The Daily Static
  The Daily Static
UF Archives
Register
UF Membership
Ad Free Site
Postcards
Community

Geekfinder
UFie Gear
Advertise on UF

Forum Rules
& FAQ


Username

Password


Create a New Account

 
 

Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index

Looking for answers by colmtourque2003-03-07 12:22:30
  Really simple. by Illiad2003-03-07 12:37:24
    That is not a reason by colmtourque2003-03-07 13:08:41
      Pot-Kettle-black. by geminidomino22003-03-07 13:17:12
        What was wrong. by colmtourque2003-03-07 13:34:46
          Nyet by Illiad2003-03-07 13:42:30
            Nyet na na by colmtourque2003-03-07 13:51:34
              I'll play . .. by skwanch 2003-03-07 14:11:39
I answered this, give me a list of times the US has done this
  • WWII: Despite the fact that Germany was blitzkrieging Europe, we stayed out of the war (at the expense of Britain, Poland, Austria, Norway, Holland, France . . ) until we were attacked
  • 1950s: Look up 'Operation Success'. The CIA backed a coup against a popularly elected Central American leader because that leader was threatening US corporate interests. What followed was a dictatorial regime that killed thousands of its own citizens and rolled back the advances the previous leader was trying to instill. But hey, they Nat'l Food Co got to keep its plantations, so I guess it was okay.
  • The Gulf War: Bush the First decided *not* to remove Saddam because it was felt that instability in the region was 'not in US interests'; as a result the massacre of the Kurds continued, and we're still right where we were in '91.
  • The Berlin Airlift: although this was a humanitarian operation, it was done to prevent West Berlin from falling to the Soviets, and thereby allowing the US and NATO to maintain a tripwire defense force within East Germany.

    I could go on and on and on, but Illiad is right. In the words of Kissinger, 'Nations do not have friends, they have interests'. It is the *duty* of the chief executive to protect the interests of the country; to betray those interests for *any* reason, no matter how noble, is contrary to his oath of office and in my mind, treasonous (Neville Chamberlain comes to mind). It wouldn't do much good for us to have a president who said 'Iraq has WMD, but I don't believe in war, so we won't do anything about it'. Whether Iraq has those weapons may be a matter of conjecture, but the motivations of nation states are not.

  • [ Reply ]

     

    [Todays Cartoon Discussion] [News Index]

    Come get yer ARS (Account Registration System) Source Code here!
    All images, characters, content and text are copyrighted and trademarks of J.D. Frazer except where other ownership applies. Don't do bad things, we have lawyers.
    UserFriendly.Org and its operators are not liable for comments or content posted by its visitors, and will cheerfully assist the lawful authorities in hunting down script-kiddies, spammers and other net scum. And if you're really bad, we'll call your mom. (We're not kidding, we've done it before.)