US Must face the Truth : Know who is the Terrorist 25 Classic Quotes on Western Hegemony 1- "It's really not a number I'm terribly interested in." -General Colin Powell [When asked about the number of Iraqi people who were slaughtered by Americans in the 1991 "Desert Storm" terror campaign (200,000 people!)] 2- "I will never apologize for the United States of America - I don't care what the facts are." -President George Bush 1988 [Bush was demonstrating his patriotism by excusing an act of cold-blooded mass-murder by the U.S. Navy. On July 3, 1988 the U.S. Navy warship Vincennes shot down an Iranian commercial airliner. All 290 civilian people in the aircraft were killed. The plane was on a routine flight in a commercial corridor in Iranian airspace. The targeting of it by the U.S. Navy was blatantly illegal. That it was grossly immoral is also obvious. Except to a patriot.] 3- "To maintain this position of disparity (U.S. economic-military supremacy)... we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming.... We should cease to talk about vague and... unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standard and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts.... The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better." -George Kennan [Director of Policy Planning U.S. State Department 1948] 4- "If they turn on the radars we're going to blow up their goddamn SAMs (surface-to-air missiles). They know we own their country. We own their airspace... We dictate the way they live and talk. And that's what's great about America right now. It's a good thing, especially when there's a lot of oil out there we need." -U.S. Brig. General William Looney (Interview Washington Post, August 30, 1999) [Referring, in reality, to the brutal mass-murder of hundreds of civilian Iraqi men, women and children during 10,000 sorties by American/British war criminals in the first eight months of 1999] 5- "The greatest crime since World War II has been U.S. foreign policy." -Ramsey Clark [Former U.S. Attorney General under President Lyndon Johnson] 6- "I believe that if we had and would keep our dirty, bloody, dollar soaked fingers out of the business of these [Third World] nations so full of depressed, exploited people, they will arrive at a solution of their own. And if unfortunately their revolution must be of the violent type because the "haves" refuse to share with the "have-nots" by any peaceful method, at least what they get will be their own, and not the American style, which they don't want and above all don't want crammed down
When there is talk of violence, let us stand up against it.In the face of death, let us honor life… Let us not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good” (Clinton). Through wording such as “let us teach our children...”, and “when there is talk of...: let us”, Clinton spoke to the American People as if they were together in their pain. Having established common ground between Americans and the citizens of Oklahoma City through parallelism, Clinton took his approach a step further by personally establishing himself as a neighbor of the citizens of Oklahoma City. He established himself as a neighbor, providing support to the people of Oklahoma. Clinton appealed to many Americans through patriotism, in which he shows America is united in support. One such example was the start of Clinton’s speech, where he thanked everyone gathered as “our fellow Americans” (Clinton).
Without understanding the importance of foreign relations the American people’s way of life could be at stake. Not only could the economic strength of the U.S. diminish, but the military might of the U.S. could also be compromised. Mead argues that without the centrality of foreign policy being evident in American politics the happiness of the world is at risk. “Since the United States has become the central power in a worldwide system of finance, communications, and trade, it is not only the American people whose happiness and security will be greatly affected by the quality of American foreign policy in coming years (Mead 176). I contend that without a strong emphasis on foreign policy, we could begin to see the end of American
“America is a Nation with a mission - and that mission comes from our most basic beliefs. We have no desire to dominate, no ambitions of empire. Our aim is a democratic peace - a peace founded upon the dignity and rights of every man and woman”- (George W. Bush, 2004)
Host: On September the 11th 2001, the notorious terror organisation known as Al-Qaeda struck at the very heart of the United States. The death count was approximately 3,000; a nation was left in panic. To this day, counterterrorism experts and historians alike regard the event surrounding 9/11 as a turning point in US foreign relations. Outraged and fearful of radical terrorism from the middle-east, President Bush declared that in 2001 that it was a matter of freedoms; that “our very freedom has come under attack”. In his eyes, America was simply targeted because of its democratic and western values (CNN News, 2001). In the 14 years following this pivotal declaration, an aggressive, pre-emptive approach to terrorism replaced the traditional
For the past fifty years or so, Americans have had the great fortune of living safely in a relatively peaceful world. That perspective changed the moment a commercial airplane slammed into the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11th. Terrorists killed over 6,000 American citizens within a few hours. Suddenly, life as America knew it changed. Many stood in disbelief when they saw the joyous reactions of people cheering on the streets of Palestine. Our nation came to realize that we were truly hated, and that terrorist regimes rejoiced in our pain. The leader of one such a regime, Osama bin Laden, became America's clearly defined worst enemy. A war has begun between bin Laden and his terrorist followers, and all people who believe in freedom. Osama Bin Laden and the terrorists were unjustified in attacking America, and cannot rationally legitimize their actions. Evidence of this, as well as a better understanding of their reasoning, can be found through examination of President Bush's speech to the nation given on September 20th, and through examining additional information on Osama and his terrorist followers.
As seen by the terrorist attacks of September 11th and afterwards this is not an easy approach, if even possible, and it asks for a unreserved commitment, the clear definition of interests within the international system, it asks for the use of force if necessary as well as the clear distinction when not, and it asks for a transformation of institutions and policies. Since this was not done early on, the examples provide the reasons of failure as well as a demonstration of a slow learning process in U.S. foreign Policy.
During the late 1600s and the to the mid-1700s, countries fought for land and power in order to have global domination. While several countries fought for the same cause, resolving their differences was nearly impossible, and this often led to more wars and conflicts. One of the many conflicts concerned the domination of North America. While many European powers competed for control of North America, Britain gained the most territory through the four French and Indian wars, King William's War, Queen Anne's War, King George's War, and the French and Indian War. As these wars progressed, Britain achieved the most success and eventually became the most dominant power in North America.
missiles in Cuba if the Americans removed their missile installations in Turkey." Few says later
As we approach the next Presidential election the topic of American foreign policy is once again in the spotlight. In this paper, I will examine four major objectives of U.S. foreign policy that have persisted throughout the twentieth century and will discuss the effect of each on our nation’s recent history, with particular focus on key leaders who espoused each objective at various times. In addition, I will relate the effects of American foreign policy objectives, with special attention to their impact on the American middle class. Most importantly, this paper will discuss America’s involvement in WWI, WWII, and the Cold War to the anticipated fulfillment of these objectives—democracy, manifest destiny, humanitarianism, and economic expansion.
After the civil war, United States took a turn that led them to solidify as the world power. From the late 1800s, as the US began to collect power through Cuba, Hawaii, and the Philippines, debate arose among historians about American imperialism and its behavior. Historians such as William A. Williams, Arthur Schlesinger, and Stephen Kinzer provides their own vision and how America ought to be through ideas centered around economics, power, and racial superiority.
The continuing successful and attempted terrorist attacks in the USA and the endless wars and conflicts in which we are involved are a manifestation of political, economical and imperialistic failures in Arab lands. This was supported by Western society with the United States as the largest of powers. Instability, oppression, poverty and political alienation that the citizens of many Islamic-Arab nations experienced within the last hundred years have led to major hatred of the United States by the people of many Arab nations. These sources of hatred can be viewed as remote causes of the endless terror attacks and conflicts around the globe. Through the analysis of these causes, it is possible to find ways to avoid such incidents of terror by solving the problem at the source.
Imperialism in America At the turn of the century, America and the views of its people changed. Many different ideas were surfacing about issues that affected the country as a whole. The Republican Party, led by William McKinley, was concentrating on the expansion of the United States and looking to excel in power and commerce. The Democratic Party at this time was led by William Jennings Bryan, who was absorbed in a sponge of morality and was concerned with the rights of man.
Herman, E. & Sullivan, G. O.1989. The Terrorism Industry: The Experts and Institutions That Shape Our View of Terror. New York: Pantheon.
The advertisements both contain the symbolism of the milk squirted in the face, but it is used as a sexual (and pornographic) innuendo and has connotations to semen being ejaculated into a woman’s face.i
Whenever world politics is mentioned, the state that appears to be at the apex of affairs is the United States of America, although some will argue that it isn’t. It is paramount we know that the international system is shaped by certain defining events that has lead to some significant changes, particularly those connected with different chapters of violence. Certainly, the world wars of the twentieth century and the more recent war on terror must be included as defining moments. The warning of brute force on a potentially large scale also highlights the vigorousness of the cold war period, which dominated world politics within an interval of four decades. The practice of international relations (IR) was introduced out of a need to discuss the causes of war and the different conditions for calm in the wake of the first world war, and it is relevant we know that this has remained a crucial focus ever since. However, violence is not the only factor capable of causing interruption in the international system. Economic elements also have a remarkable impact. The great depression that happened in the 1920s, and the global financial crises of the contemporary period can be used as examples. Another concurrent problem concerns the environment, with the human climate being one among different number of important concerns for the continuing future of humankind and the planet in general.