http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/16/in...st/16IRAN.html
Just something to think about. Please email me privately for any reply about this article. I prefer it that way.
------------------
Printable View
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/16/in...st/16IRAN.html
Just something to think about. Please email me privately for any reply about this article. I prefer it that way.
------------------
[QUOTE]Originally posted by redrice:
[B]dominic:here's a scenario for you. the big thugs bought their houses by selling oil which they got from under the land all of your houses are built on to a group of men who speak a strange language and wear weird clothes and fly around the world, grinning at people".
I agree with you - the Arab rulers are nothing more than thugs, but you should check your history books - the Arab rulers NATIONALIZED the oil fields, .....yes they adopted SOCIALIST economic polices.
Fifty years ago, Truman and Eisenhower and the British government surrendered the West's property rights in oil, even though that oil rightfully belonged to the West whose science, technology, and capital had made its discovery and use possible. The first country to nationalize Western oil by force, was Iran in 1951.
The rest of the Arab nations, (observed the West's frightened silence), hurriedly grabbed their piece of the newly available loot.
These Middle East dictators denouned egotistical capitalism as a justification for this action. They cried that their poor needed the West's sacrifice, that oil, like all property, is owned collectively, "unearned" by virtue of birth - (sounds like your politics Peter).
What those thugs did with the "loot "they confiscated and the current appalling state of their nations in political, economic and human rights terms (as a result of subordinating their citizens to "the state" or "god") is not the fault of the West, Peter.
The main cause of the problem is that the Arab Nations still operate by the same brutal tribal culture that existed in the desert at the time the British divided up the middle east after the first world war. The only difference now being that, the tribal leaders,the Arab princes etc., are extremely wealthy and have even more power.
------------------
I think you can sum all this up by saying that the world loves to bite the hand that feeds it.
I'm hearing constant criticism here and on the media, for the US getting involved in other countries business AND not "doing enough".
These are mutually exclusive!
We are not the planet's Santa Claus!
For instance, we're being criticised for having helped the AFgahns's against the Russians in the past, AND being criticized for "abandoning" them, after they beat the Russians.
I'm quite sure they didn't want us to hang around afterwords, and even now, these people who are saying we shouldn't have "abandoned them" are warning us not to engage in "nation building" once we're done with this war.
So which is it?
So, anything the US does, is going to be criticised as either meddling in others business, or "not doing enough to help"
I'm getting pretty damn sick of it, personally, and the next time some country the size of one of our parking lots gets attacked by foreign invaders, I say we just stay home and "not meddle" this time.
The rest of the planet has no problem sticking their hand out for money and food, AND accepting our military assistance when they're getting their butts kicked (like Belgium and Germany, for example???), but when we're done, whether we go home or stick around, we're wrong either way!
So all you anti-U.S.'ers out there (and in this country), just sit alone for an hour or so, and imagine what the world would be like without us doing what we do, and have done in the past, mistakes and all...
You'd either be dominated by Germans, Soviets, or the Chinese, without a doubt.
Matt Pacini
------------------
I think you can sum all this up by saying that the world loves to bite the hand that feeds it.
I'm hearing constant criticism here and on the media, for the US getting involved in other countries business AND not "doing enough".
These are mutually exclusive!
We are not the planet's Santa Claus!
For instance, we're being criticised for having helped the AFgahns's against the Russians in the past, AND being criticized for "abandoning" them, after they beat the Russians.
I'm quite sure they didn't want us to hang around afterwords, and even now, these people who are saying we shouldn't have "abandoned them" are warning us not to engage in "nation building" once we're done with this war.
So which is it?
So, anything the US does, is going to be criticised as either meddling in others business, or "not doing enough to help"
I'm getting pretty damn sick of it, personally, and the next time some country the size of one of our parking lots gets attacked by foreign invaders, I say we just stay home and "not meddle" this time.
The rest of the planet has no problem sticking their hand out for money and food, AND accepting our military assistance when they're getting their butts kicked (like Belgium and Germany, for example???), but when we're done, whether we go home or stick around, we're wrong either way!
So all you anti-U.S.'ers out there (and in this country), just sit alone for an hour or so, and imagine what the world would be like without us doing what we do, and have done in the past, mistakes and all...
You'd either be dominated by Germans, Soviets, or the Chinese, without a doubt.
Matt Pacini
------------------
I think you can sum all this up by saying that the world loves to bite the hand that feeds it.
I'm hearing constant criticism here and on the media, for the US getting involved in other countries business AND not "doing enough".
These are mutually exclusive!
We are not the planet's Santa Claus!
For instance, we're being criticised for having helped the AFgahns's against the Russians in the past, AND being criticized for "abandoning" them, after they beat the Russians.
I'm quite sure they didn't want us to hang around afterwords, and even now, these people who are saying we shouldn't have "abandoned them" are warning us not to engage in "nation building" once we're done with this war.
So which is it?
So, anything the US does, is going to be criticised as either meddling in others business, or "not doing enough to help"
I'm getting pretty damn sick of it, personally, and the next time some country the size of one of our parking lots gets attacked by foreign invaders, I say we just stay home and "not meddle" this time.
The rest of the planet has no problem sticking their hand out for money and food, AND accepting our military assistance when they're getting their butts kicked (like Belgium and Germany, for example???), but when we're done, whether we go home or stick around, we're wrong either way!
So all you anti-U.S.'ers out there (and in this country), just sit alone for an hour or so, and imagine what the world would be like without us doing what we do, and have done in the past, mistakes and all...
You'd either be dominated by Germans, Soviets, or the Chinese, without a doubt.
Matt Pacini
------------------
I think you can sum all this up by saying that the world loves to bite the hand that feeds it.
I'm hearing constant criticism here and on the media, for the US getting involved in other countries business AND not "doing enough".
These are mutually exclusive!
We are not the planet's Santa Claus!
For instance, we're being criticised for having helped the AFgahns's against the Russians in the past, AND being criticized for "abandoning" them, after they beat the Russians.
I'm quite sure they didn't want us to hang around afterwords, and even now, these people who are saying we shouldn't have "abandoned them" are warning us not to engage in "nation building" once we're done with this war.
So which is it?
So, anything the US does, is going to be criticised as either meddling in others business, or "not doing enough to help"
I'm getting pretty damn sick of it, personally, and the next time some country the size of one of our parking lots gets attacked by foreign invaders, I say we just stay home and "not meddle" this time.
The rest of the planet has no problem sticking their hand out for money and food, AND accepting our military assistance when they're getting their butts kicked (like Belgium and Germany, for example???), but when we're done, whether we go home or stick around, we're wrong either way!
So all you anti-U.S.'ers out there (and in this country), just sit alone for an hour or so, and imagine what the world would be like without us doing what we do, and have done in the past, mistakes and all...
You'd either be dominated by Germans, Soviets, or the Chinese, without a doubt.
I still say we should bake cookies for peace, or play poker for peace, or....
Matt Pacini
------------------
I think you can sum all this up by saying that the world loves to bite the hand that feeds it.
I'm hearing constant criticism here and on the media, for the US getting involved in other countries business AND not "doing enough".
These are mutually exclusive!
We are not the planet's Santa Claus!
For instance, we're being criticised for having helped the AFgahns's against the Russians in the past, AND being criticized for "abandoning" them, after they beat the Russians.
I'm quite sure they didn't want us to hang around afterwords, and even now, these people who are saying we shouldn't have "abandoned them" are warning us not to engage in "nation building" once we're done with this war.
So which is it?
So, anything the US does, is going to be criticised as either meddling in others business, or "not doing enough to help"
I'm getting pretty damn sick of it, personally, and the next time some country the size of one of our parking lots gets attacked by foreign invaders, I say we just stay home and "not meddle" this time.
The rest of the planet has no problem sticking their hand out for money and food, AND accepting our military assistance when they're getting their butts kicked (like Belgium and Germany, for example???), but when we're done, whether we go home or stick around, we're wrong either way!
So all you anti-U.S.'ers out there (and in this country), just sit alone for an hour or so, and imagine what the world would be like without us doing what we do, and have done in the past, mistakes and all...
You'd either be dominated by Germans, Soviets, or the Chinese, without a doubt.
Matt Pacini
------------------
Why is dissent always considered Un American? Isn't democracy built with the idea that dissent is a necessary part of society and politics?
------------------
[This message has been edited by crimsonson (edited October 17, 2001).]
Here, here, crimsonson.
------------------
This is my last post on this thread - check out the following:
http://www.wipewithbinladen.com/
[This message has been edited by Dominic3 (edited October 18, 2001).]