Quote:
Originally Posted by John1234  I just wanted to compliment you on your post.
While i still do not agree with your basic position, I will say that you presented the pro Iraq invasion stance in the best light that I have ever before seen it.
I can actually respect your reasons for wanting us to be there and understand them. |
I'm just tired of people trying to live the fantasy of what they think America used to be. And I'm especially tired of people not having the ability to recognize our own history in the world and how our purpose has evolved into something they are protesting. We can see distinct stages in our history and the next step should be obvious for a nation that professes to stand for human rights and deceny...
1) In the first decades of our national existence after kicking the imperial powers out, we focused on structuring our form of governance and the interaction among the states. The
purpose was to lay the foundation for an experiment in the construction of a human society that defines core values.
2) This stage was followed by a long era of expansion and growth. We pushed out to our continental and hemispheric bounds, while remaining deliberatly isolated from the problems that plagued the rest of the world. "Manifest Destiny" was our
purpose.
3) After resolving the unfinished internal problems that divided our nation during the 19th century, we began in the 20th century to reach out from our self imposed isolation. This would mark the end of the most peaceful and happiest era of our history. The war with Spain, Teddy Roosevelt's Great White Fleet, and Woddrow Wilson's decision to intervene in European affairs with World War I also marked the first American forays onto the international scene. Considering that we were a nation that had turned its previous purposes into reality and now stood poised to play a significant role in the world that it had long kept at arms legth, this was a daring step. But this proved too daring as it turned out. America looked out at the new world horizon, covered her eyes, and backed off. Wislon's dream of a new world expressed in his Fourteen Points were too bold for a Congress and a nation still wary of "foriegn entanglements." We had failed to move forward to a new national purpose and clung to isolationalism. Our refusal to deal with problems abroad may have aided in the development of a repeat of the tragically misnamed "war to end all wars."
4) The bombing of Pearl Harbor ended our isolationalism forever. It thrust America into the global role we had resisted for a century and a half. This attack sparked an acceleration in the development of our power and influence that eventually made us the world's sole superpower. We sought trade security and maintained stability for everyone. We strenghtend our ties with foreign nations through business and commerce. We negotiated peace between warring naitons and deterred countless wars just by our presence. Our new
purpose became one of guardian.
5) During the Cold War, our role and
purpose was to defend and deter as the protectors of the free world. We stood as the standard and bulwark around which all those threatened by evil ideologies and rapacious conquerers could rally. We marched against racism. Given the extent of female participation and contribution in local matters during the World War, we re-defined the work place for women. We were the shining beacon, the model of noble values and principles. But this was the fantasy. This was the image we projected and that others defined us as while we began twisting our self defined values on the international stage. We didn't do this on purpoe, but with only the European model to run with, this is what absolutely happened. Our struggle with the Soviet superpower, saw us embark on the Euopean defined tactics of be-friending the dictator that be-friended us. But even with this, we were reluctant interventionalists. We were defenders, not attackers. We did what we had to do when threatened or attacked, but did not impose change. We wanted to remain Jefferson's beacon, an example to follow. We did not want to become crusaders. And this is why our dictators were free to satisfy their needs as we shook their hands and countless local souls were crushed under fascist boot heels. Matters would have been far worse for them had they fallen under the Soviet house but the fact remains. We could have influenced our dictators more, but we refused our greater role.
6) The fall of the Kremlin marked a new era for which we refused to acknolwedge seriously. We were the sole remaining superpower. During our history, we had aided or took down 11 empires. We pretended that "our wars were over." That all the mistakes and errors that we were a part of during the Cold War would simply correct themselves. That no real threat could ever come from any nation or region considered to be a part of the "second or third" world. All those dictators and religious regimes that maintained "stability" for us against the Soviets were somehow going to behave on their own after we pulled chaulks. Throughout the 90's we heard Presidential speeches about civil rights and "New World Orders." This proved to be mere words, because we simply could not convince anybody that the world was taking a new shape based on a rudderless course. This new course must be of our direction and we must face the mistakes of the past and actually live up to our values once again. Apathy and later apologies is not the answer.
In the era of imperialism and colonialism, nations and societies gained at the expense of the others. That is no longer the case. If the powerful fleece the weak, the resulting instability will breed the problems that will come to plaque the powerful. As champions of the free world, we are the target of this plague. This plague comes form the populations we continue to ignore and treat as insignificant to our "peace." Like it was at our beginning, our once again realized purpose is to construct a
world of human decency that defines core values. In ways, much of the world agrees with this. Just look at their protests of the Olypmics and China's issue with Tibet. But once again we see a global concern for Asians. What about the Muslims in the Middle East!?!?!?!? How many Asians have been slaughtered by their neighbors over the past couple decades? Now how many Muslims have been slaughtered by theirs? And Tibet get's the global concern for human rights and decency?
People will argue that we have no right to impose our values upon the world, but this is a cop out and willfully ignorant. The entire free world shares and wraps its arms around our values. And the vast majority of people in every other society also share specific aspects of our sentiments of how one should enjoy ones personal life. We have been imposing it for the last 63 years. The only thing keeping the world back is the Cold War dictators, the Cold War religious regimes, and the international organizations who prefer the status quo to change. For those dictators and regimes that were not of our house, we treated them similarly and merely looked away.
This new era is where America is going to have to prove that it believes in its professed values or it simply enjoys preaching about it. We can see the diverse wishes of Europe already with their confusion between doing what was right and practicing apathy. We can see the deliberate malice of the UN with their confusion between doing what's right and preserving stabiltiy at all human costs. And we can see our own population struggling with how they define their morality (while preaching about American values). We must acknowledge that in this extremely fast paced information age, the abused and oppressed populations of the Cold War are getting an overdose of information. They simply can not cipher this information as well as free nations can and they will behave accordingly. Without Cold War prescriptions placed upon them, they will scream and murder for independance from unnaturally made imperial and colonial borders (Yugoslavia, Kurds, Lebanon, etc....). Our answer to them is for us to start behaving in accordance to our
professed values.
How much longer is the freest, most morally driven, and most powerul nation in history, which has proven to be able to change the world into what ever it wants, supposed to be forgiven for its apathy? Europe can afford apathy. They are scared of their own immigrations. But we have an obligation. Since we were left to do the work during the Cold War, we have to assume responsibility and continue to drive. There's nobody else out there looking to relieve us of our burden or even to share in it.
Linear Mode
Main
Extras
