Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Thanks, lots of good responses on this thread. Plenty for me to think about...
The Western Hemisphere is half of the world. The Philippines is even beyond that, you are mixing up subjects. If you don't know of any US interventions in Latin America preceding the Spanish-American War (and only know the two top flashpoints of the latter), do your own homework and read up on Wikipedia.
Sorry long way from that. Even if we take all of the Western Hemisphere then it still is not half, take a look at World Population.
I only am going to contend that which comes up, I am not going to play the game of "read your history" and it says it all.

Even poor governance can be a consequence of structures and power circles left behind(/supported from the outside). But whether or not, it doesn't matter for the subject at discussion.
But at some point you no longer have an excuse. I had a tough time in life but when I reached college, those factors no longer were controlling me, I was controlling my own destiny. Did the British leave the US with a perfect system?

OK. But if we play alt.history.what-if, I note that potential alternatives to the US isolationism that actually happened include both ones that would have been better and ones that would have been worse for the world. On less key points, I note that had Roosevelt not ended US isolationism by starting to harrass Japanese imperialist expansion, US isolation might have been just as good for the USA but worse for the rest of the world; while a truly liberal interventionist policy would have had little opportunities in the early thirties due to the Great Depression.
Good points. Have you seen the movie 2009? Harass but real threats? True for at least the early years of the depression, but by 1937 the USA were out of the worst of it and could easily have started to reform their foreign policy.

First on the GAB, that is always a problem with multicultural environment. We have ties to all parts of the world. On another board, one person always points to our trade with China to signify that we are a Fascist state. Well the US trades with 229 nations or locations in the world (one small protectorate was excluded).

Secondly, good riddance to bad baggage. So does not convince me of your points.

Not de jure, but de facto, very much so. I was not sure which African genocides you referred to, but many of those happened after 'decolonisation', when European post-imperial powers and the USA (and the Soviet Union) acted in a similar manner as the USA in the Carribean and Mesoamerica.
It would be more precise to say (in your opinion) to say imperialism not colonialization. Maybe later in the new thread you start we can look at all the African democides. Still the fault of them for leaving them a bad society/government/power structure etc. True the cold war techniques, so without the USA the world would have been better with USSR power being the sole super power?

Rutherfordian ------------------------------ RDRutherford

by Ronald Rutherford (rdrradio1 -at- msn -dot- com) on Fri Apr 13th, 2007 at 01:11:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

Display:

Top Diaries

Occasional Series