protectionist
Diamond Member
- Oct 20, 2013
- 59,668
- 20,209
- 2,250
1. Question INVALID due to false premise. (US has not committed mass murder in 3 of the 4 countries mentioned) and even in the 4th country, Vietnam, the mass murder was committed only by a few individuals in the US govt, which doesn't really match the definition of "the US", and even in the case of 1969-1973, it still is beyond the culpability of the American voters, sinc eRichard Nixon tricked voters by saying he had a secret plan to end the Vietnam war, while his opponent, Hubert Humphrey had no position on the war. As such, strange as it seemed, Nixon in 1968 was the anti-war candidate, and voters casted votes for him based on that.flacaltenn,
What would you call it if Vietnam or Korea or Iraq or Germany or any other nation the U.S. has invaded and committed mass murder, had done this to the U.S.?
What would you call it if Vietnam or Korea or Iraq or Germany had over 700 military bases outside of their national boundaries?
What would you call it if Vietnam or Korea or Iraq or Germany were patrolling the U.S. shorelines in their warships, and building military bases in the U.S.?
What would you call if if Vietnam or Iran or Russia or Iraq or anyone else were sanctioning the U.S. economy and financial system?
Would you not call it imperialism? Yes or No? Simple questions.
2. I wouldn't call it anything.
3. If it was in conformance with US policy, I wouldn't call it anything. All depends on circumstances.
4. I'd call those acts of war, almost as bad as the international burglary of the US economy, currently being done by Mexico, China, India, Guatemala, Nigeria, et al.
Last edited: