|
In Reply to: OK, I got you wrong posted by Visitor on April 07, 2003 at 08:36:25:
Thanks for the admission that I'm not a racist.
You said: "but you haven't described that famous average american who is supposed to be so informed and knows what is what." First of all, I didn't know I was expected to 'describe that famous average american.' I think it would be difficult to do so, since americans are so varied. I suppose that the famous average american is in the eyes of the beholder. But, this I can tell you, the ideologies that you are putting forth here are NOT those held by the famous average american.
Secondly, I never said that the famous average american is 'so informed' as you put it. I don't think we have to be 'so informed.' What I said is that the average american would instinctivly know that American Elitistism is a myth.
I can quickly tell you why this is a myth: We have, since our beginnings, allowed people from every nation, every religion, every ideology come to our shores. Our blood is the blood of every nation, every religion and every ideology. We are not a backward people, but a people who move forward. We admit our mistakes when we make them, and we've made many mistakes in our history. But we attempt to improve our condition, and are generally pretty good at improving ourselves.
We are not Elitists, because to be so would be hypocritical. After all, it's not WE who have done this, because truly there is no WE. WE are THEY. We ARE the Irish, the Germans, the Jews, the Japanese, the Chinese, the Russians, the Africans. We are the children of the world. We are the true melting pot of the world, where the nations have settled, intermingled and grown up into what is called The United States of America.
So, if we are Elitist (which I deny), then it's the descendents of the whole world who are Elitists.
We are the melting pot. The pot is still being stirred and it's still simmering. The cooking process isn't finished yet.
You said: "You didn't even know that Saddam Hussein was lied by the US government to invade Iraq when that had been part of the plan all along." No, I didn't know that. But, my thinking is this: I don't think we tricked him. I think he was planning on doing so already. I'd prefer to think of it as teaching him a lesson. Yes, he is a coward. For him to invade Kuwait, only if Big Brother tells him he wont spank him, shows he's a weakling and a coward. It does not bother me that the US tricked him. This sort of thing doesn't bother me at all.
You ask: "Is he an idiot, like you say? I doubt it, he is an evil man but what kind of people are those who encouraged him to move in that direction in the first place?" I don't think we encouraged him. I think he did it, thinking he could do it without us intervening, which really does show his character. You can't blame us for what he did. The way you speak, you make him sound like a child. Come on, he is (was?) a grown man. He is (was) responsible for his own actions. Don't blame us because he invaded Kuwait.
You said: "The same question is valid about the chemical weapons used on the Kurds. Members of this very same administration gave those to him." I don't believe that we gave him chemical weapons. From the evidence I've seen, he developed those on his own.
You say: "Would you give a gun to a person who is threatening to kill somebody?" Only if the gun is aimed at their own head, and it will kill the agressor. But, your question is based upon the validity of your claim, that we gave him chemical weapons. I do not believe we did.
