So, we're penalized morally for having a greater sphere of influence ? And we weren't actually hated in the Middle East, for the most part, until the Iranian revolution. We were favored there, over the Soviets, until then. A bit of a tangent... but direct textual research of Iranian early-revolution media yields surprising results. They saw American ideology as a source for their own beliefs. THey felt great empathy with us as a nation. Then, through America's treatment of the Shah, the Revolution felt betrayed. They saw us as supporting the #1 enemy of the people in violation of all the values of liberty. But... in any event... America, by your standards, is penalized through what could be either a: 1. Practical or 2. Superior ethical choice. The Soviet's "satellite republics" were not far removed, in terms of power relationships, with our relationships with Canada, Mexico, and Western Europe during the Cold War. Even if the decision to maintain minimal control over non-foreign policy matters of these nations was pragmatic, the effect should still be that one considers treatment of these nations as the equivalent of the satellites of the Soviet Union. We were nicer. The US has been an extremely benevolent hegemon, in comparison with not only the Soviets, but previous empires. Evolving notions of human rights and liberty truly have affected our foreign policy. Not as much as I'd like, but denying it entirely is just as foolish as being Reaganesque.
The bottom line is that the American public was lied to by the Bush Administration in the run-up to war. There were several statements from the administration that were either exaggerated or flat-out lies during the pre-war buildup, and most of them have been documented on this BBS. The Bush Administration has proven that the American public will buy into anything if it is shoved down their collective throat with enough force. They will try to prove it again during the 2004 election. I've already bought cleaner for the vomit stains that will appear on my floor the first time I see a Bush re-election campaign commercial with video of the draft dodger in that ridiculous flight suit with Lee Greenwood's "Proud to be an American" playing in the background. George W. Bush is a hypocrite and a master of shell-game politics.
I don't think that that is what I was saying...more that we are penealized for the means in which we acted in areas that weren't ours, but which we influenced to benefit orselves. The Soviets took over regions surrounding them as they saw them as potential threats ( and also because, factually, there was often a great deal of support for Communism in those areas originally) and once that happened they incorporated them into their domestic policy, which was oppressive. The US didn't take over land, but rather sought to ensure that Communism didn't catch on throughout the world...even if that was what the people wanted...and in so doing put it and supported many tyranical, murderous regimes. Morally I don't see that much of a distinction, overall...we were probably better, but hardly good or benevolent. Operation Ajax, 1951. Iran. Check it out. Again, I disagree with your temporal statement,and addressed that in my original response. Also, I fail to see how what you are saying, at least right here, doesn't align with Reagan. He was famous for saying that it was wrong to consider yourself 'above the fray', and dismiss both the USA and USSR as equally corrupt empires...and say that the fact was the USA was benevolent whereas the USSR was evil. How are you differing? Again, I repeat...residents of almost every single empire in history have considered themselves benevolent. You never addressed my point about the subjectivity of benevolence.
Betrayed I think that one word sums up how a lot of people in the Middle East feel towards the United States be it Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq... The history of the US using people as means to an end and then turning their backs on them is something we must address and correct if the additudes of thoise in the Middle East will ever change.. We have that opportunity now in Afghanistan and Iraq, I hope we dont drop the ball..
Always nice when people make substantive arguments rather than one liners . I understand that you disagree... but why be rude?
Forgive him, he's just angry that there isn't a "community back rub" for people who enjoy their geopolitics simplified into three sentence cliches.
