No, those people were fools because they did nothing to stop Hitler, and agreed with much of his anti-semetic BS. With Saddam, for instance, things were much different. He was locked in a box, had the no fly zone, weapons inspectors and all the nations of the world keeping an eye on him. There was no danger of him becoming anything near what Hitler was. In Saddam's case there was no effort at appeasement.
right and wrong are too simplistic terms I think Self interest is a better situation We think we right . . . because we doing things that help us . . . . . Rocket River
Those willing to ignore Hitler similarly thought that he presented no major danger. Yes a different set of circumstances but in the end just a huge underestimation. All the nations of the world keeping their eyes on Saddam? You mean Russia, France and Germany to make sure that the money flowed continuously? There's a whole in the box that leads to Syria. Any other holes?
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness The most basic assumption in the establishment of The United States is that we are right. Our tuths are self -evident. How can you argue against that?
So you believe that those countries allowed Saddam to become a mighty power? I think recent history shows us that any violations that occured in regards to Saddam, didn't make him a threat. If anyone broke the santions then they should face punishment. I dont' have a problem with that, but the truth is that the Saddam was boxed in and the world was keeping an eye on him with inspectors all over his country. Money did flow and was taken from it's original purpose by Saddam's corrupt administration. That might have helped Saddam hold power in his own country, and that's wrong. But it did not in any way make him a threat to anybody else. With Hitler the case was very different.
This is because we usually are... But seriously, there are a lot of countries/people that hate America and what we stand for...This could be based on our govt. stances on issues, our sanctions tactics, whatever, but the thing to keep in mind is that a number of these haters understand that we are important and vital to the global economy and thus, a lot of issues are forced through, regardless of who it hurts...
While many Americans think they're always right...there are many who do not. Just read this bbs, or any forum with commentary on US foreign policy. Critisism of US policies and actions is not exactly unheard of in these parts. As frustrating as it is to those who've formed an opinion on a particular issue, there tend to be others who don't see things in the same light. Democracy and civil liberties are a b**** that way. People put different emphasis on different values, sources of information, and the like. I expect the US is no more nationalistic in its views than many other nations. But when a Swede thinks his way is the best -- nobody really notices. It's the US's world prominence that makes the US appear more arrogant than other nations. That, and the *assclown* you got running things.
