Isn't it about time time that we forcibly changed the "regime" in the States, given that they seem to think they have a God-given mandate to do so everywhere else in the world (with varying degrees of catastrophic failure e.g. Afghanistan, Iraq)?
The reason I ask is that there seems to be a lot of Q's posted today suggesting that the USA nukes N. Korea, and am wondering just how long it'll be before that ignorant half-wit "Dubbya" does something stupid (yes, with Blair as his faithful lapdog as always, the spineless git).
2006-10-09 03:04:08 · 9 answers · asked by BushRaider69 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Note to Veritas:
Actually, I would describe myself politically as a slightly right-of-centre.
You say that it's not a regime, but a Government or Administration - I say to you, what was the Ba'ath Party if it wasn't an Administration?
The reason many people post content on YA regarding their "discontent" with the USA is that this one of the places where they can speak their collective mind - and given the volume of said posts, I'd say that there is a lot of unhappy people out there.
Still, you sit in your ivory tower and spout rubbish if you like. Take a look around you man, and see what is happening.
(Incidentally, sounds to me like you're a slightly blinkered Daily Mail reader, for what it's worth!)
2006-10-09 21:26:37 · update #1
Oh, and as far as providing other methods of dealing with terrorists - did we learn nothing from Northern Ireland? Much of the violence in Iraq stems from the mere presence of US, UK and other "coalition" (invading) forces in their country. It might be slightly contentious, but it is possible that the expression "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" might actually have an element of truth in it.
The foreign forces are seen by the nationals of those countries as an invading force - worse still, one who invaded without any sort of legal grounds, on the back of a bunch of lies and misinformation, with a badly put together and executed strategy, wrecked the infrastructures and simply have done nothing to make any improvement to the daily lives of the populace, rather, have plunged these countries into war-torn chaos.
2006-10-09 21:34:01 · update #2
Well I guess that depends on what would constitute regime change.
- Emprisoning citezens without trial?
- Torture (albeit not on US soil)?
- Manipulating the masses with false media?
- Rigging elections?
- Stealing from the poor to give to the rich?
Yes, I guess regime change is on the cards in this case.
2006-10-09 03:28:38 · answer #1 · answered by aziz m 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The original war aim, "to attack terrorists and countries that harbour terrorists", was perfectly sound. Osama Bin Laden, was known to be running terrorist training camps in Afghanistan, therefore, attacking Afghanistan, particularly with the oppressive Taliban running the country, was perfectly sound.
American foreign policy is not determined by subscribers to Yahoo Answers. Who is the 'WE' you refer to in relation to regime change? Also, the USA doesn't have a regime, it has a Government or an administration.
If you fail in a mission, that does not mean that it was wrong to make the attempt. Do you think that the USA and Britain should just let events like 9/11 simply pass without retaliation?
You have simply ranted against the American Government; which seems to be fashionable with students, assorted lefties, the BBC and Guardian readers, without providing other ways of dealing with terrorists. Forget the UN, it is a useless talking shop.
I get the feeling that you have been indoctrinated by left wing teachers/lecturers or terrestrial TV channels.
2006-10-09 06:49:16 · answer #2 · answered by Veritas 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, if you were to try regime change and forced democracy in the US the north and south would start fighting and the whole region would collapse into a bloody civil war ( the southern states are so polite)
2006-10-09 03:14:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, better be quick before the next war though.
The preparations are too far advanced (see link below). Its not looking good and will most likely lead to a much bigger mess soon.
2006-10-09 03:22:19 · answer #4 · answered by Nothing to say? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
JFK and the bay of pigs fiasco has positioned usa off the belief. Castro is particularly customary in Cuba, and he's no longer THAT undesirable a dictator, different than in case you annoy him. Cuba isn't a 0.33 international us of a like it replaced into while he got here into skill - it has many of the main suitable unfastened healthcare interior the international working example. besides the indisputable fact that, Cuba would abandon communism and the single social gathering state as quickly as their charismatic chief loses skill, by using his present ailment working example.
2016-10-16 00:08:49 · answer #5 · answered by lander 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
Just trying to steer the star-ship back on course which had been way off course being overlook on planet earth.
2006-10-09 19:01:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You do that and we'll get rid of Blair! Honest, just dump the gimp!
2006-10-09 03:37:14 · answer #7 · answered by Mr Slug 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I can't wait until November.
2006-10-09 03:08:25 · answer #8 · answered by Big Bear 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
grow up and get a clue.
2006-10-09 03:07:14 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋