McCain wants to kick Russia out of G-8

[sunnyside]

I think your assessment is "generally true" up until the 60's or so. Pretty much since then US involvement overseas has been corporate in nature, under the "guise" of preventing enemy powers from being able to threaten us. Most of the countries we've been involved in conflicts with didn't do anything special to become a threat for decades but suddenly became one when they did something inconvenient to really rich people in the U.S.

Because we're planning to make so much money from Afganistan. Also big gains from Grenada, Somalia, and Serbia. Though in the long run we might get some benifit from Kosovo, for now we just get temporary appreciation.

Still, especially now we're mostly about the whole war on terror thing.

Though I'll admit we aren't always 100% out there just to keep the world safe and make it a better place. For example I think the Panama business we pretty much just about protecting our National Interests. Though we we're straight up honest about our reasons for being there in that case.

[Duskofdead]

I think your assessment is "generally true" up until the 60's or so. Pretty much since then US involvement overseas has been corporate in nature, under the "guise" of preventing enemy powers from being able to threaten us. Most of the countries we've been involved in conflicts with didn't do anything special to become a threat for decades but suddenly became one when they did something inconvenient to really rich people in the U.S.

Because we're planning to make so much money from Afganistan. Also big gains from Grenada, Somalia, and Serbia. Though in the long run we might get some benifit from Kosovo, for now we just get temporary appreciation.

Still, especially now we're mostly about the whole war on terror thing.

Though I'll admit we aren't always 100% out there just to keep the world safe and make it a better place. For example I think the Panama business we pretty much just about protecting our National Interests. Though we we're straight up honest about our reasons for being there in that case.

Look how much Afghanistan has been deprioritized next to Iraq. There's a reason for that, and it's not because Al Qaida is "more in Iraq than Afghanistan." Look how much Osama Bin Laden's been a non-priority and non-news item for years now. Why is that? If we're just responding to a "threat" to us they should still be the #1 issue, and Bush should have been impeached ages ago.

Regarding Panama, ARE YOU INSANE? We deliberately invaded conviently just before the 100 year deadline where we were supposed to yield control back, and dismantled their military. And then oh look... there was a clause in the agreement that we'd hand it back over provided Panama was capable of protecting it adequately, so we have to keep it for another century.

PURE imperialism, in that case. Straight up and honest is not how I would describe how we retained control of it.

[Tsukiyumi]

Regarding Panama, ARE YOU INSANE? We deliberately invaded conviently just before the 100 year deadline where we were supposed to yield control back, and dismantled their military. And then oh look... there was a clause in the agreement that we'd hand it back over provided Panama was capable of protecting it adequately, so we have to keep it for another century.

*ahem* Not to sound like a History Nazi, but: US Invasion of Panama

[Duskofdead]

Regarding Panama, ARE YOU INSANE? We deliberately invaded conviently just before the 100 year deadline where we were supposed to yield control back, and dismantled their military. And then oh look... there was a clause in the agreement that we'd hand it back over provided Panama was capable of protecting it adequately, so we have to keep it for another century.

*ahem* Not to sound like a History Nazi, but: US Invasion of Panama

My info was out of date then, although the removal of yet again someone we helped prop up previously when it became commecially convenient to do so for our interests is still an example of this trend of self-serving intervention we are talking about.

Personally I also value just about any treaty or agreement the U.S. makes with anyone but a western European first world power or Japan to be worth a little less than the paper it's printed on.

[sunnyside]

the removal of yet again someone we helped prop up previously when it became commecially convenient to do so for our interests is still an example of this trend of self-serving intervention we are talking about.

Personally I also value just about any treaty or agreement the U.S. makes with anyone but a western European first world power or Japan to be worth a little less than the paper it's printed on.

Again we did give them back the Canal at the appropriate time. Though something I really wish some dictators would figure out is that just because the US supported you doesn't give you carte blanche to do what they want. If you start ignoring elections or ethnically cleansing we may very well turn on you.

Or, possibly, if you start going against our interests you might get bumped from "horrible person we put up with so we can deal with other horrible people" to "horrible person we're now allying against and you're going down"

As for treaties I don't think we've been breaking those in the last few decades at least. Though I'm a little fuzzy on the deal with N Korea.

Oh and the "straight up and honest" was that we said we were in Panama to protect our interests. As opposed to making something up.

And again everyone here will agree that Iraq is some messed up stuff. And while I'm sure plenty of people are "sure" nobody really knows why we're there, but the reason is probably not good.

That said I really doubt we're deliberatly letting Osama stay free. It'd be quite the feather in his cap if Bush could capture him. We just don't know where he is precisly enough, and sort of suspect it's in Pakistan which makes it politically tricky unless we know exactly where he is.

[Duskofdead]

Again we did give them back the Canal at the appropriate time.

You had the same old info as me, Tsuki corrected us both.

Though something I really wish some dictators would figure out is that just because the US supported you doesn't give you carte blanche to do what they want. If you start ignoring elections or ethnically cleansing we may very well turn on you.

Something I wish America would figure out is stop acting shocked that you're not viewed as the good guy and people out there would like to kill you after you've spent decades propping up a dictator in their country, or the CIA helped assinate/topple a legitimate government.

As for treaties I don't think we've been breaking those in the last few decades at least. Though I'm a little fuzzy on the deal with N Korea.

Are you kidding? Nuclear proliferation, Kyoto Accords, Geneva Conventions? All broken during Bush's term and more.

Oh and the "straight up and honest" was that we said we were in Panama to protect our interests. As opposed to making something up.

No suddenly the "drug lord" we put in power there couldn't be tolerated anymore because he was a "drug lord." That's exactly the story the American people, moronic consumerist sheep that they are, bought and supported an invasion over.

And again everyone here will agree that Iraq is some messed up stuff. And while I'm sure plenty of people are "sure" nobody really knows why we're there, but the reason is probably not good.

It's not rocket science, Sunny. It's the same reason we invaded Panama, it's the same reason we gave a crap if Kuwait or Saudi Arabia got invaded-- two countries who have dictatorships, btw.

That said I really doubt we're deliberatly letting Osama stay free. It'd be quite the feather in his cap if Bush could capture him. We just don't know where he is precisly enough, and sort of suspect it's in Pakistan which makes it politically tricky unless we know exactly where he is.

Can you name the last serious attempt to try to catch him? From all information I have read, we basically know the gist of where he is and it wouldn't be a huge coup in intelligence accomplishment to pinpoint it. But it's more useful to leave him free and then justify whatever the corporate elites want to do in terms of war and war profiteering in the name of "fighting terrorism." If we had Osama and finished the work in Afghanistan it would be time to come home and corporations making multi-billions on war contracts certainly don't want that.