Why are we vilified: US freedom, or US policies

[iamthewalrus109]

On Meet the press this Sunday, there was a cogent, relevant, and heated debate between Natan Sharansky and Pat Buchanan. The debate cut right to the core of what has launched us into WWIV. As noted in prior posts, Pat Bucahan, has come out on the side of a policy based paradigm, as opposed to Natan Sharansky, who viewed the attack on America as a further attack on the freedoms of the Western world or so it seemed. It raises an interesting issue, ie. what is the definition of freedom? Is freedom the right to make as much money on whom ever's land, or is it the right to live in a secure world, one entriely free of tyranny. If you look at Buchanan's recent writings, you can see the logic. Although Buchanan voted for Bush, I doubt that means he'll roll over and die over the man's policies, nor will he fall prey to naive, ramblings of GW Bush. So the question remains, what is freedom? I seems as though to GW Bush and neo-cons, its the freedom to make billions on the backs of corpses and countries, thus instituting a system that gurantees that everybody will do business, or else.

-Walrus