The Fun Continues

LT Smash apparently thinks I should give up the criticism, yet gives me more and more to work with. Frankly, I am quite surprised with his rather emotional reaction. I expected a far more reasoned and carefully worded response, but it’s all good.

Although they became sovereign and independent in 1901, they’ve never really enjoyed freedom. The only thing we have to apologize for in the Bay of Pigs fiasco, however, is that it was poorly planned and executed.

So then you admit your expulsion of the Spaniards had no effect and the Bay of Pigs was a complete failure. At least we’re getting somehwere. Though you seem to indicate that if the Bay of Pigs had gone differently the Cuban people would be in a better position now… isn’t that contradicting what you just admitted to? Again. It’s exactly this automatic, military/offensive/know-it-all posture that leads to the misguided adventures in the first place and does absolutely nothing to actually foster and promote societal change in the country you’re dealing with.

On we go:

The Philippines are a mess — I don’t see how this is our fault. We granted them independence in 1946. It’s true that they suffered under the repressive Marcos regime until 1987, but are you arguing here for more U.S. interventionism, or less

Well hail-to-the-chief then, eh? You “granted” them independance… you come off sounding like God. Why didn’t you just say “It’s they’re own problem they screwed it up” that’s what Dick Cheney apparently already thinks of the Iraqis. You’re right, it *was* their problem. I was arguing that maybe the US should have actually LEFT the Phillipines instead of staying and supporting Marcos until it was clear the Phillipinos themselves were going to throw him (and eventually the US presence).

First of all, there would have been no such country as “Panama” had it not been for the intervention of the United States against Columbia in the early 20th Century – it was just a sleepy, malaria-stricken isthmus before we decided to build a canal there. Granted, we had our own economic interests at heart, but I don’t hear many Panamanians complaining about the results today.

Again with the holier-than-thou attitude. Do you not realise that this exactly… right on the money… perfectly illustrates why people have such a problem with American viewpoints on foreign affairs?

Never mind the fact that the Panama Canal was initiated by France (sacré bleu!) and the same man, Ferdinand de Lesseps, who built the Suez Canal. You make it sound like the Isthmus was populated by a bunch of Savages before the US brought the Canal and civilization to the area when as you admit, it was purely about economics rather than to help any of the native Columbian/Panamanians.

And of course you chose to ignore the whole Noriega connection.

My apologies on my comments on El Salvador and Nicaragua. I wrote it too early this morning and have since corrected my mistake. The point remains the same though, the support of the contras in Nicaragua and the blockade led to far more hardship to Nicaraguans because of the devastation to the local economy erosion of human rights and death of thousands in the war.

As for El Salvador… the US seemed to continue to support the Government even though they continued with their support or inability to control death squads from running through the streets.

And to top it off in the 80s the US helped out Honduras by providing helicopter transport for their troops to the Nicaraguan border.

After the fall of Saigon, millions of Vietnamese took to the sea in rickety boats to escape the brutal communist regime. Many thousands did not survive the journey, but over 1.5 million eventually made it to safety in the United States. And you complain about a little bit of toxic weed-killer? Priorities, Chris.

So again all those people who unfortunately weren’t “liberated” by America and had to stay where they were (you know, because it IS home) are worthless. Who has their priorities wrong? Yes the brutal communist regime was just that… but I’m sure the skin and prostate cancer and diabetes (Admitted by the US Air Force). But don’t worry, it wasn’t a “chemical weapon” because it was the US using it right?

Why don’t you make that “weed-killer” comment to the people you sprayed it on.

Here… maybe just apologize to *one* of them yourself, at least you could apologize to her spirit and those of others like her. Or are you going to blame her plight on those damn communists with their damn socialist health care systems?

Agent Orange Baby

On Hiroshima.

In President Truman’s shoes, what would you have done differently?

I wouldn’t have opened Pandoras Box… let alone been tempted to use it. It is unfortunate that America has the distinction of being the only country to use a Nuclear Bomb in wartime… but, that is what happened and the world was forever changed.

WW2 was the scene for horrendous acts on both sides. It is infinitely debateable which one had the most effect in the long run… but I think I know which one I’ll pick.

but Bin Laden’s “Arab Militia” was among the few groups that refused assistance from the CIA.

So the fact that the CIA *offered* their assistance, but it wasn’t accepted was good for the reputation of the CIA? How does that work exactly.

I also fail to understand how you can deny the CIA providing help to Bin Laden and the precursors to the Taliban when CIA books from that era were actually being USED by terrorists in the training camps. Yes, you’re right Pakistans’ ISI was the main supporter of the Taliban. But who helped out the ISI…the CIA. If you don’t believe me, then why don’t you go to Janes, the most respected source for Defense/Intelligence related analysis in the world.

They say:

Along with Osama bin Laden, intelligence sources say a number of other infamous names emerged from the 1980s ISI-CIA collaboration in Afghanistan. These included Mir Aimal Kansi, who assassinated two CIA officers outside their office in Langley, Virginia, in 1993, Ramzi Yousef and his accomplices involved in the New York World Trade Center bombing five years later as well as a host of powerful international narcotics smugglers.

And finally there is Iraq and Iran.

You know what, you’re right… the US didn’t supply a single bomb or weapon system to Saddam. The countries that did are equally at fault. Yet even though it was widely known of the horrendous abuses commited by Saddam, Reagan saw fit to send his emmissary to shake the hand of a tyrant in the name of what? Securing access to oil?

I thought this whole discussion was about how the US was so concerned with bringing Freedom and Liberty to the oppressed of the world. It’s also really funny that you try to spin it positively by using an illegal arms deal.

Maybe instead of supplying arms to one side and publicly supporting the other you could have stepped in the middle and stopped the war… you know so that the PEOPLE could have a chance at that “Freedom and Liberty” that your government claims to hold so dear.

Yes, I do recognize many of the good things that America has done for the world. They outnumber the bad by a very wide margin. The Tsunami relief effort is only the latest example.

I also recognize that the American people for the most part are truly huminitarian people. They only want the best for the world. They only want to spread what is good and wonderful about America. Many times they succeed in this goal, unfortunately sometimes they don’t. It is these failures that I address because I do not see the required steps to avoid them in the future. I see the current US Administration continuing to make the same mistakes in Iraq. They somehow think that by forcibly deposing a dictator the resulting vacuum will magically result in the sprouting of true freedom and democracy in that region.

I simply don’t share that view… if only because history shows that freedom and societal change cannot be forced upon a people. Even in the World Wars… post-WW1 Germany fell apart quickly and it was probably the Cold War that saved Germany and Japan the 2nd time around. Popular reform must be attained naturally through popular revolution or uprising.

Oh and that reminds me. You may want to consider apologizing to the millions of Commonwealth, French, and Russian dead and living soldiers for your implications that their contribution to the successful conclusion of WW2 meant nothing.

(For those who forget… the USSR lost 27 million soldiers, and 19 million civilians… nearly 3 times the number of ALL the other Allies combined)


And for those so quick to equate us with the French because of our lack of military support in Iraq I point you to the upcoming Elections… where we were requested, and accepted to take the lead in setting up the International monitors that will, hopefully vet the process as free and fair.

It’s unfortunate, again, that they are forced to do their work from Amman, Jordan, rather than inside Iraq. But you have to work with what you’ve got.

7 replies on “The Fun Continues”


    “There was a time when I assumed that coming out in support of freedom and democracy was like being for more childhood vaccinations and fluoridated water: Only kooks were against you. After the reaction to President Bush’s second inaugural address, it turns out that promoting democracy is like testing for steroids in baseball: As long as you’re not serious about it, it’s OK.

    Two centuries after the founding of America, freedom and liberty are still radical, subversive ideas in places like the Middle East, most of Asia and American public school system. It’s not just European dictators who dismiss “freedom” with scare quotes and eye rolls. Talk to any Democrat about America’s mission in Iraq and the first mention of “freedom” or “democracy” will be met with an exasperated sigh.

    It’s not our job to spread freedom, they will tell you. Iraq will never have a real democracy. Or worse, they will elect a mullah-dominated terrorist regime. And then there’s the “hypocrisy” argument: Unless we invade China and Pakistan tomorrow, everything President Bush says about democracy today is a lie.

    Well, the last point is ludicrous on its face. The Declaration of Independence only applied to white males when it was written. Was it a mistake? What do liberals attacking President Bush’s supposedly “empty rhetoric” have to say about Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation-which only applied to slaves in the states Lincoln didn’t govern, and not to the slaves held in the North?

    Of the many dumb, anti-Bush arguments, the insistence that we must fight every battle for liberty at once or else fight none at all is one of the dumbest. It’s like arguing that Eisenhower was a failure for invading Normandy on June 6, 1944, instead of Berlin.

    But as Afghans and Palestinians and (as of this writing) Iraqis participate in their first-ever legitimate elections-with Lebanon and possibly even Saudi Arabia (!) moving in that direction-how do Bush’s opponents continue to side with the dictators and against the oppressed?

    Some liberals insist that the war in Iraq isn’t really about democracy, but is instead a war for oil and a new American empire. Their evidence for this is sketchy at best—it would be nice if the “No War For Oil” crowd would announce when we are going to finally get the oil-and their argument is even rejected by the terrorists in Iraq.

    Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, the most famous (and deadly) of the terrorists operating in Iraq states the mission of the insurgency so plainly even Barbara Boxer can understand:

    “We have declared a bitter war against the principle of democracy and all those who follow this wrong ideology….Islam requires the rule of Allah and not the rule of the people or the majority…All those who vote are infidels.” The infidels, Al Zarqawi adds in the name of G-d, shall be killed.

    How ironic that the terrorists would issue this plain, unvarnished threat to the fundamental ideas of the modern world the same week that the U.N. is commemorating the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. German fascism was also a threat to freedom and democracy, and members of the John Kerry “global test” crowd are elbowing each other for a chance to denounce it.”

    I realize that posting excerpts from other sites is not always the most interesting method to make one’s point but as usual, Chris, your point of view is the logic of the left. I agree with this fellow’s comments and wanted to share his perspective with all who might be interested.

  2. I am sorry Chris, but Lt Smash has you soundly beaten in this argument. Your rage or feelings of leftist superiority over the US have clouded you common sense and your grasp of reality.

    Just one example, Ortega was no Mr. Nice guy. He was taking money for the Soviets hand over fist to export communism to the rest of Central America. Now ask yourself, how many people did the ideologies of Marx, Engels and Lenin kill? Over 100 million I believe. I am sure you will accept this figure, it was a French historian who came up with it. Now if that is not a worthy cause to fight against, what is?

    Isn’t it amazing that right after Ortega’s Moscow funded bank account closed that peace broke out across Latin America.

    I think you have been chasing the wrong boogey man Chris. OH BTW, please learn how to spell El Salvador and Nicaragua. Spanish is quite phonetic. There is nothing quite so patronizing as a supposedly world experienced Canadian who does not know how to spell or even who the major combatants were in Central America during the 80s. Or is your problem more the fact that you already know the truth and the facts be damned, they simply get in the way of a good righteous anti US rage. This sounds like the way Stalin’s henchmen worked. We know there are 100 anti soviet agents in that town, now lets go out and find 100 people to throw in jail.


  3. actually matt…it’s a matter of poor typing skills and the lack of a spell checker.

    but thanks anyway.

    Actually.. looking through.. where did I mistype El Salvador… I’ve corrected the extra “u” out of Nicaragua?

    Oh, and this discussion wasn’t about being “beaten” or “winning”… either way of course you think he “won”… you support his view.

    Where in my posts did I support the actions of Ortega? Both Ortega, and overtime the sanctions imposed on Nicaragua by the US directly affected the people of Nicaragua. This discussion is, after all, about doing what is best for the *people*… not the leaders of other countries.

  4. The sad picture of the little girl reminds me of the pictures the pro-life people show of aborted children. The left says they are offensive and manipulative. What do you think of the reaction the right is to that picture? Further I’ve seen similar defects being corrected in cable TV documentaries regarding plastic surgery. Are you certain that this child was deformed as a result of US actions? Such damning accusations should be documented lest the left be guilty of trivializing such a tragic child.

  5. Chris,

    You are a sneaky one, but here it is as you originally typed it.

    “perpetrating civil war in El Savador [sic] for 12 years and costing 75,000 lives.”

    I believe you missed an “l” there. You know, something like this has distinct shades of 1984.


  6. LOL

    1984? right… I’m trying to brainwash you by mistyping the name of a country. haha. If it was that easy then I’d have millions of followers by now.

    I was looking for the mistake in this thread.. the mistake was in the previous thread.

    I’ve now corrected it.

Comments are closed.