If by globalization you're talking about backing juntas and arming civilians to fight in revolutions then yes absolutely, but if you're talking about the Summit of the America's and how the talks that will ultimately determine the poverty the health care the infrastructure the police and everything else that has to be paid for then well heck its the whole world really.
A question for American's
- Thread starter CDNBear
- Start date
I've made many posts with links to my evidence of the US using its military might to over throw duly elected Governments, and forcing Ameriacn style democracy on the inhabitants, via a puppet, for shear profit. Ther are so many, I could post links all day.
Hehe CDN Bear = Teddy
Thanks for a good answer. You are the kind of people I am used to - I find the ones in the part of the U.S. where I live talk directly to you - even if they are saying some hard to hear stuff.
I understand the U.S. has poked itself into many different missions where they should have chosen to remain out of the game....American Globalization is something I hear a great deal of ... if you have time to write out what you believe it to be that is fine because I have no idea what Canadians mean when they talk about it.
I hear things like: Vietnam, Somalia, Rwanda,Africa, Asia, Israel, the Middle East, South and Central America... all failures and described as Globalization... What's the point of the U.S. being in any of these places when we could be spending the money on our own secure borders, taking care of our own people and letting the U.N. go where they belong....to hell.
And the big big question (other than the trade issues which I am familiar with).... what the hell has the U.S. ever done to Canada and Canadians? This generalized nagging is unbecoming of Canadians or at least the Canadians I know and love.
You know how you stay out of trouble and avoid being criticized in our world? By doing nothing, nada, zilch!
Thanks for a good answer. You are the kind of people I am used to - I find the ones in the part of the U.S. where I live talk directly to you - even if they are saying some hard to hear stuff.
I understand the U.S. has poked itself into many different missions where they should have chosen to remain out of the game....American Globalization is something I hear a great deal of ... if you have time to write out what you believe it to be that is fine because I have no idea what Canadians mean when they talk about it.
I hear things like: Vietnam, Somalia, Rwanda,Africa, Asia, Israel, the Middle East, South and Central America... all failures and described as Globalization... What's the point of the U.S. being in any of these places when we could be spending the money on our own secure borders, taking care of our own people and letting the U.N. go where they belong....to hell.
And the big big question (other than the trade issues which I am familiar with).... what the hell has the U.S. ever done to Canada and Canadians? This generalized nagging is unbecoming of Canadians or at least the Canadians I know and love.
You know how you stay out of trouble and avoid being criticized in our world? By doing nothing, nada, zilch!
Absolutely nothing, which is why I defend them, when need be. I attack the silly generalizations and ask for proof that the US is the next Nazi nation.
CDNBear
Fair enough - the U.S. has travelled militarily to far more nations than perhaps any other nation in our modern world.
They have failed in many cases too, however they are still working with the governments with whom they failed initially to lift their standards of living for their people - they travel to the U.S. sites of universities all over the country to hold meetings on basic lifegiving knowledge such as farming and labor and economics .... the people who have been at war with the U.S. still turn to them when they want assistance... Look at VietNam for instance. A bloody failure as far as I can tell, but there is strong immigration from that nation and their people are brilliant and give them another generation they will be
well equipped to either stay in the U.S. or take their knowledge home and improve their countries as they wish.
I think the drug cartel raids in South America (or Central) were another failure and the U.S. is blamed entirely for that one - but nobody looks at those nations now to see how they have still a working relationship with the U.S. government. Perhaps people don't want to "look".
Israel should have been on its own long ago. I believe they should never have been assigned that part of the landscape by the original U.N. group (I forget their original name).... after WWII. They are supported by the U.S. and I think that is dangerous work for a nation to be dependent entirely on another. But they are the only military outpost in the middle east and perhaps the payoff is equitable. It must be like living in a bomb shelter ....
I guess I should explain, I am all for pulling up the planks, bringing the military home from all their outposts, set about repairing our own economy and defense nationally and forget the international scene for a while and let it shake out on its own.
Nobody thinks that's a good idea I guess because they don't seem to be doing it.... I really don't like this "giving it all up" stuff.... for whatever reason the government does it.... like some fairy godmother...
when there are so many of its own people in need - dire need.
Fair enough - the U.S. has travelled militarily to far more nations than perhaps any other nation in our modern world.
They have failed in many cases too, however they are still working with the governments with whom they failed initially to lift their standards of living for their people - they travel to the U.S. sites of universities all over the country to hold meetings on basic lifegiving knowledge such as farming and labor and economics .... the people who have been at war with the U.S. still turn to them when they want assistance... Look at VietNam for instance. A bloody failure as far as I can tell, but there is strong immigration from that nation and their people are brilliant and give them another generation they will be
well equipped to either stay in the U.S. or take their knowledge home and improve their countries as they wish.
I think the drug cartel raids in South America (or Central) were another failure and the U.S. is blamed entirely for that one - but nobody looks at those nations now to see how they have still a working relationship with the U.S. government. Perhaps people don't want to "look".
Israel should have been on its own long ago. I believe they should never have been assigned that part of the landscape by the original U.N. group (I forget their original name).... after WWII. They are supported by the U.S. and I think that is dangerous work for a nation to be dependent entirely on another. But they are the only military outpost in the middle east and perhaps the payoff is equitable. It must be like living in a bomb shelter ....
I guess I should explain, I am all for pulling up the planks, bringing the military home from all their outposts, set about repairing our own economy and defense nationally and forget the international scene for a while and let it shake out on its own.
Nobody thinks that's a good idea I guess because they don't seem to be doing it.... I really don't like this "giving it all up" stuff.... for whatever reason the government does it.... like some fairy godmother...
when there are so many of its own people in need - dire need.
I posted a reply to you Curiosity and although I didn't label it as such I assumed you'd pick up on it!
Curiosity
The government of the United State has been involved in financial military and political policy and decision making with and without the government of those states approval. As we now know, the people of America are prepared to intensify the arms race, police the globe and feel free to ignore international law...
Doesn't sound too much like a people we shouldn't be very concerned about.
Even if we ignore the record.
Ostrich politics was never my strong suit Curio and I don't play that game well.
Curiosity
The government of the United State has been involved in financial military and political policy and decision making with and without the government of those states approval. As we now know, the people of America are prepared to intensify the arms race, police the globe and feel free to ignore international law...
Doesn't sound too much like a people we shouldn't be very concerned about.
Even if we ignore the record.
Ostrich politics was never my strong suit Curio and I don't play that game well.
It is not the will of "American's", that is a generalization. The will of the average US citizen is, please stop F*cking with us. If they feel threatend in any way, do they not have the right, to protect themselves?
Yes absolutely they have a right to defend themselves but they also have responsibilities and there isn't much dialogue on what responsibilities those are around here!
Can we agree that the United States invaded Iraq as planned strategy dating back to the first Gulf war?
Documents have revealed that plans were in the works as early as 1991 to invade Iraq if necessary to depose Saddam Hussein.
Based on the frenzy of the aftermath of the tragedy of September 11, the United States moved forward on its agenda to invade Iraq supported by a nation of people who percieved having been done a grievous wrong. That grevious wrong perpetrated by a faction of fundamentalist Islamists and having nothing to do with Saddam Hussein?
Isn't it also true that an energetic media campaign has been relentless in attempting to persuade Americans and the world that not only the millions of dead but the billions upon billions of dollars being spent and made by only a very few was legitimate based on not their initial reasons but in the name of fighting "terrorism"?
Its Bushwaaaaaaaa
Can we agree that the United States invaded Iraq as planned strategy dating back to the first Gulf war?
Documents have revealed that plans were in the works as early as 1991 to invade Iraq if necessary to depose Saddam Hussein.
Based on the frenzy of the aftermath of the tragedy of September 11, the United States moved forward on its agenda to invade Iraq supported by a nation of people who percieved having been done a grievous wrong. That grevious wrong perpetrated by a faction of fundamentalist Islamists and having nothing to do with Saddam Hussein?
Isn't it also true that an energetic media campaign has been relentless in attempting to persuade Americans and the world that not only the millions of dead but the billions upon billions of dollars being spent and made by only a very few was legitimate based on not their initial reasons but in the name of fighting "terrorism"?
Its Bushwaaaaaaaa
Agreed, the American people were out right lied to. I've said it to you several times, when you accused me of supporting it, I have always felt that the invasion of Iraq, was a sham.
It was purely to control the flow of oil to the European Union. Further proof of America's plan on globalization, via a new puppet in Bhagdad. The old one was broke.
I've oft been critical of the media, that all the liberals claim I am a slave to. I do not trust mainstream media, and filter it with independent journalists and independent thought.
It was the same group of people who re-elected this president wasn't it?
Now if you're going to argue that the electoral system in the United States isn't fair or accurate or has been manipulated ....
Well gee...
And who are the people that can do anything about that???
All those Americans my generalization didn't encompass but enough of those who voted Bush back in?
Now if you're going to argue that the electoral system in the United States isn't fair or accurate or has been manipulated ....
Well gee...
And who are the people that can do anything about that???
All those Americans my generalization didn't encompass but enough of those who voted Bush back in?
Here's a lil' quote from the past you might be interested in. This one is where you insinuate that I support the Iraq war...
MikeyDB...
"What truth are you talking about CDNbear?
That the truth of those weapons of mass destruction wasn't? That the prosecution of a war on terrorism is carte blanche for Israel to practice its invasion at its leisure or that everyone from Palestinians and Jews and Marines an soldiers at ABu Ghraib and Guantanamo all comit atrocities and are the same when the rhetoric of propaganda is stripped away?
Is that the truth you're alluding to here Bear???"
MikeyDB...
"What truth are you talking about CDNbear?
That the truth of those weapons of mass destruction wasn't? That the prosecution of a war on terrorism is carte blanche for Israel to practice its invasion at its leisure or that everyone from Palestinians and Jews and Marines an soldiers at ABu Ghraib and Guantanamo all comit atrocities and are the same when the rhetoric of propaganda is stripped away?
Is that the truth you're alluding to here Bear???"
God Bless Toro....
For knowing his stuff....an expert... a guru.....
(I'm blushing...)
If I'm the local expert, then everyone is in trouble.
I'm sorry if you feel that to be an accusation...
I intended to convey that we trusted what this administration told us was the rationale behind invading Iraq.....that now we can assuredly agree were bogus....and I'm amazed that people continue to believe their rhetoric.
I intended to convey that we trusted what this administration told us was the rationale behind invading Iraq.....that now we can assuredly agree were bogus....and I'm amazed that people continue to believe their rhetoric.
Sorry about that...
I posted my reply to your excerpt in the wrong thread ...sorry.
I simply wanted to emphasize that a great many people believed the U.S. administration's exaggerations and misdirection given as rationale for invading Iraq. We know that those WMD may at some time have been there but they haven't been found in years so its far more likely they weren't there in the first place as claimed by this administration.
So why should anyone put much faith in what this Whitehouse has to say about anything.
I posted my reply to your excerpt in the wrong thread ...sorry.
I simply wanted to emphasize that a great many people believed the U.S. administration's exaggerations and misdirection given as rationale for invading Iraq. We know that those WMD may at some time have been there but they haven't been found in years so its far more likely they weren't there in the first place as claimed by this administration.
So why should anyone put much faith in what this Whitehouse has to say about anything.