We only attack brutal dictatorships

[MSgt]

The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must eh? Personally I believe humanity can aspire to something greater. As for the topic at hand I guess we all agree that the USA hasn’t showed too much restraint in attacking non brutal dictatorships.

Once again we get to the heart of it.....an individuals ideologies versus reality.

Hermaphrodite, we all can believe that "humanity can aspire to something greater." It doesn't do us any good to hold such pipe dreams in a world where necessity still demands attention and keeping Soviet influence out of South America was very much a necessity.

 

[Herophant]

Once again we get to the heart of it.....an individuals ideologies versus reality.

Hermaphrodite, we all can believe that "humanity can aspire to something greater." It doesn't do us any good to hold such pipe dreams in a world where necessity still demands attention and keeping Soviet influence out of South America was very much a necessity.

Did you just imply that i have both male and female sex organs?

Isnt it un-american to view the world from a realist point of view? So much for freedom and democracy....

 

[MSgt]

Did you just imply that i have both male and female sex organs?

Isnt it un-american to view the world from a realist point of view? So much for freedom and democracy....

Who said anything about "un-American?" Why so defensive? Do you feel that I am threatening your freedoms and your democracy? By all means, pipe dream away. What you should realize is that your pipe dream will only be realized after necessary events have occurred, because every nation and ideology has their own version of your pipe dream.

 

[Herophant]

Who said anything about "un-American?" Why so defensive? Do you feel that I am threatening your freedoms and your democracy? By all means, pipe dream away. What you should realize is that your pipe dream will only be realized after necessary events have occurred, because every nation and ideology has their own version of your pipe dream.

Whats my pipe dream?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Yeah i agree he was tyrant. What i was saying was that the same standards that the poster i was refering to applies to saddams tyranny should be applyed to america's tyranny.

lmfao if the U.S. intervenes then we are evil imperialists if we don't intervene then we're supporting tyrants, is that the ticket? What country has done more to promote and protect freedom throughout the world than the U.S.? If it wasn't for the U.S. you people in Britian would be speaking German or Russian today, though you probably wouldn't mind the latter, but now that the Cold War is over you people are judging the U.S. on the tactics used to bring down the Soviet Union without even firing a shot.

 

[MSgt]

Whats my pipe dream?

A perfect world.....for "humanity to aspire to something greater."


It will only happen when the elements of this world that are preventing it from happening are removed. This is wh7y I called it a "pipe dream." All civilizations and individuals within have their own version of what a perfect world is. Hitler had his and Radical Islamists have theirs.

 

[Red_Dave]

:roll: Again...the threat was not the current governments. It was what the current governments were doing with an enemy that would make them a future possible threat. Because actions were taken, those threats were not realized. Was Cuba a threat or was the Soviets parking nuclear missiles on communist land a threat?






Funny, everything I've read has communism written all over them. I typed their names in and the first links were.....

Arbenz:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobo_Arbenz_Guzman

Allende:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende

Well i explained how it was unlikely arbenz was comunist and/or working with moscow in my last post. I also provided evidence of the economic insentive behind the coup both of which you ignored. The missles in cuba where a threat but that only happend because Castro was a lenninst in league with moscow arbenz and Allende where neither. Incidently cuba would still be democratic if it wasnt for america's suporrt for castro;s predecessor . Il adress what you said about Allende shortly

 

[Red_Dave]

If not doing these actions would result in situations that are even more "morally wrong", than absolutely...

Sometimes the options are not "right" and "wrong"...

Sometimes they are "sucks" and "really sucks"...

Not "doing" these actions would leave Chile Geutamala as democratic states where the people controlled there own resources, state, and lives rather than american multinationals. Im amazed you can compare mass murdering dictators to lifting an old lady from a river.

 

[Red_Dave]

2) Allende was an ardent Marxist and, as such, an outspoken critic of capitalism. He advocated far-reaching social reforms through legal means. That made him deeply unpopular within the administrations of successive U.S. presidents, from John F. Kennedy to Richard Nixon, who believed there was a danger of Chile becoming a communist state and joining the Soviet Union's sphere of influence.

.

Well being an Ardent Marxist didnt mean Allende was in league with moscow. The fact that he advocated reforms through legal and democratic means meant that his ideas where very different to those of the soviet government and therfore unlikely to join there sphre of influence. I dont see how the fact Allende was unpopular with Kennedy and Nixon justifies removeing him-unless you think removing an leader that subverts the authoirty of the u.s presidient is justifiable. That would prove my point.

 

[MSgt]

Well being an Ardent Marxist didnt mean Allende was in league with moscow. The fact that he advocated reforms through legal and democratic means meant that his ideas where very different to those of the soviet government and therfore unlikely to join there sphre of influence. I dont see how the fact Allende was unpopular with Kennedy and Nixon justifies removeing him-unless you think removing an leader that subverts the authoirty of the u.s presidient is justifiable. That would prove my point.

Facts are facts. It's not as simple as projecting that the CIA was just bored and conducted themselves in this manner for sole economic issues. Perhaps you should read about Allende......

The superpowers -- the USSR and the United States -- were invested in the result of the election. The KGB spent $420,000 in the campaign unbeknownst to Allende, while ITT gave at least $350,000 to Jorge Alessandri. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was confident in Alessandri's victory, and did not see the need to fund Alessandri directly. Allende won.

In 1971, following the re-establishment of diplomatic relations with Cuba, despite a previously established Organization of American States convention that no nation in the Western Hemisphere would do so (the only exception being Mexico, which had refused to adopt that convention), Cuban president Fidel Castro started a month-long visit to Chile. This visit, in which Castro participated actively in the internal politics of the country, holding massive rallies and giving public advice to Allende, was seen by those on the political right as proof to support their view that "The Chilean Way to Socialism" was an effort to put Chile on the same path as Cuba.

The KGB's archives record that Svyatoslav Kuznetsov, KGB case officer in Chile, was instructed by headquarters to "exert a favourable influence on Chilean government policy". The Times extract from the Mitrokhin Archive volume II from historian Christopher Andrew and KGB defector Vasili Mitrokhin says that "In the KGB's view, Allende's fundamental error was his unwillingness to use force against his opponents. Without establishing complete control over all the machinery of the State, his hold on power could not be secure." He received $30 000 from the Soviets for "solidifying trusted relations" and providing "valuable information" [18]. According to Allende's KGB file, he "was made to understand the necessity of reorganising Chile's army and intelligence services, and of setting up a relationship between Chile's and the USSR's intelligence services", and he was said to react positively. In June 1972, Kuznetsov's close relationship to Allende may have been disturbed by the arrival in Santiago of a new Soviet ambassador, Aleksandr Vasilyevich Basov, member of the Central Committee of the Soviet Communist Party. In 1972, Moscow downgraded its assessment of the prospects of the Allende regime. The "truckers' strike", backed by CIA funding, virtually paralysed the economy for three weeks, which Moscow saw as evidence of the weakness of the Popular Unity government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende

Allende was a threat.

I do believe that anyone that subverts an American President is someone to watch. The American governmnent wants democracy and freedom for everyone in the world. For selfish reasons, the more democracy and free trade, the better for American liferstyle, not to mention the rest of the world's freedoms. Anyone who defies the American Government obviously wants something different. I choose not to defend those individuals. Some examples of individuals who want something different are:

Castro
Hitler
Saddam
Khomeini
Arafat
"House of Saud" (Pick a name)
Allende
Arbenze
Mussolini
Chavez ??


The thing is, Europe is crawling with unrest, terrorist attacks, sweeping racial and religious tensions, and threats. The America's do not have this problem and the reason is that we are able to identify the threats and deal with them before they evolve into a Nazi, Mussolini, Islamic unrest, Bosnia, USSR, or Kosovo package.

 

[Binary_Digit]

A perfect world.....for "humanity to aspire to something greater."


It will only happen when the elements of this world that are preventing it from happening are removed. This is wh7y I called it a "pipe dream." All civilizations and individuals within have their own version of what a perfect world is. Hitler had his and Radical Islamists have theirs.

You're talking about removal, Herophant is talking about prevention. Neither one will work without the other. You can remove the bad elements all you want, but unless you're preventing others from cropping up, you're just ******* up a rope. And in my opinion, humanity aspiring to something greater" is very important in the context of prevention.

 

[MSgt]

You're talking about removal, Herophant is talking about prevention. Neither one will work without the other. You can remove the bad elements all you want, but unless you're preventing others from cropping up, you're just ******* up a rope. And in my opinion, humanity aspiring to something greater" is very important in the context of prevention.

Exactly, which is why the Middle East must change. When dealing with a culture in which only faith and family matter to our enemies, we insist on making war on governments and negotiating with political organizations that are no more than mobs with diplomatic representation. Chasing down terrorists is a necessity, but by ignoring the root causes under neath, we are punching thin air.