Bush declares "Liberty" for the rest of the world

[D_Raay]

George W, Bush concluded his speech with “America, in this young century, proclaims liberty throughout all the world, and to all the inhabitants thereof.”

Now simply replace the word "liberty" with "military control" and you've got yourself an accurate statement.

I mean, if we are expected to believe that he wishes to spread freedom all over the world, then why would he think that any intelligent person would not realize that freedom and liberty can not be gained with military force. It's just a inaccurate way of saying we are prepared to INVADE anyone who doesn't allow us to get richer off them. We cannot remain complicit in this situation.

In Dostoevsky's novel, that fire in the minds of men is not a yearning for liberty, but a nihilistic will to power that can only end in destruction. Put in George W. Bush's mouth, those words are not a paean to freedom, but a manifesto of pure destructionism.
EIN VOLK, EIN FUEHRER, EIN AMERICA!

[ASsman]

Pfff, that's what you think. You wait and see, theyll like. And if they don't!
http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,272240,00.jpg

[100% ILL]

replace the word "liberty" with "military control" and you've got yourself an accurate statement.

I mean, if we are expected to believe that he wishes to spread freedom all over the world, then why would he think that any intelligent person would not realize that freedom and liberty can not be gained with military force. It's just a inaccurate way of saying we are prepared to INVADE anyone who doesn't allow us to get richer off them. We cannot remain complicit in this situation.

Military control would be too costly. In the current global economy it is beneficial to deal with countries that allow free enterprise etc. This allows the people within those countries to actually put forth ideas that would otherwise be unheard due to the stifling nature of the government. Not to mention the horrible violations of basic human rights in these various countries namely against women (Iran). Add to that the theocratic domination that is so prevelant, in which people cannot even engage in such basic activities that we take for granted; such as a demonstration against our own government, or attending whatever church you want, or none at all. The potential for change is there, it simply needs to be allowed to happen. You have to wonder what motivation Iran has in developing a nuclear program. How long can a country like Iran continue to justify denial of basic rights to women and religious freedom and still be considered reasonable?

Certainly, the powers that be are going to want to maintain the status quo within these countries, but as the world progresses how long can governments like these justify their exsistance while threatening nations that are striving to move forward with constant nuclear threats?

[phinkasaurus]

You have to wonder what motivation Iran has in developing a nuclear program.

the u.s. has a nuclear program and the distinction as the only country to ever use them on another soveirgn nation during a time of war. and the u.s. is talking about iran being next, after iraq.

is that motivation enough for you?

[Whois]

Originally Posted by 100% ILL
You have to wonder what motivation Iran has in developing a nuclear program.
-------
Because the US doesn't invade nations with nukes?

See North Korea

[100% ILL]

the u.s. has a nuclear program and the distinction as the only country to ever use them on another soveirgn nation during a time of war. and the u.s. is talking about iran being next, after iraq.

is that motivation enough for you?

If by being next, you mean the U.S. is going to hold them accountable for possible nuclear non-proliferation (http://fas.org/nuke/guide/iran/nuke/index.html) treaty violations then sure. If that is their intent.

[ASsman]

How long can a country like Iran continue to justify denial of basic rights to women and religious freedom and still be considered reasonable?
Until we get bored with other nation's natural resources... duh.

[D_Raay]

Military control would be too costly. In the current global economy it is beneficial to deal with countries that allow free enterprise etc. This allows the people within those countries to actually put forth ideas that would otherwise be unheard due to the stifling nature of the government. Not to mention the horrible violations of basic human rights in these various countries namely against women (Iran). Add to that the theocratic domination that is so prevelant, in which people cannot even engage in such basic activities that we take for granted; such as a demonstration against our own government, or attending whatever church you want, or none at all. The potential for change is there, it simply needs to be allowed to happen. You have to wonder what motivation Iran has in developing a nuclear program. How long can a country like Iran continue to justify denial of basic rights to women and religious freedom and still be considered reasonable?

Certainly, the powers that be are going to want to maintain the status quo within these countries, but as the world progresses how long can governments like these justify their exsistance while threatening nations that are striving to move forward with constant nuclear threats?

What a fanciful contrived read that was... Pure christian grade-A bullshit...

[100% ILL]

What a fanciful contrived read that was... Pure christian grade-A bullshit...

Thanks for the lucid response, so uncommon now days.

[D_Raay]

Thanks for the lucid response, so uncommon now days.
Come on now..you don't actually believe what you just wrote there do you?

[ASsman]

Didn't Paul ask the same thing to Jesus?

[100% ILL]

Come on now..you don't actually believe what you just wrote there do you?

Which part? They have been witholding information from IAEA inspectors.

http://fas.org/nuke/guide/iran/nuke/index.html

In February 2004 it was discovered that Iran had blueprints for an advanced centrifuge design usable for uranium enrichment that it had withheld from nuclear inspectors. In December 2003, Iran signed an additional protocol authorizing IAEA inspectors to make intrusive, snap inspections of Iran's nuclear facilities. The protocol was signed as an addition to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Remaining uncertainties surrounding Iran's uranium enrichment activities were addressed in the IAEA's November 2004 report.

[ASsman]

Now only if those North Koreans could catch up.

[D_Raay]

Which part? They have been witholding information from IAEA inspectors.

http://fas.org/nuke/guide/iran/nuke/index.html

In February 2004 it was discovered that Iran had blueprints for an advanced centrifuge design usable for uranium enrichment that it had withheld from nuclear inspectors. In December 2003, Iran signed an additional protocol authorizing IAEA inspectors to make intrusive, snap inspections of Iran's nuclear facilities. The protocol was signed as an addition to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Remaining uncertainties surrounding Iran's uranium enrichment activities were addressed in the IAEA's November 2004 report.
It's a road we've been down before... Do you believe Iraq is a success then? The same wheels are in motion, and tyranny set to reign once again. Do you not believe that we have massive influence when it comes to propaganda and raising threat levels where there are none?
Remember this is the same country that held candle light vigils for us after 9/11. They are NOT Arabs, they are Persians and they sit on a great deal of oil. And Halliburton is now involved? How stupid can we be?

[ASsman]

Instead of "Give him a round of applause", I think it would be great if they said "Give this mofo a hand job".

[Whois]

1953

[100% ILL]

It's a road we've been down before... Do you believe Iraq is a success then? The same wheels are in motion, and tyranny set to reign once again. Do you not believe that we have massive influence when it comes to propaganda and raising threat levels where there are none?
Remember this is the same country that held candle light vigils for us after 9/11. They are NOT Arabs, they are Persians and they sit on a great deal of oil. And Halliburton is now involved? How stupid can we be?

No I don't believe Iraq has been a success at all. But the success or failure of Iraq is contigent upon neighoring countries cooperation i.e. not supporting insurgents. I really don't think Iran will become a target. Britan will talk Iran into a peacful settlement, and the focus will probably go back to Syria. In all likelihood this is a diversion of some sort, but that is purely speculation.


It would appear things are already heating up.

http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=28930&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs

Khatami: Iran will defend itself from US

LONDON, Jan 21 (IranMania) - Iran's visiting President Mohammad Khatami warned the United States here Thursday that his country would defend itself from any hostile US action, as the war of words between Tehran and Washington escalated.
Khatami said such a move could not possibly benefit the American people and reminded Washington that it had its hands full in neighboring Iraq where the "relentless killing of people and destruction of civilian homes" continues.

"If any country tries to invade our country, we are strong enough to defend ourselves," Khatami said. "No one will benefit from an attack on our country, including the United States or others."

Khatami, here on the last leg of a seven-nation African tour, said Iran was not looking for conflict with any country and suggested that the United States would be wiser to focus its energies on extricating itself from Iraq.

"I think the United States would (be doing) a great job if they tried to put out the fire that has already been lit in Iraq," he said through a translator.

"They have created fertile ground to breed terrorists in Iraq to take revenge on innocent Iraqi people," Khatami said.

[ASsman]

If they continue to alienate Muslim countries... shit's going to hit the fan. US will fall like the U.S.S.R in Afghanistan.

[Whois]

If they continue to alienate Muslim countries... shit's going to hit the fan. US will fall like the U.S.S.R in Afghanistan.

Or like the US in Afganistan...(snicker).

[Ace42]

Military control would be too costly. In the current global economy it is beneficial to deal with countries that allow free enterprise etc.

Nonsense. It is beneficial to deal with countries that are subjugated by unfair trade deals. Why do you think the US imports its shit from China instead of Europe? Why do you think the UK has outsourced its call centre jobs to Pakistan and India? Why do you think the US is so friendly with the Saudis?

If fact, you could quite easily conclude that the poor are poor because the rich are rich and have the power to enforce unequal trade agreements that favor their interests more than the poorer nations.

poor countries have found themselves in a spiraling race to the bottom as each nation competes against others to provide lower standards, reduced wages and cheaper resources to corporations and richer nations. This has increased poverty and dependency for most people. It also forms a backbone to what we today call globalization. As a result, it maintains the historic unequal rules of trade.

http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Poverty.asp

[phinkasaurus]

If by being next, you mean the U.S. is going to hold them accountable for possible nuclear non-proliferation (http://fas.org/nuke/guide/iran/nuke/index.html) treaty violations then sure. If that is their intent.

the united states breaks or ignores or refuses to ratify more international treaties (http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/tables/treaties.htm) than any country.

but then, the u.s. is a hypocrite, so it's not surprising.