One of the most critical remarks made about the United States during "Operation Iraqi Freedom" is the economic and military support given to Sadaam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war. The picture of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Hussein while concluding a sale of biochemical weapons from the U.S. to Iraq illustrates just how faulty the foreign policy of the United States has been since the end of World War ll. Obviously, most of U.S. foreign policy since the second world war was focused on countering the communist threat from the then Soviet Union. The objective was to extend economic and military support to any country (regardless of type of government) that was {at least on the surface} opposed to Soviet communism. So too, the U.S. also made overt and covert efforts to undermine foreign governments that opposed the United States. As a democratic country, the U.S. was (and still is) willing to support brutal dictatorships so long as those dictatorships serve in our economic and military interests. The end of this war should also mark the begining of the end for this hypocritical foreign policy. Accordingly, as a citizen of the United States of America, I am demanding that legislation be passed that outlaws this policy and extends the same military and economic embargo of Cuba to all dictatorships across the globe. These dictatorships should also include those monarchies established by coup de' tat. Although communism still exists in some countries, it is no longer the cold-war threat it used to be. The major threat facing the United States now is the arming of terroist cells throughout the world while being harbored in countries run by dictators. The only way to throw off this yoke of hypocricy is to outlaw it alltogether. Perhaps then, will all nations recognize the United States as the true leader of the free world.

New topics are required to have a question or idea specified for debate. This topic is temporarily closed, pending a PM from JOEBIALEK, specifying the question for debate.

Edited to add: My apologies. I just noticed that the question was specified in the title of the thread. Should the U.S. stop supporting dictatorships. ...carry on

I'm curious... do you view the war as having removed Saddam for humanitarian purposes...? Do you expect the U.S. to really go after dictatorships and governments established through coup d'etats all over the world... and not just the ones with strategic military locations or harboring vast fields of oil?

Personally, I see this as a growth spurt for the hypocritical policy. No longer are we simply engaging in the covert operations to depose governments opposing us economically, we're broadcasting them to the world via CNN and others.

Economic embargos, hmm. The way I see it the Cuban embargo has not done and will never do anything to oust Fidel or change his policy, it only hurts the people. Sanctions in Iraq did little to Saddam Hussein but impoverished the Iraqi people, and led to great loss of life especially among children due to lack of adequate health care. South Africa was moved to change policy due to sanctions, but I have a feeling that had more to do with European white businessmen, and a time coming anyway, not quite a dictatorship, but close. Other than that, I think sanctions or economic embargos cause too much human suffering, fanning the flames of hatred and mistrust and cause separation instead of cooperation.



On this I can agree, however it is up to us to stop to supporting these dictatorships, not to govern their policy as soveriegn nations. Unfortunatley we are tied to them economically, as they to us. Basically, easier said than done. What do we do without Saudi oil or Chinese textiles?



On this I completely disagree. It appears to me a grandiose idea of this nations place in the world. We are not Kings of the World, nor should we become dictators ourselves of how all people should live their lives. To 'outlaw it all together' and 'all nations regognise' suggests we are some supreme being with force of law to everyone on the planet, and clearly, we do not have the history or the capacity to hold that title, as no nation does in this modern world. That is called 'Imperialism'. Imperialism is so out, with the fall of Rome, Ottomans, The British Empire and later Hitler. It doesnt work.

It is one thing to decide for yourselves as a nation what policies you support or decline , it is another to try to hold all others accountable to your ideology. Besides that, we still count on many countries for goods and services, which we cannot afford to 'outlaw' because we dont agree with how their governments are run.

Ill admit that I dont know the solution to this problem. I am also tired of supporting dictators with tax dollars against others, them bombing countries to smitherines when 'ole boy' is no longer of use, also with tax dollars. I want a solution too, but we have to think harder.

I support an international tribunal that prosecutes big arms dealers, who keep arming dictators and the wars which take them out. There is something very wrong with that. And Im *** NOTICE: THIS WORD IS AGAINST THE RULES. FAILURE TO REMOVE IT WILL RESULT IN A STRIKE. *** we have to pay, while they make a fotune with both hands.

We no longer need vast fields of oil, see here.

I wasn't implying we needed oil fields to keep our SUVs running or drop our gas prices. There are other reasons for having control of vast oil fields, but they are each the subject of another thread.

As for dictatorships, I found an article talking about the speculated role of U.S. corporations abroad and how the U.S. government may (or may not) factor in:

Globalexchange: U.S. Corporations Prefer Dictatorships

I don't frequent this particular site, but the article was an interesting read.

The type of gov't isn't the problem. It's what those people in power DO, that is the problem.

If Saddam was a nice guy, fed his people, wasn't trying to arm himself...than I doubt this most recent military action against him, would have ever taken place.

Democracies, Dictatorships, Monarchies, Communism...can all be equally cruel and evil.

The gov't structure alone shouldn't be reason enough to cease support.

--cheers