The problem for the US is if he is taken out, the world would know exactly who did it. That would worsen their public relations than the Wiki leaks have. Either way, they are s@rewed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
Printable View
The problem for the US is if he is taken out, the world would know exactly who did it. That would worsen their public relations than the Wiki leaks have. Either way, they are s@rewed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
The USA has no reason to have him whacked. As far as public relations are concerned, the leaks have probably done more good than harm. For decades, every time the USA has gotten involved in various causes, especially in the Middle East, complete bozos all over the Internet regurgitate their tired old mantra about us doing all this for their oil. Oil may indeed be a part of it, but only to stabilize the world's oil supply. The USA has never taken over any of the oil fields for exclusive USA production, does not control to whom the oil is sold, and doesn't even receive any kind of discount on oil purchased. Do you really think other major users would be willing or capable of doing the same?Quote:
Originally Posted by 555-04Q2
Far too many people fail to realize how naive the US government remains about other, especially tribal, cultures in it's efforts to spread what it sees as the benefits of an elected, representative republic form of government. In short, we really do undertake causes for purely altruistic reasons.
What these leaks really expose is the silly, petulant behaviour of other countries or world leaders that would otherwise never see a headline because it's easier or more popular to blame the USA.
I hope they keep on releasing what they have. Let it all see the light of day.
I don't think that even fousto believes this tripe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondo
I think they do control. Most of the embargoes in the world are initiated and lead by the US.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_embargoes
The US even controls the trade of private companies in other countries, like the submarine business of Finnish Rauma-Repola:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIR_(submersible)
Quote:
Production of the two MIR units was a prime example of Finnish-Soviet economic and technical co-operation during the Cold War. Bids from Canada, France and Sweden to construct the submarines had been retracted most likely due to political pressure. In a later interview with STT the then Rauma-Repola department head Peter Laxell said he believed that "Finland got the permit to deliver the crafts to the Soviets on the basis that the CoCom officials in the USA believed the project would be a failure . . . Once it became clear to them we actually had accomplished the engineering feat there was a huge uproar about how such technology could be sold to the Soviets, enough for many visits to the Pentagon.". [3]
Because of the CoCom restrictions, most of the technology used had to be developed in Finland. The electronics was developed by Hollming. The syntactic foam was produced in Finland by Exel Oyj, as 3M, the leading producer, refused to supply their product.[1]
The level of technology flowing into the Soviet Union raised concern in the USA and Rauma-Repola was privately threatened with economic sanctions. For example, one concern of the Pentagon was the possibility that the Soviet Union would manufacture a pioneer submarine fleet that could clear the ocean floor of U.S. deep sea listening equipment[1]. With the possibility of losing its lucrative offshore oil platforms market Rauma-Repola yielded, and submarine development ceased in Finland. One project that was abandoned was the development of a fuel cell based air-independent propulsion system.
Other countries are free to vote against or ignore embargos. It seems to me I remember some of the leaks involved countries that wanted the US to strengthen some embargos. Again, you've got all these other wormy little players wanting the USA to do in public that which they are afraid to do in public.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eki
No tripe to it. It's the way it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
Hardly a constructive comment :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
At least Hondo has expressed an opinion that is open to discussion rather than a negative one-liner.
"Free" is relative. If the US retaliates when someone goes against their will, I wouldn't call that "free". It could be very costly to companies and/or countries that go against the US will. It's like the Chinese are "free" to talk against their government and their government is "free" to send them to a prison camp for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondo
It might be or might not be. It depends on how much value you put on the principle involved. You never saw the USA invading the Soviet Union or China over human rights. That would have been stupid. The USA has had domestic trade sanctions placed upon both however. The world isn't perfect, isn't ever going to be perfect, and the USA is not the Great Satan you so desperately want it to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eki
No, I just want the world to know if the US does something unscrupulous instead of them being quiet about it and pretending to be a squeaky clean World Police with a white hat. I value honesty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondo