See, there you go again with inane and meaningless generalities. Exactly what American "aggression" are you talking about that supposedly justifies the international "community" (there's an unearned term) nuking the US?? Without at least a few specific indictments of such capital level wrongdoing to quantify your hitherto meangingless vaguries, you're just passing gas in cyberspace
I suggest you read up on the American history of interference and war mongering, rather than come to me for your education...
now, as i said earlier, i really don't think you two have any real reason to keep up the argument. josh_b recently very nicely came up with this re our less than glamorous history: "Why is the USA so frequently the victim of resentment around the world Why The USA? Introduction This section attempts to answer the question: why is the USA so frequently the victim of resentment around the world? The USA government blames hatred of democracy and envy at the American way of life for this resentment. Many people in the USA and a majority around the world look towards USA foreign policy for the answers. Much of this policy, its history and consequences is under-reported by the American media. Tables and Lists of USA Actions Since 1945 USA Backed Coups http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa01.html USA Invasions, Bombings, Military Aid Political Interventions and Sanctions http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa02.html Use of the Veto on United Nations Resolutions by the USA http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa03.html Involvement of USA Companies http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa04.html USA: Nuclear, Biological and Chemical http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa05.html Civilian Victims of USA Foreign Policy http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa06.html Some of our Korea activities: ...The USA drops 70,000 gallons (265m3) of napalm per day on Korea. This is a substance made from benzene, polystyrene and gasoline that catches fire and sticks to flesh. The victim is either burned to death or suffocated by lack of oxygen... ...During the war in Korea, USA aircraft drop a number of diseased objects (feathers, bacteria, decaying animals, fish parts) in Korea and China. Many people die from plague, anthrax and encephalitis... ...Between 1967 and 1969 the USA sprays Agent Orange over 23,607 acres (95km2) in the border region between North Korea and South Korea. Agent Orange is a defoliant and contains dioxin, a chemical producing cancer and genetic defects in babies.. Maybe better educated public, will help forge a better foreign and domestic policy. A policy of progress, civilization, and true respect for what this country stands for. We need to be a leader by example and not by force. I just hope cool heads prevail Josh"
You used that line already on Katrina. It's a very poor dodge suggesting you have no meaningful points to make. Nobodies asking for a doctoral thesis here - three bullet points of specific instances/events you characterize as "war mongering and US interferance" which justifies Hiroshima-level response would be enough to illustrate your case. With your duplicated (and very lame) response, you've used more words than you'd need for those three bullet points.
The fact that you are blind is striking... see the post immediately above your last one, if you can't be bothered to research the facts for yourself, and instead prefer your ignorance to be transformed to an appropriate level of knowledge through factual spoonfeeding.... ... your response is extremely disappointing (but probably reflective of the mass ignorance which pervades the USA), and I am therefore not surprised that you are unable to research and analyze things for yourself... the generalized ignorance of the masses is surely no less than sheer bliss, from the perspective of the US policymakers... moreover, ignorance caused by mass complacency in seeking out the facts, when the facts are widely documented, is even more of a blessing to the US policymakers... ... it is because of the ignorance of the masses (of which you are merely a representative) that US foreign policy continues to benefit from the green light of domestic consensus... I replicated the response that I offered to Katrina (aka Fasterpussycat) because I sensed (with retrospective justification) that your mind would be closed, and would be therefore incapable of an adequate level of reflection on anything I said... I urge you to open your mind up to the facts... indeed you should go beyond the passive and you should actively seek out the facts... failure to do so will continue to confine you to the wastepaper basket of the ignorance of the masses... I wish you good luck on your journey... I would hasten to add that I made the journey that I am now advocating to you... I used to be in favor of bombing anything that the media told us was a threat to the West... twas only when I became a seeker out of the facts that I had a rude awakening, an awakening that made me conclude that Western policy was not pristine and, indeed, that it was shocking...
I love the list of coups the VVV loves to post no matter what the discussion is...tell me, how many coups were done under Democratic presidents? It looks like 70% of all the so called coups occurred between 1960 and 1972.....Hmmm. Im also amazed at how once a republican takes office..he's a war monger...Bill CLinton bombed Iraq every time he had heat from his latest intern BJ ..but that's ok..He invaded some Village in Africa to accomplish i don't know what (Black Hawk Down)...but that's ok.....Bush has not launched a single missile and has sought and been granted approval from the senate, house and UN....but still he is a war monger. I guess old stereotypes die hard. I must admit though, I believe the terrorists attacks on 9-11 worked because i can't believe the cowardice tones in many of these posts...it's almost as if you want us to not say this or do this in order to avoid another terrorist attack. i say this without reservation: If any of you had a loved one killed innocently on September 11th , you would all certainly be singing another song. Also try to remember that my biggest beef with Goerge W. up to Sept. 10th was that he spent all his time at camp david...he cared as much about saddam as clinton did. Our hand was forced and we cannot wait around and hope he doesn't do something...he lost a war...he agreed to conditions of surrender...he failed to live up to them and the truth is 4 years ago is when we should have done this.
TM_Direct: Unless I missed reading some parts of this thread, I'm not sure where anyone talked about fault of repubs or dems, Bush or Clinton in particular. Maybe we need a thread to discuss all the bs each administration has shoved down the throats of our fellow citizens and the world for that matter. But also it's evident that when we get into all these geopolitical discussions just about everything is interrelated. Who is in charge, who's interests are served, who controls the money flow, who controls the guns, the media, the spin doctors, the politics, the war machine, the need to sell weapons, oil, how to bring the $$$ back that we spend for it, the divide and conquer, the basic human traits behind it, greed, power, fear, and the list can become extremely long. Yes you are correct, some of the discussion has taken of tangents and a bit away from the original thread tittle. So this recent Rumsfeld's response to UN resolutions and inspectors, maybe a more pertinent post: ...The president has said repeatedly that if Iraq does not disarm, the United States would lead "a coalition of the willing" to disarm Iraq by force... I wonder if nobody is willing, will Bush attack alone? ...officials have said the resolution also prohibits Iraq from firing on U.S. and British planes patrolling no-fly zones set up to protect Kurds in northern Iraq and Shiite Muslims in southern Iraq... I'm not sure if this is funny or sad, but for sure it is ironic. We are protecting the same Kurds, that 15 years ago we gave saddam all the bios and chems he wanted and we helped him gas 6,000 of them. What will these Kurds and Shiite thing about US and UK now? wonder what pawns have they become in who's game again? ...But U.S. officials have been deliberately vague about whether they would view any Iraqi firings as a breach of the latest U.N. resolution and therefore an automatic trigger for war.... So what is the automatic trigger? ...A caller to the radio show asked Rumsfeld about the recent parliamentary elections in Pakistan, in which pro-Taliban parties won 59 of the 342 seats. Rumsfeld said he was sympathetic to President Pervez Musharraf's attempts to "manage that country as a moderate Muslim state." "The last thing anyone in the world would want is to see Pakistan as a failed state or a Taliban state, which would be the same thing," Rumsfeld said.... Imagine Pakistan electing through a "democratic" process a Taliban majority gov't. Do we attack them next day? And why don't we attack Pakistan now? After all the Taliban/al-queda are still our greatest enemy as of 1999 and definitely after 9/11.. right? http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,70317,00.html I just hope cool heads prevail. Josh
insiteful reply and you raise some interesting points. I think the key element everyone is missing is the question of whether we would or should act alone if the Iraq situation calls for it. I believe we have no choice if you rationally think about it. We (usa) were the ones who received the threats and the attacks....Europe and asia did not...What's more is that out side of England. most of Europe is a bunch of spineless cowards who have no moral fiber to speak of...France lost it's country in about 8 days in WWII and handed their Jews over to Hitler..Another key point is the so called Super8 of the UN...There is no more super 8...there is basically China, US and Britain...Russia is still considered a super power but realistically if a full scale war broke out, they would have to fight abroad and at home amongst their provinces. As far as the Pakistan situation, I don't think we have a problem with the Taliban or their religion...All the taliban had to do last year was turn over al quda and they could have been sparred. I think the same would hold true if Pakistan went the same route, where by they promote and protect terrorists cells...On the other hand, Al queda released a statement over the weekend in which they threatened more attacks of the US does not convert to Islam....hardly sounds like a Democratic theme to me.