On US conduct during the Cold War - Page 4 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

Pogo · #46 (**permalink**) 03-29-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by faeden

Yes, some responsibility belongs to the trainer and supplier of groups (nations, armies, rebels), but often the atrocites that are commited by those groups are contrary to the wishes of the supplier.

Are the police as a whole responsible for the illegal acts of crooked cops? Don't the actual actors bear responsibility?

When groups are trained and equipped and they do a good job, should the supplier get all the credit?

Seeing as how Nazi expats were brought in to help with the training, I think it's safe to say that atrocities weren't expected to be the exception. That training and funding continued in spite of knowing that large-scale atrocities were occurring is another tip-off, too.

tamperpr00f · #47 (**permalink**) 03-29-2007

It is easy to comment on the failures of the United States, and in fact over-exaggerate those failures, when you live in a nation that hasn't ever had the responsibility of being a super-power, and/or you live under the comfortable umbrella of America's protection.

htperr6565 · #48 (**permalink**) 03-29-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pogo

When you train and arm those who do murder tens of thousands, you're as guilty as those who did the murdering, and we're not just talking about murder, either, but the most gruesome acts of terrorism imaginable.

Care to discuss specific examples?

enigma2 · #49 (**permalink**) 03-29-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by htperr6565

in which of those cases did the US murder thousands of civilians with its own forces in order to impose its own government upon them? you see, us georgians pay attention to detaills.

thousands of civilians were murdered in the red scare?

i was never aware US Military stepped foot in Cuba during the Cold War... interesting research, where did you find that??

Oh and people using thier freedoms to express their conviction that ripping fetuses out of women is not a good thing is the same thing as Soviet tanks murdering civilians..

and im ignorant. riiiiight.

Again, your knowledge of world events during the Cold War is next to none or nil!

Have you heard of the term 'proxy wars'?

Where do foetuses enter this equation?

enigma2 · #50 (**permalink**) 03-29-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by faeden

I agree with the original post's point of view. Yes terrible things took place with US support (indirect as well as direct support). However, the hegemony of the US has been a stablizing force in the world which allowed international commerce to take off and which allowed more people to act somewhat freely.
"Democracy is the worst form of government - except for all the other forms." Churchill ?

The US may not be perfect, but it is a positive force in the world.

In some cases it may be a positive force. However, I doubt the people of South America and now the middle-east would agree with that statement. All those hundreds of thousands of refugees leaving Iraq would certainly be able to put up a good case for the opposite point of view.

Well, now we see where your loyalties lie, not with the people being forced from their homes in fear but making the world safe for US multi-national profits. This has ever been the ethos behind US foreign policy! From Managua to Kabul the 'economy' is king!

htperr6565 · #51 (**permalink**) 03-29-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by enigma2

Again, your knowledge of world events during the Cold War is next to none or nil!

Have you heard of the term 'proxy wars'?

Where do foetuses enter this equation?

I am familiar with the term proxy war. Its when two powers arm two sides of another fight to further their own agenda. The Yom Kippur War of 1974 is a good example.

However, we were discussing the use of direct force by the two superpowers on other civilians. It was Soviet forces who killed thousands of Hungarians, not an armed proxy. Can you present a similar case during the Cold War of American troops being used directly to kill thousands of civilians, intentionally, during the quelling of a rebellion in which the citizens would have no choice in their future after said quelling?

fetuses entered the equation when you cited that the religous right's anti abortion stance is comparable to Soviet brutality. you brought it up!

Or is your goal here only to distance yourself from specifics in order to generalize your flawed argument?

metalted · #52 (**permalink**) 03-29-2007

we are an empire get used to it.

why dont you have a thread on the soviet conduct in cold war...

european conduct on european imperialism..

i think youl find we are the better ones.

htperr6565 · #53 (**permalink**) 03-29-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by enigma2

In some cases it may be a positive force. However, I doubt the people of South America and now the middle-east would agree with that statement. All those hundreds of thousands of refugees leaving Iraq would certainly be able to put up a good case for the opposite point of view.

Well, now we see where your loyalties lie, not with the people being forced from their homes in fear but making the world safe for US multi-national profits. This has ever been the ethos behind US foreign policy! From Managua to Kabul the 'economy' is king!

Actually, in 2007, after four years of war, 50% of Iraqis consider their life in Iraq to be much better, somewhat better, or the same since before the war.

Only 35% think coalition forces should leave...

according to poll conducted across all 18 provinces by the BBC from Feb to March of this year.

faeden · #54 (**permalink**) 03-29-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by enigma2

In some cases it may be a positive force. However, I doubt the people of South America and now the middle-east would agree with that statement. All those hundreds of thousands of refugees leaving Iraq would certainly be able to put up a good case for the opposite point of view.

Well, now we see where your loyalties lie, not with the people being forced from their homes in fear but making the world safe for US multi-national profits. This has ever been the ethos behind US foreign policy! From Managua to Kabul the 'economy' is king!

Yes, the ethos of US foreign policy IS make the world safe for capitalism. So what? When people are 'more free' they are more likely to be consumers. It is in the interest of the US that citizens of all countries are free to engage in the capitalist market. It is in the US's interest that regular people around the world are free to engage in commerce. One byproduct of this concept is liberty and an increase in the standard of living.

enigma2 · #55 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by htperr6565

I am familiar with the term proxy war. Its when two powers arm two sides of another fight to further their own agenda. The Yom Kippur War of 1974 is a good example.

However, we were discussing the use of direct force by the two superpowers on other civilians. It was Soviet forces who killed thousands of Hungarians, not an armed proxy. Can you present a similar case during the Cold War of American troops being used directly to kill thousands of civilians, intentionally, during the quelling of a rebellion in which the citizens would have no choice in their future after said quelling?

fetuses entered the equation when you cited that the religous right's anti abortion stance is comparable to Soviet brutality. you brought it up!

Or is your goal here only to distance yourself from specifics in order to generalize your flawed argument?

Would you please find where I said that and repost it?

enigma2 · #56 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by htperr6565

Actually, in 2007, after four years of war, 50% of Iraqis consider their life in Iraq to be much better, somewhat better, or the same since before the war.

Only 35% think coalition forces should leave...

according to poll conducted across all 18 provinces by the BBC from Feb to March of this year.

cough, gasp, choke!

Sorry, but I almost passed out laughing! Was this poll taken before or after the devasting last few days news from Iraq?

By the way, did you notice that you didn't include - worse, much worse and for chrissake get me outta here! in the poll questions!

Smug self-satisfaction must just ooze out of you.

enigma2 · #57 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by faeden

Yes, the ethos of US foreign policy IS make the world safe for capitalism. So what? When people are 'more free' they are more likely to be consumers. It is in the interest of the US that citizens of all countries are free to engage in the capitalist market. It is in the US's interest that regular people around the world are free to engage in commerce. One byproduct of this concept is liberty and an increase in the standard of living.

Does 'consuming' make a better world? Actually, it makes for a very unhappy and/or neurotic citizenry. Studies have shown again and again that 'consumerism' can never be satisfied. AND this is what is good for companies, but not good for people.

Grow up and move beyond the 'conspicuous consumption' treadmill.

enigma2 · #58 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by faeden

Yes, the ethos of US foreign policy IS make the world safe for capitalism. So what? When people are 'more free' they are more likely to be consumers. It is in the interest of the US that citizens of all countries are free to engage in the capitalist market. It is in the US's interest that regular people around the world are free to engage in commerce. One byproduct of this concept is liberty and an increase in the standard of living.

Oh! by the way, you didn't address my question about refugees. Or was your answer "So what?"?

enigma2 · #59 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by htperr6565

Care to discuss specific examples?

The four American nuns raped and murdered by the US trained and armed Contras, whilst helping the people of Nicaragua!

enigma2 · #60 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by htperr6565

I am familiar with the term proxy war. Its when two powers arm two sides of another fight to further their own agenda. The Yom Kippur War of 1974 is a good example.

However, we were discussing the use of direct force by the two superpowers on other civilians. It was Soviet forces who killed thousands of Hungarians, not an armed proxy. Can you present a similar case during the Cold War of American troops being used directly to kill thousands of civilians, intentionally, during the quelling of a rebellion in which the citizens would have no choice in their future after said quelling?
fetuses entered the equation when you cited that the religous right's anti abortion stance is comparable to Soviet brutality. you brought it up!

Or is your goal here only to distance yourself from specifics in order to generalize your flawed argument?

You haven't heard of the Bonus Marchers have you? Look it up!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode