Favorite US President since 1960

Pakish: One good point you mentioned the war on Iraq being based around energy and I presume you mean that country's rich oil reserves. However, that is only part of the reason for going to war with Iraq. The country that controls the worlds largest resource of oil is going to be a threat to those less fortunate. IMO it is conspiratorial that war is declared on a country that is known to shelter and produce terrorists. Coincidentally, Iraq has very large oil reserves which would be an asset for a country like the US to have some control over. It would be an advantage for the US to have some influence either direct or indirect on the management of the oil reserves. That would make the US even more powerful in the eyes of the world than it does already.

Which leads me to another point. The Kyoto Treaty. It would therefore stand to reason why the US would not be a signatory of this treaty - (basically the treaty is centred around the reduction of polluting the worlds natural resources) - if it did not have some interest in increasing its control over the worlds oil resources.

From my country's point of view this is not a good stance by the US. The Bush administration is clearly only interested in the politics of world power as opposed to environmental issues. The survival of the human race is clearly in a more precarious position if this power policy persists. We can live without oil - there are other resources being scientifically experimented with eg: wind, sun and ocean water. But we can not survive if the environment we depend on is destroyed - all for the mad ambitions of "Hawk" leaning politicians.

Yes - crack down on terrorism. Subdue the infidels so to speak. But who is the terrorist when it comes to the war against the human race?

Pakish,

just a few observations, your ranting and in many instances incoherent. However, the last observation is ludicrous.

Most important, I wouldn't browbeat anyone if I were in your place. If you want to criticize look towards your own country's heritage. Mexico hasn't had a legal election...ever! Wait, I take that back, Fox was democratically elected (a first in the country). However the opposition has ensured that he doesn't change the status quo of graft and corruption.

You mentioned the subject of oppresion, why don't we discuss the people of Chiapas and your goverment's policy towards them. Genocide comes to mind.

If the U.S. is as evil as you say, why are there in excess of 8 million illegal Mexicans living here. I'll wager that it is because they can earn a decent living, raising their children in a modicum of safety knowing that they will have a better life than their parents had.

That's a good point- as much as cold war era US propaganda characterized the Russkies as out-of-control madmen bent on world domination, the truth is that the USSR was probably less driven by uncompromizing communist ideology as they were by the simple desire to be a world power. What seemed to be an embracing of communism was little more than the latest identity crisis for a nation that has struggled with national self-doubt and a transitory, superficial glorification of Western ideals for centuries. Once the uprising was over, very little 'devotion' to communist ideals motivated the USSR's expansionist activities.

On the other hand, it seems that the religious ideology behind the bulk of current terrorist activity doesn't preclude total annihilation as a reasonable means to their ends. If I was convinced that both sides were composed of sane human beings with a difference of opinion (or a squabble over resources, the classic motivation for war), I'd probably feel safer...but at the core of the conflict is an ideological fanaticism and intolerance which amounts to chronic temporary insanity.

Our own version of this is an amalgam of democratic ideals, christian fundamentalism, and cultural homogenization (not to mention plain old greed). It's just so hard for us to believe that everybody doesn't WANT to be American.

But my own ideological blind spot is reason and compassion...I have to believe that both are always preferable to violence (except in cases of immediate self-defense). If I didn't believe this, then I'd have to conclude that the only thing that keeps human beings from a constant state of destructive chaos is the threat of organized, institutional violence.

Pakish,

Please clarify your thread, it's hard to follow but this is the best I can extract.

1) Your first sentence refers to the deaths in Chiapas. For the record there were 145 goverment reported deaths in 1993 alone, the Zapatistas claim closer to 1,000. Point aside, 15,000 inhabitants died from simple starvation in 1994. There are no indications that this number nor the rate have abated.

2) In reference to the 1 million deaths in Viet Nam, are you referreing to the second Indo Chinese war?

If so, the number is closer to 1.5 million combatants and 1.5 million civilian population that perished during the conflict. A conflict of which the U.S. was requested to intervene after the North Viet Namese invaded the south in an attempt to install a communist regime. you also need to mention the 58,000 Americans who lost their life doing so. let's not forget the 500,000 Viet Namese who were killed after the war in the reindoctrination camps. The U.S. however was no longer there when that occured.

3) In reference to El Salvador, are you referring to the Reformist coup of '79 concerning the 200,000 dead? If so, you must be referring to the campaign between the military "junta" and leftists guerrilas armed by Ortega's communist regime in Nicaragua. However, I fail to see the U.S. involvement other than the "Iran Contra" arms for sale money laundering scheme. The U.S. had no military involvement.

3) In reference to the Iraqi body count of more than 200,000, you are exagerating. The civilian body count to date (this week) puts it at a minimum of 21,239 and a maximum of 24,106. A tragedy for sure, however I would like to point out that the primary cause of these deaths are due to insurgent activity. Your comment would seem to indicate that these deaths are the direct result of the U.S. armed forces.

Concerning, the website, I will take a look at it (in detail). In the meantime, I recommend you gather your facts in an orderly and concise manner before you engage in debate. 

Acuardate que la clave para el exito es estar bien preparado.

Saludos