41 replies to this topic

[Puppeteer]

As if we need any more proof of US government's interference in regimes.
Egypt protests: America's secret backing for rebel leaders behind uprising

The American Embassy in Cairo helped a young dissident attend a US-sponsored summit for activists in New York, while working to keep his identity secret from Egyptian state police.
...
The disclosures, contained in previously secret US diplomatic dispatches released by the WikiLeaks website, show American officials pressed the Egyptian government to release other dissidents who had been detained by the police.
...
It said the activist claimed “several opposition forces” had “agreed to support an unwritten plan for a transition to a parliamentary democracy, involving a weakened presidency and an empowered prime minister and parliament, before the scheduled 2011 presidential elections”. The embassy’s source said the plan was “so sensitive it cannot be written down”.

This commentary pithily surmises that the power vacuum may lead to more totalitarian, fervent regimes superseding authoritarian, despotic governments.
Dark forces lurk in the shadows of hope

This is not the Berlin Wall. And what is waiting on the other side is not West Germany.
...
But the youth were superseded by another group who were kept in check by the Shah - the clerics. Just as Mubarak today keeps the Muslim Brotherhood, the radical side of the Muslim faith, under control.

[duke_Qa]

Pretty much anyone who is against Mubarak's downfall will say that this will cause a terrible religious regime. Israel and christian fundamentalists are probably all over that one right now.

I personally believe that Eqypt is not going to change its status to the west because of this. Sure USA have supported Mubarak with weapons and funding, but it has also as you say supported the opposition and asked for reforms. This is primarily a internal affairs revolt and not a global-politics revolt.

[Ganon]

Puppeteer.....You and your conspiracy theories.

To think that the US is trying to run the world...
People need to realize that the US is leading the world, NOT trying to control it.

Sure, we get involved with all kinds of shit, all over the world. But when you have the power, and ability, it's best to use it for the greater good.
It may not always be popular to get involved with other people's affairs, but if the US just forsake the world, and formed a symbolic shield around it's borders, not only would we be more open to attack, but some may even rationalize it as if the US, and by extension, it's citizens were living large, and enjoying the good life, and couldn't care less if the rest of the world burned.

So we like to know what's going on, and what our potential enemies might be up to.

So what?
Wouldn't you?

It's a matter of national security, and really, just common sense. It's best to take out your enemies while they're still weak.

You DO remember Hitler right?

Edited by Ganon, 29 January 2011 - 03:12 PM.

[Mathijs]

[quote name='Ganon]People need to realize that the US is leading the world' date=' not controlling it.[/quote']

Americans need to realize that we don't need your "leadership".

Edit: Wait, I just read the rest of your post. Disregard everything, I will leave it to the others.

Edited by Matias, 29 January 2011 - 02:41 PM.

[Ganon]

I never said the world "needs" our leadership.

It's not a literal statement anyway.
It's not like we're giving orders or some shit like that.

It means, in terms of innovation, democracy, capitalism, entertainment, science, technology, medicine, military...just overall really. We are leading the way.

Edited by Ganon, 29 January 2011 - 04:44 PM.

[Vortigern]

It's not like we're giving orders or some shit like that.

Oh Ganon, you do make me laugh.

[Ganon]

Why do people pick apart the most insignificant parts of my posts?

That was an example of what a leader does.
It wasn't a riddle or some kind of trick.

...

Why do I even bother...

So we like to know what's going on, and what our potential enemies might be up to.

So what?
Wouldn't you?

Or maybe you would rather be in the dark, and not have a clue...

Edited by Ganon, 29 January 2011 - 03:31 PM.

[Vortigern]

Why do people pick apart the most insignificant parts of my posts?

Because this is the internet. That's how we roll.

[OmegaBolt]

I honestly couldn't care less about the national security of America.

Also why the hell should the US be the one to decide what "the greater good" is? There is no such thing as the greater good, someone has to suffer in the end. By the greater good you mean security for the American people, their freedom and their God given right to shoot things, right?

If the US wants to "live it large" whilst watching the world burn then that's fine by me. The world won't burn, don't worry about it.

It means, in terms of innovation, democracy, capitalism, entertainment, science, technology, medicine, military...just overall really. We are leading the way.

Lol. I mean LOL.

Edited by OmegaBolt, 29 January 2011 - 04:08 PM.

[Ganon]

I honestly couldn't care less about the national security of America.

I wouldn't expect you to.

Also why the hell should the US be the one to decide what "the greater good" is? There is no such thing as the greater good, someone has to suffer in the end.

Yes, and hopefully those who suffer will be the ones who's main purpose in life is to make other people's lives harder.

By the greater good you mean security for the American people, their freedom and their God given right to shoot things, right?

No. I mean the overall peace and stability around the globe.

If the US wants to "live it large" whilst watching the world burn then that's fine by me. The world won't burn, don't worry about it.

Again, we have an elementary reply to a hypothetical statement.

It means, in terms of innovation, democracy, capitalism, entertainment, science, technology, medicine, military...just overall really. We are leading the way.

Lol. I mean LOL.

So you think otherwise?
Good, that's fucken GREAT!
I respect that, show your patriotism for your country! (Good Boy! Now go lie down.)

Edited by Ganon, 29 January 2011 - 05:59 PM.

[Phil]

Oh joy...

To think that the US is trying to run the world...
People need to realize that the US is leading the world, NOT trying to control it.

How very noble of you... so instead of outright dictating what the rest of the world should do you only manipulate and strong-arm them? Tell me, is that the kind of leadership like we see from the Egyptian authorities right now?
Maybe the US needs to realise that the world doesn't want to be lead. Ever thought of that? This unilateralism stinks to hell. At least it got a little bit better with Obama.

Sure, we get involved with all kinds of shit, all over the world. But when you have the power, and ability, it's best to use it for the greater good.

And what greater good would that be? Yours? The West's?

It may not always be popular to get involved with other people's affairs, but if the US just forsake the world, and formed a symbolic shield around it's borders, not only would we be more open to attack,

From whom?
Don't you realise that a great deal of why the US is such a popular target is because you stick your noses (and money and guns) into everybody else's affairs? Maybe if you weren't invading countries and propping up dictators with money and military aid, you'd actually have a better reputation...

but some may even rationalize it as if the US, and by extension, it's citizens were living large, and enjoying the good life, and couldn't care less if the rest of the world burned.

That would actually be a great idea. Stop "caring" and stop burning the rest of the world.

So we like to know what's going on, and what our potential enemies might be up to.

So what?
Wouldn't you?

It's a matter of national security, and really, just common sense. It's best to take out your enemies while they're still weak.

Oh yeah, right. I mean who needs civil liberties, or for that matter, the law anyway? It's about NATIONAL SECURITY. The one argument to end them all. Hey, why don't we go abduct and torture a couple of people? You know, it's a matter of national security.

You DO remember Hitler right?

No, but I'm surprised you think so. Actually, I don't think anyone on this board is old enough to remember him...

I never said the world "needs" our leadership.

Then why imply that it's the right thing? So you acknowledge the world doesn't need it, yet somehow you still do it?

It's not a literal statement anyway.
It's not like we're giving orders or some shit like that.

Oh, but you do. All over the world.

It means, in terms of innovation,

Yes.

democracy,

Hahahahaha.

capitalism,

Yes certainly. If you mean hardcore capitalism. Not sure if that's something to be overly proud of though.

entertainment,

Yep.

science,

Probably on par with Europe and some Asian countries.

technology,

Depends on what kind of technology, but generally, yes.

medicine,

No.

military

Certainly. And look at what it costs you...

...just overall really. We are leading the way.

Currently you're leading the way down. I'd rather not follow there, thank you.
Maybe it's time for some in the US to come to terms with reality and embrace it, instead of keeping up delusional ideas of a place at the top as the world's one and only super power. Times are changing. The power of the US is in slow but steady decline while new players in the global game are coming up. The US should better learn fast how to get by in a group of "equals" or it's in for a big, nasty surprise this century...

And don't just label me a US-hating socialist at a counterargument. It's not that simple.

[Námo]

It's not that simple.

[Ganon]

It may not always be popular to get involved with other people's affairs, but if the US just forsake the world, and formed a symbolic shield around it's borders, not only would we be more open to attack,

From whom?

Oh, I don't know. China seems to think they have something to prove in this century. What better way to do so than to bring down the previous most powerful country?

So we like to know what's going on, and what our potential enemies might be up to.

So what?
Wouldn't you?

It's a matter of national security, and really, just common sense. It's best to take out your enemies while they're still weak.

Oh yeah, right. I mean who needs civil liberties, or for that matter, the law anyway? It's about NATIONAL SECURITY. The one argument to end them all. Hey, why don't we go abduct and torture a couple of people? You know, it's a matter of national security.

A necessary evil. And by the way, who's being noble now?

You DO remember Hitler right?

No, but I'm surprised you think so. Actually, I don't think anyone on this board is old enough to remember him...

Heh, nice one.

I never said the world "needs" our leadership.

Then why imply that it's the right thing? So you acknowledge the world doesn't need it, yet somehow you still do it?

If the US wasn't policing the world, then it just means someone else would be. I wonder if that would make your life any different?
Well, I guess it would depend on who took up that role.

medicine,

No.

Well, I'm afraid I don't know enough on that to really make a good argument. So, on that subject I concede defeat. I was mostly basing my view on the fact that I hear so many stories about people who can't find a good hospital in Europe that can help them, be it a rare disease or what have you. So they come here to the states and find the help they need-...I think you can guess the rest.

...just overall really. We are leading the way.

Currently you're leading the way down. I'd rather not follow there, thank you.
Maybe it's time for some in the US to come to terms with reality and embrace it, instead of keeping up delusional ideas of a place at the top as the world's one and only super power. Times are changing. The power of the US is in slow but steady decline while new players in the global game are coming up. The US should better learn fast how to get by in a group of "equals" or it's in for a big, nasty surprise this century...

Heh, if you only knew.
Yes, we have been the sole superpower for about 2 decades. And times are changing.
Personally, I welcome that, let's let someone else have the wheel for a while and see if things get better.

At this point in time the second most powerful nation is China. What does that mean for us? I'll tell you.
China is nowhere near the military threat that the Soviet Union was to the US. And don't go on babbling about the simplicity of the Cold War or the arms race.
I'm tired of hearing that mindless drivel.
China's might stems mostly from their economy. They are a major competitor to the US economically, but that's a good thing.

And don't just label me a US-hating socialist at a counterargument. It's not that simple.

I wouldn't think of it. And it never is.
Good argument, much better than a single sentence meant to provoke and not really contribute anything to the discussion.
(...We've already had a few posts like that I think)

Edited by Ganon, 29 January 2011 - 06:02 PM.

[Mathijs]

Can you be any more of a typical, ignorant yank? Jesus. You make the other Americans on this board look bad. I'm sorry, I'm not in the mood to be constructive when your posts are so blatantly uninformed.

[Ganon]

So... Was that meant to contribute or provoke?

Either way you fail. I'm sorry.

Edited by Ganon, 29 January 2011 - 06:11 PM.

[Puppeteer]

Ganon you naive fool, it's not a conspiracy theory if there is DOCUMENTATION highlighting the USA's attempts to not only influence other regimes' policies but to also establish regimes as the US SEES FIT.

If the US wasn't policing the world, then it just means someone else would be. I wonder if that would make your life any different?

Britain's done that before. Pax Britannica. Britain saw that it was neither a force for good nor a beneficial force for British interests. Hence its collapse, and the subsequent rise in nationalism in Britain's colonies. Britain realised its mistake.

It may not always be popular to get involved with other people's affairs, but if the US just forsake the world, and formed a symbolic shield around it's borders, not only would we be more open to attack, but some may even rationalize it as if the US, and by extension, it's citizens were living large, and enjoying the good life, and couldn't care less if the rest of the world burned.

Ganon do you know ANYTHING about the Cold War? And I don't mean the Orthodox, self-indulgent and self-aggrandising historiography which emerged out of American patriotism and paranoia during the 1950s McCarthyism era.
Go do your research.
Go learn about the American governments propping up of foreign regimes, backing of rebel groups and interfering in/creating proxy wars.
If you want an appropriate place to start, with violent repercussions which really backfired on America, try Afghanistan. Funding of the mujahideen. Why? No other reason than to defy the Soviets, who were themselves trying to stabilise a NEIGHBOURING state.
Angolan Civil War, Arab-Israeli October War, Bay of Pigs fiasco, a bit earlier with the occupation of Nicaragua, and most notoriously the Vietnam War are all prime examples of America's heavy handed use of political narcissism to try to assert its position on the world stage.

You really need to learn that American neo-imperialism IS NOT a force for good. It is a force for Americans, by Americans, to achieve American goals. Now stop spouting bravado behind a veli of patriotism - we're not buying it.

Edited by Puppeteer, 29 January 2011 - 06:14 PM.

[Mathijs]

So... Was that meant to contribute or provoke?

Either way you fail. I'm sorry.

It was meant to offend and prompt you to stop spouting your nonsense.

[Ganon]

If the US wasn't policing the world, then it just means someone else would be. I wonder if that would make your life any different?

Britain's done that before. Pax Britannica. Britain saw that it was neither a force for good nor a beneficial force for British interests.

Firstly, Britain did not try to police the world, they were on a conquest of power.

Go learn about the American governments propping up of foreign regimes, backing of rebel groups and interfering in/creating proxy wars.
If you want an appropriate place to start, with violent repercussions which really backfired on America, try Afghanistan. Funding of the mujahideen. Why? No other reason than to defy the Soviets, who were themselves trying to stabilise a NEIGHBOURING state.
Angolan Civil War, Arab-Israeli October War, Bay of Pigs fiasco, a bit earlier with the occupation of Nicaragua, and most notoriously the Vietnam War are all prime examples of America's heavy handed use of political narcissism to try to assert its position on the world stage.

All by-products of the Cold War, and the McCarthyism mindset.
I never said I was proud of some of the things that happened, but the US is moving on from that.
The restless resistance to communism is dying, and we are beginning to embrace communist nations like China.
They are no longer a threat, and "the people" are smart enough and capable enough to prevent the spread of communism. So we don't worry so much.

You really need to learn that American neo-imperialism IS NOT a force for good. It is a force for Americans, by Americans, to achieve American goals. Now stop spouting bravado behind a veli veil of patriotism.

So true.
Oh wait, I thought you liked democracy, freedom, and the ability to choose your own destiny.

[Mathijs]

Oh man.

[Námo]

Oh, boy.

Another of these topics, where various opponents are parading their religious convictions.