thank you! ...you know i love you guys too!
i am not questioning the evils done by others. but if i would list all attrocities committed by all sides than every post would be at least 10 pages long.
the debate is about the US history and whether their actions fit the title of being the most benelovent nation in the history of mankind.
it seems our main difference lies in semantics politicians do one thing with one intention and sell it to the public under a completely different pretense. if you want to call it politics in the true meaning of sense than thats ok. i still call it hypocritical bullshit.
for me the difference between politics and hypocrisy is clear in the example of france. if france would have said we want the inspections to continue period than thats politics....however, that they said they don't want the war because of the civilian lives that are at risk made them hypocrites imo since the only thing they cared about were financial interests.
And as for all the negative actions you listed that the U.S. has commited and all the wrongs that we haven't writed yet, that's such a cheap, blatant, anti-American distracting tactic that I respect you less for having used it.
oh please...don't get so touchy! the things i listed actually happened so please get over this WILD UNJUSTIFIED ANTI AMERICAN ATTACK! call my government for what it is and i won't be offended. why is that if one critizises US govs that this is always equated to being against the american people?
lets go over the single points you mentioned:
How many U.S. and Japanese soldiers DIDN'T die because we used the bomb?
Japan already wanted to negotiate about surrender. their ONLY demand was that the emperor wouldn't be put on trial since he was something of a god to them. the US denied that request and instead dropped TWO nuclear weapons! why two i ask you? why a plutonium and a uranium bomb? it was a terrible war crime nothing more nothing less.
Japan and the neighbors it was brutalizing, better before or after WWII?
question ...did the US go to war against japan to liberate the people or to gain control of the area? i am not questioning that the outcome for the koreans and chinese was positive but to say the US intervened for human rights reasons is a lie.
Germany better before or after WWII?
Germany i let not count at all. had wilson kept his word and his 14 points in 1918 than neither hitler nor WWII had ever happened. it was the benevolent US that contributed big time in causing the whole mess.
East Germany or West Germany better? North Korea or South Korea better?
no question that capitalistic oriented economies work better. i never questioned that.
Life for the average joe in Panama better before or after we got that punk out?
i am not aware of any beneficial economical changes to panama since noriega was removed. did the US create a paradise there without letting me know?
Would people in Vietnam be living better or worse lives if we had been able to keep South Vietnam free?
they surely would live better lives hadn'T the US faught in the war. china is doing pretty well ...there is no reason to believe vietnam would be off worse.
Africa better or worse without the billions in U.S. aid we send there every year?
great pitfall right there! the US and europe give money to africa....at the same time our economies suck 10 times as much out of their countries...not paying them enough for their goods. the US and europe keep terrible regimes alive just because they support our economical interests.
Iraq better before this or after this?
iraq was a prosperous country before the war with iran which was faught in part for US interests.
the west in general and the US as the leading power in particular are the main cause of hunger and poverty in the world. our governments help the criminal regimes all over the world. only if a dictator decides to fight against our industrial interests is he declared a devil and taken out. THAT is what i call hypocrisy.
in some cases good came out of US led interventions but the price was always terribly high and the true reason for the different interventions was NEVER human rights issues.
my good hearted fellow.
The Fact is the US has done more in Aid (food, defense, donations) since WWll than any other nation.
simon and i and several others have demonstrated already that this is to put it deplomatically...not true. you can repeat it and repeat it but that won't change the facts.
The US fought to end slavery, stopped Hitler, confronted the USSR, End Communism, Helped in Somalia and other African Nations, I can go on and on. Created NATO......
oh yeah....first the US screwes germany over in WWI which allowes hitler to gain power in the first place. than they back england so it can oppose rightful german demands on poland...than after the war starts the US supports stalin (a true mad man...who killed nearly 20 million of his own people). with this the US basically sells half of europe to the communists and in the end praises itself for winning the cold war for the oppressed europeans. LOL thats what i call a well planned operation.
do we really have to list all the bad dictatorships that the US backed in africa and asia? just as the most screaming example...how do you justify the support for the qumer rouge in kambodia? what was the bigger evil that was prevented there?
That is the difference between me and you. I admit the US has made mistakes, however, I will balance those mistakes with the good.
no the difference is that you believe the US administrations over the decades are actually benevolent and interested in bringing freedom, wealth and prosperity to the world.
i do not question that occationally something good came out in the end after a US intervention....what i question is the motives! this is a debate about hypocrisy and the US surly is the global leader in that discipline.