Reply With Quote
If the US didn't take a stance on Communism worldwide and basically pester the USSR to death, do you think some of our Eastern European posters would be posting on this website today?
Right, just like people had no idea what the spread of communism would mean for the US? The spread of communism to places like... lets say VIETNAM!? So basically what you're telling me is that this war is preventing the spread of Islamo-fascist ideals in the hope of preventing a hypothetical future overrun of American ideals of rights and liberties. In other words, we're back to the 1950s?
If the US didn't take a stance on Communism worldwide and basically pester the USSR to death, do you think some of our Eastern European posters would be posting on this website today?
Are you saying they would have been incapable of self liberation?
Who knows? Some of the French fought like a mother er in WWII and I doubt that they ever would have beaten the Nazis without a little help from somewhere.
The Polish got the kicked out of them when they didn't tote the communist line, and it took them 50 years to get out from under the Nazis/Soviets.
Are you going to try to pull some sort of gotcha! on me or something, like the theory of Islamic countries moderating on their own? Who knows?
Indeed, but what does that have to do with defending your country? Look all I'm saying is don't try to convince people you're defending yourselves, when in reality you're defending your interests and that is not always a righteous thing!
I'm not trying to be righteous. Myself and my interests are pretty damn closely related, as probably are yours!Look all I'm saying is don't try to convince people you're defending yourselves, when in reality you're defending your interests and that is not always a righteous thing!
FYI, you have exceptional grammar for someone from Argentina/a non-English speaking nation, Manumania... if that's your REAL NAME!(I know you've been around a long time).
I'm not trying to be righteous. Myself and my interests are pretty damn closely related, as probably are yours!
FYI, you have exceptional grammar for someone from Argentina/a non-English speaking nation, Manumania... if that's your REAL NAME!I didn't mean you specifically, I meant the US as a whole. To answer your question, I was born in Italy to Argentinean parents, and lived all over the place, including the US. I've gone to American schools all of my life though. To give you an idea, I've lived in Italy, France, England, Lybia, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Peru, Venezuela, USA. My real name is Eric
I'm saying that there are other methods and freedom would exsist regardless of what America does. People want freedom and gravitate torwards it, it's not a unique American invention which is contrary to the at ude in this country.
I'm a firm believer that your nations at ude and how it is displayed through forgien policy shine through and have a big impact on your world affairs. I think that is one reason America has a lot of trouble at times. As much as people here love to compain about supposed French arrogance, they never see themselves filling that role pretty ing well.
Argentina had a "moderate" goverment at the time, but in which many top members were secretly sympathetic to Hitler, Mussolini and Franco. The country had big economical connections with the UK, but also a huge amount of Italian and Spanish immigrants (both for and against the fascist goverments in their homeland). Only after the war we had a massive amount of immigrants from Eastern Europe (my grandad came from Poland in 1948), but before the war the Jewish here were a very small minority. So the point is back then, there were pro (both for the Allies and the Axis) and against war positions. There were big political tensions in the country, and had the goverment declared for one side or another early in the war, it wouldn't have counted with support or it would have caused riots or fightings between both sides.
As the war developed, it proved that the best for the nation's economy was a neutral position (an error that affected our economy and alliences after the war). Also, we didn't have a huge or modern army (basically, we never did in our 195 years of history; our main victories were small scale battles), so declaring war against either side would have mean losing the country to a foreign power. We only declared war in 1945, when it was obvious that Germany was going to lose.
But that was pretty much the stance of the whole region, the only country that joined the Allies was Brazil, in 1942, the rest of South America remained neutral or joined the war very late.
As for the Spanish question, Argentina didn't take part in the Spanish Civil War (again, there were both pro and against positions), but the country did receive a lot of the refugees who fled from Franco (my other grandfather came here in 1938 from the Basque country).
From Wikipedia:
Roberto Ortiz was elected president in 1936, followed by Ramón Castillo. Argentina was officially neutral during most of the Second World War; much of the public sympathized with the Allied side, however the military governments that ruled between the years 1943-1946 favoured the Axis Powers, although towards the end of the war Argentina entered on the Allied side.
Last edited by Manu'sMagicalLeftHand; 07-13-2005 at 06:47 PM.
I don't think there's anyway Communism would have lasted this long regardless if the US did anything. Communism is in itself a flawed concept. The natural greed of people is what makes communism collapse.
Link?
Link?the royal families in Saudia Arabia
Link?and Kuwait,
and Israeli violations of human rights.
Link?
Go under my name and read through my posts. I've provided a lot of information on that before. , for the last one look no further than the annual State Dept report on Human rights violations. Israel is a annual member.
Who do we get cheap oil from? And what countries don't?
Which middle eastern countries did we use as pawns in the cold war?Using the Middle East as pawns in the Cold War.
Link?Our lack of respect for human rights for non-Americans.
Unreal
\
Are you kidding? its a well known fact that the US trained and armed Iraqui soldiers to pester the Russians during the Cold War
That's funny because we had nothing to do with the Shah or his father coming to power...we put political pressure on him for Democratic reform, he was pro-western leader that was in favor of that reform until the Islamists started trying to over throw him...
As for when he was deposed...
It was this man who gave him shelter:
The fellow I am talking about is of course the man sitting to the left of the woman sitting to the left of Michael Moore at the Democratic National Convention.
And we support their violations?, for the last one look no further than the annual State Dept report on Human rights violations. Israel is a annual member.
Question...who is responsible for the modern incarnation of Israel?
That's what I thought...not a link...just standard liberal rhetoric that is in no way back up by facts.
The best one of course is the "cheap oil" oil being a globally traded commodity with regulated prices and all...it might get cheaper for us...it will get cheaper for everyone, including the people that live in Arab countries...
If we truly wanted subsidized oil we would have been lining up to the best cheap oil deal in recent memory...known as the OFF program...that was the subsidized oil...that was the oil being sold at discount prices off the world market. And it was France, Germany and Russia that were getting most of it...you know...the same guys that were against taking any action against Saddam even if he did have WMD.
Whottt, I may have no link, but I guarantee you what I'm saying has been proved. Now, I don't have to convince you of anything, you believe what you want.
P.S. I will be looking for a link about this, I'm sure its out there
Wasn't the all powerful Reagan who gave Saddam his weapons?
link? link? link?
Yes, and Carter & Ford gave F-14's to the Shah of Iran. Moral of the story: you can't trust the governments of middle eastern nations, because in 10 years it could be someone else.
What weapons?
And why did we give him the weapons we are alleged to have given him?
Your ignorance of history is liberal rhetoric? Wheres the link to your brain?That's what I thought...not a link...just standard liberal rhetoric that is in no way back up by facts.
No need to throw insults sucker...it just makes you look bad.
Just admit you don't know what the you are talking about and you are just repeating you hear other people say.
Pathetic.
Wow, someone must have started their period today. As for not knowing what I'm talking about, it's pretty clear that you are the one who has no grasp of American (or any) history. Go grab a book or something, it might do you some good.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
