But if Benedict Arnold had betrayed the English rather than the American cause, would you then still consider him to be a traitor *OR* would you call him a hero of the American cause?
Either way, he his both a traitor and a hero - much like today's so called "terrorists" wouldn't you agree?
I have lots. He started out as a traitor to his king and was the most effective treasonous military leader. (unlike some who were worshiped despite never having won any battle of consequence and having to be rescued by the French, of all people, at Yorktown.)
He then recanted his treason and became a loyal subject again, after realizing what a bunch of ungrateful scumbags his fellow traitors were.
Luigi
No doubt it would be much better - in your lexicon - to simply avoid presenting said children with ANY drug therapy. The last argument of a lost cause is "What about the children?"
All of which falls under the rubric of "damaging the diplomatic process". There is a balance to be struck between the necessary secrecy of diplomacy and the desire of people in power to hide from scrutiny. This isn't simple nor is it obvious. Evidently you think it is simple black and white. I do not. It is a tradeoff. I trust neither the Asaanges of this world, nor the Obamas...
I've done my homework ... for many years. The only thing of which I am certain is that if one does not believe in the fundamental rightness of liberty, markets, capitalism, and trade, one will always be led to foul conclusions...
Right, but I've read their considerably writing ... you might do the same.
I do so wish the US would withdraw from the world state for, say, 20 years or so that people like you could get a taste of what the planet would feel like with people of conviction and genuine interest in liberty might feel like. You are free to criticise us as you wish ... you have that luxury because - if you live free - it is almost certain that American blood and treasure made it possible.
I would have "sympathy" because I share their view of liberty. I would not consider them oppressed victims as the Manning defenders do for him.
That's your response to me pointing out you didn't know what you were talking about re: Wikileaks? That's as clumsy an attempt at side-stepping as I've ever seen.
BTW, the problem with the drug trial is that kids were killed and maimed. But them's the breaks, the important thing is protecting Pfizer's profitability without any pesky lawsuits. Besides, it happened in Africa, like that should be a problem for an American company, pfffft.
No, you didn't. You dismissed some of the Wikileaks revelations as not being related to the leaked diplomatic cables and thus not germane to this thread. I just pointed out two of the issues I'd mentioned did in fact come from those leaked cables. In other words, you didn't know what you were talking about (what a shocker!) and now you'd chew off your own thumbs before you'd admit that.
Do you take any other form of exercise besides placard waving? Oh, and slogan chanting, that must be good for the breathing muscles. However you could use some practice climbing down, especially if you're just going to skim the headlines rather than read in enough detail to know what the hell you're talking about.
Unless of course he has the experience of living in one of those countries where America supported a brutal dictator because he was happy to play ball with American corporate interests or otherwise suit American foreign policy. You know--the Philippines, Nicaragua, Dominican Republic, Iran, Chile, Guatemala--it's a long list. But what the hell, so long as United Fruit or whatever company was making good profits, and the local labor leaders were in prison or missing, why should Americans care if their nation supported a military junta that overthrew a democratically elected government? At least the place didn't go commie, 'cause we don't care for brutal regimes that oppress their people. Well, unless we're making good money there, no need being damn fools about all that liberty crap when profits are at stake, right?
about re: Wikileaks? That's as clumsy an attempt at side-stepping as I've ever seen.
them's the breaks, the important thing is protecting Pfizer's profitability without any pesky lawsuits. Besides, it happened in Africa, like that should be a problem for an American company, pfffft.
related to the leaked diplomatic cables and thus not germane to this thread. I just pointed out two of the issues I'd mentioned did in fact come from those leaked cables. In other words, you didn't know what you were talking about (what a shocker!) and now you'd chew off your own thumbs before you'd admit that.
chanting, that must be good for the breathing muscles. However you could use some practice climbing down, especially if you're just going to skim the headlines rather than read in enough detail to know what the hell you're talking about.
Oh, I fully acknowledge that I do not know every detail of WL spewage. I further acknowledge that there are many things I do not know. But also am not an apologist for the "we're always wrong, thank God WL is proving" line of reasoning you and so many demonstrate. Does our government act stupidly from time to time? Sure. Should they be called on it? Sure. But having a soldier betray his oath of service isn't the way to do it, and demanding that he receive some heroic treatment and sidestep his responsibilities is absurd.
where America supported a brutal dictator because he was happy to play ball with American corporate interests or otherwise suit American foreign policy. You know--the Philippines, Nicaragua, Dominican Republic, Iran, Chile, Guatemala--it's a long list. But what the hell, so long as United Fruit or whatever company was making good profits, and the local labor leaders were in prison or missing, why should Americans care if their nation supported a military junta that overthrew a democratically elected government? At least the place didn't go commie, 'cause we don't care for brutal regimes that oppress their people. Well, unless we're making good money there, no need being damn fools about all that liberty crap when profits are at stake, right?
Ahhh yes, the Great Equivocation Argument. Because America acted badly in a few instances (S. America especially), we are to believe that US policy is generally bad and evil. You might go review the meaning of the word "proportionality" before vomiting this sort of thing.
The US has - on occasion - acted very stupidly around the world. But for the most part, and far more often (far, far, far more often) it has been an instrument of liberation, the relief of suffering, and the defense of the innocent. This, of course, is now coming to a gradual halt as you Equivocators wring your precious hands as you major on minors ...
You may have missed his unambiguous statement that his positions are always ideologically driven -- ie, reasoning backward FROM a pre- ordained conclusion.
He stated THAT part beautifully.
It makes one wonder how you cling so tenaciously to the notion of "free markets," yet insist that they not be applied to the actions of Nations -- implicitly demanding that yours intercede in the actions of others.....
Actually, I tend to agree with you: absent SOME of the US's interventions, the world would be a much less equitable, much less civilized place than, even, it is.
Ditto the notion of "free markets." Absent the same sort of intervention, the haves will -- at every opportunity -- screw the have nots.
Now,now - mustn't let reality intrude on the dreamworld of the flag wavers :-).
Excellent article in the December issue of American History relating how Patrick Henry warned of the dangers in a strong federal government.
You appear to be having a slight reading problem. Let me explain what the words mean. The things I mentioned - liberty, markets, capitalism, and trade - are *starting points* from which we *begin*. Without such sound starting points, we end up with execrable conclusions - e.g, The conclusions of the ideological left. It is You And Yours that are most usually guilty of working from a desired endpoint backward through a tortured set of mental gymnastics.
I have no idea where you got that idea. I do want truly free markets. This means that NO one should interfere in market action - individual, corporate, or government - until/unless there is evidence of fraud or force ... which would on its face make markets not free.
My preference would have been to keep the US completely out of world affairs until/unless there was a threat *to* the US. That horse, however, long ago fled the barn. The fact is that from TR forward, the US has had an interventionist foreign policy. Demanding we butt out now is simply not realistic. But - as I said - even a casual examination of our history shows far, far more benefit to the rest of the planet than downside. But the Devlin-esque Equivocators have a really hard time with that. They come from a position of "If it's not perfect, it's no good." Their world is black, white, simple, and unambiguous. It is also completely disconnected from Reality.
It is proper to intervene in markets when there is evidence of fraud, force, or threat. It is improper to intervene because some hang-wringing peddler of phony Social Justice (tm) wants to use government itself to commit the act of fraud to forcefully redistribute wealth.
I really would wish that the "US would withdraw from the world state" as it seems that whenever you get involved you make matters a lot worse due to the greed and ambitions of many of your leaders.
As for "so that people like you could get a taste of what the planet would feel like with people of conviction and genuine interest in liberty might feel like." Do you really think that the leaders of your country are really concerned about that?
They are not interested in "liberty" per-se, they are only interested in the "fast buck" that they can make from selling arms, food etc and will only step in to protect those interests - your participation in two world wars [late at that], Korea, Vietnam, the first Gulf war and the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq are proof of that.
If America really believes in *true* liberty, why has it not interfered in Russian, Chinese and North Korean affairs (to name a few) to "liberate" them?
I do live in a supposedly "free" [1] country, and that country was 'free' and winning wars long before America was founded - and in fact, the birth of the American dream was one of the few wars in history that America has won - think about it.
As for "American blood and treasure made it possible" America has gained far more "treasure" from her participation than it has ever expended (countries have been made to pay dearly) and as for the spilling of American blood - again far more innocent blood has been spilled by non-Americans by Americans - again think about the Nuclear bombs, carpet bombing, cluster bombing, agent orange and the indiscriminate use of weapons on civilian populations - along with the American ideology that any non-American is a nonentity.
[1] Made far more George Orwellian and dangerous by the knee jerk reactions of one of the dumbest presidents you have ever had - along with the poodle-like idolatry of one my countries leaders of that lying president and the so-called "American dream".Good night and have a pleasant Christmas - unlike many in America and the world.
Like I said, I hope you get your wish. I'd like to see the US withdraw from the military, diplomatic, AND humanitarian sphere around the world, and never again offer a dime of solace, or a drop of blood. It would be good to watch the planet struggle with the many threats around the world (China, Russia, militant Islam, AIDs epidemics, tribal slaughter, ethic cleansing, and so forth) without the good old Red, White, And Blue to beg for help. Perhaps then you might learn some manners and say "Thank You" for the help you've received rather than howling about how bad it all is.
BTW, I speak as a naturalized US citizen. I wasn't born here, and English was my second written/read language. I've lived in Europe and done business there and in Asia. You aren't "Disbelieving", you're Delusional.
You don't think we ought to convict him before we kill him?
I can't imagine what comic book you're reading.
The United States has not charged Assange with anything nor has it asked that he be extradited to the US.
Nor will it.
Assange will get a pass from the US for the simple reason that any criminal offense the USA can concoct to sanction Assange would apply equally well to the NY Times. Assange did not steal these communications nor is there any intimation he participated in any way with their theft. He merely publicized them.
Same as the New York Times.
Further, as to your (erroneous) assertion that Palin demands the unlawful execution of Assange, I should point out that killing a terrorist is not unlawful. That said, what she ACTUALLY said, in contradistinction to your claim, was:
"Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders?"
Think football or baseball coach. If the coach could pitch or pass as well as the player he's instructing, he'd be on the field making the big bucks!
In the case of Venezula, the "nuts" screw the "haves."
Heh! Keep believing that. America is the oldest democracy in the world (with the possible exception of the Isle of Man).
I'll give you that American, India (the largest democracy in the world), and other spots are the inheritors of the English Common Law and that shaped our country well.
But countries with "freedom?" and "democracy?" well, we're the one with the longest history and tradition.
Gives me goose-bumps. Nothing beats the smell of Napalm in the morning.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.