NationStates Jolt Archive

The US has supported dictatorships in numerous countries, often when the alternative was democracy. It has decided that people were unfit to choose their leader and supported a military dictatorship in the democratic government's place, simply because the government supported policies that threatened US economic power.

To name a few examples:

Chile - 1973 - the US coordinated the coup which placed Pinochet's fascist regime in power. we must alway remember september 11th 1973.

Nicaragua - the US gov't suppressed Sandino's rebellion in the 1920s and installed the Somoza regime. The US gov't attacked the Sandinista regime in the 1980s and supported the Somocista Contra terrorists in Honduras (there were also Sandinista Contras in Costa Rica). The Iran-Contra conspiracy involved the latter intervention.

Argentina - the US gov't supported the military dictatorship in the 1980s. Kissinger personally discussed and approved the disappearences; he is on tape.

Guatemala - the US gov't (or the CIA) overthrew the Arbenz gov't in the 1950s.

Iran - the US gov't overthrew the republic and installed the monarchy in the 1950s.

Dominican Republic - the US gov't invaded in the 1960s.

Indonesia - the US gov't overthrew the Sukarno gov't and installed the Suharto regime in the 1960s.

Zaire - the US gov't assassinated several politicians, sent mercenaries to defeat local rebels in the east (Operation Dragon Rouge) and installed the Mobutu regime.

El Salvador - the US gov't funded the death squads in the 1980s.

Iraq - the US gov't supported Saddam Hussein in the 1980s. if that was bad enough, the US gov't then supported Chalabi in the 1990s and until last spring.

South Korea - the US gov't supported the military dictatorship in the 1980s. (it certainly had enough troops on the peninsula to influence policy towards democracy ... if it wanted to)

Haiti - the US gov't occupied Haiti in the 1920s and backed the recent coup.

Bolivia - the US gov't supported the coup in the 1960s.

Philippines - the cases are legion.

Peru - the US gov't supported the Fujimori regime.

This is hardly new and explosive information.

Don't forget Pakistan, the latest US junior-dictatorship, led by Musharraf, who removed democracy from that country.

Yeah, well, he who controls the spice, controls the Universe.

*cough* Panama *cough* It's not everyday that a nation's president is a CIA operative.

And you're OK with the fact that the US has supported these dictatorships?

And the point of this shocking and exclusive information is?

Yeah, well, he who controls the spice, controls the Universe.



Also he who has the oil has the money and power. :gundge: :gundge:

And you're OK with the fact that the US has supported these dictatorships?
No, but not all these dictatorships are still around.

And we don't need to be told the US uses violence on a grand scale.

The point is that the US isn't pro-freedom and actually supports dictatorships when it benefits the US.

I aloready know this stuff, Letila.

When we supported those dictatorships it was for the purpose of either helping someone else, who, then, was better (Eg: Supporting Iraq in the 70's and not IRan but now we are at war with Iraq). Times change kid, sometimes we need to support something we don't like for the better of the two outcomes. Get used to it, many countries do it.

*drumroll*The point is that the US isn't pro-freedom and actually supports dictatorships when it benefits the US.

And you're OK with the fact that the US has supported these dictatorships?
No, but I can't pick where I'm born, can I?

When we supported those dictatorships it was for the purpose of either helping someone else, who, then, was better (Eg: Supporting Iraq in the 70's and not IRan but now we are at war with Iraq). Times change kid, sometimes we need to support something we don't like for the better of the two outcomes. Get used to it, many countries do it.

So in other words, it would be ok for me to shoot you if it benefited me? The US claims to be fighting for freedom, so why did they support so many dictatorships?

When we supported those dictatorships it was for the purpose of either helping someone else, who, then, was better (Eg: Supporting Iraq in the 70's and not IRan but now we are at war with Iraq). Times change kid, sometimes we need to support something we don't like for the better of the two outcomes. Get used to it, many countries do it.
So it is OK to be anti-freedom abroad if it helps the state?

So it is OK to be anti-freedom abroad if it helps the state?
As long as its republicans who do it :) (kidding)

So in other words, it would be ok for me to shoot you if it benefited me? The US claims to be fighting for freedom, so why did they support so many dictatorships?
To fight communism, most of the time.

To fight communism, most of the time.

So it replaces one dictatorship with another? How does that solve anything?

So it replaces one dictatorship with another? How does that solve anything?
We don't (didn't) have to worry about resources from a particular country falling into the hands of the enemy, didn't have to worry about dominoes, or another Cuban Missile Crisis.

We don't (didn't) have to worry about resources from a particular country falling into the hands of the enemy, didn't have to worry about dominoes, or another Cuban Missile Crisis.

Then why didn't we make them democracies?

Then why didn't we make them democracies?
Because they have an annoying habit of demanding rights and selecting their own government which may not be friendly.

Best not to leave some things to chance.

Then why didn't we make them democracies?
You said it yourself, democracies were what produced some of the regimes we were trying to take out in the first place. What good is it if we take out Allende and his far-left allies and they elect others to replace him?

I'm shocked! /sarcasm off.

NO FLAMING

That's BS, the U.S. didn't overthrow Sukarno, Suharto did. Although Suharto was probably a thousand times worse, that doesn't change the fact that Sukarno was a dictator, also.

Somoza was not a dictator. That's more left-wing BS spread by Dan Blather and the rest of our communist media.

You said it yourself, democracies were what produced some of the regimes we were trying to take out in the first place. What good is it if we take out Allende and his far-left allies and they elect others to replace him?

So what right did we have to decide who ruled the Chileans?

That's BS, the U.S. didn't overthrow Sukarno, Suharto did. Although Suharto was probably a thousand times worse, that doesn't change the fact that Sukarno was a dictator, also.

Somoza was not a dictator. That's more left-wing BS spread by Dan Blather and the rest of our communist media.

Communist media? :confused: It looks rather pro-capitalism to me.

Of course, there's this: http://www.antenna.nl/wvi/eng/ic/pki/pds.html

So what right did we have to decide who ruled the Chileans?
What rights are there in international politics?

Listen, The real world isnt defined by good and bad, boys and girls! Some times you must choose The lesser of two evils. Example: Iran(which had taken U.S. citizens captive, attacked U.S. Helicopters, and was totally Anti-U.S.) against Iraq(not entirely evil yet, run by some tin-pot dictator with really no power, still had ties with U.S.).

And dont get me STARTED on Great Britain! Or Germany! Or France! Or any other of your crazy little European countries!(only country that has its hands clean so far is Canada...)

BTW- Noriega(the Panamanian Dictator) wasn't COnfirmed to be a CIA agent. Not to mention during the 80's all he did was threaten teh U.S. He even declared WAR on the U.S.! of course he was defeated and now sits in a Miami-district prison, but still!

Oh, and i LIVE in Panama, so i would know.

So what right did we have to decide who ruled the Chileans?
Every right.

Yup, thats right. Every right in the world? You know why? We saved the world from impending doom 50 bagillion times! If a nation poses a threat to hemispherical Security... i dont wanna be that country.

And the U.S. has supported far worse dictators than the ones you mentioned. What about the U.S.S.R., Ho Chi Minh, Robert Mugabe, Pol Pot, Souphanouvang, and all the other communists we put in power?

Listen, The real world isnt defined by good and bad, boys and girls!
If only Bush knew that.

Every right.

Yup, thats right. Every right in the world? You know why? We saved the world from impending doom 50 bagillion times! If a nation poses a threat to hemispherical Security... i dont wanna be that country.

So freedom was ignored when the American empire was at stake. How nice.

Listen, The real world isnt defined by good and bad, boys and girls! Some times you must choose The lesser of two evils. Example: Iran(which had taken U.S. citizens captive, attacked U.S. Helicopters, and was totally Anti-U.S.) against Iraq(not entirely evil yet, run by some tin-pot dictator with really no power, still had ties with U.S.).

And dont get me STARTED on Great Britain! Or Germany! Or France! Or any other of your crazy little European countries!(only country that has its hands clean so far is Canada...)

BTW- Noriega(the Panamanian Dictator) wasn't COnfirmed to be a CIA agent. Not to mention during the 80's all he did was threaten teh U.S. He even declared WAR on the U.S.! of course he was defeated and now sits in a Miami-district prison, but still!

Oh, and i LIVE in Panama, so i would know.

So why didn't the benevolent US support democracies instead?

Listen, The real world isnt defined by good and bad, boys and girls! Some times you must choose The lesser of two evils. Example: Iran(which had taken U.S. citizens captive, attacked U.S. Helicopters, and was totally Anti-U.S.) against Iraq(not entirely evil yet, run by some tin-pot dictator with really no power, still had ties with U.S.).

And dont get me STARTED on Great Britain! Or Germany! Or France! Or any other of your crazy little European countries!(only country that has its hands clean so far is Canada...)

BTW- Noriega(the Panamanian Dictator) wasn't COnfirmed to be a CIA agent. Not to mention during the 80's all he did was threaten teh U.S. He even declared WAR on the U.S.! of course he was defeated and now sits in a Miami-district prison, but still!

Oh, and i LIVE in Panama, so i would know.


Currently we are for the greater of two evils: We are against Iraq more than Iran.
So what do you mean lesser of two evils: When was last time we did that?

No offense, but if you hate the U.S. so much, why don't you leave?

No offense, but if you hate the U.S. so much, why don't you leave?
I don't think that it is he hates the US, just the government.

And the U.S. has supported far worse dictators than the ones you mentioned. What about the U.S.S.R., Ho Chi Minh, Robert Mugabe, Pol Pot, Souphanouvang, and all the other communists we put in power?

WE never put communists in power!

What books have you been readin, boy?

The U.S.S.R. was an ally of necessisty! If we didn't have the U.S.S.R on our side, we'd all going Heil Hitler! right now.

And Robert Mugabe isn't Communist...

1.So freedom was ignored when the American empire was at stake. How nice.



2.So why didn't the benevolent US support democracies instead?

1.Yup. Any country would do ANYTHING to defend itself. Or else that is ONE stupid country.

2. BEcause, in the third world, the Democracies are sometimes worse than teh dictatorships! The elections are rigged, and a WHOLE lotta badder stuff.

Besides, Musharraf is what one could consider a good dictator. No torture, no imprisonment of Political figures(exile is a sifferent matter...), no radicalism, and he actualy has done GOOD stuff for the country!(how would i know? Once again.. i lived there!)

WE never put communists in power!

What books have you been readin, boy?

The U.S.S.R. was an ally of necessisty! If we didn't have the U.S.S.R on our side, we'd all going Heil Hitler! right now.

And Robert Mugabe is Communist...
Wasn't Saddam fairly communistic?

WE never put communists in power!

Yes, we did. I could name literally dozens of books, many of them written by anticommunist leaders we betrayed, that back this up.

No offense, but if you hate the U.S. so much, why don't you leave?
Who are you speaking against?

1.Yup. Any country would do ANYTHING to defend itself. Or else that is ONE stupid country.

2. BEcause, in the third world, the Democracies are sometimes worse than teh dictatorships! The elections are rigged, and a WHOLE lotta badder stuff.

Besides, Musharraf is what one could consider a good dictator. No torture, no imprisonment of Political figures(exile is a sifferent matter...), no radicalism, and he actualy has done GOOD stuff for the country!(how would i know? Once again.. i lived there!)

Sometimes worse? So? Dictatorships are still usually worse.

No offense, but if you hate the U.S. so much, why don't you leave?

I will when I get the chance and money.

the funny thing about critics is that most of them think they are makeing the world a better place. Critics contribute nothing to society.

In other words, if you don't like it stop moaning and do something to change it.

on another point. The US, like most countries, does what's best for themselves at the time. the current administration believes establishing freedom and democracy in Iraq is what's best for the united states. because administrations in the past have not thought the same does not make current policy a lie.

I get so sick of people calling the US evil because of this or that reason. yes leaders in the past, and leaders today, have made mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes. I don't think any other nation would have done much, if any, better with the responsiblity the US has had. It's easy to criticise from our high intellectual vantage points, but hind sight is always 20-20.

and even when you add all the negative aspects of the country up there's still no place I'd rather live. I'm not ashamed to say that I'm an American. I'm grateful that I was born in this country.

Who are you speaking against?

I was asking Letila.

the funny thing about critics is that most of them think they are makeing the world a better place. Critics contribute nothing to society.

In other words, if you don't like it stop moaning and do something to change it.

on another point. The US, like most countries, does what's best for themselves at the time. the current administration believes establishing freedom and democracy in Iraq is what's best for the united states. because administrations in the past have not thought the same does not make current policy a lie.

I get so sick of people calling the US evil because of this or that reason. yes leaders in the past, and leaders today, have made mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes. I don't think any other nation would have done much, if any, better with the responsiblity the US has had. It's easy to criticise from our high intellectual vantage points, but hind sight is always 20-20.

and even when you add all the negative aspects of the country up there's still no place I'd rather live. I'm not ashamed to say that I'm an American. I'm grateful that I was born in this country.

I'm glad I'm American too.
What bad things have the swiss done? I know there neurtal but still. My hindsight is is bad as my eyesight actually but i'll take your word.

Oh and the election might change things if things go as planned.

the funny thing about critics is that most of them think they are makeing the world a better place. Critics contribute nothing to society.

In other words, if you don't like it stop moaning and do something to change it.

on another point. The US, like most countries, does what's best for themselves at the time. the current administration believes establishing freedom and democracy in Iraq is what's best for the united states. because administrations in the past have not thought the same does not make current policy a lie.

I get so sick of people calling the US evil because of this or that reason. yes leaders in the past, and leaders today, have made mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes. I don't think any other nation would have done much, if any, better with the responsiblity the US has had. It's easy to criticise from our high intellectual vantage points, but hind sight is always 20-20.

and even when you add all the negative aspects of the country up there's still no place I'd rather live. I'm not ashamed to say that I'm an American. I'm grateful that I was born in this country.

My point EXACTLY!

the funny thing about critics is that most of them think they are makeing the world a better place. Critics contribute nothing to society.

So where's the point of representative democracy

Please tell me that this thread is a charade, and that there are no people who are actually THAT naive.

I think that helping / creating "dictatorships" was probably a bad idea.

OTOH, simply standing back while the USSR assumed dominance, worldwide bases of operation, and a virtual monopoly over the planet's resources would probably have been a worse idea. At the very least, it might have delayed the USSR's fall by decades by providing it with an enormous source of cheap oil and funds.

For the record, Letila, USSR = a bad thing.

The problem with democracies, especially poor ones, is that people tend to vote for the "bread and circuses" option far too often. (Republics are somewhat more stable.) A charismatic popular leader can often fool the people, especially if they are poor, uneducated, and hungry, into believing that Communism is actually a GOOD idea. It turns out not to work beyond a small-scale level, for many reasons including the high corruptibility of revolutionaries, many of whom tend to want merely to replace one corrupt, repressive oligarchy with another, as has happened everywhere "Communism" has been tried so far.

So, when it comes down to it... better "our" corrupt, repressive government, than "theirs."

BTW, I notice you leave out all the corrupt, oppressive, often genocidal governments that the USSR supported. You should at least give credit where credit is due: our opponents killed far more people than our allies did.

First "purge this!" of Two

the funny thing about critics is that most of them think they are makeing the world a better place. Critics contribute nothing to society.

In other words, if you don't like it stop moaning and do something to change it.

on another point. The US, like most countries, does what's best for themselves at the time. the current administration believes establishing freedom and democracy in Iraq is what's best for the united states. because administrations in the past have not thought the same does not make current policy a lie.

I get so sick of people calling the US evil because of this or that reason. yes leaders in the past, and leaders today, have made mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes. I don't think any other nation would have done much, if any, better with the responsiblity the US has had. It's easy to criticise from our high intellectual vantage points, but hind sight is always 20-20.

and even when you add all the negative aspects of the country up there's still no place I'd rather live. I'm not ashamed to say that I'm an American. I'm grateful that I was born in this country.

If John Wayne Gacy's lawyer said "Gacy, like most people, does what is best for him at the time. We all make mistakes and it makes no sense to criticize him for decisions he made in the past," you wouldn't nod in agreement, would you?

Please tell me that this thread is a charade, and that there are no people who are actually THAT naive.

I think that helping / creating "dictatorships" was probably a bad idea.

OTOH, simply standing back while the USSR assumed dominance, worldwide bases of operation, and a virtual monopoly over the planet's resources would probably have been a worse idea. At the very least, it might have delayed the USSR's fall by decades by providing it with an enormous source of cheap oil and funds.

For the record, Letila, USSR = a bad thing.

The problem with democracies, especially poor ones, is that people tend to vote for the "bread and circuses" option far too often. (Republics are somewhat more stable.) A charismatic popular leader can often fool the people, especially if they are poor, uneducated, and hungry, into believing that Communism is actually a GOOD idea. It turns out not to work beyond a small-scale level, for many reasons including the high corruptibility of revolutionaries, many of whom tend to want merely to replace one corrupt, repressive oligarchy with another, as has happened everywhere "Communism" has been tried so far.

So, when it comes down to it... better "our" corrupt, repressive government, than "theirs."

BTW, I notice you leave out all the corrupt, oppressive, often genocidal governments that the USSR supported. You should at least give credit where credit is due: our opponents killed far more people than our allies did.

First "purge this!" of Two

Exactly!

TAke that you communist!!! Communism=the anti-freedom

If John Wayne Gacy's lawyer said "Gacy, like most people, does what is best for him at the time. We all make mistakes and it makes no sense to criticize him for decisions he made in the past," you wouldn't nod in agreement, would you?
I'm not up on stuff so who was John Wayne Gacy?

The entirely of the Cold War was an ugly moral compromise with exactly those opposing parameters to be balanced. We sailed between the Scylla of Communism and the Charybdis of anti-communist dictatorships.

It was either that, or a shooting war, and the Korean War pretty much proved to everyone that this was not a good idea.

Also: WE Funded them? Kinda leaves out the ones the USSR funded, or the ones everybody funded (Heck, more than 90% of Hussein's military equipment was French or Russian),

Whenever you hear the phrase "rocket propelled grenade" in the context of anone shooting at U.S. forces, you can bet it's a Russian-made RPG-7, which the USSR handed out like bubble-gum cards in the 1970's and 80's.

If John Wayne Gacy's lawyer said "Gacy, like most people, does what is best for him at the time. We all make mistakes and it makes no sense to criticize him for decisions he made in the past," you wouldn't nod in agreement, would you?

Not necessarily. YOu can whine all you want, but all we are saying is that The U.S. was doing what was best for the U.S. Of course putting dictatorships isn't exaclty good, but its good for the U.S., and to the U.S. the U.S. is the most important.

...*whipsers*communist!*whispers*

Whenever you hear the phrase "rocket propelled grenade" in the context of anone shooting at U.S. forces, you can bet it's a Russian-made RPG-7, which the USSR handed out like bubble-gum cards in the 1970's and 80's.

Yeah, but the Pakistanis make a pretty nasty rocket launcher that*thankfully* only a VERY VERY VERY few amount of terrorists have their hands on.

BTW-If they were like bubble-gum cards i wonder if people collect em...

The problem with democracies, especially poor ones, is that people tend to vote for the "bread and circuses" option far too often. (Republics are somewhat more stable.) A charismatic popular leader can often fool the people, especially if they are poor, uneducated, and hungry, into believing that Communism is actually a GOOD idea. It turns out not to work beyond a small-scale level, for many reasons including the high corruptibility of revolutionaries, many of whom tend to want merely to replace one corrupt, repressive oligarchy with another, as has happened everywhere "Communism" has been tried so far.

And maybe that was because capitalism was hurting those third world countries. If it was working for them, they wouldn't have chosen "communism".

BTW, I notice you leave out all the corrupt, oppressive, often genocidal governments that the USSR supported. You should at least give credit where credit is due: our opponents killed far more people than our allies did.

Two wrongs don't make a right and the lesser evil is still an evil.

I'm not up on stuff so who was John Wayne Gacy?

John Wayne Gacy was a serial killer.

In this context, he's used as a very bad analogy, in comparison to the United States, and is largely evidence of the kookiness level of the person making the comparison, which in this case seems to be getting higher every post.

The US has supported dictatorships in numerous countries, often when the alternative was democracy. It has decided that people were unfit to choose their leader and supported a military dictatorship in the democratic government's place, simply because the government supported policies that threatened US economic power.

To name a few examples:

Chile - 1973 - the US coordinated the coup which placed Pinochet's fascist regime in power. we must alway remember september 11th 1973.

Nicaragua - the US gov't suppressed Sandino's rebellion in the 1920s and installed the Somoza regime. The US gov't attacked the Sandinista regime in the 1980s and supported the Somocista Contra terrorists in Honduras (there were also Sandinista Contras in Costa Rica). The Iran-Contra conspiracy involved the latter intervention.

Argentina - the US gov't supported the military dictatorship in the 1980s. Kissinger personally discussed and approved the disappearences; he is on tape.

Guatemala - the US gov't (or the CIA) overthrew the Arbenz gov't in the 1950s.

Iran - the US gov't overthrew the republic and installed the monarchy in the 1950s.

Dominican Republic - the US gov't invaded in the 1960s.

Indonesia - the US gov't overthrew the Sukarno gov't and installed the Suharto regime in the 1960s.

Zaire - the US gov't assassinated several politicians, sent mercenaries to defeat local rebels in the east (Operation Dragon Rouge) and installed the Mobutu regime.

El Salvador - the US gov't funded the death squads in the 1980s.

Iraq - the US gov't supported Saddam Hussein in the 1980s. if that was bad enough, the US gov't then supported Chalabi in the 1990s and until last spring.

South Korea - the US gov't supported the military dictatorship in the 1980s. (it certainly had enough troops on the peninsula to influence policy towards democracy ... if it wanted to)

Haiti - the US gov't occupied Haiti in the 1920s and backed the recent coup.

Bolivia - the US gov't supported the coup in the 1960s.

Philippines - the cases are legion.

Peru - the US gov't supported the Fujimori regime.

fuck you

Two wrongs don't make a right and the lesser evil is still an evil.

And all the ideals and good intentions in the world don't mean a damn thing if you're DEAD.

You can go into a fight and fight fair, Letila, and that's all well and goody for you.

But if you fight fair, while your opponent uses dirty tactics, your inner moral high ground may remain intact, but YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE.

And maybe that was because capitalism was hurting those third world countries. If it was working for them, they wouldn't have chosen "communism".

Capitalism is one of the best things for Third World countries. Look at Chile, for example. Under Allende, it had inflation in excess of 500%, widespread food shortages, 1/3 of the work force protesting and demanding Allende's resignation, etc. Pinochet, whatever his faults, saved his country from collapse. He brought Chile out of the toilet and turned it into the most prosperous country in Latin America, and the standards of living skyrocketed drastically.

fuck you

Well, that was helpful and insightful.

If that's the sum of your ability to contribute, you would be wiser to shut up, because you're not helping. There are others who can handle this topic with more rationality and intelligence.

So was the whole point of this supposed to be that the U.S. is bad? Who cares? We are the only superpower, the biggest kid on the block, and who gives a damn what other weaker nations think?
AlmightyWhitey has spoken.

Capitalism is one of the best things for Third World countries. Look at Chile, for example. Under Allende, it had inflation in excess of 500%, widespread food shortages, 1/3 of the work force protesting and demanding Allende's resignation, etc. Pinochet, whatever his faults, saved his country from collapse. He brought Chile out of the toilet and turned it into the most prosperous country in Latin America, and the standards of living skyrocketed drastically.

If you weren't poor or against Pinochet, that is. Show that this is true for all the other countries.

And all the ideals and good intentions in the world don't mean a damn thing if you're DEAD.

You can go into a fight and fight fair, Letila, and that's all well and goody for you.

But if you fight fair, while your opponent uses dirty tactics, your inner moral high ground may remain intact, but YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE.

So in other words, it doesn't matter how much suffering occurs as long as the US succeeds.

And all the ideals and good intentions in the world don't mean a damn thing if you're DEAD.

You can go into a fight and fight fair, Letila, and that's all well and goody for you.

But if you fight fair, while your opponent uses dirty tactics, your inner moral high ground may remain intact, but YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE.
Unless you have Heavenly Father on your side and then it doesn't matter what dirty tricks the opponent uses you will win. As long as your own people aren't full of sinners and keep high ground of course.

But, sorry for the spirituality talk. But I still think that having a higher power on your side and moral high ground = victory alot easier than fighting fire with fire.

The US has supported dictatorships in numerous countries, often when the alternative was democracy. It has decided that people were unfit to choose their leader and supported a military dictatorship in the democratic government's place, simply because the government supported policies that threatened US economic power.

To name a few examples:

Chile - 1973 - the US coordinated the coup which placed Pinochet's fascist regime in power. we must alway remember september 11th 1973.

Nicaragua - the US gov't suppressed Sandino's rebellion in the 1920s and installed the Somoza regime. The US gov't attacked the Sandinista regime in the 1980s and supported the Somocista Contra terrorists in Honduras (there were also Sandinista Contras in Costa Rica). The Iran-Contra conspiracy involved the latter intervention.

Argentina - the US gov't supported the military dictatorship in the 1980s. Kissinger personally discussed and approved the disappearences; he is on tape.

Guatemala - the US gov't (or the CIA) overthrew the Arbenz gov't in the 1950s.

Iran - the US gov't overthrew the republic and installed the monarchy in the 1950s.

Dominican Republic - the US gov't invaded in the 1960s.

Indonesia - the US gov't overthrew the Sukarno gov't and installed the Suharto regime in the 1960s.

Zaire - the US gov't assassinated several politicians, sent mercenaries to defeat local rebels in the east (Operation Dragon Rouge) and installed the Mobutu regime.

El Salvador - the US gov't funded the death squads in the 1980s.

Iraq - the US gov't supported Saddam Hussein in the 1980s. if that was bad enough, the US gov't then supported Chalabi in the 1990s and until last spring.

South Korea - the US gov't supported the military dictatorship in the 1980s. (it certainly had enough troops on the peninsula to influence policy towards democracy ... if it wanted to)

Haiti - the US gov't occupied Haiti in the 1920s and backed the recent coup.

Bolivia - the US gov't supported the coup in the 1960s.

Philippines - the cases are legion.

Peru - the US gov't supported the Fujimori regime.


And quess what?! In about each and every case the US did the right and moral thing. E.g. in Chile it was Allende who was a fascist while Pinochet is a very honorable man. Etc.

Unfortunately, God/Jesus/Etc. is sometimes on both sides, as often soldiers on both sides pray to Him, so I wouldn't necessarily count on Jesus to help you win a war. I'll take superior firepower and determination any day. Soldiers, not chaplains, win wars.

Example of Communist opression:

Hungary: 1950's

Hungary in a move vastly supported by the people tries to break free of the Soviet Bloc and ousts the Communist Dictator. After a few days, however, Soviet Tanks come in and blast the hell outta everything. Doesnt gain independence until the Soviet union is weakned by U.S.

Tianamen Square:1989

Thousands of Protesters flock the CHinese Capital of Beijing. Within a few days, Here comes the signature COmmunist move: send in the tanks into an undefended group of people. Thousands murdered by Chinese soldiers.

American Situations similar:

Philipines: Early 20th Century

Philipinos rebel, U.S. crushes Philipino rebellion. However, U.S. tries to work out deal with Philipines for independence and such. U.S. fixes damage caused by putting down revolt. Philipines gains independence in 1946.

Peace Protests: 1960's

Thousands march the streets of americas cities in Protest to the Vietnam war. Few, if ANY, people die only when the protest break into riots. No tanks or heavy infantry sent in.

Also he who has the oil has the money and power. :gundge: :gundge:

And... he who has the cookie... no longer... wants a cookie?

And quess what?! In about each and every case the US did the right and moral thing. E.g. in Chile it was Allende who was a fascist while Pinochet is a very honorable man. Etc.

BS. Pinochet was the fascist. Allende was at worst an authoritarian socialist. Pinochet killed 3,000 people and tortured thousands more.

Example of Communist opression:

Hungary: 1950's

Hungary in a move vastly supported by the people tries to break free of the Soviet Bloc and ousts the Communist Dictator. After a few days, however, Soviet Tanks come in and blast the hell outta everything.

Tianamen Square:1989

Thousands of Protesters flock the CHinese Capital of Beijing. Within a few days, Here comes the signature COmmunist move: send in the tanks into an undefended group of people. Thousands murdered by Chinese soldiers.

American Situations similar:

Philipines: Early 20th Century

Philipinos rebel, U.S. crushes Philipino rebellion. However, U.S. tries to work out deal with Philipines for independence and such. U.S. fixes damage caused by putting down revolt. Philipines gains independence in 1946.

Peace Protests: 1960's

Thousands march the streets of americas cities in Protest to the Vietnam war. Few, if ANY, people die only when the protest break into riots. No tanks or heavy infantry sent in.

I'm not defending Marxism at all. I'm merely saying that the US has also done a lot of bad things.

If you weren't poor or against Pinochet, that is. Show that this is true for all the other countries.



So in other words, it doesn't matter how much suffering occurs as long as the US succeeds.

Letila, you must have a very depressing life.

I'm not defending Marxism at all. I'm merely saying that the US has also done a lot of bad things.

Yes, but it shows how much BETTER we were than the U.S.S.R.

Would you rather be ruled by the U.S. or the U.S.S.R?

I'm not defending Marxism at all. I'm merely saying that the US has also done a lot of bad things.[/QUOTE]

That's very insightful. I'll mark this down as the day that I learned that the U.S. did bad things. Brilliant.

Yes, but it shows how much BETTER we were than the U.S.S.R.

Would you rather be ruled by the U.S. or the U.S.S.R?

I'd prefer to be ruled by neither. Two wrongs don't make a right.

BS. Pinochet was the fascist. Allende was at worst an authoritarian socialist. Pinochet killed 3,000 people and tortured thousands more.

Source?

I'd prefer to be ruled by neither. Two wrongs don't make a right.

That was not an answer.

U.S. or U.S.S.R.?

Source?

Um, thats actually true.

No, but I can't pick where I'm born, can I?
Yeah, that's a good point. It wasn't exactly like, "Hmm, I like England but I think I'll choose the U.S." Or did you think we could use a time machine and go back and say, "No mister President! Don't support them!!" Not to sound all flamey but.... England does have some blood on thier hands too.... Just saying, if we're going to bring up the past....

That was not an answer.

U.S. or U.S.S.R.?

Neither. Both are bad.

Neither. Both are bad.

YOU HAVE TO CHOOSE ONE!!!

Jeez! I ask a simple question...

YOU HAVE TO CHOOSE ONE!!!

Jeez! I ask a simple question...

Why? Both are evil.

And quess what?! In about each and every case the US did the right and moral thing. E.g. in Chile it was Allende who was a fascist while Pinochet is a very honorable man. Etc.

Source? :rolleyes:

Why? Both are evil.
Ok, evil? Am I evil? I live in the U.S., thus I must be evil. :rolleyes: :headbang: :rolleyes:

And maybe that was because capitalism was hurting those third world countries. If it was working for them, they wouldn't have chosen "communism".

People never "choose" communism. If they did, communists never would have had to resort to mass murder, genocide, and terrorism to force it upon people. In every communist revolution in history, the communists have committed the most abominable atrocities in order to terrorize the people into submission and create some semblance of a "popular uprising." In Algeria, Ben Bella liked to tear people's throats out. The Sandinistas liked to burn people alive, gouge out eyeballs, castrate men and stuff their genitals in their mouths, beat people to death, shoot children, kill men in front of their families, etc. In Rhodesia, the 'Patriotic' Front butchered innocent children, even babies, and massacred thousands of people, the overwhelming majority of which were black (although the 'Patriotic' Front was allegedly trying to 'liberate' them). In South Africa, communists liked to 'necklace' anticommunist blacks; they'd tie the victim's hands with barbed wire, put a gasoline-soaked tire around the person's neck, make them drink gasoline, set them on fire, and then taunt them as they slowly and painfully burned to death. In the Congo, communists cut people open and ate their livers and kidneys while they were still alive. In Vietnam, communists pounded nails into Christians' foreheads (crown of thorns), jabbed wooden chopsticks into childrens' ears so deep that their eardrums burst, beat little girls to a bloody pulp with rifle butts, slashed open pregant womens' wombs, disemboweled and decapitated people, tore out fingernails, broke toes and fingers one by one, impaled people on wooden poles, burned people to ashes with flame-throwers, shoved bamboo lances in one ear and out the other, castrated men and sewed their genitals inside their mouths, sliced off peoples' tongues, gang-raped women, etc. These were not isolated instances, either. This kind of barbarism has happened in every communist revolution in history. To be fair, anticommunists have committed their share of atrocities (Suharto, Elian Rios Montt, Park Chung Hee, Rafael Trujillo, Fulgencio Batista, the apartheid regime of South Africa, etc.), but the death toll of those killed by communism- and the barbarity of the methods of torture implemented against the victims- exponentially exceeds anything anticommunists have ever done.

Um, thats actually true.

I'm not denying it. I'm just asking for a source.

People never "choose" communism. If they did, communists never would have had to resort to mass murder, genocide, and terrorism to force it upon people. In every communist revolution in history, the communists have committed the most abominable atrocities in order to terrorize the people into submission and create some semblance of a "popular uprising." In Algeria, Ben Bella liked to tear people's throats out. The Sandinistas liked to burn people alive, gouge out eyeballs, castrate men and stuff their genitals in their mouths, beat people to death, shoot children, kill men in front of their families, etc. In Rhodesia, the 'Patriotic' Front butchered innocent children, even babies, and massacred thousands of people, the overwhelming majority of which were black (although the 'Patriotic' Front was allegedly trying to 'liberate' them). In South Africa, communists liked to 'necklace' anticommunist blacks; they'd tie the victim's hands with barbed wire, put a gasoline-soaked tire around the person's neck, make them drink gasoline, set them on fire, and then taunt them as they slowly and painfully burned to death. In the Congo, communists cut people open and ate their livers and kidneys while they were still alive. In Vietnam, communists pounded nails into Christians' foreheads (crown of thorns), jabbed wooden chopsticks into childrens' ears so deep that their eardrums burst, beat little girls to a bloody pulp with rifle butts, slashed open pregant womens' wombs, disemboweled and decapitated people, tore out fingernails, broke toes and fingers one by one, impaled people on wooden poles, burned people to ashes with flame-throwers, shoved bamboo lances in one ear and out the other, castrated men and sewed their genitals inside their mouths, sliced off peoples' tongues, gang-raped women, etc. These were not isolated instances, either. This kind of barbarism has happened in every communist revolution in history. To be fair, anticommunists have committed their share of atrocities (Suharto, Elian Rios Montt, Park Chung Hee, Rafael Trujillo, Fulgencio Batista, the apartheid regime of South Africa, etc.), but the death toll of those killed by communism- and the barbarity of the methods of torture implemented against the victims- exponentially exceeds anything anticommunists have ever done.

Then why didn't the US support democracies in those countries?

In every communist revolution in history, the communists have committed the most abominable atrocities in order to terrorize the people into submission and create some semblance of a "popular uprising." In Algeria, Ben Bella liked to tear people's throats out. The Sandinistas liked to burn people alive, gouge out eyeballs, castrate men and stuff their genitals in their mouths, beat people to death, shoot children, kill men in front of their families, etc. In Rhodesia, the 'Patriotic' Front butchered innocent children, even babies, and massacred thousands of people, the overwhelming majority of which were black (although the 'Patriotic' Front was allegedly trying to 'liberate' them). In South Africa, communists liked to 'necklace' anticommunist blacks; they'd tie the victim's hands with barbed wire, put a gasoline-soaked tire around the person's neck, make them drink gasoline, set them on fire, and then taunt them as they slowly and painfully burned to death. In the Congo, communists cut people open and ate their livers and kidneys while they were still alive. In Vietnam, communists pounded nails into Christians' foreheads (crown of thorns), jabbed wooden chopsticks into childrens' ears so deep that their eardrums burst, beat little girls to a bloody pulp with rifle butts, slashed open pregant womens' wombs, disemboweled and decapitated people, tore out fingernails, broke toes and fingers one by one, impaled people on wooden poles, burned people to ashes with flame-throwers, shoved bamboo lances in one ear and out the other, castrated men and sewed their genitals inside their mouths, sliced off peoples' tongues, gang-raped women, etc. These were not isolated instances, either. This kind of barbarism has happened in every communist revolution in history.

YEAH BUT CAPITALISM INVOLVES SOME PEOPLE HAVING MORE RESOURCES THAN OTHERS AND IS THEREFORE MORE EVIL!

:) :p

No offense, but if you hate the U.S. so much, why don't you leave?
Old and tired rhetoric. Stop it. Really.
Questioning the actions of one's government does not equate to hating the country. Why do so many people choose to make connections that defy logic?
We're allowed to speak out against anything we see fit. It doesn't make anyone unAmerican. It actually makes them more American.
People can even choose to take action. If you think voting for a president makes you feel empowered, you really ought to cast a vote every year in local and state elections. That's where you can really make a difference. And write to your Senators and House Reps and tell them what you think about issues. That's the actual *ahem* purpose of representation.
Anyway Letila, it's water under the bridge, babe. You might think it's filthy polluted water, but it's under the bridge nonetheless. Move forward. There's really nothing anyone can do to change the past.

Why? Both are evil.

Because, 99% of the time you are going to have to choose between two evils. Just choose the lesser of two evils!

Then why didn't the US support democracies in those countries?

Dude, I don't know. I don't shape U.S. foreign policy. The people who do are obviosuly far more nuts than I am.

Questioning the actions of one's government does not equate to hating the country.

Agreed, but if all you do is complain about and denounce it, that suggests something, doesn't it?

Then why didn't the US support democracies in those countries?
Because their weren't any any big campaign contributors around in whose best interest it would have served.

PS - We tried in Vietnam. Didn't quite pan out. Though defense contractors made a fortune.

Dude, I don't know. I don't shape U.S. foreign policy. The people who do are obviosuly far more nuts than I am.

You have to be nuts to run for office these days... with all that internet blamming and swift-boat vet kinda groups...

Agreed, but if all you do is complain about and denounce it, that suggests something, doesn't it?
Yes. It suggest naivetee (is that the right word?), deep-seeded resentment and somebody who might need a nap.

It is the first and foremost responsibility of any country to protect and take care of its citizens. What you want is the US to reach out to all the other countries that share common beliefs, and face hundreds of attacks themselves? Because that's what would happen - the US would not be able to defend itself as efficiently (money and troops), the terrorists would get mad at our bias, and we would be worse off than what we are now. Sorry buddy, but I think that you're in a pretty big pickle, because there would be a great big deal more of suffering/warfare in the world if this happened. I highly doubt that you will be willing to risk your safety and life for this. The US simply is not omniscient. We do what we can, but when it comes down to another country and ourselves, we do what we can to protect ours. Anyone would do the same, and yes that includes you.

Why do you feel the need to accuse the US for everything that goes wrong in the world? There are other countries that are much worse. We're one of the very few nations in the world that lends a helping hand to others in need. Yet instead of getting on the other nations, you chose us to get mad at. It doesn't make any sense. In fact it's just what the terrorists are doing.

Who ever said the US was some angel momma's boy? The US will do what it needs to for it's own best interests. Compared to other countries we're a knight in shining armor anyway, quit babbling about it.

Why do you feel the need to accuse the US for everything that goes wrong in the world? There are other countries that are much worse. We're one of the very few nations in the world that lends a helping hand to others in need. Yet instead of getting on the other nations, you chose us to get mad at. It doesn't make any sense. In fact it's just what the terrorists are doing.

The lesser evil is still an evil. I don't care whether the US is nice as far as empires go, it still supports dictatorships and that makes it wrong.

The lesser evil is still an evil. I don't care whether the US is nice as far as empires go, it still supports dictatorships and that makes it wrong.

Believe whatever you want, Letila, you are all alone here.

This just goes to show that you can insult our current and past leaders, but insulting the U.S. as a whole isn't going to get you very many friends.

Here's some interesting stuff. George Kennan, one of the main architects of post WWII-U.S. foreign policy said in 1948:

we have about 50% of the world's wealth, but only 6.3% of its population... In tihs situation, we cannot fila to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity... To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives... We should cease to talk about vague... and unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.

http://perso.infonie.be/le.feu/ms/histdoc/kennaag.htm

The lesser evil is still an evil. I don't care whether the US is nice as far as empires go, it still supports dictatorships and that makes it wrong.
Admittedly, evil is evil however you look at it. The US has made mistakes in the past, some very big ones. Everyone has, but that does not make us clean. The only thing we can really change now is our own government by participating in it. I am satisfied with the way we are heading, but if you are not, go out and try to change it (although in a legal and morally justifiable manner).
I wouldn't live anywhere else in the world. Except for maybe a little resort in the Pacific only for occasional vacations.

Admittedly, evil is evil however you look at it. The US has made mistakes in the past, some very big ones. Everyone has, but that does not make us clean. The only thing we can really change now is our own government by participating in it. I am satisfied with the way we are heading, but if you are not, go out and try to change it (although in a legal and morally justifiable manner).

Yes, because voting has been such an effective way of preventing the US from supporting atrocities in the past. :rolleyes:

Let's not forget that after the nazis made Mussolini into puppet, America made Italia into a puppet after all conflicts were over after WW2. Now we leap and America looks. Instead of adopting a traditional government, the catholics are still controlling the government along side the US Government...

honstly do u not think the people of america other than the red necks dont know this. we

:confused:

we made it to 8 pages wowundefined!

I'd like to first note that Latila is most assuredly not alone here.

On to addressing specific points through the body of the thread:

1.Roach-Busters
No offense, but if you hate the U.S. so much, why don't you leave?

Worst. Argument. Ever.
First, I don't leave because I don't have the money required to do so. If anyone feels like supporting my expatriation, I'll be on my way out.

Second, because as soon as someone from anywhere else in the world criticizes America they are immediately labeled as idiotic foreigners that shouldn't run their mouths about countries they don't even live in.

Third, I don't hate the U.S. at all, I hate what people are doing to it. Primarily the government.

2.The Lightning Star
Any country would do ANYTHING to defend itself. Or else that is ONE stupid country.

Does that suggest that Palestine should be attacking Israel? Or perhaps conversely that Israel should be demolishing Palestine? Wouldn't it be in our best interest to annihilate anyone that might ever potentially be a threat, in that case? This moral relativism is foolish and typical.

...also from The Lightning Star
Of course putting dictatorships isn't exaclty good, but its good for the U.S., and to the U.S. the U.S. is the most important.

Rather than playing for team U.S.A., you might be interested in checking out team human some time. It's pretty sweet.

Eudeminea
even when you add all the negative aspects of the country up there's still no place I'd rather live. I'm not ashamed to say that I'm an American. I'm grateful that I was born in this country.

I most assuredly agree. For all the wrong done by America, it has done a rather significant amount of right... The problem is, wrongs and rights don't counterbalance eachother, they're separate scales. I love my concept of America, which I believe to be along the same lines as what the country was intended to be, which is why I find it painful to watch politicians, warmongers and religious zealots destroy it.

BastardSword
Unless you have Heavenly Father on your side

Man do I ever hope you're being sarcastic. You do realize that both sides in any given war believe that their own token "Heavenly Father"(c) is on their side, right?

The world doesn't have to be such a terrible place, people. It's everyone's decision.

2.The Lightning Star
Any country would do ANYTHING to defend itself. Or else that is ONE stupid country.

Does that suggest that Palestine should be attacking Israel? Or perhaps conversely that Israel should be demolishing Palestine? Wouldn't it be in our best interest to annihilate anyone that might ever potentially be a threat, in that case? This moral relativism is foolish and typical.

...also from The Lightning Star
Of course putting dictatorships isn't exaclty good, but its good for the U.S., and to the U.S. the U.S. is the most important.

Rather than playing for team U.S.A., you might be interested in checking out team human some time. It's pretty sweet.



1a. Actually yes, Palestine SHOULD be attacking Israel, since As logn as Israel exists there, quite frankly, will never be a Palestinian State.

Same for the Israelis. If there is a Palestinian state then there wont be an Israeli state for much longer.

1b. "Play for team Human?" Ahem, if you show me ONE country that is(or has) done that, maybe i will. But since we don't live in "Happy miracle everybody is a friend huggy-wuggy world" Independent nations MUST, i repeat, MUST look after their interests or that Nation will be destroyed.

Oh, and i LIVE in Panama, so i would know.

Off topic but couldn't help it. Living somewhere doesn't mean you know jack-"rabbits".

Half the Americans living in the US don't know which candidate supports increased taxes for people making $200k and up.

Or perhaps conversely that Israel should be demolishing Palestine?

i agree israel is one of the most intelligent and capable countrty for demolishing another nation, yet they havent yet have they. i dont think so. :rolleyes:

The US has supported dictatorships in numerous countries, often when the alternative was democracy. It has decided that people were unfit to choose their leader and supported a military dictatorship in the democratic government's place, simply because the government supported policies that threatened US economic power.

To name a few examples:

Chile - 1973 - the US coordinated the coup which placed Pinochet's fascist regime in power. we must alway remember september 11th 1973.

Nicaragua - the US gov't suppressed Sandino's rebellion in the 1920s and installed the Somoza regime. The US gov't attacked the Sandinista regime in the 1980s and supported the Somocista Contra terrorists in Honduras (there were also Sandinista Contras in Costa Rica). The Iran-Contra conspiracy involved the latter intervention.

Argentina - the US gov't supported the military dictatorship in the 1980s. Kissinger personally discussed and approved the disappearences; he is on tape.

Guatemala - the US gov't (or the CIA) overthrew the Arbenz gov't in the 1950s.

Iran - the US gov't overthrew the republic and installed the monarchy in the 1950s.

Dominican Republic - the US gov't invaded in the 1960s.

Indonesia - the US gov't overthrew the Sukarno gov't and installed the Suharto regime in the 1960s.

Zaire - the US gov't assassinated several politicians, sent mercenaries to defeat local rebels in the east (Operation Dragon Rouge) and installed the Mobutu regime.

El Salvador - the US gov't funded the death squads in the 1980s.

Iraq - the US gov't supported Saddam Hussein in the 1980s. if that was bad enough, the US gov't then supported Chalabi in the 1990s and until last spring.

South Korea - the US gov't supported the military dictatorship in the 1980s. (it certainly had enough troops on the peninsula to influence policy towards democracy ... if it wanted to)

Haiti - the US gov't occupied Haiti in the 1920s and backed the recent coup.

Bolivia - the US gov't supported the coup in the 1960s.

Philippines - the cases are legion.

Peru - the US gov't supported the Fujimori regime.

Reading worthless knowledge of 3rd world hell holes is not worth my time.
I am a rich american, get that crap out of my face.

Reading worthless knowledge of 3rd world hell holes is not worth my time.
I am a rich american, get that crap out of my face.


Dude so am i, but u do need to care about this because weither u like it or not it comes back to ur money.

:headbang:

Um, thats actually true.
Actually that's not. The infamous 3,000 (almost) figure includes almost 1000 victims of LEFTIST violence. So it was rather more like a low-intensity civil war (which did not turn full scale only because the army under Pinochet intervened early enough).

excuse me but what topic r we on now
:(

Neither. Both are bad.

Having lived for a long time in both, I humbly suggest that anyone remotely hinting at any moral equivalence between the USA and the USSR is either extremely ignorant or extremely immoral (or both).

The point is that the US isn't pro-freedom and actually supports dictatorships when it benefits the US.
Most everyone does. This is nothing new. Dictatorships are considered to be far more stable (policy wise) than democracies. Thus making them a "safer" bet (relations wise) than democracies.

All major world powers are guilty of this at one time or another.

Actually that's not. The infamous 3,000 (almost) figure includes almost 1000 victims of LEFTIST violence. So it was rather more like a low-intensity civil war (which did not turn full scale only because the army under Pinochet intervened early enough).

Funny how I never heard that.

"Once in power, Pinochet and his government quickly moved to suppress leftist opposition. Constitutional civil liberties and human rights were curtailed, resulting in the deaths of approximately 3,000 Chileans and thousands of political refugees being received abroad."--Wikipedia.

No mention of leftist violence.

now i will i agree on that, because i lived in the ussr too. But i have lived in more a 1/3 of the worlds nation for at least a 1/4 of year and no nation is like the irrogant usa,

lol :)
did i mention 1 was israel

BTW- Noriega(the Panamanian Dictator) wasn't COnfirmed to be a CIA agent. Not to mention during the 80's all he did was threaten teh U.S. He even declared WAR on the U.S.! of course he was defeated and now sits in a Miami-district prison, but still!

Oh, and i LIVE in Panama, so i would know.

Iraq wasn't confirmed to have WMD either. Those CIA guys. They hate confirming things.

thats nothing new

The Lightning Star
1a. Actually yes, Palestine SHOULD be attacking Israel, since As logn as Israel exists there, quite frankly, will never be a Palestinian State.
Same for the Israelis. If there is a Palestinian state then there wont be an Israeli state for much longer.

I find your version of international politics in which the only answer is the equivalent of grand scale gang warfare troubling at best, as by the logic applied here, any country that ever (and for any reason, or no reason at all) believed another country to be a current (or potential) threat to their own would be justified in pre-emptively attacking that country. North Korea and Iran may as well begin the assault, in that case - we may get around to acting in a way contrary to their best interests one of these days.

1b. "Play for team Human?" Ahem, if you show me ONE country that is(or has) done that, maybe i will. But since we don't live in "Happy miracle everybody is a friend huggy-wuggy world" Independent nations MUST, i repeat, MUST look after their interests or that Nation will be destroyed.

A current example? While no perfect "Happy Miracle Everybody Is A Friend Huggy-Wuggy World" (which is an amusing title, I'll give you :p ) can exist in the real world, most of the countries in Scandinavia are currently doing quite well so far as I can tell. I'm not suggesting that the world's problems could be fixed overnight (for, while they technically could if everyone just decided to quit being such nationalists, I'm aware that that's not going to happen) it seems exceedingly foolish of us to simply accept where we are as the best we can do and stop trying to find a better solution.

Y'know what I think would be a better solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict? If they both knocked it off. They're fighting over dirt. I know it's not so simple as telling them this, but it would be just that simple in application, if only people were educated enough to understand the world around them in anything more than an egotist/nationalist sense. People far too often in my opinion consider Palestinians to be entirely at fault in the conflict (as they're the side more commonly employing what are considered to be terrorist-esque actions), but what they fail to grasp it that generations of Palestinians grow up being taught nothing but hate and vengeance. If we'd hooked Palestine up with all those tanks and helicopters instead of Israel, perhaps the suicide bombers would be coming from the other side of the border... They're using the tools they have to accomplish what they've been taught to do.

Americans claim that America is the best country.
Chinese claim that China is the best country.
Japanese claim that Japan is the best country.
English claim that England is the best country.
It's all the same.

Christians claim that their god is the only true god.
Jews claim that their god is the only true god.
Satanists claim that they are the only true god(s).
Mormons are idiots.
It's all the same.

I'm most assuredly not the hippie-esque long haired thc-laden person you may have imagined (by merit of the tone of your 'happy huggy etc etc world'), I've simply come to the conclusion that accepting what we are doing as the best we can do is foolish.

The Lightning Star

Y'know what I think would be a better solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict? If they both knocked it off. They're fighting over dirt. I know it's not so simple as telling them this, but it would be just that simple in application, if only people were educated enough to understand the world around them in anything more than an egotist/nationalist sense. People far too often in my opinion consider Palestinians to be entirely at fault in the conflict (as they're the side more commonly employing what are considered to be terrorist-esque actions), but what they fail to grasp it that generations of Palestinians grow up being taught nothing but hate and vengeance. If we'd hooked Palestine up with all those tanks and helicopters instead of Israel, perhaps the suicide bombers would be coming from the other side of the border... They're using the tools they have to accomplish what they've been taught to do.

Americans claim that America is the best country.

It's all the same.

Christians claim that their god is the only true god.
Jews claim that their god is the only true god.
Satanists claim that they are the only true god(s).
Mormons are idiots.
It's all the same.

.

honsetly i dont think u realize how importrant religon is to people in the first place, which was going on whith israel and such, a fight over relgious land mainly. And as for the whole everyperson loves there country, quite the contrary granted i like some nations i have lived better than others but still neither america, britian, india, nor israel are my supportive country. And agian same deal for religion . im a jewish buddhist, if u couldnt tell by country name, and i know im not the only 1. morons are strange not idiots
that all no religion is technically better.

of course this is all off topic.

what everyone is so dumbfounded by my profound statement that u cant speak.
i feel so honored. :D

now i am feeling isolated. is ther anyone out there.


:(

i dont care what u say just say something it could b utterly bs and i wouldnt care. Pleaz say something.

fine :upyours:

Israelities et Buddist
honsetly i dont think u realize how importrant religon is to people in the first place, which was going on whith israel and such, a fight over relgious land mainly.

I understand the religious significance of the land, and so far as not realizing religion's importance - I believe if anything I may go too far with it, as I'd say that an overwhelming majority of the world's problems are caused by religion.

And as for the whole everyperson loves there country, quite the contrary granted i like some nations i have lived better than others but still neither america, britian, india, nor israel are my supportive country.

I would contend that your having lived in multiple countries has greatly expanded your ability to appreciate the merits and recognize the flaws in differing areas due to your experience - most people don't have that kind of background.

I refer you to exhibit a: (which could imply that there are numerous exhibits, but that's not the case here.)
http://www.avenger.net/idoru/images/morans.jpg

noting your last two posts, sorry for the delay, connection at home has been plagued with problems as of late.

Funny how I never heard that.

"Once in power, Pinochet and his government quickly moved to suppress leftist opposition. Constitutional civil liberties and human rights were curtailed, resulting in the deaths of approximately 3,000 Chileans and thousands of political refugees being received abroad."--Wikipedia.

No mention of leftist violence.

There's really nothing funny in ignorance. Wikipedia does not actually say that all the dead were on the Left and anyway its article is extremely short. However there was a truth and reconciliation (or something like that) commission in Chile which wrote a long report which happens to be the original sourse of all those "nearly 3,000 people" claims. Except that the report actually listed each person by name and clearly indicates that almost a third were actually members of the military and police killed by the leftists.

first i wanna u for making special with the whole worldly thing, second lol about morans(kinda supports my idea of red necks), 3rd i though u were awe-struck(lol) and am sorry i havent meditated today so i get kinda angry sometimes

I was unaware that Wikipedia is the end-all and be-all of human knowledge. Looks to me like a handy, yet extremely limited in scope, instand reference guide for people too busy or too lazy to engage in an in-depth exploration of the facts.

I was unaware that Wikipedia is the end-all and be-all of human knowledge. Looks to me like a handy, yet extremely limited in scope, instand reference guide for people too busy or too lazy to engage in an in-depth exploration of the facts.
Wikipedia is just fine. It's a source of collected knowledge. It tries to be unbiased and does so quite good in most cases. Topics that are under debate are specially marked and up for dicussion to come to a consensus. I think the Wikipedia is more reliable for historic facts than anything else on the net.

Letila, you forgot to mention the constant US support for Israeli state terrorism and anti-Cuban terrorism.

And some of you people actually consider the USA a “bad” nation as a whole? Really? You have got to be kidding me! Wake up folks. It’s not perfect, but it’s not a “bad” country.

When we supported those dictatorships it was for the purpose of either helping someone else, who, then, was better (Eg: Supporting Iraq in the 70's and not IRan but now we are at war with Iraq). Times change kid, sometimes we need to support something we don't like for the better of the two outcomes. Get used to it, many countries do it.

Yes, for example, when we invaded Guatemala it was to help the Dole corporation who was better than the Guatemalan peseants who lived on the land that Dole wanted. And times changed, then Dole's bannanas were important, now Haliburton's oil wells are. So we invade Iraq to help Haliburton who is better than the Iraqi citizenry and the entier Moslem world. :rolleyes:

That's BS, the U.S. didn't overthrow Sukarno, Suharto did.
Yes, of course. With the help of US weapons and "kill-lists" supplied by the CIA.

Yes, for example, when we invaded Guatemala it was to help the Dole corporation who was better than the Guatemalan peseants who lived on the land that Dole wanted. And times changed, then Dole's bannanas were important, now Haliburton's oil wells are. So we invade Iraq to help Haliburton who is better than the Iraqi citizenry and the entier Moslem world. :rolleyes:

Why do so many people spell "Muslim" wrong? Is it THAT hard people?

Israel will go to any length to ensure its survival. It, as a nation, has reached out and smacked either another country or a group based on nothing more than an intelligence lead. And personally, I can’t blame them. Bless them. I guess that makes them a “bad” country also? And England?

And grow up morons… We invaded Iraq for the oil… You guys tried that argument before. The price at the pump is way up right now. All that oil sure helped, huh. LOL So funny! Get real.

Yeah, well, he who controls the spice, controls the Universe.
Yes! The Spice must flow!!!

Why do so many people spell "Muslim" wrong? Is it THAT hard people?
its not wrong just a different spelling. You can spell Koran Qu'ran or Quran. Im sure some people spell idiot differently too.

its not wrong just a different spelling. You can spell Koran Qu'ran or Quran. Im sure some people spell idiot differently too.

HMmmmm?

How can someone spell Idiot differently?

And grow up morons… We invaded Iraq for the oil… You guys tried that argument before. The price at the pump is way up right now. All that oil sure helped, huh. LOL So funny! Get real.
Why would oil companies put their prices down? What are people going to do? Just stop using oil LOL no chance.

Why would oil companies put their prices down? What are people going to do? Just stop using oil LOL no chance.

They would put it down because they would get more BUISINESS! Supply and demand, and if the People stop demanding it by walking more and using public transportation, the companies will LOOSE money! Not to mention the fact that the oil will be alot mroe expensive to obtain...

They would put it down because they would get more BUISINESS! Supply and demand, and if the People stop demanding it by walking more and using public transportation, the companies will LOOSE money! Not to mention the fact that the oil will be alot mroe expensive to obtain...
At current prices do you see any EDIT:*more people* doing this just walking or using public transportation?

The "truth" about the US is this......

We do what is in OUR best interest. Period.

Show me any other country that does not do the same. Just one.....

Those who are NOT from the US have no idea what we are like. They watch movies and TV shows made here and think life is actually like that. Running gun battles in the streets.....years ago people actually thought the streets here were paved with gold. In some sense they are. Opportunities here are greater than anywhere else in the world.

First, I don't leave because I don't have the money required to do so. If anyone feels like supporting my expatriation, I'll be on my way out.
If you're Jewish, there are lots of right-wing Christian organizations who will gladly pay for your resettlement to the Gaza Strip or The West Bank.

I guess that makes them a “bad” country also? And England?
No, only the Israeli, American and British governments are bad. The people are fine. In fact, Israel has a huge peace movement that wants the oppression of Palestinians to end.

They watch movies and TV shows made here and think life is actually like that. Running gun battles in the streets.....years ago people actually thought the streets here were paved with gold. In some sense they are. Opportunities here are greater than anywhere else in the world.
We don't think America is like that. We know more about your country than you think we do. Greatest opportunities in the world? I don't know about that, maybe if you're rich...

We don't think America is like that. We know more about your country than you think we do. Greatest opportunities in the world? I don't know about that, maybe if you're rich...

Where else can someone go that does not speak the language and within 3 years build a multi-million dollar a year business?

My business partner did.....and we do business with dozens of other businesses owned by immigrants who are even more successful than we are. Yes, the "opportunities" are here....but you do have to work at it.

the funny thing about critics is that most of them think they are makeing the world a better place. Critics contribute nothing to society.

That's just crazy talk! I think you're talking about moaners, who do nothing. They have little of intelligent commentary to make, and can not back up their mouthings with facts. Criticism is different...is is meant to create change...to make people aware of issues and to offer alternatives. Think of
Solzhenitsyn, Noam Chomsky, your famous founding fathers...ALL criticised aspects of their society that they found lacking, and many changes in public perception (and indeed within those societies) resulted from it.


In other words, if you don't like it stop moaning and do something to change it.

Agreed...but I don't think you should have to shut up until you're finished changing 'it'.

on another point. The US, like most countries, does what's best for themselves at the time. the current administration believes establishing freedom and democracy in Iraq is what's best for the united states. because administrations in the past have not thought the same does not make current policy a lie.

No, but denying, or justifying what was done, without apology, IS a lie. You are then saying, "Hey, we screwed up, but that was then and this is now." You can not do that with a clear conscience if those people who were in power then are still making policy decisions! (re: Henry Kissinger etc)


I get so sick of people calling the US evil because of this or that reason. yes leaders in the past, and leaders today, have made mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes. I don't think any other nation would have done much, if any, better with the responsiblity the US has had. It's easy to criticise from our high intellectual vantage points, but hind sight is always 20-20.

and even when you add all the negative aspects of the country up there's still no place I'd rather live. I'm not ashamed to say that I'm an American. I'm grateful that I was born in this country.

No, the topic of this post is not new to us. Unfortunately, it IS news to many people. Why? Because these things are not discussed in the mainstream. Many U.S citizens are not aware of the double-edged sword that was U.S policy during the support of these dictatorships. The administration is still not honest about what went on (because the people that need protecting are still around no doubt). So, you may be sick of hearing about it, but it needs to be repeated again and again until it becomes common knowledge, and not just some dirty little secret only a few of us know. They say that those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it. If you don't KNOW that history, you are at a double disadvantage.

No one is saying you should be ashamed of living where you happened to be born. However, don't gloss over what your country has done. Accept it, revile it, and work to make sure your future governments don't make the same mistakes.

No, the topic of this post is not new to us.

Oh yeah about that what about Venezuela the first coup of this century said to be backed by the CIA, against a democraticly elected president.

Oh yeah about that what about Venezuela the first coup of this century said to be backed by the CIA, against a democraticly elected president.

What about it? Was that a question? :)

Sounds like a little history repeating...

Opportunities here are greater than anywhere else in the world.

That depends on what you mean by "opportunities". If you mean obtaining as high standard of living as possible, that's wrong. Switzerland and the Scandinavian countries provide higher living standards.

That depends on what you mean by "opportunities". If you mean obtaining as high standard of living as possible, that's wrong. Switzerland and the Scandinavian countries provide higher living standards.
not quite; as an individual, you are more likely to attain the highest possible standard of living for yourself if you are in America. the highest AVERAGE standard of living may be found in other nations, but in America there is more opportunity for an individual to make ludicrous amounts of money and spend it how they like...in countries with higher average standards of living, there are generally higher taxes and more hurdles for individuals who wish to accumulate crazy personal wealth.

not quite; as an individual, you are more likely to attain the highest possible standard of living for yourself if you are in America. the highest AVERAGE standard of living may be found in other nations, but in America there is more opportunity for an individual to make ludicrous amounts of money and spend it how they like...in countries with higher average standards of living, there are generally higher taxes and more hurdles for individuals who wish to accumulate crazy personal wealth.

But since the highest avrege is in other countries, doesn't that mean that your odds of obtaining a high standard is those countries? Sure, you may not be flithy rich, but still have a great chance to really live a good life.

But since the highest avrege is in other countries, doesn't that mean that your odds of obtaining a high standard is those countries? Sure, you may not be flithy rich, but still have a great chance to really live a good life.
it's a matter of semantics; your likelihood of obtaining a good standard of living are higher in countries like the ones you listed, but your likelihood of reaching the level of ridiculous wealth seen in the American upper class is only found among royal families in the rest of the world. so if your aim is to merely have a high standard of living then you're better off playing the odds in Scandanavian countries, but if you really want to be the filthiest sort of rich then there's no better place than America.

it's a matter of semantics; your likelihood of obtaining a good standard of living are higher in countries like the ones you listed, but your likelihood of reaching the level of ridiculous wealth seen in the American upper class is only found among royal families in the rest of the world. so if your aim is to merely have a high standard of living then you're better off playing the odds in Scandanavian countries, but if you really want to be the filthiest sort of rich then there's no better place than America.

I've seen some numbers indicating that Ingvar Kamprad, founder and owner of IKEA (Swedish), has more money than Bill Gates.

So what right did we have to decide who ruled the Chileans?



Welcome to the anarchy that is international politics. If we could replace any government with one that liked us better, we did. It's not anything to be proud of, but without any type of supranational government that nations have to answer to, the only restraints on the US were self-imposed.

By the way, we supported dictatorships over democracies because they were less likely to fold and become communist. Democracies have a bad habit of reflecting what the people want, and sometimes the people make the wrong choice (Nazi Germany, for example). A dictatorship, for all of its drawbacks, has the advantage of keeping its head of state in power, and if that head of state favored the US, then they supported him.

i love hoe u guys love to blame just as much on israel as on america, wiether covertly or not. I honestly think it is repulsive. FYI im a jewish-buddhist and have lived in enough countries not to have 1 sisded view.

i love hoe u guys love to blame just as much on israel as on america, wiether covertly or not. I honestly think it is repulsive. FYI im a jewish-buddhist and have lived in enough countries not to have 1 sisded view.
A Jewish Buddhist?!

Well, I'm not all that surprised - one of my friends is a half-Chinese half-European Jew.

Anyways, concerning the Arab-Israeli conflict, I equally blame all parties who are responsible.

no im saying u r making israel into some demon like the George Bush.

agian im feeling isolated :mad:

no im saying u r making israel into some demon like the George Bush.
Israel's not some demon - If you want I'll objectively lay out the points concerning the conflict:

Israelis
Deserve to live on land as much as Palestinians
Deserved a placed after the Holocaust
Want to live in peace with their neighbors
Are forced to fight back, and sometimes retaliation (like with any other nation tho) has some unintended collateral damage
I applaud Sharon for wanting to pull out
Sometimes (like all other nations) gets undesirable politicians (I am NOT alluding to Sharon here, I am just stating the facts)

Palestinians
While not as much as a "people" as a rallying cry, still have somewhat of a valid claim to the land (like the Israelis)
Need to subdue the terrorists plaguing their territories
Should be able to live in peace with Israelis
Sometimes (like all other nations) gets undesirable politicians



Forgive me if some subconcious bias skewed my thoughts to one side or another

trust me u r one of the least bias om the web. considering that some nations r trign to push a bill through the un stating all jews be sent to palistine to be slaughtered.

racists :sniper: :mp5:

and im a pacifist

im geussing u all r repulsed by that propasal that u r not responding.

im back after a moment of meditation to calm down. oh and the us is no angel but certainly looks like one compared palestine or some asian countries.

ok i need attention and im not getting any. :(