Originally posted by: johnnobts
i want to crush my enemies by winning them over.
Then you oppose the misuse of the US military for imperialistic violence under cover of 'freedom' rhetoric?
You are against our historical policies of, say, invading Viet Nam, invading Panama, invading Grenada, organizing a coup against democracy in Iran and Chile, terrorism in Nicaragua?
Or are you only in favor of limiting your violence to those closer here, but you are happy to 'de-humanize' enemies further away?
Oh, I know, the leaders who are pursuing the evil policies are always happy to tell you a nice cover about how the enemy is a threat and can't be reasoned with, etc.
The question is whether you are corrupt enough to accept the cover stories and allow your money to feed the machine of violence, or you stand up for truth and justice.
Have you read even one of the following books:
Any book by Michael Parenti, any book by Chalmers Johnson, Chris Hedges' "War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning", Noam Chomsky's "Failed States", Howard Zinn's "Declarations of Independance", Walter Lippman's "Public Opinion", Geg Palast's latest book, "Perils of Dominance" by Gareth Porter, "Masters of War: Latin America and US aggression from the Cuban revolution through the Clinton years" by Clara Nieto", or others I can name? Just one to get informed?
Above someone asks whether liberals 'like' the oppression of the book 1984. Of course not. "Brave New World", though, is a better picture of the oppression we see, where the truth can be freely available, as in the books above, but it's buried in a sea of pleasurable distractions and harmless to power because few will read it.