[bargalunan]

When US bring democracy in other countries :

Mossadegh prime minister was elected in Iran in 1952 and wanted to nationalize petrol.
Eisenhower said something like “ eliminate the problem called Mossadegh and get our petrol back “ (french translation…)
CIA organized communist bomb attacks, riots (operation Ajax) in order to raise the Shah to power and his prime minister nazi general Fazlollah Zahédi (his political police : Savak highly influenced by Gestapo)
Mossadegh died in prison in 1967.

Salvator Allende was elected president of Chile in 1970, CIA raised dictator Pinochet in 1973.
Salvator Allende was executed in 1973.

Hugo Chavez is elected in Venezuela (petrol). US always try to eliminate this president who invests his petrol benefits for his country.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Is elected in Iran in august 2005 and launch again a civil nuclear program (that could lead to military program ?…)
When there will be no more petrol in Iran, what kind of energy will this country be allowed to use ? If western countries were Iran, what would they do ? They’ll also try to anticipate future. I know may be he isn’t a saint, I just keep occidental logic.
What will GW Bush decide ? He’s waiting for the first reason to declare war in end August or beginning September 2005 ! US military bases have already been set around Iran (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kirghistan, Ouzbékistan, Irak, Koweït and Qatar) for months.

(It would be also ironical that US let now Irak attack Koweit since Irak is under US political control : the 02 aug 2005 Irakian deputies declared Koweit was infringing Irak/Koweit border line. I just make a free nightmare without any evidence of this intention ! But the last time it happened, Saddam Hussein overran Koweit.

GW Bush lost the election in Florida in 2000 and was declared president by the Supreme court (justice) with members named by G W Bush’s father.
Bush declared war to Irak and Afghanistan, change their governments without catching Ben Laden, without finding links between Irak and Ben Laden, without finding mass destruction weapons in Irak.
US own civil and military nuclear. US launched a program of miniaturised nuclear bombs “mini-nukes”. And remember what is the only country that used nuclear weapon in history ?

Recalling WW2 :
Before the nuclear bombing, unlike other Japanese cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki had never been attacked by US because it would have altered the results in order to establish liable statistics of the nuclear efficiency !! (French and British TV broadcast last week)
Japan had already decided to surrender before Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and US leaders knew all about that. Thanks to Little Boy and Fat Man, Japan will surrender to US and not to URSS ! Thus Japan became under US control and not URSS control.
Tokyo 70.000, Hiroshima 140.000, Nagasaki 70.000 at the end 1945. Multiply per 2 after for the two last ones victims of radiations.

We should do something to bring democracy and freedom in United States !

After
- a century of oil pillage in middle east, by the western world (France, GB as well),
- manipulations in order to keep these Arabian countries divided, and thus keep the power
(you can extend to Asia, Africa and South America). French and British are also responsible in having cutting the border lines throw ethnic people according to their economical interests, and divide these new countries in several different ethnic trends.
Divide in order to rule !
- years of food blockade in Irak,
I don’t think virgins are necessary to motivate people to become terrorists and fight against US ! (French members of Resistance were seen like terrorists in WW2.)

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

It's imperialism if you're determined to stay and exact tribute from the resulting subjects. Absent staying...

When the domination is obvious, people have an easy objective to fight (some French against nazis…). When you put a puppet, stemmed for this country, you command it, and you control the main companies, it’s less easy for folks to react. But this country is still under your control. It will follow your orders and interests.

For example it’s also useful to control countries producing petrol in order to keep dollar as the main international trade money… Otherwise it would lead to an economical breaking down
that threatens US (and the world) because economically they aren’t really so mighty. Look at the economical deficit.

Originally Posted by Cyclefrance

No doubt the US intended/intends to make the US and world a safer place through its actions, but the effect has produced and continues to produce something else.

I often agree with you, but in this case I doubt whether it’s true: Just look at the results. Leaders aren’t crazy in their logic (but humanely, emotionally they are), I think they want these effects.

Originally Posted by Cyclefrance

Give a man a good enough reason (stimulus) to react and he will - the harsher the reason the stronger the reaction.

I agree 500%. It’s the reason they act like this with several stages (economical crisis, food blockade… à reaction (terrorist, war) à action (war that you are surely going to win) to get the power justified as being seen as victim of terrorism)
For exemple : US iron and petrol blockade against Japan before WW2, food blockade against Irak before Gulf War (hundred thousand civil victims)………..

After war Iran / Irak, Irak was ruined. But Saddam could be an important force in Middle East. US incited Koweit to provoke it in extracting oil at the border line and in requiring repayment of military help. US promised with ambassador April Glaspie that US wouldn’t interfere because before British decolonisation Koweit was part of Irak. à Saddam attacked Koweit à US Gulf war 1

When you want a result, create the problem that your result will resolve ! Thus the population will accept it and thank you !

I think in politic there’s no friend, no enemy, only just interests. Just look back at history.

I disagree with countries politic not people.

Bye