R
rdean
Guest
It itself is continuing in the same vain that happened in the Cold War, supporting dictators, taking down democratically elected leaders, doing whatever it can to make sure its ideology is first in the world, and pretending its ideology is something different.
I agree. On topic, the Bush-Gore debate on nation building:
…..
It's interesting to observe how 9/11 flipped Bush's position to match that of Gore's. We still see that playing out today with ISIS. People in the West want to shape the Middle East into a Western mold rather than to allow them to develop their own societal model with the ISIS Caliphate.
The question is this. If the US left the Middle East alone, would it become a Caliphate? I don’t believe so. I believe that if Muslims in the region had stability, they’d be different.
You can look at the examples of Qatar, UAE, to some extent Saudi Arabia, of countries that, while they still keep parts of Islam that are in the past, their stability (and money) is keeping extremism away from these places.
Where the extremism is taking place is often in places with a lot of outside pressure from the West, ie, regime change and so on.
The point is that the US is doing things that aren’t good, it’s causing more problems in the world than anyone else.
Part of this, a huge part in fact, arises simply from American stature. The Global System is of American design. America works to maintain that system. If America had the power of Canada, then the Global System would carry the imprimatur of China and Saudi Arabia, for instance. Human rights would be devalued, forced adherence to ideology would be normalized, the Charter of Human Rights would likely not even exist, the Soviet Union would likely still be in power, etc.
What you need to suss out is the degree of American policy which goes beyond what is necessary in keeping the world operating on an American vision of global affairs.
Which leads us back to US interests. The US does EVERYTHING in its own interests. Do you not think that Muslims would not react to this? That there are no consequences to any of this?
Do you not think that a lot of people getting pissed at this are actually now being more easily radicalized?
At home rights and freedoms and democracy are at a second rate level compared to various countries in Europe.
If you have a plan on how to ethnically cleans America to bring about the same level of cultural homogeneity found in Europe, then I'm eager to read your plan.
I don’t get your point. I’m not talking about being able to have freedom and liberty with only one race in a country. What are you getting at?
Taking down democratically elected leader Hugo Chavez in the 2002 coup d’etat while at the same time supporting Saudi Arabia, you couldn’t make it up.
Are you some kind of Chavez truther? People have their own damn agency, you know, everyone is not a puppet of America.
I didn’t like Chavez. He messed up Venezuela well and truly. However the US helped take him down for a reason, as I’ve stated in the previous post. As Bush said in the interview you showed, Bush was willing to take down leaders who got in his way. He did this. It didn’t last a week though. Consequences to actions?
Well I was in Constantinople airport in April, I haven’t visited the actual city since 2009.
Christian Constantinople ceased to exist in 1453.
It just disappeared? Poof, in the air? No, the Hagia Sofia is still there. It’s a museum now, I was in the city when Obama went in a stroked a cat in the Hagia Sofia. Yes, it’s in a Muslim country, it’s called Istanbul, but it’s still Constantinople, you can’t change history.
However the point you seem to be making is that in history things have changed. Sure they have, however this happened before the contemporary era for this issue that I’d say started about 200 years ago, more or less.
My point is that Islam is not solely reaction, it's proactive. Islam didn't come to hold it's territory in the world by reacting to foreign initiated invasions, repelling the invaders and capturing their lands. Islam is designed as a vehicle for war.
Of course it didn’t. Nor did Christianity. People make comments about Islam, while ignoring the reality of other events that happened. Religion in general is designed as a tool of war. Look at saints in Christianity. St. George, damn it, he’s killing a dragon. I’m trying to remember which church I went into where there were loads of painting of a saint going around “converting” people to Christianity, he basically killed a lot.
Celebrate Columbus Day? Well… he didn’t exactly not kill anyone, he’s responsible for an estimated (and it can only be a vague estimate) 6 million people, through disease, killing and so on. That doesn’t include all those killed in the Americas who followed his path, like Hernan Cortes and Pizarro. Ever read about the invasion of the Inca lands? The Spanish would lose like one soldier to every 100,000 or so Incas. It wasn’t exactly nice.
I’m talking about the vilifying of Islam by Bush, the making of a common enemy for the US and the west to get behind, and for all of this to change massively. Bush changed the game.
You seem to be divorced from reality. It's guys like me who vilify Islam, not idiots like Bush:
Bush vilified Islam more than anyone else. His words had more power due to his position, and his actions too.
Backgrounder The President s Quotes on Islam
