NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon2/world.html (fore educational purposes)

Latest American wars: Operation Enduring Freedom-Invasion of Iraq.

The American nation has lost nearly all goodwill it had after the September 11 bombings,due to the incompetence of your President.Then,you Americans go ahead vote for him AGAIN!HOW STUPID IS YOUR ELECTORATE?

Vote Clinton in again,and you get two for the price of one.I have an even better idea.Let the People of the World vote for America's Presidents and remove that right from the American people,who obviously cannot be trusted with their complex politics and blend of religion to be entrusted with an institution that has far too much effects on the world. {sarcastic tone here}

When people overseas say thay hate America,you must realise that it is more to do with your foreign policies more than anything else.Your foreign policy,as the diminishing superpower you are,has far too much effects,and your administration fails to consider long term goals in a holistic manner.Just,don't vote in a Texan next time ok?Oh,and stop being so damn impatient as a people,and adopt the long view.

Thankfully,India and China will rise to balance out your influence and power.The USA needs to learn its place and responsibility in the world.Sadly,I have to admit that the world would be a worse place without the USA.You are a necessary evil,and the lesser of multiple evils.

(fore educational purposes)

I dont no where my edukasion wood bee without it.

Same old same old, cut and paste. :rolleyes:

I dont no where my edukasion wood bee without it.

Oh give him a break. :D

...edukasion, eh? Hmm...that'll be my second altered word, after turning thank you into syankuu! (I'm going to alter the entire English language then use my altered version everywhere and see if it catches on or not. If I'm lucky I'll influence language across the world!)

Thumbless: That doesn't make it any less true.

[The American nation has lost nearly all goodwill it had after the September 11 bombings,due to the incompetence of your President.Then,you Americans go ahead vote for him AGAIN!HOW STUPID IS YOUR ELECTORATE?

Not very as Kerry was far drier than Bush was. If you want to talk stupid, we could look at Florida because it was their idiots that could not figure out how to read a ballot even AFTER it was printed in a newspaper.

Vote Clinton in again,and you get two for the price of one.

Hillary? President? GOD NO!! There are several democrats here that do not want her as president.

I have an even better idea.Let the People of the World vote for America's Presidents and remove that right from the American people,who obviously cannot be trusted with their complex politics and blend of religion to be entrusted with an institution that has far too much effects on the world. {sarcastic tone here}

Only if we can vote for your nation's leaders.

Thankfully,India and China will rise to balance out your influence and power.The USA needs to learn its place and responsibility in the world.Sadly,I have to admit that the world would be a worse place without the USA.You are a necessary evil,and the lesser of multiple evils.

And China wants territory. Yea they will balance things out alright. Just like Germany and Austria-Hungary balanced out the French and British powers. We all know how that turned out.

America, FUCK YEAH!!!1

America, FUCK YEAH!!!1

I concur..and if you want Bill and Hillary back in the white house then you my friend need to seek immediate psychiatric help

Sign me up for a padded cell, then. Friend.

http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon2/world.html (fore educational purposes)

Oh, gee an internet bitching linky, i will stick with my history books and local library thank you.

Latest American wars: Operation Enduring Freedom-Invasion of Iraq.

Yup, thats what it is alright...was thatthe title of praragraph below or do you have Capt. Obvious powers?

The American nation has lost nearly all goodwill it had after the September 11 bombings,due to the incompetence of your President.Then,you Americans go ahead vote for him AGAIN!HOW STUPID IS YOUR ELECTORATE?

...where the fuck have you been? This is his last year in office and you start bitching now? I am certain no bad political choices have ever been made where you are from. We getto have our worst president...


Vote Clinton in again,and you get two for the price of one.

OK, we cant Vote clinton in AGAIN because the Clinton who was in BEFORE cant and isnt running. His wife is, see they are two DIFFERENT people, OK?


I have an even better idea.

I kinda doubt that.


Let the People of the World vote for America's Presidents and remove that right from the American people,who obviously cannot be trusted with their complex politics and blend of religion to be entrusted with an institution that has far too much effects on the world. {sarcastic tone here}
Ohh hahaha funny sarcasm. What little shit hole do you hail from ? It cant be the UK the education system there wouldnt produce such a dumbass.

When people overseas say thay hate America,you must realise that it is more to do with your foreign policies more than anything else.
Again, exercising those Capt. Obviuous powers.

You must understand when I say I hate you, I mean I hate you.


Your foreign policy,as the diminishing superpower you are,has far too much effects,and your administration fails to consider long term goals in a holistic manner.
Our piss poor current administration aside, "holisitc manner" what the fuck are you on about? What government approaches foreign with a manner that isnt self serving to the Government? A "holistic manner" get fucking real, unless you are from the land of OZ you can stick that right back up your holistic.


Just,don't vote in a Texan next time ok?

...? Nevermind.

Oh,and stop being so damn impatient as a people,and adopt the long view.

Impatient about what ? What the hell are you talking about?


Thankfully,India and China will rise to balance out your influence and power.

...you dont understand the way that works do you?


The USA needs to learn its place and responsibility in the world.

Superpower...got it, thanks.


Sadly,I have to admit that the world would be a worse place without the USA.

Sadly someone, anyone has made the world a betterplace then what it would have been? You are sad about that? You are simple minded arent you.


You are a necessary evil,and the lesser of multiple evils.[/B]

..Evil.
So where you live has rendered nothing but good upon the world?
You only notice what we do because of our influence. Our system might have dropped the ball but if Bush is the closest thing to a Pol Pot we get I can live with that.
Get some perspective Capt. Obvious before you go posting garbage like this.

Thankfully,India and China will rise to balance out your influence and power.

Sadly these two said countries are only getting their supposed economic boom due to exploiting a large percentage of their population. Of which, live in abject poverty and are not recieving any benefits from this apparant economic boom. They won't last.

I would be insulted, but eh...all I hear is "blah blah blah blah"...

Sorry comrades...I just don't like ranting this early in the morning.

@Skibereen: mate take it easy... i mean sure the OP wasn't exactly civil in his tone but your ad hominem here doesn't in any way invalidate the history website he is advertising... all he is saying is that America is nowhere near as morally pure as it is claimed and that its imperialistic legacy is maintained through no better means than any other empire in the course of human history...

there is no issue of "if our country is shit yours is shitter" so pipe down.

@Skibereen: mate take it easy... i mean sure the OP wasn't exactly civil in his tone but your ad hominem here doesn't in any way invalidate the history website he is advertising... all he is saying is that America is nowhere near as morally pure as it is claimed and that its imperialistic legacy is maintained through no better means than any other empire in the course of human history...

there is no issue of "if our country is shit yours is shitter" so pipe down.

First line of your post--"mate take it easy" made me want to listen to you.
Last line of your post--"so pipe down" made me want to tell you to go fuck yourself.

I never said America was pure, or just, or pefect. So you pipe the fuck down mate. I believe quite the contrary as a matter of fact. I am embarrassed often by the History of what my country has done on many occassions.

If the OP had come with a little respect on his critique he would have gotten repsect in kind. He didnt. So he got what he gave.

He approached with an arrogance, not an equality. You say "no better means then any other empire" i say no better or worse mean then any other GOVERNMENT. you want to say empire...cool i can live with that. You wnat to equate us as being just any other group...super, i can agree with that...we aint special no doubt on that from me brother. But we are not the the fucking mutant cousin in the basement. I dont mind having flaws pointed to, but dont come at me with your correction pen if you are gong to do it from the position that you arte better then me...or that your nation is better then mine. As if the people of the world who are not US citizens are by default more intelligent and moral just because they are not US citizens...he can stick that right up his fucking ass.

IN the last 200 hundred year place Americas Power on any nation and tell they would have done anything any differently...maybe they would have fucked over different people...but they would have fucked people over none the less.

So dont tell me to pipe down friend, because no we are not "better" then anyone else...and none else is "better" then us.

You're wrong.

For one thing, Bush wasn't elected to his first term. He was appointed. And the reason for his victory is that 51% of Americans felt that it would be bad for the troops to change presidents. Obviously, they were wrong, but they aren't any stupider then the electorate of any other country.

You're wrong.

For one thing, Bush wasn't elected to his first term. He was appointed.

You are wrong. Bush WAS elected to his first term. He was not appointed.

Same old same old, cut and paste. :rolleyes:

do you even know what the :rolleyes: is for?

I never claimed my country was perfect.However,given the special case of the USA,which always trumpets its claim as the 'LAND OF THE BRAVE AND FREE', as if there weren't any other country as righteous as it was,and has always acted as the world's policeman when nobody asked them to,I decided to stir shit up.

As for a more holistic planning of foreign policy-EVERY Government formulates a foreign policy that protects its national interests.However,the way the American government goes about it is dictated by politics,the short term view of things and ideology rather than pragmatism and facts.Bush went to cut funding for contraceptives in Latin America because of domestic politics involving your Christian right,without considering its effects.

In the 1980's,once Afghanistan had served its purpose in bleeding the USSR,America abandoned it to its own devices,letting the warlords fight each other,abandoning the people who'd served them to the warlords.In the end,it became a breeding ground for Al-Queda,and the USA once more had to go in.You could have saved lives and money by stabilising it in the first place.Instead,you took the short term view and abandoned it.By holistic,long term planning,you actually maintain relations,everyone wins and prospers,and you generally ensure a greater amount of safety for your citizens.Your current policies are deficient in that regard,though I have limited knowledge of your politics.

Yu maintain double standards.Examples are Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.You constantly criticise China and countless nations of human rights violations,but your military lets allied countries such as Syria and Egypt 'aggressively interview' your prisoners,because you don't want to get your hands dirty.

You constantly encourage democracy and human rights,yet one of the worlds biggest human rights violators is Saudi Arabia,your bosom buddy whom you get most of your oil from.

You accuse others of indencency and grotesqueries,you shoot down others,you maintain double standards that suit yourself,and you deny and infringe upon the sovereignity of others.

You ask China to reevaluate the yuan,your 'great country' talks about globalisation and free trade,yet you put up trade barriers and practice protectionism,the exact opposite.

{What isn't there to not admire about your 'great country'?}

We could look at Florida because it was their idiots that could not figure out how to read a ballot even AFTER it was printed in a newspaper.


SIR! or Madam! You are now officially off my christmas card list!

I will have you know, we tried...and we tried hard

Good day to you sir or madam...I SAID GOOD DAY!

Clinton did not do well for the U.S., and anyone who knows what they're talking about can figure that out. I'm not saying Bush has done a bang up job, but if you think we need Clinton back in office, then you probably shouldn't have the right to express opinions, much less vote on American presidents.

I don't think you really have any business saying what U.S. foreign policy should be, or who our presidents should be, when you come from some hole of a country with a failing economy.

Take your socialism elsewhere.

SIR! or Madam! You are now officially off my christmas card list!

I will have you know, we tried...and we tried hard

Good day to you sir or madam...I SAID GOOD DAY!

*slaps Hynation*

Snap out of it. You'll give yourself a hernia.

do you even know what the :rolleyes: is for?

do you? :rolleyes:

*slaps Hynation*

Snap out of it. You'll give yourself a hernia.

You don't know what it was like that day man!

Old women, lost New Yorkers and confused Jews everywhere....I saw one old man vote for Buchanan...it was terrible...they were blind man...it was like they were blind...there were holes in the WALL man!

I held the dying hand of a man who voted Kerry...he wanted Nixon man!

They didn't know what they were doing man...*sobs heavily*

It was rigged I tell you! There were cookies in the voting booths...*puts gun in mouth*

You are wrong. Bush WAS elected to his first term. He was not appointed.

That is funny. Actually no, it is really sad but a giggle still escaped me.

Clinton did not do well for the U.S., and anyone who knows what they're talking about can figure that out. I'm not saying Bush has done a bang up job, but if you think we need Clinton back in office, then you probably shouldn't have the right to express opinions, much less vote on American presidents.

I don't think you really have any business saying what U.S. foreign policy should be, or who our presidents should be, when you come from some hole of a country with a failing economy.

Take your socialism elsewhere.

...?

I actually think Clinton was a great president, and he was definetley much better than Bush. Oh by the way, saying "whoever disagress with me is too stupid to express opinions" is not the way to intelligently debate. And I dont agree with the OP, but seeing as he has not even stated what country he is from, making remarks about it's economy is rather foolish. And he said nothing about any economic system, so I dont see where the socialist remark came from.

F

That is funny. Actually no, it is really sad but a giggle still escaped me.

Prove me otherwise. I am tired of people saying that Bush was appointed where every re-count showed Bush winning. Even the Press proved that Bush won the state of Florida. So yes...Bush won Florida and the electoral college fairly.

Good day.

http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon2/world.html (fore educational purposes)

Latest American wars: Operation Enduring Freedom-Invasion of Iraq.

The American nation has lost nearly all goodwill it had after the September 11 bombings,due to the incompetence of your President.Then,you Americans go ahead vote for him AGAIN!HOW STUPID IS YOUR ELECTORATE?

Vote Clinton in again,and you get two for the price of one.I have an even better idea.Let the People of the World vote for America's Presidents and remove that right from the American people,who obviously cannot be trusted with their complex politics and blend of religion to be entrusted with an institution that has far too much effects on the world. {sarcastic tone here}

When people overseas say thay hate America,you must realise that it is more to do with your foreign policies more than anything else.Your foreign policy,as the diminishing superpower you are,has far too much effects,and your administration fails to consider long term goals in a holistic manner.Just,don't vote in a Texan next time ok?Oh,and stop being so damn impatient as a people,and adopt the long view.

Thankfully,India and China will rise to balance out your influence and power.The USA needs to learn its place and responsibility in the world.Sadly,I have to admit that the world would be a worse place without the USA.You are a necessary evil,and the lesser of multiple evils.

Interesting you say all this when you obviously have not bein paying attention to who the candidates are for 2008.

I'm surprised that the international community hasn't rallied to Ron Paul. He may be a Texan, but he's the only candidate from Bush's party saying the US needs to pull out of Iraq as fast as possible and that future US foreign policy should be one of not meddling in the internal affairs of other nations.

And to believe that China or India will balance us out of the picture is naive. Heed the advice of "Deep Throat": Follow the money.

Eventually the US dollar will collapse due to the US's gov't and citizens mutual deficit spending. The fact that we, the US, export our debt will ultimately render our currency worthless. This steady inflation of the dollar will ultimately send the world into a mild recession, first in the satellite markets--like Asia--and then the major markets--like both Europe and the US--until the world accepts the Euro as the new world reserve currency. Once that occurs, the EU will move to become the new world power, if their governments don't defecit spend their way into a worthless currency like the US is doing. Given the fact that they are all welfare states as it is, it shouldn't take them long to do so.

After that, who's next in line is anyone's guess. China will fail unless they unpeg their currency from the dollar.

The fact that the dollar is the de facto world currency is entierly the reason BushCo went to Iraq. They took out Saddam because he was pushing OPEC to switch the money used in the oil trade from US dollars, the only currency it can be traded in, to Euros. Iran is doing the same thing now, so now the US Gov't is getting onto their backs. If this currency switch is carried out by OPEC, demand for the dollar will fall drastically and cause the US to go bust.

It's called "Dollar Hegemony." Read up on it.

I actually think Clinton was a great president, and he was definetley much better than Bush.

A damn sloth would be a better President than Bush...

As for Clinton, he did a lot of good... unfortunately, Bush came along and made it all vanish.

LMAO

thats all this thread deserves.

I would be insulted, but eh...all I hear is "blah blah blah blah"...

Sorry comrades...I just don't like ranting this early in the morning.

Same here-

Also, originator of thread, try to learn punctuation, if you don't, it just makes you look like a deranged noob.

Some of me does want to go on a spiel about how Europe is continually bashing us over the head for not adopting more 'socially responsible' economic principles, regulations, and when we do (of course making it harder for companies to more successful, all in the name to be 'socially progressive') have our economy kicked in the balls because of something like Sarbannes-Oxley they crow at how stupid and decadent we're becoming, even though the law could've some straight out of France (in a lot less 'socially progressive' version, of course).

How I must disagree. The US has a plethora of good choices this presidential election, especially in the Republican Party. I find Obama a little dimwitted, though thankfully he can be controlled by more intelligent people. Clinton scares the shit out of me. Bill Richardson is the one I like the most, and he's the best overall candidate for foreign policy. Sadly, he probably has no chance.
The Republican party has some of the best choices in years. The three big candidates (Romney, Giulliani, and McCain) are all socially moderate, economically liberal, and hard-hitting on foreign affairs. Giulliani's currently my favorite, but only because's he's a proven leader. Bloomberg would make a terrific president, too, but he'd never win as an independent, nor get anywhere in the Republican party. I think that the socially conservative elements would accept a Mormon before they accept a Jew as president.

Thumbless: That doesn't make it any less true.

Yes, I know. It wasn't very accurate when the original author penned it, nor when it was pasted. :p

do you even know what the :rolleyes: is for?

Sure do! :)

Here's a history of US "interventions" in Latin America.



1846

The U.S., fulfilling the doctrine of Manifest Destiny, goes to war with Mexico and ends up with a third of Mexico's territory.

1850, 1853, 1854, 1857

U.S. interventions in Nicaragua.

1855

Tennessee adventurer William Walker and his mercenaries take over Nicaragua, institute forced labor, and legalize slavery.

"Los yankis... have burst their way like a fertilizing torrent through the barriers of barbarism." --N.Y. Daily News

He's ousted two years later by a Central American coalition largely inspired by Cornelius Vanderbilt, whose trade Walker was infringing.

"The enemies of American civilization-- for such are the enemies of slavery-- seem to be more on the alert than its friends." --William Walker

1856

First of five U.S. interventions in Panama to protect the Atlantic-Pacific railroad from Panamanian nationalists.

1898

U.S. declares war on Spain, blaming it for destruction of the Maine. (In 1976, a U.S. Navy commission will conclude that the explosion was probably an accident.) The war enables the U.S. to occupy Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines.

1903
The Platt Amendment inserted into the Cuban constitution grants the U.S. the right to intervene when it sees fit.

1903

When negotiations with Colombia break down, the U.S. sends ten warships to back a rebellion in Panama in order to acquire the land for the Panama Canal. The Frenchman Philippe Bunau-Varilla negotiates the Canal Treaty and writes Panama's constitution.

1904

U.S. sends customs agents to take over finances of the Dominican Republic to assure payment of its external debt.

1905

U.S. Marines help Mexican dictator Porfirio Díaz crush a strike in Sonora.

1905

U.S. troops land in Honduras for the first of 5 times in next 20 years.

1906

Marines occupy Cuba for two years in order to prevent a civil war.

1907

Marines intervene in Honduras to settle a war with Nicaragua.

1908

U.S. troops intervene in Panama for first of 4 times in next decade.

1909

Liberal President José Santos Zelaya of Nicaragua proposes that American mining and banana companies pay taxes; he has also appropriated church lands and legalized divorce, done business with European firms, and executed two Americans for participating in a rebellion. Forced to resign through U.S. pressure. The new president, Adolfo Díaz, is the former treasurer of an American mining company.

1910

U.S. Marines occupy Nicaragua to help support the Díaz regime.

1911

The Liberal regime of Miguel Dávila in Honduras has irked the State Department by being too friendly with Zelaya and by getting into debt with Britain. He is overthrown by former president Manuel Bonilla, aided by American banana tycoon Sam Zemurray and American mercenary Lee Christmas, who becomes commander-in-chief of the Honduran army.

1912

U.S. Marines intervene in Cuba to put down a rebellion of sugar workers.

1912

Nicaragua occupied again by the U.S., to shore up the inept Díaz government. An election is called to resolve the crisis: there are 4000 eligible voters, and one candidate, Díaz. The U.S. maintains troops and advisors in the country until 1925.

1914

U.S. bombs and then occupies Vera Cruz, in a conflict arising out of a dispute with Mexico's new government. President Victoriano Huerta resigns.

1915

U.S. Marines occupy Haiti to restore order, and establish a protectorate which lasts till 1934. The president of Haiti is barred from the U.S. Officers' Club in Port-au-Prince, because he is black.

"Think of it-- niggers speaking French!" --secretary of State William Jennings Bryan, briefed on the Haitian situation

1916

Marines occupy the Dominican Republic, staying till 1924.

! 1916

Pancho Villa, in the sole act of Latin American aggression against the U.S, raids the city of Columbus, New Mexico, killing 17 Americans.

"Am sure Villa's attacks are made in Germany." --James Gerard, U.S. ambassador to Berlin

1917

U.S. troops enter Mexico to pursue Pancho Villa. They can't catch him.

1917

Marines intervene again in Cuba, to guarantee sugar exports during WWI.

1918

U.S. Marines occupy Panamanian province of Chiriqui for two years to maintain public order.

1921

President Coolidge strongly suggests the overthrow of Guatemalan President Carlos Herrera, in the interests of United Fruit. The Guatemalans comply.

1925

U.S. Army troops occupy Panama City to break a rent strike and keep order.

1926

Marines, out of Nicaragua for less than a year, occupy the country again, to settle a volatile political situation. Secretary of State Kellogg describes a "Nicaraguan-Mexican-Soviet" conspiracy to inspire a "Mexican-Bolshevist hegemony" within striking distance of the Canal.

"That intervention is not now, never was, and never will be a set policy of the United States is one of the most important facts President-elect Hoover has made clear." --NYT, 1928

1929

U.S. establishes a military academy in Nicaragua to train a National Guard as the country's army. Similar forces are trained in Haiti and the Dominican Republic.

"There is no room for any outside influence other than ours in this region. We could not tolerate such a thing without incurring grave risks... Until now Central America has always understood that governments which we recognize and support stay in power, while those which we do not recognize and support fall. Nicaragua has become a test case. It is difficult to see how we can afford to be defeated." --Undersecretary of State Robert Olds

1930

Rafael Leonidas Trujillo emerges from the U.S.-trained National Guard to become dictator of the Dominican Republic.

1932

The U.S. rushes warships to El Salvador in response to a communist-led uprising. President Martínez, however, prefers to put down the rebellion with his own forces, killing over 8000 people (the rebels had killed about 100).

1933

President Roosevelt announces the Good Neighbor policy.

1933
Marines finally leave Nicaragua, unable to suppress the guerrilla warfare of General Augusto César Sandino. Anastasio Somoza García becomes the first Nicaraguan commander of the National Guard.

"The Nicaraguans are better fighters than the Haitians, being of Indian blood, and as warriors similar to the aborigines who resisted the advance of civilization in this country." --NYT correspondent Harold Denny

1933

Roosevelt sends warships to Cuba to intimidate Gerardo Machado y Morales, who is massacring the people to put down nationwide strikes and riots. Machado resigns. The first provisional government lasts only 17 days; the second Roosevelt finds too left-wing and refuses to recognize. A pro-Machado counter-coup is put down by Fulgencio Batista, who with Roosevelt's blessing becomes Cuba's new strongman.
! 1934

Platt Amendment repealed.

1934

Sandino assassinated by agents of Somoza, with U.S. approval. Somoza assumes the presidency of Nicaragua two years later. To block his ascent, Secretary of State Cordell Hull explains, would be to intervene in the internal affairs of Nicaragua.
! 1936

U.S. relinquishes rights to unilateral intervention in Panama.

1941

Ricardo Adolfo de la Guardia deposes Panamanian president Arias in a military coup-- first clearing it with the U.S. Ambassador.

It was "a great relief to us, because Arias had been very troublesome and very pro-Nazi." --Secretary of War Henry Stimson

1943

The editor of the Honduran opposition paper El Cronista is summoned to the U.S. embassy and told that criticism of the dictator Tiburcio Carías Andino is damaging to the war effort. Shortly afterward, the paper is shut down by the government.

1944

The dictator Maximiliano Hernández Martínez of El Salvador is ousted by a revolution; the interim government is overthrown five months later by the dictator's former chief of police. The U.S.'s immediate recognition of the new dictator does much to tarnish Roosevelt's Good Neighbor policy in the eyes of Latin Americans.

1946

U.S. Army School of the Americas opens in Panama as a hemisphere-wide military academy. Its linchpin is the doctrine of National Security, by which the chief threat to a nation is internal subversion; this will be the guiding principle behind dictatorships in Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Central America, and elsewhere.

1948

José Figueres Ferrer wins a short civil war to become President of Costa Rica. Figueres is supported by the U.S., which has informed San José that its forces in the Panama Canal are ready to come to the capital to end "communist control" of Costa Rica.

1954

Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán, elected president of Guatemala, introduces land reform and seizes some idle lands of United Fruit-- proposing to pay for them the value United Fruit claimed on its tax returns. The CIA organizes a small force to overthrow him and begins training it in Honduras. When Arbenz naively asks for U.S. military help to meet this threat, he is refused; when he buys arms from Czechoslovakia it only proves he's a Red.

Guatemala is "openly and diligently toiling to create a Communist state in Central America... only two hours' bombing time from the Panama Canal." --Life

The CIA broadcasts reports detailing the imaginary advance of the "rebel army," and provides planes to strafe the capital. The army refuses to defend Arbenz, who resigns. The U.S.'s hand-picked dictator, Carlos Castillo Armas, outlaws political parties, reduces the franchise, and establishes the death penalty for strikers, as well as undoing Arbenz's land reform. Over 100,000 citizens are killed in the next 30 years of military rule.

"This is the first instance in history where a Communist government has been replaced by a free one." --Richard Nixon

1957

Eisenhower establishes Office of Public Safety to train Latin American police forces.

! 1959
Fidel Castro takes power in Cuba. Several months earlier he had undertaken a triumphal tour through the U.S., which included a CIA briefing on the Red menace.

"Castro's continued tawdry little melodrama of invasion." --Time, of Castro's warnings of an imminent U.S. invasion

1960

Eisenhower authorizes covert actions to get rid of Castro. Among other things, the CIA tries assassinating him with exploding cigars and poisoned milkshakes. Other covert actions against Cuba include burning sugar fields, blowing up boats in Cuban harbors, and sabotaging industrial equipment.

1960

The Canal Zone becomes the focus of U.S. counterinsurgency training.

1960

A new junta in El Salvador promises free elections; Eisenhower, fearing leftist tendencies, withholds recognition. A more attractive right-wing counter-coup comes along in three months.

"Governments of the civil-military type of El Salvador are the most effective in containing communist penetration in Latin America." --John F. Kennedy, after the coup

1960

Guatemalan officers attempt to overthrow the regime of Presidente Fuentes; Eisenhower stations warships and 2000 Marines offshore while Fuentes puts down the revolt. [Another source says that the U.S. provided air support for Fuentes.]
1960s
U.S. Green Berets train Guatemalan army in counterinsurgency techniques. Guatemalan efforts against its insurgents include aerial bombing, scorched-earth assaults on towns suspected of aiding the rebels, and death squads, which killed 20,000 people between 1966 and 1976. U.S. Army Col. John Webber claims that it was at his instigation that "the technique of counter-terror had been implemented by the army."

"If it is necessary to turn the country into a cemetary in order to pacify it, I will not hesitate to do so." --President Carlos Arana Osorio

1961

U.S. organizes force of 1400 anti-Castro Cubans, ships it to the Bahía de los Cochinos. Castro's army routs it.

1961

CIA-backed coup overthrows elected Pres. J. M. Velasco Ibarra of Ecuador, who has been too friendly with Cuba.

1962

CIA engages in campaign in Brazil to keep João Goulart from achieving control of Congress.

1963

CIA-backed coup overthrows elected social democrat Juan Bosch in the Dominican Republic.

1963

A far-right-wing coup in Guatemala, apparently U.S.-supported, forestalls elections in which "extreme leftist" Juan José Arévalo was favored to win.

"It is difficult to develop stable and democratic government [in Guatemala], because so many of the nation's Indians are illiterate and superstitious." --School textbook, 1964

1964

João Goulart of Brazil proposes agrarian reform, nationalization of oil. Ousted by U.S.-supported military coup.

! 1964

The free market in Nicaragua:

The Somoza family controls "about one-tenth of the cultivable land in Nicaragua, and just about everything else worth owning, the country's only airline, one television station, a newspaper, a cement plant, textile mill, several sugar refineries, half-a-dozen breweries and distilleries, and a Mercedes-Benz agency." --Life World Library

1965

A coup in the Dominican Republic attempts to restore Bosch's government. The U.S. invades and occupies the country to stop this "Communist rebellion," with the help of the dictators of Brazil, Paraguay, Honduras, and Nicaragua.

"Representative democracy cannot work in a country such as the Dominican Republic," Bosch declares later. Now why would he say that?

1966

U.S. sends arms, advisors, and Green Berets to Guatemala to implement a counterinsurgency campaign.

"To eliminate a few hundred guerrillas, the government killed perhaps 10,000 Guatemalan peasants." --State Dept. report on the program

1967

A team of Green Berets is sent to Bolivia to help find and assassinate Che Guevara.

1968

Gen. José Alberto Medrano, who is on the payroll of the CIA, organizes the ORDEN paramilitary force, considered the precursor of El Salvador's death squads.

! 1970

In this year (just as an example), U.S. investments in Latin America earn $1.3 billion; while new investments total $302 million.

1970

Salvador Allende Gossens elected in Chile. Suspends foreign loans, nationalizes foreign companies. For the phone system, pays ITT the company's minimized valuation for tax purposes. The CIA provides covert financial support for Allende's opponents, both during and after his election.

1972

U.S. stands by as military suspends an election in El Salvador in which centrist José Napoleón Duarte was favored to win. (Compare with the emphasis placed on the 1982 elections.)

1973

U.S.-supported military coup kills Allende and brings Augusto Pinochet Ugarte to power. Pinochet imprisons well over a hundred thousand Chileans (torture and rape are the usual methods of interrogation), terminates civil liberties, abolishes unions, extends the work week to 48 hours, and reverses Allende's land reforms.

1973

Military takes power in Uruguay, supported by U.S. The subsequent repression reportedly features the world's highest percentage of the population imprisoned for political reasons.

1974

Office of Public Safety is abolished when it is revealed that police are being taught torture techniques.

! 1976

Election of Jimmy Carter leads to a new emphasis on human rights in Central America. Carter cuts off aid to the Guatemalan military (or tries to; some slips through) and reduces aid to El Salvador.

! 1979

Ratification of the Panama Canal treaty which is to return the Canal to Panama by 1999.

"Once again, Uncle Sam put his tail between his legs and crept away rather than face trouble." --Ronald Reagan

1980

A right-wing junta takes over in El Salvador. U.S. begins massively supporting El Salvador, assisting the military in its fight against FMLN guerrillas. Death squads proliferate; Archbishop Romero is assassinated by right-wing terrorists; 35,000 civilians are killed in 1978-81. The rape and murder of four U.S. churchwomen results in the suspension of U.S. military aid for one month.
The U.S. demands that the junta undertake land reform. Within 3 years, however, the reform program is halted by the oligarchy.

"The Soviet Union underlies all the unrest that is going on." --Ronald Reagan

1980

U.S., seeking a stable base for its actions in El Salvador and Nicaragua, tells the Honduran military to clean up its act and hold elections. The U.S. starts pouring in $100 million of aid a year and basing the contras on Honduran territory.
Death squads are also active in Honduras, and the contras tend to act as a state within a state.

1981

The CIA steps in to organize the contras in Nicaragua, who started the previous year as a group of 60 ex-National Guardsmen; by 1985 there are about 12,000 of them. 46 of the 48 top military leaders are ex-Guardsmen. The U.S. also sets up an economic embargo of Nicaragua and pressures the IMF and the World Bank to limit or halt loans to Nicaragua.

1981

Gen. Torrijos of Panama is killed in a plane crash. There is a suspicion of CIA involvement, due to Torrijos' nationalism and friendly relations with Cuba.

1982

A coup brings Gen. Efraín Ríos Montt to power in Guatemala, and gives the Reagan administration the opportunity to increase military aid. Ríos Montt's evangelical beliefs do not prevent him from accelerating the counterinsurgency campaign.

1983

Another coup in Guatemala replaces Ríos Montt. The new President, Oscar Mejía Víctores, was trained by the U.S. and seems to have cleared his coup beforehand with U.S. authorities.

1983

U.S. troops take over tiny Granada. Rather oddly, it intervenes shortly after a coup has overthrown the previous, socialist leader. One of the justifications for the action is the building of a new airport with Cuban help, which Granada claimed was for tourism and Reagan argued was for Soviet use. Later the U.S. announces plans to finish the airport... to develop tourism.

1983

Boland Amendment prohibits CIA and Defense Dept. from spending money to overthrow the government of Nicaragua-- a law the Reagan administration cheerfully violates.

1984

CIA mines three Nicaraguan harbors. Nicaragua takes this action to the World Court, which brings an $18 billion judgment against the U.S. The U.S. refuses to recognize the Court's jurisdiction in the case.

1984

U.S. spends $10 million to orchestrate elections in El Salvador-- something of a farce, since left-wing parties are under heavy repression, and the military has already declared that it will not answer to the elected president.

1989

U.S. invades Panama to dislodge CIA boy gone wrong Manuel Noriega, an event which marks the evolution of the U.S.'s favorite excuse from Communism to drugs.

1996

The U.S. battles global Communism by extending most-favored-nation trading status for China, and tightening the trade embargo on Castro's Cuba.

But, I suppose that's all just liberal anti-American nonsense. Or perhaps it doesn't matter because Latin Americans don't matter (they just want to steal our jobs anyway. And they hate our freedoms.)

He's (the OP's) right, but in that outraged leftie teenager kind of way.

I never claimed my country was perfect.However,given the special case of the USA,which always trumpets its claim as the 'LAND OF THE BRAVE AND FREE', as if there weren't any other country as righteous as it was,and has always acted as the world's policeman when nobody asked them to,I decided to stir shit up.

Stir shit up...you did this by looking and sounding stupid. Quite a plan.
The USA isnt a special case idiot, it simply has the most influence, so there for it is most visible.

As for a more holistic planning of foreign policy-

There is that word again...you are really dumb as fucking rock arent you?

Holistic: Relating to or concerned with wholes or with complete systems rather than with the analysis of, treatment of, or dissection into parts.

Below you clearly state that every government is selfinterest centric so claiming the US isnt Holistic is like claiming it is on earth...of course it isnt holistic no nations foreign policy is.

And for that matter your arguement isnt considering the global system it is piece meal, you bitch about "double standards" and then use them...which leads me back to you being a complete moron. Complete. Holistic, as in your whole being, moron.


EVERY Government formulates a foreign policy that protects its national interests.

No shit Capt Obvious are back on this ? Now you are repeating what i have already said in previous posts.

However,the way the American government goes about it is dictated by politics, the short term view of things and ideology rather than pragmatism and facts.

As opposed to using what? What does your government use to formulate its foreign policy? A quija board? A magic eightball? The I-Ching? Please dont tell me they use long term, long sighted "holistic" policies that take account the future of the entire planet regardless of how it's own citizens will react to their immediate needs not being met...because you would be a liar along with a Complete moron if you said that.




Bush went to cut funding for contraceptives in Latin America because of domestic politics involving your Christian right,without considering its effects.

Wow, that tyrant. How about they get up off their own dime...how about blaming the governments that are allowing themselves to be bought and sold like common street whores...? Crazy, but if you want to hold people in power responsible hold them all responsible...oh wait...moron...I forgot.



In the 1980's,once Afghanistan had served its purpose in bleeding the USSR,America abandoned it to its own devices,letting the warlords fight each other,abandoning the people who'd served them to the warlords.

Wrong.
We didnt leave the people to the Warlords, we left OUR Warlords WITH the other Warlords. Since I know both Afghans and Reds who fought in that war please dont give me a shit history lesson, based off your impotent narrow thought line.

In the end,it became a breeding ground for Al-Queda,and the USA once more had to go in.
No the USA didnt HAVE to go in.
Al-Queda wasnt bred in Afghan, you have to go a little further up the Jihadist ladder then that. But again...I wouldnt expect you to have any real understanding of...well just about anything.


You could have saved lives and money by stabilising it in the first place.

I couldnt have saved a damned thing. I am not the United States government.

Instead,you took the short term view and abandoned it.

I did not abandon a thing...you give me a lot of credit.

By holistic,long term planning,you actually maintain relations,everyone wins and prospers,and you generally ensure a greater amount of safety for your citizens.

A few points here.
1. We have already established the meaning of Holistic and that NO government practices those type of foreing policy decisions.

2. Speaking specifically on Afghan...how old are you boy? Hind sight is 20/20 you are trying to sound intelligent because you look at the past and have the relevant information laid out before you and calming look it all in total context and perspective and come to the obvious conclusion...moron.
My 11 year old could do that...it doesnt mean she should dictate foreign policy.

3. I dont have any citizens.

Your current policies are deficient in that regard,though I have limited knowledge of your politics.

Did you read this sentence before you clicked "Submit Reply"?
Seriously.
If you are talking about the nation of the USA then how can claim to know its policies and not its politics.

If you are talking to me then waht the fuck do you mean "Your current policies are deficient in that regard" I dont have any policies I am a fecking citizen, civilian, private sector worker. Seriously, can you be more stupid?


Yu maintain double standards.

Man, you dont even know what color my eyes are how do you know what standards I keep?

Examples are Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.

Wasnt me...again though...thanks for the credit.


You constantly criticise China and countless nations of human rights violations,but your military lets allied countries such as Syria and Egypt 'aggressively interview' your prisoners,because you don't want to get your hands dirty.
A few points here.
1. I dont critique China except on Human rights issues...and guess what fucko they deserve to be critiqued on those issues...dont they? I mean really, are you saying that because the US is guilty no one else is? Of course you are...because you are a moron. Wait wait...are you saying the US is the only country who is wrong and wont admit it? Because well that would make you a moron too. But back to my main point...I love China, the people are warm and friendly, the culture is amazing.

2.I dont have a military...I am just a guy remember.
Not that I have "Allies" but you think Syria is more of an Ally to the US then China? Do you smoke crack a long with being a moron?
The US would let Egypt declare war on it if it meant staying allies with China.
Truly you amaze me.


You constantly encourage democracy and human rights,yet one of the worlds biggest human rights violators is Saudi Arabia,your bosom buddy whom you get most of your oil from.
A few points here.

1. Yes I do encourage Democracy and Human treatment of others.

2. But I am not "Buddies" with Saudi Arabia. I am not saying I wouldnt be...if Saudi Arabia was a guy...instead of a nation.

3. I get my oil from the Bmart at the corner of my street.

4. If you mean the US, the top three Oil suppliers to the US are Canada, Venezuela, Mexico.

Moron.


You accuse others of indencency and grotesqueries,
[quote]
Prove I do this.

[QUOTE=Orion Ascendant;12725932]
you shoot down others,you maintain double standards that suit yourself,and you deny and infringe upon the sovereignity of others.
What!?! Are you talking about a person or a country? Seriously pick a grip on reality and stick to it.


You ask China to reevaluate the yuan,your 'great country' talks about globalisation and free trade,yet you put up trade barriers and practice protectionism,the exact opposite.

I didnt ask China to do shit.

As for my Great Country...well here is the great thing about it...we dont all agree on Globalization...including our politicians...crazy.


{What isn't there to not admire about your 'great country'?}

I believe you meant to write "What is there to admire about your 'great country'?" See you used double negative which is rather extraneous.

This question is entirely stupid...to suggest there is nothing Great about the United States is laughable. Especially considering your piss poor grasp of politics and history.

You have barely touched on anything of fact that there is to be ashamed of...I bet you can easily name off a dozen things that are great about the US.

I have no qualms about criticizing my country, or yours, the difference between you and me...I do it honestly and objectively, you son, simply dont.

You bitch like an old woman.

You constantly encourage democracy and human rights,yet one of the worlds biggest human rights violators is Saudi Arabia,your bosom buddy whom you get most of your oil from.


While I agree with you that our friendship with Saudi Arabia is terribly hypocritical for a nation that boasts of its commitment to freedom and democracy, this isn't true. The Saudis only supply about 6% of our oil demand; the vast majority comes from Canada, Venezuela, and Nigeria.

In fact, the European Union and Japan get a far bigger share of their oil from the Saudis than we do.

-snip-

Wow, your worthless opinion are bolded, so it must be true! Also, I stopped reading after you insulted our electorative, and yes, your opinion are not wanted or needed and are worthless.

Why Skibereen,thanks for flaming me.I'm sure you're a nice enough person in real life.....

But your insults don't really get under my skin.My aim is simple;to get under people's skin and make them think,using the lowest common denominator.

Personal insults don't really get to me.But thank you for trying.

However,you get angry easily.Internet grant great anoynimity doesn't it.

How about you give me a call at +65 98466098.An overseas number.I'll be glad to accomodate you if my schedule allows.

When will people learn... dont feed the troll.

It is pointless and stupid.

Another American loving NSer. :rolleyes:

Look, I've been accused of being amazingly anti-American in my time (with good reason on some occasions) but your thread makes me want to feel the crushing relief of caving my own head in with a brick.

Just thought I should point this out.

Then,you Americans

Really, it pisses me off quite a bit when people start using "you Americans" on this forum. We're not all Americans here, and not every american is a Bushist. So, please use the third person and avoid generalisations. "Ad nationem" arguments are as useless as "ad hominem" arguments are.

Anyway yea, when people like me here in old Europe feel anti-American, it is really the US foreign policy we protest against. We know, though, that many US citizens aren't very supportive of imperialism. So, we hope that the US electorate will enforce a change.


The idiocy of the current US foreign policy (or Bush Wars, we might call it) is exemplified, imho, by a very simple fact.

Tony Blair is very close to Bush, and very supportive of the War on Terror thingie.
Yet, Tony Blair has steadily reduced the british military effort in Iraq in the last year. Why? Guess.
Tony Blair is going to resign, and the next British PM isn't going to keep British troops in Iraq very much longer.
I don't think that anyone could blame UK for "cowardice" like many Americans did with France and Germany, when they choose not to partecipate to the invasion of Iraq. Remember, UK is the country who resisted ALONE against the whole Axis (Germany, Italy and Japan) on so many theatres of war (let's see... the skies of England, North Atlantic, the Mediterranean and Northern Africa, Eastern Africa, South Pacific and Indochina...) for a whole year back in WW2 (the fall of France, may 1940, invasion of CCCP, july 1941 iirc).
No, I don't think that anyone in the world could call the Brits "cowards".
Hence, it must be that the British government has weighed the pro and the contra of the occupation of Iraq, and decided that UK isn't getting any benefit from that. Islamic terrorism has hit London even when the british soldier were fighting the insurgence in Iraq. Muslims of all the world are looking onto Britain as an enemy power. This isn't a good thing for Britain.
It isn't for the US either. Expecially when the US leadership has managed to raise anti-US feelings in Europe, has gone back to Cold-War era tones with Russia, etc, etc.

So, I do hope, for the US and for the whole world, that America is going to make an U-turn about foreign policy. If America wants to play the part of the world's boss, it has to listen to other countries and the UN, too.

Here's a history of US "interventions" in Latin America.


Wasn't it the so-called "Monroe doctrine"? "America to the Americans", meaning Northern America, Central America, the Caribbean Islands and Southern America to the US government and corporations ;)

I think that is the strongest hard hitting war we have been through because it really set the goverment strait that no matter the color of your skin all men (and women) are created equal no matter what!!!

The OP can go die in a fire for all I care.

Monroe doctrine... "America to the Americans"... Northern America, Central America, the Caribbean Islands and Southern America to the US government and corporations.

Amen!

Thank for that informative post. Now please don't post ever again lest we be overwhelmed with your cunning insight and bountiful wisdom.

I would prefer a Chinese superpower to replace the US.

I would prefer a Chinese superpower to replace the US.

Then you're an utter fool.

The US does things for the US. There is no doubt about this. But the US is fundamentally an economic power; it acts to improve it's business situation far more than for any other reason. This was masked for a time by the death-struggle it was in with the Soviet Union, and by the rage felt against the Al Qaedists, but it remains the most important reason for the US ever taking action.

The US is also non-expansive. Over a hundred years have passed since the US added any territory to it's physical size.

China is physically expansive, and is fundamentally a military power. Their economic expansion has fed their military far more than any other part of their society, and they are in the process of a massive modernisation drive.

The US does things you don't like. Well, frankly, get over it. You want China to take over? Well, guess what? That's exactly what they'll do.

Then you're an utter fool.

The US does things for the US. There is no doubt about this. But the US is fundamentally an economic power; it acts to improve it's business situation far more than for any other reason. This was masked for a time by the death-struggle it was in with the Soviet Union, and by the rage felt against the Al Qaedists, but it remains the most important reason for the US ever taking action.

The US is also non-expansive. Over a hundred years have passed since the US added any territory to it's physical size.

China is physically expansive, and is fundamentally a military power. Their economic expansion has fed their military far more than any other part of their society, and they are in the process of a massive modernisation drive.

The US does things you don't like. Well, frankly, get over it. You want China to take over? Well, guess what? That's exactly what they'll do.

Exactly - though I think we've added a couple states and a few territories in the past century. It never ceases to amaze me how many people simply can't handle Freedom and long for a Socialist government to tell them what to do. :rolleyes: It's sad, but we overcome it. :)

I have an even better idea.Let the People of the World vote for America's Presidents and remove that right from the American people,who obviously cannot be trusted with their complex politics and blend of religion to be entrusted with an institution that has far too much effects on the world. {sarcastic tone here}


You are an idiot, shut your damn face. :)

I'm sure you are oh-so-enlightened over there. You seem to have everything figured out for our whole nation. We are not worthy of your presence {sarcastic tone here}

Then you're an utter fool.

The US does things for the US. There is no doubt about this. But the US is fundamentally an economic power; it acts to improve it's business situation far more than for any other reason. This was masked for a time by the death-struggle it was in with the Soviet Union, and by the rage felt against the Al Qaedists, but it remains the most important reason for the US ever taking action.

The US is also non-expansive. Over a hundred years have passed since the US added any territory to it's physical size.

China is physically expansive, and is fundamentally a military power. Their economic expansion has fed their military far more than any other part of their society, and they are in the process of a massive modernisation drive.

The US does things you don't like. Well, frankly, get over it. You want China to take over? Well, guess what? That's exactly what they'll do.

$439.3 Billion US
$29.9 billion China

Who's the military state? And excluding Tibet which happened under Mao, what countries has China annexed? Please look at US history, you'll find it full of occupation, annexation and the occasional native genocide.

We barely vote for president, we vote for the people who vote for the president. Besides most Americans are too busy worrying if the candidate is calling themself a democrat or a republican to notice they're voting for an idiot.

We barely vote for president, we vote for the people who vote for the president. Besides most Americans are too busy worrying if the candidate is calling themself a democrat or a republican to notice they're voting for an idiot.

Valid point Sir. It's atrocious that barely half of the nation cares to vote. Then everyone whines when someone gets in that is hated?

We barely vote for president, we vote for the people who vote for the president. Besides most Americans are too busy worrying if the candidate is calling themself a democrat or a republican to notice they're voting for an idiot.

Come on now - you expect your state's electors to revolt? :p

$439.3 Billion US
$29.9 billion China

Who's the military state? And excluding Tibet which happened under Mao, what countries has China annexed? Please look at US history, you'll find it full of occupation, annexation and the occasional native genocide.

First, check the percentages of GNP used for military spending; raw numbers do not tell th whole story. Second, China considers the following to be "traditionally chinese":

Korea
Taiwan
Siberia
Vietnam (and they tried to take it during the 1970s)
Okinawa
Burma
The Spratly Islands
And, according to some sources, the islands of Japan.

The US, on the other hand, has expanded since 1907: not one inch. Some territories have changed designation (such as Alaska and Hawaii becoming states). The US, simply, is not an expansionist state.

First, check the percentages of GNP used for military spending; raw numbers do not tell th whole story. Second, China considers the following to be "traditionally chinese":

Korea
Taiwan
Siberia
Vietnam (and they tried to take it during the 1970s)
Okinawa
Burma
The Spratly Islands
And, according to some sources, the islands of Japan.

The US, on the other hand, has expanded since 1907: not one inch. Some territories have changed designation (such as Alaska and Hawaii becoming states). The US, simply, is not an expansionist state.

What a load of crap, the US was formed on imperialist annexation and occupation of the Americas, war with the Spanish etc etc, whatever some Chinese consider to be part of their country is irrelevant compared to what they have actually done, China has only annexed Tibet, under Mao over 60 years ago, nothing else, China has been the victim of aggression in most cases, whether it be Japanese or American. We all know the neocons who control the White House consider the whole world fair game for the US.

What a load of crap, the US was formed on imperialist annexation and occupation of the Americas, war with the Spanish etc etc, whatever some Chinese consider to be part of their country is irrelevant compared to what they have actually done, China has only annexed Tibet, under Mao over 60 years ago, nothing else, China has been the victim of aggression in most cases, whether it be Japanese or American. We all know the neocons who control the White House consider the whole world fair game for the US.

Please do not assert what "we all know"

What a load of crap, the US was formed on imperialist annexation and occupation of the Americas, war with the Spanish etc etc, whatever some Chinese consider to be part of their country is irrelevant compared to what they have actually done, China has only annexed Tibet, under Mao over 60 years ago, nothing else, China has been the victim of aggression in most cases, whether it be Japanese or American. We all know the neocons who control the White House consider the whole world fair game for the US.

While China might not be an expansionist the US certainly is not.

Let us look at the last major US annexation of land: Post Spanish-American War which was... 1898! Or over 100 years ago.

In the past the US has been a very expansionist we bullied Mexico and Spain into war but since the 20th century we have done nothing in terms of gaining our own territory, heck we have given away territory like giving the Phillipines independence, and Cuba de facto independence.

Every war after the Spanish-American War (heck including the SA War if you want to get technical) talks about a war of liberation of an oppressed people or the chance to spread democracy/stop communism in another part of the world. Whether it be Europe (WW I and II, Kosovo), Asia (Vietnam, Korea), Middle East (Iraq I and II), Latin America (Nicaragua, Grenada, Panama), Africa (Somalia)

Maybe the wars were not done under the most just of circumstances but they were/are not wars of conquest.

Please do not assert what "we all know"

What, you didn't know that "neocons" are currently planning a world takeover? :p

Anyway, it's stupid to try and tie a country's future to it's history. If it made sense, we'd all be paranoid and arming ourselves against the threat of Italy, Greece, and Mongolia. :D The fact that the Chinese were victims of the Japanese doesn't mean they're harmless little butterflies. :p

What, you didn't know that "neocons" are currently planning a world takeover? :p

Anyway, it's stupid to try and tie a country's future to it's history. If it made sense, we'd all be paranoid and arming ourselves against the threat of Italy, Greece, and Mongolia. :D The fact that the Chinese were victims of the Japanese doesn't mean they're harmless little butterflies. :p

Exactly. Finally a little bit of logic =o

What a load of crap, the US was formed on imperialist annexation and occupation of the Americas, war with the Spanish etc etc, whatever some Chinese consider to be part of their country is irrelevant compared to what they have actually done, China has only annexed Tibet, under Mao over 60 years ago, nothing else, China has been the victim of aggression in most cases, whether it be Japanese or American. We all know the neocons who control the White House consider the whole world fair game for the US.

And the US hasn't annexed anything in 60 years...and don't forget Chinese support of genocide in the Sudan or their continued aggression against Taiwan. They're worse than the US in a lot of ways.

$439.3 Billion US
$29.9 billion China

Who's the military state? And excluding Tibet which happened under Mao, what countries has China annexed? Please look at US history, you'll find it full of occupation, annexation and the occasional native genocide.

Gee, its not like China is a Military Police State or anything. Lets see, they have tried to occupy Korea, Vietnam, Mongolia, and parts of India and the SU. That's just about every country they border.

And for everyone who whines about how the US is violating human rights all over the globe, I challenge you to name 1 (major) country with a better record. (by major, countries that actually have some global influence)

Continents:
Europe: Yeah right. All Western European nations were massive imperialists, and Eastern Europe was communist.

Africa: Do I need to say anything?

South America: These are the guys the US paid to commit abuses for them.

ME: Again, do I need to say anything?

East Asia:China and SE Asia was commie, Japan was facisit, and India, the best of the lot, still has Kashmir and Bangledash to taint its hands.

Australia: Actually the only possible countries that could claim to have a better record are the former British dominions, but they were very similar to the US in the way that they treated the Native population.

I'm not justifying the US's actions. I'm just saying that for a country that has had to deal with massive foreign immigration, race issues, fighting a massive cold-war, and kick-starting a new idea called democracy, it has done far better than anyone could have perceived.

I would prefer a Chinese superpower to replace the US.

No, no you would not.

And the US hasn't annexed anything in 60 years...and don't forget Chinese support of genocide in the Sudan or their continued aggression against Taiwan. They're worse than the US in a lot of ways.

Bullshit, no one can do anything about that mess in Sudan because the government won't back down, saying the Chinese support genocide because they can't diplomatically solve this complex and massive problem all on their lonesome is ridiculous at best, blame mongering to be fair. Aggression against Taiwan? wtf are you talking about? The US is far more belligerent in international relations than China, the US in most cases demands, threatens and sprouts cold war rhetoric to the media for the conservative turds that dominate your country. And btw the RoK should be part of the PRC, I mean after the American Civil War did you expect the union to just leave the CS with a small territory, in that context the US was remarkably aggressive and imperious. The communist could have rolled over Taiwan and surrounding islands with ease during the Revolution, they showed remarkably restraint compared to historical US.

Every war after the Spanish-American War (heck including the SA War if you want to get technical) talks about a war of liberation of an oppressed people or the chance to spread democracy/stop communism in another part of the world. Whether it be Europe (WW I and II, Kosovo), Asia (Vietnam, Korea), Middle East (Iraq I and II), Latin America (Nicaragua, Grenada, Panama), Africa (Somalia)
Your a joke.

These days the nature of warfare and hegemony have changed, no longer do armies have to occupy land in such a way, that concept of imperialism is out of date. These days US imperialism and hegemony is about corporate control of capital flow, controlling resources and money in friendly/puppet states and having a vast empire of strategic military bases throughout the world. In a way this is both a traditional imperialism plus a class battle, for the battles with most likely be fought in the banks overseas. The US in this case is the bulwark of reaction, and China a force of progression. People on these forums just can't accept the sheer power China can wield in monetary terms against the US, buying government bonds, manipulation of monetary worth and valuation, it's already inevitable that half the US will be owned by Chinese state companies and in the pockets of the Communist Party.

Your a joke.

These days the nature of warfare and hegemony have changed, no longer do armies have to occupy land in such a way, that concept of imperialism is out of date. These days US imperialism and hegemony is about corporate control of capital flow, controlling resources and money in friendly/puppet states and having a vast empire of strategic military bases throughout the world. In a way this is both a traditional imperialism plus a class battle, for the battles with most likely be fought in the banks overseas. The US in this case is the bulwark of reaction, and China a force of progression. People on these forums just can't accept the sheer power China can wield in monetary terms against the US, buying government bonds, manipulation of monetary worth and valuation, it's already inevitable that half the US will be owned by Chinese state companies and in the pockets of the Communist Party.

Sir, no disrespect, but "go slip in a puddle of AIDS"

Your a joke.

These days the nature of warfare and hegemony have changed, no longer do armies have to occupy land in such a way, that concept of imperialism is out of date. These days US imperialism and hegemony is about corporate control of capital flow, controlling resources and money in friendly/puppet states and having a vast empire of strategic military bases throughout the world. In a way this is both a traditional imperialism plus a class battle, for the battles with most likely be fought in the banks overseas. The US in this case is the bulwark of reaction, and China a force of progression. People on these forums just can't accept the sheer power China can wield in monetary terms against the US, buying government bonds, manipulation of monetary worth and valuation, it's already inevitable that half the US will be owned by Chinese state companies and in the pockets of the Communist Party.

Yes, yes.. God forbid the U.S. participate in the global economy. :p

When you outsource a Ford shop to Jalisco, it's not commerce - it's hegemony. Forced sterilizations and abortions, "disappearance" of Party opponents and threats to neighboring countries by China pale in comparison to this terrible 'hegemony.' :D

Yes, yes.. God forbid the U.S. participate in the global economy. :p

When you outsource a Ford shop to Jalisco, it's not commerce - it's hegemony. Forced sterilizations and abortions, "disappearance" of Party opponents and threats to neighboring countries by China pale in comparison to this terrible 'hegemony.' :D

The only reason the US and other countries oppose the children policy in China is not on any moral or ethical grounds, it is because they are afraid economically of China, they know overpopulation would kill the Chinese economy just as it did under Mao and in other communist states. The fact is, it's inevitable and you all know it, in 10 to 20 years China will be a larger industrial economic power than the US, and in 50 years who knows. Without resorting to the usual aggressivist 'containment' and war, the US has little if any chance of stopping Chinese development.

The only reason the US and other countries oppose the children policy in China is not on any moral or ethical grounds, it is because they are afraid economically of China, they know overpopulation would kill the Chinese economy just as it did under Mao and in other communist states. The fact is, it's inevitable and you all know it, in 10 to 20 years China will be a larger industrial economic power than the US, and in 50 years who knows. Without resorting to the usual aggressivist 'containment' and war, the US has little if any chance of stopping Chinese development.

Wealth (which China is slowly gaining now that it's dropping Communism by and by) tends to lower birthrates. Fewer farmers, fewer kids. No doubt there's a lot of Chinese, but their growth probably isn't going to continue indefinitely, as they become more urban. Freedom is contagious. :) I'm just amused whenever the definition of "imperialism" goes, in the course of a debate, from invading and subjugating a society to putting Coca-Cola on their shelves. It just isn't the same. ;)

Wealth (which China is slowly gaining now that it's dropping Communism by and by) tends to lower birthrates. Fewer farmers, fewer kids. No doubt there's a lot of Chinese, but their growth probably isn't going to continue indefinitely, as they become more urban. Freedom is contagious. :) I'm just amused whenever the definition of "imperialism" goes, in the course of a debate, from invading and subjugating a society to putting Coca-Cola on their shelves. It just isn't the same. ;)

Your acting as if consumer goods and services are somehow new to China, they have had them for quite a while now, against popular myth, during the cold war great amounts of consumer items were produced, not as much as the West but then again the West is just wasteful. The continuing urbanization of will as you say eventually put the children policy out of date and the Party will repeal it, but this time has not yet come, their are still millions of Chinese in agrarianism. You see, in the last decade the Party gave the people two doors, one was for economy and one for politics, if you go through the economy door you find prosperity, you go through the politics and you'll hit a brick wall. In that way the state isn't restrictive as it's the persons fault if they become a victim for going into politics when they know the consequences of bringing the nation away from socialism.

Now of course there is a massive tendency for people in the West to view China as a massive contradiction in that they are embracing capitalism. This is patently untrue, no nation on the earth is fully capitalist. About the only 2 arguments for this is that China has consumer goods, and it has private enterprise. Both of these are untrue, socialism does not preclude consumer goods, and for the second I shouldn't have to remind anyone that private enterprise doesn't really exist in China, all companies are able to operate on the profit motive but they are massively restricted by the state and taxed for their access to the Chinese market. Sure you'll see 'Coca Cola' and all the rest in China, but that means little when Coca Cola the company in China is just a subsidiary company of the state, go into their offices in Beijing and they'll be a Communist Party official in charge.

Through this manipulation of the market, especially in valuation of their currency, the Chinese as a socialist state are beginning to outdo the West in labor and productivity. You should understand that socialism is not capitalism or communism, it is a mix, half way between, in a transition to communism, if you think about it like that it's much easier to understand and if research the matter more you'll see the contradiction doesn't really exist. The poverty in China is largely caused by those still living the agrarian life, once they people become integrated into the urban life it will decrease and the Party can use it's vast surplus in taxation and the like to bring literacy, infrastructure and proportionate wages to the people. Sure China may not look equal now, but into the future 'Chinese Socialism' I think will produce great results.

10 to 20 years China will be a larger industrial economic power than the US

All thanks to something we like to call the US CONSUMER.

$439.3 Billion US
$29.9 billion China

Who's the military state?

Define military state! Last time I checked, the US was not controled by the US Military.

And excluding Tibet which happened under Mao, what countries has China annexed? Please look at US history, you'll find it full of occupation, annexation and the occasional native genocide.

Umm yea...I suggest you look at what the Chinese claim as their own and who actually owns them. :rolleyes:

No, no you would not.

Well, the food would be tastier...

What a load of crap, the US was formed on imperialist annexation and occupation of the Americas, war with the Spanish etc etc,

And that was the last time we actually got territory was during the Spanish American war. Since then, the Philippines was returned to the local inhabitants. What? WOW! We actually gave up territory. Guess when that was! 1945. Now pray tell tell me where we are expanding and what territories we are adding.

whatever some Chinese consider to be part of their country is irrelevant

:headbang:

You sir, need to smell the coffee once in a while and lay off the drugs and whatever it is you decided to smoke. It is very relevent for if they do become a superpower, all hell is going to break loose in that region and the last thing that is needed is another pacific war.

AP,

You need to grasp politics here. Has the US done bad thing? Yes we have. I am the first to admit it.

Now...look at the history of the planet, every nation has done bad things pretty much.

As to China...they abuse Human Rights DAILY!!! They talk about expansion. They have plans to carry out what they want to do. You prefer China being a power? Be ready for World War III if they ever decide to carry out their threats.

You need to grasp politics here. Has the US done bad thing? Yes we have. I am the first to admit it.

Now...look at the history of the planet, every nation has done bad things pretty much.


Two wrongs don't make a right (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_wrongs_make_a_right_%28fallacy%29)


As to China...they abuse Human Rights DAILY!!! They talk about expansion. They have plans to carry out what they want to do.

See above.

You prefer China being a power?

Straw men (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man) burn well, but don't suffice as convincing arguments.

Two wrongs don't make a right (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_wrongs_make_a_right_%28fallacy%29)



See above.

:rolleyes: I know that but that was not the point of the post. :rolleyes:

What a load of crap, the US was formed on imperialist annexation and occupation of the Americas, war with the Spanish etc etc,

Of course it was. So was the British Empire; so was the French Empire, the German Empire, the Russian Empire, and, in fact, every country that exists now or has ever existed since the dawn of civilization.

Now that we have gotten past that irrelevancy, you might actually realise that the US is not, today, expansionist, and in fact has not been since before 1900. The crap, my friend, is yours.

whatever some Chinese consider to be part of their country is irrelevant compared to what they have actually done, China has only annexed Tibet, under Mao over 60 years ago, nothing else,

Lie. China has invaded Vietnam twice (but I guess it's not expansionism if you lose, hmm?) and clashed with Soviet forces in Siberia on numerous occasions. they have also stated their absolute willingness to use force on Taiwan to forcibly integrate it - only US pressure and support for Taiwan has forestalled this.

And this was ALL after Mao.

Oh and let's not forget their attempt to bring the Korean Penninsula under their control - or maybe you forgot the Korean War?

China has been the victim of aggression in most cases, whether it be Japanese or American.

Another Lie. China has never been the victim of US aggression. In fact, the only time US forces opposed Chinese was in the Boxer Rebellion - as part of the multinational force sent to rescue the embassies in Beijing.

The US served as a counterweight to British imperial ambitions in China. They supported the Nationalist takeover from the Imperial Government. It was because of the Japanese invasion of China that the US embargoed Japan's oil - an act that led directly to Pearl Harbour. In point of fact, throughout most of it's history, the US has enjoyed cordial or even friendly relations with China.

Of course it was. So was the British Empire; so was the French Empire, the German Empire, the Russian Empire, and, in fact, every country that exists now or has ever existed since the dawn of civilization.

Now that we have gotten past that irrelevancy, you might actually realise that the US is not, today, expansionist, and in fact has not been since before 1900. The crap, my friend, is yours.



Lie. China has invaded Vietnam twice (but I guess it's not expansionism if you lose, hmm?) and clashed with Soviet forces in Siberia on numerous occasions. they have also stated their absolute willingness to use force on Taiwan to forcibly integrate it - only US pressure and support for Taiwan has forestalled this.

And this was ALL after Mao.

Oh and let's not forget their attempt to bring the Korean Penninsula under their control - or maybe you forgot the Korean War?



Another Lie. China has never been the victim of US aggression. In fact, the only time US forces opposed Chinese was in the Boxer Rebellion - as part of the multinational force sent to rescue the embassies in Beijing.

The US served as a counterweight to British imperial ambitions in China. They supported the Nationalist takeover from the Imperial Government. It was because of the Japanese invasion of China that the US embargoed Japan's oil - an act that led directly to Pearl Harbour. In point of fact, throughout most of it's history, the US has enjoyed cordial or even friendly relations with China.

I do not think he understands history that well.

Bullshit, no one can do anything about that mess in Sudan because the government won't back down, saying the Chinese support genocide because they can't diplomatically solve this complex and massive problem all on their lonesome is ridiculous at best, blame mongering to be fair.

Guess who's producing 500,000 bpd of oil in Sudan with the help of their government, and guess who's consistently stonewalled calling the situation genocide? That's right, China. They are up to their necks in supporting those atrocities and have no problem sacrificing innocent lives for their resources. China makes the US look like a good guy when compared to their reckless pursuit of greed.

Aggression against Taiwan? wtf are you talking about? The US is far more belligerent in international relations than China, the US in most cases demands, threatens and sprouts cold war rhetoric to the media for the conservative turds that dominate your country. And btw the RoK should be part of the PRC, I mean after the American Civil War did you expect the union to just leave the CS with a small territory, in that context the US was remarkably aggressive and imperious.

The PRC has no legitimate claim to Taiwan; the only way Taiwan can ever become part of mainland China is if the people vote to do so. Otherwise, China's only option is to take it by force. In fact, Taiwan has a lot more legitimate claim to the government of China than the Communists, who waged a civil war to forcefully take over the country.

The communist could have rolled over Taiwan and surrounding islands with ease during the Revolution, they showed remarkably restraint compared to historical US.

They just rolled in to a war of aggression against Korea instead.

They just rolled in to a war of aggression against Korea instead.

And the allies pushed them right out of South Korea just like they did North Korea.