Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-31-2006, 09:38 PM
pgardn
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dalakhani
And why did we then abandon the somalians? nothing to gain maybe?

And why did we support Idi Amin or Mobutu or the countless others?

And why havent we been tougher with China on trade if we have such a problem with their human rights practices? Why were we much more lenient in our attitude toward China back when their human rights policies were measurably worse? Could it be because we needed them against the big, bad USSR?????
We have and will continue to do the wrong thing. We strive to do it right. We have backed some hideous killers you are correct.

So why did we drop Marines in Somalia to BEGIN with? and that is not the reason we keep pestering China. The USSR is gone. So why dont we just lay off and get that trade that other countries step in for?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-31-2006, 09:47 PM
dalakhani's Avatar
dalakhani dalakhani is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Washington dc
Posts: 5,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pgardn
We have and will continue to do the wrong thing. We strive to do it right. We have backed some hideous killers you are correct.

So why did we drop Marines in Somalia to BEGIN with? and that is not the reason we keep pestering China. The USSR is gone. So why dont we just lay off and get that trade that other countries step in for?
17.7 billion dollar trade deficit??????????????????????????

Yes, it seems that we are indeed being REALLY tough on China.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-31-2006, 09:53 PM
dalakhani's Avatar
dalakhani dalakhani is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Washington dc
Posts: 5,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pgardn
We have and will continue to do the wrong thing. We strive to do it right. We have backed some hideous killers you are correct.

So why did we drop Marines in Somalia to BEGIN with? and that is not the reason we keep pestering China. The USSR is gone. So why dont we just lay off and get that trade that other countries step in for?
Quick history lesson:

The US supported the ousted leader Barre from 1978 until he was overthrown in 2001. We backed him to a tune of 900 million dollars while he killed, raped and pillaged.

In the ensuing Melee', the US wanted to take control of the southern part of the red sea but more importantly the Suez Canal.

The marines were there so that a religious fundamentalist wouldnt take over thus preventing the US from possibly mining for oil to the north.

Maybe you didnt know this.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-31-2006, 10:09 PM
pgardn
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dalakhani
Quick history lesson:

The US supported the ousted leader Barre from 1978 until he was overthrown in 2001. We backed him to a tune of 900 million dollars while he killed, raped and pillaged.

In the ensuing Melee', the US wanted to take control of the southern part of the red sea but more importantly the Suez Canal.

The marines were there so that a religious fundamentalist wouldnt take over thus preventing the US from possibly mining for oil to the north.

Maybe you didnt know this.
I did not know this, but I know of other situations that back your case that are horrible. I also know a lot of cases I have not mentioned that support my basic premise. On the whole, we TRY to do the right thing.

My Uncle (my father's Identical twin) was in the foreign service all my life (mostly in Southeast Asia during the tumultuous 60's and 70's, Indonesia later) and was Ambassador to New Guinea as a career man. Hardly a giant post, and this in no way makes me an expert. But he has made it clear that we attempt to do the right thing even though politics gets in the way as always. I have peppered him with examples that dal. is peppering me with. He is also horrified about our situation in Iraq. He is not aligned with a political party, but I think he might be a little on the liberal side.
From most of the history I know, "we" have made some horrible decisions but have also acted in a manner that does not in anyway help us financially or politically and is totally on the side of human rights.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-31-2006, 10:16 PM
dalakhani's Avatar
dalakhani dalakhani is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Washington dc
Posts: 5,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pgardn
I did not know this, but I know of other situations that back your case that are horrible. I also know a lot of cases I have not mentioned that support my basic premise. On the whole, we TRY to do the right thing.

My Uncle (my father's Identical twin) was in the foreign service all my life (mostly in Southeast Asia during the tumultuous 60's and 70's, Indonesia later) and was Ambassador to New Guinea as a career man. Hardly a giant post, and this in no way makes me an expert. But he has made it clear that we attempt to do the right thing even though politics gets in the way as always. I have peppered him with examples that dal. is peppering me with. He is also horrified about our situation in Iraq. He is not aligned with a political party, but I think he might be a little on the liberal side.
From most of the history I know, "we" have made some horrible decisions but have also acted in a manner that does not in anyway help us financially or politically and is totally on the side of human rights.
I dont disagree with this. If it DOES NOT hurt us politically, we have and will help out. I cant cite any cases right now but im sure there have been some.

I just think this whole "spread democracy in the middle east" thing is the biggest load of s h i t a US govt has ever tried to perpetrate on the world and it own people. We arent in Iraq to "spread democracy". We arent there to "liberate people". If democracry indeed spreads and people are liberated then that is great but it is not even close to the main objective, an objective that has been spun and changed multiple times since the start of the iraqi war.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-31-2006, 10:29 PM
pgardn
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dalakhani
I dont disagree with this. If it DOES NOT hurt us politically, we have and will help out. I cant cite any cases right now but im sure there have been some.

I just think this whole "spread democracy in the middle east" thing is the biggest load of s h i t a US govt has ever tried to perpetrate on the world and it own people. We arent in Iraq to "spread democracy". We arent there to "liberate people". If democracry indeed spreads and people are liberated then that is great but it is not even close to the main objective, an objective that has been spun and changed multiple times since the start of the iraqi war.
Maybe not democracy. But for gosh sakes basic human rights... that has to sink in sometime. The middle east has gone thru far too many despots and crazy people. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe some cultures do not permit basic human rights. I mean my gosh look at what they do to their women. And what we did (and to some extent still do) to our women.

I have now been upgraded to Hollywood Park because of my political threads on a horse board. Hollywood Park will be developed into something else in two years most likely...
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.