English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Since the repressive Soviet state collapsed under the weight of its own cruelties and lies, democratic America went from strength to strength, buoyed by its national commitment to “liberty and justice for all”.

On Sept. 17, 2001, Bush signed a secret executive order authorizing the CIA to kill, capture or detain Al “Qaeda operatives”. The CIA founded secret detention centres in Eastern Europe to keep the imprisoned far from the prying eyes of reporters or Red Cross officials. Because these high-value prisoners — so-called ghost detainees — were going to be subjected to "enhanced interrogation techniques."

2006-09-01 09:14:38 · 20 answers · asked by Malcolm X 2 in Politics & Government Politics

That's Orwell-speak for what's known in English as torture. The list of enhanced techniques includes such old favorites as "water boarding" (feigned drowning) and feigned suffocation, "Palestinian hanging," a "stress position" in which a detainee is suspended from the ceiling or wall by his wrists, which are handcuffed behind his back.

Around the World, Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo prisons became the symbol of the “freedom-loving democratic nation”

2006-09-01 09:14:59 · update #1

20 answers

Agree completely...Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld have turned us into the soviet union. You didn't mention warrant-less wiretaps, or the fact you can be yanked out of your car and searched without cause...something that would have started another revolution 100 years ago. This is what happens in a democracy where only 30% of the people vote. Thomas Jefferson was right when he said all societies need a revolution now and again. I think it's time now.

2006-09-01 09:23:11 · answer #1 · answered by Perry L 5 · 2 0

Trying to understand your question, I presume that you are asking which ideology emerged victorious, liberal open society or police state. I think that the answer is neither. The problems with an open society were demonstrated on 11 September 2001 and the aftermath, as United States citizens began to barter off some openness in our society for supposed security. (One result of this barter is found in frustrating dealings with the DMV, and that's just some of it.) A police state, however, chafes under the friction of attempting to improve the living conditions of citizens by proposing solutions that appear to threaten the government.

I think that the resulting ideology is a hybrid of the two. In a way, the US was never totally an open society, and the USSR was never totally a police state. (Even under Stalin, Russians were loyal to their country against German invasion.) I think what happened is that each side became more like the other.

In regard to the somewhat unrelated commentary about covert tactics, that's old news. The US has been involved in multitudes of questionable covert actions for much of their history. Just how many times did the US invade Haiti? Nicaragua? Mexico? Yes, the US has been known to be nasty in its foreign policy, but that's been true of many other powers in history. That's not meant to be a defence, but in truth the only real difference between the situation provided and other actions in the past is the apparent visibility of the current one.

One of the most renowned generals in US history, William T. Sherman, is quoted as saying, "War is hell." His context was the devastation that his army left as they invaded Confederacy in the US Civil War. Little did he know how true his words would be in the secret (and not-so-secret) wars that are fought all the time.

2006-09-01 20:53:04 · answer #2 · answered by Ѕємι~Мαđ ŠçїєŋŧιѕТ 6 · 1 0

I'm having trouble making the connection between your question and your statement about Bush and the CIA. The Soviet state collapsed because its system was flawed. A country can't commit 60% of its GNP to weapons production, as the USSR did, and feed its people.
I know of cruel people who lie and are successful. Lack of virtues aren't going to topple a government whether it's totalitarian or democratic.
Whatever Bush and the CIA have been up to, they've done it because they thought it best for the nation. Nixon did some pretty underhanded things as well. In the end, it's up to us to decide if their actions were right or wrong. Nixon had a rude awakening. Perhaps Bush will also.

2006-09-01 17:38:00 · answer #3 · answered by Overt Operative 6 · 0 0

Soviet Union: 20 Million executed simply for being a member of the wrong party, or wanting to practice any religion.

U.S. post 9/11: 2 or 3 thousand known or suspected terrorists being held and interrogated.

Soviet Union: state controlled press to prevent the public from keeping an eye on the government.

U.S. : free press that has endless and constant stories keeping the public informed as to what the government is doing.

Yeah, it's just the exact same as the old Soviet Empire. Retard.

2006-09-01 16:22:10 · answer #4 · answered by Aegis of Freedom 7 · 1 3

Hey Malcom

Why did you murder Clyde X back in the 1960's. All the local papers had you pegged as the prime suspect. But in the 60's Clyde was just another dead black man. The police never really cared who did it.

Is that all part of the religion of peace thing.

Go big Red Go

2006-09-01 16:29:05 · answer #5 · answered by 43 5 · 0 2

I agree with your views on the anti "terrorism" laws - but I think it is abundantly clear that Capitalism won the Cold War - it never was about America vs Russia, it was about Capitalism vs Communism, and there are very few communist countries left, and very few of them are pure communist. Just because the Capitalists now want to introduce authoritarian governments it doesn't really have anything to do with the cold war.

2006-09-01 16:28:11 · answer #6 · answered by Mordent 7 · 1 1

I think you'll agree, the winners of the Cold War were the armas manufacturers. Government and nations are becoming obsolete, it's now about mulit-national companies. He with the most bucks at the end of the day wins! Depressing.

2006-09-01 16:22:09 · answer #7 · answered by Alobar 5 · 3 1

While informative, this discourse doesn't really contribute much to the answer to your question. The Council for Foreign Relations wins all wars...for their masters...the true Ruling Class.

2006-09-01 16:21:32 · answer #8 · answered by westgaliberty 6 · 2 1

As long as it happens off American soil, and isn't banned by the countries it is happening it, and is not against any treaties we have signed, then its all good baby.

Burn 'em!

2006-09-01 18:40:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yeah I really am going to trust someone who values the opinion of one of the most bigoted and violent intentioned people of the 20th century.

2006-09-01 16:23:38 · answer #10 · answered by Black Sabbath 6 · 0 3

fedest.com, questions and answers