America - worlds' freedom fighters or terrorists ???

[alpha85]

Im sure everyone has heard of one mans terrorists is anothers freedom fighter. this should be interesting. UNdeniably, America instigated the 'war against terror' without UN approval. according to the chain of events up til now, would YOU consider America to be the worlds friend Ifreedom fighter) or foe (terrorists).

sorry if rule broken above.

Smithi

 

[Aegis]

I personally don't consider the US to be either of those things. Both of those options seem too extreme for such a complex country IMHO.

 

[dave_rhino]

Just watch Team America, sure its a ridiculous comedy, but the idea of America destroying the world whilst trying to save it is very realistic in my opinion.

Maybe 'Terrorist' is too strong of a word to use though.

 

[alpha85]

thats a fair opinion lol. ps gotta love team America, was hilarious.

 

[MILF Man]

There is too much appeasement from the U.S. to the world to be terrorists. The U.S. is too scared to offend anyone or hurt their poor feelings.

While Muslims are killing people thru out the world. 50 countries this religion of peace is at war with right now.

 

[georges]

1st option for me and it will always be 1st option for me

 

[Legzman]

Hell I'm an american and I voted Terrorists, as that's really what we are. Not to the extent of the taliban but terrorists none the less

 

[Perilypos]

Too simplified for me, I think the question is much more complex. As a superpower, the U.S.A. has some important interest in different regions all over the world and, by and large, it is logical the U.S.A. tries both to eliminate the hostile regimes and to support its allies in those regions. The absence of an interference by the U.S.A. would not establish the complete and absolute independence of those regions - simply another superpower (China, Russia, etc.) would take the advantage. My knowledge may be insufficient, but I am sure that the American influence is more suitable to my concept of freedom, than the Islamic, Russian or Chinese one. That's why I incline towards considering the U.S.A. as the freedom fighter and, although it is asked in too simple and extreme way in my opinion, I voted for this choice.

 

[Iwillnever]

I don't know...i'm kinda inbetween.

 

[BNF]

I personally don't consider the US to be either of those things. Both of those options seem too extreme for such a complex country IMHO.

Perfect statement as an answer to the question. :thumbsup: :glugglug:

 

[Iwillnever]

I personally don't consider the US to be either of those things. Both of those options seem too extreme for such a complex country IMHO.

I guess I should have went with that...

 

[pussy+dickdenice]

Perfect statement as an answer to the question. :thumbsup: :glugglug:

I agree with you, BNF. What do we mean by America here? The people? The Leadership?

A country as a whole can never be either. If you take only the methodology adopted by the leadership, its complete different question.

And Jan, you too have simplified the question to a great extent. Talking about democracy doesn't mean adopting democracy in all affairs of state, internal or external.

Its an agreed fact that terrorism has increased after the American Leadership took up the slogan of "War on Terrorism" .

As, Germany, pre-war, as a whole was not Nazi, similarly America as a whole is not a terrorist country.

I reserve my vote.

dd

Only ten minutes, he is back and on the board. Tell him to get off and change his shirt and give him a welcome back. :crash:
pd

 

[sonny forelli]

the good guys

 

[gaunameister]

Terrorist: Hiroshima, Napalm, Bombs in schools and hospitals in Irak, Nicargua, South American Terrorist govs in 70's, Monsanto, Exxon Valdez, and many many blood all over the world...
The answer is simple... terrorist

 

[Torre82]

Within the confines of the question: We arent freedom fighters, so that only leaves terrorists.

Outside the question: Obvious terrorists. Not by our outright methods, no. We're precise, exacting and overtly obvious in our power-grabbing. We want oil. We kill our enemies under our own pretenses and we keep our population almost under opiates with our media spin-doctors. But we deny medical aid to certain countries because of 'a few bad apples' or a disagreement of petty matters.

I dont believe we should be a nurse or police for the rest of the world, so its not my point to argue, really.. but while we're sending these supplies/vaccines out, you cant just support a country one moment and deny them the next. It breeds resentment that, in the long term.. causes problems.

Anyhow, you cant 'fight for peace'. Sitting here thousands of miles from any of the death, I dont want the luxury of ignorance. For every civvie of theirs, for every one of our soldiers killed.. no oil or peace of mind is worth the terror we've caused.

 

[pickles&cumquat]

America has always stood for an eye for an eye..... neither terrorist or freedom fighter, simply a nation with it's own agenda

 

[member006]

I personally don't consider the US to be either of those things. Both of those options seem too extreme for such a complex country IMHO.

:thumbsup: Yep, I agree with this also. To vote I have to say freedom fighters.

 

[pussy+dickdenice]

America has always stood for an eye for an eye..... neither terrorist or freedom fighter, simply a nation with it's own agenda

Thanks. I didn't have so low an opinion about US. Its the language of the animals, not humans.

But are you sure Americans, the peoples, feel the same? See Fox just above. I salute him for his views. He is going to be a great lyricist & I request him to put the lyric on the post. :thumbsup:
dd

 

[Member2019]

Here's the deal. Every country has its selfish interests. The lack of an unified front on many matters comes back to bite all of us in the butt later. Iraq is a perfect example. No one wants to talk about 1995. They point at the US back in 1984 or ealier on Iraq (after 1979), not what some countries were doing 1988 and even post-1991, which the US was not because we realized it was not a regime to deal with. Oh the hypocrisy!

No one gets more scrutinized than the US, quite lopsided, by far. People want to argue what the US is "doing wrong" from an alleged "impartiality" standpoint. But the irony is that some many people are pointing these things about the US out, all while their own nation's selfish interests are completely left out of the debate. Such people finger pointing at the US have absolutely no ground to stand on when it comes to their own nation!

So the ultimate irony is that when I finally point those things out in return, people call me "judgemental." Uh huh. Yeah, so when I throw the reality of their nation's selfish interests back in their face, because I've had enough of theirs towards they US, they call me judgemental and argumentative, all while they ignore it. WTF?

Instead of finger pointing, demonizing and otherwise blaming everyone on one entity, it would help and go a lot farther to step back and realize the views of many different people and agendas in a discussion. If there is one thing I can do more than most everyone I meet, that's it. Yes, I'm a biased American. But damn if I can't see far more sides than most of the people here!

Like one Swiss citizen pointed out after 9/11, "I don't think the world realizes how 9/11 will change Americans."

 

[Red Spyder]

Since the U.S. sent some limited support to the Central American freedom fighters (couldn't send more because of some bleeding hearts in congress), not to mention to the Afghan freedom fighters (but not to Osama as I have found out recently), I'd put the U.S. on the side of freedom fighters.

The way I saw it during the Iran Contra scandal was that we Latin Americans kept complaining about how much the U.S. was sticking their noses in our business, but I never saw anybody complain when the Soviets and Cubans were sticking their noses in our business. The U.S. goes to war to defend South Vietnam, lots of protests. The Soviets invade Afghanistan, no protests. I hate double standards, that is the reason I ended up on the right wing side.