Explosion at US Embassy in Ankara

I just love the above expression of innocence and indignation. No offence intended; but you do understand the concept of Imperialism Pregnar?

The US does not have to 'conquer' and 'keep' countries in the sense you mean, in order to extend power and control over them.

Let's ask the question in a slightly different manner shall we for the connotations are the same. In how many countries has the US tried to/succeeded in extending its power and influence through 'diplomacy' or military force?

The list is pretty endless;

Iran, Guatemala, Cuba, Iraq, Dominican Republic, South Vietnam, Chile, Ghana, Afghanistan, Turkey, Nicaragua Cambodia, Angola, Venezuela and Palestine to name but a few.

It's no good pretending that the US has ever consisted of the benign, warm and fluffy, apple pie loving Uncle Sam, your shocked horror response indicates.

 

DHKP Flag





The organisation was originally formed in 1978 by Dursun Karataş as Revolutionary Left (Turkish: Devrimci Sol or Dev Sol), a splinter faction of Devrimci Yol ("Revolutionary Way", also known as Devrimci Yol), which splintered from the People's Liberation Party-Front of Turkey (THKP-C), which in its turn was a splinter of Revolutionary Youth Federation (commonly known in Turkish as Dev Genç).

A 1994 factional infighting within Dev Sol resulted in two factions: the main group led by Dursun Karatas[citation needed] was renamed DHKP/C, while Bedri Yağan created a new THKP-C (not to be confused with the original one).

In all cases of "Parti-Cephe" (Part-/Front) names, "Party" refers to the group’s political activities, while "Front" is a reference to a group’s military operations. Theoretically they are separate entities.

The group espouses a Marxist-Leninist ideology and holds an anti-U.S., anti-NATO positions. It considers that the Turkish government is under the control of Western imperialism and seeks to destroy this control by violent and democratic means.

It finances its activities chiefly through donations raised in Turkey and Europe.[1]

 

This bombing is probably in response to NATO’s deployment of Patriot missile batteries along Turkey’s 560-mile border with Syria.

http://world.time.com/2013/02/01/patriot-missiles-arrive-in-turkey-how-they-affect-the-syria-equation/#ixzz2JlxRxp7S

 

You could say that about most large developed or developing countries: The UK, Russia, China, France, etc.

 

That's a pretty woeful defence if you don't mind my saying so; and cannot be seriously construed as justification.

 

Just about every country desires to expand its influence internationally and all have different mechanisms for doing so based on their current resources. It isn't really a defense, it's more so just the way that international relations work.

 

Uh huh. So are lies, mass murder, and cover up's acceptable 'mechanisms'..

 

Why would we consider such methodologies acceptable? It isn't against international law to extend political influence overseas.

 

We shouldn't.

Let's ask our Gov's.

 

Seeing as how the US has had different committed foes during our involvements with those countries, how about looking at their records to see this whole matter in the proper context?

The Soviet Union's record of killing, military, governmental/political and economic oppression when they were spreading their poisonous system on the poor, uneducated peoples in third world countries who were too weak, poor, unsophisticated or ignorant to resist the USSR. The USSR who actually DID annex and consume the nations they conquered.

You assert that WE WERE IMPERIALIST???

When you bother to look at how, when, where and why we were involved with many of those nations , you'll see it was to oppose Communism. Why not declare your love and allegiance to Communism??? By presenting only one side of the matter you reveal what might be your favorite color.

Red.

And the only other countries on your OBJECTIVE list represent the OTHER land gobbling force this world has had to contend with. Islamism.

And Iran is the world's leading exporter of terrorism.

You fault us for opposing them?

You sound like quite the fair minded observer.

The unimpeachable source for a balanced analysis.

 

Really?

By what measure?

Says who? See, funny thing is...I do not agree.

Prove it.

 

But not with the same ferocity America has done in say the last 50 years.

 

Depends on what you mean by ferocity. The US is the global superpower, so of course it is going to be involved more deeply with international institutions and major foreign events than most other countries. We simply have the means to project our power further than any other country. But other countries have been very aggressive in expanding power bases as well, such as China who has made a big play for Africa here (just as an example) or Russia who has troops stationed in Georgia, and Moldova, has first strike reservations over resources in the Caspian Sea, is trying to claim the north pole and who uses its power in the security council to support countries such as Syria, Sudan, and Iran.

 

I' m referring to sheer military might.

 

No other country has our military capabilities.

 

Prove it yourself.

Google: World's sponsor of terrorism

 

It's very difficult for people who have been surrounded and virtually cocooned by ideological and cultural 'enclosures' to step back and see that quoting the past actions of others cannot excuse, or make right theirs.

I understand why people do this, it incredibly hard to accept that ones beloved country is in decline, both economically and morally; and have to continue to believe that which they are trying so hard to force upon others is the 'only' right way, when everything and eveyone else is screaming otherwise. I'm sure other fading empires will have reacted in exactly the same way.

I feel your pain Dylith...

 

means nothing when you losing every war

can't even beat a few hundred old Taliban in the hills of Afghanistan

 

When I read the first two sentences of your reply I started to get excited; I thought "this person has made an interesting point, worthy of debate".... this quickly led to dissapointment, when I read on.

Firstly: the interesting section, yes lets put the whole matter into the 'proper' context

You have painted a wonderfully altruistic picture where the US rode in atop its charger to defend the poor, uneducated peoples in third world countries who were too weak, poor, unsophisticated or ignorant to resist a poisonous system.

Unfortunately; this picture is somewhat flawed. There was nothing altruistic about these American ventures, in fact quite the opposite; and was caused mainly by mutual paranoia during the cold war.

The crux of the matter is that during the cold war, the USSR was regularly trying to initiate allies; due to an ongoing fear of invasion by the West; The Soviets provided countries with economic aid, technology, weapons and military advisors on the condition that they would become a soviet ally.

The equally paranoid US felt that Communism an/or Socialism was a huge threat to American finance capital; and after WW2, because there was a major power vacum (for obvious reasons) the US wanted to dominate. Lets not pretend that US Imperial 'Democracy' was any more benign than 'Evil Communism' and lets certainly not try to imply that the US opposed Communism because it was authoritarian and stifled democracy, that argument Pregnar holds very little sway, given how many dictatorships you supported during the cold war.

The U.S government and many of its people are still making an enormous effort to portray U.S. economic and military institutions as innocent victims of barbarism; it seems that somewhere in translation a lie has become the truth.

As for the rest of your post;

Don't be so silly. That sort of childlike nonsense gives a lot of weight to my comment in another thread; that the US is very socially under-developed.

This immature belief system that states that if one critisises the US one has to be a Communist, or Islamist; is unsophisticated and very embarrassing.

 

Hmmm..but when mechanisms are actioned with such arrogance and virtual impunity; sooner or later such countries have to accept the adverse effects brought about by these 'International Relations' and sooner or later such arrogant undertakings bring about blowback.

The irony is; that the American right wing has such an aversion to' big government'; and yet you excuse your Imperialism, whilst at the very same time you are rabidly trying to assert military/economic domination across the world. It appears that outside of the US most of the rest of the world understands US foreign policy better than the US population does.

Also strange that you continue to intervene in so many other countries so long after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US alleged source of all the worlds problems, Oh wait a minute; Islamists have now taken on that mantle... how silly of me.

The worlds biggest problem at the moment is not the Soviets, nor China, nor Iran, nor the flavour of the month and very convenient Islamists; the worlds biggest problem at this point in time is that there is no other rival super power to reign you in and restrain your dangerous adventures.

That said; I think were I party to US foreign policy decision making at this point in time I would be trying my very best to cultivate friends, rather than continuing to make the whole world my enemy; given the precarious economic position the US now finds itself in.

You won't wake up tomorrow to find your empire gone; but as the gradual process of serious decline has deeply embedded itself; this 'eventual' outcome is probably inevitable.

 

Approx around the same time scale as Israel came into being.

Must be another hateful coincidence, peddled by me, for no reason other than to hate Jews.

- - - Updated - - -

It was your assertion.

God promissssssssssssssd, remember?

Prove God. Then prove God promhisssssssssssd.

 

Jack my boy,
To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize...
Looks familliar ?
The answer is God.

 

Which god? I can criticise them all.