Even if the US were trying to conquer Iraq euro style, I would support it.

[Lancer]

If the US was trying to make Iraq a colony, good for them! They would be part of a stable democracy with the right to travel and free speech. Nobody would be trying to exterminate the minorities in their country as Saddam is. Sure, the US and allies would gain the oil wealth of the country but do you think Iraqi people would see any of that anyway?

When the euros took over countries they crushed the people under an iron boot. Hell, concentration camps were invented during the Boer war and only perfected by the Germans later. These countries peoples are full of criticism over US foriegn policy but the forget that the US isn't the mass murderers when it comes to modern foriegn policy. We didn't instigate imperialism, colonialism. We didn't invade African nations or try to assimilate Algeria like the French. We weren't the ones who enslaved South Americans to work in gold mines like Spain and Portugal or gave small pox to American Indians like the English.

Sure, we supported people like the Shah of Iran but that was to contain the Soviets. Because of these efforts of containment eastern europe is free, the Russians themselves have basic rights.

Yet the european people have discovered morality all of a sudden and accuse the US of improper foriegn policy.

It's fairly funny, but we consider the source.

[Chris 62]

Not to add to your obvious frontal assault, but did you know Britain kept Iraq after WWI for oil?

They also pioneered bombing civilians there to keep them in line with a minimum garrison.

Just an historical oddity that is.

[notyoueither]

The US and Europe need Iraq for bases. That's it. That's all.

[Lancer]

I wasn't aware of that Chris.

[ravagon]

Re: Even if the US were trying to conquer Iraq euro style, I would support it.

Even better?
Let the Euros conquer Iraq - Euro style.
Of course, they'd botch it up and come running to the US waving their hands for the US to clean up the mess they'd made.
Then, as always, as soon as it was over they'd promptly disarm, forget about what the US had just done or why they did it, and start criticising them for not doing it more humanely and on US soil.

I think I'm joking...

[Lancer]

ravagon, nope, you THINK, that's why you're now in deep w/ your fellow Aussietonners.

Nice to see you.

[ravagon]

Just being a "discussion sponsor".

Nice to see you.

Ditto.

[notyoueither]

Seriously, the US can never deal with the house of Saud as it needs dealing with without safe bases on the borders.

[HershOstropoler]

"We didn't invade African nations or try to assimilate Algeria like the French."

Well if the french had tried the US style in Algeria, they would have massacred at least 10 times as many natives, put the rest into reservations, and had no serious problems with independence movements....

[Lancer]

Hersh, it was mostly early colonizers that did that...euros. Later, when the US liberated became independant it was again mostly euro immigrants that headed west and came into conflict w/ the Indians. The US cavalry became involved only when the euros got themselves into trouble encroaching on Indian land. The folks that were then considered Americans were mostly in the original 13 colonies and many opposed what immigrants who headed west were doing to both the Indians and the buffalo...

[HershOstropoler]

First the US ended the british declaration on the settlement limits ofter independence. Second the US claimed those lands and organised them as territories, later states. Third the US government violated or embraced the violation of virtually all treaties made with native Americans.

Conclusion: It's been the Euros' fault! (And I blame the yankees for the Boer war)

[Chris 62]

You forgot how Britian renegged on the 1783 treaty, and egged on the natives to attack the Americans in the period between the revolution and the war of 1812, a major factor in the US never again believing the natives would not keep their word.

[Lancer]

Eh well, it was worth a shot.

[HershOstropoler]

Originally posted by Chris 62
You forgot how Britian renegged on the 1783 treaty, and egged on the natives to attack the Americans in the period between the revolution and the war of 1812, a major factor in the US never again believing the natives would not keep their word.

Did both sides really need that to confirm their mutual trust?

[Seeker]

Um, Honduras and Nicaragua anyone??? That's what kept echoing in my mind to all the things said the US doesn't do.