• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Why the US is a Target For Terrorists

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Here is my view on why the US is a target for terrorists. When you examine American foreign policy, we see that the US only gets involved in other countries only when American interests are involved. We have also seen where the US has supported some very unsavory and ruthless characters, dictators that served American interests, yet committed alot of crimes against their own people. I would like to make a case for Bosnia and Rwanda. I myself served as a soldier in Bosnia and am famaliar with the politics surrounding the eventual NATO intervention in this country, which, I might add, came too little too late. The US never wanted to get involved in Bosnia, because their was no interests involved in Bosnia. The US only got involved in Bosnia when it started to seriously threaten Clinton politically with the Sarajevo Marketplace Bombing that made World Headlines. He had no choice but to intervene or become the target of world outrage himself. Yet, there were far far worse crimes committed in Bosnia than the Sarajevo Marketplace Bombing, it just so happenned that this crime made the news. In actuallity, the diplomatic efforts the US was involved in before the NATO intervention was in affect, acting as accomplices to the genocide.

Rwanda is another prime example, where the West could have easily stopped a genocide, knew full well what was going on and the massive scale, but chose not to intervene to stop the genocide because their was no American interests involved. It was a horrible genocide, much like Bosnia, but on a slightly greater scale. Everywhere you look at American interventions, you see a pattern where American foreign policy is based strictly on American interests with very little morality or sound moral principles involved in deciding whether the US should be involved. But because the US bases it's foreign policy decisions strictly on interests, it has made enemies abroad and sown bitter feelings. These feelings and these enemies were the source of where these terrorists come from. American actions themselves can be characterized as terrorist.

The perception, is that the US is in Iraq based on oil interests and not based on the moral principles of freedom or to stop a genocide or an injustice. American consistently has never based it's foreign policy on justice or morality. It is because of this; because of some US foreign policy actions that can be characterized as terrorist in nature, US diplomatic drives based on interests, some of which are criminal in nature, the support of dictators that serve American interests, because of this, America has now become a target of terrorists. It is because of this, that September 11 happenned. America is reaping what it sows. The old addage, you reap what you sow.
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by Timmyboy:
Here is my view on why the US is a target for terrorists. When you examine American foreign policy, we see that the US only gets involved in other countries only when American interests are involved. We have also seen where the US has supported some very unsavory and ruthless characters, dictators that served American interests, yet committed alot of crimes against their own people. I would like to make a case for Bosnia and Rwanda. I myself served as a soldier in Bosnia and am famaliar with the politics surrounding the eventual NATO intervention in this country, which, I might add, came too little too late. The US never wanted to get involved in Bosnia, because their was no interests involved in Bosnia. The US only got involved in Bosnia when it started to seriously threaten Clinton politically with the Sarajevo Marketplace Bombing that made World Headlines. He had no choice but to intervene or become the target of world outrage himself. Yet, there were far far worse crimes committed in Bosnia than the Sarajevo Marketplace Bombing, it just so happenned that this crime made the news. In actuallity, the diplomatic efforts the US was involved in before the NATO intervention was in affect, acting as accomplices to the genocide.

Rwanda is another prime example, where the West could have easily stopped a genocide, knew full well what was going on and the massive scale, but chose not to intervene to stop the genocide because their was no American interests involved. It was a horrible genocide, much like Bosnia, but on a slightly greater scale. Everywhere you look at American interventions, you see a pattern where American foreign policy is based strictly on American interests with very little morality or sound moral principles involved in deciding whether the US should be involved. But because the US bases it's foreign policy decisions strictly on interests, it has made enemies abroad and sown bitter feelings. These feelings and these enemies were the source of where these terrorists come from. American actions themselves can be characterized as terrorist.

The perception, is that the US is in Iraq based on oil interests and not based on the moral principles of freedom or to stop a genocide or an injustice. American consistently has never based it's foreign policy on justice or morality. It is because of this; because of some US foreign policy actions that can be characterized as terrorist in nature, US diplomatic drives based on interests, some of which are criminal in nature, the support of dictators that serve American interests, because of this, America has now become a target of terrorists. It is because of this, that September 11 happenned. America is reaping what it sows. The old addage, you reap what you sow.
Your exactly right. I've always said our government used 9/11 as an opportunity. They jumped on that tragedy to bullshit passed like the Patriot Act.

No matter what side of the aisle your on, you cannot deny the fact that their has got to be something seriously wrong with this country when we are having this many discussions and debates regarding the Constitution. This should be a given. We shouldn't be discussing something so inherent and obvious. These are our RIGHTS! The mere fact were debating some of these shows something is wrong with the picture. But so far, collectively as a nation, were in no hurry to adjust the set. I know elections are a year away, but that doesn't mean we can let our Representives know of our outrage.
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Billo_Really said:
Your exactly right. I've always said our government used 9/11 as an opportunity. They jumped on that tragedy to bullshit passed like the Patriot Act.

No matter what side of the aisle your on, you cannot deny the fact that their has got to be something seriously wrong with this country when we are having this many discussions and debates regarding the Constitution. This should be a given. We shouldn't be discussing something so inherent and obvious. These are our RIGHTS! The mere fact were debating some of these shows something is wrong with the picture. But so far, collectively as a nation, were in no hurry to adjust the set. I know elections are a year away, but that doesn't mean we can let our Representives know of our outrage.
It was perhaps the most disrespectful way to honor the victims of 9/11, to use them as a tool to ram legislation past Congress. If you voted against this legislation in Congress, your political career would be finished because you would be "unpatriotic." I swear, nobody in Congress, except for maybe one or two have any balls.
 

Diogenes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
4,980
Reaction score
3,059
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
TimmyBoy said:
When you examine American foreign policy, we see that the US only gets involved in other countries only when American interests are involved.
Do you suggest that we should intervene in the affairs of other countries when there are no American interests are involved, perhaps out of the goodness of our hearts to save the poor benighted people from themselves? Or are you suggesting a course of isolationism?
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Diogenes said:
Do you suggest that we should intervene in the affairs of other countries when there are no American interests are involved, perhaps out of the goodness of our hearts to save the poor benighted people from themselves? Or are you suggesting a course of isolationism?
We should intervene in countries that are victims of mass genocides because not only is it morally right, but it is in our best interests.
 

George_Washington

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
1,962
Reaction score
0
Location
United States of America and proud of it!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
You guys, I don't really fear the Patriot Act. Call me crazy but I think it was a good idea. I just think it will help ensure our safety better by helping government agencies to gather intelligence quicker. I know it says Bush can hold people indefinitely without trial. I guess maybe that part can be reworded but the rest seems to be alright.
 

Diogenes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
4,980
Reaction score
3,059
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
TimmyBoy said:
We should intervene in countries that are victims of mass genocides because not only is it morally right, but it is in our best interests.
Ah, there's that reference to "our best interests" again. I would suggest that there is another criterion, and that is that our intervention must be effective - if we have no hope of accomplishing our goal, whatever it may be at the time, we should stay out. We can actually accomplish something useful in the case of tsunamis or earthquakes or Iraqi dictators, but there was no chance of accomplishing anything in Rwanda short of re-establishing colonialism.
 

Diogenes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
4,980
Reaction score
3,059
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
George_Washington said:
You guys, I don't really fear the Patriot Act. Call me crazy but I think it was a good idea. I just think it will help ensure our safety better by helping government agencies to gather intelligence quicker. I know it says Bush can hold people indefinitely without trial. I guess maybe that part can be reworded but the rest seems to be alright.
Agreed. The Act basically gives the government the same latitude against terrorists that it already has for the pursuit of organized crime.
 
Top Bottom