Please stop the "we support democracy" stuff

[stoffi]

All Bush'ists and republicans, please stop saying how you want a president who fights for freedom and democracy in the middle east and etc.
We all know you won't go to war unless there is oil or israel involved.

In fact, USA has supported an incredible amount of tyrants up throughout the years, they have overthrown democratically elected governments, and put in military juntas instead. USA will support tyrants, legit governments, and whatever they like, as long as they get oil.

South america is a brilliant example of all this. Maybe some republicans should do some reading about how many governments USA overthrew.


During the last 8 years, Bush has ruined USA's image in the world, and he has multiplied the number of terrorists by 100 atleast. And now they want me dead aswell, all thx to usa.

I was very pro-usa before Bush, and I still was during the first year or so. I thought bush was a good guy who wanted the best for the world. I was very very wrong.

I see Obama as a guy who might change your image into a positive one. Mccain is just another Bush, who sees only war and doesn't understand the war on terror can't be won like that.
We all want those damn terrorists gone, but we gotta get them at their roots, BEFORE they become terrorists. Mccain is a moron, a warmongerer and he has no clue about economics.



And btw, did you know that the economical growth is ALWAYS larger when a democrat president rules usa? Republicans only support the richest of the rich, democrats see the people better, but far from good.

[Bluefaerydust]

do you know that it always is bad when democrats rule the congress? lol

[freemehul]

We all know you won't go to war unless there is oil or israel involved.

Germany had no known oil reserves, Bosnia has no oil production, but there are more such examples

In fact, USA has supported an incredible amount of tyrants up throughout the years,

devide et impera is a strategic necessity not a luxury

South america is a brilliant example of all this.

one swallow does not make a summer

I thought bush was a good guy who wanted the best for the world. I was very very wrong.

you were wrong because you are a fool, in fact you are still a fool and you are still wrong

Mccain is just another Bush,

McCain is no Bush

We all want those damn terrorists gone, but we gotta get them at their roots,

Fanaticism must first be lulled, in order that it may be eradicated. You cannot lull a fanatic to sleep when you are timid, you can only lull a fanatic to sleep by rocking his cradle.

he has no clue about economics.

If you want to get out of an economic crisis then you can do two things. Lower taxes or lower interest rates.
Obama wants to raise taxes, McCain wants to cut spending.

And btw, did you know that the economical growth is ALWAYS larger when a democrat president rules usa?

The amount of CO2 in the air is higher when the economy is booming. But is it higher because the economy is booming, or is the economy booming, because the amount of CO2 is higher. Likewise is the U.S. economic growth higher, because there is a democratic president, or is a democratic president elected when economic growth is higher. I say it is the latter.

democrats see the people better, but far from good

never see the people better than they really are. See them as they are.

[freemehul]

All Bush'ists and republicans, please stop saying how you want a president who fights for freedom and democracy in the middle east and etc.

I am neither a Bushist, nor a republican, but I say what I want. I want a president that fights for democracy wether it is in the middle east or outside of it.

[Opid]

I've been lurking around here in the politics forum for a while, just to enjoy a pleasant intelligent exchange of thoughts and ideas.
But seriously freemehul, with your last message here I just had to register and respond because it's just plain ol' stupid and ignorant...

If you're arguing for republicans, then Germany and Bosnia are no proper examples when you're trying to prove that they aren't waging wars out of self-interest.
For starters both of those wars were initiated under the rule of a democrat presidents.
And secondly Germany was the one who declared war on the united states, not the other way around.
And don't even think about mentioning either Korea or Vietnam, since the Domino Theory basically was a theory of self preservation.
So no acts of selflessness in the name of democracy there either.

"Divide et impera" is quote describing an idea that's in the very heart of a foreign policy doctrine that's solely propelled by the goal of gains for oneself.
You're not fending off stoffis claims by using that quote, you're just confirming them.

Further on I'd like to quote McCain:
"Let's look at our record"
Yes, let's look at the record. One swallow doesn't make a summer? True.
But:
http://www2.truman.edu/~marc/resourc...rventions.html
Tell me again that there's just One swallow..

Also it's kind of funny how you first oppose that Bush wouldn't be intelligent, just to exclaim in the next sentence that McCain is no Bush.
I suppose you're not trying to say that McCain, as opposed to Bush, is stupid.
It's just amusing to see how you argue against people, not to make a point, just for the sake of arguing.

To attempt to defeat terrorism by use of force, on the other hand, is not just stupid and ignorant but also dangerous.
Aggression only feeds anger. Even grade school children understands that.
Islamists are the aggressors and oppose the american way of life?
The United States of America and their way of life has existed for 332 years. Islam even longer.
Is it a coincident that the increase of terrorist acts coincide with the increase of american military presence in the middle east?
The claim of terrorists opposing americas way of life is just lame.
Acts of terror has always been the response against every colonial empire in history.
And not just by muslims.
It's not as much opposing a way of life as it is an attempt to preserve a way of life.
I'm not defending fundamentalists way of life(any, not just muslims) but I am trying to say that you can not teach people a better way by use of force.

I know squat about economics, but I do believe:
Unprivileged citizens aren't getting far from **** in welfare.
And during a depression their is an increase of citizens without a monthly income.
Lowering taxes, when the amount mouths dependent on welfare are Increasing, just doesn't add up to me.
On the other hand I do find that increasing the tax for people that are wealthy(ergo; not in dire need) to help feed the increased amount of unemployed people does add up.

But, again, I know **** about economics. So this is just my reflections on the subject.

I want a president that fights for democracy wether it is in the middle east or outside of it.

Free choice at gun point is no free choice.



And remember; You can measure the progress of a society by how it treats its weakest members.




That's just my five cents

[Magn]

I have to agree with Opid.

My naivete about the US being near perfect was ended at the tender age of 16 when I did a research on Cuba (think before Castro... more like Batista and how the US got into Cuba in the first place).

Some of the things they did to fight communism was just more to add to the flames for me (overthrowing democratically elected governments is pretty low).

And the way they assisted the Iraqi war effort against Iran by providing them intelligence for their chemical weapons (despite the fact that these weapons were forbidden to start with)... and trying to delay an international reaction against the use of the so said weapons... that was pretty revolting.

As for the involvement in Irak, ask yourself this: Would the US really be there if there was no petroleum involved?

Simply put, private interests have a great deal of influence on US' military decisions across the globe.

Of course, its nothing particularly horrible in the light of all the other attrocities that have been comitted through human history.

All countries that were in a position of power at one point or another (England, France, Germany and a long trailing list of countries) did some pretty awful stuff themselves and as such, I don't think they are more of a moral authority than the US.

But the claim goes both ways. I don't think the US has a greater claim at superior morality than most other democratic countries and a couple more who are not democratic.

[METALLICA]

stoffi, there is a height requirement for this ride, minimum 4 feet

sorry, maybe next year

[METALLICA]

"To attempt to defeat terrorism by use of force, on the other hand, is not just stupid and ignorant but also dangerous."

got any brighter ideas? send some flowers maybe? give them a kitten? buy them a new towel?

[freemehul]

My naivete about the US being near perfect was ended at the tender age of 16 when I did a research on Cuba (think before Castro... more like Batista and how the US got into Cuba in the first place).

That naivete was ended the minute I was born. Democracies aren't perfect, they never were, the U.S. is nothing different. Cheney and Bush emphasized that beyond a doubt. However a democratic government is still the optimal form of government, because the alternatives are far worse.

If you're arguing for republicans, then Germany and Bosnia are no proper examples when you're trying to prove that they aren't waging wars out of self-interest.

Look wars are fought for two reasons, fear and self-interest. But that doesn't mean there can be an enlightened self interest involved.

got any brighter ideas? send some flowers maybe? give them a kitten? buy them a new towel?

because that would be the alternative you are hinting at

and I'm sorry to break the news to you, but I don't think a kitten was going to keep Hitler from invading Poland


and I know you are wrong in saying that sending a new towel to the terrorists is going to stop them.

You want to know why you are wrong?

There were 4 planes at 9/11, not 2 planes like you are saying!

[Sully]

For those that believe the war on terrorism is a losing battle you have obviously never been to Iraq....

During my 2 14-16month deployments the change of the people is shocking...I first went to Iraq during the end of OIF1 and stayed til after the first elections(Beginning of OIF3) At the time the majority of the population i encountered were friendly to US soldiers but at the same time not quite trusting of us.

I Again deployed to Iraq at the end of 06 till the begin of 08 and it was shocking. Not only are the majority of the population excited about the military but mid way through the deployment the citizens of Iraq had enough They formed groups in there neighborhoods to wipe out terrorists...Sons on Al Qaida watch lists were being hunted by shamed fathers and mothers. And with the support of the US Army and the Iraqi Army these neighborhood watch groups are 1 by one cleaning up their country.

So believe the Liberal media all you want CBS can spin their lies all day long but their reporters that went with us were having a hard time putting a negative spin on what was actually happening....

[Opid]

Look wars are fought for two reasons, fear and self-interest.

Ok, so you're finally coming to terms with the fact that the US aren't selflessly fighting for democracy across the globe?
Good.

I don't oppose wars as such. I'm just not a pro-war fanatic.
What really troubles me is that America is so blatantly inconsistent in what they say and what they actually do.
Invading countries to "promote democracy" while simultaneously feeding and supporting dictators.
The lack of truthfulness is just... troubling.

and I'm sorry to break the news to you, but I don't think a kitten was going to keep Hitler from invading Poland

Yes, correct. But why?
Hitler would have never even been in power over Germany if it hadn't been for the Allies aggressive approach in the Treaty of Versailles.
Just as I previously said: Aggression feeds anger.
Germany was left crippled, isolated and humiliated by the treaty. Hitler was able to rise to power because of that, with the promise of restoring the nations pride at any cost.


And from the other side of the coin:
You can quite clearly see what success Hitler had with his aggressive approach.



Nice to hear about the progress in Iraq. I do indeed hope that they'll be able to acheive some form of stability.

But you can not approach a problem as an aggressor and expect that you'll be able to fully solve it.
Disabling a countries military power does not mean that the citizens will automatically submit to your ideas.
The more likely case is instead that the ideas and values of the conqueror will be met with an increased scepticism and anitpathy.

And as you point out yourself, Sully:
In the end it's not the army, but the people themselves that's making the real difference.

[RAKIdaRHINO]

METALLICA

got any brighter ideas? send some flowers maybe? give them a kitten? buy them a new towel?

I got one for you. Instead of claiming to make the world a better place actually make it a better place. A man that has food on the table is less likely to kill his neighbour. You CANT win war on terrorism since the war on terrorism puts fuel on their flame. Terrorism is like greek fire, when you fight it **** hits the fan.

Terrorism is a symptom, not the disease itself. The best way to fight terrorism (god that word is so overused by now) is to cut supply line of new terrorists. Terrorism cannot only be seen as evil and fanatic, you also have to understand what pushes someone as far as killing oneself for his cause. Im not saying you shouldnt fight terror, but your war on terror hasnt made you safer, on the contrary it only aids those you claim to fight.

Your war on terrorism has achieved jack **** towards making the world a safer place, and until you change strategy that wont change.

“I don't care if I fall as long as someone else picks up my gun and keeps on shooting.”
----

Sully

At the time the majority of the population i encountered were friendly to US soldiers but at the same time not quite trusting of us.

Guess what? They never really hated you in first place.. Its not what you did but why and how you did it thats the real problem.

Hopefully USA can correct its early devastating mistakes and iraq can start to take control of itself again. Done right hopefully Iraq can be a somewhat safe place again in a few years, if not i unfortunately suspect youre going to be there for a long long time (unless you pull out early which will make things a lot worse than they were before you went in)

---

Anyway, until we in the west stop our hypocritical bull**** and actually accept other peoples choices (like the democratic election of hamas for instance) were never gonna achieve much in these regions.

-----

Opid
Thats because we in the west dont give a **** about their democracy.. it doesnt matter if they are democratic or theocratic.. as long as they play ball we happily support them regardless of what goes on in the country.. if they oppose our interests however we make sure they pay the price one way or another.. just take a look at history and the world today..

Fight for democracy my ass.

[freemehul]

Ok, so you're finally coming to terms with the fact that the US aren't selflessly fighting for democracy across the globe?

I never said anything to the contrary. Protection is afterall self interest.

I don't oppose wars as such. I'm just not a pro-war fanatic.

neither am I, but unlike you I at least realize when wars are necessary

Germany if it hadn't been for the Allies aggressive approach in the Treaty of Versailles.

you see this is just wrong. Hitler would never have come to power if the krach of 1929 never happened, not because of the treaty of Versaille, no matter how wrong that treaty was, it isn't the reason. In fact it is Hitler himself who first spewed out that lie. Just like it was Saddam who said the war in Iraq was about oil.

You can quite clearly see what success Hitler had with his aggressive approach.

uhm now wait a minute didn't he lose the war and shot himself ;). But if you are saying he lost because of his aggresion then you are wrong. He lost because he was evil.

In the end it's not the army, but the people themselves that's making the real difference.

I agree but were they ever given a choice under Saddam. I think not, in fact I know it is not.

I do indeed hope that they'll be able to acheive some form of stability.

So do I, but with Obama in office that will not happen.

[RAKIdaRHINO]

Freemehul

neither am I, but unlike you I at least realize when wars are necessary

Why was the invasion of Iraq necessary?

you see this is just wrong. Hitler would never have come to power if the krach of 1929 never happened, not because of the treaty of Versaille, no matter how wrong that treaty was, it isn't the reason. In fact it is Hitler himself who first spewed out that lie.

There never is just one reason. The treaty of versaille is formally accepted to be one of the underlying causes for the situation in Germany leading up to what we now know as WWII. If the people hadnt felt the same way they wouldnt have listened to him.

Just like it was Saddam who said the war in Iraq was about oil.

Yeah, cause US and the west never did anything before to get that oil right? What about the development and CIA involvement in Iran after their democratically elected leader started demanding that profits of oil money belongs to the iranian people? What happened to the leaders in South America doing the same? As i said, as long as people play ball and we get what we want we gladly support tyrants and murderers, its when they oppose us we all of a sudden start fighting them.

I agree but were they ever given a choice under Saddam. I think not, in fact I know it is not.

Saddam hardly gave a **** about the people, but once again, we gladly supported him as long as he danced to our pipe. Coincidence? I think not. And honestly, what difference does it make if they have a choice if were going to punish them if theyre not making the choices we want them to make? We can hardly call ourselves supporters of democracy and same time punish people for electing the wrong people.

[Sully]

70% of iraqis wouldn't ask why we invaded but rather why we took so long.

Here are a few facts for you about Iraq.

Saddam was a Sunni
Sunnis make up less than 30% of the population
Shiites make up almost 60% of the population
Kurds make up about 10% of the population
Under Saddam's rule those that faught back were killed
Saddam gased Kurds multiple times
Saddam attacked and repressed Shiites on a regular basis


So i guess you are right he didnt care for the people...Unless they were Sunni he treated them like 2nd class citizens...

So lets look at what the war in Iraq has achieved....Power in Iraq is now controlled by the people....Wow


FYI if the war was about Oil why does the US neither receive Oil from Iraq or profit off of it in any way? Look at history all you want but it wont always provide answers for the future