posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 04:27 AM
The importance of free trade is debatable, as obviously it can ameliorate and dilapidate individual groups of people respectively. However, do you
really think capitalism and globalization are bringing more good to the world than harm when currently about 30% of the world's population, if not
more, are still living in absolute poverty?
And why are you so certain that without free trade the world would not be as properous (minority parts of it) as it is today? As far as i concern,
socialism and communism both accentuate on equality of individuals and a classless society. Isn't that much more fair of a civilization than US and
the rest of the capitalist nations?
There is an existing sucessful example. Cuba has probably the best, if not one of the best health care provided to the people in the world. Its
poverty and homeless percentage of the general population is also one of the lowest. Simply the Communist government is capable to accommodate
shelters and financial assistence to the people in need, they are not forced to be outcasts of the society, living in the streets and eat McChicken
for every meal.
Free trade and globalization do benefit to people, but dare i say mostly to the middle class, cooperations, multi-naitonals and conglomerates. It is
commonplace for them to exploit and abuse labour and cheap natural resources in the third world countries and manufacture goods into much higher value
for profit maximization.
Even if free trade is not entirely deleterious to the entire world, the signicance of its existence is still not as essential as posters such as zoro
said it would be, as other economic systems would have easily substitute its place.
Despite the lend lease which France and UK were to repay America back through the 50s and early 60s, US already received an incredible sum of cash in
the 40s. Further more, American Cooperations exploit this opportunity of desperate lack and need of weapons and war machines in Europe, to say that
America benefit "well" financially in WWII selling arms to Europe would simply be an understatment.
It was true that through the New Deal, America was already recovering its economy in the 30s. But Nazi domination in Europe would undoubtedly set back
the resurgence, and in the long run, as i have mentioend, the US would have lost its European market for its comodities, which was a large majority
fot its exports revenue.
America only joined the war after Pearl Harbour. And the Nazis declared war on US, following suit on Japn, due to the fact they were in the Axis
alliance. Would have US directly involve itself in WWII if Japan and Germany did not show any agression towards it? Historians today still find this
to be a controversial topic.
You simply did not read carefully of what i have posted. I did not state that US created Israel, i wrote: "Israel is another matter created by US".
Britain was the one that composed the formation of Israel, but US was greatly in favor of this idea due to the fact it was reluctant to accept all the
Jewish refugees into its borders.
With US backing, the UN partitioned Zionists to set up Israel, and it created the foundation of the Middle East conflicts that still exist today.
During the Cold War, US simply intensified the tension between Israel and the Arab world. In order to gain a foothold in Middle East and gain sphere
of influence in the region, ever since 1949 US has been giving financial aids and military supples woth of value to the thousands of millions
annually. To this day, USA has already granted Israel $49,064.20 million dollars of military supplies.
Progressively, Israel used these weapons given to them "generously" by the US to invade rest of Palestine that was not given to them as part of the
Israel borders by UN, including West Bank, Golen Heights and others. Conquest of these areas drove, an estimation conducted by UN, 726,000
Palestinians into refugees without a place to call home. It was these victim's desperation for TRUE feedom and indepence that drove them to become
freedom fighters against the Israel rule, and to the west known as terrorists. Now go ahead and tell me that US did not contribute or in the least
extent in some ways responsible, to a news boradcast about a Palestinian terrorist blowing himself up in an Israeli bus you and I watch on the TV
Yes, USSR formed the Warsaw Pact, and controlled satellite states in Eastern Europe. But if you have any knowledge in Cold War history at all, you
should also know that NATO, was created in 1949 April 4th with support of Washington. And only after West Germany was drawn into NATO as well, did
USSR tolerated no more and created the Warsaw Pact in May 14, 1955 as a defensive responce to this aggresssive move by the west.
It was clearly stated the reason for Warsaw Pact: "The situation created in Europe by the ratification of the Paris agreements, which envisage the
formation of a new military alignment in the shape of "Western European Union", with the participation of a re-militarized Western Germany and the
intergration of the latter in the North Atlantic bloc, which increases the danger of another war and constitutes a threat to the national security of
Factually, most non-American historians agreed that during the Cold War, USSR was often casted in the role of defensive and passive, while the America
the ambitious and paranoid aggressor.
The death of Stalin and the emergence of new Russian leadership, Malenkov, Molotov, Beria, Bulganin and of course Khrushchev brought about
de-stalinization, and the policy of Peaceful Co Existence. Russia was reforming and undergoing a new mood of openess and tolerance to the West. Go
read the book Thaw by Ehrenburg published in 1954 for evidence.
Although reasons for the Peaceful Co Existence was partly beecause Khrushchev firmly believed that the contest between Capitalism and Communism was
unecessary, because according to the Marxist theory two revolutions in a capitalist society world would occur, in the end the workers were remained in
control of the country and a communist governing body would be set up.
Despite this, it was still geniune that USSR wanted peace. As seen from Khrushchev's recongnition of Israel and West Germany in the late 50s, and in
July 1955 USSR actively arranged a summit meeting in Geneva through encouragement from Churchill. And later a second more direct meeting with
Eisenhower in Camp David. Krushchev further showed its sincerety for peace by publicly condemning Stalin's rule of Russia in a government meeting.
Nonetheless, it was USA that refused USSR's peace offer.
The third meeting that was about to beging in Paris, was melt down as in May 1960, U2 spy plane was spotted flying over USSR air space and the
Russians shot it down for self defence. If the U2 plane was never sent to spy on Russia by US, the Cold War coming to an early end would possibly
Originally, US was in fear of Communism taking over the world through Eisenhower's Domino Theory. However most historians nowadays find it to be
ridiculous, as examples such as China proved that the establishment of Communist government there had no influence over its smaller neighbour such as
India, Japan, Taiwan etc.
I also find it rather laughable that if the stupidity of believing in the Domino Theory was not enough, the Americans went to the extent of fighting
proxy wars in Asia through always and continuously supporting the corrupted "democratic" governments:
Ngo Dinh Diem in South Vietnam
Signman Rhee in South Korea
Jiang Jieshi in Formosa
As for War in Vietnam, even the Americans within did not believe in the cause of fighting against Ho Chi Minh, who was a fair and just ruler of the
Vietnamese people comparing to the corrupted Ngo Dinh Diem, who the US supported.
Massive demonstratoins were held throughout US in the 60s, draftees burnt their draft cards openly, in May 1969 The New York Times broke the news of
the secret bombing of Cambodia. President Nixon ordered the FBI to wiretap the telephones of four journalists and 13 government officials to determine
the source of news leak.
The most infamous and bloody demonstration in the war was perhaps the Kent State Protest. 4 students were killed by the Natoinal Guard, Alison Krause,
Jeffrey Miller, Sandra Scheuer and William Schroeder. In which two were bayonetted and two were shot.
In the war, there are unbelieveable inhumane acts conducted by the Americans. In 1968 Marh 16, more than 500 people, many of them women and children ,
were slaughtered by G.I. without valid rules of engagement.
Within the country, Black americans where denied right to vote, hundresds of paratroopers were needed in 1957 to allow black children to enter Little
Rock High School in Arkansa, in 1958 a 9 years old black boy received a 14 year prison sentence for merely kissing a 7 years old white girl in North
Carolina, in which the white girl admitted she was in love with him.
Now, with all these examples, US's emphasize and criticism on human rights on communist china, north korea and USSR seemed ironic, hollow, and
Who ever said there are no evidence of American industries abusing and exploiting labour in Latin America during the 50s to fund the Eisenhower
Doctrine? US secretary of state, John Foster Dulles, who was also a commited and famous Anti Communist politician and took a main role for refusal on
USSR's Peaceful Co Existence Policy, apparently owned a food company in Guyanna, underpaying the labour there to overwork for profit maximization
with the lowest production costs possible. The Rockefeller family also did the same, and if you even request evidence for proving the Rockefeller to
be exploiting South American labour, you are just proving and displaying your ignorance and absurdity.
What good is signing a protocol if it is not ratified and taken into action?? And don't attempt to misdirect the blame onto Aussies with this one,
they are not the one adding 40% more pollution to the planet yearly.
The US isn't "colonizing" or building an empire. Of course not silly, Americans have a different name for it, such as :"Protecting freedom,
liberating the people" and so forth. In countries such as Iraq US "liberated", it would set up a pro-western democratic puppet government through
variety of means. Keep in mind that right now the US has over 200 active military bases all around the world for "protection of global peace and
I still firmly stand my ground.
Without the US, the world today would be without the Middle East problems. Without the US, the world today would be 40% less polluted annually.
Without the US, the world today would be without the forgotten deaths in Vietnam and Korea and other wars waged by USA against communism. Without the
US, equality of every human being, just and fairness in the world may actually have a chance to be.
[edit on 13-12-2005 by EarthUnificationFrontier]