David, America had the "sympathy" of the world after 9/11 because the world only likes America when we're on our knees. If we've been sucker-punched, if we're groveling and begging for forgiveness, or kissing their asses, then they like us.

I see the article mentions the "imperial US" notion and cites as evidence our bases in Germany and Japan. Funny it doesn't mention our bases in the Philippines -- oh, that's right, they asked us to leave, and we did. Or the bases in Saudi Arabia -- oh, that's right, they asked us to leave, and we did. Also doesn't mention how Germany squawks and whines and howls every time someone talks about closing our bases there -- they LIKE the economic boon having them gives them. Likewise, Japan appreciates having the US military there for other reasons beyond economic -- with North Korea and China looming so closely and so belligerently, they find it reassuring having us there.

Yeah, I figured we'd keep some bases in Iraq. But they would only last as long as the Iraqi government permits it -- just like every single other US military base in other countries around the world.

And before you get your knickers in a twist, Guantanamo is a special case -- our lease is open-ended, and requires both sides (us and Cuba) to agree to end it.

Care to cite any examples of how having a US military presence in a country has proven to be a dangerous, destabilizing, tyrannical influence?

The Islamists' hatred and attacks on America didn't begin with the invasion of Iraq. It didn't begin on 9/11. It's arguable when it really began, but my personal preferred like of demarcation was the Iranian revolution and the hostage crisis -- that day in 1979 when Iranian militants invaded sovereign US territory, occupied it, and kept Americans hostage without any serious repercussions. At that point, President Carter demonstrated that the United States would tolerate flagrant acts of war without retaliating. And that set the stage for the last 25 years of terrorism, including (but not limited to) Bin Laden and Al Qaeda's repeated and escalating acts of war against us, all pretty much ignored until 9/11.

I could say more, but I got laundry to do and I owe Wizbang a few pieces for tomorrow.

J.

'I am not real big on conspiracy theories...'

Really?

Such rapier wit Tran. Can I use that one? No really? If you took the time to read the articles, there is nothing conspiracy about them. The Neocon hijacking of our International Policy is quite real, as are the people behind it. You choose to ignore that all you wish, does not make it any less true.

"Care to cite any examples of how having a US military presence in a country has proven to be a dangerous, destabilizing, tyrannical influence?"

It's ironic about the Philippines....we had our bases there when the country was run by a dictator. But that's ok, he was OUR dictator.Nope, no tyranny there, nothing to see, move along...It's unfortunate, though, that the American Government refuses to clean up the bases they polluted.They asked us to clean up the base and we didn't.Interesting line of demarcation, Jay. I would argue that the hatred goes back even further. At least until February 8,1963, the day that a U.S. backed military coup put the Baath Party in power in Iraq. And in Iran there was Our Shah...nope, no imperialism here, nothing to see, yawn, move along...

Yeah, David, backing Marcos was a mistake. It was the triumph of RealPolitik, the good old days of "he may be a son-of-a-bitch, but he's OUR son-of-a-bitch." Much like our relationship with Saddam for a long time. It's a pity that "principle" has become a bit more important these days; we coulda got a LOT more oil a LOT more cheaply if we'd just turned a blind eye to his repeated atrocities and done bidness with him.

And I specified the Iran Hostage Crisis as the "line of demarcation" when the Islamists -- you might have heard of them; they're the ones who want to establish the worldwide Caliphate, the whole globe governed by Islam, and are ready to kill whoever they need to achieve it -- first realized they could commit acts of war against the United States without fear of serious retaliation. And they proved it again and again -- in Beirut, in 1982; in New York, in 1993; in... oh, you've heard it all before. At least, I know I've said it numerous times.

J.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Subscribe to this comment thread.

Comments: