Is the US a rogue nation

[samsara15]

is that why so many Conservatives hate and fear the UN? Afraid to give up a little bit of its sovereignty. Afraid to make American soldiers subject to international laws. A bully to smaller nations.

 

[rationalist]

The answer to your question is a resounding yes.

The US is the most dangerous nation on earth.

Largely because 50% of its population believe Fox Views to be the most trustworthy news program.

No wonder the Government can get away with telling them it is noble when it invades countries, kills millions of people, destabilises deomcracies, impoverishes people, tortures people and does it all in the name of 'freedom' and 'democracy'.

I mean, people like OldCrapper can't see the connection between a load of oil barons cooking up a story to attack a country rich in oil and the oil.

How STUPID is that???

 

[Pandora]

is that why so many Conservatives hate and fear the UN? Afraid to give up a little bit of its sovereignty. Afraid to make American soldiers subject to international laws. A bully to smaller nations.

Conservatives hate the UN (at least some of us do) Because they are anti Jewish for one. The UN is made up of many Jewish hating nations.

They are currupt, they are a joke.

Libya being elected chairman of the United Nations Human Rights Commission. That was the biggest joke, but it was not a funny one!

The oil for food program that ran through the UN and the American left did not bad an eye.

The United Nations is Incompetent & Corrupt.

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan was currupt and everyone turned the other way.​

 

[PLC1]

Still, there must be a better choice than trying to impose a pax americana on the rest of the world or giving more power to the likes of Quadaffi et. al. What we really need is a coalition of the civilized nations of the world, perhaps an expanded NATO. The idea behind the UN is a good one, just as the idea behind the League of Nations was well intentioned.

 

[GenSeneca]

The idea behind the UN is a good one, just as the idea behind the League of Nations was well intentioned.

What's the road to hell paved with again?

there must be a better choice than trying to impose a pax americana on the rest of the world

There is... We stop using our military and foreign policy for purposes other than protecting the rights of American citizens.

This means no nation building, no wars to make the world "safe for democracy", no "humanitarian" wars fought for the "human rights" of some other country, no propping up foreign states with the lives, blood and treasure of Americans, no more perpetual foreign aid commitments...

Simply a return to the specific, constitutional, mandate for the use of both our military and foreign policy: Protect the individual rights of all Americans.

 

[samsara15]

Our nation building has very self-serving, Right Wing slant.

 

[GenSeneca]

Our nation building has very self-serving, Right Wing slant.

Do you consider Capitalism a Right Wing ideology?

I disagree that nation building is right wing... It's part of the Progressive ideology rooted in altruism. Same is true for using our military and foreign policy to advance "human rights" in other countries, it's a Progressive concept born of altruism.

 

[PLC1]

What's the road to hell paved with again?

Hmm.. yellow bricks, as in the yellow brick road? Or maybe it is good intentions.

There is... We stop using our military and foreign policy for purposes other than protecting the rights of American citizens.

This means no nation building, no wars to make the world "safe for democracy", no "humanitarian" wars fought for the "human rights" of some other country, no propping up foreign states with the lives, blood and treasure of Americans, no more perpetual foreign aid commitments...

Simply a return to the specific, constitutional, mandate for the use of both our military and foreign policy: Protect the individual rights of all Americans.

Now, there's an idea that should be enshrined and put in the middle of the chambers where the House and the Senate debate such things as when we need to go to war, and what kinds of wars should be supported.

 

[samsara15]

Do you consider Capitalism a Right Wing ideology?

I disagree that nation building is right wing... It's part of the Progressive ideology rooted in altruism. Same is true for using our military and foreign policy to advance "human rights" in other countries, it's a Progressive concept born of altruism.

You may call it progressive, but youi have a way of labeling anything you find unpleasant as progressive. I see it as paternalism. Do you deny that Conservatism also contains altruism? That attitude seems similar in spirit to me of the attitude of Protestants who try to maintain that Catholics are not Christians.

 

[GenSeneca]

You may call it progressive, but youi have a way of labeling anything you find unpleasant as progressive.

I am a long time student of ideologies and philosophy, so when I use terms, it is for the purpose of clarification, not obfuscation. An example of the latter would be when the Left accuses Conservatives of being Fascists or Nazi's. Such accusations are simply to label their opponent as bad in hopes that people will completely ignore them. I don't want people to ignore the progressives and their movement, people need to learn about the history of Progressives so they can understand why it's incompatible with individual rights.

I think it's time for a history lesson... Teddy Roosevelt was both a Republican and a Progressive, it was his vision of the US as having the duty of being the worlds policeman that still flavors our foreign policy today.

Adopting Imperialism: Roosevelt's speeches fundamentally transformed popular opinion in the U.S. He equated imperialism with masculinity and ambition while denouncing isolationism as lazy and cowardly. Roosevelt argued that imperialists were not greedy but courageous instead. He claimed that "we do not admire the man of timid peace. We admire the man who embodies victorious effort." Roosevelt was trying to speak for the American people when he said those words. And owing to his reputation as a war hero and his immense popularity, he succeeded. Americans embraced first his words and then later his policies.

As president, Teddy Roosevelt translated the doctrine of the strenuous life into an active foreign policy. In 1904, the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine made America the police of Latin America. This policy gave the U.S. exclusive rights to intervene in Latin American countries, ostensibly to ensure their stability. Roosevelt is also famous for his "big stick" diplomacy which America still uses today. Essentially, he believed that all negotiations would be easier with a strong military behind him so he expanded the armed forces and gave especial emphasis to the Navy. He sent the Great White Fleet around the world just to show off America's strength. His imperialist policies also included the annexation of Hawaii and quelling a rebellion in the Philippines. Taking these policies as a whole, Roosevelt turned America into a major player in global affairs.

Do you think it's sheer coincidence that George Bush was labled an "imperialist cowboy" where his foreign policy was concerned? Teddy Roosevelt used the image of a cowboy, from his rough rider days, to bolster the popularity of his imperialist foreign policy. You should take some time and read some of TR's speeches about what he saw as the role of our military and foreign policy, then compare that to Bush's speeches on the same matters. Progressives, despite being so completely outnumbered, have placed themselves in positions of power for more than a century and, because they are in both parties, their policies have dominated the political arena.

I see it as paternalism.

Funny you should mention that, I see Progressivism as being very paternalistic. Look at your fellow Progressives and the utter contempt they have for the average American. They see the average American as too stupid to know what's in their own best interest so it's incumbent upon the "enlightened" Progressives to use the force of government in order to care for all of us unenlightened, backward thinking rubes.

Do you deny that Conservatism also contains altruism?

Of course not... Religion is based on the altruist code of morality and religious Conservatives are likely to share that morality. Now the big difference between the religious altruists and the social altruists, is the former doesn't believe (with a few exceptions) in using the power of government to force their morality on others while the latter insists on imposing their morality on every single individual by force.

That attitude seems similar in spirit to me of the attitude of Protestants who try to maintain that Catholics are not Christians.

My apologies, I have no idea what you are referencing here.

 

[Stalin]

Here it is...

Chapter and verse...

"...First, remember that you are unlikely to find completely objective reviews for this book, but that's okay because of its extremely political nature. Blum is a polemicist, meaning he wants to create controversy and hard feelings in order to make his point. And yes the basic political angle of his work is leftist on the surface. However, he does have plenty of criticism for Clinton and the Democrats, so Blum's political persuasion might be more accurately described as social anarchist, as he distrusts all government and politicians and believes all power should be in the hands of the real people. Such sharp politics will rile up readers of any stripe, making objectivity hard to hang on to.

Regardless, most of this book contains extremely useful and relevant information on US chicanery and violence around the world. Despite the constant predictable sloganeering about freedom and democracy, the US has always been more concerned about preserving corporate interests and a hegemonic domination of power, with an ideology that is unyielding and destructive. Entire peoples and nations around the world have been ruined and exploited. This is why people around the world hate us, not because of a vague dispute with a vague concept like freedom. But anyone who makes that accusation will be given the narrow-minded but still harmful label "Un-American" and will be ignored, if not persecuted. That's what makes Blum's work important to read, and he mostly provides sharp evidence. Unfortunately his polemic style often descends into sarcasm, damaging his credibility, and he tends to rely on lists rather than deeper insights. Meanwhile the entire book is almost sunk by the mind-numbing final chapter that is merely a list of social problems and crimes that Blum disagrees with, offering little connection to the focus of the rest of the book.

That's about as objective as I can get with this review, given my own personal politics. ..."

http://www.amazon.com/Rogue-State-3...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1266642642&sr=8-1


Comrade Stalin

 

[Gipper]

Good lord! Progressives have been in charge for decades, yet lefties are complete unaware of this fact. How can that be? Do they know nothing of history?

In the last 100 years nearly ALL our presidents were progressives. With the exception of Coolidge and Reagan, all were stinking progressives...some much worse then others.

Pictured here are four stinking progressives and one Marxist.

Can you find the Marxist?

 

[Free Palestine]

America is a rogue country for sure . Since it builds its great empire by stealing petrol , killing innocents , occupying others' lands , supporting Israeli terrorism , and the funny end of all this is The American calls for fighting against terrorism !! I actually don't know who is the real terrorist ?!!!

 

[rationalist]

I do, it is the US.

They are just better at selling their religious fundamentlaism to the suckers which to be fair is not difficult if you look at how Hollywood works

Apparently the British film 'The madness of King George' was going to be called 'The madness of George III' (3 being his regnal number) but Hollywood insisted that the title be changed as Americans would want to know what happened to the Madness of King George I and II.

Now that is stoooopid.