USA - General discussion (Part 1)

[thegurgi]

Originally Posted by staringelf

So Americans can even invade a country and tell them how to create a society, but we should just watch the whole thing silently and shut up? Do you think this is strictly America's business? Unfortunately, it is not. It is a World issue.

This is EXACTLY what i'm talking about... first, i said it's pointless cause in these cases it's nearly impossible to change peoples minds on the issues. Everyone has a very myopic view on it...

but you know... why is it that the world doesn't do anything about it? Why is it that the United States gives out more foriegn aid than any other country (maybe other than Japan)... why is it that when one country has a natural disaster or civil unrest that we try to help out, but when something wrong happens here we get nothing. Where was the immediate aid from YOUR countries when these things happen (even abroad)? i'm sorry, but i think it's SO rude to completely bash the people who just want to help. That's what the soldiers want to do... i know SO many people who have served over in other places trying so hard to do something good, but instead everyone HATES us, we sacrifice SO MUCH and you aren't doing anything about it except TALK, but there's very little action... you're all so against this war cause what? You think Iraq was better off? Under a DICTATOR?! It may have not been the right time and it may not have been for the right reasons, but, it's going on, and the lives of the people in Iraq are improving, if but a little and it's not the fault of us or the people, but the group that's still supporting Saddam, the fundamentalist, even if we left do you think everything would be perfect?! They'd take control again and the people would once again live in a subservient world... i guess it was such a horrible thing to try and help them... yeah it is a world issue, but apparently, WE'RE the only ones doing it (that is, the coalition, but it seems like even the countries also involved have no support, which seems pretty shameful)

But this is about THE ELECTION

[Kate]

kirillov, 2nd of November.

[thegurgi]

november 2nd (which also just so happens to be my birthday)

[Unplugged]

Originally Posted by thegurgi

you aren't doing anything about it except TALK

My country has military forces in Iraq. Not that I agree with it, because this war was not even aproved by the UN, so it doesn't surprise me it doesn't have much support.

Originally Posted by thegurgi

You think Iraq was better off? Under a DICTATOR?!

Why don't you go invade other countries that have dictators or fake governments who repress their people and don't give them rights? If that's your logic, then the world would be in permanent war for the next 200 years or more. And it wouldn't even happen anyway, because as long as your country has good relations with those countries and money keeps coming in...

And I'm glad the EU has not decided to take similar actions to invade countries just like that. I'm proud of that. Because people can come together and fight for their rights too, here we had a dictatorship until 1974, but the people came together and fought, and there was a revolution - we also had a secret police controlign everyone's every move and word, but it was possible. Of course foreign power can also help through many ways, but one thing is *helping*, pacifically, the other thing imposing and invading and bombing everything. Because the reason given to you wasn't that USA was gonna invade Iraq for a question of human rights, but because it "had" weapons of mass destruction. You went there out of specific selfish interest. Now that that bullshit is finally done with, you come and say "Oh, but see, we are so good, because there's no Saddam anymore, and the people will be happy, what would be of Iraq without us?!".

And stop talking about the soldiers. No one here is bashing the soldiers, they are just peons on a despicable plan, of course they are not to blame.

And suggesting only the US helps people when natural disasters occur.. I'm not even gonna comment on that, cause it's so silly it's absurd.

Anyway, thegurgi, I don't hate anyone or any country, but looking at your speech makes me understand how people can hate America, or a large part of Americans. Sorry. It's the typical "We're the best and we can do anything we want" arrogant attitude.

[thegurgi]

Originally Posted by staringelf

And stop talking about the soldiers. No one here is bashing the soldiers, they are just peons on a despicable plan, of course they are not to blame.

Trust me, when you blame the plan, you're blaming the soldiers... cause they absolutely hate it that people don't support the war, it makes them feel awful.

I know that everything isn't perfect, but every one constantly insults where i'm from, and i tried to say something good about it, i hate it that no one is with us, that no one else supports it. Cause i think the world SHOULD be involved. and i DO think we should be taking care of the other dictators, cause everyone SHOULD be free. But it'd be impossible for our army to take on more than one war now-a-day, hahaha, we don't have the leader for it or the army. The only way for us to do that would be to have a draft, for our volunteer army to take on all the dictators of the war, well... it WOULD be impossible.

You're last comment hurts my feelings beyond anything i've ever read or had someone say to me (and i've been followed by people shouting "cripple") HOW DARE YOU! i've tried nothing to prove that american's aren't as ignorant as the rest of the world pegs us, i have nothing but compassion for the people of the world i just want everything to be ok, but i've learned from my life that nothings perfect, and that just because you're flawed doesn't mean you can't make a difference. It's not easy supporting this war, especially with nearly EVERYONE around me not, and well... i'm just so sick of this. It's already happened, there's really nothing you can do about it, so just TRY to see the silver lining, something good can happen from something bad, We can't just walk away, we need to concentrate our efforts on helping the people. We don't bomb as much as we feed and cloth and shelter... and if you can't see that, you're well, not worth discussing with, it's obviously nothing but negativity and... well, i'm not going to deal with this anymore. Just feel really happy about yourself, it's like i REALLY needed to feel worse about myself.

[Kate]

Originally Posted by thegurgi

Trust me, when you blame the plan, you're blaming the soldiers...

I don't mean to get in the middle of it, but I think when a person says he's not blaming the soldiers, he knows that he's not blaming the soldiers. This is not a thread where people tell each other who they are blaming.

Originally Posted by thegurgi

every one constantly insults where i'm from

No one's insulting the U.S. We're just expressing our opinions about the current administration, that is George W. and his "gang".

Originally Posted by thegurgi

i DO think we should be taking care of the other dictators, cause everyone SHOULD be free

Have you considered the fact that maybe people don't want to be free? That maybe the way things are suits them fine, and goes hand in hand with their religions and beliefs? Who gives America the right to "free" people? Planet Earth is not "Hollywood" for you. People actually die and actually suffer. Plus, America has plenty of it's own problems to sort out within its borders, likes education, economy, science, human rights, conservation... etc etc etc.

Originally Posted by thegurgi

It's not easy supporting this war

You don't have to support it if you don't want to, or if common sense tells you that this war is plain wrong. Have you thought about WHY everyone around you doesn't support the war? There might be a few reasons...

Originally Posted by thegurgi

we need to concentrate our efforts on helping the people

Yeah, of course America needs to sort out it's mess in iraq, but Kerry will do a better job at it. At least I hope he'll leave Iraqi people some of their oil so they won't go hungry.

Originally Posted by thegurgi

it's like i REALLY needed to feel worse about myself.

No one's trying to make you feel worse. We all love you for your contributions to this forum.

[thegurgi]

Originally Posted by katbeidar

Planet Earth is not "Hollywood" for you. People actually die and actually suffer.

You said that to the WRONG person, you do realise i spent half my life in a hospital. I've seen people die (including 2 of my best friends), i've seen people suffer. In fact, i have suffered, i know life isn't hollywood, i know life isn't perfect, and i don't want people to live that way. No one should. absolutely NO ONE, even if they don't know anything else, they should have a right to be able to BE that. I wasn't given that choice but i'm well off despite what i've been given, but they could HAVE that life, they should have the right to it, and they would if we would all DO something about it.

[luxxi]

Originally Posted by spyretto

And why should I take heed of the alleged "complaints" by someone like Al-Zarqawi ( who defies all laws of warfare, shows no respect for innocent human life at all and would go as far as to abduct children and behead them as "enemies of "Islam" were he able to ( we've already seen worse in Chechnya, haven't we? ). Such barbaric acts pertaining to the Middle Ages have no place in the civilised world. The problem is how you fight such wackos and psychos - oh yeah they're wackos and psychos alright. You don't drop a bomb and blow everything to smithereens, that's for sure. That would be a wacko reaction, indeed.
Who can deny that Islamic fundamentalism and extemism fuels such inhumane practices, while hard-line muslim law encourages acts that are simply barbaric and anachronistic?

And is Zarqawi only one who is fighting Americans? Far from it, he and his group is one very small part.

Originally Posted by spyretto

What kind of evidence do you have that the Iraqui people back the terrorist groups? Where? In Basra? Mosul? Badgad? Or in some areas that are not under the US and interim government's control yet? Who may be supporting the terrorist groups? Apparently those who have a reason to support them, those who must have lost the power they enjoyed under Saddam Hussein. I doubt whether the vast majority of Iraquis oppressed and imprisoned under Saddam Hussein would want to help either side. I gather they are simply intimidated by the continuing violence and I can't imagine they would side with either the Americans who they have every right to see as occupiers - that's what they appear to be in their eyes - or the insurgents.

I didn't say tey support terrorist groups. They are supporting insurgents. Where is proof? By the fact that insurgency is stil alive and kicking. If guerillas don't have support of population they loose quickly. If poplation is suporting them they thrive.

As for where. Sunni triangle (specially Faluja, Ramadi), Najaf, Sadr City. Basically everywhere where are no-go areas for occupation forces.

Originally Posted by spyretto

Gross stereotype. You see, one can't refrain from using stereotypes just to maintain one's arguments, innit??

What sterotypes? One invasion. can you deny that was part of the plan? Two. Puppet governemnt. What was Chalabi and his INC if not "government-in-exile" that was flown in to take control of country? Chalbi, the favourite of various neocons. Three. Bases. there were plans that US will retain control of several (air)bases to allow them to compeltly move out of Saudi Arabia.

[thegurgi]

just a little thing about the election, or rather an observation, well, more about the electees:

I think that bush and kerry are in essense the same person. Bush is that person squashed into a short little man, and kerry is the streched out tall, gangly man. Now, all we have to do is find the average man in between... hehehehe.

(i usually take this further, that bush and kerry have him tied up and locked in a closet in their shared apartment in Seattle, where they live together, for some reason)

[luxxi]

Originally Posted by katbeidar

Offtop:
It's not what you said, by how you said it. "Offended" is probably a bad choice of words, it was more like "upset". Never mind, just treat people's opinion with respect in the future.

Excellent. Make some general remarks to which I can't properly respond instead of being specific. How mature....

[spyretto]

Originally Posted by luxxi

And is Zarqawi only one who is fighting Americans? Far from it, he and his group is one very small part.

In numbers it may be small but in influence it may be large, judging from copycat terrorist groups who try the same methods. Al Zarqawi said he's taking orders from Al Qaeda, maybe the others can go and pledge their alliegiance too?

I didn't say tey support terrorist groups. They are supporting insurgents. Where is proof? By the fact that insurgency is stil alive and kicking. If guerillas don't have support of population they loose quickly. If poplation is suporting them they thrive.

As for where. Sunni triangle (specially Faluja, Ramadi), Najaf, Sadr City. Basically everywhere where are no-go areas for occupation forces.

I think you're making a hasty generalization and you base it on the fact that Iraq is diverse, and some areas influenced by insurgents are still resisting the American and Iraqui forces. As a matter of fact I believe that the majority would support the ensuing elections as long as they're conducted freely, and I wouldn't imagine Iraqui people in their majority would like to see another dictatorship - whether islamic fundamentalist or pure military - reinstated. Who knows, I might be wrong, and they still might prefer to live under the gun and under repression. It just base my view in commonsense but perhaps the commonsense of the Iraquis are different to our commonsense?

What sterotypes? One invasion. can you deny that was part of the plan? Two. Puppet governemnt. What was Chalabi and his INC if not "government-in-exile" that was flown in to take control of country? Chalbi, the favourite of various neocons. Three. Bases. there were plans that US will retain control of several (air)bases to allow them to compeltly move out of Saudi Arabia.

The stereotype consists in viewing all coalition efforts in Iraq as an attempt to control the area militarily and install their own "puppet" government, as you repeat time and again. Perhaps you should go back and read the statement by Bush I posted above. I prefer to see America's role as aiding in resolving crises around the world, not use the same ol' stereotype I find in your argument coz it's trite and anachronistic. If it wasn't for America's efforts the world would have degenerated into global anarchy and constant war some fifty years ago. And then, things like multinational coproration interest and globalization would count for very little.
You may all enjoy slamming America because you can, because they're always in the centre of attention and every action they do is scrutinised - unlike your beloved third-world regimes - but if you haven't realised already, America may be the reason for your well-being. I've come to realise It's so easy to blame America for every problem in the world cause they're an easy target and you can cover your own ass that way - I don't mean you, personally.

[freddie]

Originally Posted by haku

Wow, there is a Socialist Party in the US? I thought that was illegal or something, lol.

That would be good for the US and the rest of the word if that country was run by socialists for some time.

Maybe a communist party is. But the socialists are a regular part of the world politics. There are socialists in European Parlament as well.

[haku]

Originally Posted by freddie

There are socialists in European Parlament as well.

I knew that. The biggest party in France is the "Parti Socialiste".

By "good for the rest of the world", i meant that it would be a good thing for everyone if the US could have a *real* political alternative, instead of just Republicans and Democrats which are no alternative at all. In European countries, Republicans and Democrats woud be in the same right wing party. It seems that noone is left wing in the US. Socialists would make big improvements in social and environmental issues.

Originally Posted by staringelf

And I'm glad the EU has not decided to take similar actions to invade countries just like that. I'm proud of that. Because people can come together and fight for their rights too, here we had a dictatorship until 1974, but the people came together and fought, and there was a revolution - we also had a secret police controlign everyone's every move and word, but it was possible. Of course foreign power can also help through many ways, but one thing is *helping*, pacifically, the other thing imposing and invading and bombing everything.

I agree with that. It's always better when people free themselves.

When Portugal was under the dictatorship of Salazar (or the Generals that followed him, i don't know their names sorry), i'm sure a few European countries could have easily invaded Portugal and "free" the people. But at what price?
Invading the country would have required massive bombings of cities, causing thousands of civilian casualties. The country should have been occupied and run by foreign military forces for years, causing resentment in the Portuguese population.
What good would have come out of that?

Instead, Portuguese resistance groups ("secretly" supported by European democracies) have fought the dictatorship from the inside and have managed to overthrow the military dictators. It may have taken longer to overthrow the dictatorship that way, but in the end it caused less deaths for Portuguese, and most importantly, Portuguese people got the pride of freeing themselves, which is important for a nation.

[Unplugged]

Yeah, haku, exactly! What pride can any nation have in having some outsiders come and bomb the place and then "free" the country?

Sure, it did take a long time for us to achieve the revolution, but it's possible, we did it, so can others, and it's much better for a country to free itself and have proud in its revolution and its people than being run by outsiders

[haku]

Originally Posted by thegurgi

why is it that the world doesn't do anything about it? Why is it that the United States gives out more foriegn aid than any other country (maybe other than Japan)...

Here's some numbers from the OECD concerning the foreign aid given by the 22 most industrialized countries in the world.

The first number is the amount of aid (in millions of US dollars) given in 2003 by each country, the second number is what percentage of its GNP this aid represents.

United States - 15,791 - 0.14
Japan - 8,911 - 0.2
France - 7,337 - 0.41
Germany - 6,694 - 0.28
United Kingdom - 6,166 - 0.34
Netherlands - 4,059 - 0.81
Italy - 2,393 - 0.16
Canada - 2,209 - 0.26
Sweden - 2,100 - 0.7
Norway - 2,043 - 0.92
Spain - 2,030 - 0.25
Belgium - 1,887 - 0.61
Denmark - 1,747 - 0.84
Switzerland - 1,297 - 0.38
Australia - 1,237 - 0.25
Finland - 556 - 0.34
Ireland - 510 - 0.41
Austria - 503 - 0.2
Greece - 356 - 0.21
Portugal - 298 - 0.21
Luxembourg - 189 - 0.8
New Zealand - 169 - 0.23

So yes, with almost 16 billion dollars, the US is the largest contributor, but it only represents 0.14% of its GNP, which is actually the lowest percentage of all 22 countries. The US is in fact the country which makes the least effort comparatively to its wealth.

Norway at the opposite gives "only" 2 billion dollars, but it represents 0.92% of its GNP, a much bigger effort than the US.

Portugal, staringelf's country, gives 298 million dollars (which you may find ridiculous compared to the huge amount the US gives) but it represents 0.21% of its GNP, again a bigger effort than the US comparatively to its wealth.

Countries like France, Germany, and the UK, give almost half as much (in billion dollars) as the US, even though they are obviously far from being half as rich as the US.

So yes, the US is the largest contributor in raw money, but comparatively to their wealth, all other industrialized countries are more generous than the US.

[Unplugged]

Yes, haku that is true. And not that I need to prove anything, but Portugal also had a major contribution to help Timor Loro Sae become the nation that is today, Portugal was the main contributor who joined forces to stop East Timor people from having their freedom and human rights violated - and we didn't need any bombings. Portugal colaborated with the UN and with Indonesia so they would withdraw their military occupation from Timor, helped independence movement leader Xanana Gusmão to come out of prision and help in the creation of an independence plan, and through hard negotations between Portugal, the UN and Indonesia, a commitment was established to give back independence to Timor Loro Sae if the people voted for that in a referendum, which they did. And all of this was established through peaceful negotation.

And the US role in this? The saviour of the world's role, the World Police's role?
I quote:
"The United States -- as well as Australia and Britain -- has been complicit in this terror. The US has coddled Indonesia as a valuable ally in the war against communism and as a lucrative trading partner, providing Indonesia and its military with funding, training, and weapons. Despite the end of the Cold War, increasing international criticism of both Indonesia and its western supporters, and growing dissent in Congress over US policy on Indonesia, the relationship remains intact. "

more info here: http://www.motherjones.com/news/spec...timor/dossier/

So, other countries do contribute for peace too, even small ones like mine who have fewer resources. We are far from being the best, but does it really matter which country is "the best"? Not for me. Maybe for America it does, it needs to reaffirm itself constantly at any cost, God knows why. I think it's sad because it has everything to be a great nation, but it loses itself with greed and arrogance.
Personally, I am proud of my country's behaviour in this particular situation, but we also did many bad things in other situations and I will never be blind to say "Oh, can't you see we were only trying to help?" And I'm not using this example as a flag, as I said, but since thegurgi wants to play the poor victim which country is so fair and good and only tries to help, while the other ones are "all talk", I found it was important to mention this, just like haku found it was important to show those numbers, which speak for themselves. Showing "trophees" is certainly not my attitude nor my country's, as for America I'm not sure, but maybe the hollywood-like press conference with a guy saying "Ladies and Gentlemen: We got him!" and then the later footage of Saddam's medical examinations in humiliating condition speaks for itself. I am no way trying to generate hate against America, I think any kind of hate is wrong, but I will not shut up when I see arrogance and badly explained premises either.

[spyretto]

Speaking of Portugal, I had a nice port to celebrate the inevitable re-election of George W Bush. It's a fine wine, as sweet as the Greek sweet wine but with a touch of sourness for an aftertaste, and without the hangover effects. Apperitif wine still, wouldn't go with any food as far as I'm concerned.

Very nice indeed... cheers


If regimes like the Indonesian were in the position that the US are right now they would be 10 times worse...sorry, correction, 100 times worse. You can keep on pretending you split mosquitos yet swallow whole camels but that would never change the facts.

That goes for all anti-Americans out there like my friend luxxi, who's trying to pretend he's "fair", and see only "facts" but has something else on his mind. Get a grip on reality, dear.

As for the elections G. W. Bush is the best choice of the two. Kerry cannot guarantee Iraq's post war prosperity, and the world's security and he surely has no clue about domestic issues either. America didn't vote for Gore, there's no way they'll rectify that mistake by voting for someone as incompetent as John Kerry. Forget about it...capiche?

[luxxi]

Originally Posted by spyretto

In numbers it may be small but in influence it may be large, judging from copycat terrorist groups who try the same methods. Al Zarqawi said he's taking orders from Al Qaeda, maybe the others can go and pledge their alliegiance too?

If they pledge their allegiance than you will have a pont. Untl then no.

Originally Posted by spyretto

I think you're making a hasty generalization and you base it on the fact that Iraq is diverse, and some areas influenced by insurgents are still resisting the American and Iraqui forces.

And how big are those areas? Take for instance sunni triangle. Sunni resistance. Then you have Sadrists, shi'ias. Who had no love for Saddam yet went up in arms agaisnt US. Wonder why? And wonder why shi'ias in the south (where Brits are) was quiet all this time? You had insurection in Njaf yet Basa (second largest city) was quiet.

Originally Posted by spyretto

As a matter of fact I believe that the majority would support the ensuing elections as long as they're conducted freely, and I wouldn't imagine Iraqui people in their majority would like to see another dictatorship - whether islamic fundamentalist or pure military - reinstated. Who knows, I might be wrong, and they still might prefer to live under the gun and under repression. It just base my view in commonsense but perhaps the commonsense of the Iraquis are different to our commonsense?

Too bad that woun't happen. Look at Rumsfelds statements that elections might not be held in entire Iraq, but only in pacifies areas. Basically where people don't like US and make their displeasure show they woun't be allowed to vote.

Originally Posted by spyretto

The stereotype consists in viewing all coalition efforts in Iraq as an attempt to control the area militarily and install their own "puppet" government, as you repeat time and again.

So far little was shown this isn't a goal.

Originally Posted by spyretto

Perhaps you should go back and read the statement by Bush I posted above.

Because we all know that politicians never, ever lie in order to achieve their goals.

Originally Posted by spyretto

I prefer to see America's role as aiding in resolving crises around the world, not use the same ol' stereotype I find in your argument coz it's trite and anachronistic.

Crisis like brutal and nuclear armed dictatorship in North Korea, Balkan slaughterhouse in 1990s, civil war in Tajikistan, Armenian-Azerbaijan war, opressive rule of Taliban in Afghanistan, Rwandan massacres....?

Give me a break, US gets involved where there are interests to protect or gain, not where people suffer.

Originally Posted by spyretto

If it wasn't for America's efforts the world would have degenerated into global anarchy and constant war some fifty years ago. And then, things like multinational coproration interest and globalization would count for very little.

So because they did a good thing back then they have a blank cheque to do whatever they please now?

Originally Posted by spyretto

You may all enjoy slamming America because you can, because they're always in the centre of attention and every action they do is scrutinised - unlike your beloved third-world regimes - but if you haven't realised already, America may be the reason for your well-being. I've come to realise It's so easy to blame America for every problem in the world cause they're an easy target and you can cover your own ass that way - I don't mean you, personally.

If you put yourself in spotlight you will be scrutinised. If you claim you promote freedoms and democracy your support for opressive regimes like Saddam's and Pinochet's will be thrown at you.

[thegurgi]

Originally Posted by staringelf

but since thegurgi wants to play the poor victim which country is so fair and good and only tries to help, while the other ones are "all talk",

I love it when my words are twisted, i didn't say that other countries didn't do anything. Just that we did the most, and i don't understand why we are hated. Why do people hate Us? Shouldn't the world hated be the Chechyans or the Terrorists groups? I feel that everyone just focuses on the enemy. It's hard to justify this war, but you kind of have to cause it's happening. When we first invaded Iraq i was completely against it, but there's nothing that we can do about it NOW except hope for the best instead of focusing on the negative. That's all i've really been trying to say. The United States isn't the greatest country on the earth, and i'm sorry that it's influence pisses you all off so much, but i feel that this is the most fruitless arguement ever, what's done is done. Is everyone still pissed off about the Crusades or the Inquisition? Cause i think those events were a hell of a lot worse than what we're doing. And probably in 200 years this war will probably only be a paragraph or two in a high school text book.

Obviously, in this thread it seems more important to slander and hurt other people for HOW the argue and not the arguement itself. I've tried really hard to defend something despite my cold, stress from school and got nothing but what i feel to embarrassed. And i'm SEVERLY dissapointed in StaringElf, i can't believe he'd say those things to me... and i can barely think to handle this much longer. I think i'm a good moral person and it's just not fair for me to be treated this way because i think that something good can come out of this. Call me an optimist, i don't care, but i know from my life that even when things aren't perfect you can make the best of it all. Why am i the only one who cares about that?

[spyretto]

Originally Posted by luxxi

If they pledge their allegiance than you will have a pont. Untl then no.

Oh common. Their brutal/copycat methods shows that they would. Lets watch this space. So which ones do you classify as freedom fighters and which ones as terrorists? Lets say Al Queda/Jawhid & Jihad are terrorists. How about the other copycat groups?

And how big are those areas? Take for instance sunni triangle. Sunni resistance. Then you have Sadrists, shi'ias. Who had no love for Saddam yet went up in arms agaisnt US. Wonder why? And wonder why shi'ias in the south (where Brits are) was quiet all this time? You had insurection in Njaf yet Basa (second largest city) was quiet.

Sunni resistence? The Sunnis will support the elections and not you or anybody else can change that. Iraq will be a free country, whether you like it or not. Iraq will eventually be pacified.

Too bad that woun't happen. Look at Rumsfelds statements that elections might not be held in entire Iraq, but only in pacifies areas. Basically where people don't like US and make their displeasure show they woun't be allowed to vote.

His statements are directly related to the security question in Iraq. If such areas are not secure, election might not take place there. Nothing to do with what you claim. Elections will be free and legitimate give or take a few mishaps, in the same fashion they were held in Afghanistan.

Because we all know that politicians never, ever lie in order to achieve their goals.

Pure speculation. So far the US/coalition forces are acting for the benefit of the Iraqui people. If you think they want to control Iraq for their own interests it's your prerogative. Time will tell.

Crisis like brutal and nuclear armed dictatorship in North Korea, Balkan slaughterhouse in 1990s, civil war in Tajikistan, Armenian-Azerbaijan war, opressive rule of Taliban in Afghanistan, Rwandan massacres....?

Give me a break, US gets involved where there are interests to protect or gain, not where people suffer.

The US have not been idle as far as the North Korean issue is concerned. But as I said they do not pose a serious threat to world security at the moment. Their efforts are more towards putting pressure on the US/ South Korea for their own intererests. I don't think the North Korean regime poses a thread, if you do, well, it's your right. But you can't ignore the facts, nor deny reality.
NATO's intervention was vital for the Balkan issue, and they didn't even have a visible goal other than to stop genocide. Are you going to blame the Us for that too? What other country would make such sacrifice now? France? Germany? gimme a break. They don't want to be involved.

So because they did a good thing back then they have a blank cheque to do whatever they please now?

No, but why are you always critical of America's good-natured intentions? US soldiers are losing their lives as we speak for the freedom of the Iraqui people. Are you not greatful for that?

If you put yourself in spotlight you will be scrutinised. If you claim you promote freedoms and democracy your support for opressive regimes like Saddam's and Pinochet's will be thrown at you.

So what's your point? When did the US support the Saddam regime? Are you referring to the Iraq/Iran war? Are you aware of the fact that Homeini's regime posed a 10 times greater threat than Saddam's at that time? Are you now going to blame the US for the fact that Saddam Hussein later turned against his own people with mass murders, tortunes, genocide and posed a threat for the security of the whole region?

Find me a free Iraqui who can claim Saddam Hussein was better for Iraq and I'll rest my case. You won't find them.