T Nation

What Other Countries Should America Liberate Next?

This is in response to a request that usmcccds made in another thread. So, since, according to him, we should be liberating countries from unjust rulers, tyrants, etc., etc., what should be next on the list? Also, what other countries should be on that list and why aren’t we already in those places? Obviously, Iran and North Korea should be on that list, so let’s move past them for now and go to the next country on the list. Which one should it be? Which country is next up for the wonderful chance to get bombed into democracy?

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This is in response to a request that usmcccds made in another thread. So, since, according to him, we should be liberating countries from unjust rulers, tyrants, etc., etc., what should be next on the list? Also, what other countries should be on that list and why aren’t we already in those places? Obviously, Iran and North Korea should be on that list, so let’s move past them for now and go to the next country on the list. Which one should it be? Which country is next up for the wonderful chance to get bombed into democracy?[/quote]

I say free America next.

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This is in response to a request that usmcccds made in another thread. So, since, according to him, we should be liberating countries from unjust rulers, tyrants, etc., etc., what should be next on the list? Also, what other countries should be on that list and why aren’t we already in those places? Obviously, Iran and North Korea should be on that list, so let’s move past them for now and go to the next country on the list. Which one should it be? Which country is next up for the wonderful chance to get bombed into democracy?[/quote]

I say free America next.[/quote]

I concur.

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This is in response to a request that usmcccds made in another thread. So, since, according to him, we should be liberating countries from unjust rulers, tyrants, etc., etc., what should be next on the list? Also, what other countries should be on that list and why aren’t we already in those places? Obviously, Iran and North Korea should be on that list, so let’s move past them for now and go to the next country on the list. Which one should it be? Which country is next up for the wonderful chance to get bombed into democracy?[/quote]

I say free America next.[/quote]

I concur.[/quote]

You would not like the MO.

A lot of countries that really need it just aren’t very interesting.

If I were going to liberate another country it would have to be one that is likely to cooperate, like Ireland or something. Not like bombing them out of existence either, but more like hanging out and getting a pizza.

No one wants to have a pizza with a bunch of jihadists. They’d probably laugh when you burn the hell out of the roof of your mouth. They’d be all “Ha! That is what your hell will feel like you infidel!”.

I didn’t exactly request it, but that’s fine I suppose. For the 15th time today, I never ever one time said anything about Bombing Democracy, I said we SHOULD help in anyway we can those oppresses.

As usual reading comprehension is relatively low in pwi.

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This is in response to a request that usmcccds made in another thread. So, since, according to him, we should be liberating countries from unjust rulers, tyrants, etc., etc., what should be next on the list? Also, what other countries should be on that list and why aren’t we already in those places? Obviously, Iran and North Korea should be on that list, so let’s move past them for now and go to the next country on the list. Which one should it be? Which country is next up for the wonderful chance to get bombed into democracy?[/quote]

I say free America next.[/quote]
From who?

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This is in response to a request that usmcccds made in another thread. So, since, according to him, we should be liberating countries from unjust rulers, tyrants, etc., etc., what should be next on the list? Also, what other countries should be on that list and why aren’t we already in those places? Obviously, Iran and North Korea should be on that list, so let’s move past them for now and go to the next country on the list. Which one should it be? Which country is next up for the wonderful chance to get bombed into democracy?[/quote]

I say free America next.[/quote]
From who?[/quote]

Dunno, from those taxing you.

As I understand it, for the Greek Hoplites as well as American farmers pre revolution it was understood that free men would not accept direct taxation.

Wherever that was the commonly held position, civilization flourished.

Let illegals join the military and invade Mexico, leaving them there as an occupying force.

It’s our fault they’re over here in the first place, there are still gaps at the Border
a fuckin’ Battleship can fit through sideways without detection.

Well 'Bam had his chance to help out the Iranian people when they tried to step up and he didn’t (and now we may be forced to intervene militarily sometime in the near future). He had a chance to help out in Syria and he hasn’t (and now the Syrian resistance is accepting help from Islamic extremist groups because they are showing up with guns and are fighting on their side, so when those extremists begin to dictate policy after the current regime is displaced, we may have to deal with it then). Way to kick the can down the road… Oh wait - that’s what liberal democrats do.

With a record like that, I don’t see America bombing anyone into democracy. Kinda reminds me of the slogan on a tee shirt owned by my second stepfather (a Marine who served in 'Nam), “Let us win your hearts and minds, or we’ll burn your damn huts down!”

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I didn’t exactly request it, but that’s fine I suppose. For the 15th time today, I never ever one time said anything about Bombing Democracy, I said we SHOULD help in anyway we can those oppresses.

As usual reading comprehension is relatively low in pwi.

[/quote]

And yet you refuse to provide your list. I can think of numerous countries with oppressive governments that need our “help” like Iraq did. And yet you refuse to give a list of other countries that are being oppressed and deserve the kind of forced democracy we gave Iraq.

For such a noble goal and something you’ve stated you believe over and over you sure are silent on who you’d help.

So far we have this:

423 would help Iraq because they are oppressed. He’d go over for ten years and spend a couple trillions to help them and demolish numerous lives.

Is Iraq the only oppressed nation in your viewing? I’ve got to conclude it is because you won’t mention anyone else.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This is in response to a request that usmcccds made in another thread. So, since, according to him, we should be liberating countries from unjust rulers, tyrants, etc., etc., what should be next on the list? Also, what other countries should be on that list and why aren’t we already in those places? Obviously, Iran and North Korea should be on that list, so let’s move past them for now and go to the next country on the list. Which one should it be? Which country is next up for the wonderful chance to get bombed into democracy?[/quote]

Actually, he’s right. If America and the West want to minimize the triple threat of radical Islam, economic migration (legal and illegal) and rogue states, they should be doing their best to liberate the shitholes of the world.

But speaking as someone who grew up in a Muslim nation (albeit not of a Muslim background) both sides are doing it wrong. Short of complete genoicide Mongol-style, bombs doesn’t work - its a very expensive short term fix that has unpredictable consequences. But the liberal lets-all-hold-hands-and-sing-kumbaya is equally stupid. Its an equally expensive way of making the fundies think you are weak kneed cowards, which only makes them want to kill you more. They are bullies and tyrants - they get off on oppressing the weak and stupid (their populace) so the last thing you want to do is show them that you, too, are weak and stupid. South Korea has been showing the Kims how weak and stupid they are for the last 20 years or so (“Sunshine Policy”). Every time the Kims needed money they just made a threat or fired a missile and voila, they get aid. Guess how well that worked out?

There’s one way America hasn’t yet explored in solving this crisis. IMHO its a no-brainer, cheap and easy solution - the only drawback is it’ll take at least a generation or two, but the cost would be negligible over all those years. The solution is - guns and books.

Take a typical shithole like Pakistan. The nation is pathetically overpopulated, high poverty, run by a corrupt government, has nukes and lots and lots and lots of fundies. On top of that, they also sponsor terrorism against their neighbors India, fund jihadis in Afghanistan and sheltered OBL. Perfect for regime change, right?

The first thing the US government should do is apply diplomatic pressure to acquire a huge tract of land in Pakistan, that should be considered as a diplomatic enclave - US soil. Next, build a school and university there, providing top-class Western education. Professors and teachers should be drawn particularly from those with a liberal, atheistic bent - they may even do it for free/cheap, they’re all bleeding heart about “helping people”, right?

Pakistan should then be “encouraged” (or forced) to send their best and brightest minds to the school, which would be accepting students young (starting from say, age 6). The school would be a strictly “no religion zone”, with no religious dress or classes permitted, and would be full board. Students would only be allowed to visit home for short periods. They would also need to sign bonds that ensure they work in their home nation for at least 10 years - in return for being provided a top education, that’s a sweet deal.

After being immersed in Western culture and provided quality education for over 15 years, these students would then be far smarter and more capable than their local counterparts and, hopefully form a Western-friendly “elite”. Over one or two generations, these elite would eventually take over leadership of the nation and begin ruling with a less tyrannical or fundamentalist approach. A constant pool of graduates from the schools would ensure that the best and brightest of the nation would only be pro-American.

It’s what the British did during the colonial era, and it worked like a charm, particularly in Southeast Asia - where they did it particularly well.

[quote]H factor wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I didn’t exactly request it, but that’s fine I suppose. For the 15th time today, I never ever one time said anything about Bombing Democracy, I said we SHOULD help in anyway we can those oppresses.

As usual reading comprehension is relatively low in pwi.

[/quote]

And yet you refuse to provide your list. I can think of numerous countries with oppressive governments that need our “help” like Iraq did. And yet you refuse to give a list of other countries that are being oppressed and deserve the kind of forced democracy we gave Iraq.

For such a noble goal and something you’ve stated you believe over and over you sure are silent on who you’d help.

So far we have this:

423 would help Iraq because they are oppressed. He’d go over for ten years and spend a couple trillions to help them and demolish numerous lives.

Is Iraq the only oppressed nation in your viewing? I’ve got to conclude it is because you won’t mention anyone else. [/quote]

T-Nation PWI isn’t my full-time job so I’ll post when and what I want.

This, “423 would help Iraq because they are oppressed. He’d go over for ten years and spend a couple trillions to help them and demolish numerous lives.” IS TOTAL SHIT. It’s what YOU wanted to READ in the other thread. It isn’t what I said. It’s kind of like the intel that you kept saying WANTED TO SEE A CERTAIN THING SO WE COULD JUSTIFY INVASION. Who is being inconsistent now?

Here are multiple quotes from the other thread:

“I would love to re-allocate wasted money to help those in need in Egypt”

“I am not for “bombing people into democracy”. I am for doing what we can to allow others the OPPORTUNITY to be free.”

“Would you like me to start a thread about all the countries we should invade? Am I required to quantify every answer with every single other time I would apply the answer? I also never ever said invade. I’ve said help as best we can, which doesn’t always necessitate an invasion. You are the one that keeps saying bombing = freedom giving, not me. I never said military action is a must.”

“We should do what we can to help ALL those oppressed. This whole time my statements have been based off what imo we SHOULD do not what we HAVE to do. Military action is only one possible course of action, the one used in Iraq. It may not be the best course of action in other situations. Iraq doesn’t = Syria, which doesn’t = Somalia, which doesn’t equal Iran. If you want to discuss another situation, start a thread about it.”

“Everyone is equally deserving of freedom, which is why I think we should help where we can. I don’t think we deserve it any more than the people of Iran or Iraq.”

“Jesus dude, seriously how many times do I need to say this. You are the one bring up other places in a thread about Iraq. I will gladly comment on otehr situtions, make the thread and we’ll go from there.”

“I never even mentioned others dick heads in power, ask me what I think, and I’ll answer.”

“Earily silent, THE THREAD IS CALLED IRAQ INVASION 10 YEARS AGO, not hey what do you think of every fucked up dictator on this planet.”

“Oppression is bad, like I’ve already said multiple time, we should do everything we can to help the people being oppressed. I don’t start threads in pwi often and I’m not required to in order for my point to be heard. I haven’t commented on other example because this is a thread about Iraq. For the 5th or so time, if you would like to discuss what we should do in another scenario, go ahead and start a thread. No one is stopping.”

-These are all copied and pasted directly from the thread. If you are intellectually honest you’ll go back and re-read our exchanges because you obisouly didn’t the first time. You can also answer questions I posed, which you didn’t AT ALL. I gave every effort to answer your BS, the fact that you can’t see past this absurd notion that I HAVE TO COMMENT ON EVERY OPPRESSED PERSON/NATION IN THIS WORLD in order to make a point about Iraq is, stupid.

So you’ll shut the fuck up:

Iraq
Iran
Libya
Somalia
Egypt
North Korea
Syria
Burma
I donno half of Africa

These are all places that could use out help. DO NOT READ MILITARY INVASION. Is that clear. Let me say it again, I am NOT saying we need to invade/occupy these place. Only that they could use out help.

Are you happy now? Try and read the WHOLE post.

[quote]NotaQuitta wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This is in response to a request that usmcccds made in another thread. So, since, according to him, we should be liberating countries from unjust rulers, tyrants, etc., etc., what should be next on the list? Also, what other countries should be on that list and why aren’t we already in those places? Obviously, Iran and North Korea should be on that list, so let’s move past them for now and go to the next country on the list. Which one should it be? Which country is next up for the wonderful chance to get bombed into democracy?[/quote]

Actually, he’s right. If America and the West want to minimize the triple threat of radical Islam, economic migration (legal and illegal) and rogue states, they should be doing their best to liberate the shitholes of the world.

But speaking as someone who grew up in a Muslim nation (albeit not of a Muslim background) both sides are doing it wrong. Short of complete genoicide Mongol-style, bombs doesn’t work - its a very expensive short term fix that has unpredictable consequences. But the liberal lets-all-hold-hands-and-sing-kumbaya is equally stupid. Its an equally expensive way of making the fundies think you are weak kneed cowards, which only makes them want to kill you more. They are bullies and tyrants - they get off on oppressing the weak and stupid (their populace) so the last thing you want to do is show them that you, too, are weak and stupid. South Korea has been showing the Kims how weak and stupid they are for the last 20 years or so (“Sunshine Policy”). Every time the Kims needed money they just made a threat or fired a missile and voila, they get aid. Guess how well that worked out?

There’s one way America hasn’t yet explored in solving this crisis. IMHO its a no-brainer, cheap and easy solution - the only drawback is it’ll take at least a generation or two, but the cost would be negligible over all those years. The solution is - guns and books.

Take a typical shithole like Pakistan. The nation is pathetically overpopulated, high poverty, run by a corrupt government, has nukes and lots and lots and lots of fundies. On top of that, they also sponsor terrorism against their neighbors India, fund jihadis in Afghanistan and sheltered OBL. Perfect for regime change, right?

The first thing the US government should do is apply diplomatic pressure to acquire a huge tract of land in Pakistan, that should be considered as a diplomatic enclave - US soil. Next, build a school and university there, providing top-class Western education. Professors and teachers should be drawn particularly from those with a liberal, atheistic bent - they may even do it for free/cheap, they’re all bleeding heart about “helping people”, right?

Pakistan should then be “encouraged” (or forced) to send their best and brightest minds to the school, which would be accepting students young (starting from say, age 6). The school would be a strictly “no religion zone”, with no religious dress or classes permitted, and would be full board. Students would only be allowed to visit home for short periods. They would also need to sign bonds that ensure they work in their home nation for at least 10 years - in return for being provided a top education, that’s a sweet deal.

After being immersed in Western culture and provided quality education for over 15 years, these students would then be far smarter and more capable than their local counterparts and, hopefully form a Western-friendly “elite”. Over one or two generations, these elite would eventually take over leadership of the nation and begin ruling with a less tyrannical or fundamentalist approach. A constant pool of graduates from the schools would ensure that the best and brightest of the nation would only be pro-American.

It’s what the British did during the colonial era, and it worked like a charm, particularly in Southeast Asia - where they did it particularly well.[/quote]

I don’t like the idea of forcing education on Pakistan or taking a chunk of land for U.S. soil. I think you’d be pissing off a lot of people in the process of “helping” them. Helping to educate them is a good path imo, yet like Iraq, I think we need to do a better job of playing a supporting role vs. leading the way. The Pakistani and Iraqi people need to grown on their own and figure it out with us as a guide not a mentor, if that makes sense.

I also think the Middle East is a bit tired of western culture and we should be careful not to push it on them.

I’m not into intervention much myself, but if you want to free a people, China has enslaved about 20% of the globe. Trying to free any other country is really just fucking around.

France.
Pretty please.

I promise we will surrender.
Obamaphily is already quite prevalent here.
And that’s what we usually do anyway.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.