Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
That's a kind way of putting it. It's all very ends-justify-the-meansy.
Because, you know, American military superiority + American hegemony = world peace and universally free peoples. It's like mathematics. Every time you do the calculations, the same answer comes up.
We can see it happening even today. Afghanistan and Iraq were like failed experiments, and now the U.S. isn't sure how to call them off. It certainly isn't sure on how to take the next step in its crusade for world peace and free peoples. Maybe all it did wrong is make a few mistakes in the math. Maybe it just needs more military and hegemony.
Maybe China has some ideas. But don't let them get too carried away. They aren't American enough. But they're working on it.
|
It is becoming difficult for me to follow you. What they want and what I want are the same - they elaborated on how to get there, I did not. American greatness does not necessarily mean it comes at the expense of others. Fighting for freedom is a necessary and worthy goal, it requires a strong military. I think you read things into their stated mission that is not there.
Is your argument that strong nations should not fight for the freedoms of oppressed people? I also know the concept of nation building and intervention is controversial, however, I think there is a role for strong nations, do you? And again, using Canada as an example, was your government wrong to use its military in a manner that supported the goals of PNAC in Afghanistan and Iraq?