POLL: Should the US rule the world?

Remove all ads!

Blackthorne. I did not invent the notion of pre-emption, perhaps the neo-conservatives and the link above supplied by BOC may enlighten.... (Or not). I don't claim the war to be pre-emptive, it is simply premeditated (as in murderous). That's the rhetoric we hear to explain why we need it.

If the UN was the body that negotiated the ceasefire to end the first Gulf War, then should it not be the UN that states that the conditions are breached and then conflict will resume? When did the UN state that they will resume conflict. I am still waiting for the resolution.

Darkwolf. Credibility and motives are relative. In the eyes of itself, the current administration of the US has only good intentions and lots of credibility. In the eyes of the Arab world, those who protest against the war, and especially terrorists, the US has no credibility whatsoever. Especially in this war. They view US motives as being aggressive expansionist colonisation.

If the government can't tell us about what they are doing then why are they there? I don't feel comfortable with the notion that "they can't tell me because it's in my best interests to be left ignorant". The reason that the governments can act despite the voice of so many people is, because they can. They hardly represent the people then and so much for democracy.

Don't you think that it is a little odd that the leaders of so many countries are NOT backing this war while their people are against it? Your point is? Numbers don't make actions ok.

To flip the coin. Terrorists like Bin Laden believe they have pure motives, that is to remove the US from the Muslim world and end the Israeli problem. They also have credibility in the eyes of those who support them and there are a lot of people in the Arab world who may disagree with their methods, but they feel that they are credible.

Did you think about this.

"We were not a threat to the lives of the Arab Muslims; they simply felt that we threatened their religion and way of life. They are now a threat to US lives."

Muslims perceived a threat despite there being no actual threat and now Muslims are a threat to US lives.

So that means all Muslims are a threat to the US and are terrorists and therefore the US should pre-emptively attack every Muslim.

I think that the US is a threat to me too. The US does threaten my way of life as an Australian, which is quite different from that of the US. Am I now a threat to you?

The above is very scary.

Also. "The Islamic terrorists stated reason for attacking the US is because we are the "GREAT SATAN", we are decadent, we are an affront to god, and we support the expansionist Zionists. The stated reason for the coalition attack is that the current Iraqi regime is threat to the stability of the region, supports terrorism, and brutally oppresses the people of Iraq."

To put all the above into equivalent terms.

The US views terrorists as evil. Terrorists view the US as evil.

Terrorists view US as decadent, US views terrorists as brutal. Both view each other as evil.

Terrorists view US as supporting Zionists (they view them as terrorists), US views Iraq as supporting terrorists. Both do the same.

US calls Iraq part of the "Axis of Evil", terrorists call US "Great Satan".

For me there is no difference between the rhetoric and loopy logic here. Both sides are equal. Both sides are evil. Both sides have suspect motives and both sides have very dubious credibility.

 

I am US citizen and to be perfectly honest...i am saddened about what we are doing in the Arab world. I think both sides are correct in their views as the other as evil. I have never been to the Middle East (which in and of itself is a "colonial" word...after all who decided what east is...why, the west of course) but I know life over there is different than life here...in the extreme. Rampant hunger (I believe), poverty (I know), and the defining notion that their future is not going to be decided on their own.

Here in America we have the luxery of morality. It is easy to be kind to neighbors when you have all the essentials of life at home. Yet how moral would I be if I were say...starving? That neighbor I let borrow some ketchup in better times might be a little put off if he found me rumaging through his fridge late one night during a famine. Since he would be in the same hungry boat as me, I imagine he would stop me. In my mind I would see my children distented and sad...and this would lead to a dead (or incapasitated) neighbor with an empty fridge. Is that moral? Probably not, as it would involve murder and theft. Yet given the choice between my children starving and killing my neighbor...well I don't know what I'd do as I have never had to deal with starvation. I also don't have any kids so my neighbor can rest safe tonight regardless. My point being...morality is relative.

If you took Sadam and placed him in control of the United States he would be looked on as a dictator and most certainly evil. Yet if you took George W. and placed him in charge of Iraq (not in the sense of what is going to happen...I mean switched roles) Bush the Second would probably end up dead as his morality could not survive the enviroment.

I can understand why the Arab world hates us as well. Well, I should say I try to understand their view as much as my comfortable life will allow. They "own" the absolute most precious resource in the world. Oil. The leftovers of the dinosaurs. Black gold. Without oil life as we know it could simply not exist. Average Joe Arab lives in poverty while the land he lives on literally provides the most basic need of modern living. This can not sit well. Understandibly so.

This war is about one thing. Oil. How could it be about anything else? Morality of a government? That is laughable. It saddens me that my neighbors and peers are so ignorant as to honestly believe that we are killing Iraqies today as to give them freedom tomorrow. That freedom will of course be entirely relative to how much and how quickly they are going to give us what we need to survive...oil. Yet you, Mr. or Mrs. International should understand that average Joe or Jane American honestly believes we are doing this for a moral reason...to help out the Iraqie people. Unfortanetly, the average american has no concept of Arab life as their eyes are blinded by a full stomach and a fulfilled life. Simply put, I do not believe our morality could survive the harsh realities of Arab life. Yet our citizens are blind and as such are not stopping this war.

We are not going to make a "happy" Iraq. I mean, duh. What are we going to do? Educate them and provide them with the means to capitalize on just how resourcefully rich they are? I think not. An uneducated and impoverished Middle East is the only society that can survive the harsh relaties of the modern world. We need them dumb and helpless. We have the power to keep them dumb and helpless. They are going to stay dumb and helpless, I can almost guarentee it. It's sad, but practical.

I know I owe every Arab citizen an apology. In fact, the entire modern world owes every Arab citizen a BIG apology. But what am I going to do? Pay twenty dollars a gallon so they can live the same lifestyle as me? The modern world could not survive that...and so the Arab world is going to stay in the sad shape it is.

In summation, the bible is correct in saying it is easier for a elephant to get through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to get into heaven. And guess what folks...if you are reading this message board...you probably are considered rich by those with empty stomachs and lives. Hey, we may all be going to hell...but at least our gas guzzling SUV's will get us their quickly, right?

 

It's true.

Well, I was going to post a fairly long rant in here, but it's not like I have anything different from my last 10 rants to post.

Isolationism > you.

(Isolationism is greater than you.)

 

That's true. Iraq is the second largest producer of oil in the world (Saudi Arabia is the largest). US sanctions and trade embargos have left them without too many options on who to sell it too. It just sorta sitting there, no being pumped. The oil that is sold, though is used to fund atrocities and weapons production.

 

I should rule the world.

HaHAHAAAA

[Go read the sticky at the top of the forum listing before you post in this forum again.] -Tal

[ March 31, 2003, 14:56: Message edited by: Taluntain ]

 

ummm, right. me too

 

Thats the strange thing about 9/11,so many people act as if the world changed after that day.I do not mean to make any less of this horrible event but these kinds of things have been going on forever, 9/11 only brought it to US soil.

Granted I cant recall a terrorist attack on this scale,but history is littered with attacks.People just have not been paying attention.

This war without end concerns me though.I am all for protecting our interests but this war on terrorism seems to give the US a little too much leeway for conducting war on other countries.

 

Well, that reminds me of Goebbels saying "If the jews weren't there I'd have to invent them!". The same applies to Bin Laden and crew. Without a doubt evil (unlike the jews) they are the perfect excuse and starting point for the republican hardliners (just check BOC's excellent link here or above) to start shaping the new, monopolar world.
With Bin Laden alive and around an increased defence spending and occasional wars against other baddies are much easier justified.

PS: I'd like to add another interesting link which is perhaps a litte "leftist" but very illuminating and at least worth pondering about for 5min.

[ March 31, 2003, 13:27: Message edited by: Ragusa ]

 

I thought they did already?

 

I think of the US as a kind of Roman Empire and i hope the US Empire will go down because of orgies and decadence. But before this will happen the rest of the world might suffer a while.
My american boss refuses to cut his beard until they stop the war. And he fears he'll have to look like ZZ Top.
He told us also that the documentation of the war in the US is very poor and demagogical. Because of this he always asks us for european infos about the war as he has no internet access.
"My" Americans will come back soon to France which they prefer, because here are not so much Americans.
He thought about making a documentation about the people in his american hometown but then he said nobody would want to watch it as it's too depressing.
So not every American wants to rule the world. Some don't even like America.

 

By the way...does anyone see a little poetic beauty in this? I mean check it out...the newest civilization in the world (America) is attacking the oldest (the Fertile Crescent, Iraq) over the leftover remains of our evolutionary ancestors (oil). I think the devil has a refined sense of irony.

I would write the poem by the way but i once tried to write a poem about an orange and it didn't go so well. I haven't looked back since.

 

well, technially, the newest nation in the world is one of those that broke away from Russia in the early 90's... but I see your point.

 

Ragusa,

Interesting link. It's too early to accept or dismiss his ideas. Let's just keep them in mind and see if events move towards or away from Booker's direction.