JW Frogen said:
Lestat,
I never justified detention without trial, read my intial post again, carefully this time.
Forgive me if i misintrepeted your post, but I got the impression that you were somehow justifieing this archaic barbaric proposal.
JW Frogen said:
Of course the overwhelming good that America has acheived world wide in the last half century does not excuse the lapses from that good,
It can be argued that the the bad that America has committed in the last half century should not be forgiven, cause of some of the 'lapses' from that bad.
Yes...I agree that the US has done some good, this cannot be denied. However, a close look at the 20th century, you will find that the US have in some way or another been involved in nearly every conflict of the 20th century.
JW Frogen said:
wether demaned by strategic reality or not. Though real politic must be assessed by any serious thinker on the subject. (For instance America is often critisised for not demanding democracy in Saudi Arabia, but a serious look at this proposal would reveal America has no choice. It would lead to a greater problem than the one it seeks to solve. Nations have to act in the real world, not in playschool. To not do so, leads to catastrophe.)
What catastrophe do you speak off?
What...and Islamic state. Is this a catastrophe?? Why..what would that be a catastrophe??
And when I say an Islamic state, I mean a caliphate, not the tyrannical 'Islamic' republics such as Iran, or the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Just as I thought, democracy is only viable when it suits the interests of the west.
Do you not see any hypocricy in this sort of policy.
And you wonder why arabs mistrust the US??
JW Frogen said:
I simply point out no major power in human history has done as much good or been as benevolent as the United States.
That is absolute garbage.
It can be argued that the Greeks have done heaps of good for the world, the advantages are to numerous to be listed.
And the Romans, for all there faults introduced many concepts and innovations that have been great for humanity.
As has the Islamic empires of the Umayads and the Abbasids.
Yes, so have the US...agreed, however, to claim that no major power has done as much good as the US is simply misleading, and to describe the US as benevolent....is just bordering on ridiculous.
Perhaps you should ask the residents of Nagasaki about the benevolence of the US??
JW Frogen said:
I condem Guantanamo and this new proposal for instance. As will the US appellet courts I believe long term.
Once again.....I'm curious as to why you believe this. These prisoners have been sitting in Guantanamo now for 3 years, with rumours of torture and human rights abuses in abundance.
Yet the US courts have done squat!
JW Frogen said:
As to America only caring about itself, well nations do not have freindships, they have interests. If you see the world any other way, you are likely to be dissapointed for the rest of your lives no matter who is the major power in the world. This view is even predominant in the UN.
Agreed. However, if humanity is to progress, then it is this way of thinking that has to change.
Yes...perhaps in the past this was a fact of life. However, we are supposed to have progressed, we are now educated.
If you are happy to accept the status quo, then fine, go ahead. However, I will not.
Your right, there's probably nothing I can do about it, and maybe I will be dissapointed for the rest of my life, however, I will never accept it.
I will continue to speak out against these 'major powers' that belittle human lives, spread destruction and misery, all for what....there 'interests'.
JW Frogen said:
But American interests in the last half century have more often than not been based not only on self interest but also idealism.
No....american interests have ONLY been based on self interest. The idealism is just a tool, a method used to manipulate the masses into supporting there interests.
Patriotism, democracy, freedom....all 'buzzwords', all terms which are used to manipulate societies views, to accept the sometimes abhorrent policies of the US, which they must have to achieve these self interests.
However.....if the US admin were as 'patriotic' as they claimed to be, then they would never have sprayed Agent orange on there own troops in Vietnam.
They would never have sold weapons to the contra's.
If the US were as 'democratic' as they claim to be, they would never have removed the democratic govt of Chile, to replace them with murdering dictators.
If the US were as committed to 'freedom' as they claim to be, then they would never have even considered locking up people for up to 3 years without trial, and they would never have even thought of imprisoning these very same people for life, all because they don't have enough evidence to try them in a court of law.
JW Frogen said:
From the Marshall Plan, rebuilding it's former enemies and insuring that they are democratic (compare that with the Soviet occupation of their occupied zone, Americans did not need to build walls to keep people in NATO) to it's crucial role containing totalitarian Soviet communism (ask Vaslev Havel, or Lech Walensa how important America was sustaining their hopes)
Agreed, that the Marshall plan was one of the good things that the US govt has done in the 20th century.
However, don't be fooled. The marshall plan was a required reaction to the growing threat of communism.
If there was no soviet or communist threat, do you believe that the US would still have implemented the marshall plan?? I think not.
JW Frogen said:
America has often, unlike almost any other world power in history, chose their idealistic nature over the direct real politic instinct.
Once again, I strongly disagree with this statement.
The Islamic empire for one, definately chose its idealistic nature over direct real politic instinct.
And the soviet union for all its faults did the same. Just happens that with the examples listed, I assume that you strongly disagree with there idealogies....whereas you agree with the US idealogy.
Perhaps this is why you are defending the US with such gusto.
JW Frogen said:
Somalia is the perfect example of this. America had NO strategic or economic interest in the country, it simply wished to stop famine, which it largely did, and to end the warlord domination of the country at the request of the UN, which it failed at.
Correction....no strategic or economic interests WHICH WE KNOW OF.
JW Frogen said:
Or Kosovo, there was no economic or strategic interest for America, beyond keeping Europe from looking completely impotent in dealing with the problem.
You think??
You don't think that bringing down the last communist (Socialist) government , and the removal of the last truly anti-US leader in Europe as being in the strategic interests of America...or more importantly...NATO??
JW Frogen said:
I am not arguing that America is perfect,
Once again, I apolagize if I misinterpreted what you were saying. But it appeared to me that you were somehow trying to justify why America has the right to implement life detention without trial.
JW Frogen said:
no nation can be, or that it has never strayed from it's idealism,
You say that as if it somehow justifies the actions of a country, that they have never strayed from its idealism.
Nazi Germany never strayed from its idealism.
Soviet Russia never strayed from its idealism.
North Korea has never strayed from its idealism.
I think you get my point!
JW Frogen said:
as with Chile and Pinoche, (even with Chile America was the critical factor in the countries present democracy eventually demanding Pinoche hold a referenum on his leadership and honour it when he lost, this occured under Bush Sr.)
Chile is but one example of many.
A similar tale can be said of many South American nations.
Then there is Iraq. Indonesia. Nicarugua.
Then there's the nutters like Idi Amin that have been placed in power by the US.
JW Frogen said:
nor I am arguing I agree with much of the present Presidents policy, though I do some, but no nation has produced or protected more democracies in human history.
Only when it suited there US strategic interests to protect those democracies.
Like c'mon...they only entered WW2 AFTER they were attacked.
It appears that they were more then willing to sit by and watch all of Europe fall to the tyranny of the Nazi's.
JW Frogen said:
No major power has ever been this benevolent.
Once again, I'm sure that the Iraqi's, Afghani's, Vietnamese, Koreans, and residents of Nagasaki just to name a few would strongly disagree with you.
JW Frogen said:
Nor are any of the alternatives, such as China, better, or more competent, such as a UN controlled world.
In this regard, I agree with you.
However, just because the alternatives are worst, doesn't mean we should just accept any actions of the major super power of the world.
JW Frogen said:
Which is not even realistic, the UN was not contructed in this manner. Witness their massive failures in Rawanda, Bosnia, even Somalia with US help. The UN has never established peace anywhere, they can only maintain it once it is established.
Agreed. I'm definately no supporter of the UN. The concept of the veto is most undemocratic, don't you agree.
JW Frogen said:
Here are a list of countries that would now not be democratic if not for America.
I assure you, the list of countries that would be democratic if not for US meddling would be a lot longer then the list which you have provided.
Also, would be interesting to see a list of all the conflicts of the last century, in which the US instigated, or were somehow involved in.
It would be a rather long list.
JW Frogen said:
I just think there is a reflexive, often mindless anti Americanism about, that while justly critising some aspects of US policy, moves to a unrealistic veiw of America's overall effect on the world. Which has been more good than not. And certainly preferable to the present alternatives.
Not at all...it is not 'anti-americanism' to criticise any policy which you do not agree with.
I am not anti-american. I've grown up with american culture. Many of the american virtues and idea's are great, and yes, I agree many american innovations have made the world a better place.
However, I am very much anti-american forriegn policy.
Why? Because it is aimed at achieveing maximum profits for american multi-national coglomarates (I'm sure I have mispelt that word

), with the price often being human suffering.
Because it is aimed at achieving ultimate power for the american nation, often the price being the deaths of thousands of innocent people.
Because this policies are empirical in the nature, and often result in the oppression and persecution of millions of 3rd world civilians all over the world.