America's misuse of Freedom

Discussion in 'History' started by vsivam, Sep 2, 2004.

  1. vsivam Registered Member

    Yes i too agree that Hussein had WMD's. Is he a significant threat to America?.I don't think so.
    It's really utter foolishness (sorry for being thick) to take actions against other country based on propositions. Now who is suffering, it's Iraqi women and childrens are suffering now. Will you allow your country occupied by Iraqi army saying that America possesed WMD's(though they have). Every country in the world does have the right to possess Weapons to protect their soverneigty. It's a well known fact now that, since Iraqis didn't pose any credible threat to America they invaded them. Pls look in to the claims made by Bush before war, is any of the one true?.
    Now NorthKorea have openly declared that their enemy is Bush's America and why didn't America wage war against them?
    Because America know they possess WMD's and nuclear weapons.
    I was a real supporter for America when they bombed Afganistan. But what Americans doing now is completely against humanity and for sure they have to answer for their actions.

    I have a basic doubt. First of all tell me who is America to say that this country can have WMD, where as this country can't have.
    Who are they to put this world order? Are Americans appointed by God to look after the world. This may sound silly but this has to be answered.
    Will you accept if your country men is killed by other nation's army?, and if your government is a puppet one activated by some one else?.

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. vsivam Registered Member

    So you mean to say that the people in America has to go through this lie.
    Iam not sure about American constitution. But i beleive they should have some option to replace the government if the people feel that the Administration is not good enough. In India, Japan we have something called No Confidence motion which can even topple the government if the administration found guilty
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Spyke Registered Senior Member

    I already said Americans have an option, and again it's called an 'election'. You vote unpopular officals out of office. You don't rise up and overthrow elected officials every time you disagree with their screw ups.

    And the US has the impeachment process, but this administration has not been found guilty of anything other than some bad decisions at this point.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. vsivam Registered Member

    But the bad decision had cost so many innocent lives, not in America but in Iraq. When Iraq was no where related to 9/11 why this hasty decision?.
    I personally feel that this administration should be guilty of misleading the American people in War against Iraq.
    American soldiers who are dying there are dying in vain.

    This country which has made so many mistakes over the history will be punished by the God. People in America has to realise that their government is trying to dictate other countries, which in turn one way or other will bring down their own country. No country in the world remained as super power for long, history says so. America has to realise this truth and should avoid arrogant behaviours and stop invading other countries.
  8. Spyke Registered Senior Member

    But as yet no commission has proven that this administration purposely mislead the American people. If that were to change, then yes.

    Who's god? Your god? Bush's god? I'm not particularly interested in superstitions.

    I'm well aware of history.

    I agree, although I did support the invasion of Afghanistan, as I believe you said you did as well. I would have no problem with the invasion of Iraq if the administration had made a better case for it than they did.
  9. Brandon9000 Registered Senior Member

    Since one single WMD smuggled into the US and used could kill as many as a million people, this strikes me as a huge threat.

    Don't know what this means.

    Our invasion was justified by self-defense, as outlined in my first comment in this post. People have always suffered during wars going back through the entire history of our species. But, frankly, considering that Hussein ruled his country with an iron fist, and had about a million of his people killed and many tortured, their suffering now doesn't seem that much worse. At least their suffering now may be transitory, since it is mostly caused by people who are horrified at the idea of elections and think nothing of implementing attacks specifically directed at non-combatants. The US in cooperation with the government of Iraq are trying to stop the terrorists from causing this suffering.

    No, nor need I do that to be consistent. My position is that of all the nations and terrorist groups that will try to acquire WMD in the present or the future, the terrorist groups and a few of the worst dictators with ties to terrorists should be prevented from doing so.

    What does sovereignty mean in a government ruled by a few thugs who kill and/or torture any citizen who dares to voice an opinion?

    Hussein had made WMD, had tried to make others, had used them, had concealed them, and had lied about them. The only open question is how recently. Based on what was known at the time of the invasion it was entirely possible that he still had them and was completing his development and accumulation of others. One single WMD smuggled into a western city and used could kill as many as a million people. That seems like a pretty credible threat.

    Yes, his claim that there was a significant chance that Hussein had not disarmed. That was very true. Furthermore, based on Hussein's past behavior, there was every chance that once sanctions were lifted and the spotlight was off him, he would secretly resume his WMD development. The worst of the worst dictators, with ties to terrorism, and a propensity for annexing neighbors ought not to be allowed to possess these doomsday weapons.

    That is exactly right. We should have been more vigilant in preventing North Korea from acquiring nuclear weapons, but we screwed up and now they are invulnerable for all intents and purposes. We didn't want to let Hussein achieve this near invulnerability.

    Keeping WMD out of the hands of evil madmen and latter day Hitlers is actually a good thing for humanity.

    All responsible nations should joing forces to keep WMD out of the hands of terrorists and the worst of the worst dicators. We are allowed to act in our own defense. We would have been very unhappy if Hussein had used WMD to obliterate one or two of our cities.

    We conquered Japan once, and turned them into a democracy. The same with West Germany. We are commited to self-rule for all people and have scheduled elections for Iraq and Afghanistan.
  10. neoclassical Banned Banned

    "Freedom" is our moral justification for dominating others.

    Witness Vietnam, the Iraq war, and the Cold war, of course.
  11. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    The American thirst for oil was created by the corporations who control our president and vice-president, not by the people themselves. We could cut our oil consumption by at least 75% if everyone who could do their job at home were allowed to. That would be enough to make us self-sufficient and have no need for petroleum from the Middle East. Telecommuting experiments have occurred frequently over the past fifteen years and they were always successful. Most American workers spend their day using a computer and talking on the telephone, two devices that they all have in their homes. But these experiments are always quietly cancelled with no explanation. It is the energy companies who rule our country.

    The best reason to vote for Kerry (and probably the only reason since he's just as big a jerk as Bush) is that he is not a pawn of the energy companies. I doubt that world politics will be affected by the ketchup market. ^_^
  12. Maria Registered Member

    I think so. The individual...maybe not. The German society as a whole still needs to recognise the element in their 30's psyche that allowed Hitler to rise. We are defined by our pasts, in my opinion so are countries and communities.
    The same applies to the US. The US needs to accept responsibility for its mistakes.
    It seems to be me, however, that other countries are the exact same. It's not a uniquely American issue. Here in Ireland, a 'neutral' country, we allowed our Shannon Airport to be used during the Iraq War as a stopover. There was much made in the media of the considerable indignation the country felt. The majority of people I know did feel uneasy at the manipulation of our position. Most, however, accepted the appeasement of our great employers, the Americans, as inevitable. I was one of those people. With the mistake (a mon avis) of the Iraq War I feel shame for not acting with better ideals.
    I misused my own freedom of thought and expression, I twisted my thought process to be pragmatic...this could still be a good thing.

    I agree. I'm sick of people complaining of being denied democratic powers when their Government acts in a way they disagree with. The elected government is elected by the people (well in EU,US etc) and generally IS fair. If a counciller picks a representative you don't like, it was still your choice of counciller. I really say thank god to the fact that my government chooses our EU commisioners.
    I hate the term democratic deficit.
  13. Hideki Matsumoto ñ{ìñÇÃóùâ?ÇÕêSÇÃíÜÇ©ÇÁóàÇ ÈÅB Registered Senior Member

    Islamic "freedom" is far different than the Western "Christian" freedom. North America should be careful not to push western values on Islamic nations! This is why you Americans have so much trouble with terrorism!! DO NOT PUSH WESTERN IDEAS. Islamics want their own space!! LET THEM BE!
    I find the US increasingly ignorant of other nations values and ethic codes!
  14. philocrazy Banned Banned

    Hideki Matsumoto the world isnt as simple as it used to be
    it is complex japanese betamax vcr that is difficult to
    troubleshoot and repair
  15. philocrazy Banned Banned

    first lets see japanese do a good deed
    let other nations have electronics
  16. Hideki Matsumoto ñ{ìñÇÃóùâ?ÇÕêSÇÃíÜÇ©ÇÁóàÇ ÈÅB Registered Senior Member

    Philocrazy. Japanese govt is part of the UN aid workers group. We ship millions of tonnes of Rice to Africa. We make all sort of things better than US can do. I see you are attacking my culture and ethnicity. Exactly what type of bullshit that gets U.S. into trouble!
    Leave other countries alone . Let them have their own culture !
  17. vslayer Registered Senior Member

    just like in vietnam, the americans wanted to "free" the vietnamese by giving them a capitalist government. the only reason the communist one was poor was because they had to spend so much money fighting off american terrorists.

    right now the americans are calling al-sadir a terrorist for trying to run the country, he was chosen by the iraqis to lead, but the americans want their appointed govt. that they pay off to steal oil

    BTW. dont dis japan, japan rocks
    nippon ga dai suki desu
  18. fadingCaptain are you a robot? Valued Senior Member

    al sadr was chosen by the iraqis to lead?
  19. Brandon9000 Registered Senior Member

    We invaded because of WMD, not to free the Iraqis from a hideous dictator. That was just something that it was nice to be able to do while in the nighborhood, not our reason for going in. Having removed the existing government, we had an obligation to get the Iraqis started on a new one, and since we believe in democracy, that is the type of government we are setting up.

    If your values and ethical code dictate that these countries should be ruled by tyrants who deny the people any say in the country's government, and often keep most of the money for themselves, then your ethical values stink. Furthermore, who said that the people in these countries don't want democracy? It's not like anyone is asking them. Somehow I doubt that many people prefer to have no say in how their country is run.
  20. s0meguy Worship me or suffer eternally Valued Senior Member

    Lol you say "we" as if your government cares about any of you and your pride blinds you from your government's real intentions. WMD's were an excuse for many other things beyond what you are so proud of.
  21. Brandon9000 Registered Senior Member

    On the contrary, we invaded because of WMD. Long before Bush 2 came on the scene, I advocated invading Iraq for this reason, and I, therefore, supported him when he did. One single use of one single WMD in a population center could kill between a few thousands and more than a million people depending on the exact scenario. With dangers this grave, we were absolutely right to act. Had I been in Bush's position, I would have invaded before he did. As for them caring about me, the way it actually works is that I vote for the candidate who most closely parallels my own opinions.
  22. s0meguy Worship me or suffer eternally Valued Senior Member

    No, you vote for someone that makes the best appearence (in terms of publicity stunts). WMD was only an excuse for many many other reasons that the average American wouldn't understand.
  23. Brandon9000 Registered Senior Member

    Well, I'd like to see some evidence to backup your assertion, but even if you were correct, it would only mean that Bush did the right thing for the wrong reason. The level of danger posed by WMD is so great that terrorists and monsters like Saddam Hussein simply cannot be allowed to acquire any significant capacity to use them. What would it have been like to fight WW 2 against a Hitler armed with WMD? I don't want to find out.
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2004

Share This Page