Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3
The above is pretty convoluted.
First, America will have almost nothing directly to do with internal struggles for freedom or a voice within another nation.
The reason America was directly involved in Iraq was because of "our" (not yours specifically is understood) desire to remove Saddam Hussein. After removing him from power we had two choice, "nation build" or allow chaos. Bush with the urging of people like Colin "you break it, you fix it" Powell, went the "nation building" route.
The changes going on in other nations in the ME, not getting any publicity, do not have any direct US involvement. People around the world can see on their own that there is a better way, and that it involves the ability to play a role in self-determination - in a word, freedom.
|
It's not so convoluted. It's the arrogance that is behind conservative (and not so conservative) American opinion. When it is expedient for us, we back internal struggles for freedom. For example, during Iran's elections in 2009 - I don't recall any claims being made in the American media at that time that they should remain calm and patient. But when it could be potentially difficult for us, we suddenly become concerned about stability. And, of course, when it becomes our interest to invade, we can't be stopped until the target is completely and utterly broken. Woops.
What's more, it's unbelievably arrogant to purport that the protesters in Egypt just don't understand the economic situation in their own country. Surely you can see that.