Al Qaeda calls a truce

[Ned]

PAX, Bush said we would stay only as long as we were welcome and that our presence was required. I believe him.

The basic neocon philosophy is that democracy is the solution for the world. Iraq is step 1.

[Pax]

When you take the wraps off the Neocon policies what you really have is Neoimperialism. I am opposed to imperialism in any shape or form.

I don't see it leading to safer world, middle east or U.S.

I see orphans, cripples, and funerals. All in the name of a war for peace. Ridiculous.

I am all for fighting but only for just causes.

[Az]

I am opposed to imperialism in any shape or form.

Do you think the world would be better without the Roman empire? The Helenistic empires? The empires of the Ancient ME? The British Empire?

And I can hardly have any nationalistic bias towards any of those, if you know what I mean.

[Pax]

I think the world would be better off with out the British Empire. I think the Roman Empire was beneficial to civilization. I'd have to think about all the others.

[Flip McWho]

Goddamn you talk like the British Empire is still going. That died years ago.

It's virtually impossible to say whether the world would be a better place with or without any empires. The world would be a very different place but can you really say better or worse if you have absolutely no clue as to what it could have been like.

I like your policy of diplomacy Pax, it's very idealistic. Non too sure whether it would actually work though. Also all that AQ can negotiate is to stop terror attacks. Its not like they have the power to negotiate on behalf of sovereign ME states.

Eh, sometimes it makes you wonder if the world would be a better place without religion and Gods. I suppose we'd just find something else to bash our heads over.

[Drake Tungsten]

When you take the wraps off the Neocon policies what you really have is Neoimperialism.

How, exactly?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Pax Africanus
I think the world would be better off with out the British Empire. I think the Roman Empire was beneficial to civilization. I'd have to think about all the others.

So you think their colonies would have been better off without the British coming?

You realize they would still be ancient civilizations and in absolute poverty, by our standards.

[Sandman]

The British Empire was neutral at best. And don't say we brought railways. Lots of places managed to get them without being conquered.

[Kuciwalker]

Yup. And all of them were in Europe or North America.

[Sandman]

Or South America. Or Asia. And most of the railways we built in Africa were shabby resource extraction operations, rather than long-term useful transport networks.

[Kuciwalker]

South America got conquered. Africa got conquered. Asia was mostly conquered, and the parts that weren't fall into various European countries' "spheres of influence". In fact, the only non-European country that industrialized that I can think of was Japan. (America, Canada, and Australia are basically European countries.)

[Spiffor]

China got industrialized with no more foreign influence than Japan. The industrialization of China was a change from within, and not from without (although the technology was western, exactly like in Japan).

[Sandman]

South America broke away before railways became established. They didn't have to be conquered by Britain to get them.

You're right about Japan. But don't you think it's likely that India would have gotten on the development train as well, had they not been conquered? Or that China would have been in better shape had the Opium Wars not occured?

These places lost as much as they gained by European overlordship.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Spiffor
China got industrialized with no more foreign influence than Japan. The industrialization of China was a change from within, and not from without (although the technology was western, exactly like in Japan).

Oh, I thought it was sort of an economic colony of the European nations (what with the boxer rebellion and stuff).

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Sandman
South America broke away before railways became established. They didn't have to be conquered by Britain to get them.

They also had huge investment from the US.

You're right about Japan. But don't you think it's likely that India would have gotten on the development train as well, had they not been conquered? Or that China would have been in better shape had the Opium Wars not occured?

These places lost as much as they gained by European overlordship.

What's the point? They've happened to gain from the corporations. I think they would get rather annoyed if you stuck your self-rightous nose in and kept the corporations from employing them.

If they want the corporations gone, let them make that decision. You shouldn't make it for them.