From: "Casey" <hidden@lucifer.com>
>
> Well, it seems that a few of the responses on this thread are specifically
anti-US in their tone.
If you are referring to me then I am dissapointed that this is how I appear.
I am not Anti-American. But I am anti much current US foreign policy.
>
> I don't get it. Why do some of the list members feel it's necessary to
come up with presumptions about actions the US never took? To even mention
none existent horrors of slaughtered Iraqis is ridiculous. There was no
slaughter. There was decisive action taken upon the coalition forces to
drive Hussein's armies from Kuwait. Whatever the reasons were for the
actions was decided upon by coalition forces and those who participated in
the coalition agreed upon them at the request of the Kuwaiti monarchy.
>From the pictures I have seem of the road to Basra, it was a slaughter. This
was due to the totally unequal morale, technology and training of the two
sides. The comparative casualty figures back this up. But war isn't supposed
to be fair and I am happy that the coalition casualties were very low.
My question wasn't actually about the morals of this slaughter, but whether
images of the slaughter was what stopped the western forces capitalising on
their victory. Joe says that it was more to do with realpolitik and the
resurgence of Iran.
>
> What occurred after the Gulf War ended was approved by the UN. There are
arguments against the sanctions now, but those countries that walked hand in
hand with the US were compelled to aid a country that was overrun by Iraqi
tanks.
>
> Furthermore, I won't say whether, or not, I agree with a new war with
Iraq. I haven't come to any decisive conclusions----but, I do have a
definite feeling that I would not want to be involved in the fighting that
may occur.
>
> What bothers me is how some of the list members take everything that the
US does and warps it to form the basis of their arguments against the US.
No nation is innocent. History has proven that. So, while you may feel
the US is not doing it's part to be the good guy on the block, I say look
around the block...the US has done a pretty good job of reining in trouble
makers. And if you don't like what the US has done, then do something
about it. Vote into office the people who share your ideology, your point
of view, what have you.
With power comes responsibility. I don't feel that the US is behaving very
responsibly. It seems to be pursuing its own narrow interests regardless of
the consequences to the other peoples of the world, torpedoing the Kyoto
Protocol being but one example.
When the USSR was perceived as a real threat the USA it curbed the worst
excesses of US foreign policy (and vice versa). Now that counterweight the
US is free to throw around its considerable military and economic might on
the world stage. Would the USSR have done the same if it had 'won' the cold
war? Probably to a much greater extent. Perhaps I am being naive in holding
the USA to higher standards than its predecessors as world's most powerful
nation. However the US does have an enlightened constitution, largely based
on freedom for the individual. Is it too much to ask that these basic
principals be extended to non-Americans?
Ever empire has done shitty things in what it perceived as its own narrow
interests (the British Empire included). But that doesn't mean that we can't
aspire to higher standards.
>
> Is there anything the US has done to help humanity? I think so, but I'm
beginning to think that many of you don't. Oh well.
>
> Ponder this...can we, or should we, blame the Brits for
Israeli/Palestinian conflict from it's beginnings in the 1940's, the
conflict in Kashmir that erupted after India and Pakistan were granted
independence in 1948, the eradication of thousands of Aborigines, Africans,
Indians, and American Indians throughout the history of the British Empire?
Can we blame Germany for the Holocaust and WWII, the same going for the
Japanese with their own atrocities against the Chinese during WWII? What
of the Russians since they killed millions of their own in order to quell
any dissent? Oh yeah, how about the multitude of 3rd world countries whose
leaders took it upon themselves to eradicate their foes?
...
The British Empire does bear at some responsibility for the current mess in
the middle east and many other problems. Did the British Empire eradicated
large numbers of American Indians? I thought white Americans did most of
that, but I don't have any numbers to hand.
Of course no individual can bear responsibility for acts that were committed
before they were born.
We need to understand the past, but not be shackled to it. Otherwise we will
end up with the situation we have in Northern Ireland, where people are
still fighting about injustices committed 600 years ago.
Andy Brice
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Sep 22 2002 - 05:06:19 MDT