Did George Bush change American Foreign policy post 9/11?...

Pages: 1 2

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
Did George Bush change American Foreign policy post 9/11?...

2008-12-16 02:50:49

ghettoperson: Member; +1,943|6653

...Or was it a continuation of the what was followed during the 1990's?

Sorry about the title; stupid word limits.

Anyway, I believe that foreign policy during the 1990's was very much interventionist and so in this way GWB has not actually changed matters for the better or worse. Clinton was a big fan of humanitarian intervention, and wanted to show that the US was capable of improving the world after the Cold War finished. The Clinton Doctrine in reality is not that different from the Bush doctrine. Both are interventionist, and can be twisted into what the POTUS wants them to be. George Bush came to power as an isolationist, and despite current perception of them being a right wing movement, PNAC did not support him, whilst being big fans of Clinton. This all changed when he made the choice to go into Afghanistan.

Your thoughts on the subject?

2008-12-16 03:06:37

Catbox: forgiveness; +505|6720

George Bush made the world a safer place... he saw the trouble in Iraq and went in and fixed it... God Bless George Bush... thank you for keeping us safe... even in the face of criticism.... even small politically insignificant countries like Ireland can agree.... George Bush and his support for Israel and democracy and freedom throughout the world is a win for everybody...

Love is the answer

2008-12-16 03:10:12

rammunition: Fully Loaded; +143|5865

[TUF]Catbox wrote:
George Bush made the world a safer place... he saw the trouble in Iraq and went in and fixed it.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!

you have to love how americans live in their own deluded fantasy world were they write there own false history.

America helped Saddam into power.
America gave Saddam WMD and urged him to use it on the Iranian civilians.
America then demonised Saddam.
America destroyed Iraq in the first Gulf War then starved 1million Iraqis to death and thought it was a "price worth paying"
America then removed Saddam from power, dismantled all security and civilian infrastructure creating a mayhem of terrorism and poverty, but free oilfields.
Every American involvement in Iraq has been selfish and catastrophic.

Last edited by rammunition (2008-12-16 03:12:08)

2008-12-16 03:21:01

Catbox: forgiveness; +505|6720

George Bush made Iraq a better place.... if he had more time he could fix the rest of the backward countries over there... once anybody from over there moves to the US... they realize that we are like them and just want to live a normal life... without the hate... and they enjoy living in the greatest country in the world... don't let that hate eat you up... ram

Love is the answer

2008-12-16 03:27:47

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6156|what

Of course he changed American Foreign policy post 9/11.

His first step was declaring a war on terror.

lol catbox. I can picture you writing those posts with a huge grin on your face.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v83/rac_goshawk/awesome.png

2008-12-16 03:34:01

13/f/taiwan: Member; +940|5702

[TUF]Catbox wrote:
George Bush made Iraq a better place.... if he had more time he could fix the rest of the backward countries over there... once anybody from over there moves to the US... they realize that we are like them and just want to live a normal life... without the hate... and they enjoy living in the greatest country in the world... don't let that hate eat you up... ram

Have you ever been to Iraq pre-2003? Or are you just one of those people who criticizes the country/government/people/their way of life based on what you see on TV and read in the paper?

2008-12-16 03:35:40

rammunition: Fully Loaded; +143|5865

[TUF]Catbox wrote:
George Bush made Iraq a better place.... if he had more time he could fix the rest of the backward countries over there... once anybody from over there moves to the US... they realize that we are like them and just want to live a normal life... without the hate... and they enjoy living in the greatest country in the world... don't let that hate eat you up... ram

you seriously are deluded

2008-12-16 04:25:31

Braddock: Agitator; +916|6294|Éire

[TUF]Catbox wrote:
George Bush made the world a safer place... he saw the trouble in Iraq and went in and fixed it... God Bless George Bush... thank you for keeping us safe... even in the face of criticism.... even small politically insignificant countries like Ireland can agree.... George Bush and his support for Israel and democracy and freedom throughout the world is a win for everybody...

You may think I'm joking but George Bush did make the world safer in one way... he made terrorism unacceptable in the Western world. The IRA will never return to violence, not in a post 9/11 world. ETA will achieve nothing through violence in a post 9/11 world. Wealthy idealists will be a lot less likely to bankroll Western freedom fighting groups in a post 9/11 world. That is largely thanks to George Bush.

This however does not wash his hands of the blood of all those Iraqi men, women and children. It has also not made one iota of difference to Middle Eastern or African terrorism.

2008-12-16 04:26:42

Braddock: Agitator; +916|6294|Éire

rammunition wrote:
[TUF]Catbox wrote:
George Bush made Iraq a better place.... if he had more time he could fix the rest of the backward countries over there... once anybody from over there moves to the US... they realize that we are like them and just want to live a normal life... without the hate... and they enjoy living in the greatest country in the world... don't let that hate eat you up... ram
you seriously are deluded

Dude... he's being sarcastic.

2008-12-16 04:55:48

ghettoperson: Member; +1,943|6653

TheAussieReaper wrote:
Of course he changed American Foreign policy post 9/11.

His first step was declaring a war on terror.

lol catbox. I can picture you writing those posts with a huge grin on your face. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v83/r … wesome.png

Yes, but the idea the the US has the right to invade a country for either terror reasons, or humanitarian reasons has not. They may go in for different reasons, but they use the same means.

2008-12-16 05:23:36

M.O.A.B: 'Light 'em up!'; +1,220|6226|Escea

rammunition wrote:
[TUF]Catbox wrote:
George Bush made the world a safer place... he saw the trouble in Iraq and went in and fixed it.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!

you have to love how americans live in their own deluded fantasy world were they write there own false history.

America helped Saddam into power.
America gave Saddam WMD and urged him to use it on the Iranian civilians.
America then demonised Saddam.
America destroyed Iraq in the first Gulf War then starved 1million Iraqis to death and thought it was a "price worth paying"
America then removed Saddam from power, dismantled all security and civilian infrastructure creating a mayhem of terrorism and poverty, but free oilfields.
Every American involvement in Iraq has been selfish and catastrophic.

This world, did the UK and France like vanish completely or am I missing something entirely?

https://timesonline.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/12/11/interpreter_in_basra.jpg

fee fi fo fum, I spy an Englishmun

Last edited by M.O.A.B (2008-12-16 05:30:15)

2008-12-16 05:51:28

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6156|what

ghettoperson wrote:
Yes, but the idea the the US has the right to invade a country for either terror reasons, or humanitarian reasons has not. They may go in for different reasons, but they use the same means.

When you invaded a country you used to be invading a country. Iraq and Afghanistan were not wars on either country or population, but militants\insurgents inside the country.

An example of what I would consider good foreign policy however, is post invasion the "rebuilding plans" and state building as a new method for security and stability. Training police and local security forces as your own personal watchmen and also integrating a large number of the population into your own army in a way was brilliant.

The training of a local police force, made of up civilians who were once part of the Saddams army gave them something to focus on. There was a very real risk that the disposed army once decommissioned would feel contempt for the "liberators" who've taken away the livelihood and power these men once had.

Can you imagine if the former army had started a revolt well after US forces had settled it? It could conceivably not have taken very long, and these forces would have had access to stockpiled weaponry. And integrating these men into a trained police by US soldiers was good enough to cause the extremists to focus on the police recruitment centres because it was Iraqi's betraying their country-men.

What came about was extremists killing Iraqi's who were trying to make a living as part of the police force. A police force that was protecting the civilians and a real necessity.

And now that it has come time for withdrawal (from Iraq anyway), the Iraqi Government is confident in it's own ability to self govern.

If this is foreign policy from now on, to integrate the local populace of a toppled regime\hostile-state as it's own protection then I believe that is good strategy both in terms of saving lives and stabilising a potentially disastrous situation of local rebellion and revolt.

2008-12-16 07:05:09

Shahter: Zee Ruskie; +295|6779|Moscow, Russia

TheAussieReaper wrote:
If this is foreign policy from now on, to integrate the local populace of a toppled regime\hostile-state as it's own protection then I believe that is good strategy both in terms of saving lives and stabilising a potentially disastrous situation of local rebellion and revolt.

i'll agree with you when i see current "democratically elected" iraq regime maintaining control after US occupation forces leave - which (maintaning control that is) is very unlikely to happen, imho, not without consistent outside support anyway.

if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.

2008-12-16 14:53:58

Poseidon: Fudgepack DeQueef; +3,253|6541|Long Island, New York

rammunition wrote:
you have to love how americans live in their own deluded fantasy world were they write there own false history.

The irony here is ASTOUNDING.

2008-12-16 14:55:46

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6474

Poseidon wrote:
rammunition wrote:
you have to love how americans live in their own deluded fantasy world were they write there own false history.
The irony here is ASTOUNDING.

Everyone writes their own history, you're both nobbers.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2008-12-16 15:01:47

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6409|North Carolina

Well, one thing's for sure...

Before 9/11, the big issue was corporate corruption. After 9/11, terrorism became it.

The only major difference I see is that we're more aggressive than we used to be.

2008-12-16 15:13:51

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6604|132 and Bush

Are you familiar with the Carter Doctrine? Fuck humanitarian intervention, he made intervention the policy if our oil was threatened.

Also consider that it was Clinton who made regime change in Iraq official policy.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2008-12-16 15:34:32

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6409|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:
Are you familiar with the Carter Doctrine? Fuck humanitarian intervention, he made intervention the policy if our oil was threatened.

Also consider that it was Clinton who made regime change in Iraq official policy.

We usually pursued more international approval before actual invasions until this recent one. I'd say the doctrine of pre-emption is considerably more aggressive than most of our policies have been in the last few decades.

2008-12-16 15:39:30

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6604|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
Are you familiar with the Carter Doctrine? Fuck humanitarian intervention, he made intervention the policy if our oil was threatened.

Also consider that it was Clinton who made regime change in Iraq official policy.
We usually pursued more international approval before actual invasions until this recent one. I'd say the doctrine of pre-emption is considerably more aggressive than most of our policies have been in the last few decades.

No we did not. We pretended we did though. .. just like we pretended to do so before Iraq. We also went in with the help of Denmark, UK, Australia, Poland, and Spain.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2008-12-16 15:39:46

Ajax_the_Great1: Dropped on request; +206|6650

Interventionalism is as American as apple pie.

2008-12-16 15:41:09

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6409|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
Are you familiar with the Carter Doctrine? Fuck humanitarian intervention, he made intervention the policy if our oil was threatened.

Also consider that it was Clinton who made regime change in Iraq official policy.
We usually pursued more international approval before actual invasions until this recent one. I'd say the doctrine of pre-emption is considerably more aggressive than most of our policies have been in the last few decades.
No we did not. We pretended we did though. .. just like we pretended to do so before Iraq. We also went in with the help of Denmark, UK, Australia, Poland, and Spain.

Well, admittedly, it is rather hard for me to argue against the notion that we are too aggressive in general.

I suppose Bush just wasn't as good at bullshitting as previous leaders have been.

2008-12-16 15:42:05

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6604|132 and Bush

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Interventionalism is as American as apple pie.

Yes, in that regard we've kinda butchered our constitution.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2008-12-16 15:45:28

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|6765

rammunition wrote:
[TUF]Catbox wrote:
George Bush made the world a safer place... he saw the trouble in Iraq and went in and fixed it.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!

you have to love how americans live in their own deluded fantasy world were they write there own false history.

America helped Saddam into power.
America gave Saddam WMD and urged him to use it on the Iranian civilians.
America then demonised Saddam.
America destroyed Iraq in the first Gulf War then starved 1million Iraqis to death and thought it was a "price worth paying"
America then removed Saddam from power, dismantled all security and civilian infrastructure creating a mayhem of terrorism and poverty, but free oilfields.
Every American involvement in Iraq has been selfish and catastrophic.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

and saddam never did anything wrong. or the euros were never involved in any way right? god damn you are beyond help. i think you have mad cow. i really do.

Last edited by usmarine (2008-12-16 15:45:41)

2008-12-16 15:46:49

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|6765

i would like to thank the mods for letting rammuntion ruin another thread.

2008-12-16 16:30:33

xstax981: Community Modder; +93|6679

rammunition wrote:
[TUF]Catbox wrote:
George Bush made the world a safer place... he saw the trouble in Iraq and went in and fixed it.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!

you have to love how americans live in their own deluded fantasy world were they write there own false history.

America helped Saddam into power.
America gave Saddam WMD and urged him to use it on the Iranian civilians.
America then demonised Saddam.
America destroyed Iraq in the first Gulf War then starved 1million Iraqis to death and thought it was a "price worth paying"
America then removed Saddam from power, dismantled all security and civilian infrastructure creating a mayhem of terrorism and poverty, but free oilfields.
Every American involvement in Iraq has been selfish and catastrophic.

Now don't take this as a knock against Britain or Europe as a whole, because everyone from there is respectful and level-headed from what I read. I only mean this to rammunition, to wake him up from his "Europe has never done wrong" deluded fantasy world as he calls it.

Your continent colonized Africa, which was doing mighty fine on its own.
Your continent tore up eastern Africa in battles to protect only its commercial interests
Your continent then ditched Africa and left it to stew in its war torn state
Your continent spawned many civil wars, in which there were many more deaths than that in Iraq
Your continent spawned World War II, the deadliest war that has ever occured in the period of mankind.
Your continent/country's involvement in America when it first began was only for selfish reasons.

I'm not also going to say America is perfect either. We've done pretty stupid crap (slave trade), and we still do some stupid crap too. But ramm can't gloat about Britain when they've had a dark shadow as well.

All in all, every country has had their bad points. But ramm bloating his ego about America being the devil was just aggravating me for the longest time now.

/rant

(feel free to correct me on different things)

and i just realized that I fed a troll.

Last edited by xstax981 (2008-12-16 16:46:04)

Pages: 1 2

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
Did George Bush change American Foreign policy post 9/11?...

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums Did George Bush change American Foreign policy post 9/11?...

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

rammunition wrote:

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

rammunition wrote:

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

ghettoperson wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

rammunition wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

rammunition wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

rammunition wrote:

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

rammunition wrote:

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

Board footer