To Our Veterans!

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Layout, I'm not a communist far from it. You seem to think it is the responsibility of the US to run around the world and save people from their 'Bad' governemnt choices. I disagree, with that position and furthermore my position of avoiding foriegn entanglments was the primary view of the foundin generation. So that would make my view more "traditionally" American than yours.

It is a FACT of history that the US Army invaded Russia, burned Vladivastock to the ground and siezed the siberia oil fields during WW1, I doubt you had ever heard of that, look it up.

It is also a FACT of history that no Russian army ever burned an American city.

Incidenly the Siberia expedition also turned mutinous when the soldiers realised they were being used against basically poor peasants and refused to follow further orders to attack. Its a fascinating piece of history our Government hopes we don't know.

WAR IS A RACKETT!

While you're worrying about the commies in Russia or the Veit Cong sitting in a grass hut thousands of miles away from us your commie next store nieghbor is voting demoncrats into office or worse rhinos and the whole gang are socialist at best, certainly all fascist.

The only two candidates in the Presidential race who have even read the Constitution are Ron Paul, and Gary Johnson, but they're kooks.

I used to be all gung ho johny america, like you, but WACO opened my eyes to how evil governemnt is, and the more I learn the worse it looks.

In the last 100 years this country has seen 1 constituional President, Calvin Coolidge. 2 decent presidents Eisenhower and Reagan.

You think I'? A kook because I think the US governemnt is wack, so did Gen. Patton, (who was killed for his threat to run for president and clean house) Smedly Butler, whose book is still in print, and Eisenhower, whose final address to the nation containd the criptic line "Beware the military industrial complex"

Incidently, the proper description for the US political system since FDR is Democratic Fascism. Fascist governemnts combine the power of the governemnt with the money of "big bussiness" to keep the masses in line.

If you look at the current regulatory sceme in the US it is all designed to support giant bussinesses at the expense of the small bussiness. I don't have to out compete you if I have governemnt connections I can out legislate you.

Ayn Rand was very Prophetic with "Atlas Shrugged" of course she lived through the ultra fascist FDR years.

Sent from my SPH-D700 using EO Forums

I see BOTH sides of this. I do not now, nor have I ever, backed or supported anything that this country has done wrong. I also know that we are NOT the most evil thing ever to grace the face of the earth. I also know that some, not all, of the so called 'bad things' that we do as a Nation are not. Believe it or not, not everything is reported as it truly happens.

Just think had we kept the Siberian oil fields Stalin would not have been able to imprison the millions there that he did. How may died in the gulags? Maybe we should ask the Mongolians how much they enjoyed life after the Soviets enslaved them.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
You seem to think it is the responsibility of the US to run around the world and save people from their 'Bad' governemnt choices.
.... and people really think it was only the Russkies or the Red Chinese that used brainwashing ....

I used to be all gung ho johny america, like you, but WACO opened my eyes to how evil governemnt is
I too was once .... Waco was just another nail in the coffin ....

For me, the tipping point was learning (back in the late '70's and early '80's) about some of the COINTELPRO stuff .... and some of the various experiments undertaken by the US intelligence and military communities on the US civilian populace without their knowledge or consent ...

This (specifically) included the September 1950 incident .... where a pair of Navy minesweepers trolled around San Francisco Bay, spraying biological agents (largely bacteria apparently - including one known as "UK 8" which was developed at the UK's Portadown CBW complex) on a completely unwitting civilian population.

In addition to the above, these incidents have included the following:

1952-53: US military release clouds of “harmless” gases over six US and Canadian cities.

1955: Tampa Bay, Florida, undergoes a bout of CIA inspired “Whooping Cough.” Twelve deaths result.

1956-58: Swarms of Mosquitoes believed to be infected with Yellow Fever are released in Georgia, and Florida. Dozens fell ill, and some deaths recorded.

1965: Prisoners in Philadelphia, subjected to dioxin - a key component in a defoliant widely used in Vietnam.

1966: The New York subway “bacillus” experiment.

1968-69: CIA experiments with injecting poison into the water supply of a US government building in Washington DC.

1969-to date: Experiments and developments of CBW agents continue .... in secrecy.

Of course, the above is just the tip of the iceberg when comes to the evil of the US Government in terms of its actions against its own citizens ....

It doesn't include, for example, the proposal - by no less than the Joint Chiefs themselves - for false-flag acts of terrorism within United States, to create a pretext for a war against Cuba ....

The above incidents give one a little look into to the sick, twisted "minds" of some of the whackadoodles that are attracted into the military and intelligence communities ....

And anyone who would assert that it is only the politicians that are the problem, has their head firmly inserted so far up their proverbial *** that it is highly unlikely they will ever see the light of day again ....

Such would be the mind of the thoroughly brainwashed ....

These folks can generally not countenance even acknowledging the crimes enumerated above .... and if they do, they do it unwillingly, usually with some feeble justification that it had to be done for the "greater good" .... or with the utterly lame fallacy that it's somehow "ok" because someone else did something worse ....

It is largely an attempt to divert attention ....

And it truly says a lot about how little faith they have in the US as a nation that they believe the Republic cannot survive the exposure and acknowledgement of this type of criminality, and holding those who committed the crimes fully accountable ....

and the more I learn the worse it looks.
Yup .... the more one looks, the more inescapable the conclusion becomes ....

The things which are right with America largely have to do with our civil society .... the civilian population, the character of the vast majority of its people, it's commonly-held ideals - including the Constitution and rule of law, personal freedom and individual liberty, and our intended form of governance ....

Most of what is really wrong with the US comes from, or has to do with the government .... and the military and intel communities are part of that ....

The above should come as no real surprise, for our Founding Fathers told us it would be thus ....

And it might have a little something to do with why the Founders saw standing armies as a danger ....
 
Last edited:

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
I see BOTH sides of this. I do not now, nor have I ever, backed or supported anything that this country has done wrong.
Good - for that you deserve the gratitude of the citizens of this nation.

I also know that we are NOT the most evil thing ever to grace the face of the earth.
That may be .... however, whether it is or not, it's entirely irrelevant to the issue at hand ....

I also know that some, not all, of the so called 'bad things' that we do as a Nation are not. Believe it or not, not everything is reported as it truly happens.
No doubt - but just remember that cuts both ways: for better and for worse, for good and for bad ....

There can be little doubt that the full extent of the USG's criminal acts will never be known and fully documented .... due to the efforts of criminals to cover their tracks and destroy the documentation of the crimes ....

Just think had we kept the Siberian oil fields Stalin would not have been able to imprison the millions there that he did. How may died in the gulags? Maybe we should ask the Mongolians how much they enjoyed life after the Soviets enslaved them.
I think that if you, as a private citizen, wish to go do something to prevent the enslavement of the Mongolians that's perfectly fine ....

However, preventing enslavement of the Mongolians - who, the last time I looked were not US citizens, nor residing in the United States and subject to it's laws - is not something covered anywhere in the US Constitution ....

If you know it to be otherwise, please point me to the relevant passage and text ....
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
The United States did nothing to prevent the enslavement of and the murder of Mongolians. I ONLY brought it up to show that the Soviets were always far worse than anything that we did.

That, however, does not excuse anything that was done that was wrong, illegal etc.

It is also wrong to paint an entire population with the same brush.

" US intelligence and military communities"

If a single black man commits a crime does that make every member of the black community a criminal? Yet, when a small minority of intell agents or military personnel do wrong the entire 'community' is some how at fault. I also find it amazing that those who ordered these illegal and immoral actions are given a free pass or even admired.

Criminal behavior is a personal CHOICE. So is immoral behavior. Every crime committed is committed by an individual or individuals, not by a 'community'.

OR

Are those who served, without committing or turning a blind eye, not worthy of the idea that innocence is assumed under the Constitution?

I also find it amazing that a member put up a post to honor veterans for their service and it is turned into a 'slam fest' against them.







 

EASYTRADER

Expert Expediter
Layout,
I think you have missed the point.

Incidently, Christian theology does recognise communal guilt. Whether the constitution does or not. I think this country has sewn the wind and is going to reap the whirlwind.

I know you are either ignorant of history or you choose to willfully ignore it, but we are 1 bad election away from a totalitarian police state. I think were gonna get it too. If you haven't read "The Rise and Fall of the Third Riech" you should.
All of the laws that Hitler had passed in his first year as chancellor, to completly consolidate his power, EXHIST now in the United States. All that is needed, is someone with the guts to use those laws.

INcidently Hitler was a decorated veteran, and the german army was largly resposable for putting him in power.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Layout,
I think you have missed the point.

Incidently, Christian theology does recognise communal guilt. Whether the constitution does or not. I think this country has sewn the wind and is going to reap the whirlwind.

I know you are either ignorant of history or you choose to willfully ignore it, but we are 1 bad election away from a totalitarian police state. I think were gonna get it too. If you haven't read "The Rise and Fall of the Third Riech" you should.
All of the laws that Hitler had passed in his first year as chancellor, to completly consolidate his power, EXHIST now in the United States. All that is needed, is someone with the guts to use those laws.

INcidently Hitler was a decorated veteran, and the german army was largly resposable for putting him in power.


I am driving a truck instead of fishing and hunting for my remaining years because I refused to commit an unconstitutional act. I never ignored anything. I left the Agency when given that illegal order. An order that came, as always, fom the civilians in charge of DOD.

At no point in my career did I commit a crime or unconstitutional act. I am responsible solely for my actions. You can choose to accept blame for the sins of the military that you did not partake in if you wish. If that makes you feel good, more power to you.

To say that I don't understand what is going on in this country tells me that you have never read anything that I have ever written in here.

When the time comes, not if, I will again take up arms in defense of my Constitution. That time will come, most likely sooner than later. As always I will not start the fight, but will respond when attacked.
 

EASYTRADER

Expert Expediter
Lol,
Well I'm sure we can continue this conversation, over a tin bowl of potato water, while waiting for our liquidation as political undersirables.

Sometimes I wish I was never unplugged from the matrix.
 
Last edited:

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Lol,
Well I'm sure we can continue this conversation, over a tin bowl of potato water, while waiting for our liquidation as political undersirables.

LOL!! Won't happen to me! I have little doubt that I will be shot long before they feed me their swill!
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
The United States did nothing to prevent the enslavement of and the murder of Mongolians.
Where is it in our Constitution that we should have ?

Where - anywhere - in the writings of the Founders are we given this national moral mandate to be the policemen of the world ?

If it is not to be found in either of those places, where might I find it ?

Look - I respect the intent (since I am afflicted with it myself) - and those things which I believe are motivating you .... respect for human rights, the right of a people to self-determination and freedom, the desire for justice, and the inclination to protect the innocent and weak from evil and harm by "bad men" ....

What concerns me greatly is the inclination that I see to have this nation play Barney Fife and Johnny-Do-Gooder around the world .... and even worse yet, to do so under the force of arms ....

Possibly one of the most fundamental concerns that we ought to have as a nation is our own survival .... and the preservation of our own freedom and liberty for ourselves, and our posterity ....

I ONLY brought it up to show that the Soviets were always far worse than anything that we did.
And from my perspective it's exactly that kind of thinking that is extremely dangerous .... for several reasons ....

First, because it appears to indicate a willful lack of critical inspection of, and honesty about, the affairs and conduct of this nation at various times throughout it's history ....

(BTW - when did the Soviets ever use atomic weapons against a civilian population ?)

Secondly, because it appears assume that there is .... a moral superiority which is necessarily inherent within our nation .... (we good, they bad ....)

This moral superiority is perhaps only ever true (if at all) when we as a nation adhere strictly to the precepts underlying, and contained in, both our Declaration of Independence and Constitution ....

It seems that the Founding Fathers knew this .... since they themselves commented on it repeatedly ....

Here's a newsflash for ya: man is man ....

He is capable of both incredible evil ..... and acts of altruism that border on the almost divine ....

Until one can come to terms with the reality that anyone (including you or I) is potentially capable of either - including the most horrific acts you can possibly imagine - one is simply deluding oneself ....

Many doomed men have attempted to travel a road that was paved with (so-called) "good intentions" .... and wound themselves - and others - up in various hells of their own making ....

That, however, does not excuse anything that was done that was wrong, illegal etc.
Your assertion is, however - by it's very nature - a minimization of things done that were wrong, illegal, etc. .... it can't help but being so ....

It is also wrong to paint an entire population with the same brush.

" US intelligence and military communities"
You mean like you apparently just did above with the Soviets ?

Or like you have done in the past with those who are for peace and are against war ?

These crimes I speak of were undertaken by the intelligence and military communities .... it wasn't done by your local PTA, the Elks, or the Rotarians ....

That, of course, doesn't mean that everyone in those communities participated or even had knowledge of the events (which was why I used the word "some" at one point and underlined it to emphasize it) .... and so, those that didn't, are not necessarily culpable individually, for the specific acts of others ....

If a single black man commits a crime does that make every member of the black community a criminal? Yet, when a small minority of intell agents or military personnel do wrong the entire 'community' is some how at fault.
Clearly, the entire community (as particular individuals) are not specifically at fault for that particular act ....

Nevertheless, once cannot say that the institutions themselves were not at fault ....

As a member of a community, or as part of an institution, one bears a certain responsibility for that thing one is a part of ....

If one wishes to take the position that we as a nation are collectively responsible for much good throughout the world (as you have), then it surely must follow that we also bear some sort of a collective responsibility for the bad that is done in our names as well ....

I also find it amazing that those who ordered these illegal and immoral actions are given a free pass or even admired.
It is possible to both admire - and despise - someone at the same time.

All it requires is the ability to look at something specific (in isolation from the remainder of the individuals speech, conduct, etc.) IOW: differentiation ....

Of course, there is always the matter of weighing the entirety of an individual's conduct and life and forming a singular opinion based on that .... but that's a different thing ....

Criminal behavior is a personal CHOICE. So is immoral behavior. Every crime committed is committed by an individual or individuals, not by a 'community'.
True enough .... but every individual bears a certain responsibility for the greater entities that they are a part of ....

From my perspective, that's just a cold hard fact.

To argue otherwise, is to argue for a diminution of responsibility ....

And I see that as an effort to escape responsibility ....

Are those who served, without committing or turning a blind eye, not worthy of the idea that innocence is assumed under the Constitution?
Of course, they are ....

I also find it amazing that a member put up a post to honor veterans for their service and it is turned into a 'slam fest' against them.
Actually, I don't think that is what happened at all ....

What did occur was that an individual (a veteran, BTW) commented on his own experiences .... and commented on his own perceptions of the corrupted actions and nature of the State (past and present), including war ....

I then thanked him for his service .... and for having the guts to speak out and call things as he saw them .... since it is my perception that such sentiments are often unwelcome, particularly by those who would prefer to stick their heads in the sand ....

That perception was immediately confirmed by a post, the essence of which was: if you object to anything that you perceive as wrong with the US government or this country, rather than speaking out, or seeking to do anything about it, you should just get out ....

IOW, the commentary which you protest was directed primarily at the State .... and in my case, at particular state institutions themselves .... certainly not at any of the individuals who had served honorably ....

Of course, there might be a gulf of difference in what you and I might consider to be "honorable service" ....

As an example of that is the difference between how you and I view whistleblowers:

I tend to view them as heros - because they often risk much (perhaps their freedom .... or even their very lives) to expose wrongdoing by the state, and keep the citizens of this nation accurately informed about things which the government would deceive them ....

Given that the citizens of this nation are the ones who are ultimately responsible for it, I think that might (in many cases) be a good thing ...

You, on the other hand, appear to view them as .... traitors ....
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Your hatred of those of us who were willing to defend the Constitution is telling.

I am done with your garbage. I committed NO crime, committed NO unconstitutional acts. I did my best and am PROUD of all I did. I am responsible for MY actions ONLY.

Don't like that? Too bad.

You can read anything you want into what I write, spin it, ridicule it and me if you so choose. So be it. You are more than welcome to continue to belittle me, my career and my family as you have in the past. It must suit some deep need, who am I to deny that?

I answer to only two beings, my wife and my God. You are neither one of those beings.


I served the citizens of THIS country and OUR Constitution to the best of my ability. What citizens of foreign countries this is of no importance to me

I will rest easy when my time comes.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Layout,

I'm quite happy to let others judge who harbors hatred - and who doesn't .... and what that hatred, if any, is actually directed towards ....

I wrote what I wrote, and I stand by it ....

BTW - in your reply to me, you addressed absolutely nothing of the substance of the issues that I raised ....
 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
2. What years did the US invade Russia and burn a city and several villages, and occupy the teritory for several years?
For those of us with limited internet search skills, maybe you would like to help us out with a link or some other source to confirm the details of this atrocity.:confused:
 

EASYTRADER

Expert Expediter
I read about it in the book "Oil" by upton sinclair, I believe Smedly Butler mentions it in his book "War Is a Rackett", I just tooled around the internet some more and it appears most of the attrocities were commited by Czarist forces and the Japanese. The US General refused to get involved, and stuck to "guarding" the railroad.

The point is we never should have been their in the first place. It was known as "The Siberian Expedition"

The soviet position is that because the US guarded the railroad and supplied the czarists and Japanese, we share the blame for what happened. This is probly so, but I don't know.

I do know this, no RUssian expeditionary force ever set foot in the US, which is mainly my point.
 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by EASYTRADER

Layout, I'm not a communist far from it. You seem to think it is the responsibility of the US to run around the world and save people from their 'Bad' governemnt choices. I disagree, with that position and furthermore my position of avoiding foriegn entanglments was the primary view of the foundin generation. So that would make my view more "traditionally" American than yours.

It is a FACT of history that the US Army invaded Russia, burned Vladivastock to the ground and siezed the siberia oil fields during WW1, I doubt you had ever heard of that, look it up.

It is also a FACT of history that no Russian army ever burned an American city.

Incidenly the Siberia expedition also turned mutinous when the soldiers realised they were being used against basically poor peasants and refused to follow further orders to attack. Its a fascinating piece of history our Government hopes we don't know.
Nice to see some editing has been done on this post - I didn't think Vladivostok had ever been burned to the ground by invading American forces, during WW1 or any other time. Kudos for the corrections. But you're right, The Americans should have never been over there in the first place. The whole mission was a misguided effort in futility ordered by a liberal, misguided president who didn't have a clue what he was getting our troops into and had no military strategy in mind for achieving a successful conclusion. After reading the following link, the whole deal kind of reminds me of Barack Hussein Obama's approach to Afghanistan.
AEF Siberia

Years later, Secretary Baker confessed, "The expedition was nonsense from the beginning and always seemed to me one of those sideshows born of desperation."[32] An insufficient number of troops, political misconceptions, a lack of military strategy all contributed to the failed intervention. And yet, the war against Bolshevism had every opportunity for victory. Trotsky remarked at the time, "When the Allies manage to act unanimously and undertake a campaign against us, all shall be lost."[33] Coordinated effort, a clear purpose, and more troops had the chance to make history.
You having served in he military like some others of us can certainly understand the plight of the soldiers that follow orders, get sent to godforsaken places and get caught up in seemingly nonsensical endeavors at the direction of politicians insulated from the real world. Given the size and scope of the US military, the simple fact is that it will never be efficient - but when managed right it can certainly be effective, as it has been in the past. However, it's neither fair nor realistic to take isolated incidents (both real and imagined) and try to use them collectively as an indictment against our active duty soldiers, veterans and our country's foreign policy as a whole. The good that been accomplished far outweighs the bad - and they deserve credit for that.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
You having served in he military like some others of us can certainly understand the plight of the soldiers that follow orders, get sent to godforsaken places and get caught up in seemingly nonsensical endeavors at the direction of politicians insulated from the real world.
One doesn't have to have served to be able to conceptualize that .... although having done so would certainly enhance one's appreciation of the concept I am sure ....

However, it's neither fair nor realistic to take isolated incidents (both real and imagined) and try to use them collectively as an indictment against our active duty soldiers, veterans and our country's foreign policy as a whole.
I am never disappointed at your ability to work in a strawman or some other logical fallacy into a discussion .... it is truly an ability to be admired ....

The good that been accomplished far outweighs the bad - and they deserve credit for that.
That, of course, is a matter of opinion - and - like the word "is" - what one's definition of "good" is .....

I do have to say though ..... you, actually quoting Leon Trotsky, is just about priceless ....

I'll forever cherish the memory ....
 

EASYTRADER

Expert Expediter
I changed the post because I could not remember source. When I tooled around the internet I couldn't find any reference to it. Likely, I was duped by commie propaganda.

The reason I recommend the younge generation NOT join the military is because of the "Civilian" leadership. They can't be trusted, the last truely defensive war the US fought was 1812,
The mexican war was trumped up to capture California, Spanish war was trumped up to grab the Philipines, WW1, was because the British owed us more money than the Germans. WW2, happened because of us having "entangleing" alliances. (But it was probly a just cause anyway)
Korea, was a UN fiasco, which MacArthur won, and then Truman fired him, esentially snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Vietnam, can be explained by NO ONE, even JFK once remarked in a meeting " Will someone please explain to me what the hell we are doing there", Gulf War 1 was trumped up to punish Sadaam for dropping the dollar as his oil currency. Afganistan was a punitive expedition, that has turned into an occupation. (I suppose it was justified)

As for Gulf War 2, I have read Rumfelds book, and Chaneys book, The 911 Report, and "Cobra 2" , I see no reason why we should have gone over there, I initially thought it was to set up a base from which we could hit Iran, which is the problem in the middle east.

I left out the small police actions, purposely.

Though if you're interested in a decent book on them try "Overthrow", I can't remember the author. But it basically covers every outright and every clandestine foriegh adventure most of which backfired, some of which still have ramfications today like our Overthrowing Irans parliament and installing a dictator who terrorised the people until he was throw out by Islamic radicals, who have sought revenge ever since.
 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
The reason I recommend the younge generation NOT join the military is because of the "Civilian" leadership. They can't be trusted, the last truely defensive war the US fought was 1812,
The mexican war was trumped up to capture California, Spanish war was trumped up to grab the Philipines, WW1, was because the British owed us more money than the Germans. WW2, happened because of us having "entangleing" alliances. (But it was probly a just cause anyway)
WW1 and WW2 were both "just causes", especially considering the Germans were sinking American ships and conspiring with Mexico to declare war against the US in WW1; our entry into WW2 speaks for itself.
Korea, was a UN fiasco, which MacArthur won, and then Truman fired him, esentially snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Vietnam, can be explained by NO ONE, even JFK once remarked in a meeting " Will someone please explain to me what the hell we are doing there", Gulf War 1 was trumped up to punish Sadaam for dropping the dollar as his oil currency. Afganistan was a punitive expedition, that has turned into an occupation. (I suppose it was justified)
Korea - agreed;
Vietnam was a mess that JFK actually started with a misguided policy based on his reelection concerns, sending in advisors and special forces and getting us too involved in their hopeless mess. He should have listened to Ike and been more concerned with Laos. Instead he believed in the ill-conceived "domino theory" about insignificant countries falling to communism; after his was killed, LBJ took over and made things worse in a hurry.
Gulf War 1 happened because Iraq invaded our ally Kuwait. There shouldn't have been another Iraq war if Bush 41 had taken out Saddam when he had the chance after the "Mother of all Surrenders".
Afghanistan happened because of 911 - and our first effort there was justified and successful. Things might have been different if we hadn't pulled back and let the terrorists and Taliban retake the areas they had been chased out of. But here again, we're dealing with a country that's not really a country in the usual sense.
As for Gulf War 2, I have read Rumfelds book, and Chaneys book, The 911 Report, and "Cobra 2" , I see no reason why we should have gone over there, I initially thought it was to set up a base from which we could hit Iran, which is the problem in the middle east.
Keep in mind the prevailing intelligence of the day - that was available to both Democrat and GOP leaders in Congress - indicated to the US, the UN and other concerned countries that Iraq possessed WMDs and Hussein refused to admit inspectors that might have been able to prove otherwise; Iraq was also in violation of about 16 UN resolutions. Democrats and Republicans alike voted overwhelmingly to support military action against Iraq - a fact the Dems conveniently forget after the fact. However, after the Hussein dictatorship was overthrown there was evidence uncovered that indicated they actually DID have WMDs to some degree. Remember, they had 14 months to clean out the place while Bush diddled around with threats and warnings. Is Iraq better off now than they were with Saddam in power? Absolutely. Is the US better off? Yes - so far, assuming we don't have to go back in.
Though if you're interested in a decent book on them try "Overthrow", I can't remember the author. But it basically covers every outright and every clandestine foriegh adventure most of which backfired, some of which still have ramfications today like our Overthrowing Irans parliament and installing a dictator who terrorised the people until he was throw out by Islamic radicals, who have sought revenge ever since.
Granted, the Shah wasn't perfect to say the least - but he was certainly better than the Ayatollah Khomeini and his Islamofacists that control the place today. Thanks to Jimmy Carter for that.

But coming full circle, suppose we had taken the isolationist position advocated by Ron Paul? What would the mideast be like now, with Saddam Hussein controlling the Kuwaiti oil fields, Al Quaeda breeding terrorists like roaches in every pesthole of the world, and an Iraq/Iran nuclear arms race? Considering the global nature of our economy, our refusal to develop our own energy sources, and the nonsensical tax and spend economic policy of the Obama administration, it's not realistic to think we could sit huddled up within our own borders and not protect our interests overseas.
 

EASYTRADER

Expert Expediter
1. Prior to the US overthrow of the Iranian parliment, their was no Islamic terroism. So had the US remained nuetral in the middle east there would be NO al queda.

2. Why should we care if Saddam Hueisien, got his countries oil back? (Yes Quwait used to part of Irauq, it was separated out by the Brits, to cut the Iraqis out of their oil dividends)


This is part of the problem with dscussing policy issues, Americans are totally ignorant, of their own history and of world history to boot.
 

EASYTRADER

Expert Expediter
The Germans had a right to sink our ships in ww1, we were sending arms to Britain, we were aready against them. Your comments on that issue reflect exactly what the problem is, a lack of "Nuetral Foriegn Policy" drags us into these stupid wars.

For an education on the cuases of ww1 see "The Proud Tower" and "The Guns of August" both book still in print. There was no "over arching moral imperitive" that dragged us into ww1, we could have just as easily sided with Germany, but France and England owed us more money so to protect the debt we sidedwith them. (Incidently, they never paid us back anyway)

As for WW2, it was "probly" justified, but again it is a MYTH that we were just mindin.g our own bussiness when the Japanese attacked us.
1. Hitler order his navy to avoid US flagged ships, even though our Navy was hunting his submarines, prior to a "declared" war. See "Rise and Fall of the Third Riech", prior to 1941, the Germans we're not interested in the US even though we had attacked them.
2. If Japan attacked the US first, then explane the "Flying Tigers", remember prior to them Japan was an allie.

The reasons you cite for these "wars" are not reasons for "war" but are arguments for a NUETRAL foriegn policy.

Since 1812, the US has NEVER been invaded or even attacked by a invading force. Every war since has been a direct result of
the US's activist foriegn policy.

IT IS this foriegn policy that cause's the wars. Some people think the US should dominate the world, therefore they support this type of policy. Hitler thought Germany should dominate Europe for the same reasons. Other people think aggressive US foriegn policy is good because Politicians tell them it is. I suspect you are in this camp, most Americans are.

Again, you guys all think I'm a loon, but except for Hamilton and Burr, the US founders and all the Presidents untill Andrew Jackson followed a "NON-Interventionist" foriegn policy., After Jackson, we again went non-interventist untill, Teddy Roosevelt who single handledly started the Spnish American war, to obtain possesion of the Philipines to use as a coaling station fr the Navy.

Since TR, the US has been imposing its will on other countries.

So again, if you agree with this policy you are either ignorant or an Imperialist.

I used to be both Ignorant and Imperialist, but my religious conversion to Christianity, changed my Imperialist views, the ignorance has been a hard fight to overcome, because everything in todays society is designed to keep us "IN LINE."

If you haven't read
"War is a Rackett"
"The Proud Tower"
"Overthrow"
You have no IDEA of the otherside of the story, because the US Governemnt like all governemnts only tells its side of the story.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
1. Prior to the US overthrow of the Iranian parliment, their was no Islamic terroism.
Not to mention to the CIA torture (at least supervised, not if actually directly carried out) back in the '50's of Sayyid Qtub .... the inspirational/ideological father of radical Islam, Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and Al Qaeda ....

Qtub already had a bad buzz on 'Murrika after going to school here and seeing 'Murrikan society in the 1950's .... and I'm sure the fine folks at the CIA, under Dulles' direction, helped that right along .... turning mere disdain and disgust into violent undying hatred ....

So had the US remained nuetral in the middle east there would be NO al queda.
To see a blow-by-blow of what the Compulsive Retards of American (foreign) Policy (CRAP) have spawned, scope this out this little historical narrative:

The CIA and The Muslim Brotherhood: How the CIA Set The Stage for September 11 (Martin A. Lee – Razor Magazine 2004) « ce399 | research archive (anti)fascism

2. Why should we care if Saddam Hueisien, got his countries oil back? (Yes Quwait used to part of Irauq, it was separated out by the Brits, to cut the Iraqis out of their oil dividends)
It ain't about Kuwait - he wants the oil .... the empire needs it ....

Kuwait, being the far weaker of the two, is the more "ideal" candidate to back .... for what ought to be fairly obvious reasons ....

This is part of the problem with dscussing policy issues, Americans are totally ignorant, of their own history and of world history to boot.
Keep in mind you're attempting to have a conversation with someone who apparently doesn't believe the United States has ever meddled anywhere overseas ....

Any actions the United States has ever taken overseas are always entirely justified .... and morally correct ....
 
Last edited:
Top