project for the new american century

[udsuna]

Actually, this is a Republic, not a Democracy. It's always been a Republic. No true Democracy has ever existed in this world.

[bipper]

I still think your being sarcastic....
Bipper

woa, I am seriously scared. This would be oppression, and I don't think America has what it takes to tackle all the worlds problems. We can only do this together, peacfully.

If two people are arguing and one blows the other one up, that doesn;'t make the more powerful one right. It does to an extent, as there is less resistance to his point, and if there is no one to say he is wrong, is he?

do you think American beliefs are that important? Death solves nothing.

Actually, this is a Republic, not a Democracy. It's always been a Republic. No true Democracy has ever existed in this world.

Democratic Republic as I have learned is the official label. It is still a form of democracy.

[Dignified Pauper]

If two people are arguing, and one blows the other up, then that's murder.

However, when two countries squabble (and one is America) and the other country doesn't agree, then America must lay down discipline. It's like spanking a child. It hurts us more than it hurts them.

Now, as far as opression goes. Freedom freeing, but it isn't free. While Iraq will eventually have more freedom in the end, the price to obtain freedom is not free. Look at what America did, we started a revolution and we freed ourselves at the cost of war. Well, we're willing to have those other countries pay that price for freedom under our carefully watched eye. Iraq would never have had a revolution, but because we intervened, they are in a better world stance. If we start doing this to all countries, eventually, the world will be more like America, which will be the best thing for the world down the line.

[bipper]

oh, you are serious...

Well, one one person kills another, it is murder. We killed how many in iraq. Its murder, but justified. That is not what I am getting at - What I want to say, is that if that is how the world will be, we mad Iraq free so that WE could oppress them.. weird.

edit- I do agree that it is good Iraq was freed, but we should only be there for protection. There is a difference between offering protection for what we belive in, and forcing it.
Bipper

[The Man]

If Dignified Pauper is not sarcastic/playing devil's advocate, then my name is Karl Rove.

[Dignified Pauper]

i think you fail to realize that if your beliefs don't follow American beliefs, then you are doomed to fail. That's why we are enforcing our beliefs on others, we know that our beliefs are correct. It's like a little kid that kills a baby bird. He doesn't know it's bad until someone tells him it is bad.

I hope you understand my points. After-all, sometimes, tolerance isn't going to work. We'd like to tolerate other countries, but only if they tolerate us and accept us as the world leader and the morally superior. If they can't tolerate us then we need not tolerate them, thus we will show them true tolerance under our freedom of the Democratic Republic. While I may not agree with everything you have to say, as an individual, I can't do anything about it, and as an American, you have the right to disagree, so long as it does not disturb peace or interfere with american globalization, because it is essential for a free and more democratic Earth.

[lordblazer]

oh, you are serious...

Well, one one person kills another, it is murder. We killed how many in iraq. Its murder, but justified. That is not what I am getting at - What I want to say, is that if that is how the world will be, we mad Iraq free so that WE could oppress them.. weird.

edit- I do agree that it is good Iraq was freed, but we should only be there for protection. There is a difference between offering protection for what we belive in, and forcing it.
Bipper

lol Free lol man its chaos in Iraq. They were better off with a dictator..Atleast their was order.

[Teek]

The Project for the New American Century is a non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; and that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle.

Wow, look how that isn't the American government.

I hate threads like these. I mean, let's answer honestly: this is crazy, and I have enough conviction in the American people that if this was actually attempted, the majority of people would recognize it for what it is - blind use of force. Thankfully, this isn't even the American government, but a group of crazed-Conservative-patriots who are lost on world affairs (and morality).

But, some of the "ideas" posted in this thread are just as ridiculous. "America needs to stop this and follow Kyoto agreements!" Uhm, no. Don't give more useless ideas in the face of an opposing useless idea. America doesn't have to do anything - especially not what the rest of the world wants from America.

And comparing America to the Nazi state is over-doing it.

[nik0tine]

Wow, look how that isn't the American government.

But they have alot of influence in the government. Plus, the goals of this group are being accomplished by the government.

[Teek]

The group has been complaining that the government isn't helping them.

The United States military is too small for the responsibilities we are asking it to assume. Those responsibilities are real and important. They are not going away. The United States will not and should not become less engaged in the world in the years to come. But our national security, global peace and stability, and the defense and promotion of freedom in the post-9/11 world require a larger military force than we have today. The administration has unfortunately resisted increasing our ground forces to the size needed to meet today's (and tomorrow's) missions and challenges.

Not to say the group isn't scary, but really, were you expecting someone like Rumsfeld not to like this? Of course some of the idiot Christian-Right Conservatives are liking the sound of it.

There have to be some rational people in our government, because they aren't getting what they want. And the people wouldn't stand for it.

[Skyblade]

Wow, look how that isn't the American government.

Plus, the goals of this group are being accomplished by the government.

Well, that's hardly surprising. I mean, the whole point of the government is to complete the goals of the majority of the nation's people. So is it any wonder that it is doing things that some of its people agree with?

[The Man]

The problem here is that in this case, it's not a majority of the nation's people it's representing at all. I'll wager that the majority of the American people, being told this group's explicit aims, would be repulsed by a lot of the policies it wishes to enact.

I don't think anyone ever equated this exactly to the current American government, but you'd have to be pretty dense to believe that a large number of its goals have not been pursued in one oblique fashion or another since the Bush administration came to power, especially since a large number of the most powerful people in the administration are in the group.

And it's all well and good to say that America doesn't have to do anything, but if it wishes to continue to have the goodwill of the rest of the world, it would be highly advisable for it to do certain things, such as respecting generally accepted international law, and avoid others, such as abandoning globally accepted environmental standards. A lot of the world doesn't like America or Americans very much right now, and it's not entirely unrelated to American foreign policy within the past four years.

[Teek]

Thankfully, the Bush Administration has less than three years left, and I'm almost certain that we'll get a Democratic administration. Which means I'll have to fight draining social programs rather than world domination. I know that a lot of people from high-up are in this plot, but who cares? They can't really do anything without the consent of the people.

And give me a good reason why we need to have the world love us?

[Dignified Pauper]

Besides, we already have a coalition within our own government that wants these claims. The Coalition of a New American Empire. It's just about every member of the Bush Cabinet.

[Wuggly Blight]

I highly doubt even America has the means to enact this programme. There are MANY other powerful nations out there there would be very disgruntled. The very idea is repulsive, When Germany started to invade other nearby countries, it ended in the largest war in history. That is something I would never want to see in my lifetime.