World: not U.S. role to spread democracy

[gh0st]

But why do they want to kick us in the first place?

It's for things we have done.

Of course. Its the things they percieve we have done. I dont deny you that point, but humanitarian missions only? Big mistake. Its too late to take back the things the last couple generations have done (which I have no inclination to defend right now, I have other things on my mind) but not defending ourselves is a bigger mistake.

 

[Cole]

The U.S. doesn't really make a huge push on spreading democracy..but it does influence it.

But for countries that it does influence it does not make there democracy system work exactly like ours.

 

[^Ben]

It's a tricky situation but I don't think we should of gone to the extreme to invade a country, which has for the short term and possibly the long term has made things much worse.

We should of kept OBL in hiding and worked on some of the other world problems.

I'm not saying lay back and let them kick us, but at the moment we are just creating more of them to kick us while we gradually get weaker.

 

[gh0st]

It's a tricky situation but I don't think we should of gone to the extreme to invade a country, which has for the short term and possibly the long term has made things much worse.

We should of kept OBL in hiding and worked on some of the other world problems.

I'm not saying lay back and let them kick us, but at the moment we are just creating more of them to kick us while we gradually get weaker.

I dont think we should have either. But were stuck with it so we make the best of it that we can. I would disagree with much worse, in fact, I think it will make things better in the long run.

OBL is in hiding. If we keep him alive, he simply formulates plans to destroy America and the freedoms you and I hold dear. He's a dangerous terrorist, and keeping him alive is a liability.

More of what? My country hasnt been attacked any time lately. Dangerous dictator is gone, a country has now chosen the democractic path (ironic, considering people are claiming we imposed it upon them; they gave it to themselves), soon it will be over and the world will be better. Iraqs neighbors will see how life should be lives, and democracy will thrive, by the PEOPLES choice, in the middle east. You are far too pessimistic my friend.

 

[^Ben]

I'll reply later im just researching my further points.

 

[kmack]

Gh0st, it is you who do not know the story of Cuba.
After "Rescuing" Cuba from Spanish rule (starting with the much debated bombing of the U.S.S. Maine). In fact Cuba was on the verge of self-liberation, and only the United States intervention prevented them from finally ousting thier Spanish oppressors. After the victory in the Spanish American war we moved right in to assume their role. 80% of Cuba's economy came under the control of United States Businesses. (I should note, we did much the same thing in the Phillipines, and in the years after we took over from the Spanish, we raped and murdered over 200,000 CIVILIANS in the Phillipines. Their resistance was guerrilla tactics, and to fight it, US Generals ordered thousands of innocent people killed because they could be a threat, these men were later Court Martialed for their actions). By 1920 U.S. Business men OWNED TWO THIRDS of the arable land in Cuba. The United States kept a military prescense to quell uprisings and protect the business' assets. While the big business men in the U.S. thrived, 600,000 (big number, no denying that) Cubans had no employment, the rest worked in terrible conditions for little pay, or resorted to drug trafficking (this is all in the 1930's). The revolution (begun in 1956) was because Communism seemed to be a viable option, and it was seen as a viable option because of what the UNITED STATES did. When two thirds of your country is owned by foreigners and you (and 599,999 others) are jobless, Communism seems like a damn good idea. Despite the CIA's best efforts (in 1959 they sent in Sabateurs to end the revolt, but failed) and a full scale (Authorized by our president) invasion was FLATLY DESTROYED by the revolutionaries. Yes they were communists, but being communists was far better than what they faced under our rule.

That is all fact.

Arguably the story of the Phillipines is much worse, but unfortunatly our tactics there were so barbarian they could not resist effectively (and the Cubans had Soviet support, a key factor lackeed by the Phillipinos). Our relations slowly improved and we again liberated them in WWII and since then we have enjoyed good relations.

 

[CptStern]

I would disagree with much worse, in fact, I think it will make things better in the long run.

was that your motivation when you installed saddam?


"While many have thought that Saddam first became involved with U.S. intelligence agencies at the start of the September 1980 Iran-Iraq war, his first contacts with U.S. officials date back to 1959, when he was part of a CIA-authorized six-man squad tasked with assassinating then Iraqi Prime Minister Gen. Abd al-Karim Qasim."

source


it astounds me how so few of you who support the war actually looked at the facts before hand

 

[gh0st]

was that your motivation when you installed saddam?

it astounds me how so few of you who support the war actually looked at the facts before hand

I didnt support the war. However I'm not clueless enough to say that no good will come from it. If I can see beyond partisan lines stern, maybe you could too.

Oh wait. None of this has to do with installing saddam. Diplomatic ties change, surely a wise old sage such as yourself knows that.

 

[KoreBolteR]

was that your motivation when you installed saddam?


"While many have thought that Saddam first became involved with U.S. intelligence agencies at the start of the September 1980 Iran-Iraq war, his first contacts with U.S. officials date back to 1959, when he was part of a CIA-authorized six-man squad tasked with assassinating then Iraqi Prime Minister Gen. Abd al-Karim Qasim."

source


it astounds me how so few of you who support the war actually looked at the facts before hand

on that 'source' you gave, where does 'the information clearing house' get all thier stories? i just find it hard to understand on how this website can know so much.

surely not all that can be personal opinions of the people who write for the site....

 

[CptStern]

yup ..it ended when saddam got tired of playing for the americans and decided to invade kuwait (his biggest mistake) oh did you read the part where the CIA gave lists of suspected iraqi communists to saddam who mysteriously wound up dead shortly afterward ...to the tune of 4000?

40 years of involvement with saddam ...bound to be tons of skeletons in the closet ...big big skeletons with gnarly teeth ...why do you think saddam wont be tried in an international court even though he commited crimes outside of iraq?

 

[KoreBolteR]

why you on 4 warning levels cpt?
u was on 2 last time i checked...

 

[CptStern]

on that 'source' you gave, where does 'the information clearing house' get all thier stories? i just find it hard to understand on how this website can know so much.

surely not all that can be personal opinions of the people who write for the site....

please kore can you please take the time to cross reference it? the author also writes for the washington times and United Press International

 

[The Monkey]

Cuba, cuba. I'll go easy on you since you have the history of cuba grossly wrong. As I recall cuba was liberated (by Teddy Roosevelt no less ) by the United States. Only after we granted them their freedom (big mistake, for them) did they turn into the communist hypocrites they are now. Che Guevara is a communist, nothing more, and he worked for Castro, executing innocent people as they went. Thats not freedom. The philipines I'm inclined to agree with, but there were economic reasons for taking them, though I recall us granting them their freedom, such as a gateway to trade with Asia - a wise inclination by our leaders of the time. Manifest destiny was still 'in' at this point, and the Monroe Doctrine (ie, kicking europe out of the western hemisphere) was still in effect, which is another reason for us taking cuba over, and fighting with the spanish. However, I would argue you couldnt say this was very imperialistic. The imperialism of European powers of old was much greater, and MUCH more harmful. Even into the 20th century when Britain took over parts of the middle east after ww1, harvesting oil for their own benefit, Europes control of foreign soil has been devastating.

If we limit ourselves to humanitarian missions, terror thrives. Simple as that.

So wait, are you actaully saying that Cuba was a democracy before the communist revlolution? Fulgencio Batista was a dictator even worse that Castro. He starved his own people in order so increase his own wealth. But hey, but hey, he allowed american corporations, and he was against communism, so what does it matter if he killed thousands of innocent people?

 

[Lemonking]

Germany is unimportant,they envy the US. They will never do a millitary op again. thats why they where all mad
france are just as wussies
peolpe in france seem to forget that without the US they would be speaking German.And if its the role of of the most powerfull nation of the World to spread democracy then who has that role?
Poland, Ukraine ,Canada no I dont think so

 

[burner69]

Germany is unimportant,they envy the US. They will never do a millitary op again. thats why they where all mad
france are just as wussies
peolpe in france seem to forget that without the US they would be speaking German.And if its the role of of the most powerfull nation of the World to spread democracy then who has that role?
Poland, Ukraine ,Canada no I dont think so

Ah, so France owe America, and therefore should let them do what they want? If Pearl Harbour hadn't have happened would France still owe you? Really, France owe Japan for stirring up the US - should Japan run around spreading their social ideals to nations?

Democracy is not something we can force upon nations, it needs to make it's own way there. Sure, we can help them, but by looking at past experiences with 'getting involved' in other countries, we don't tend to do that - often quite the opposite in fact.

 

[Absinthe]

Germany is unimportant,they envy the US. They will never do a millitary op again. thats why they where all mad
france are just as wussies
peolpe in france seem to forget that without the US they would be speaking German.And if its the role of of the most powerfull nation of the World to spread democracy then who has that role?
Poland, Ukraine ,Canada no I dont think so

You talk like a moron. I'll ignore your stupid baseless jabs at foreign nations, since this ignorance has probably been ingrained into you with freakin' sandpaper since birth. I'll just say that past actions do not absolve you from current crimes. If I saved a bus full of children a week ago, I'm still going to get a jail sentence if I assault and rape a woman tomorrow.


You people manage to butcher every ****ing topic in the Politics forum, and I'm proably just as guilty as any man.

Screw it, this has gotten tiresome now. I've had enough of it.

 

[CptStern]

ya cuz the brits and canadians did nothing to liberate france ..it was the mighty americans that saved the day ...2 whole years before you guys mustered the courage to charge to our rescue we were slogging in the trenches

revisionist history is freakin annoying

 

[Lemonking]

ya cuz the brits and canadians did nothing to liberate france ..it was the mighty americans that saved the day ...2 whole years before you guys mustered the courage to charge to our rescue we were slogging in the trenches

revisionist history is freakin annoying

without the US UK wouldnt had the money and the war mashines
to hold against the Germans
The Germans knew that the Americans where giving alot of Buck
to the brits that why Operation Seeloewe never happend
but stillk the Brits and Canadians also played an important role
and also payed with thousands of lives.

 

[Lemonking]

You talk like a moron. I'll ignore your stupid baseless jabs at foreign nations, since this ignorance has probably been ingrained into you with freakin' sandpaper since birth. I'll just say that past actions do not absolve you from current crimes. If I saved a bus full of children a week ago, I'm still going to get a jail sentence if I assault and rape a woman tomorrow.


You people manage to butcher every ****ing topic in the Politics forum, and I'm proably just as guilty as any man.

Screw it, this has gotten tiresome now. I've had enough of it.

could u explain whats baseless about my opinion?
and im not a moron :flame:

 

[MJB006]

Lemonking is right in that the british would not have lasted without the aid of American military supply. British military supply in wwII was highly inferior to that of the Germans. Yes the British and the Canadians did fight hard and with plenty of force but much like iraq (both times) it was in a supporting role to the much larger American force which took large portions of the beaches and territory across Europe. British dominated the African theater however.

 

[seinfeldrules]

ya cuz the brits and canadians did nothing to liberate france ..it was the mighty americans that saved the day ...2 whole years before you guys mustered the courage to charge to our rescue we were slogging in the trenches

Mustered the courage? Mustered the courage stern? How about you tell that to the 400,000 dead American soldiers from WWII who died freeing your nation, I'm sure they're all a bunch of cowards who waited it out as long as possible

 

[kmack]

Gh0st no reply for the Cuban Revolution? please, dont preach to me about the right of a country to defend itself in the name of communism.

 

[GhostFox]

How about you tell that to the 400,000 dead American soldiers from WWII who died freeing your nation

To be fair, Sterny is Canadian, and like the US, Canada never was under any threat from Hitler. An invasion of NA would have been logistically impossible. Canada never needed saving.

That being said, I think it goes to show how powerful the sacrifice was of US and Canadian soldiers was, because they could have stayed out of the war completely and lived in peace.

 

[clarky003]

didnt America use the second world war as impetus to get out of the great depression... it benifited the government at the time so they purposely didnt warn those in Pearl habour about the approaching attack, in order to give them a forseeable reason to goto war, all in order to allow the bankers to make the money that they needed to make to stop the depression.

 

[GhostFox]

didnt America use the second world war as impetus to get out of the great depression... it benifited the government at the time so they purposely didnt warn those in Pearl habour about the approaching attack, in order to give them a forseeable reason to goto war, all in order to allow the bankers to make the money that they needed to make to stop the depression.

No. While the war did signifigantly boost the post-depression economic boom, PH was not some big govt. conspiracy. War can be great for th economy as WW2 showed, but it also could have been detrimental. The fact is it would have been too dangerous of a game to play, even if FDR had wanted to let the attack happen. What if instead of galvanizing the american public for war, it made Joe American realize that he didn't want any more americans dying for a European war, and therefore the American public became united against the war? It just as easily could have been counterproductive.

While conspiracy theorists love the idea of FDR letting PH happen (or causing it) the fact is that there is no truth to those assertions.

 

[seinfeldrules]

To be fair, Sterny is Canadian, and like the US, Canada never was under any threat from Hitler. An invasion of NA would have been logistically impossible. Canada never needed saving

We was talking about his relatives in France I believe.

 

[gh0st]

After "Rescuing" Cuba from Spanish rule (starting with the much debated bombing of the U.S.S. Maine). In fact Cuba was on the verge of self-liberation, and only the United States intervention prevented them from finally ousting thier Spanish oppressors.

Right off the bat, pure bullshit. The cuban insurgency (yes, thats exactly what they were) BEGGED to be recognized by the US, because their campaigns against the spanish were not going so hot. They werent on the verge of anything, while the Spanish did grant some autonomy to the Cubans, it was not until the Maine was destroyed (by a sea mine, by the way, not sure where you got bombing from) that we actually sent troops there, and, well, you know, won.

After the victory in the Spanish American war we moved right in to assume their role. 80% of Cuba's economy came under the control of United States Businesses. (I should note, we did much the same thing in the Phillipines, and in the years after we took over from the Spanish, we raped and murdered over 200,000 CIVILIANS in the Phillipines.

More lies. Teller amendment clearly says that the US government has no juristiction in cuba, and would assume no such role. What american farmers do is none of the governments business, you should know that. Lets see the sources of that 200,000 number please

Their resistance was guerrilla tactics, and to fight it, US Generals ordered thousands of innocent people killed because they could be a threat, these men were later Court Martialed for their actions). By 1920 U.S. Business men OWNED TWO THIRDS of the arable land in Cuba.

Because back in the day, US military leaders had 'spine' and were willing to make tough choices for a greater good.

When two thirds of your country is owned by foreigners and you (and 599,999 others) are jobless, Communism seems like a damn good idea. Despite the CIA's best efforts (in 1959 they sent in Sabateurs to end the revolt, but failed) and a full scale (Authorized by our president) invasion was FLATLY DESTROYED by the revolutionaries. Yes they were communists, but being communists was far better than what they faced under our rule.

Basically what we did in Hawaii during this time. Dole (yes, the pineapple guy) essentially gained statehood by owning the business there. A wise business move, too, byt he way. I dont knock them whatsoever. Oh, flatly destroyed? If you mean sending cuban peasants back to cuba to take it back, you are just full of shit. that wasnt a full scale invasion by any stretch of the imagination (except maybe an america haters imagination)
[/QUOTE]

Dont cram your liberal 70s history down my throat, I dont hate america and neither should you. Frankly though, this little path we took is getting off topic, so I'm gonna end this particular conversation right here.

 

[CptStern]

We was talking about his relatives in France I believe.

france? no

 

[seinfeldrules]

Oh man I am too tired. I just noticed I used 'we' instead of 'he'.

 

[CptStern]

my relatives are not from france

 

[gh0st]

my relatives are not from france

Yeah right.

 

[bliink]

Topic.

 

[kmack]

Because back in the day, US military leaders had 'spine' and were willing to make tough choices for a greater good.

That is disgusting. You realize that we ordered 100,000 + Phillipino's into CONCENTRATION CAMPS, where conditions were so awful over 11,000 people died, were it not for a court martial and change of leadership, who knows what would have happened. These are the things done not by great leaders, but by tyrants (Do you say that Hitler had a spine and was making tough choices for a greater good? you probably would.).

 

[kmack]

More lies. Teller amendment clearly says that the US government has no juristiction in cuba, and would assume no such role. What american farmers do is none of the governments business, you should know that. Lets see the sources of that 200,000 number please

Farmers are not the problem. It is the businessmen who own and operate the sugar factories.

This isn't liberal bullshit, and it's not from the 1970's. I am a history major and this particular arguement related to what I am working on at the moment. I am reading accounts of the Phillipino Revolution from the poit of the Americans (Including Mark Twain) and they are just as displeased as EVERYONE should be to this day. I cannot believe you called the military officials who ordered the moving of philipino citizens into CONCENTRATION CAMPS for the greater good. Is ordering the women raped, and boys as young as TEN killed because they could still pose a threat for the greater good? If you truley believe that, truley in your heart justify that, then I can assure you you have never left your home town, you do not know a way of life other than luxery, and your moral beliefs are a heinous affront to the civilized world. The only greater good that came from that was the advancement of American business.

 

[GhostFox]

I am a history major and this particular arguement related to what I am working on at the moment.

Unfortunately in the world today that is meaningless. As I have said before I know someone who was a history minor until her professor insisted that Lincoln hated black people and wanted to increase slavery, and failed half the class for arguing that the emancipation proclamation intended to free the slaves.

Now I am not saying that your professor is like that, but I am saying that they will teach you what they want to, regardless of the truth. In reality we need some sort of educational regulatory comission to get political agendas out of our schools and universities.

 

[clarky003]

you know what would be nice, if we had less realist's in this world, and more of the right kind of idealist's, just that alone would make the world a better place if you ask me.

 

[CptStern]

but I am saying that they will teach you what they want to, regardless of the truth.

how ironic

 

[ComradeBadger]

Unfortunately in the world today that is meaningless. As I have said before I know someone who was a history minor until her professor insisted that Lincoln hated black people and wanted to increase slavery, and failed half the class for arguing that the emancipation proclamation intended to free the slaves.

Now I am not saying that your professor is like that, but I am saying that they will teach you what they want to, regardless of the truth. In reality we need some sort of educational regulatory comission to get political agendas out of our schools and universities.

That kind of teaching is illegal over here

 

[kmack]

I assure you, it is illegal over here too. If it were true, a student would go to a university official (if not because of the content, because of the grade) and there would be a scandal sensationalized in the media.

I should also note, that i have not stated my opinions gh0st, i have stated fact. Things found in books, and unlike professors, school text books are generally about the facts, and not the authors opinions. They have the numbers in them, they have the testimonials from people who lived it. Everything I said is true. You gave your opinions on the people of Cuba and the Phillipines and the US role, you didnt give any facts. I gave you the facts.

 

[GhostFox]

I assure you, it is illegal over here too. If it were true, a student would go to a university official (if not because of the content, because of the grade) and there would be a scandal sensationalized in the media.

Apparently you never watch TV or read the newspaper. It's hard to go a day without another story of political bias controlling the education system.

It is in no way illegal. I just read about the most popular professor at a university being fired because he refused to push a liberal agenda in his course and instead kept his political beliefs out of the instruction.

Everyone should push for the Academic Bill of Rights. Politics should play no role in education. http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org/