the republican approach to international challenges has been to assert, and indeed try to impose, our democratic values by military means. should we feel enlightened enough to go ahead and just run the world, or should we spend more time defending ourselves and making a better case for our way of life before the world body of opinion, and wait until they get onboard willingly.
2006-08-03 13:52:14 · 7 answers · asked by emptiedfull 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
This countries beliefs have always been to impose our standards and values on others.
This is the sad sad fundamentalist christian society that we live in today. Defending oneself is far different from being the aggressor.
The fundamentalist is so scared of globalization that they will do anything to assert their power worldwide to show they will not be a part of it. And yes, Bush is the captain of this ship. And this ship is headed towards a big iceberg.
2006-08-03 13:57:24 · answer #1 · answered by trevor22in 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Of course Bush amplified the violent cycle!!!!!Iraq,,,weapons of mass destruction,ah where r they???????there never was any and The American gov new it.It is OK to train others to attack Iran,can't have it both ways.Where is the help for Lebanon,American is run by the Jews,u don't have to be a brain surgeon to work that out,and I am on the other side of the world.The Jews say one thing and mean another.This war will end when one has wiped the other out.As that is the aim on both sides of the fence.America should mind it's own business and leave other countries out of their desire for war.I feel sorry for the innocent Americans caught up in the terrorism,children killed etc.....but it is happening on all grounds where war is going on,it is not fair for the innocent.
2006-08-03 21:06:58 · answer #2 · answered by fairie 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The hubris and arrogance of the neoconservative agenda, coupled with the greed of the chimpy administration have accelerated the militant state of the world. Most of the combatants now see themselves as fighting against threat to their "way of life", be it a foreign invader, a terrorist used to create chaos, a different religion, or a superpower imposing it's will.
2006-08-03 20:59:47 · answer #3 · answered by BarronVonUnderbeiht 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's the silliest thing I've ever heard. The radical muslims have been attacking every where in the world since the 1972 Olympic attacks, the disco techs in Germany, capturing hostages in Lebanon in the eighties, the first world trade center attack, attacks in Sri Lanka, Philipeans all occurred before Bush took office.
2006-08-04 02:52:56 · answer #4 · answered by .45 Peacemaker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes and yes. Why should we impose our beliefs on others? I do not think this is about creating a democratic middle east anyway. It is all about the land and oil, and last but not least, money. The American/Israeli marriage of greed and violence has to stop.
2006-08-03 21:13:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Clinton stood by while the world trade center was attacked, and multiple other bombings and did nothing.
2006-08-03 20:58:51 · answer #6 · answered by Black Sabbath 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Al said it best:
"The world is a dangerous place to live
not because of the people who are evil,
but because of the people who don't do
anything about it."
-- Albert Einstein
2006-08-03 21:06:25 · answer #7 · answered by lordkelvin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋