[Amnesiac42]

yeah, what makes me mad about the UN is that no one ever stands up to the united states. it's like this new form of imperialism that's more about absorbing other economies into our own, consequently making them dependant on ours, than say, just walking in and saying "guess what we're taking it."

i saw this guy on cspan at like three in the morning when i was throwing up from really bad food poisoning, and he was talking about how you can literally draw a circle on a 2 demensional map of the globe connected by all of the major players in the world economy and all of the countries in the middle are the ones that they crap on, basically, and oddly enough contain most of the resources. and the problem in the middle east is that their econominc output is equal to the input, so they're perfectly self sustaining. of course the problem is that we want them to play ball with us, and they pretty much hate us for it, among other things. so setting up a democracy there, and hoping it will spread, is our foot in the door to finally getting some of that.

so all of this said, i wonder... we go into iraq, claiming that they have WMD and plan on attacking us. this turns out to be wrong. so then we claim our actions are justified because we're liberating the citizens, which i would agree we are but think that's a pretty sneaky and shitty excuse. now, we set up a democracy over there, and we're hoping this will spread?

my question, is it right to force another nation to change it's government & relations specifically in order to serve the interests of another?

the "other interests" being that america's goal (i'm assuming) is to consolidate world powers under one roof (obviously america's). which begs the question, what then? would the world really be a more peaceful, happier, free place? or quite the opposite?