Is the US a warlike country?

[GePap]

Originally posted by techumseh
Of all the liberal BS that's been spouted on this forum, this takes the cake! These coups have been initiated, planned and organized in Washington and Langley, not Santiago or Jakarta or wherever. If it wasn't for the US, few, if any, of these coups would hav ocurred at all. The US is COMPLETELY responsible for these violations of democracy and human rights. Rationalize away, GePap.

The assertion that no coups would have taken place, 1. is pure speculation, and hence hardly a basis for idea. Second, no one can plan where there is no fertile soil. The US engineered to have Allende thrown out, yes- did they order Pinochet to kill 3000? Or Suharto to kill 500,000? Did they order an end to elections? There is a difference between a coup, which is a violationj, and mass murder- people are still responsible for their actions- I am sure NIxon and Kissinger did not give a rats butt about 3000 poeople killed in Chile, but they did not order 3000 killed in Chile, right-wing military officers did.

Let me try this again. If your country interferes/invades other countries as often as the US does, and thousands of people die, and if you consider your country a democracy, what is your responsibility as a citizen? This is a serious question.

A country that takes part in a crminal conspiracy certainly has part of the blame for the crimes, but conspiracy and murder are two different charges.

I have friends in the US, mainly guilty liberals who don't know whether to apologize or rationalize. (Sounds familiar!) Others I know believe the US is justified in doing whatever it's leaders think is necessary. (Also familiar) The failure of US liberals to take clear and courageous stands leads to the victory of the neocons time and again. John Kerry is only the latest example.

Hey, I was a Dean supporter.

[Arrian]

Short answer:

No. I generally agree with what GePap's been saying (and, where they haven't disagreed and subsequently bickered, DanS too).

-Arrian

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Kuci, yes other Western countries are warlike.

If they're ALL warlike, it's a rather stupid troll to single out the US, dontcha think?

[techumseh]

Originally posted by GePap


The assertion that no coups would have taken place, 1. is pure speculation, and hence hardly a basis for idea. Second, no one can plan where there is no fertile soil. The US engineered to have Allende thrown out, yes- did they order Pinochet to kill 3000? Or Suharto to kill 500,000? Did they order an end to elections? There is a difference between a coup, which is a violationj, and mass murder- people are still responsible for their actions- I am sure NIxon and Kissinger did not give a rats butt about 3000 poeople killed in Chile, but they did not order 3000 killed in Chile, right-wing military officers did.

In Indonesia, the CIA gave the Indonesian army the list of leftist political, trade union and student leaders that were rounded up and killed. Now you can claim that the US was blissfully unaware of what would happen when they put these thugs in power, but it lacks a certain credibility, wouldn't you say?

A country that takes part in a crminal conspiracy certainly has part of the blame for the crimes, but conspiracy and murder are two different charges.

Hair splitting.

Hey, I was a Dean supporter.

Your posts seek to rationalize, minimize and trivialize US illegal actions towards other countries. Very liberal.

[General Ludd]

How much of the european 'warlike behaviour' took plac, when they where still monarchies and empires - and how much afterwards, since they have become more democratic and liberal?


The USA was built with the intention of avoiding the war mongering and imperialism of european monarchies.

[Arrian]

Whereas your posts seek to place 100% of the blame for everything on the US. I wonder, why is GePap in the position of rationalizing US actions? Perhaps because the alternative position, as embodied by you, is even MORE absurd?

-Arrian

edit: crosspost with Ludd.

[Arrian]

How much of the european 'warlike behaviour' took plac, when they where still monarchies and empires - and how much afterwards, since they have become more democratic and liberal?

Do you blame monarchies & empires for the World Wars? Every major Euro nation involved was either a monarchy/totalitarian, had an empire, or both. So that knocks out pre-1945. However, that then puts us in a timeframe where European power had declined, and the major powers were the USA and USSR. During that time period, western Europe's defense was at least in part taken care of by the USA, thus lightening the defense budgets of those countries.

So how much of W. Europe's current pacifism is due to democracy and how much is simply a function of the lull in European power - and, post 1989ish, the lack of an enemy? Will Europe remain pacifistic if/when its power waxes again (either in real terms, or relative to a decline of the US)? I don't know, but if it does it would be rather remarkable in human history.

-Arrian

[Whaleboy]

If they're ALL warlike, it's a rather stupid troll to single out the US, dontcha think?

Western culture to be specific, though I think it's a phenomenon that can manifest itself in countries and cultures based on the circumstances, not the specifics of those cultures. However, it's reasonable to say that some are more vulnerable to it than others, and the USA would be a prime candidate for that.

[techumseh]

Originally posted by Arrian
Whereas your posts seek to place 100% of the blame for everything on the US. I wonder, why is GePap in the position of rationalizing US actions? Perhaps because the alternative position, as embodied by you, is even MORE absurd?

The alternative position being that one country shouldn't invade, destablize or overthrow the legitimate government of another country simply because it disagrees with it's political and economic policies? Or that it is the duty of citizens in a democracy to actively oppose such actions by their governments?

By gum, you're right! I AM being absurd. I'll stop right now.

[Arrian]

You're just being silly now.

The absurd position is that everything (bad) the USA has ever had a hand in anywhere is 100% our fault (whereas, of course, anything good that may happen could possibly be to our credit, but that's another argument).

You seem to place zero culpability on anyone else, and that's what GePap reacted to. Reasonably, IMO.

Being against military intervention and/or regime change - which you bring up in your last post - isn't absurd at all.

-Arrian

[Ned]

Originally posted by Whaleboy




So tell me, where does this duty, this moral obligation come from? Ah! Lets pluck the seeds of democratic destiny from thin air? It's simply that warlike americans have misplaced faith in their own ideals, have an absurd amount of stubborness and conviction in their own righteousness, to the extent that they would seek to impose themselves abroad.

Democracy and the American way isn't all it's cracked up to be, it's childish to think of it in terms of "good" righting "evil" in the world. Travel more.

Ah, come on now. There is a disaster in the Indian Ocean. Where does the world turn for help? China? Canada? No, the USA. There is a reason.

When things were falling apart in Yugoslavia, Clinton tried to stay out of it and let the Euro's handle it. They failed and came begging to Uncle Sam.

We are asked to help because we are virtually the only nation in the world that can help. If we were to say no where we are the only hope, I say we would be derelict in our duty to mankind. We have the power to do good and we should. The world actually expects it of us.

Now you say that America has no right to poke its nose into the world's affairs? That, my friend, is looking at what is going on back-asswards. We are spending fortunes and sacrificing the lives of our youth to help the world become a better place. We have been doing this for 100 years now, since WWI. All this blood and gold has not bought empire, it has bought better lives for the people of this planet.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ned


Ah, come on now. There is a disaster in the Indian Ocean. Where does the world turn for help? China? Canada? No, the USA. There is a reason.

Funny you should say that given that the scale of the aid is very similar from the two countries.

[KrazyHorse]

That's absolute by the way. To give the same amount per capita the US would have to pony up 700 million. I'd like to see that happen.

[Kuciwalker]

...

Oh! You're talking about Canada. I thought you meant China there for a bit.

[Ted Striker]

I think Japan PW3D everybody