[Black Wolf]

You know, every so often I start liking the Americans. I like a lot of you here on HLP. I like a lot of the ones who've come over and spent a semester on student exchange over here. I like my flatmate.

And then I read stuff like this thread and realize that for every sane, sensible, funny guy/girl I meet, there're half a dozen Liberators out there who want to bomb the Arabs out of existence because it's good for Uncle Sam.

Thanks Lib - you've restored my mind to it's natural state.

[Ford Prefect]

...and return to the days of might makes right.

Return? When did humans leave those days? I must have missed that in the history books.

[Ford's opinion]When we take a step back, what the hell is the difference anyway? You're essentially arguing between people killing each other and nations of people killing each other, and since people who disagree tend to form their own nations anyway, it's all just an endless joke with no punchline.[/Ford's opinion]

[Unknown Target]

Originally posted by Liberator
I would like to ask a question, and I will do it is as unexplosive a way as possible.

Which shall it be?  

1)America is to use her status as a "super-power" for the betterment of the world.

You don't make the world a better place by attacking countries alone, unsporrted, under lies and false pretenses, and then torture it's population.

See, Lib, I'm a patriot too. I love America. But the thing that makes me different, and indeed, a better servant of my country, is that I allow myself to question the actions of said country. If everyone blindly followed anything, be it ideals, their country, their religion, or even their own impulses, then they would be doing more harm than good - you never, ever follow something blindly. You must question things to improve things. If we never question America, and assume that whatever she does is right, then when she finally does something wrong (and she will, Liberator - we are mortals led by mortals), then no one will be there to stop her, and correct her. America, indeed, all countries and peoples of the world, are children needing guidance. If you do not provide this guidance, then they will never learn and improve. If they never learn and improve, then they can only get worse. And when a super power such as America gets worse, the world gets worse.


Yes, we are a powerful nation, and yes, I believe we are the greatest nation to ever walk the Earth, but unlike you, I believe that we can do wrong. You can think that you're as right as your Christian God, but when it comes right down to it, the mind that guides your body and actions is simply reacting to mortal concerns, and therefore suspectable to mortal complications.
You must question to make better. You must make better to survive.

[Rictor]

Alright, I should have worder that better. I meant return to the days when a might makes right approach to international affairs was seen as legitimate. In theory, the UN is supposed to settle these sorts of things, and for the most part they are seen by the world as a credible organization for that task. But increasingly, powerful nations (this includes the "doves" France and Germany, the US, the EU, Russia and others) give themselves the authority to intervene in the issues of other nations at will, and try to pass the whole thing of as right an proper. Observe the occupations in Haiti, Kosovo etc, as well as the mentality of interventionism prevalent among the politicians of these nations, and to an extent among the populace as well.

[Ford Prefect]

Originally posted by Rictor
Alright, I should have worder that better. I meant return to the days when a might makes right approach to international affairs was seen as legitimate. In theory, the UN is supposed to settle these sorts of things, and for the most part they are seen by the world as a credible organization for that task. But increasingly, powerful nations (this includes the "doves" France and Germany, the US, the EU, Russia and others) give themselves the authority to intervene in the issues of other nations at will, and try to pass the whole thing of as right an proper. Observe the occupations in Haiti, Kosovo etc, as well as the mentality of interventionism prevalent among the politicians of these nations, and to an extent among the populace as well.

Now consider the ridiculously short amount of time for which the UN has existed, and how little time it took for "might makes right" to work its way back into the general mentality. This is because [booming voice of god] we are always the same, no matter what organizations we create to pretend otherwise.

But hey, better to try than to accept it, I suppose.

[Unknown Target]

I disagree. I think that eventually we may be able to make a functioning society that will stand in place for at least two hundred years. Look at America - it's been about that long before we started to really fall.
But with enough regulation and checks and balance, things like freedom and prosperity can be extended.
And when that ends, there will always be a resistance, to the end of time, people will resist tyranny. It doesn't matter if they win or lose, there will always be the good and the bad, and both sides will be constantly fighting. It's the embodiment of human nature to fight for our beliefs, and since those will always differ from others, we will always fight.

[Ford Prefect]

200 years? Big whoop. As you said, America has already managed that. The structure of our government has succeeded in stalling the human animal, but even in American history, you can see how hopelessly delicate the balance is between tyranny and liberty, right back to the Alien and Sedition Acts. You're certainly right that our lot in life is to fight. I don't know about you, but I find that rather depressing if I think about it for any length of time. That's what's so hideous about it all; if we all agree on everything, the individual is dead. But if we allow ourselves to be different, we're doomed to suffer at the hands of one another.

If there were a god I would kick it in the nuts.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Liberator
1)America is to use her status as a "super-power" for the betterment of the world.

You think killing everyone in the Sunni Triangle would make the world a better place?

It might be a good idea to remember that it's Americas previous attempts to make the world a better place that resulted in Saddam being in power in the first place.
 Same for Bin Laden and the same for Iran.

So no I don't think America should try to make the world a better place. It's patently obvious that it's not very good at it.

[Kosh]

2)America doesn't do a damn thing.

Case 1)America does something and automatically it is assumed that they are worse than leaving things as they were.

America doesn't do a damn thing about a lot of bad regimes. In fact, the US has a history of propping up bad regimes.

Iran used to have a democracy, but the US overthrew that democracy and installed the Shah.

After Vietnam invaded Combodia and kicked out Pol Pot's COMMUNIST regime, guess who the US supportted and sheltered? The reminants of Pol Pot's COMMUNIST regime.

1)America is to use her status as a "super-power" for the betterment of the world.

That would be nice if it actually did use its super-power status for the betterment of the world, but it rarely does.

Well, the first thing is - why this despot? Why Iraq?

Read that article that I posted the other day and all will be revealed. I'm serious.

Errmm....Saddam was a despot, a particularly evil one at that. While I don't support the US invasion, his deposition is by far worse than any of what America has done so far.

You're forgetting that Saddam was merely a puppet of america for many years. When he gassed the Kurds, america thought it was ok, because he was a "good" evil dictator. It wasn't until he decided that he didn't want to merely be a puppet that america removed the "good" part of ""good" evil dictator.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Liberator
I would like to ask a question, and I will do it is as unexplosive a way as possible.

Which shall it be?  

1)America is to use her status as a "super-power" for the betterment of the world.

OR

2)America doesn't do a damn thing.

Case 1)America does something and automatically it is assumed that they are worse than leaving things as they were.

Case 2)America is bad mouthed and touted as 'not caring enough' and not doing enough.

Which shall it be, gentlemen?  Because quite obviously there is no middle ground and frankly I'm tired of America not being able to win.

2/

Because the US doesn't do things "for the betterment of the world".  It does things for the betterment of (the people in charge of) the US.  That's all any country does; the difference between the US and, for example, the UK is that we don't have the capability to force our viewpoint upon any country in the world, and the US can and does try to.

You want the US to be the worlds policeman, yet it ignores and wilfully damages the only institution set up to provide international law by consensus.

If the US wishes to be looked at as a caring country, how about - for example - making that 0.7% recommended GDP target for aid (without strings attached to the governments foreign and moral policy; i.e. not restricting Aids assistance) - that wouldn't only be a massive hike in what is paid, but set an example to almost every country in the world (AFAIK it's only a few of the Scandinavians who meet that target).  i.e. genuine help, not gunboat diplomacy masquerading as help.

(NB: not using the term America, because it apparently pisses off the rest of the people living on those 2 continents)