Abuse worse than under Saddam, says Iraqi leader

Gerrardfo · Joined: 04 Sep 2004 Posts: 325

A little while ago I read an article similar to this about the torture camps the U.S. had in several foreign nations. They were called "Black Sites," and were involved in the CIA leak. Ever since that day, Democrats have tried to pass legislation to uphold humane activity and prevent any torture. They have even recruited a few Republicans to their side, and one-time prisoner of war (not recently, of course) John McCain. It is true that the US has a negative image overseas because of their brute force in any situation regardless of danger level, but that policy is one that shadows how scared the United States is of enemy attack. MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) has a little basis for keeping the world together on a single thread, even to push the US to make sure Iraq cannot harm them.

I don't like how Bush handles any foreign affairs; in my personal opinion, any 2008 candidate will easily have more popularity than Bush. However, put yourself in Bush's shoes for a minute. You start off winning the election on a messy ballot, then have to be in office on one of the worst terrorist attacks in the past few decades (9/11/01). Is your country going to be happy if you just sit back and declare that the US will not do anything about the attacks? No, the country hungers for revenge, no matter what the cost. The only problem is that the US is a split nation, and though there are definitely people that hate the concept of war, you might find some that approve of Bush. In September his approval rating was inching below the 50% mark; by now I cannot fathom that it's above 40%.

Another concern is the extent of US imperialism. From the late 1800s and early 1900s, the US has desired control of more land. From Seward's Folly to the Open Door Policy in China, the US has always desired more land in any region. However, the main point of US imperialism was to extend Democracy to the far corners of the earth. In WWII most Democracies fell and were replaced with Totalitarian governments, so we know that the plan of enforcing Democracy in Iraq might fall to history. If we don't learn from history, it's bound to repeat itself. In this sense, the US is there because they don't know what will work in fixing up Iraq that isn't bound to fail.

If this continues, we can expect the worst from foreign nations. Among my friends, we have all agreed that WWIII will involve everyone vs. US; we have to hope we gain allies and can correct this problem before we explode into any problems.

Koen · Administrator Joined: 10 Mar 2004 Posts: 338

quidam · Joined: 22 Apr 2005 Posts: 196

Venezuela prepares for WWIII, and intends to beat other countries' two mohawks with large-scale mohawk production. Two, three, four, five mohawks and more.

Mondegreens ahoy.

Stucco · Joined: 14 Mar 2005 Posts: 549

I wouldn't be surprised if this were true. I hope it arrests as the publicity spreads. Blah blah blah.

I have a super idea. Bring in many more kind and humane European troops to replace those mean ol' U.S. forces. This way I can have my brother back for Thanksgiving and Christmas next year, and Iraqis will be happy. I'd love for the U.S. troops to have a good reason to vacate the country.

Gerrardfo · Joined: 04 Sep 2004 Posts: 325

Hmm, the Netherlands preparing means a bit, as anything can cause war outbreak. Prince Ferdinand (or whatever his name was) and Gavriloo Princeps are a nice example, and this is a more visible and expectant version. The US spent billions on the European Recovery Plan, and helping Greece and Turkey. I didn't remember the entirety of the goals, but it isn't too shocking that the US had their own motives.

Containing Communism is not the goal here, but instead to prevent a weak government from coming to power. The US tactics are poor, they could have serious consequences, but for now we have to trust that Bush will make prudent judgment in the upcoming months. The fate of the world actually depends on it.

quidam · Joined: 22 Apr 2005 Posts: 196

Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria, Gerrard.

Craze · Joined: 30 Jan 2005 Posts: 5385 Location: Indiana, U

This brings me to wonder the tactics of suucha WWIII. Think back to WWII at Germany's tactics. They took over a large part of Europe before they were finally stopped, and Nazi Germany doesn't have even the remote resources the US has today. If we were put in Germany's place would it be a Nuklear Global castrophe? Would Europe be taken over...

How would a country, as ourselves fight such a war without inducting the former?

Archon · Joined: 12 Oct 2004 Posts: 13

Trotsky1 · Joined: 12 Apr 2005 Posts: 811

mmm:<

I really hope after all these years, it will not come to another war. What is the need to be the most powerfull nation in the world other than for childish braggin rights.

I can not see that happening with nuclear weapons and such forth on every concievable side. What worries me is that the preident that reprsents america now, does certainly stand for aggresivily maintaining US dominance, it seems so far at any costs.

Over perhasp a president that is prepared to accept that bar war the US can not maintain its dominant position but instead look to allie, to maintain american safety and strength. I see that as a much better way myself of resolving things. The US will certianly in all foreseeable circumstances remain a key player in the future of the world. But can the all time good guy, really turn into the bad guy?

blkaznguy4 · Joined: 04 Jun 2005 Posts: 82

Well the thing is, most need to look to the Asia ... problem is ... if any kind of conflict in Asia esscalates ... we may find ourselves in WWIII, and i'd be bigger then ever. T.T

China(Big exporter of basically any manufactured product in the World Econ) + N. Korea(Unknown Threat to world) = Communist

N. Korea v. S. Korea + Japan (Long time hatred of Japanese, and South Korea is self explanatory)

China v. Japan (Rape of Naking, long built hatred in most chinese people)

China v. Taiwan + US (But we're already so damned overstretch doubt any good will come if we spread even thinner)

Taiwan + Japan (China Aggression increased due to their soft power)

So ... as you can see the Asian pacific is already in the crisis where we see massive brinks to spilling problems over. from my view, it looks as if once a problem spills out in Asia, US will get invovled, decreasing its support in the Mid East ...

I.E. Israel(Good army, most of its stuff were recieved in 1995 ~ 2002, very high tech considering its support by the US. also starting to show signs of rebellion v. US orders T.T another Sadam/Al-Queda) + Afgan + Iraq, opening mideast for powerstruggle once again T.T and also the unstablity of Iraq and Afgan will only let problems spilling over requiring more help from the outsides ...

So in the end ... we're gonna have some fun =D ... ... ...T.T

Craze · Joined: 30 Jan 2005 Posts: 5385 Location: Indiana, U

Archon · Joined: 12 Oct 2004 Posts: 13

i meant that they do not deserve to join EC yet. i do not mind any Turkish person and have many Turkish friends but they agree with me that their governemnt is not helping the situation at all.
no offence to be taken at all mate.

Koen · Administrator Joined: 10 Mar 2004 Posts: 338

A bit off topic prolly, but you should see the movie:

Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb

It's quite old, but really funny Razz

JimmyJohnJoe · Administrator Joined: 27 Sep 2004 Posts: 166

You see the problem with this all, Is that Bush doesnt know what he is doing.He is trying to finish what his father started.Once he realizes the world has Changed since his Dad was in office, then i think he could better Run this country. Being as it is Since he took over Unemployment went up, as did our national Debt, he has also Caused innocent us Citizens to lose their life so we can get more Oil for our country. That in itself is an Act of Treason.