|
I guess you didn't read my posts.
Let me paraphrase: It is hypocritical for america to claim that civil rights and the spread of democracy are high priorities. Anyone trying to claim that our little excursion in iraq was more than just accidentally humanitarian is trying to sell you something. America, as evidenced by our foreign policy in uzbek and guinea and china and a whole slew of other nations, doesn't really give two shits about the spread of democracy and human rights for all.
You haven't really argued against this so i guess you agree.
I agree with you that many iraqis are better off, but i don't think you should pretend that "liberation" was any more than a positive side effect of our war. A convenient way to sell the war to the masses. "Operation iraqi freedom" is an easier sell than "operation put small, militarily insignificant, rogue nations on notice." I don't think that we are one bit safer, since al quaeda is the real threat, and as of late the only connection between obl and saddam is of the conspiracy theory sort.
I know nothing is simple, that politics is a dirty game, that is why i cringe when i hear the president claim that he is greatly concerned with the well being of foreigners, because he is not. He is concerned with protecting his vision of america's long term goals. Nowhere significant on that list is democracy and human rights for all. America may claim to be all for the spread of democracy, but america is only for america.
|