Yes lol you have moral grounds to be policing the world, yes you have. You should tell people how to live their lives. I'm not saying the result is always great but you should try. You want to let people live their lives? Sure see what happens in Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Congo, Sudan etc etc. Oh women are living as slaves in Saudi Arabia. But don't do anything cause they'll get pissed off and punch you in the face! You know what that is? That's egoism. Like Europe, all they do all day is sitting on their asses and talk about diplomacy and talking blah blah blah. Meanwhile in Congo 4 million people are rape-tortured-murdered. You are afraid people'll dislike you and and punch you in the face. That's egoism. You accept the suffering of others to save yourself. Again I'm not saying the Iraq war is just, but IF you support such policies and then change because of threats you are egoistic and coward! One thing if you speak honest and say it's not worth it or too expensive but don't start with that world police crap. There is no country I rather have as world police. I don't know how the patriot act works cause I am not from USA but if it adds security then it's not bending, it's preparing! Bending is changing all you believe in cause you're afraid of punches and people calling you world police. I never seen bttf[QUOTE="Cow4ever"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] what are you talking about? rons'position is that we have been acting like dicks the world over for decades, it is expensive, we have no moral grounds to be policing the world and telling people to live our way or else, and it pisses people off, if you piss enough people off at some point youre going to get punched. his position is not that 9/11 or terrorism is justified, or that we should bend to fear, hell he is against the patriot act and the TSA as those actions are bending to fear. we are altering our lives because of threats of violence and giving up personal freedoms and dignity. i dont know where you got your information but you might want to check the horses mouth if you want it to be reliable.
our current role in international politics is that of Biff from back to the future.
TheWalrusBeast
Your argument would make sense if the US has actually been so kind to do something other than talk if its not in its interest. In the few countries you listed, the US has frankly done nothing positive and if anything, actually detrimental
Rwanda - massacres and war crimes of unimaginable scale and US never intervened or even sent any peacekeepers
Saudi Arabia - One of America's best allies even though they just stopped a popular coup in Bahrain and the Saudi kingdom is still a theocracy that bars women from driving and stones them for dating
Iran - Theocratic with a crazy leader but the US obviously can't do anything and hasn't done anything. In fact, its the US that caused this regime's rise because of the support of the dictatorial Shah in the 1970s who the Iranians toppled.
Congo- Again US never intervened and did little besides criticisms from the state department
Sudan - similar to that of Congo and Rwanda, US never intervened, did absolutely nothing while people were getting massacred during its civil war
Ron Paul really has a point. If the US is really the fair and moral superpower, it would have done things not in its interest to protect people but it only does things in its interest and historically has always been short-sighted in its policies (i.e. supporting Taliban against the Russians, bringing up Saddam against the Iranians, attacking Iraq thinking it would be a quick win, etc). Thus, its policies like these and hypocrisy that brings so much hate to America.
Well I agree. But they should, that's my point regardless of what others think.
. 
Log in to comment