Hey Rev,

Seems like you're wound up a little too tight. So you hate America big deal. Don't like it go get yourself elected and change policy. Maybe when you're elected you will probably realize that pulling out of every nation we're holed up in does nothing to improve our standing in the world. If anything you will probably see more people complain of why we arent doing enough.

On another point. Take Europe for example. They talk a big game about how we are a bunch of cowboys, violent idiots ad nauseum.... Who among you remembers Sierra Leone and France's involvement in protecting their bussiness interests at the point of a gun? Where were all the protests decrying the FROG'S naked aggression on some poor African having his house torched because he had the audacity to stand up to FROG Mining Corporations raping their national resources? So you see REV. It isnt just America being the Big Bad BOOGEY MAN. Lots of nations do it. I don't make excuses for us being foul at times. It's just a part of life. Always remember, if you're not prepared to fight dirty then, expect other people to fight that way against you anyway. Also remember this quote by George Orwell. Maybe it will remind you to be glad you live in a country that although you appear to hate with a passion, it still gives you the right to spout your insipidly witted comments on the rest of us.

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

If you can't stomach it.... Do us a favor and leave and go see if you have a better lot somewhere else. I hear Utopia is busy founding itself on Earth right now. They are going to be taking applications for citizenship as soon as they exterminate the previous inhabitants of the country they're presently conquering.

I'm disgusted by the off topic comments in this discussion. Am I the only one who sees that "the Rev" has hijacked this thread?
What a waste of my time. I was hoping to find some "considered comments" that were somehow RELATED to the article. I'm seeking to understand, not seeking to have my time wasted.

Felicity,

In the early days of Hitlers rise to power , he was very much admired and quite popular in the world.

As usual, many just dont understand or refuse to give credit to a country who during the better part of the 20th century through sacrifice and perseverance and at great cost kept real dictators like Hitler, Stalin , Tojo and Mao at bay. If you just even crunch the #'s on $'s and human lives,
it would speak volumes. But no, we just dont even want to look.

Mr. Percer,

What is that old adage, 'you cannot clean someone else's house if you will not clean your own'? I have always been amazed by the number of Americans who have been in denial about American misbehavior. Even those Americans who would begrudgingly admit to it at all, would rationalize America's misbehaviors by comparing America with some other nation or group of people who they believed had done worse or who were doing worse.

I would want to gag, for they seemed to be saying that America may have killed thousands for example, but the other guy or nation killed tens of thousands. Somehow Americans believed that America was then somehow justified given that their American misbehavior was not as bad as someone else or some other nation or group.

Most Americans have a very sanitized view of America and they are always willing to overlook America's past and present inane behaviors and policies in the name of patriotism, but that does not make it right!

In the event that you are serious about the question that you put forth, on the international stage just consider (and this list does not include America's most egregious misbehaviors) some of the following:

• The USA and England's involvement in the Middle East from the 1940's to the present.

• The USA, the Masoud and Saudi Arabia and the Contras.

• The USA and the Cuban Five and other American malfeasance in Cuba.

• The Shah, Papa Doc, Aristide, Marcos, Noriega, Patrice Lumumba...and the destabilization of other governments, supplying weapons, being in bed before with Saddam....

I could go on and I haven't even discussed what has gone on internally, all of which was fully supported by every branch of the United States government and most American citizens.

Every person needs something to believe in and I understand that, for it helps each of us to maintain homeostasis. However, at times we ought to step out of our comfort zones and do some self examination to determine whether what we believe in is fact or faction...

America cannot lead the world or dictate to the world, when the world is aware of American malfeasance and misbehavior that is at times kept secret or hidden away from American citizens.

To RS:

You have argued rather well that the nations of the world would certainly be justified in launching a war against the United States. We have defied many UN Resolutions, the Geneva Convention, the International Criminal Court at the Hague. We are building and selling nuclear weapons: We manufacture chemical and biological weapons.

And to boot, the president of the United States is by some reports the most hated man in the world. A rogue killer on the loose with an unmatched arsenal at his finger-tips would certainly justify, by your standards, a military response by the rest of the world.

Your thinking has existed for millenia and is why wars have existed from the time we were all running around in animal skins and living in caves. In fact, Darwinian evolution may work for plants and animals, but it falls flat on its face when it comes to the human species.

Cleaning house is fine with me. i just want to hear a sound policy not built upon imaginary concepts. Foreign policy cannot be the realm of dreamers unwilling to do what is necessary from time to time. I am also tired of the constant bickering from both sides of the arguement. While both believe they are correct neither has a patent on truth and both should be held accountable. Being the biggest power on the planet does carry great responsibility which neither side seems willing to take up. For clarity the two sides I'm discussing are the two main players conservatives and liberals. Here is a question for you. What are feasible alternatives?

Rev
What misbehavior are you talking about?

Mr. Percer,

You still have not answered my questions?
Why won't individuals like you, who live in the United States, confront American malfeasance and misbehavior, are you in denial?

If no other nation on the planet addresses its internal problems, does that make it okay for our country to conduct itself as a rogue nation?

Or is it your praxis, well, everybody is doing bad stuff, so we can as well? I was always taught to do the right thing regardless of what other people do!

RS,

We respectfully disagree and I am comfortable with that. With regard to your recantation of the past, you ignored the West's interference in the Middle-East going back to the 1940's right up to the present.

I will never understand how some Americans can conveniently ignore certain aspects of history and point out other portions that would appear to support their positions.

And with respect to your closing comments, the U.S.A. has between fourteen and forty thousand nuclear devices. The U.S.A. has used nuclear devices. The U.S.A. is currently occupying two nations. I know that most Americans don't get this, but the U.S.A. is a hostile terrorist spy nation, and if any nation should be chastised, disarmed, monitored and sanctioned by the worldwide community, it should be the United States of America. Why won't that happen, because the U.S.A. has the ability to defend itself, rightly or wrongly, against the whole world?

I agree with what Mr. Bush said a year ago, that any nation has the right to defend itself from an outside aggressor. I would add one thing; they have the right to defend themselves just as America apparently does, by any means necessary. So why does Mr. Bush and people who think like him want to keep certain other nations disarmed?

You simply believe in a double-standard, whereas I believe that the same standard should apply to all nations, especially the U.S.A.!

In denial about what? The great problems on the world stage within the past decade really seem beyond our(the US) control. On a scale of human suffering African wars make our excursions look like child's play. What fuels these conflicts is the abundance of weapons produced by Soviet Bloc countries and sent as foreign aid of 50 years. So,... maybe you could answer one question, why isn't more being done to stop Africans from killing themselves, is it because it's easier for you to blame American foreign policy than to see the real problems in our world today?

RS posted:
"Don't let your utter disappointment with how this currrent administartion executes its foreign policy blind you to the fact that it's a various dangerous world and there will always be countries that are gunning for us, simply because of who we are and not because we invaded two countries, one a failed state and the other run by a dictator."

I find it hard to follow your logic. I'll be brief: who 'we are' is a country that conducted an unlawful invasion, that fuels and takes part in the main crisis in the ME by taking side, financing and arming Israel... a country that supports a genocidal regime, Guatemalta(...), for a UN security council seat.

Rev-

While I appreciate a good dose of sarcasism, it's only funny if the context of the statement is based in reality. Yes, it's true that our Global War on Terrorism could and should have been handled much more differently and much more competently than it has. to this point. As a liberal, I have many issues with both Iraq and Afghanistan. But as a former Army brat who also works for the Army, I cannot disagree more with your declaration that America is the core/sole reason for the current state of world affairs.

Quite frankly, your arguement fails to take into account basic historic facts, such as; separate from WWII, this country has never attacked another country using nuclear weapons. Every war this country has fought in from WWI up to 9/11, another country requested our assistance and we gave it to them, usually at great cost to America in terms of lives and resources. Afghanistan was a failed state that allowed a movement of global terrorism to fester and spread. And Iraq, although we shouldn't have invaded the country until we were finished in Afghanistan AND had clear, definitive evidence of collusion with terorists and/or a program to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, was ruled by a dictator who invaded two neighboring countries and killed hundreds of thousands of his own people, as well as defied numerous U.N. Security Council Resolutions. It's not like America attacked Canada.

While the ends rareley, if ever, justify the means, the bigger problem with Iraq and to a somewhat lesser extent the entire Middle East is that at some point in the near future, the West will have to deal with it simply because this region has too much influence (oil primarily) over world affairs to not deal with it. Don't let your utter disappointment with how this currrent administartion executes its foreign policy blind you to the fact that it's a various dangerous world and there will always be countries that are gunning for us, simply because of who we are and not because we invaded two countries, one a failed state and the other run by a dictator.

Lastly, do you honesty think that if we hadn't invaded either Iraq or Afghanistan that North Korea wouldn't still be attempting to develop nuclear weapons? This has been an ongoing issue for atleast the last 8-10 years. Or how about Iran, who has explicitly stated that they want to wipe Isreal off of the face of the Earth. Do us all a favor and try to look at the big picture while appreciating the fact that this world is not merely black and white but numerous shades of gray.

Folks seem to forget that the Korean Conflict is the longest armed conflict this nation has ever engaged in. There has been no peace teaty signed by Nortk Korea over its invasion of the South. we and the other members of the United Nations have engaged in an enduring cease fire. All it really takes is one shot for the shooting to start again. Moreover, how is North Korea any different than Iraq or. for that matter, any better. Could it be that the Iraq situation was, in fact, Bush's revenge for what Saddam had tried to do to Bush 41.

I am curious; what do you think would happen if the U.S. were to unilaterally destroy its nuclear weapons, downsize its navy to little more than a coastal defense force, close all bases outside of the U.S. (I assume you will allow Pearl Harbor, etc, to remain), and reduce the Army down to perhaps a Division-sized force, incapable of doing more than, hopefully defending the CONUS?

elder dxs,

I am curious what would happen if half of America was not so obdurate?

Have you considered what took place in America on 9/11 despite all of what you mentioned? None of this stuff that we have been paying for over the years, worked to defend the nation; well it all worked when we attacked two other unarmed nations.

Perhaps there is another answer to the conundrum. America places a lot of emphasis and spends a lot of money on so-called defense. The country that spends more on defense than reportedly all of the other nations of the world combined, while occupying a permanent seat on the UN Security Council is also the leader in world-wide weapons profliferation. Our behavior inspires other nations to arm themselves, lately with nukes!

Perhaps we should focus more on peace than so-called (premptive) Defense. I am truly in favor of an American Peace Department, its objectives will be to learn how to live peaceably with other nations of the world! The latter is something that some arrogant, we are Superpower American citizens, cannot comprehend doing; to much pride!

All of our current Departments such as the Department of State are mostly focused on American interests, not world-wide peace (well other than pseudo-America style peace, i.e., do it our way or we will strangle your nation or blow the h'll out of you if you don't)!

Is this the kind of nation that you want?

I'm sure that if the US left the world stage the rest of the people in the world would all join hands and live in peaceful harmony...

So Mr. Percer are you saying then that America's behavior is somehow justified because other nations, in the past and present, have been and are known to conduct themselves in a similar manner as the U.S.A.?

Why won't individuals like you, who live in the United States, confront American malfeasance and misbehavior, are you in denial? If the citizens of Austria and Germany were to have stood up to Hitler, could a worldwide conflagration perhaps have been avoided, one similar to what the world is experiencing now as a result of the misbehavior of the United States and the Republican Reich?

I would bet that you believe in personal improvement, and not only to better yourself but to improve the conditions in your home (that you live in), regardless of the behavior of the other inhabitants of the house or your neighbors!

So let's clean up our own house regardless of what anyone else does, instead of trying to rationalize and justify American misbehavior based upon the real or propaganized behavior of other nations!

To whom much is given, much is required...

It seems to be pretty easy for people to whine about things when they refuse to believe that the only problems in the world are created by the country they are living in. I'm sure that if the US left the world stage the rest of the people in the world would all join hands and live in peaceful harmony. I guess all that has happened in the past perpetrated by people not involved with the US were just fictions foisted on us by some vast right-winged or left-winged conspiracy. It's too bad that 1941 there was not some sort of plan to deal with an aggressive Japan except the "sit on hands until smacked" one.

From what teh negative commenters are saying, it sounds as if you all would prefer that the U.S. do something other than what it has done since the end of WW II: prepare for military conflicts in an unstable world.

I am curious; what do you think would happen if the U.S. were to unilaterally destroy its nuclear weapons, downsize its navy to little more than a coastal defense force, close all bases outside of the U.S. (I assume you will allow Pearl Harbor, etc, to remain), and reduce the Army down to perhaps a Division-sized force, incapable of doing more than, hopefully defending the CONUS?

We have, as a nation, been in the position of policing the world since WW II. Sure, we could unilaterally abandon that role; is that your desire? Are you confident that the member nations of the U.N. would take up the dities rather than following inthe footsteps of the League of Nations (you do remember that fine organization, do you not)?

Quit drinking so much kool-aid, folks. Until Jesus comes back, "the world is a toll-free toilet" (George Clinton, Parliament-Funkadelic).

Dialectical Materialism's collide with military euphemisms and political misdirection......

Keep telling the truth Mr. Arkin.

Let's face it, the use a conjunctive like pre-emption is preferable to stating one's true objective, to unjustifiably attack beforehand. It makes it much easier for the American citizen to go along with their government's going around the world and attacking other sovereign nations at will. Simply saying that we attacked a nation without cause and murdered its innocent citizens would be too much for the American psyche to bear.

Sadly, the United State's actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, have necessitated that the U.S.A. even back away from the term pre-emption, lately! Why? We forged ahead and attacked a country based on our suspicions, that in one instance said nation purportedly possessed WMDs.

Later it was confirmed that just as the U.N. Inspectors were saying all along, there weren't any WMDs. The damage was already done however, so the U.S.A. simply continued on with its rampage in this once sovereign nation just as it is doing today, rationalizing that we have no choice but to stay now or some rogue nation might come in take over if we were to leave; a rogue nation, however, with rogue leaders are already occupying Iraq and that nation cannot wait to get to the other two nations who it considered to be a part of the axis-of-evil. If those nations are evil, then what does that make the killer U.S.A.?

I am disappointed that the U.N. and the world are apparently more concerned about the possibility of what the DPRK might do in the future, as to what the United States has been doing in Afghanistan and Iraq for the past 3 years.

Call it what you will General, but the world knows how America operates and America has scenarios in place already delineating how they plan to deal militarily with the DPRK or any other nation that gets in its way; and the fact is that those nations do not have to do anything wrong! And if Chaney or McCain were to become President, I would recommend that the governments of the DPRK and Iran should begin to invest in bomb shelters. The Red Phone, between the U.S.A. and the DPRK and Iran are non-existent, and the war hawks in DC would like nothing less than to take down the DPRK and by any means necessary, even if in the end they might have to say, oh oops and oh well!

Good paper. however, there is nothing strange or new about the use of contradiction (call it 'diplomatic contradiction') to get one's message heard...

¬Plausible deniability perhaps....?

Of course America has scripted a plan to attack the DPRK, and every other nation of the world for that matter. I can recall how angry the Republicans were at Jimmy Carter for giving away America's Panama Canal(-:. In fact I am sure that America had a plan in place long before this latest incident; that plan is about 50 years old.

Let's not forget that both Great Britain and the United States have taken turns spying on the United Nation on more than one occasion and even on America's allies in the past. I don't suppose that we have satellites and other air surveillance engaged in spying on the DPRK and another score of nations (that America considers to be enemies of America) for nothing.

I spoke with military officials who admitted that they were sent covertly into Iraq a year in advance of the invasion (during the time when Bush was still conditioning the American people before proceeding with his pre-planned invasion of that country).

I am sick of lying and misdirection by our government, however, too many Americans, on the other hand, simply accept lying and misdirection as par for the course. For the American citizen there is no such thing as full disclosure by its government.

And since Congress has little interest in knowing the truth, where does that leave the rest of the country? It pretty much leaves our employees in Washington to run wild and commit all kinds of malfeasance and atrocities, unchecked, in America and around the world.

Given the current technologies that are in use by America, no nation in the world is truly sovereign and their porous and amorphous borders are in effect, non-existent. Totalitarian America is spying and listening in at all times, and is prepared to attack any nation on the planet whenever it pleases. But what gives us the right?

A civilized nation, it would seem to me would not permit this kind of unchecked power to remain in the hands of any citizens or the government. And please don't tell me about the Congressional Intelligence Committees, they get around them as well!

There are some people in America who actually are above the law, they can murder and get away with it and they know it!

It is obvious that, no matter what the backdoor channels sy, no official would admit openly thta a plan is being refined- not drawn from scratch- to affect a preemptive strike in N. Korea, provided that the supreme leadership can be killed at the very begining of such a strike.
It would also be naive to think that such a plan has not been put in place, every time the US is preparing to attack in mass (even though strictly from the air) a country.
This has been the case with Iraq, it has been the case with Iran, and probably still is, and in essence has been one of the main subjects of training and interst within the paramilitary wing of the CIA; it probably is now beeing exemined by DoD special teams.

The most dangerous regime in the world

.... that is armed to the teeth with an overabundance of nukes and coventional weapons, a country that has invaded and is currently occupying two once sovereign nations is the United States of America.

And what is so ironic is that the world is more exercised, given America's need to deflect the world away from what it is doing.

The world may speculate about the DPRK plans to do, however, the world can see what the U.S.A. is doing and where is the outrage?

Sad world and another sad time in our history! It rises to the level of when this land was taken from its native inhabitants and when the same decided to enslave citizens from another continent.

Will America ever stop? I doubt it!

Again the DPRK hasn't done anything wrong, but we sure have!

Arkan,

Come on, any nation with an offensive nuclear capability, or even one close to having that capability, merits a preemptive strike plan. Planning isnt execution. But as we've seen with Iraq, execution doesnt always equal sound planning.

I generally share your views on most issues Bill. But, I wonder if sometimes we in the West make large grandiloquent staements about such other nations--like North Korea and Iran--yet fail to recognize how the rest of the world might interpret our own actions throughout the world.

You referred to North Korea asa the most dangerous regime on earth. Maybe. But, North Korea, Iran, Syria nor Iraq has military bases throughout every corner of the world. None of those states have foreign troops occupying the soil of other sovereign nations. None of them spends--or even has anywhere near the capacity to spend the tiniest fraction of what this country spends every year on inconceivably dsstructive military weapons that could destroy the rest of the world many times over.

None of these nations has recently indicated a desire to invade and occupy any other country for whatever reasons. None of these countries has sought to impose economic sanctions on countries the deem to be their "enemy" through United Nations resolutions. And none of them has acted through the UN to try and get this country to reduce its own arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.

Do you not find it odd that it is we--America--who has done all of these things in the world all using the supremely arrogant notion that we are a morally superior nation and if only the rest of the world would adopt all of our social, cultural, religious and political values, then a millenium of peace would ensue?