R
Ridgerunner
Guest
If you do not consider Saddam Hussein an aggressive fascist, then what do you think would fit the criteria?
And if you do not consider 911 aggression, what would you require to fit your understanding of it?
- Status
And if you do not consider 911 aggression, what would you require to fit your understanding of it?
S
SCALCO
Guest
Remember we were attacked on 9/11 first… There have been other attacks in Europe since then. It is possible that our “offense” has prevented further attacks.
S
SCALCO
Guest
One communist govt. taking over another. Were the Vietnamese concerned about the killing going on in Cambodia? Were they liberators or invaders? I have limited time to search, but can you supply a fact check to support this. They ousted the Khmer Rouge and that’s probably all you mean.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
To my recollection, this was no humanitarian gesture on the part of Viet Nam. There were a lot of Vietnamese being slaughtered by the Khmer Rouge and thrown into the Mekong River. If I am not greatly mistaken, there were either some cross-border attacks by the Khmer Rouge, or attacks on Vietnamese in territory claimed by the Khmer Route, as well as killings of Vietnamese in Cambodia itself. Recall that there were plenty of Vietnamese there during the war, because that’s where a good part of the Ho Chi Minh Trail was. In any event, it was retaliatory, not humanitarian. The No. Vietnamese had death camps of their own going. They installed a communist government friendly to Viet Nam after they pushed the Khmer Rouge into the jungle.
As I recall, that precipitated the “five mile war” between Viet Nam and China, as China, at the time, did not want Viet Nam’s power to spread in the region. To my recollection, the Vietnamese did withdraw from Cambodia shortly after that.
D
distracted
Guest
Fighting against Communism is fighting FOR Christianity… It is too bad there are blood-thirsty, power-hungry people in the world, but that is a reality. . & we in our (so-called) Christian nations have no choice but to sometimes fight wars to end this evil… (Of course, we should always try first to convert… but so far, Has that been effective??
)This makes me realize all over again the importance of EVANGELIZING!!
We Catholics aren’t very good at that… (usually)…
D
D_M
Guest
Cicero, the roman statesman, once told a story (I don’t know if the story was true or myth) that went something like this:
Alexander the Great was out conquering the world and his forces captured a pirate who was brought to the great conqueror to meet him face-to-face. Alexander asked the pirate, “How do you dare to infest the safety of the seas?” And the pirate insolently and stubbornly replied, “And how do you do the same to the whole Earth? For I go about in my small boat plundering ships, and so I am a pirate, you do the very same with an entire army and therefore you are an emperor.”
Alexander the Great was out conquering the world and his forces captured a pirate who was brought to the great conqueror to meet him face-to-face. Alexander asked the pirate, “How do you dare to infest the safety of the seas?” And the pirate insolently and stubbornly replied, “And how do you do the same to the whole Earth? For I go about in my small boat plundering ships, and so I am a pirate, you do the very same with an entire army and therefore you are an emperor.”
D
D_M
Guest
I’m anti-atheist.so… are you pro-Communist or not??
Communism is an economic system.
R
Ronald_E
Guest
I would suggest that 9/11 is a result of an enemy lacking sophisticated weapons and extremists using religion as an opportunity to attack us for our historical involvement in the Middle East.
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
Saddam Hussein didn’t attack us on 9/11. He had nothing to do with it.
Hope this helps.
Jim
O
onetimeposter
Guest
This is true.Saddam Hussein didn’t attack us on 9/11. He had nothing to do with it.
Hope this helps.
Jim
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Well, not actually, since I have known that from the beginning. Saddam started two aggressive wars, used WMD in one of them and domestically, and killed upwards of a million people in his career. He made a truce at the end of his last aggressive war, and violated it in many ways, one being his firing on American and British planes. He was as complete a totalitarian as ever walked. Kind of seems like a fascist aggressor to me.Saddam Hussein didn’t attack us on 9/11. He had nothing to do with it.
Hope this helps.
Jim
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Oh, looking back, I see where you’re coming from. No, I was not saying Saddam Huseein had anything to do with 911, nor was it the basis for the Iraq War. However, 911 was the proximate cause of the war in Afghanistan, and no one can seriously contend that 911 was not an act of aggression.Saddam Hussein didn’t attack us on 9/11. He had nothing to do with it.
Hope this helps.
Jim
.
A
Al_Masetti
Guest
With death camps. Kind of a unique twist for a simple “economic system” … no?
More like Murder Incorporated with a political motivation.
amazon.com/Black-Book-Communism-Crimes-Repression/dp/0674076087
The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression
When it was first published in France in 1997, Le livre noir du Communisme touched off a storm of controversy that continues to rage today.
Even some of his contributors shied away from chief editor Stéphane Courtois’s conclusion that Communism, in all its many forms, was morally no better than Nazism; the two totalitarian systems, Courtois argued, were far better at killing than at governing, as the world learned to its sorrow.
Communism did kill, Courtois and his fellow historians demonstrate, with ruthless efficiency: 25 million in Russia during the Bolshevik and Stalinist eras, perhaps 65 million in China under the eyes of Mao Zedong, 2 million in Cambodia, millions more Africa, Eastern Europe, and Latin America–an astonishingly high toll of victims.
This freely expressed penchant for homicide, Courtois maintains, was no accident, but an integral trait of a philosophy, and a practical politics, that promised to erase class distinctions by erasing classes and the living humans that populated them.
Courtois and his contributors document Communism’s crimes in numbing detail, moving from country to country, revolution to revolution. The figures they offer will likely provoke argument, if not among cliometricians then among the ideologically inclined. So, too, will Courtois’s suggestion that those who hold Lenin, Trotsky, and Ho Chi Minh in anything other than contempt are dupes, witting or not, of a murderous school of thought–one that, while in retreat around the world, still has many adherents. A thought-provoking work of history and social criticism, The Black Book of Communism fully merits the broadest possible readership and discussion. –
M
mlchance
Guest
No, he wasn’t, and, yes, he did. President Lincoln was throughout most of his political career a Free Soiler who wanted to halt the expansion of slavery into new territories. His views against slavery did evolve, but slowly. By the end of his life, he was at best what one could consider an “enlightened racist,” firmly convinced of the general inferiority of Blacks but also firmly committed to the Declaration of Independence’s statement regarding our equality before the Creator. On top of all of this, he was a tyrannical president who willfully violated the Constitution by forming West Virginia, arresting the Maryland legislature, jailing people in the North who criticized his war policies, et cetera.
But that’s all off-topic.
How about this: The Vietnam War was a noble undertaking to help defend a people against aggressors that (as history has shown) aimed at destroying Vietnamese society. Those feckless Communist-sympathizers who aided the enemy’s cause in the U.S. are the ones who ought to be ashamed of themselves.
– Mark L. Chance.
D
D_M
Guest
When the virgin at fatima was talking about the errors of Russia I really don’t think she was referring to the collectivization of resources and the lack of a consumer-based economy.
When the United States waged war in Viet Nam they did not do so to fight against atheism and spread christianity, but they did it to fight against communism and spread consumer capitalism.
Hitler waged war against communism too, he killed 20-30 million people in the Soviet Union… would you justify what he did on the basis that he was fighting against communism and therefore it was a christian war?
O
onetimeposter
Guest
Are you talking about the same Saddam Hussein that was an American ally while he committed most of his atrocities? Are you talking about the same Saddam Hussein that was helped into power and armed by the United States of America? Is that the Saddam Hussein your talking about, the former American Ally?
'*In 1988, when a Senate Foreign Relations committee staff report exposed the killings of Kurds in northern Iraq, Sen. Claiborne Pell (D-R.I.) proposed the Prevention of Genocide Act to put pressure on the Iraqi government. But the Reagan administration orchestrated the measure’s defeat in Congress. ( This is the WMD that you were talking about, Saddam used them while he was an American Ally and I wonder how he got his weapons)
In an echo of Winston Churchill’s comment a half century before, one defense official told the New York Times, “The use of gas on the battlefield by the Iraqis was not a matter of deep strategic concern.”
Part of the reason for Washington’s silence about Saddam’s use of weapons of mass destruction was that U.S. corporations helped to supply them. Throughout the 1980s, the Iraqi government bought the ingredients for its biological weapons program legally–from suppliers in the U.S. and Europe.
Strains of anthrax, botulinum and other toxins came from a company in Rockville, Md.–or from the U.S. government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. When Iraq provided a report on its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs to United Nations inspectors at the end of 2002, the U.S. tried to censor information about American corporate suppliers.
But a German newspaper revealed that Iraq’s report implicated 24 major U.S. corporations–including Hewlett-Packard, Honeywell, Sperry, Rockwell, Dupont and Bechtel–for selling chemicals and weapons to Iraq while Saddam was Washington’s allies. And this was only the tip of the iceberg. From the early 1980s, some of the biggest names in Corporate America–Amoco, Mobil, Westinghouse and Caterpillar, to name a few–joined a U.S.-Iraq Business Forum to lobby Washington to strengthen its ties to the Iraqi government.*’
D
D_M
Guest
I’m by no means unfamiliar with the crimes that were committed in the past century in the name of Marxism-Leninism.
I don’t mean to defend it either… but I don’t think that Marx’s critique of privately-owned capital, or the sociology of dialectic materialism (ie. the ideology) is really what made this system evil.
The evils that come forth from Russia and spread throughout the world had to do with the militant atheism that sought to destroy every enemy of the party that stood in its path.
But when the United States and its allies went to war in places like Korea, Viet Nam, or the larger complexities of the cold war, the ideological mindset was not a fight against atheism and to spread the name of Christ, but was a fight against the destruction of free market economies, and was done in the name of democracy or in the name of the western liberal capitalism.
I by no means wish to acquit the horrible crimes you do truly mention that occur, but to suggest that the problem was communism and lack of democracy… and not atheism and lack of christianity… which is what the United States was fighting for in its ideological mindset and stated within its propaganda, is not really a fight of good vs. evil.
- Status