The Terrible Hypocrisy of England and America ın Geopolitics

[El Kabong]

No, Obama hasn't changed that at all.

Oh well that's nice to read at least you're not in denial over that.

[TitoFan]

Tito,

I couldn't agree more we should have told France to go it alone but basically the called in their favor. We pulled the NATO mutual defense card for Afghanistan and they basically said you owe us on this one. The really glaring part about the whole thing is US military strength has basically allowed our NATO partners to become practically useless for any real combined effort. I'm not saying a British Para is a watered down version of our 82nd or Rangers but the fact that NATO couldn't handle Libya w/o us (our technology) is very telling. If it were up to me I'd pack up our shit and bring it home then tell the world they can go it alone for a while.

I think we're homing in on the root cause, Victor. The smart thing for the U.S. to do would be to address the NATO in the following manner:



"Look guys, for whatever reason, we're always seen as the meddling bad guys in conflicts across the globe. The whole purpose of NATO is to have a unified global power precisely for the resolution of conflicts in different parts of the world that could potentially spill over and affect other nations. Right now, you're (NATO) a bunch of wimps, basically depending on us, big bad U.S.A., to come running over and put out whatever fires flare up across the world. And for our troubles, we're hated by most of the Arab world, and a few other countries. This, in turn, helps fuel the acts of terrorism against our citizens, both in our own country and abroad.

We can't go back and undo the past. But we ask... no... we demand that NATO implements an action plan to strengthen its forces sooner rather than later, so we can go back to concentrating on our own affairs, and take a break from this bad guy image we've gotten. We're tired of getting shit all over us every time we're asked (or not) to come to the rescue. That is not our job exclusively. All other allied nations have to stop leaning on us, knowing we'll do the dirty work and get shit on in return."

Regards,
Uncle Sam

[El Kabong]

....I like to dream too

[TitoFan]

....I like to dream too

Which basically confirms the fact that the U.S. would rather keep its "ace up the sleeve".... meddling in handpicked foreign affairs that suit a particular political and/or economic agenda.... while crying about getting hated for having to be the world's "policeman".

[El Kabong]

Hey, don't complain to me, complain to Obama, HE thought it was a great idea....though I'm betting when Benghazi went down he wanted a do-over

[TitoFan]

He thought WHAT was a good idea?? We're talking U.S. foreign policy here. Can you put your anti-Obama rants aside for just a minute? Or are you implying that all the U.S.'s problems abroad are Obama's fault also?

[VictorCharlie]

What the US needs is a defined foreign policy. A set standard of protocols that lead to military action (define what types and when they are used), diplomatic engagement, introduction of UN resolutions etc.

[El Kabong]

He thought WHAT was a good idea?? We're talking U.S. foreign policy here. Can you put your anti-Obama rants aside for just a minute? Or are you implying that all the U.S.'s problems abroad are Obama's fault also?

Obama is Commander in Chief and he had the option of saying "OK we'll help you out France & Italy" or "Sorry fellas we're kind of tied up at the moment" and he chose to help out. And what do we have to show for it? Sure Moamar Qudaffi is dead & gone, but now we have a Libya that's split in two and half of it is of the "Let's burn down the West even if it means we will destroy the entire world" variety of government and by government I mean insane mob of Militant Muslims.

But hey we're supposed to re-elect Barry aren't we? I mean that cat has done such a bang up job from everything to unemployment (higher than when he was first elected) to foreign policy (we're being attacked by terrorists again) am I right? So who's ready for 4 more years

[TitoFan]

He thought WHAT was a good idea?? We're talking U.S. foreign policy here. Can you put your anti-Obama rants aside for just a minute? Or are you implying that all the U.S.'s problems abroad are Obama's fault also?

Obama is Commander in Chief and he had the option of saying "OK we'll help you out France & Italy" or "Sorry fellas we're kind of tied up at the moment" and he chose to help out. And what do we have to show for it? Sure Moamar Qudaffi is dead & gone, but now we have a Libya that's split in two and half of it is of the "Let's burn down the West even if it means we will destroy the entire world" variety of government and by government I mean insane mob of Militant Muslims.

But hey we're supposed to re-elect Barry aren't we? I mean that cat has done such a bang up job from everything to unemployment (higher than when he was first elected) to foreign policy (we're being attacked by terrorists again) am I right? So who's ready for 4 more years

Yes... that damn Obama. He's ruined all the good will that George W. had meticulously and skillfully built up with the rest of the world throughout his 8 years as President.

[El Kabong]

Yes... that damn Obama. He's ruined all the good will that George W. had meticulously and skillfully built up with the rest of the world throughout his 8 years as President.

People like to paint W as some sort of gun slinging cowboy and so I would like to ask "Would W have allowed our men to get massacred in Banghazi?"...I mean if W was the "Shoot first ask questions later" leader everyone seems to believe he was then you've got to figure he would have handled it in a manner that would have at the very least had our Armed Forces ATTEMPT to rescue those men.


And Fort Hood? That's still strictly a case of "workplace violence", nevermind what the guy said about Allah.

also Benghazi happened because of a VIDEO on YOUTUBE

[Gandalf]

I think you're taking it a bit too far, Miles. Nazi Germany invaded other countries, because Hitler wanted to expand Germany's borders. He wanted to create something similar to the Roman Empire. The Nazis also committed heinous crimes against humanity, particularly the Jews, through mass extinction, based solely on this warped sense of race superiority on the part of Hitler. But there was another thread on Nazi Germany, and frankly I don't want to go down that route.

The U.S., IMO, is guilty of meddling where it does not belong. But as far as I know, it is not trying to expand its borders by invading any other country. If that were the case, Mexico and Canada would be the first victims. What the U.S. is guilty of is pretending to know what is good for countries halfway around the world, including those cases where said country poses no danger to America, or its citizens.

But not all interventions have been unpopular with the rest of the world, either. I seem to remember that when Iraq up and invaded Kuwait, and the U.S. responded, global opinion was in favor of the U.S. at that point. Then the U.S. took it a step further and invaded Iraq, in an effort to displace Saddam Hussein. THAT was not so unanimously cheered by the rest of the world. And of course there was the foolish and artificial "hunt" for the WMD, which of course were never found. When 9/11 happened, surely the global community must have expected SOME response. And again, at least initially, the world's countries we're solidly backing the U.S. That is of course, until George W. failed to capitalize on this new wave of good will by being his usual bumbling self.

But again, as with all arguments, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. No... the U.S. does NOT have to be involved in every issue outside its borders, as Lyle and others might feel. But there ARE legitimate interests that the U.S. must protect in the name of national security.

The REAL problem, as I have stated before, is that "in the name of national security" is a funny phrase, in that it can be distorted, misinterpreted, played with to serve political interests, etc, etc. And THIS is why I posted what I posted before.

But I agree with you on the drone strikes. Many of these are completely reprehensible. Keeping one U.S. pilot safe at home, weighed against killing scores of innocent civilians, well.... I don't want to stir up any shit, but I think this one is a slam dunk. It's not like the jet fighters of today are as vulnerable as the old fighters of WW-II. Again, back in the days of Iraq, I don't recall too many casualties involving jet fighter pilots. And those faced heavy fire from the Iraqis. You remove the human element from these strikes... you risk more innocent casualties. There's no other way to put it.

I don't mean to ramble (although that's exactly what I'm doing), but bottom line is this:

The world needs open and objective minds. Sometimes we are guilty of extremist beliefs, which cloud our better judgement and produce these broad, mostly inaccurate statements. If we're rational and leave our emotions out of it, we'll see that the truth always lies somewhere in the middle.

Again I strongly disagree with you Tito. You falsely trumpet the naive and indoctrinated belief that the USA has some kind of pursuit of nobility on its mind, when most of the evidence points in quite the opposite direction. Do your research on Reagan and his covert operations in central America in the 1980's. Keeping it in modern times alone just look at which nation has most tried to restrict due international process in the UN with the veto. The US is the guilty partner by far. Russia tails far down in the list. Then if the US gets angry with France for vetoing Iraq they get angry and say 'do it our way or you will suffer' offering incentives for the likes of Russia to commit terrorist acts in Chechnya just as long as they support it. These are mafia tactics and this is America.

America didn't give a shit about the people of Iraq whatsoever. It was just another in the grand imperial design. First you have manifest destiny and wipe out the natives, and then you embark it on a global scale and have military bases spread throughout the empire. It is no trick of the imagination. Iraq was an illegal war based on Nuremburg Principles and furthermore it had little international support. Most in the world were against it and regarded America as a menace. Other 100, 000 deaths, continued torture, bombings and uncertainty are testament to how immoral it all was. And let's not forget how poor the US made Iraq with sanctions which only really affected the general population. America has never cared about the people of Iraq.

It isn't a system designed to care. It is a psychopathic war machine that has to justify that ridiculous military spending in some way. And Romney thinks it needs more!

[Gandalf]

Due Process? What constitutes due process for military action? Nations do what is in their best interests and to expect anything else is naive.

International consensus, not commiting acts of aggression. Iraq was a grab for oil and it failed. It was an obvious breach of international law and Bush and Blair are still yet to be held account for their crimes. They are obvious crimes. Fabricating evidence, war of aggression, acts of terror and torture etc.

Nations should do what is in their own interests, but force has no relevance to such an argument. That is criminal and abusive.

[Beanz]

Everybody has gone mad.

Lyle You can't seriously blame Obama for Benghazi and then fail to mention the fact that he hunted down and killed the uber cunt Bin Laden, something W never quite managed. And TitoFan You can't moan about America being stretched and NATO being wimps whilst neglecting to mention the fact that in 90% of conflicts defending democracy the little old UK is first to help whilst the rest of the UN and NATO sit on their hands. Kirkland you seem to think that everything in the world is America and the UK's fault and that without them we would all be eating candyfloss. Miles you go on and on about the horror whilst flippantly comparing your haircut to an auschwitz Jew, well that is all very witty and all that but most Jews did not have the privilege of leaving the shower afterwards.

Miles ,Brockton, TitoFan and Kirkland do you think that the Chemical weapons that Saddam used to massacre the Kurds were just figments of the dead's imagination?

The truth is the world is not run by one great conspiracy and dressed up as a fight for freedom by Evil men, propping up others, just as it is not run by incorruptible eunuchs with only the happiness of mandkind filling their hearts. It is a mess but all hope is not lost and people muddle along because we are a young species, struggling to live together in a globalised world, full of disparate values. Whilst things in retrospect could always have been done with more care and efficiency, I can not in good conscience focus on drones killing terrorists in Pakistan without acknowledging the "horror" of Taliban edicts that are responsible for shooting young girls in the face for attending school or hanging people for the "crime" of being raped.

"Should we just look away and cover are ears?"

America can be dumb and Britain can be arrogant but that is not the same as Evil. Doing nothing is collaboration.

[Gandalf]

Greenbeanz, and how long was America a good friend of Sadaam's while content in the knowledge of what acts Saddam was commiting upon his own people? The hypocrisy is astounding. However, leaving aside that observation and heading towards the so called reason for war, was that Saddam posessed WMD and posed an iminent threat. Now that was a lie and we know that there simply was not such a threat. We commited a war of agression on an impoverished state, with next to no self defense, and yet interestingly, is in possession of significant supplies of oil. We went to war to war without the backing of the UN and America threatened weaker states to garner support and even encouraged Russia to murder in Chechnya to get them on side. France nobly said no to this nonsense and we all know how the US media reacted to that one. Let's put aside that the US is the largest vetoer in the UN and that US media only ever puts that in a minor paragraph on page 24.

It is no coincidence that America working for its cartels has spread misery, murder and backed dictatorship and torture around the globe for nigh on half a century. It is no conspiracy, it is huge and evidence overwhelming. The polls show that it isn't a conspiracy, but more popular opinion than anything else.

[Gandalf]

Lyle, the Nazi's restricted freedom and commited wars of agression. America is now restricting freedom and commiting acts of agression. With the support of Israel America also supports the Gaza concentration camp. It is quite fascistic, just more subtle with the two party dictatorship.