Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

America First: Why we need to examine our insane Foreign policy
self | 12/29/2001 | Demidog

Posted on 12/29/2001 9:27:49 AM PST by Demidog

I am not an America hater by any stretch of the imagination. Nor are the plethora of folks calling for a re-examination of our foreign policies. But that's what we're called.

I wish I knew why.

I really don't want to be against any American. I don't like being on the butt end of insults. So if there were a way to somehow explain what it is that bothers me about our foreign policy without the resultant cries of "traitor! treason! Islam firster!" I would.

One of the main problems apears to be that any "agreement" with bin Laden and his band of murdering thugs is seen to be support. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is probably true that bin Laden knows that water is tantamount to life in the desert. If I agree with this, I am no more supporting bin Laden than you are by agreeing.

When we decry any actions taken by Israel, we are "anti-semites." When Israel admitted that they had set a booby trap near an area where children played and 5 Palestinian boys died when it went off, you couldn't get near the topic without being ridiculed.

This is puzzling to me. There is nothing wrong per se with Israel and certainly not Jews, but for certain they are not perfect. For some, Israel is perfection and any criticism is tantamount to racism. Those who disagree are shouted down with such fervor it makes one pause.

American policies aren't perfect either. It is arguable for instance that John Wayne's death from cancer could be attributed to nuclear tests performed back in the 40's. Movie locations happened to be in the area where tests occurred. Many film industry professionals who worked on movies filmed in Nevada died from cancer including that great American we called "the Duke."

Many soldiers who were in the vicinity of those tests also died from cancer.

Why is it an indictment on all of America to bring such mistakes to light? In general, the American population has no say so in the slightest regarding these sorts of activities nor do they have much say in our foreign policy.

But as usual, it is the American population that has to accept the consequences of Policy mistakes made by the government. To say that those who object to this "hate America" is completely absurd.

The truth is quite the opposite.

I love America. And those who decry our foreign policy blunders and the theft of our hard earned money that is necessary in order to carry out these blunders also love America. We're simply tired of having to pay the price for those mistakes, while those who carry them out never have to suffer the consequences.

One of the most bizarre claims by those who are calling us "America haters" and "Islam firsters" is that terorrists are simply angry that we are so democratic as a nation and love freedom. These terrorists "hate freedom" and thus hate America and Americans. They're "jealous," in other words, of our prosperity.

This is about as brilliant an analysis as claiming that Timothy McVeigh was upset that he was no longer an employee of the federal government and thus took out his jealosy and rage on that same federal government.

It is the analysis of the simpleton.

The fact is, we only know what the terrorists claim. Not that it matters much. The opinions of mass murderers are not that important. Clearly however, this is not what any of the terrorists are saying. What they are saying is that they believe themselves to be oppressed by our foreign intervention.

When students took Iranian embassy employees hostage, their reason given for such extraordinary measures was American meddling in Iranian internal affairs.

The Shah of Iran was our personally hand-picked leader for their country. The CIA had, in the time period between the time we basically annexed Iran during WWII, purposefully destroyed opposition to the Shah by using tactics they had learned in South America.

None of those tactics were even remotely related to "freedom" or the principles upon which this nation was founded. They were the actions of a government that believed the Iranian people were chattle and were not worthy of chosing their own leadership.

So what happened? A number of Americans paid the price for our meddling. When we allowed the Shah to enter America to receive medical treatment, the last straw was put upon the back of that proverbial camel.

And that is not to mention the American lives that were sacrificed in a botched rescue attempt. For some, these lives are expendable. They are the price a nation pays for being a "super power." I agree with that assesment. But I don't think we need to be a superpower. I don't think we need to meddle in the affairs of other nations in order to protect our borders.

As is proven time and time again, such meddling has a high price.

And therein lies the rub. Dying in order to defend this nation from an attacking force is national defense and is noble. Sending young men and women across the globe to secure oil fields and preserve the "American way of life" is a sick project. I for one, am not willing to lose a single American for the cynical goal of sub-dollar-a-gallon fuel for my SUV.

If that is the measure of value for an American life then you can call me an America hater all day long and I will be proud to wear that badge.

I criticize our foreign policies because they result in the deaths of American soldiers and citizens at home and abroad. In no way do I criticize Americans. In the aftermath of the Trade Center attacks, it wasn't the government that responded with such ferocity and bravery. It was the average American.

The Beaurocrats were busy playing CYA and letting us know that none of this was their fault. In the meantime, Americans came up with over 60 million dollars in cash and even more in valuable resources in spite of the fact that they are taxed to the extreme in order to pay for the very policies that helped to incubate the attacks of 9/11.

America proved it's greatness in the response to the attacks. The government proved it's complete disregard for human liberty by passing laws which violate the spirit and letter of the Supreme law of the land. Even while the fires were still burning.

America is a great nation and is full of great people. Unfortunately its leaders have no respect for its people or its laws. Pointing this out is not showing hate for anything but the lawbreakers who do so.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 841-860861-880881-900 ... 961-978 next last
To: Roscoe
The old America is the moral equivalent of the Taliban argument again?

Bless yer little heart.

I am trying to like you, but you are making it hard to like you.

861 posted on 12/30/2001 6:09:46 PM PST by carenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 860 | View Replies]

To: malador
Hmmm....glad I checked back in here......couldn't help but laugh at this post......he sure do seem to have an unnatural affection for Pravda, among other weird ideas!! LOL.
862 posted on 12/30/2001 6:12:47 PM PST by Rowdee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 843 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief,carenot
Isn't that the little action that effectively wiped out 2 city blocks?
863 posted on 12/30/2001 6:15:47 PM PST by Rowdee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 848 | View Replies]

To: exodus
You mean state parks that are administered by the government closer to the people; who are a lot more answerable to the people for how these parks and stuff are taken care of?
864 posted on 12/30/2001 6:18:31 PM PST by Rowdee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 852 | View Replies]

To: carenot
Sure that was one of the racing guys kids.....one of Al Unser's kids.
865 posted on 12/30/2001 6:20:30 PM PST by Rowdee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 857 | View Replies]

To: carenot
..."At whom was all this firepower aimed? The targets were four men, three women and six children -- members of an anti-government, urban survivalist cult called MOVE."...

Well, this author certainly did miss with his thesis!!! He failed to report that this was done "for the chilrun"!

Seriously, Poe is more right on that he could possibly be off.

866 posted on 12/30/2001 6:26:54 PM PST by Rowdee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 858 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Can't bear leaving the plantation?

By reading the discussion you will discover that we are talking about a legal issue that is -- he purports -- unaffected by physical location of the individual as well as their voluntary renunciation of citizenship.

867 posted on 12/30/2001 6:59:09 PM PST by mindprism.com
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 831 | View Replies]

To: exodus
We have no system. It is controlled by methods beyond your control. And agreeing with any government method displays your nakedness to the truth about America.
868 posted on 12/30/2001 7:08:02 PM PST by Buckeroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 847 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Hey Roscoe, I'm always interested in how people think, and why. You seem to think a lot differently than many people here, so I'd like your opinion on something and if you would be so kind to explain how you come to your views on this question, I'd be grateful:

In your opinion, in a civilized nation under what circumstances would a militant uprising or intifada be justified? Does it require conditions or a percentage of the population, what mixture of things? At what point would Roscoe pick up his gun to reclaim freedom? Give a brief outline and the logic supporting it.

Is "anything short of taking away guns or the vote" essentially permissible in your world-view?

When do "armed marches/protests" become appropriate?

869 posted on 12/30/2001 7:22:32 PM PST by mindprism.com
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 838 | View Replies]

To: mindprism.com
In your opinion, in a civilized nation under what circumstances would a militant uprising or intifada be justified? Does it require conditions or a percentage of the population, what mixture of things?

Sounds like a Blue Book for parlor Revolutionaries.

870 posted on 12/30/2001 7:27:11 PM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 869 | View Replies]

To: exodus
You don't care about national parks. You care about a government that agrees with you.
871 posted on 12/30/2001 7:46:23 PM PST by Buckeroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 852 | View Replies]

To: karm
No problem. Thank you for referencing. I can't say that any of my ideas will make the world a "better place to live in". For some people they may not. However, not being so shaky on who we are allied with might do just that. Example being that while we pay foreign aid to Israel we also pay foreign aid to her enemies. This is just odd to me, unless I am missing something. The fact that the money we hand out is also used by despots to wage war makes no sense to me.

Also, the U.S.A. is called in a lot to mediate between nations, if they ask for our help we should try our best to do so. Paying foreign aid to nations make us seem less impartial and more open to attack by smear agents looking to capitalize on that fact. Namely our media...

I hope this makes sense...as I am not sure of your own thoughts on the subject.

872 posted on 12/30/2001 7:53:08 PM PST by JakeWyld
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 795 | View Replies]

Comment #873 Removed by Moderator

Comment #874 Removed by Moderator

To: malador
Exactly.

What 'they' don't seem to understand is that the Anti-Federalists wanted to be even more restrictive....not more loose and open to ludicrous interpretation. To listen to them and the likes of Waters, Dingall, Rangel, Owens, and Kennedy, the Founding Fathers were to the left of them!!!

875 posted on 12/30/2001 9:09:06 PM PST by Rowdee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 873 | View Replies]

To: malador
Hmmm....I read what you said several times and it seemed to me like comparing apples and oranges. Maybe if you were to expound a little I might understand what you are getting at.

However, at face value you have a point. Although (unless I missed it) I haven't seen any strict examples of "nation building". Of course I haven't paid attention to how this new guy Korzai(sp?) was installed. I may be a little behind the times. :)

876 posted on 12/30/2001 9:23:52 PM PST by JakeWyld
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 874 | View Replies]

Comment #877 Removed by Moderator

Comment #878 Removed by Moderator

To: Roscoe
Sounds like a Blue Book for parlor Revolutionaries.

Based on your response, does that mean you wouldn't have fought for the American Revolutionary War (had you lived then)?

879 posted on 12/30/2001 11:44:53 PM PST by Pay now bill Clinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 870 | View Replies]

To: Pay now bill Clinton
On December 16, 1773, Libertarians would have sided with the East Indian Company.
880 posted on 12/30/2001 11:56:06 PM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 879 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 841-860861-880881-900 ... 961-978 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson