>Nonsense. I guess a country that openly plans the destruction of another country is perfectly fine with you?

Of course not. But what has the US done to iraq? Isn't that exactly what you describe above?

>A country that supports and provides arms for terrorists?

If you mean iraq.. there is no evidence that Saddam was supporting the taliban or Al-quida. If refering to afghanistan, you'll have to keep in mind that the taliban are not Al-quida. In fact you'll be supprised to learn that the taliban do not have much to do with Al-quida. In fact, they don't like achother either.

And was the US not supporting the afghan resistance in the war with russia and supporting them with arms?

>It has almost reached the point where the war in Iraq is not between insurgents and the U.S. and Iraq forces or the Sunnis and the rest of the country but between Iran and the U.S. Venezuela is another story altogether. Sometimes you amaze me Walter - you are the first to 'demonize' the U.S. and yet you totally disregard the evil out there - I guess because it is not directed at you and the Netherlands...

I'm stunned again about how people talk about evil. Most often evil only exists in the eye of the beholder. What defines evil? You define evil present in countries like Iran and Venezuela, while they define the Evil as in the US. If you were born in one of those countries you'd describe evil in a much different way. Take a step back and look at the arguments and why they are making them.

Sure, we can agree upon the third reich of Hitler as beeing evil, but here again you have to watch out. What would we have thought right now, if hitler succeeded in killing every jew and created a new world order with a 'volkswagen' and a job for each and every citizen in its empire? We'd probably would not have defined him as evil, but as a hero that succeeded in overcomming the depression of the 30's of the previous century.

And history of course is scattered with examples alike. The winner is always right is a rule that is applicable here. Napoleon is thought of being an evil man, but if you deepen yourself into what he accomplished and the political changes he triggered, you'll have a total different view. If he would have succeeded he'd probably would be labeled as the greatest european in history.

And what to think of the romans. Were they evil or not..... ??

As for 'demonizing' the US. I don't think in those terms. I don't believe in world powers doing charity. The US is an empire that will do what is neccesary to protect and expand it. And it is not a world power because of all the great people that live there or the 'best' or most developped nation on earth. It is because they control the global economics (through oil and the dollar), nothing more, nothing less.

And for protecting its empire it has to deal with the threats. If a world power is threatend, it will try to deal with it and if neccesary it will do so with dirty tricks. The iraq war is one of them. The motives really are about the protection of its empire, while the motives were presented as something totally different and more acceptable to the general public.

It is the way it works, always has worked and will work in the future. You'll have to accept that. (Advise, read 'The rise and fall of great empires' by Paul kennedy).


Iran is an islamitic country which chooses to live by their own rules. That is perfectly fine with me as long as human rights are reasonably respected and they are not starting war leading to massive amounts of deaths.


I don't know much about Venezuela but it also has a strong leader that has a certain vision (which is necceary for a country to progress). I certainly can see that Chavez wants a stronger economy and better deals on oil.