the imaginary weapons of mass destruction fast enough for the trigger-happy and impatient American Bush regime's purposes. The U.S. government wanted a war, and all of this WMD nonsense was just an excuse. Strange how the U.S. did NOTHING when Saddam Hussein actually had chemical weapons, and used them against Iran and his own people. Oh, of course, back then he was 'one of us', a 'good guy'! Sheesh!



Conveniently you forget to mention when it was that he murdered his own citizens (and the Iranians) with chemical weapons. It was prior to 1990/91, when the world did absolutely nothing to stop him, because back then he was still a pliable Pentagon puppet. Then he invaded Kuwait, and he quickly fell out of favour.



'Never'? Really? They defeated the Nazis didn't they? What, exactly, IS 'a good global citizen' in your opinion anyway? Is it a nation (like Australia) that does as it's told by Uncle Sam? Yes, that must be it.

Ukraine is an example of American imperialism, they warp it so much that it seems like Russia is the aggressor but they're just acting rationally in the face of relentless expansion of NATO and encroachment into Russia's traditional sphere of influence. NATO is has always been an anti-Russian alliance so think of it from our perspective if Russia or China tried to build their own version of "democracy" in Mexico or the Caribbean? The Soviets tried to and that was as close to a nuclear holocaust as we have ever been so maybe we should apply the golden rule to foreign relations, don't be brainwashed by the empire craving bloodthirsty neoconservatives. I was watching the GOP debate last night and you had like all the candidates besides Trump and Rand Paul who wanted a "no fly zone" over Syria and Iraq which Russia has the permission to fly in the airspace of, they want World War 3 with the Russians or at least that is what they're advocating.

The EU/US basically gave Yanukovych an ultimatum between them and Russia, Yankovych was democratically elected and by margins over 90% in the area that rebelled and they illegally overthrew the government corrupt or not(Tymoshenko or Poroshenko aren't any less corrupt or authoritarian, they just get a nice briefcase of US currency every month so we don't mind) Those protests were created by outside instigators, the US spend billions since the fall of the Soviet Union "building democracy" in Ukraine with these many faceless NGOs and they coopt extremists opposition as foot soldiers against the government thus the presence of neo-nazis in the new Ukrainian government. Ukraine really is a real country, look at how it splits demographically and geographically. I believe in self-determination, the people should decide.

Russia's actions in Syria have all made sense, the US wanted to do what they did to Gaddafi to Assad and that would led to ISIS and or al-Qaeda with territory from the Mediterranean to the Tigris. Look at Libya now, Libya is worse off now than they ever were on the brutal dictatorship of Gaddafi. There were no "moderate" rebels, there is a massive force of foreign fighters in the country waging war against Assad, there are hundreds militias and there is no way to vet anyone. The "good ones" just get killed instantly, lay down their weapons, or just disappear after we train and arm them. ISIS has billions of dollars in American military equipment, we are responsible for this. Assad is secular, he protected minorities, we called him a reformer at one time so to pretend like he's Hitler when Saudi freakin Arabia is the head of the UN Human Rights Council or whatever is a complete joke. Stop arming terrorists, stop sticking our fingers where they don't belong. Russia and Iran are protecting an important ally for themselves against people who would just as soon kill us if given the chance.

Our only chance at progress in this world is to work with the Russians, we have a common enemy and are a lot more alike then we might want to admit. We need to get out of this Cold War pissing contest mindset, we're friends with the Saudis and plenty of way worse human rights abusers so Russia is so bad? The US doesn't have anywhere to talk, we don't have the moral high ground.

@Lintar

You seem like the typical Aussie who owes their country's independence to the U.S. for saving it from the Japanese after the British diverted it's forces back to Europe.

The BBC keeps reporting on Ukraine and how the current president is doing the bidding of the People who want to join the EU.
You could learn a lot by watching the BBC World Service, which is hated by the reigning conservative government who hates the BBC for being too liberal.

The BBC World Service is the most unbiased source in the world .
They are also reporting that Russia is still in violation of the cease fire they signed with Ukraine, by sending troops and armaments into Ukraine.

As for your list of countries:

1) China was a republic, who was the principle ally of Allies in Asia. USSR supported Mao when his rebellion started to lose. USSR gave it's all, blowing China into a full blown civil war, which eventually lead to the rebel communist lead by Mao to defeat the democratic government.

2) Italy was not a direct U.S. proxy. Italy like the other Axis powers was forced to sign a huge treaty with big terms.
This lead to Italy becoming it's current republic.

3) Greece was a slightly different matter because, they refused to agree to the terms of peace with Germany the other countries accepted. Greece chose a different path to settling peace with Germany, which all hasn't been settled yet.

4) [color=red]Philippines was U.S. territory[/color=red] after it was seceded to the U.S. in the treaty ending the Spanish American war in 1898.
The U.S. has [color=red]special treaty obligations[/color=red] with the Philippines as part of their independence agreement.

5) Korean War was the [color=red]first UN sanctioned mission[/color=red], with the USSR abstaining. The U.S. and it's allies carried out the UN mission as dictated by [/color=red][b]UN Security Council.[/color=red]
The USSR and China sent troops and armaments to counter the UN mission to prop up the communist.
When the war ended in 1953 with a stale mate, China and USSR became the protectorate of North Korea and the U.S. became the Protectorate of South Korea. These treaties still stand.

6) Albania joined the USSR as a satellite state in late 1945, as the USSR refused to allow democratic elections.
The Western Allies supported the democratic factions until the were defeated in early 1946.

7)West Germany was under U.S., French and UK controller as Treaty with Germany required. East Germany was given to USSR for control as part of the same treaty.
Berlin was divided up between the Allies, Western Allies took the Western half of Berlin, while USSR took the Eastern city.
West Germany still had to get allied approval over certain areas as stated in the treaty. East Germany had to answer to Moscow as required.
West Germany was created by the merging of UK, U.S. and French occupation zones on May 23, 1949.

Though the Western Allies could still override and/or veto any acts of the West German government, if they felt it was necessary as the treaty gave them the power to do so.

It was the U.S. who decided to rebuild and to invest in West Germany to create the current Germany we all know.
The British and French wanted to gut West Germany as punishment for the world wars and leave them in jobless and poor so they could never challenge the UK and French power again.
Since the UK and France (along with the rest of Europe) needed American money to rebuild and to prevent full default on war debt, they had to agree to the U.S. plans for West Germany.

Germany is greatly indebted to the U.S. for saving them from the vengeful allies.

East Germany was literally left in ruins by the Russians, who literally took anything of value to rebuild the USSR.
They purposely strictly managed East Germany and regularly "taxed" them to rebuild the USSR.

April 1st 1948 to May 12th 1949, Stalin cut off West Berlin, which was in violation of the treaty, forcing the Western Allies to airlift supplies into West Berlin.
Eventually Stalin gave up and restored the corridors to West Berlin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Bl ... in_Airlift

Germany has not regained fully sovereignty to this day, though Germany was reunited in 1990 and the allies gave up nearly all control to the new Germany under the reunification treaty.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on ... to_Germany

Though Germany still has some international limitations imposted under the reunification treaty as requested by the UK, Russia and France.
The biggest limitations are Germany cannot leave the Euro and must finance the European Project.

Iran wasn't the U.S. doing per say, President Eisenhower didn't want to do it.
The UK demand the U.S. back them in their desire to reinstate the Shah of Iran.
Technically the Shah of Iran was overthrown and he requested help from the UK and U.S. to reinstate him to the throne.
Republic of Iran never won internationally acceptance of their right to rule, as the international community sided with the Shah.
As treaty obligations with the Shah, the UK and eventually the U.S. came to his aid and reinstated his government. Obviously the horrendous backlash that occurred the second time he was overthrown is still being felt.

9) The Western Allies led by the U.S. support all capitalist factions in Central and South America, while Cuba and the Soviet Union supported the other factions. Obviously it was horrible for the Central and South America, but it wasn't the U.S. acting alone.

Learn world history please

Actually Iran and Iraq used chemical and biological weapons in their bloody war in the 80s.
Iran was backed by the USSR, Iraq was backed by the U.S.
The UN Security couldn't reach an agreement to intervene.

Iraqi people rose up after the Gulf War 1 ended, which Saddam used his weapons on them.
The U.S. failed to persuade the UN Security Council to authorize force against Saddam for these acts.
The U.S. chose not to intervene because Russia and France had defense treaties with Saddam and were willing to enforce them.
Instead the U.S. was able to get compromise which contained the following:

1) Iraq had to completely disarm and allow inspectors in to monitor and certify it.
2) Iraq was sanctioned from selling oil, except some for food and other medical materials
3) A no fly zoned was imposed on Northern and Southern parts of Iraq, which the U.S. and NATO allies would patrol.
4) The NATO allies could only use force to defend the no fly zone.
5) Iraq would be punished for violating the terms.
6) No invasion or regime change would be allowed without approval of the UN Security Council.

Saddam violated every resolution passed by the UN Security Council, which culminated to the passage of 1441.
Saddam also violated 1441, which even Mr. Blix and the IAEA reported Iraq was not complying with the them and the terms.
The U.S., UK, and most of the other Western allies were fed up with Saddam his constant violations of the resolutions, leading to the Iraq War in 2003.

As for the Russians, they didn't defeat the Nazis on their own, or with their own arms.
Stalin was nearing complete defeat until the U.S. and UK sent him the necessary arms, tanks, trucks, and other materials needed for him to win the Eastern front.
WITHOUT THE MASSIVE WESTERN SUPPORT, Stalin would have had to surrender to Germany.
Also Hitler's meddling also helped to some degree.

The U.S. literally had the massive resources required to keep the other allies afloat during the war.

USSR/Russia broke the Yalta agreement with allies, over the future of Eastern Europe.
Stalin was required to completely withdraw from Eastern Europe except for East Germany and to allow democratic elections and home rule in Eastern Europe.
Stalin broke the accords and took Eastern Europe by force (which Eastern Europe still resents to this day).
Churchill wanted to launch a surprise attack against USSR in early 1946 to force Stalin to comply, but the U.S. threaten to pull the plug on the UK if they did. Churchill couldn't afford to lose the U.S. aid, so he relented.

Russia also armed Libya, which used the weapons against it's own people until NATO under the UN intervened.
Russia also armed Syria which used the chemical weapons on it's own people.
Russia also refuses to give it's own citizens full freedoms and free & fair elections, Putin is literally controlling everything.
Russia hasn't even made peace with China it's communist neighbor.
Russia also arms numerous rebel groups around the world, in order to destabilized the NATO, EU, U.S., UK, China, South America, Central America, Canada and even Australia.
Russia also backs the repressive regimes in Africa, Venezuela, Central Asia, and Belarus (the last Russian strong hold in Eastern Europe).
Russia also has been nationalizing non Russian companies in it's borders, which is a violation of the agreements with the West.

Russia hasn't faithfully and full kept to any agreement it has made in well over 100 years, not even with China.

Australia rarely does anything positive with the U.S., instead opting to go against the U.S. interests at almost every turn.
Australia takes it's orders from Beijing not D.C. on almost every issue.

Australia is commonly referred to here in North America as "hating Canada as much as it hates the U.S.!"
Australia is well known for hating Canadians and Americans.

Australia ≠ UK.... UK normally works together on foreign policy with the U.S.

Of course, it had to happen eventually. No, I am not a 'typical Aussie' (if there even is such a thing, which I seriously doubt). Yes, the Japanese were defeated, but does this therefore mean that for the rest of eternity we should all bow down and worship the Almighty U.S.A.? Does it mean that for generations to come we should all just do whatever some U.S. President wants us to? So much for 'independence'!



The B.B.C.! L-oh-L!

Okay, a bit of advice is now called for. It may not be such a good idea for you to rely upon a single source of news and information. It pays to seek out and find alternative sources, for the single source you rely upon may be wrong, or worse, biased. When you say 'too liberal', I'm assuming you don't mean conservative (which is what liberal in Australia, and the rest of the world, means), nor pro-Putin. The B.B.C. is not unbiased, for no news service in the world is truly unbiased. Don't be so naive.



Believe it or not, prior to the beginning of the Second World War (i.e. the years 1937 and 1939) the U.S.S.R. supported the Nationalists, and ignored Mao. The U.S.S.R. was also not responsible for the subsequent civil war, although post-1945 they made the commitment to support Mao, since it suited them at that time to do so (i.e. the United States was actively supporting Chiang Kai-Shek, and Stalin didn't want a strong and united Nationalist China just across his border).



I wasn't talking about Fascist Italy, but the Italy of the post-war years. I don't know why you brought up what you did here, because it's irrelevant.



How did this justify the U.S. (and Britain's) support for the military regime there?



Yes, and how did the Philippines become a colony of the U.S. in the first place? The Spanish-American War was initiated by the United States under the false pretext of responding to an (as it turned out, imaginary) provocation (the U.S.S. Maine incident) by Spain. It represented an easy and quick chance to seize territory, which didn't turn out to be as easy and quick as had been hoped. It was yet another example of good old-fashioned 19th century imperialism, nothing less.



The U.S.S.R. did NOT send troops to Korea. Where did you get that piece of misinformation from, or did you just make it up? The nation that becomes a protectorate is the one that is subservient, not the other way around as you have it here. Please do get your terminology straight, because your misuse of words is doing you no favours.

I don't know if I should even bother debunking the rest of your response here. I'm at work now, so maybe I should just accept the fact that in spite of there never having been in the history of mankind such easy access to so much information, there has also - ironically - never been so many people who don't even correctly recall what happened in the world just five minutes ago, never mind 40 years. That's not a personal attack, by the way, just an objective observation of the situation as it now is.

Hilarious!

I already knew that which I presented to you, even where I post a link to, for example, a Wikipedia article. Telling me to 'learn history' is rather pointless, especially since a) I already know quite a great deal about it, and b) I actually lived through much of the post-World War 2 era of which I speak, and remember the events as though they were just yesterday! Can you claim the same? Here is a simple question for you. Without looking it up, can you tell me what the name of the Nicaraguan president was during the time of the Iran-Contra scandal? I'll give you a clue; his first name was Daniel. What was his surname? Remember - don't 'Google' it!

I have more than one news sources, I used the BBC because they are the most unbiased news source in the world.


USSR sent arms to bolster China and their MIG fighters to stop the air campaign of the UN over Korea.
This helped stalemate Korea.

USSR/Russia and China are the protectors of North Korea.
North Korea gets all it needs from these two countries, which is why it hasn't collapsed despite UN sanctions.
China doesn't want a unified Western oriented Korea and they don't want a flood of millions of refugees from North Korea either.

So I did a slight boo boo, get over yourself (yes it was by accident).

It's no big secret that Australia has a huge international reputation for hating all things foreign and all peoples foreign.
Australia is known for being on of the most nationalistic and ethnocentric countries in the world.

The saying goes... "If an Australian likes you, there is something wrong!"

Seriously what is with Australians hating everything foreign?

Are you talking about Noriega (? pardon the bad spelling)
My uncle worked for two years as the head of Save the Children.

Most everything I know about WWII, Great Depression, Pre 1980s, is from my grandparents who lived it and still complain about the rest of the world not doing enough and hating on the U.S.

All of this is spot on. I hope 'Xenocity' takes note. Yes, it truly IS a joke that the Saudi's, of all people, are on the UN Human Rights Council. When I first heard this I simply could not believe it. The U.N. has well and truly become a pathetic, sick joke. Here is a disturbing article - http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... ncil-place

You do realize as part of the enacted UN reforms was free and fair democratic elections of countries to the UNHRC and few other posts.

The Security Council 10 elected seats are democratically elected within each group.
Ironically the reason why the Security Council fails to get anything done is the permanent 5 members, who constantly veto anything they don't like.

If the UN and other institutions were charted by Australia, you and the rest of Australia would be defending them with every muscle.

Xenocity, why are you now trying to engage in ad hominem attacks? For the record, I was born in England, not Australia. "Seriously, what is it with Americans bombing and shooting everything foreign?" That sounds really stupid, doesn't it. Crass generalisations about entire nations are just lame, and a sure sign of lazy and careless thinking.



NO! It was ORTEGA! Daniel Ortega. Noriega was the dictator of Panama until the Yanquis removed him in 1989, on charges of - get this - 'drug trafficking'!.

Whatever...

Actually Stereotypes of Americans are so ingrained into society isn't even funny (Ok it is still funny to some degree).
As an American, it's mostly true for the most part, especially the foreign policy part.
We know how we are viewed and accepted because we are known for using muscle when necessary instead of kowtowing like the UK, France and others have done in to their aggressors when they weren't the aggressors.
The U.S. didn't forcible annex countries into like the old world countries.
We even let the Philippines, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, VI, NMI, Midway, and other former territories vote on their future with most opting to return to independence with most keeping special agreement with the U.S. under form of near full independence.

The UK won't even give the Falkland islands back to Argentina, which was forcible annex from Argentina.
The UK won't even let Gibraltar return to Spain (which is was wrongfully taken from Spain) and the remaining oversees possessions vote on independence.
France keeps an iron fist on it's remaining overseas territories as well.
Etc...

Despite all the shooting the U.S. does, it has done far more good for the world than any other country to date.

1)The U.S. has kept the world at peace even a shaky peace at times (though that wasn't entirely our fault).
2) The U.S. has gives more money away each year in foreign aid than the rest of the world put together.
3) The U.S. gives more money in the form of emergency aid, than the rest of the world does each year (including Nepal this year)
4) The U.S. willing offers to protect countries in exchange for payment, if a country asks for U.S. protection.
5) The U.S. has taken on more refugees than any other country has since 1945, and the majority of refugees have fully integrated into society and are productive members.
6) The U.S. has kept all sea and most air lanes free and open without asking anything in return.
7) Keeping the international lanes open, has allowed the global economy to grow leaps and bounds more so than under any empire to date.
The U.S. has invested more in humanitarian efforts than the rest of the world combined.
9) The U.S. has done more for human health and diseases than the rest.

Oh lets not forget the U.S. let the internet go into ICANN hands for governing without a fight, so the world could freely use the internet, which was created by the U.S. Government.
If all goes right the U.S. will have handed over the last remaining power over the internet by 2017 aka control over the root DNS.

My country men maybe too gun happy and too willing to fire at first glance, at least we have heavily invested in making the world a much better place and keeping at peace more so than the rest of the world.
We aren't xenophobic either.

Right now UK and Australia are two of most xenophobic countries, right up there with Saudi Arabia, Japan, China, South Korea, and Russia.
The native people of these countries regularly hostile to foreigners including temporary refugees who come to their countries.
Australia regularly deports refugees back to regimes who are trying to kill them.

It's better to be know for being the strong gun happy country who gets regular bouts of criticism from the world than being known for very hateful towards foreigners and all things foreign.

If the world was given a choice to replace the U.S. center of the world system, they couldn't find a country they like and trust enough to take the role.

Like Harvey says in The Dark Knight, "You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain"