America. Why do they get involved?

Question

Ok , they started a war in Vietnam- WHY? They invaded Iraq, (where are them WMD) there are more deaths there now than when Saddam ruling. You tell other countries they cant have nuclear weapons yet go ahead and beef up your arsenal. Why do they not get involved in the isralei/lebanon conflict? Oh sorry a sanction or 2, that showed em! The genocide in Rwanda was not met with the force of the Yanks.. No oil? The civil wars going in the old soviet block, how many GI's were sent to sort that lot out..must have been too cold..Oh and no oil.

When is Bush going to admit he wants to control the worlds economy by thinking of excuses to invade country's that are rich in oil when there are attrocities that need to be sorted out on an humane basis?

Answer 1

I really do feel gifted to be an American don't get me wrong but I kinda want to hang my head in shame because of what our country has became.. We the Americans are now the terrorist killing innocent women and children If I was the rest of the world I would gang up on us and kill us all. With all the horrible things we have done to other ppl other countries. Its really sad:( So we took out saddam because he was killing his ppl and rapping his women?? Um how many ppl have died since we have been in that country? Im sure alot more than the ppl who died at saddoms hands what about rape I hear in the news all the time about our solders rapping the women and even rapping men over there.. Its really sad:(

Answer 2

The Vietnam war was was already under way when the U.S. jumped in. Why? They did so to attempt a balance of power between the West and Communism. They thought they could win or at least contain it. However, they did so on a preface that today is largely admitted to have been faked.

It's those WMD not them WMD. The U.S. or Britain isn't ruled by hotheads so quick to nuke anyone standing in their way. There are several governments in the former soviet block who now have nuclear weapons and instead of dealing with one country, the USSR, now there are about a dozen to negociate with.

If you attack a country which has nuclear weapons and they are loosing very badly, they have nothing to loose and wouldn't hesitate to use them. Remember, they're told by their leaders that the next life is better than this one. In that, given the state of affairs in the Mid-East, they may be right: It couldn't be any worse.

If the U.S. had been smart, they would have taken Saddam out of the country and held him as a trump card. This is what they did with Napolean. They could always put him back on his Emperor's thone as a puppet ruler and the people would have followed him. They could have done the same with old Saddam.

Rwanda, Rhodesia, South Africa all have major problems. These were British colonies, not American. So far, Britain hasn't jumped in either.

Bush won't admit he wants to control the world's economy by invading countries rich in oil. I'm not convinced that he wants to control the world's economy. There is no doubt he's in bed with big business and has a screw the little guy type of mentality. In the case of Iraq, yeah, they had oil, but Afghanistan didn't. All they had were a bunch of starving people, mountains and a government run by terrorists supported by the Saudi government. Oh, and supposedly, Osama Bin Laden. It was probably and still is a training ground to export terrorism to other lands that they don't agree with.

You do have a point that it took forever and a day to go into Serbia under NATO but much quicker into the gulf. The reason being not only the U.S. depends on oil. At the time, the invasion by Iraq into it's neighbor kingdom of Kuwait pushed the world into a global recession.

Answer 3

Global politics has always been that way. Certain countries and regions are 'strategically important'. The Middle East is the biggest producer of oil which is critical to the industrialised nations. So whoever controls it pretty much controls the world.
Rwanda exports a small amount of agricultural produce and so is pretty much irrelevant. It wouldn't make a jot of difference to the world economy if Rwandans kill each other until nobody is left. Harsh but true.

Answer 4

1) Vietnam was the French's war. America came into help and ended up getting stuck ------- GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.

2) Saddam DID use WMD's on his own people.

3) Genocide in Rwanda- prime example of what happens when Americans do nothing!!!

4) America DOES control the worlds economy!!!---WTO, WORLD BANC, NAFTA, NASDAQ, DOW etc etc ..



With great power comes great responsibility..Since your not an American, I wouldnt expect you to understand!

Answer 5

I'd recommend Hyde Park for your oratory outpourings. The US was asked by South Vietnam to help prevent the rise of communism throughtout that country. After 12 years oand 60000US deaths, they failed. They invaded Iraq believing Saddam was a sponsor of terrorism - amongst other things. To go into the Lebanon would mean fighting Syria. Why should America be involved in Rwanda (or Zimbabwe or Nigeria or - the list of renegade African countries is endless). Send troops into Russia? You're having a laugh, aren't you? Your question is varied but totally inaccurate.

Answer 6

I love the way you posed your question.
Bush is not at all interested in the world's other problems, leastwise those that involve atrocities and inhumane treatment. After all, we are deeply involved in the infliction of 'atrocities and inhumane treatment" of innocent people ourselves. Bush is a Lame Duck.
He has three 6-months terms left. (and one week). For the rest of his terms there is little he can do to correct his past mistakes...So he will stay the course, making still other dastardly mistakes as he goes along.
You see, Bush's BIGGEST mistake is actually believing he is some kind of god.

Answer 7

Hello mate, crikey we are on a soapbox today, i think that no matter what there is always going to be a country that wants to be the worlds police , mabye other countries with absolute looney tunes for leaders take notice of Bush and know he is a bit unstable himself! I think they stop trying to make the world a better place and get their own house in order.....who can forget New Orleans!

Answer 8

Because we always need an enemy to fight (we can't fight the Russians now as the Cold War is over - we still got a beef with Castro though) i'm ashamed to say. I've been called unpatriotic because of my views. Waiting for the knock on the door just now to take me to Guantanamo Bay.

Answer 9

Read between the lines my friend. GW is a moron. I am not going to stick up for him. Vietnam was supposebly for rubber or something like that that was economic, but i do think we should be doing other things that make sense like Invading Iran, or peace keeping in Darfur. or many many other things.

Answer 10

WOW! You've lumped several different things into one. For one, Bush wasn't in office during the Vietnam war. As far as this Iraqi war, he was acting on, what was suppose to be solid evidence. I don't think anyone knew how evil the Islamic Extremists could be. As far as America getting involved in other situations around the globe, it seems to me that we are expected to come in and hand out aid and security to others. I've actually heard it said on news reports, that other governments are waiting for America to step in on a situation...WHY US??? And then when we do, we are condemned for it. Check out our track record...we are usually the first to arrive in the case of natural disasters. We unload Billions into countries, because internal wars have their people oppressed. We are putting up with illegal immigration because of rights activists. I could go on...but I think I've made my point.