American Imperialism - A list of American Imperialism (2 Viewers)

[stamos]

Originally posted by um..
what does "freeing them from islam" imply, then?

making sure that they don't have to adhere to strict sharaiah law which was drawn up (i'm probably wrong) in the NINTH CENTURY

next time you shoplift i'll cut off your hand and then you'll see how it feels

i'm not saying islam is bad. I'm saying literal interpretations of the shariah are bad. It's like if orthodox jews literally interpreted the law in exodus that declare anyone who eats shellfish should be put to death. Literal interpretations=sux0r.

freeing people from being slaves to the anarchronistic aspects of shariah law? gud.

 

[Alexander]

? Does any country do anything outside their own interests?
In regards to islam, i reckon Israel has been the main instigator of change in the middle-east, not the religion. People choose what to follow, take the west for example, we're fat and rich, so we swing towards generosity and kindness and love in Christianity. Arabs dont have that luxury.


Anyway...the US is the only country i'd like to be the lone power. Sure, they get a bad president now and then, but in the larger scheme of things, they are the good guys.
Democracy and fairly loose christian beliefs are a good combo for the world power.
At least there are positives to US globilisation. They didn't choose the outcome of WW2.

 

[um..]

i still stand by my belief that jamaica should be the world's lone superpower

 

[euripidies]

now who are the nave ones.

 

[um..]

you?

 

[George W. Bush]

Originally posted by euripidies
anyways i think the point is that america doesnt do anything outside of its own interests. and before someone talks about aid think image.

And why should they?

 

[um..]

because, sometimes they do things in their interests that are not in the best interests of other, which can cause problems

 

[euripidies]

"because, sometimes they do things in their interests that are not in the best interests of other, which can cause problems"

yep and then they wonder why people hate them so much.

 

[euripidies]

i have a question for you guys. in world war two America dropped the A-bomb right? Oh but thats right they'll never do it again ok cool. oh wait a second they planed to drop A bombs in the Koran war but they got the peace deal in time, Looks like if there getting pressed for money they'll do anything so if their the only power then they can.

 

[euripidies]

Alexander youre obviously youngish and you SHOULD start to realise the world around you... its a healthy thing, but let us know when you work it out!

just for starters look up the word oligarchy that would be a better term when talking about the USA's political system.

 

[um..]

Originally posted by euripidies
i have a question for you guys. in world war two America dropped the A-bomb right? Oh but thats right they'll never do it again ok cool. oh wait a second they planed to drop A bombs in the Koran war but they got the peace deal in time, Looks like if there getting pressed for money they'll do anything so if their the only power then they can.

nixon and kissinger wanted to use tactical nukes in cambodia as well

 

[euripidies]

kissinger i hate him,

Kissinger covered up Chile torture
by Lucy Kosimar
(The Sunday Observer, [UK] February 28, 1999)
A newly declassified cable obtained by The Observer reveals the lengths to which Henry Kissinger went to cover up atrocities in Chile and give comfort to the regime of General Pinochet.

The cable, describing their only meeting in 1976, shows how Kissinger bolstered Pinochet while hundreds of political prisoners were still being jailed and tortured.

The then American Secretary of State assured Pinochet that President Gerald Ford's administration would not punish him for violations of human rights. He told him he was a victim of Communist propaganda and should not pay too much attention to American critics.

The cable is among files being declassifed for the Spanish prosecutor seeking Pinochet's extradition from London to face trial in Spain. The Law Lords' revised judgment is expected within three weeks.

Pinochet led the coup which overthrew the democratically elected President Salvador Allende in 1973. Kissinger's complicity has always been suspected, but the cable reveals details which will cause him deep embarrassment.

The cable shows, too, that in 1974 he rejected the advice of his own officials that he should publicly denounce the plan by Chile and other repressive regimes to set up a covert office in Miami for the notorious terrorist Operation Condor.

Had he done so, prospective victims would have been warned. Although the office was not in fact opened, the conspiracy continued to target and murder the regime's enemies.

After hits in Buenos Aires and in Rome, the operation came to Washington with a vengeance. A car bomb killed Orlando Letelier, former Chilean Foreign Minister and ambassador to the US, and his Institute for Policy Studies colleague, Ronni Moffitt.

Pinochet could feel confident that such activites would cause few problems. After all, he had had a warm private meeting with Kissinger a few months before.

The meeting occurred in Santiago on 8 June 1976, during a gathering of the Organisation of American States. Kissinger and the Assistant Secretary for Inter-American Affairs, William Rogers, met Pinochet in the presidential suite in Diego Portales - an office building used during repairs on La Moneda, the presidential palace Pinochet had bombed.

Kissinger, dogged by charges he had promoted the military coup against an elected Chilean government, sought to maintain a cool public distance from Pinochet. But at his confidential meeting, he promised warm support.

Kissinger made clear how much he backed Pinochet, saying, 'In the United States, as you know, we are sympathetic with what you are trying to do here. I think that the previous government was headed toward Communism. We wish your government well.'

He dismissed American human rights campaigns against Chile's government as 'domestic problems' and assured Pinochet that he was against sanctions such as the proposed Kennedy Amendment to ban arms aid to governments that were gross human rights violators.

Kissinger had a problem because the OAS report to the Santiago meeting said that mass arrests, torture, and disappearances continued in Chile. The speech he would give that afternoon could not ignore human rights but must not offend or weaken Pinochet.

Kissinger wanted Pinochet to know that the speech should not be interpreted as a criticism of Chile. He told him: 'I will treat human rights in general terms and human rights in a world context . . . I will say that the human rights issue has impaired relations between the US. and Chile. This is partly the result of Congressional actions. I will add that I hope you will shortly remove those obstacles.'

He added: 'I will also call attention to the Cuba report [on human rights there] and to the hypocrisy of some who call attention to human rights as a means of intervening in governments.'

But Kissinger suggested to Pinochet that his statements on Chile were calibrated to avoid greater damage to the country. He told him: 'I can do no less without producing a reaction in the US which would lead to legislative restrictions. The speech is not aimed at Chile.'

And he emphasised that he did not believe the charges. 'My evaluation is that you are a victim of all left-wing groups around the world, and that your greatest sin was that you overthrew a government which was going Communist. But we have a practical problem we have to take into account, without bringing about pressures incompatible with your dignity, and at the same time which does not lead to US laws which will undermine our relationship.'

 

[euripidies]

Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity [U.S. military-economic supremacy]... To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming... We should cease to talk about vague and...unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.

George Kennan
Director of Policy Planning
U.S. State Department
1948

this is a good passage -

1964 1973
American-backed Overthrow of the Democratic Government of Chile

Estimated civilian deaths: over 5000 people from the subsequent Pinochet terror campaign; at least 1000 people missing and presumed dead

From Killing Hope
by William Blum:

[Democratic Marxist President] Salvador Allende was the worst possible scenario for a Washington imperialist, [who] could imagine only one thing worse than a Marxist in power an elected Marxist in power, who honored the constitution, and became increasingly popular. This shook the very foundation stones on which the anti-Communist tower was built: the doctrine, painstakingly cultivated for decades, that communists" can take power only through force and deception, that they can retain that power only through terrorizing and brainwashing the population.

After sabotaging Allendes electoral endeavor in 1964, and failing to do so in 1970, despite their best efforts, the CIA and the rest of the American foreign policy machine left no stone unturned in their attempt to destabilize the Allende government over the next three years, paying particular attention to building up military hostility. Finally, in September 1973, the military overthrew the government, Allende dying in the process.

They closed the country to the outside world for a week, while the tanks rolled and the soldiers broke down doors; the stadiums rang with the sounds of execution and the bodies piled up along the streets and floated in the river; the torture centers opened for business; the subversive books were thrown into bonfires; soldiers slit the trouser legs of women, shouting that In Chile women wear dresses!; the poor returned to their natural state; and the men of the world in Washington and in the halls of international finance opened up their check-books. In the end, more than 3,000 had been executed, thousands more tortured or disappeared.
(End of Killing Hope excerpt)

In the bloody coup of September 11, 1973, Henry Kissinger and the CIA helped General Augusto Pinochet overthrow the democratically-elected leftist government of President Salvador Allende. The Fascist puppet-regime of Augusto Pinochet then embarked on a 17-year terror campaign against the people of Chile, which included mass arrests and executions, death squads, torture and disappearances. Many of the victims were fingered as radicals by lists provided by the CIA.

Santiagos national stadium was used as a mass execution site. Robert Saldias, the first army officer to come forward publicly without concealing his identity, said prisoners entering the stadium were identified by yellow, black, and red discs. Whoever received a red disc had no chance, Saldias said.

Many of the professional torturers and assassins in the Chilean military (and in every other Fascist country of Central and South America) were trained at the School of the Americas, in Fort Benning, Georgia.

Under Pinochet, Chile also participated in Operation Condor, a joint collaboration between the U.S.-backed dictatorships of Chile, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay and Brazil to hunt down and murder exiled opponents of those regimes. Successful hits included the 1976 car-bomb explosion in Washington D.C., which killed Allendes exiled foreign minister Orlando Letelier, and his aide, American Ronnie Moffitt.

I dont see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist because of the irresponsibility of its own people.

Henry Kissinger
1970
referring to Chilean voters

 

[euripidies]

If terrorism means intimidation by violence or the threat of violence, and if we allow the definition to include violence by states and agents of states, then it is these, not isolated individuals or small groups, that are the important terrorists in the world.

If terrorist violence is measured by the extent of politically motivated torture and murder, ...it is in the U.S.-sponsored and protected authoritarian states the real terror network that these forms of violence have reached a high crescendo in recent decades.

Edward S. Herman
The Real Terror Network

 

[euripidies]

good link for American Imperialism or state terroism take your pick.

http://free.freespeech.org/americanstateterrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html

 

[Alexander]

somebody turn it off

 

[Enlightened_One]

America might be a pack of self righteous mongrels, and the rest of the yanks might be decent honest people, just not in government, but they do look out for their own interests at the expense of others. However America is a country of rights. The people do have a great deal of power by comparison to many other countries.
America cannot torture or outrightly abuse it's citizens, the people wouldn't stand for it, and their system of government would collapse.

On the other hand many Middle Eastern countries are awash with human rights abuses and dictatorships. They are in a lot worse condition than America. It's about time someone gave a helping hand to the peasants, the ones who suffer the most.

The only problem is that the yanks use this an excuse to try and run the world, while pursuing their own interests. Iraq was a mess of human rights abuses, but other countries are in far more dire messes, yet America doesn't step in there.
Basically America does the right thing, but not enough of it, and certainly not for the right reasons.

The real ones to blame are the UN. The UN needs more power to control these abusive dictatorships. If America wanted to police the world they should follow the orders of the UN.
The UN were created after world war 2 to prevent such a disaster occuring again, and to strive for world peace. The collective minds of the world ought to be the ones to say who needs the most help. And if the yanks wanted to help, they could insert their troops into those countries.

Of course, the UN does favour a few countries with a little more power. The winners of the second World War make up permanent members of the security council and have more say in matters.
But the biggest bitch is this: Australia helped win world war 2, yet weren't honoured with the same status as Britain and America etc. It's discrimination

 

[Alexander]

I wonder if you could compare the UN to communism: All good in theory, but nobody will put theory about self interest without incentive.

The US might be the most powerful nation on earth, but in terms of standard of living, they've got nothing on us, or canada, or even the UK.
Im so sick of this bloody childish view that they're all these evil, rich, fat people thinking up ways to become more fat and rich at the expence of others. Im not sure if this runny nosed twat has made up his mind about what America is...corporations or Bush?

 

[Comrade nathan]

Enlightened_One

Most of you post was irrelevant and you started to go off topic saying the UN were the problem, Do you mean the UN needs more power to step in and stop americas motives with force?

 

[euripidies]

Originally posted by Alexander
I wonder if you could compare the UN to communism: All good in theory, but nobody will put theory about self interest without incentive.

The US might be the most powerful nation on earth, but in terms of standard of living, they've got nothing on us, or canada, or even the UK.
Im so sick of this bloody childish view that they're all these evil, rich, fat people thinking up ways to become more fat and rich at the expence of others. Im not sure if this runny nosed twat has made up his mind about what America is...corporations or Bush?

if you have read the communist thread you'd know what incentives there are in Marxist economics but seeing you dont care what the labour value theory is and you rather just rip of something you dont understand, I dont think theres much point in responding to someone as ignorant as you other then stropping other people from accepting your rhetoric. Just a note on the UN, the UN never had much of a chance for having power seeing one of the major players in its creation was the USA an imperialistic terrorist state.