Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (167391)	7/27/2005 10:35:10 AM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

How would you characterise the PNAC position papers vis-a-vis global tyranny?

To: one_less who wrote (167391)	7/27/2005 10:36:45 AM
From: el_gaviero	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

“Please make your case for the USA tyrannising [sic] the people of Iraq.” A case shouldn’t be too hard to make. Start, say, with the USA invading Iraq under a pretext, and killing 40 or 50 thousand of them when they presented no danger to us. I’d say that is a fairly solid foundation on which to build an argument for US tyranny with respect to Iraq. Oh, and by the way, when you make your automatic instinctual response, keep in mind that I am not a liberal. Far ((actually VERY FAR) from it, so try to be a little more creative with your insults.

To: one_less who wrote (167391)	7/27/2005 12:55:54 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Make the case that Hitler was tyrannizing France -- people went about their business and there was a functioning government of French people. So long as you did no resist the invasion and occupation of France by Germany, the Germans were happy to let you go about your business. You either don't get it or have a strong need to deny it -- but it is this simple: Lacking any legitimate or legal basis for an invasion, the USA lied about a non-existent threat to the national security of the USA and invaded Iraq, a sovereign country that had not attacked the USA and that posed no threat. The raw naked aggression of this act was apparent to most people in the world, but of course not in the US where people wanted so badly to think of themselves as "good guys" that the invasion of another country and the army of occupation currently in place was seen as some sort of goodwill gesture. The USA sees itself as an uncontested superpower in a unipolar world. The moment it uses this power, in the form of its military capability, to invade and occupy non-aggressive sovereign states that pose no threat, then you have the global tyranny.