MollyHendrix Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 But we can't control everything. I think that is very obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anjin-san Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 ^ True. We put Saddam Hussein in charge and took him out when needed.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giordano Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 The point being....that you shouldn't want to control everything.... and that if you stop trying to, you will also eliminate the need to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MollyHendrix Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 The point being....that you shouldn't want to control everything.... and that if you stop trying to, you will also eliminate the need to do so. Very true! I think our government is becoming almost too powerful. Some people may not see it now but if they continue on the same path it can't be good for the future generations. I believe we need some drastic change in the office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I realise there is no easy solution by now.... but a bit of selfreflection on how righteous your country actually is might be in order. Some good points in your post...but I'm going take a stab in the dark and suggest that you probably meant to write "self-righteous" not "righteous. Two entirely different meanings. The U.S. would be in better shape if it stopped trying to play World Cop. But the problem is the same one Michael Corleone faced in the Godfather story: Every time he thought he was out, they pulled him back in. Let's face it, even when the U.S. has tried to not get involved, there has always been some country screaming for our help, often from countries that are the first to criticize the U.S. for getting involved in other country's affairs. When the U.S. intervenes, it's a bully. When we sit back and let the other countries haggle it out themselves, we're called callous and heartless. You always hear the cry in the UN and media: "Why doesn't the U.S. DO something?" So, while I agree that the problems the U.S. faces with the hardline extremist Islam governments and others around the world may be partially borne of frustrations over the intrusions of U.S. foreign policy, it's not the only reason. And it's not as simple as the U.S. pulling everybody out everywhere and saying to the world: "you're on your own". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giordano Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 yes, pardon my english. I'm not a native speaker. Like I said. At this point the easy solution is not there. And although i'm not very happy with the (social-political) state the world is in now, I'm not one for revolutionary change. And I do not pretend to have the awnsers. These problems that the world has with the USA have grown to be so over the last 100 years and will probably take the same time to resolve themselves. What I was pointing out is, that this self image that the USA is god's gift to the world might need some revision. It would suit your country and the state that it is in compared to other western (and quite a few 3th world ones) countries. ps. Thank you for ramming jazz, blues & rock&roll down our throats :-) much appreciated! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I was thinking the same thing. I'm not aware of the US aiding him taking control of Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 The US most certainly supported SH. We began aiding him with money, military intelligence and weapons to assist their war with Iran, back in '82. I know he took over the presidency in 79/80, but we were more than happy to keep him in power to keep Iran under control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betteremily Posted August 1, 2012 Author Share Posted August 1, 2012 Don't forget CIA trained Osama Bin Laden... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Yep. I believe the CIA term for it is "Blowback". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electrophile Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 The US most certainly supported SH. We began aiding him with money, military intelligence and weapons to assist their war with Iran, back in '82. I know he took over the presidency in 79/80, but we were more than happy to keep him in power to keep Iran under control. ....and when he was no longer of any use to us, we killed him. The US military is basically the Mob, only instead of pinstriped suits, they wear camo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redrum Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Duck.......and cover! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 ....and when he was no longer of any use to us, we killed him. The US military is basically the Mob, only instead of pinstriped suits, they wear camo. Don't start military bashing. This is a sensitive area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electrophile Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I'm not bashing the military. I have great respect for what our men and women overseas do, even if I don't agree with why they're doing it. I was likening our taking out Saddam Hussein to the way a mafia hitman would take someone out who was of no use to the family anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MollyHendrix Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 ....and when he was no longer of any use to us, we killed him. The US military is basically the Mob, only instead of pinstriped suits, they wear camo. Yes, please don't start that. Freedom isn't free. There are many of my family members that have lived through the military for all of their lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anjin-san Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 The US most certainly supported SH. We began aiding him with money, military intelligence and weapons to assist their war with Iran, back in '82. I know he took over the presidency in 79/80, but we were more than happy to keep him in power to keep Iran under control. Before that,the Iran/Iraq war started in 1980,... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anjin-san Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 ....and when he was no longer of any use to us, we killed him. The US military is basically the Mob, only instead of pinstriped suits, they wear camo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electrophile Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Yes, please don't start that. Freedom isn't free. There are many of my family members that have lived through the military for all of their lives. My late uncle served in Vietnam. 82nd Engineering. He built bridges. Never talked about his service over there to anyone, even his family. Both grandfathers fought in WWII, my dad's maternal grandfather fought in WWI. I'm sure if we dig deeper, we had family in the Civil War. I don't hate the military or the people who serve in it. I don't like what our government makes them do, or where they send them, but I'm allowed to disagree with the way our armed forces are used, and why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LedZeppfan77 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Don't be silly. Democracy means that an Islamic country can only have a government of which the USA approves. One might think you are anti American Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 One might think you are anti American Nick Well, he is English, after all. The bloody Redcoat! In Electrophile's defense, as a former soldier, I think one can support the troops yet still disagree with the way politicians deploy them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anjin-san Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Well, he is English, after all. The bloody Redcoat! Keeps us on our toes,then again,never mind,.... [Electrophile's defense, as a former soldier, I think one can support the troops yet still disagree with the way politicians deploy them. One of our tenants. KB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 I'm surprised so many people voted 'no'. With all the trouble brewing in the world (and not just in the Mid-East); it's pretty sad that so many people just turn a blind eye and think it will all just go away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahfin Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 I'm surprised so many people voted 'no'. With all the trouble brewing in the world (and not just in the Mid-East); it's pretty sad that so many people just turn a blind eye and think it will all just go away. What makes you think that's the motivation behind why people voted no? I would think that's something only they would know themselves. At lots of points in history people have declared that the end of the world is just around the corner (remember the Gulf War, the Y2K scare, 9/11, etc.?). What makes this particular time period any different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 Don't be silly. Democracy means that an Islamic country can only have a government of which the USA approves. I totally agree with you on that one. Off the top of my head, I can think of two Islamic countries that America openly disapproves of: Iran and Syria. And you would have to be blind not to see how much the US government wants both those countries 'reformed'. An attack against both those nations (especially Iran) could easily lead to World War III. It's impossible to play the 'world's policeman', without it coming back to haunt you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 What makes you think that's the motivation behind why people voted no? I would think that's something only they would know themselves. At lots of points in history people have declared that the end of the world is just around the corner (remember the Gulf War, the Y2K scare, 9/11, etc.?). What makes this particular time period any different? I'm sorry, I think you misunderstand. I'm not implying by any means that WWIII is right around the corner. But I think with the events of the past couple decades, I feel as though everything is coming together (if that makes sense). With the economic decay of America, and the mess in the Middle-east (which seems to keep getting worse and worse); and the Chinese and Koreans and all that etc.; I think everything is in a downward spiral. If WWIII is gonna happen, I think it will most likely be within a decade or two. If I gave the impression that I felt it was immediate, I do apologize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.