But I don't endorse imperialism, no matter which country happens to be carrying out the policy. I see imperialism as a big coil that spreads outwards to solve supposed external problems and then drags them inwards.
Where I disagree with you over Iraq is the fact no invasion was carried out during the time it would have been legitimate - after Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. But the U.S. opted to wait and impose sanctions for many years and, whether we admit it or not, this caused untold misery for innocents. That in turn, fueled Islamic extremism. That, in part, led to 9/11 and subsequently Bush's plan to return to Iraq and hope overthrowing Saddam would solve the problem for once and for all.
Sadly I don't think it will. If you could defeat religion via force the Roman persecution of Christians would have prevented the eventual rise of Christian Fundamentalism in your country and elsewhere, correct?
Now look at the effects of Bush's Iraq policy. You have the Russians struggling to contain the secular regimes in surrounding ex-soviet countries. You have Iran getting stronger and also fundamentalist. You have Iraq returning to religious clerics with a strong dose of anti-western ideology.
You even have thousands of people in France and Britian flocking to Islam, covering themselves from head to toe.
Frankly it worries me. It makes me wonder whether the fall of the USSR was really a good thing since at least communism came up with eye-surgery, Olympic medals and the first woman in space. Today people are simply flocking back into the arms of religion be it Christian fundamentalism in America or Islam in Europe.
Where I disagree with you over Iraq is the fact no invasion was carried out during the time it would have been legitimate - after Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. But the U.S. opted to wait and impose sanctions for many years and, whether we admit it or not, this caused untold misery for innocents. That in turn, fueled Islamic extremism. That, in part, led to 9/11 and subsequently Bush's plan to return to Iraq and hope overthrowing Saddam would solve the problem for once and for all.
Sadly I don't think it will. If you could defeat religion via force the Roman persecution of Christians would have prevented the eventual rise of Christian Fundamentalism in your country and elsewhere, correct?
Now look at the effects of Bush's Iraq policy. You have the Russians struggling to contain the secular regimes in surrounding ex-soviet countries. You have Iran getting stronger and also fundamentalist. You have Iraq returning to religious clerics with a strong dose of anti-western ideology.
You even have thousands of people in France and Britian flocking to Islam, covering themselves from head to toe.
Frankly it worries me. It makes me wonder whether the fall of the USSR was really a good thing since at least communism came up with eye-surgery, Olympic medals and the first woman in space. Today people are simply flocking back into the arms of religion be it Christian fundamentalism in America or Islam in Europe.
davidmc said:Iraq was constituted w/, primarily I believe, British influence (League of Nations?). Hell, you even drew thier boundary lines for cryin' out loud & installed thier 1st leader. Do you now have no interest in thier future Sure it's expensive BUT what was the alternative & do you believe that it would've been cheaper to deal w/ the thug at a later time Us baby-sitting him for another 10-15 yrs.