|
US should mind their own business (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| trancaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
trancaholic:
Name a country that the U.S. has annexed due to it's "Imperialism".
I'll give you a hint...it's real close to 0... :crazy: |
Wauw. Really clever. I'll make you a deal: Come up with a planet made of purple fungus, then I'll provide you with the example.:rolleyes:
Did you see me claiming that the US has annexed any countries? Did you see me claim that the US conducts imperialistic warfare? I called out for Shakka to back up his claim with a concrete example - don't jump to conclusions on any hidden agendas I might have. |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yoepus
Yea those countries were just some off the top of my head too!
With some more thought, heres a few others:
China, Lebanon, South Africa, East Timor, Indonesia, Columbia, Venezula, Mexico, Canada, Russia, Philipines and Ireland.
I'm sure I could think of more too if I really wanted. But at least in one point in time, the people of these nations cried out for US help, and recieved it. |
:wtf: uh.. pretty much all of the nations you listen are cases where the US intevened and not them crying out for help. :rolleyes: |
|
|
| svens_bath |
| El Salvador requested US help against Nicaragua in the early 80s |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
You didn't think you would get away with this so easily did you. |
Acutally I really was hoping you'd realize the stupidity of your statement and let me get away with it :D
But oh well, to battle:
| quote: |
Now, I'm not a historian |
Yes, I clearly realize this when reading your post.... ;)
| quote: |
the people of those countries cried out for US military intervention and got it, and I just haven't heard about it. But here's my initial thoughts on your list: |
Lets not get into "the people" definition problem, as debating definitions is never fun. For sake of argument I'm saying "the people" are either a majority or a large influential population of the country and/or the government repersenting (or not repersenting) said people.
Obviously there are always dissenters and its never "all the people".
Saying that, lets continue...
| quote: |
Poland, UK, and France - I'm guessing that you're referring to WW2? |
Poland is applicable during WWII, but I was refering to the post-cold war era in particular. UK is WWI and WWII, ditto France (and cold war era defense for both of them (and germany, italy, spain, netherlands, etc, other nato countries too now that I think of it...)).
| quote: | | The US only entered this after being attacked itself - staying out of harms way for a couple of years. So while the US lend a helping hand to these countries, it was not an intention of the US per se. |
The US entered the EUROPEAN front after being attacked from the ASIAN Front? Come on. If the USA wanted to skirt the issue, they could have just attacked the Japanese and been the better for it. The Germans had sunk US shipping prior to pearl harbor and the US did not retaliate. The US did provide military aid to the UK and inturn occupied countries before it officially declared war.
Similar to Bush today, Rosevelet wanted to intervene in the EUROPEAN theatre (as Bush in Iraq) prior to Pearl Harbor (as Bush to 911) but the US people did not support such action before the events.
| quote: |
Iraq - please. Remember those WMD? |
Iraq required assistance during the Iran-Iraq war and recieved it from the USA. Or does that not count because Iraqis aren't people?
Come on.. remember, where did Iraq get those WMD :rolleyes: :p
| quote: |
Vietnam - FFS please. The majority of the Vietnamese population wanted to join North Vietnam in bliss communism. The US interfered because it hated communism more than it respected democratic ideals. |
No, majority North Vietnam perhaps, but if the majority really wanted communism why could they not do so peacefully? But had to result to massacres, slaughter, indimination etc? The Vietnamese killed more Vietnamese than the Americans did...
| quote: |
Canada, Russia, Ireland, South Africa, Mexico, Georgia, Ukraine, India - which military interventions are you talking about? |
You are right, I mistook when reading "military intervention" for "intervention". None the less in many if these cases the threat of US force was enough to make these nations co-operate.
Canada during the revolutionary and war of 1812 did request US intervention in some parts. Mexico similar during the US-Texas-Mexican war (remember the Alamo?)
Russia - during WWII (after Germany decided, "Heck who need's an ally!?!") and a possible argument can be made during the Cold War.
the New South Africa was able to come to existance over the old South Africa primarly due to US military intervention (arms sanctions).
In Georgia and Ukraine people felt comfortable uprising with the precedent that the US will no longer sit ideally as democracy are supressed. The threat of force played a part here (as it did in Lebanon requesting a Syrian pull-out recently) although not involved directly.
India has request US intervention to prevent Pakistan from nuking them. Pakistan has done similar. US diplomacy (which now gives military aid to both countries) in part solved this crises.
As to Ireland, I was refering to the US brokered peace agreement in Northern Ireland.
| quote: |
Palestine, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Pakistan, Panama, Hiati, Saudi Arabia, China, Lebanon, Indonesia, Columbia, Venezula, Philipines - ah the great democracies. You're bitching about people complaining about the US policies - not governments. |
I don't want to make this a who is the peoples/what is a democracy/legit government etc debate, because that would be endless... as above lets just stick to a broad definition. I don't think it disuades the point.
| quote: | | for all contries but Haiti and Columbia I don't have a clue what military intervention you're refering to. Presence of military bases perhaps? |
Palestine recieved US arms and funding to setup a "security force", also one can consider the cease-fired forced on Israel during 1967 an intervention on the side of the Palestinians (and certaintly intervention on the side of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria).
Similar US intervention happened during the 1956, and 1973 wars when Israel was able to beat through the Arab armies.
Pakistan - see above. Plus military aid during the numerous Paki-Indian wars.
Panama - See Noregia.
Saudi Arabi - See first Gulf War and perhaps second.
(just noticed I forgot to add Kuwait to my list.. hmm how could of I forgotten Kuwait?! Such a clear cut case...)
China - during the people's uprising and WWII (against Japan).
Lebanon - side effects from Gulf War II, but also internvetion during 1983.. recall Marine barracks bombing.
Indonesia and Philiphines - aside from WWII and granting their independence, military assistance and intervention today against terrorist cells.
Venezula - were able to cut off the drug trade (they ran off to Columbia). Might consider the attempted coup on the current dictator as intervention.
| quote: |
East Timor, Somalia - I thought these were UN operations? |
Right. Tell me one successful UN operation without the US.
All nations did not have to pull out of Somolia when the US did, but they did it anyway.... East Timor recieved a lot of backing from the US.
| quote: | | Balkans - I thought this one was a Nato operation, and then a UN operation? But even so, I'll grant you this one, because the US was the main agitator behind the intervention. Whether the people actually wanted it will have to hear Drug_Tito about. |
Actually it was a UN operation and then a NATO operation. But you have several different conflicts in there. Since the Balkans has so many ethnic regions it is not hard to make an argument that some of these ethnic regions welcomed US intervention. Clearly in Kosovo the muslims appreciated US internvetion where as the Serbs did not.
| quote: |
Israel - yes, although I wouldn't classify your help to Israel as military intervention per se, I guess it's a valid entry. However, the people of Israel is *not* complaining about US colonialism, so the example is really irrelevant for the discussion. |
I dunno, everyone around ISrael is complaining about US colonialism though. US military internvetion in favor of Israel is best illustrated via the military airlift during the 1973 war where the US flew in tanks, planes, bombs, and guns, as the soviet Arab armies encircled it and attacked in suprise on Israel's holiest day.
| quote: |
South Korea - granted. Wanted help and are complaining. |
Right, you can add the Japanese who's military is basically American, but they aren't complaining about colonialism... |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
I never said we inveted it (slavery).
The natives were'nt just merely "conquered" and "colonized", their entire race (pretty much) in what is now the US was MASSACRED and WIPED OUT. There's a big difference. |
No they weren't.
They have HUGE pieces of land and choose to segregate themselves.
Try actually going to a reserve and see how they govern themselves; you'd be shocked. |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
No they weren't.
|
:stongue: ok, that wasn't only funny but kinda sick and disgusting. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
Wauw. Really clever. I'll make you a deal: Come up with a planet made of purple fungus, then I'll provide you with the example.:rolleyes:
Did you see me claiming that the US has annexed any countries? Did you see me claim that the US conducts imperialistic warfare? I called out for Shakka to back up his claim with a concrete example - don't jump to conclusions on any hidden agendas I might have. |
Yea, I jumped the gun on what is normally the next step in this type of arguement with the "Imperialism" statement true. :p
it's just cause it's so common yaw know :toothless |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
They have HUGE pieces of land and choose to segregate themselves. Try actually going to a reserve and see how they govern themselves; you'd be shocked. |
HUGE pieces of land? What the are you on? Before they were colonized/massacred/conquered they had ALL of the land. The european colonizer had no ing business being here in the first place. So I don't really see what you're point is. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
Somalia - I thought these were UN operations?
|
And who created and essentially bankrolls the UN?
| quote: | | I called out for Shakka to back up his claim with a concrete example |
In all honesty, I'm surprised you even had the gall to go there. I think Yoepus made his point rather well (Certainly better than I would've:D ) |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | | Originally posted by shaolin_Z The european colonizer had no ing business being here in the first place. So I don't really see what you're point is. |
:conf:
Why did the Europeans have "no ing business" to be in the New World?
Do we have "no ing business" bing in space? Shall we bring down all our satillites and never have a space flight again? |
|
|
| smokeape |
Right now nK and Iran are crying out for our help with their nuclear weapons programs. I believe the US can assist them with a few well placed strikes.
BTW, we're not treating Iraqis like American Indians. We are, in fact, trying to let them govern themselves as a democratic society instead of suffering under dictatorial rule. Don't believe we did that with the Indians and don't believe we're trying to claim any of Iraq as sovereign territory either, so your premise is blatantly flawed from the onset. What we did in the United States with the Indians 150-200 years ago is what advanced civilizations had done as well in Europe, Africa, Asia, Australia, and South America in the past as well. And last time I checked, Europeans captured and imprisoned African natives that were brought to America for resale as slaves.
;)
[[[smoke]]] |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by smokeape
Right now nK and Iran are crying out for our help with their nuclear weapons programs. I believe the US can assist them with a few well placed strikes.
BTW, we're not treating Iraqis like American Indians. We are, in fact, trying to let them govern themselves as a democratic society instead of suffering under dictatorial rule. Don't believe we did that with the Indians and don't believe we're trying to claim any of Iraq as sovereign territory either, so your premise is blatantly flawed from the onset. What we did in the United States with the Indians 150-200 years ago is what advanced civilizations had done as well in Europe, Africa, Asia, Australia, and South America in the past as well. And last time I checked, Europeans captured and imprisoned African natives that were brought to America for resale as slaves.
;)
[[[smoke]]] |
Do you know what would happen if America attacked North Korea? |
|
|
|
|
