WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT TERRORISM? By Dr. Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret.*

[B00ne]

I just think he is trying to say: why not let countries mind their own business and do normal fair lefal trade instead of having the US mingling with them (by intrigue, war, whatever) for their advantage.

tscenter about this :"It would be like Mexico "nationalizing" its industries and taking full control of US companies who have invested billions there. " what u say there is certainly right, but the US did and is doing it too if they feel the need. May I say Bayer. Bayer was deowned by the US and depreived their brand names in the US (they bought back the Bayer name for some billions some years ago, they still dont have the Aspirin brandname back) And the US was thinking about doing it again last year when the Milzbrand letter stuff was going on and the US didnt feel like paying the price for the medicine that only Bayer produced so it was proposed to just deown them and take it - wasnt done though. But u know what I am getting at...

 

[Tominator]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Tominator
What a loon! Little in the way of facts and proof that even in the military there are liberals who try and rewrite history to fit their beliefs and not the other way around.

I'm still waiting for your reply(remember you had no time then) where you accused me of the same things(the rewriting of history yadda yadda ya part). You don't just have that bound to Alt-H (HELP!!!!!) do you?

I and others have completely refuted your attempts of this many times but like the typical Liberal, when faced with facts they just ignore them. Liberals just think if something is repeated so many times it becomes fact.

Just do a search or two and all your idiotic rants will have been answered. I've built one comp today and repaired two more and again I do not have the time to once again shove the facts down your throat....

 

[sandorski]

I agree with the guy. Americans generally think of themselves as spreading American values around the world, but those outside the US look at the ideas of the US, then they look at the actions of the US and sigh a collective(translated from many languages ) and say WTF?! This is not to say that the US hasn't done some good things in the international realm, for it has(Germany and Japan as already mentioned are a couple examples), but if one looks at the history of the US, one will find the support of dictatorships and scoundrels from way before the Cold War and even now(after the Cold War). During the time of the Cold War, I'll concede, support for Dictatorships had some(relatively) justification, but before and after?

Strange thing though is that outside of selling some weapons to some countries that were not Communist, the USSR only directly supported Communist countries/rebel groups. Contrast that with the US's support of anyone willing to oppose Communists and/or willing to supply the US with important goods/commodities(one of the primary reasons the US resisted adopting sanctions against South Africa: titanium)and one has to wonder whether Freedom and Democracy mean anything in US foreign policies. Looks to most that Capitalism is the only thing of importance to US foreign policy.

Now, knowing that someone will say Capitalism=Democracy=Freedom, the historical record shows that it is not. Capitalism can function just fine in a Dictatorship, Theocracy, or Democracy it's just a market system not a social order or political system. Democracy can function just fine combined with a Capitalistic, Socialistic, or Theocratic system it's a political system, not a social order or economic system. Freedom can go hand-in-hand in a Capitalist, Socialist, Dictatorship(doesn't happen much anymore aka Dictatorships have changed), or Theocratist(word?) system, it's a social order, not an economic system or political system.

 

[tcsenter]

tscenter: I'll hand it to you, that's an excellently crafted attempt at diverting the arguement away from his thoughts/ideas/opinion.

Actually, it addresses his argument in head-on fashion, but only if you're politically and intellectually savvy enough to know it.

Where is Bowman's concern for the hundred million or so people "collectivized" for the good of the Communist State during the 20th century? Where is Bowman's concern for the would-be murdered, imprisoned, and oppressed peoples who would have been and in fact were deemed a threat to communism had Latin America, Chile, Iran, South Vietnam, Afghanistan and other countries come under communist or nationalist rule?

None, of course, he expresses none. And the reason is, as I've said, because Bowman is not as opposed to a murderous dictatorship as he his morally selective about which murderous dictatorships he finds compatible with his own ideological and political sympathies.

Name a single conflict or coup mentioned by Bowman that was NOT fundamentally about containing and resisting Soviet communism. I realize the Cold War has been over for a while, and a lot of younger people have no inkling of how brutal Soviet collectivism was and why it needed to be contained. Short memories are a tragic but staple trait of homo sapien.

There was a battle being fought between Western Democracy and Soviet Communism for influence, control, and alliances of monumental political and economic world importance. The Soviets were doing the EXACT same thing we were, trying to beat the other to the punch and subvert the other's influence around the world. If it hadn't been us, it would have been the Soviets. That was the hand we were dealt.

As regrettable and painful as the Cold War's unintended consequences have been, it is NOTHING compared to the way the world would be today had we done nothing.

I don't know about you, but I prefer the stars and stripes to the hammer and sickle, even if Bowman has swallowed the "Heidi-esque" propoganda posters depicting the "benevolent" Soviet Collective Farm where everyone is smiling and whistling while they work. Smiling because they weren't hauled off to concentration camps that day and 'collectivized' for the good of the state.

 

[ElFenix]

i stopped reading as soon as he said for "united fruit... and chiquita banana." its the same company. he doesn't know that, so he probably doesn't know much about the rest of the history of the area. since they are a pretty big part of it.

 

[dahunan]

"We did it in Iraq, where we killed a quarter of a million civilians in a failed attempt to topple Saddam Hussein, and where we have killed a million since then with our sanctions. About half of these innocent victims have been children under the age of five.

Biggest bunch of crap ever typed.

Whenver I see someone believe that sanctions imposed by The United NATIONS against Saddam are responsible for mass deaths of children then I immediately discount anything they say. They are haters pure and simple.

Just because an individual has served in the US Military does not make them loyal to America - McVeigh ring a bell?

 

[sandorski]

Tominator: Your one post was the best(and only) post of opposition I got.

The threads here

tscenter: "Actually, it addresses his argument in head-on fashion, but only if you're politically and intellectually savvy enough to know it."

I'll agree with the "politically" part.