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.

Pastimes : Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Broken_Clock who wrote (511)	6/16/2008 12:20:28 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3816

You're confused. If I am, its because your logic is confusing an unsound. You used the bases as an argument that the US was imperialistic. The bases don't provide for much of a basis for such an argument. Whether the US is imperialistic or not might be a more important issue, but my point was that your logic was faulty. Other arguments for the larger issue don't negate my point. Also most of those military bases have little to do with imperialism. The US occupied places like Germany and Japan, after we defeated them after they attacked us. We then let them establish their own independent governments, but kept bases there from which we could help protect them against external threats. Again and again we controlled areas but than let them become independent. Germany, Japan, South Korea, The Philippines (here there was imperialism for awhile, but we ended it and gave them their independence), Cuba (other than Gitmo) Iraq, etc.