🚀 go-pugleaf

"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >Pacifism leads to rule by tyrants.
> Strange logic there.

Maybe you need things worked out for you step by
step....

It isn't that hard if you think it through.  No pacifism
ever succeed in the large without a powerful ally
to keep things in limits.

Pacifists thought Hilter could be resisted by peace
and this delayed many responses to his actions that
led to WW2.

Someone like Sodamn Insane could not be resisted
by Pacifism.  Neither could the Taliban.  The Soviets
had to be stopped by military power in support of
economic and political 'cold' war.

Even the Berlin airlift would not have worked to keep
Berlin free, were there not a military presence to back
up the action.

> >So does Empire (that other's throw this word around
> >proves they misunderstand either IT or the U.S.)
>
> I don't think you understand what the United States of America were
> found on are you would spite when use the word "empire".

Sorry, that isn't even a coherent sentence (but I have
trouble with spelling and grammar sometimes too.)

America did colonize North America from sea to sea.
We took most of that (or bought it) from existing colonial
powers.  What was done to the Indians was a crime --
many crimes.

BUT, we made no attempt to take Mexico, Canada, Central
or South America (some of which was possible and some
reasons existed to do so.)

Even when we won wars again Spain (Cuba, Phillipines),
Germany (twice), Japan, etc we made no attempt to KEEP
those as Empire nor did we try to rule those peoples.

Shall we mention Afganistan or Iraq which we have not tried
to own or rule?

Even Puerto Rico has always had the option for its people
to go, stay, or become a state as it's people decide.

> >The U.S. is the first superpower in world history-- going
> >back to at least the Chinese, Persians, and Alexander--
>
> None of those were superpowers and neither are we.

Well since you claim there are NO superpowers (and
appently never have been), just change the wording to
"the most power nation on Earth with no clear opposition".

Alexander took as much of the world as he could physically
reach -- until he died.

Pretty much the same for the Persians and the Romans
and the dynastic Chinese.  Hint:  How many distinct languages
are spoken natively by those within the current China,
thousands of years after the fact?

Same for the Soviets.  Look what happened when the
Communist government failed.  Not only did the Empire
of 'external' nations evaporate, but Sovient Union itself
dissolved into the component Republics or even smaller
units (cf. Cheznya.)

> No, empire ever returned what it won with out lots of blood being
> spent by those they stole form got it back.

That is THE POINT - by definition America doesn't seek Empire.
Thank you.

> We have better things to than going around protecting people and
> Nations who won't protect them elves.

That makes sense, except for couple of nasty points:

    1) We would be protecting ourselves too
    2) It is good and proper to help the world avoid tyranny
            and to stand for the rights of ALL MEN
    3) We are hopelessly interconnected to the entire world

There are probably a host of other points.....

Herb Martin
Try ADDS for great Weather too:
http://adds.aviationweather.noaa.gov/projects/adds