pastro243 said:
You didnt mention how they supported democracy by putting dictators in almost every country that was too socialist for them, but I guess that that people dont matter since they are monkeys that didnt know what was best for them, am I right?
The US is certainly not the worse in the world, but dont put them as if they were the best. Being better than china is not a great acomplishment.
Also, I know you changed your president, but the last guy was the one who said "you are with us or with the terrorists" or something like that, thats not a good comment either, glad ricardo lagos, our president in the time we where in the defense thing in th UN said they werent going to support an invasion.
|
"You didnt mention how they supported democracy by putting dictators in almost every country that was too socialist for them, but I guess that that people dont matter since they are monkeys that didnt know what was best for them, am I right?"
The people don't matter because they are monkeys? I hope you're not implying that I have this mindset lodged in my mind. That would be a rather unfair assumption, no?
"The US is certainly not the worse in the world, but dont put them as if they were the best. Being better than china is not a great acomplishment."
So in your opinion, who is the best? Just curious. In my mind, the ideal country would be one that promotes religious and cultural freedoms. One that has a fair justice system. How many countries are you innocent until proven guilty, and have right to a fair trial? Might be surprised. Not many countries out there are founded on things such as a bill of rights. International aid. I know one country that donates more than any other. UN funding too, unfortunately. Perhaps I'm rambling on now. :|
"Also, I know you changed your president, but the last guy was the one who said "you are with us or with the terrorists" or something like that, thats not a good comment either, glad ricardo lagos, our president in the time we where in the defense thing in th UN said they werent going to support an invasion."
I believe the people of Iraq deserve freedom from tyranny and genocide, and I do believe the US could have went about that in a way that was not nearly as destructive. You're right. The comment, "You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror." was not the best choice of words.
Here is what came directly before that sentence.
"A coalition partner must do more than just express sympathy, a coalition partner must perform," Bush said. "That means different things for different nations. Some nations don't want to contribute troops and we understand that. Other nations can contribute intelligence-sharing. ... But all nations, if they want to fight terror, must do something."
I think it has been taken out of context. This statement was made not long after the World Trade Center was hit and thousands killed. Terrorism is something that is universally hated and feared. What country would not want to do more to stop it? Don't interpret that as support for Bush, or his policies, because it's not.