By: Grace

Grace — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 13:00:19 +0000

RabbiBrant-In spite of the destruction the US wuhrgot on South Vietnamese territory, most people there don’t seem to blame the US for it (at least that is what I have been told). But what about Germany and Japan in World War II? They really got walloped by the US and the British, including nuclear weapons on the latter and yet both countries are close allies of the US and public opinion supports that. Thus, we see that a sober reflection on the causes of the conflicts the US was involved in doesn’t necessarily lead to knee-jerk resentment on the part of the populations that was on the receiving end.Andy-What you say about the global chess game sounds reasonable, but what is the alternative? People had to choose sides. You can’t put your head in the sand. What about Cuba they chose (or at least Castro and his cronies) the other side. Are they better off for it? Like I stated, the alternative to empire is out and out anarchy. Who would benefit from that? The liberal dream of a bunch of benevelont little countries living in peace with one another without any coercive force lurking in the background is just a delusion. When the UN war formed all progressive opinion thought that here was a great chance to move beyong the nation-state to move towards a more collective security system that was internationalized. How did that work out? Did it prevent the War in Vietnam, the Soviet invasions of Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan and all the bloody wars in the Middle East and Africa? President Obama supposedly opposed the idea of the US being the lone cowboy in the world, yet he is running a war in Afghanistan, he liquidated Awlaki in Yemen so he is finding out what others already know .there is no alternative to empire flexing its muscles from time to time.

Comments on: Kucinich: Saying No to Permanent Global War

By: Grace