Is America To Blame?

[AllieBaba]

Now people argue that we embargoed Oil on Japan and forced them into war. The plain truth is they had invaded Manchuria Before the embargo. The embargo was meant to try and remove their ability to make war on other nations, and led to them attacking us in the end. However that does not mean we should not have done it.

Yes, Japan was doing horrible things. It's not, however, our place to try to right every wrong in the world. We didn't have the moral authority back then, and we certainly don't have it now.

“[America] goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.” - John Quincy Adams

It is the place of every human to attempt to right every wrong in the world. It can't be done, but you TRY.

 

[Charles_Main]

Clearly, and we would not be moving towards leaving Iraq, and all those oil contract in Iraq would be ours, and We would still control Germany and much of western Europe. Mexico would be ours as we once sacked mexico city. lol I mean come on people. We may not always do the right thing, but when you call us imperialist you are betraying your utter ignorance to the fact that we are like no nation on earth that has ever existed.

Name another nation that has sacrificed so much Blood and treasure, and repeatedly then returned the conquered land to the conquered?

Call it what you want, but it is not Imperialism in the purest form of the word by any means.

Returned the conquered land to the conquered, with a puppet government and our military still firmly in place.

Even if we did do that, which we don't, that isn't imperialism.

Funny isn't he. I was unaware that the governments of Japan and German were our puppets. We are some shitty ass puppet masters if that is the case because they are often very uncooperative with us

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Clearly, and we would not be moving towards leaving Iraq, and all those oil contract in Iraq would be ours, and We would still control Germany and much of western Europe. Mexico would be ours as we once sacked mexico city. lol I mean come on people. We may not always do the right thing, but when you call us imperialist you are betraying your utter ignorance to the fact that we are like no nation on earth that has ever existed.

Name another nation that has sacrificed so much Blood and treasure, and repeatedly then returned the conquered land to the conquered?

Call it what you want, but it is not Imperialism in the purest form of the word by any means.

Returned the conquered land to the conquered, with a puppet government and our military still firmly in place.

Even if we did do that, which we don't, that isn't imperialism.

Actually we do. The government in Afghanistan is a great example of this. As for imperialism, I'm not sure I've even said the word in this thread.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Now people argue that we embargoed Oil on Japan and forced them into war. The plain truth is they had invaded Manchuria Before the embargo. The embargo was meant to try and remove their ability to make war on other nations, and led to them attacking us in the end. However that does not mean we should not have done it.

Yes, Japan was doing horrible things. It's not, however, our place to try to right every wrong in the world. We didn't have the moral authority back then, and we certainly don't have it now.

“[America] goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.” - John Quincy Adams

It is the place of every human to attempt to right every wrong in the world. It can't be done, but you TRY.

And if in the process of trying to right every wrong in the world we cause more wrongs then we are as bad as the evil we're trying to right.

 

[Ozmar]

Well, there was a perceived shock at 9-11 occurring by members of the US public. I'm not talking shock at the ACTUAL event - that is a given, but the kind "I can't believe this happened to us" and "why" did it happen.

Of all the thoughts that went through my mind that day, not ONCE did I think those two thoughts. I was not surprised at all that it happened, nor why it happened. So I guess that is the 'payback' element of the OP...

Ahh- okay. From that standpoint, no, I don't think we deserved any kind of "payback". At that point, we were not yet in Iraq or Afghanistan. What do you think they were paying us back for?

Not being Muslims.

 

[Trajan]

we can start with the easy one;

1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) the policy or practice of extending a state's rule over other territories: Yep

explain please?

Well via economics and military strength you vicariously run Iraq and Afghanistan at the moment. You have bases in Germany (although no to little political influence) and Saudi Arabia...

there's a start...

Our mission in iraq is being drawn down, we have next to zero political influence among them, we have not raped them for their resources and we will not exercise control of there army or parliament...

'Bases in Germany' does not fit the imperial definition in any way shape or form, in fact, it confirms quite the contrary , they are markers if you will of our aversion to 'imperialism'.

Saudi Arabia? Hello, They invited us to base there.

I don't even really know what you mean...in what context?

No offense but, are you making this up as you go along?

 

[Hot Wire]

Take all the emotion out of the argument and let's get to the basic premise. What do you guys think of American hegemony, or 'imperialism' for want of a better word - whether it be economical or militarily?

I find it weird/bizarre/strange that a lot of the extreme right in America (and on this board) are all about "freedom", "pursuit of happiness", "freedom of speech" yadda, yadda, yadda, yet your country has absolutely no problems interferring in the inner mechanisms of other countries - overtly (Iraq/Afghanistan/Panama), or covertly (Chile/Central America)..

How do you marry both trains of thought and not expect some kind of payback?

Just wonderin'.....

I completely understand payback. I understand exactly why someone in the ME or Latin America would hate us. It's perfectly understandable, and human nature.

The extreme right are utterly hopeless in this respect.

Boo Hoo,Everything bad in the world is Bush's fault!!Blah ,Blah ,Blah,Whine on liberals!!

 

[jillian]

Take all the emotion out of the argument and let's get to the basic premise. What do you guys think of American hegemony, or 'imperialism' for want of a better word - whether it be economical or militarily?

I find it weird/bizarre/strange that a lot of the extreme right in America (and on this board) are all about "freedom", "pursuit of happiness", "freedom of speech" yadda, yadda, yadda, yet your country has absolutely no problems interferring in the inner mechanisms of other countries - overtly (Iraq/Afghanistan/Panama), or covertly (Chile/Central America)..

How do you marry both trains of thought and not expect some kind of payback?

Just wonderin'.....

I completely understand payback. I understand exactly why someone in the ME or Latin America would hate us. It's perfectly understandable, and human nature.

The extreme right are utterly hopeless in this respect.

Boo Hoo,Everything bad in the world is Bush's fault!!Blah ,Blah ,Blah,Whine on liberals!!

where did he mention bush?

perhaps you're above your pay grade in this thread and should stick to the flame zone?

 

[hjmick]

I completely understand payback. I understand exactly why someone in the ME or Latin America would hate us. It's perfectly understandable, and human nature.

The extreme right are utterly hopeless in this respect.

Boo Hoo,Everything bad in the world is Bush's fault!!Blah ,Blah ,Blah,Whine on liberals!!

where did he mention bush?

perhaps you're above your pay grade in this thread and should stick to the flame zone?

For some folks the mention of "the extreme right" equates to "Bush." Never mind that Bush wasn't really "extreme right," unless of course one is a far left, fringe communist...

 

[jillian]

Boo Hoo,Everything bad in the world is Bush's fault!!Blah ,Blah ,Blah,Whine on liberals!!

where did he mention bush?

perhaps you're above your pay grade in this thread and should stick to the flame zone?

For some folks the mention of "the extreme right" equates to "Bush." Never mind that Bush wasn't really "extreme right," unless of course one is a far left, fringe communist...

i don't know... apparently the rightwingnut thought they were talking about him.

 

[killemall]

Take all the emotion out of the argument and let's get to the basic premise. What do you guys think of American hegemony, or 'imperialism' for want of a better word - whether it be economical or militarily?

I find it weird/bizarre/strange that a lot of the extreme right in America (and on this board) are all about "freedom", "pursuit of happiness", "freedom of speech" yadda, yadda, yadda, yet your country has absolutely no problems interferring in the inner mechanisms of other countries - overtly (Iraq/Afghanistan/Panama), or covertly (Chile/Central America)..

How do you marry both trains of thought and not expect some kind of payback?

Just wonderin'.....

It is the holding of two diametrically opposed beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, while believing both to be true, that cause the absurdities that lead to atrocities.

We, (and Israel) cry that Iran is supporting terror. This is all Zionist boilerplate nonsense. The U.S. supports terrorist groups all the time. Come on! Why is it when we support terrorist groups like the MEK and the Jundallah it is foreign policy, but when Iran supports opposition groups or its special forces, the Quds Force of the Revolutionary Guard conducts "foreign policy by other means", it suddenly becomes "TERRORISM".

When we overthrow a government and install a brutal dictator like the Shah or support Saddam, we inflict daily terror to an nation and its people for years on end - and it is called foreign policy

The CIA carries out assassinations and it is still considered foreign policy. When the Sandinistas were killing preists and nuns, it was still foreign policy. When we were mining harbors in Central America, yep, you got it, -foreign policy.

We sicced Saddam's army on Iran, blew Iranian passanger planes out of the sky, and attacked both Iranian and Iraqi oil platforms in the Gulf -more foreign policy

When we became involved in Lebannon’s civil war and used naval gunfire on villages killing hundreds, of women and children, again foreign policy.

But then yahoos like you wonder why they then took out the Marine barraks. According to you morons they “hated us for our freedoms”. The fact that we killed hundreds of women and children was of no consequence.

You guys remind me of the Jew who is going off to war to kill Turks and the mother, worried for her son’s health, tells him not to overexert himself and says, “Kill a Turk and rest. Kill another Turk and rest.” Her son says, “Mom, what if they kill me first?” The mother replies, “Why would any of them want to kill my boy?”

There is a good way to end terrorism, and that would be for the U.S. to stop engaging in it. By U.S. definition, if the U.S. kills women and children to fore regime change, well that's just not terror by our definition. But if someone else does the same thing, then they are murdering cowards and terrorists. The hypocrisy is ridiculous.

 

[AmericanFirst]

A question that has been done over and over. Frankly I tire of the Debate.

Suffice to say that if we do not fill the roll of the worlds Main power. Someone else will.

Why not just mind your own business? Can't hurt....

Because if you do not take care of it over there it will come over here, remember 9-11? We went to Afghanistan and Iraq in response to 9-11, I hate it when people forget that. It is funny how when we go into a country and take care of a problem legitimately some idiot says we are pushing our agenda on them. If Gore, Kerry, or Obama were president then they would probably blame us and ask the other countries for their forgiveness, idiots.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Take all the emotion out of the argument and let's get to the basic premise. What do you guys think of American hegemony, or 'imperialism' for want of a better word - whether it be economical or militarily?

I find it weird/bizarre/strange that a lot of the extreme right in America (and on this board) are all about "freedom", "pursuit of happiness", "freedom of speech" yadda, yadda, yadda, yet your country has absolutely no problems interferring in the inner mechanisms of other countries - overtly (Iraq/Afghanistan/Panama), or covertly (Chile/Central America)..

How do you marry both trains of thought and not expect some kind of payback?

Just wonderin'.....

It is the holding of two diametrically opposed beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, while believing both to be true, that cause the absurdities that lead to atrocities.

We, (and Israel) cry that Iran is supporting terror. This is all Zionist boilerplate nonsense. The U.S. supports terrorist groups all the time. Come on! Why is it when we support terrorist groups like the MEK and the Jundallah it is foreign policy, but when Iran supports opposition groups or its special forces, the Quds Force of the Revolutionary Guard conducts "foreign policy by other means", it suddenly becomes "TERRORISM".

When we overthrow a government and install a brutal dictator like the Shah or support Saddam, we inflict daily terror to an nation and its people for years on end - and it is called foreign policy

The CIA carries out assassinations and it is still considered foreign policy. When the Sandinistas were killing preists and nuns, it was still foreign policy. When we were mining harbors in Central America, yep, you got it, -foreign policy.

We sicced Saddam's army on Iran, blew Iranian passanger planes out of the sky, and attacked both Iranian and Iraqi oil platforms in the Gulf -more foreign policy

When we became involved in Lebannon’s civil war and used naval gunfire on villages killing hundreds, of women and children, again foreign policy.

But then yahoos like you wonder why they then took out the Marine barraks. According to you morons they “hated us for our freedoms”. The fact that we killed hundreds of women and children was of no consequence.

You guys remind me of the Jew who is going off to war to kill Turks and the mother, worried for her son’s health, tells him not to overexert himself and says, “Kill a Turk and rest. Kill another Turk and rest.” Her son says, “Mom, what if they kill me first?” The mother replies, “Why would any of them want to kill my boy?”

There is a good way to end terrorism, and that would be for the U.S. to stop engaging in it. By U.S. definition, if the U.S. kills women and children to fore regime change, well that's just not terror by our definition. But if someone else does the same thing, then they are murdering cowards and terrorists. The hypocrisy is ridiculous.

Idiot. Iran is supporting terroizm, Israel owns Israel nobody else and should kick the satan worshipers out. Radical Islam started this fight a long time ago and then cry when us or Israel respond. TOO BAD!!! Stop killing innocent people and claiming it in the name of their false god and maybe we will stop kicking their pathetic buts.

 

[p kirkes]

President Teddy Roosevelt set America on the path of becoming a major player in world events during the early 1900's. Succeeding Administrations have interpreted America's role according to their own lights, all in the name of the American people.

There is little the average American can do to help chart our countries course in foreign affairs. We are sometimes given a voice, mainly through polls, but many times Administration's go their own way, all in our name.

If memory serves, WW1, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan after Tora Bora come to mind as generally opposed by the American people.

Events where American's were mostly in agreement with the presiding Administration were the Spanish American war, Mexican war, WW2, Cold War, Granada, Panama and Gulf 1.

We are being pulled deeper and deeper into an abyss since TR built his great white fleet.

Where it will end nobody knows. This is just how I perceive our history.

Regards

 

[johnrocks]

Government intervention carries the risk of unintended and negative consequences weather it is domestic or foreign policy in nature.

 

[Charles_Main]

Government intervention carries the risk of unintended and negative consequences weather it is domestic or foreign policy in nature.

No more than non intervention does in many cases.

 

[Charles_Main]

I think his point is we were meddling behind the scenes, and he would be correct. However what we were not doing, Or more to the point is, what we were not capable of. Is reacting sooner. That fact is why since then we have tried to always remain able to project power, and react earlier to developing situations.

Now as long as we retain that capability we will be labeled an imperial power. Whether we flex or not. IMO

I think we intentionally stayed out of WWII until we had no choice. Most of this country saw it as not our battle... what they knew of it they saw as a jewish problem.

i don't think our responses since then have had anything to do with trying to make up for not acting sooner then. i think it had to do with cold-war expansionist attitudes... which, fairly, were often in response to soviet expansionist attitudes.

this new interventionism doesn't have the same basis... its oil politics.

Each action may not have been because we were making up for not acting sooner in WWII. However the official US policy of being able to Fight 2 major wars and one minor one at the same time. Which was developed after WWII was indeed a direct response to our experience in WWII.

I don't disagree with calling it Oil Politics. I would however point out that access to affordable Oil could be considered a National Security Issue. Considering Oil is needed for our Military forces to act in any way One might even say it is a very serious National Security Issue.

 

[johnrocks]

Government intervention carries the risk of unintended and negative consequences weather it is domestic or foreign policy in nature.

No more than non intervention does in many cases.

I'm going to give an example of government intervention causing unintended consequences.

Healthcare costs going up due to so much government intervention from Medicare to the HMO Act, third party payors pushing costs up.


What would non intervening cause in the form of a negative consequence that can't be self correcting with non intervention? I may very well agree, just want to see if our ideologies are similar or not.

 

[Charles_Main]

Government intervention carries the risk of unintended and negative consequences weather it is domestic or foreign policy in nature.

No more than non intervention does in many cases.

I'm going to give an example of government intervention causing unintended consequences.

Healthcare costs going up due to so much government intervention from Medicare to the HMO Act, third party payors pushing costs up.


What would non intervening cause in the form of a negative consequence that can't be self correcting with non intervention? I may very well agree, just want to see if our ideologies are similar or not.

Well I was speaking strictly about Military and Defense issues when I said many times non intervention can have just as many bad consequences and intervening.

Getting into Government Intervention in Domestic Issues is for another thread

 

[johnrocks]

No more than non intervention does in many cases.

I'm going to give an example of government intervention causing unintended consequences.

Healthcare costs going up due to so much government intervention from Medicare to the HMO Act, third party payors pushing costs up.


What would non intervening cause in the form of a negative consequence that can't be self correcting with non intervention? I may very well agree, just want to see if our ideologies are similar or not.

Well I was speaking strictly about Military and Defense issues when I said many times non intervention can have just as many bad consequences and intervening.

Getting into Government Intervention in Domestic Issues is for another thread

lol, fair enough. I just apply it in both areas. Now, I'm fixing to go wage war on some food.