How come the US never got any shit for supplying Saddam WMDs (graphic pictures)

[MavsSuperFan]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/dec/31/iraq.politics

The Reagan administration and its special Middle East envoy, Donald Rumsfeld, did little to stop Iraq developing weapons of mass destruction in the 1980s, even though they knew Saddam Hussein was using chemical weapons "almost daily" against Iran, it was reported yesterday.

US support for Baghdad during the Iran-Iraq war as a bulwark against Shi'ite militancy has been well known for some time, but using declassified government documents, the Washington Post provided new details yesterday about Mr Rumsfeld's role, and about the extent of the Reagan administration's knowledge of the use of chemical weapons.

The details will embarrass Mr Rumsfeld, who as defence secretary in the Bush administration is one of the leading hawks on Iraq, frequently denouncing it for its past use of such weapons.

The US provided less conventional military equipment than British or German companies but it did allow the export of biological agents, including anthrax; vital ingredients for chemical weapons; and cluster bombs sold by a CIA front organisation in Chile, the report says.
The most egregious was when we supplied saddam with VX nerve gas
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkbBnvz0rw0
youtube video about how deadly VX nerve gas is.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-153210/Rumsfeld-helped-Iraq-chemical-weapons.html

US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld helped Saddam Hussein build up his arsenal of deadly chemical and biological weapons, it was revealed last night.
As an envoy from President Reagan 19 years ago, he had a secret meeting with the Iraqi dictator and arranged enormous military assistance for his war with Iran.
The CIA had already warned that Iraq was using chemical weapons almost daily. But Mr Rumsfeld, at the time a successful executive in the pharmaceutical industry, still made it possible for Saddam to buy supplies from American firms.
They included viruses such as anthrax and bubonic plague, according to the Washington Post

http://*****.com/general29/wesold.htm


Reports by the US Senate's committee on banking, housing and urban affairs -- which oversees American exports policy -- reveal that the US, under the successive administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush Snr, sold materials including anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992, as well as germs similar to tuberculosis and pneumonia. Other bacteria sold included brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene.
...
The shipments to Iraq went on even after Saddam Hussein ordered the gassing of the Kurdish town of Halabja, in which at least 5000 men, women and children died. The atrocity, which shocked the world, took place in March 1988, but a month later the components and materials of weapons of mass destruction were continuing to arrive in Baghdad from the US.
The Senate report also makes clear that: 'The United States provided the government of Iraq with 'dual use' licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological and missile-system programmes.'

This assistance, according to the report, included 'chemical warfare-agent precursors, chemical warfare-agent production facility plans and technical drawings, chemical warfare filling equipment, biological warfare-related materials, missile fabrication equipment and missile system guidance equipment'.

http://www.iranchamber.com/history/iran_iraq_war/war_pictures/14_iran_iraq_war.jpg

Photos of the halabja massacre below, extremely graphic
[QUOTE]The Halabja chemical attack (Kurdish: K

[RidonKs]

thanks for this post. given the extent of american involvement in iraq since the 1991, it's a screaming travesty that more americans don't understand the american relationship with iraq throughout the 80s.

[BigBoss]

http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/osama-bin-laden.jpg

[Nanners]

The reason the US doesnt get shit for doing things like this is because of people like you mavs, people with opinions like the one you were posting in this nuclear weapons thread (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=353014).



Its unfair to compare a super state to a normal country.

The United states is more moral, altruistic and just than any other superstate in human history. Name one super state that is more fundamentally moral than the United States of America.

[kNIOKAS]

The reason the US doesnt get shit for doing things like this is because of people like you mavs, people with opinions like the one you were posting in this nuclear weapons thread (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=353014).
Ouch

[bdreason]

The reason the US doesnt get shit for doing things like this is because of people like you mavs, people with opinions like the one you were posting in this nuclear weapons thread (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=353014).


The U.S. does a lot of fukced up shit, but it could be worse. Let's be real here, the U.S. dominates the World's oceans with it's military, and if it wanted to, could probably conquer half the World.

Can you imagine if China or Russia had the U.S.'s military capabilities? :eek:

[MavsSuperFan]

The reason the US doesnt get shit for doing things like this is because of people like you mavs, people with opinions like the one you were posting in this nuclear weapons thread (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=353014).
Stand by that.

I have never said in absolute terms the US hasnt done horrific things.

Its unfair to compare a super state to a normal country.

Persian empire
Alexander the Great's empire
Roman empire
Byzantine Empire (eastern roman empire)
Ottoman empire
Han Dynasty
Tang Dynasty
Ming Dynasty
Qing Dynasty
Mongol Empire
Rashidun Caliphate
Umayyad Caliphate
Abbasid Caliphate
Ottoman Empire
Dutch Empire
Spanish Empire
Portuguese Empire
Russian Empire
British Empire
French Empire
Austro-Hungarian Empire
German Empire
Imperial Japan
USSR
Nazi Germany

The United states is more moral, altruistic and just than any other superstate in human history. Name one super state that is more fundamentally moral than the United States of America.

Those states are the peers of the USA, and we are their moral betters

Edit, the reverse its true too, its unfair to blame canada, mexico, sweden, etc for not stopping the rwandan genocide or not saving the Yazidi

[RidonKs]

The reason the US doesnt get shit for doing things like this is because of people like you mavs, people with opinions like the one you were posting in this nuclear weapons thread (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=353014).
this is extreme and too personal imo even if it is accurate which i do believe it is

[RidonKs]

Stand by that.

I have never said in absolute terms the US hasnt done horrific things.

Its unfair to compare a super state to a normal country.

Persian empire
Alexander the Great's empire
Roman empire
Byzantine Empire (eastern roman empire)
Ottoman empire
Han Dynasty
Tang Dynasty
Ming Dynasty
Qing Dynasty
Mongol Empire
Rashidun Caliphate
Umayyad Caliphate
Abbasid Caliphate
Ottoman Empire
Dutch Empire
Spanish Empire
Portuguese Empire
Russian Empire
British Empire
French Empire
Austro-Hungarian Empire
German Empire
Imperial Japan
USSR
Nazi Germany

The United states is more moral, altruistic and just than any other superstate in human history. Name one super state that is more fundamentally moral than the United States of America.

Those states are the peers of the USA, and we are their moral betters

Edit, the reverse its true too, its unfair to blame canada, mexico, sweden, etc for not stopping the rwandan genocide or not saving the Yazidi
and buddha was more moral than joseph smith

who cares?

(this is all relevant to the response i gave you in the nuclear thread nanners linked)

[Nanners]

this is extreme and too personal imo even if it is accurate which i do believe it is

Its not at all too extreme or too personal. If mavs doesnt want me to point out problems with the stuff he posts around here, he should stop posting so much stupid bullshit.


How come the US never got any shit for supplying Saddam WMDs


I have never said in absolute terms the US hasnt done horrific things.

Its unfair to compare a super state to a normal country.

There you go mavs, you just answered your own question. The reason the US doesnt get any shit for supplying Saddam with WMDs is because some people think that the US is the most morally righteous superstate in history, and some people also think superstates should not be held to the same standards as weaker countries. Who cares if the US supplied Saddam with chemical weapons, the US only gave him these weapons for the greater good, and we all know that 'bad empires' like Nazi germany would have given Saddam nukes, right?

[MavsSuperFan]

Its not at all too extreme or too personal. If mavs doesnt want me to point out problems with the stuff he posts around here, he should stop posting so much stupid bullshit.





There you go mavs, you just answered your own question. The reason the US doesnt get any shit for supplying Saddam with WMDs is because some people think that the US is the most morally righteous superstate in history, and some people also think superstates should not be held to the same standards as weaker countries. Who cares if the US supplied Saddam with chemical weapons, the US only gave him these weapons for the greater good, and we all know that 'bad empires' like Nazi germany would have given Saddam nukes, right?
For the record I want the still living Reagan administration officials prosecuted in a US court of law. I think US laws should constrain american administrations. I am against international laws constraining american administrations, but American laws definitely should.


Its not at all too extreme or too personal. If mavs doesnt want me to point out problems with the stuff he posts around here, he should stop posting so much stupid bullshit.
I dont mind you pointing out where you think I am wrong, I like debate, it sucks when everyone agrees. I just dont think you have done so.

You just use emotional ad hominem attacks and insults like a child. You very rarely provide an actual counter argument


The reason the US doesnt get any shit for supplying Saddam with WMDs is because some people think that the US is the most morally righteous superstate in history,
I do think that, name one superstate that is more moral? I am open to changing my mind, but you refuse to contradict me with an actual example, you just use insults.

nd some people also think superstates should not be held to the same standards as weaker countries.
Correct, its unfair to both, obviously being stronger, from time to time you will exhibit bullying behavior.
Also you cant fault a country like Sweden for not stopping the Rwandan genocide.


Who cares if the US supplied Saddam with chemical weapons, the US only gave him these weapons for the greater good, and we all know that 'bad empires' like Nazi germany would have given Saddam nukes, right?
No, I think its horrible the reagan administration armed saddam with WMDs.

Those kurds that got slaughtered are our fault. Why do you think I made this thread?

I wish people like Rumsfeld were sentenced to life in prison for giving saddam vx nerve gas. I wish american courts would take the appropriate action.

My comments in the other thread were in defense of america as overall doing moral actions, especially when compared to other states of immense military power.

I have never stated america has not committed horrific war crimes or is a moral country in absolute terms.
I consider giving saddam vx nerve gas and anthrax and other biological and chemical weapons a war crime

[Nanners]

You just use emotional ad hominem attacks and insults like a child. You very rarely provide an actual counter argument


Thats just not true. I always start out with legitimate counter arguments. When my legitimate arguments get ignored, or when I am arguing with someone who has a long history of posting like a fvcktard, only then do I start throwing around the insults.

[Nick Young]

Goddamn Reagan!

ARM THE SHIT OUT OF THE KURDS. Give them control of the whole phucking region! Turn Kurdistan into Israel 2.0: The more powerful sequel. Let these people finally have a UN recognized nation. Give them license to keep order and do whatever the phuck they want! They deserve revenge for how WE phucked them around by arming their enemies. Kurds are also like the ONLY country in that region that actually protected and looked after their Jews. THEY HAVE A LONG HISTORY OF TOLERANCE, and are pissed off as shit and won't phuck around when it comes to seeking vengeance against all these assholes who have phucked with them for too long.

[DeuceWallaces]

Are you 17?

They got tons of shit for it during the first and second Bush Wars. I don't know how many times I saw pics of US Presidents shaking hands with him while gas-bags yelled on TV.

[Godzuki]

i love how none of u fgts focus on the contexts of situations and the why's, just blanket U.S. blaming in hindsight constantly for everything. yes we do shit like arm people to fight other people. we are doing it now. sometimes it comes back to bite us, but our intention is NEVER to purposely create monster dictators or Islamic extremist groups like u stupid fgts always want to paint.

dumbass foreign history revisionist mf'ers :facepalm

[RidonKs]

i love how none of u fgts focus on the contexts of situations and the why's, just blanket U.S. blaming in hindsight constantly for everything. yes we do shit like arm people to fight other people. we are doing it now. sometimes it comes back to bite us, but our intention is NEVER to purposely create monster dictators or Islamic extremist groups like u stupid fgts always want to paint.

dumbass foreign history revisionist mf'ers :facepalm
america gave lots of support to the mujahideen in afghanistan. sound familiar?

america gave lots of support to dictators; mobutu (congo), suharto (indonesia), pinochet (chile), the shah (iran), mubarak (egypt). sound familiar?

the intention isn't always to create monster dictators or extremist groups. the intention is usually apolitical. but the result is at least occasionally and probably often the creation of both monster dictators, extremist groups, or in the worst case scenarios, both.

[kNIOKAS]

yes we do shit like arm people to fight other people. we are doing it now. sometimes it comes back to bite us, but our intention is NEVER to purposely create monster dictators or Islamic extremist groups like u stupid fgts always want to paint.

:eek:

a. it actually often is to create monster dicatators and extremist groups
b. claimed intentions do not take away the responsibility, especially when US seems to never learn

[dude77]

The United states is more moral, altruistic and just than any other superstate in human history. Name one super state that is more fundamentally moral than the United States of America.

Those states are the peers of the USA, and we are their moral betters

Edit, the reverse its true too, its unfair to blame canada, mexico, sweden, etc for not stopping the rwandan genocide or not saving the Yazidi

the us government has done some really fkd up shit .. giving the impression to the world that they are on some higher moral ground doesn't negate all of that .. it's like suddenly praising a mass murderer because he helped a kid cross the street .. you've been brainwashed and indoctrinated well

[Dresta]

Oh dear, another thread for hipsters to spout their ahistorical nonsense about the big bad America that is so much worse than everyone else, giving the middle finger to a power that won't do anything about it, revelling in the comfortable feelings of heroism this provides, heroism devoid of risk that is.

Bask in the the comfort of this risk-free opposition to some great towering, evil power that poses no threat to you while you can, these opportunities for self-grandeur don't always make it so easy to be a freedom fighter!!

America has been the easy target for 3rd-rate intellectuals since the 1950s, and your fatuity will be properly exposed before long like good old Monsieur Sartre's & co.

And yes, i recognise the many crimes of US foreign policy, i'm just not naive enough to compare them to some utopian ideal of a world-dominant power that doesn't pursue its own interests and is capable of preserving worldwide peace and harmony without the landing of a single troop or the dropping of even one bomb. When you compare the United States you must compare it to past dominant world-powers, not to some abstract ideal that has never existed and will never exist.

[YouGotServed]

Oh dear, another thread for hipsters to spout their ahistorical nonsense about the big bad America that is so much worse than everyone else, giving the middle finger to a power that won't do anything about it, revelling in the comfortable feelings of heroism this provides, heroism devoid of risk that is.

Bask in the the comfort of this risk-free opposition to some great towering, evil power that poses no threat to you while you can, these opportunities for self-grandeur don't always make it so easy to be a freedom fighter!!

America has been the easy target for 3rd-rate intellectuals since the 1950s, and your fatuity will be properly exposed before long like good old Monsieur Sartre's & co.

And yes, i recognise the many crimes of US foreign policy, i'm just not naive enough to compare them to some utopian ideal of a world-dominant power that doesn't pursue its own interests and is capable of preserving worldwide peace and harmony without the landing of a single troop or the dropping of even one bomb. When you compare the United States you must compare it to past dominant world-powers, not to some abstract ideal that has never existed and will never exist.

rat poison

[MavsSuperFan]

Thats just not true. I always start out with legitimate counter arguments. When my legitimate arguments get ignored, or when I am arguing with someone who has a long history of posting like a fvcktard, only then do I start throwing around the insults.
Name one superstate more moral than america?
you still have not done so. You dislike debate, you cant handle someone with a different opinion than you and lack the ability to actually make a counter argument.

has a long history of posting like a fvcktard
provide an example, please, I personally think all of my positions are well reasoned out.

[Nick Young]

Mubarak was not even that bad. He was much better then what the Egyptians got going on now.:facepalm

[MavsSuperFan]

Are you 17?

They got tons of shit for it during the first and second Bush Wars. I don't know how many times I saw pics of US Presidents shaking hands with him while gas-bags yelled on TV.
I am mostly referring to why no administration officials faced legal consequences for arming Saddam with WMDs

[MavsSuperFan]

Oh dear, another thread for hipsters to spout their ahistorical nonsense about the big bad America that is so much worse than everyone else, giving the middle finger to a power that won't do anything about it, revelling in the comfortable feelings of heroism this provides, heroism devoid of risk that is.

Bask in the the comfort of this risk-free opposition to some great towering, evil power that poses no threat to you while you can, these opportunities for self-grandeur don't always make it so easy to be a freedom fighter!!

America has been the easy target for 3rd-rate intellectuals since the 1950s, and your fatuity will be properly exposed before long like good old Monsieur Sartre's & co.

And yes, i recognise the many crimes of US foreign policy, i'm just not naive enough to compare them to some utopian ideal of a world-dominant power that doesn't pursue its own interests and is capable of preserving worldwide peace and harmony without the landing of a single troop or the dropping of even one bomb. When you compare the United States you must compare it to past dominant world-powers, not to some abstract ideal that has never existed and will never exist.
I actually agree with 99% of this
I think america is astonishingly non-imperial relative to its military power

Still dont think when we do wrong american courts shouldnt hold our officials responsible

[Nanners]

Name one superstate more moral than america?
you still have not done so. You dislike debate, you cant handle someone with a different opinion than you and lack the ability to actually make a counter argument.

provide an example, please, I personally think all of my positions are well reasoned out.

I never fvcking said there was a superstate that was more moral than america. You are arguing against a strawman you dumb cvnt.

It has nothing to do with "disliking debate", which you would have realized if you took a minute to read and comprehend any of my posts. What I have said many times already, is that arguing over which superstate is the most moral is pointless and a monumental waste of fvcking time.

Who gives a fvck if america is the most moral superstate? Patting ourselves on the back for being less cruel than other powerful countries is narcissistic and pointless. People in foreign countries like Nicaragua and Iran that have been fvcked over by americans dont feel better about their situation because the people who fvcked them are more moral than the british empire was, they still got fvcked either way.

[MavsSuperFan]

I never fvcking said there was a superstate that was more moral than america. You are arguing against a strawman you dumb cvnt.

It has nothing to do with "disliking debate", which you would have realized if you took a minute to read and comprehend any of my posts. What I have said many times already, is that arguing over which superstate is the most moral is pointless and a monumental waste of fvcking time.

Who gives a fvck if america is the most moral superstate? Patting ourselves on the back for being less cruel than other powerful countries is narcissistic and pointless. People in foreign countries like Nicaragua and Iran that have been fvcked over by americans dont feel better about their situation because the people who fvcked them are more moral than the british empire was, they still got fvcked either way.
When did I say they should feel good about america?
For the record I have said that I understood why arabs attacked us on 9/11, I understand why persians in iran would hate us

I never fvcking said there was a superstate that was more moral than america.
Thats all I was saying, you seemed to disagree


It has nothing to do with "disliking debate", which you would have realized if you took a minute to read and comprehend any of my posts. What I have said many times already, is that arguing over which superstate is the most moral is pointless and a monumental waste of fvcking time.
All debate on ISH is a waste of time

America is the most moral, is all I was saying.

Eg if person A assaults someone and person B cripples somone, person A has committed less of a crime. That is all I was saying.


Who gives a fvck if america is the most moral superstate? Patting ourselves on the back for being less cruel than other powerful countries is narcissistic and pointless.

many people should care about america's morality. We have done many things that are in the benefit of non-americans.
Also we have refrained from doing many things that would be immoral, but clearly in our best interests.

America is a great nation by any objective measure, that takes into context how other nations with america's level of military power has acted.

Many regions of the world are incredibly indebted to american foreign policy.
-South Korea
-Japan
-Taiwan
-All of western europe
-Eastern europe (other than russia and serbia)
-Albania, Kosovo
-The yazidi
-the Philippines (though we committed war crimes during our occupation)
-Israel
etc
Even in the case of iran, we have no idea how mohammad Mosaddegh would have turned out. The islamic republic of iran hasnt exactly been a pillar of human rights.

Its not like the shah was preventing a liberal democracy.

[Nanners]

Thats all I was saying, you seemed to disagree


Well maybe if you took a minute to actually read my posts you would understand my positions. I said on multiple occasions that I think discussing whether america is more moral than the british empire is a complete waste of time, but not once that america is less moral than the british empire. You claim that you want to have a "debate", but you are just flat out ignoring posts made by people when you think they have a dissenting opinion. Why the fvck would I want to have a debate with someone who cant even be bothered to read my posts?

[MavsSuperFan]

Well maybe if you took a minute to actually read my posts you would understand my positions. I said on multiple occasions that I think discussing whether america is more moral than the british empire is a complete waste of time, but not once that america is less moral than the british empire. You claim that you want to have a "debate", but you are just flat out ignoring posts made by people when you think they have a dissenting opinion. Why the fvck would I want to have a debate with someone who cant even be bothered to read my posts?
i addressed that point. I read all of your posts
I disagreed with you.


I said on multiple occasions that I think discussing whether america is more moral than the british empire is a complete waste of time,
You feel its not important, I feel its extremely important.

All debate on ISH is a waste of time. none of us affect policy any more than voting and writing our congressmen, unless we secretly have congressmen on ISH which i doubt


You claim that you want to have a "debate", but you are just flat out ignoring posts made by people when you think they have a dissenting opinion.
I have read every single post of yours.
All of your points I have disagreed with I have addressed and made a counter point.

Your position is that the fact that America does anything wrong is wrong and America should change the things it does wrong.

I havent addressed that because I agree with that.

I addressed your refusal to give america credit for all the good it does and all of the bad things it could do. Eg, until a couple of posts ago you havent said that America is the most moral superstate in human history. You just kept saying that wasnt important, which I disagree with. The world would have been a very different place had America acted like the Soviet Union in terms of trying to dominate other nations

[Dunaprenti]

Eg, until a couple of posts ago you havent said that America is the most moral superstate in human history. You just kept saying that wasnt important, which I disagree with. The world would have been a very different place had America acted like the Soviet Union in terms of trying to dominate other nations
Morality has changed throughout the centuries and I cannot see how you can compare The Roman Empire with current US.
Also, is this way of thinking applicable to everything, or just superstates? If a mass murderer is philanthropist, should we not be more concered with the killings?

About USSR, they were doing the same thing the US is/was doing - funding and sometimes participating in wars which would grant them influence in the region. Of course they did a lot of despicable things in "friendly" countries, for which they are despised.

[pinhead]

The U.S. does a lot of fukced up shit, but it could be worse. Let's be real here, the U.S. dominates the World's oceans with it's military, and if it wanted to, could probably conquer half the World.

Can you imagine if China or Russia had the U.S.'s military capabilities? :eek:

It took you 10 years to find Bin Laden and you can't even stop some British Muslim loser beheading your citizens. You are being laughed at by the muslim world.

British Empire the GOAT superpower.

[KingBeasley08]

It took you 10 years to find Bin Laden and you can't even stop some British Muslim loser beheading your citizens. You are being laughed at by the muslim world.

British Empire the GOAT superpower.
American military is the strongest in the history of this planet. Undeniable fact

[pinhead]

American military is the strongest in the history of this planet. Undeniable fact


All brawn no brains. Which sums up American society quite well too.

[KingBeasley08]

All brawn no brains. Which sums up American society quite well too.
Not true. Best technology in military history. GOAT brawn, GOAT brains :applause:

[Nick Young]

Dont mind pinhead. He is butthurt that the Scots are declaring independence soon and taking 90% of the UK's oil with them. Soon the UK will be Germany's bitch, and England's neighboring kingdoms will consist only of the mighty Wales, Cornwall and North Ireland :lol Without their oil their economy will crash and they will be forced to go in to the Euro. Oh yes they have the Falklands too, they fought very hard and killed many people to secure that useless chunk of rock, and are still very proud of it to this day XD


I am looking forward to Scottish independence as it means the value of my US dollars blows up through the roof over here.

Phuck the Queen. Your empire is dead.


He's just mad that USA were the first to rebel and jump off that sinking ship:lol

[Derka]

All brawn no brains. Which sums up American society quite well too.

The World Cup was months ago, bro. Time to let it go.

[RoseCity07]

How do you sleep at night if you know you directly contributed to the killing of children. Innocent people is bad enough. Killing kids is as low as it gets.

[RidonKs]

Oh dear, another thread for hipsters to spout their ahistorical nonsense about the big bad America that is so much worse than everyone else, giving the middle finger to a power that won't do anything about it, revelling in the comfortable feelings of heroism this provides, heroism devoid of risk that is.

Bask in the the comfort of this risk-free opposition to some great towering, evil power that poses no threat to you while you can, these opportunities for self-grandeur don't always make it so easy to be a freedom fighter!!

America has been the easy target for 3rd-rate intellectuals since the 1950s, and your fatuity will be properly exposed before long like good old Monsieur Sartre's & co.

And yes, i recognise the many crimes of US foreign policy, i'm just not naive enough to compare them to some utopian ideal of a world-dominant power that doesn't pursue its own interests and is capable of preserving worldwide peace and harmony without the landing of a single troop or the dropping of even one bomb. When you compare the United States you must compare it to past dominant world-powers, not to some abstract ideal that has never existed and will never exist.
and how dare i ask will this exposure take place? you can tell me all about sartre's "exposure" by way of analogy if you'd like. i'm unfamiliar. i guess i'm not in on all the important shit people need to know about like what happened to that guy.

nobody is comparing america to an ideal like "utopia" or some objective morality. people are pointing to crimes committed by state governments and suggesting the people living in them take the necessary steps to prevent crimes like them from happening again. this isn't rocket science, and it isn't an abstract journey through epistemological ethics. it's just common sense. and the point is particularly powerful when talking about countries with functional democratic processes that mean people can have a say in their representative government. if you think THAT'S idealistic, well then we fundamentally disagree on what is possible in this world and what isn't and there's no point continuing the discussion.

incidentally for people living in countries without those formal democratic mechanisms, there are still recommendable steps to be taken to acquire those mechanisms. it's happened all throughout history. these are democratic revolutions. i understand well enough that there is not a democratic revolution looming over america's immediate future. i'm sure we at least agree on that fact.

in my opinion, it is in fact you who are falling prey to a deterministic worldview in which, as you say, the world-dominant power must pursue its own self interests without second thought and must ignore peace and freedom without a first thought and must always be deploying at least one soldier and dropping at least one bomb.

it's painful that i feel the need to explain this, but here we go. nobody on the self-righteous bleeding heart feel good in our bellies emo-prog left believes the world is going to be a utopia any time soon. and if they've given it any modicum of thought they would also probably understand that the world will never be a utopia by the very definition of the world which can only contrast the world we actually live in -- ie. not a utopia.

america is not an easy target. america is the appropriate target because it is the most powerful and influential state in the world on practically every level; in international bodies, in economic ties, and primarily in military power which is crucial. it also leads a broad coalition of allied states which come in a variety of colours -- social democratic, state capitalist, theocratic, tyrannical, criminal, completely indifferent and unimportant, etc. none of this is remotely deniable but feel free to challenge me for evidence if you'd really like.

the american empire is not more benign than the british empire because the founding fathers decided it should be and wrote a super moral constitution and instilled in the american mind some divinely inspired moral code or even an effective set of rules for constraining its naked aggression. america has been THE most militaristic and aggressive nation in the world for *GASP* 50 years. exactly the same time frame me and my 3rd rate intellectual friends have been pointing the fact out.

but back to the point; the american empire is more benign for other reasons. i wouldn't mind hearing your suggestion/opinion as to what those reasons are. what has made america a more benign empire than its british predecessor? better question: what made the british empire less brutal than ancient athens, which it was? please give me your take.

i don't feel like a hero. but i do have a conscience. :confusedshrug:

[RidonKs]

I actually agree with 99% of this
I think america is astonishingly non-imperial relative to its military power

Still dont think when we do wrong american courts shouldnt hold our officials responsible
you miss a key point here and i'm afraid it has to do with the real world rather than anything to do with "should".

in the real world, which has been happening for quite a while now in case you haven't noticed, superpowers DONT hold themselves accountable. and before you say america is different because it is more benign, notice america has NEVER held a single one of its leaders accountable for blatant aggression around the world. crimes you are consistently pointing out and have some idea of.

yet how many american presidents have actually been impeached while in office? only two. one for lying about a blowjob, the other for choosing a new secretary of war. how's that for holding leaders accountable?

the notion that american courts are going to charge american leaders for crimes committed by an american presidential administration is unbelievably naive.

this is why international bodies are necessary. this is why the UN and world court and the international criminal court and a whole host of other institutions, weak as fk though they are, exist right now. and in fact the united states were integral to their creation and remains a high contracting party to international law which does exist by solemn and inviolable treaty... according to the law anyway. hell according to the fcking constitution.

that american administrations continue to ignore these agreements and laugh them off as nonsense when they are brought up does not undermine the fact that they exist and are real.

[tgan3]

The U.S. does a lot of fukced up shit, but it could be worse. Let's be real here, the U.S. dominates the World's oceans with it's military, and if it wanted to, could probably conquer half the World.

Can you imagine if China or Russia had the U.S.'s military capabilities? :eek:

How do you know that they don't have?

[RidonKs]

bump