What's your Stance on America?

[MrFun]

I find semantical acrobatics played out by some people in oder to fluff up some things about United States amusing sometimes.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Why is it semantical acrobatics? It's no such thing. Supporting dictators is miles away from installing them. Supporting dictators is something you HAVE to do if you don't want to piss off most of the world. Installing dictators... you have a choice there.

[MrFun]

But still, you can install dictators without the obvious military invasion -- CIA operations, is another option.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yes, but once again, we had absolutely NO role in installing Saddam to power.

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Yes, but once again, we had absolutely NO role in installing Saddam to power.

Exactly, Imran is right as usual. We did not install Saddam but we did support him as he was fighting against those we felt were a much greater threat to America and Americans.

Using MrFun's logic, Ambassador Joe Kennedy installed Hitler as dictator of Germany because he supported him.

Way to go, Joe!

[Kidlicious]

What are we suppose to compare the US to?

My opinion of the US culture and govt is very poor, probably because the US has a strong negative effect on me personally. They have the power to screw with me. So I can't really rate it.

There is something about Americans that make them follow the leader. They think they are so independent, but most of them just follow along with what their parents, schools, media, and polititians tell them.

[Ramo]

Yes, but once again, we had absolutely NO role in installing Saddam to power.

Yes we did. We supported the Ba'athist Party against the Qaseem gov't, and then Tikriti Clan (Saddam's clan) within the Ba'athist Party. Our support was instrumental in his siezing power.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Kidicious
What are we suppose to compare the US to?

My opinion of the US culture and govt is very poor, probably because the US has a strong negative effect on me personally. They have the power to screw with me. So I can't really rate it.

There is something about Americans that make them follow the leader. They think they are so independent, but most of them just follow along with what their parents, schools, media, and polititians tell them.

everybody does that, not just americans.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by MrFun
Well, if you call the history of installing dictatorships in different parts of the world moderation . . . . .

It is. Again, compare it to what happened under other superpowers.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I voted 2 because I deem your social model to be utterly nightmarish,

Well, duh, you're a commie. Most of the rest of the world is capitalist, too, though...

because of your consistent bullying over the world ever since you became a superpower,

That's basically the definition of the word, and nothing special regardless.

because of an apparent American unability to question its self-righteousness.

Which is of course why people like Michael Moore don't exist... what really seperates us from all past powers is that we do have a large segment of our population at least willing, or more than willing to question our self-righteousness (oftentimes, whether such questions are justified or not).

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yes we did. We supported the Ba'athist Party against the Qaseem gov't, and then Tikriti Clan (Saddam's clan) within the Ba'athist Party. Our support was instrumental in his siezing power.

Even if the US supported the socialist Ba'athist Party (unlikely.. supporting socialist rebels during the Cold War?), we installed General al-Bakr, not Saddam. The fact that Saddam eventually took power in the government doesn't mean the US installed him.

[Ramo]

The Ba'athists weren't socialist, any more than the Nazis were socialist. They were Arab nationalists, thought to be a counterpart to the Soviet-friendly Qaseem.

And again, we supported Saddam's clan within the Ba'athist party.

So clearly we had at least SOME role in installing Saddam.

[Imran Siddiqui]

As much as we had SOME role installing Helmut Kohl to power in Germany.

[Ramo]

We had far more of a role in the ascension of Saddam than Kohl. Clearly, it's not true that, "we had absolutely NO role in installing Saddam to power."

[Imran Siddiqui]

Only if you want to streach things . Installing a party does not equal installing a party underling to power. It'd be like asserting that Communists had a role in installing Stalin to power when they backed the 1917 Revolution.