2fast4u said:
ah, dreaming. sorry but the usa is dependant on europe about as much as europe is dependant on the usa. u dont honestly believe that any country could survive on its own these days?
further, i believe we wouldnt have to deal with the terrorism in this excessive way. the reason is simple: about all military action that was made by the un were initiated by the usa. does this ring a bell?
How about bin ladins statement towards the UN countries? Even australia...AUSTRALIA for fucks sake, what has australia done? I guarentee you its less than most of europe.
And so far as dependencies, if it realy came down to it, we would survive on our own. This I have no question of, the very land that the US is on is rich of resources. We have a huge overabundance of crop yields, which is quite frankly all you need to just survive. If we needed weapons on our own, our land provides plenty of resources for that as well.
you completely fail to acknowledge that not all shit the u.s. did around the world turned out to be succesful, OR good for the respective countries.
Well, lets see about that.
wwI .. a war out of self-interest
wwII .. a liberation, yes. no doubt about that
Ah yes, the ol' lucitania and the zimmerman note...and who could forget pearl harbor? And wait a second, germany had huge debts after the first war, and somebody was paying those debts on their behalf. Damn, I forgot who that somebody was, oh well, they were probably a bunch of assholes anyways with some sort of profit motive in mind, even though they got no return on anything.
Oh, and lets not forget japan. We rebuilt hiroshima and nagasaki after we nuked them into oblivion. We didn't get anything back for that. Did japan rebuild pearl harbor? Hah, yeah right. In fact the US were the first to start rebuilding their defeated enemy. Everybody else up until that point did the opposite. Damn americans and their anti-reparation policies.
korea .. an indirect war against the ussr
USSR? Who are they? Oh thats right, that communist group that ceased to exist over a decade ago. And we still to this day keep troops in korea, who get war time pay even during peace time, I might add, because the north is so hostile.
Wrong. Does the name Ho Chi Minh ring a bell? He hated the USSR, he wanted nothing to do with their version of communism. That war was out of political interest. The USSR only funded his effort because they wanted to see communism spread to it. The USA was in that war because they wanted to simply stop the spread of communism. Funny thing too, because just two years before the US left vietnam, the USSR and china both wanted to be on good terms with the US, so they halted all funding and weapon transporting to the North vietnam government. It surprises me just how many people don't know shit about that war. The north actualy surrendered before we left as a result of operation linebacker, they took over south vietnam 3 years after the US had already left. That country turned to shit right afterwards as well, look what state they are in, vs how they could have been (modern day south korea is the example).
nicaragua .. a war out of economic interest. not directly but with backing of fascist forces
Please elaborate on this, I don't know what kind of argument you're trying to make here. AFAIK it was pretty much the same thing that was going on in vietnam, only not as intense.
iraq iran war .. backing of saddam out of economical interest
I don't know the specifics of that particular war either, but like I said, not everything turns out peachy. And there probably was a lot more than economical interest.
the list goes on. now my question is, did you even read my post? cuz it seems like you dont _want_ to acknowledge that your country hasnt always made a perfect score with its interventions or acted out of pure human points of view. most times it was self-interest that drove em.
Ok lets add to the list then: somolia. WTF would we have to gain economicaly from liberating somolia? That country cant even afford to eat dirt. We wasted 13 perfectly good soldiers over there just for some stupid liberation shit that they aren't even willing to fight for. Yeah, you're right, I do admit things go wrong, just look at somolia. What a waste on our part. And they don't even want our help, I say fuck em. In this case we should definitely not go in unless it does serve economical gain. For all I care, they can live in the poverty life that they apparently are willing to fight in order to maintain.
now here is where the "liberations" come in again. bombing _does_ create more terrorism out of the same reason as u pointed out. why were they raised to hate americans? cuz you bombed them. cuz u sanctioned them.
cuz you helped some fascist fuckers come to power and oppress them. then the fascist at the top happens to feed them with anti-american bullshit after he develops a mind of his own and turns against you. the joke is that you put the fascist in power. then there is some effort to be taken to get rid of him.
Like I said, when we tear down a crap government, a new one has to replace it. The fact that saddam is corrupt has nothing to do with us, thats his own business. Our mistake was putting him there. I never said we were perfect. Take cuba for example. The fact that castro became corrupt had nothing to do with us. He actualy started out pretty good.
diffrent example: a war was waged against a country backed by the u.s. cuz the opponent country happened to be a good economic partner. anti americanism does not come out of nowhere my friend.
another one: backing israel with its clearly racist actions against the palestenians, is it a wonder their kids are largely brought up to be anti-american?
your problem is you try to seek the problem elsewhere when it actually is created on your own part.
erm .. no. you should remove the reason why anti-american things can be believed by people.
Actualy I would be lieing if I said I knew jack shit about what is going on in isreal. Perhapse somebody who lives there, like |dude|, could give us a better idea of what exactly the US is doing? And his oppinion on whether or not we should just leave isreal to the hands of the pallistinians?
possibly, but only if you are succesful, which i wouldnt bet my shoes on. and besides, where is my grant that iraq will have a better government after saddam? i havent heard a whole lot from your govt about whats going to happen to the country. you realize that if it wont turn out to be good, these people will continue hating you..
now imo all this "liberation" stuff is made up by your government so that the american people can feel noble. actually i cant see much interest in liberating the iraqis from their part. this is more a side effect of the whole operation.
Currently that argument is only speculation. Time will tell what the result will be. But that said, it's pretty sad that you want to see the citizens of iraq suffer simply because you want the US to fail.
BTW, I am still waiting for your response to this:
The moral of the story: You need to take an honest look at your philosophy. Your philosophy says this: Say a gangster murdered somebody in cold blood, and he was being arraigned. His gang says to release him, or they will commit more anonymous murders until he is released scott free. According to you, we should let the murderer go scott free, not having a thing to worry about for commiting his crime. You know, we don't want anybody else to be put in any danger just for some guy who is already dead.
:happy:
lain:. I am sorry if I offened anybody, but I think that the only way to achieve long term peace is to take out leaders such as Saddam. I know nobody is prefect, either action (fight or not to fight Iraq) could lead to nasty situations. However, in my opinion, fighting against saddam and liberate Iraq is the better thing to do than to leave it to its nuclear and biological programs. I think we put in more inspectors and give them more time could help (Althought Chances are slim). However, the fact is, as stated by Bush, the US will go it along if it has to. Now, I don't think there are coutry that is willing to help Iraq to fight against US...
