Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Internet chiefs told to curb Islamists online [View all]cprise
(8,445 posts)47. Its a mistake to blame victims for the results of your own agression
In governance, religion is the last resort of the incompetent. The US/NATO technological leviathan is powerfull enough to instill feelings of inadequacy in any population. Continually toppling foreign governments (throwing societies into disarray if not shattering them as in Iraq) is their M.O.
"The United States is and will remain the one indispensable nation in the world. Now, sustaining our leadership, keeping America strong and secure means we have to use our power wisely," Obama said in his address to the American Legion in North Carolina."
This is the rhetoric of world domination. "Indispensible" largely means the ability to choose which people in a given country receive the arms and support needed to stay in power (whether or not the local population likes it):

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/08/26/world/middleeast/united-states-arms-sales-rise.html?ref=middleeast
...let's not forget SA has never been a haven for women - we have nothing to do with that.
Of course we do. The US has made the Wahabist kingdom in SA possible and props it up continually. Ensuring the Saudis will drop oil prices at our command means the US can prevent any other oil-rich countries from challenging US economic power (by undermining oil revenues, or keeping the world interested in the dollar as a defacto reserve currency even if a petro state stops accepting dollars in exchange for this crucial resource).
We could have chosen a tribal faction with more modern aspirations, or even better, left them to themselves. But the US seems to have developed a preference for dealing with knuckle-draggers.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
51 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I just wanted to poke in here to remind you that you don't know what your are talking about.
Ash_F
Oct 2014
#43
Saddam was a doomed man in 2003. The Radical Islamists would have taken over by 2009
FrodosPet
Oct 2014
#48
You realize that this "choice" is no accident -- in fact, it is by design.
The Stranger
Oct 2014
#27
Actually, Israel and the U.S. have always subverted the secularists -- including the Ba'athists --
The Stranger
Oct 2014
#26
But here in the US religous extremists are having more and more influence
whereisjustice
Oct 2014
#10
I don't see much difference. Many GOP/Tea Partiers openly talk about implementing Biblical Law
CJCRANE
Oct 2014
#49
No. Freedom of speech in the marketplace of ideas, remember. One would need hate speech laws.
Fred Sanders
Oct 2014
#5
Restricting propaganda from one terrorist source makes the country just like NK..all righty then.
Fred Sanders
Oct 2014
#18
Like the teabaggers, some folks think private companies not wanting to broadcast hate and
Fred Sanders
Oct 2014
#32
This is a really bad idea, Governments banning together to block speech they do not like
Youdontwantthetruth
Oct 2014
#6
Private media companies and private cable news also do not need to provide a big platform.
Fred Sanders
Oct 2014
#19
Private cable/sat/internet companies can pick and choose what they do and do not broadcast
Youdontwantthetruth
Oct 2014
#23
Government policies that promote disparity while eliminating accountablity
whereisjustice
Oct 2014
#9