Its true that the US is judged by a higher standard... and much in part to the ideology they preached about freedom and democracy... not only because they are a superpower.For the members who discuss Afghanistan:
I have obviously a complete other view on this issue, for several reasons. But I won’t go into that here since it would switch the topic into an other debate.
Salaam. A
Aldebaran - I would be interested in your views and I gather so might Xtisme given he was hounding me to start such a thread.
What to kick it off - but please please try to keep it calm, polite and factual (or at least referenced). This is very friendly advice from one who essentially agrees with a lot of your postings, if sometimes regret their tone. 
I think it is not exactly about being judged by a higher standard.
It is about being judged at their ability to support propagandized ideology by actions reflecting them.
Failior to do this is seen as the ultimate hypocrisy.
That is one of the problems the USA needs to face.
The lack of credibility caused by its double standards; the failior of the US to imply their own ideology on their own foreign policy, diplomacy and actions, is one of the major causes of frustration among a certain amount of the population in the MENA region. To name one example, but one that causes not only the USA problems.
Salaam. A
nqkarpov,
Well I would like to participate in such a discussion.
But when it comes to provide “reference”. It depends on what is meant by that. And I’m a bit in short of time the coming weeks. Maybe we could do this in October… it certainly can be interesting.
About the tone of my postings:
I know very well that I can come across as provocative. Not always meant to be yet it seems to be part of my (cyberspace) personality.
But I’m completely innocent and extremely harmless, suffering from a mild form of rare lunaticism.
Sooner or later people discover that which results in them approaching me with the mildness of human compassion.
Salaam. A
From Rashak Mani
Agreed, this WOULD be silly of me, had I actually ever said anything of the kind. Are you sure you are actually READING my posts?? If so, could you put in the section you interperet that I said such a thing as only France and Germany don’t want to send troops, etc? Maybe I miss typed something (its possible in my addmittedly lengthy posts that I made a mistake). Or maybe it doesn’t say what you think it says?
The POINT I was trying to make, is that the ISSUE is about control. Unless you are saying that if America stepped back the UN WOULD NOT send troops in, food, medicine, etc?? If thats not what you are saying (and if you are, cite please?), then the core issue is who is in charge of the opperation. THATS what I was saying. Don’t strawman me please. If you think that the UN will not send troops and assistance reguardless, then say that and back it up. My contention is that America wants to be in charge, and have the UN or other allied soldiers under her command. THe UN (and specifically France and Germany, as well as myriad other countries that are being asked to send soldiers) wants the UN in charge of all efforts. There are no alturistic motives here…its purely a power struggle, plain and simple. I’m not getting in to blame here…were I France or Germany (or any of the other countries balking at sending assistance, but especially them), I’d be damned if I’d help the Americans in this mess either. Do you NOW understand my point?
notquitekarpov, sorry if you felt I was hounding you. I was TRYING to stay on topic (such as it is) and not hijack this discussion into a whole other direction. I didn’t realize that I had posted anything of substance about Afghanistan, and didn’t realize you were mearly responding. My appologies. I wasn’t trying to be condescending or insulting to you, either, but we obviously disagree on the use of force, and on the actual events that transpired in Afghanistan. To my mind, it was fairly well established that the Taliban supported and assisted AQ willingly. Obviously its not to yours, thus we have a point of disagreement. The reason I wanted you to post, was I wanted you to get the chance to set up your OP with the events as YOU see them, what levels of force you thought would be appropriate, etc, so I could get a good idea of what you were talking about and then respond.
Aldebaran, I ask you for reasonable answers so we could DISCUSS these issues like grown ups, with a few cites to back up your positions, and you give me strawmen of my views (if you even read them fully) and more wild language and flames. I don’t think that a reasonable discussion is possible here, unfortunately. As you didn’t bother to actually discuss what I said in any detail (or coherently), I don’t feel the need to bother with whatever you were babbling about the UN, Iraq and such…god (and hopefully you) only know what you were getting at…I sure don’t. Maybe Rashak Mani can translate for you what you were getting at, as he seems to have some insight into what you are going on about. I honestly don’t have a clue what you are trying to say. As for a lack of impartiality and insight…well, funny you should say that. The irony is highly amusing.
-XT
xtisme. Ok re-read your post … it did seem at first glance you were critical of France and Germany… wasnt the case… sorry.
As for Aldebaran… I get part of what he wants… but the last post finishing in “mildness of human compassion” is beyond my grasp
(Just a bit back on the Ireland conflict thing… I think the US govt. never made much of an effort to stop money being sent to the IRA by its citizens… at least that was the impression I had.)
Without getting to involved and intending to make this my first and only post on this matter.
Aldy: you truly are one sad embittered and nasty individual.
Go in the name of God GO!! and take your bloody salaams with you.