It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by irbilly
4thDoctorWhoFan man i see you in every thread lol. do you ever take a break my friend
Originally posted by Xtrozero
I guess your definition of the word “conquering” is a little different than mine for I get the impression that you meant it to mean we want to own that country.
Originally posted by Xtrozero
Here is the interesting part, if Iran didn’t get involved and the Iraqi people were able to come together and actually form a central government of their choosing we would be long gone. That doesn’t sound like an imperialistic power conquering.
Originally posted by johnsky
I find very little difference between the United States and all other nations who have played a hand at conquering.
Most nations who go to lengths to invade a country often tell their people it's for the freedom and safety of the homeland.
See : Rome, and Nazi Germany.
They also attempt to deliver the message that they are bringing the victims out of 'chaos', and restoring 'order'.
The British, French, and Spanish all used the term "civilizing" to explain their acts of oppression on the nations they took over.
As did the Romans.
Originally posted by Voxel
The level of control we seek to impose on the supposedly autonomous government of Iraq IS "imperialistic power mongering" or maybe you just aren't aware to the levels our government seeks to control Iraq in order to benefit from its material wealth and financial potential. Sure they can have any government they want, as long as it operates in a manner compatible with what we desire.