Make your own free website on
The BCC Archives
May 2003 - Response to a Letter
Commentary March 27, 2007
Commentary August 27, 2006
July 4 2006 - Commentary
June 29, 2006 - Commentary
April 22, 2006 Commentary
April 02, 2006 Commentary
August 09, 2005 Commentary
September 21, 2004 Commentary
September 05, 2004
September 04 2004
September 03, 2004
May 02, 2004 - Commentary
January 03, 2004 - commentary
December 31, 2003 - commentary
December 29, 2003 - commentary
December 02, 2003 - commentary
November 26, 2003 - Commentary
November 08, 2003 - Commentary
October 26, 2003 Commentary
October 12, 2003 - Commentary
October 04, 2003 - Commentary
September 27, 2003 Commentary
Septmember 21, 2003 - Commentary
September 15, 2003 - Commentary
September 04, 2003 - Commentary
September 01, 2003 - Commentary
August 27, 2003 - Commentary
May 2003 - Response to a Letter
August 25, 2003 commentary

I have had a good part of the train ride home to thinking on how to respond your statement.  Yes, it was in part a bit showmanship on the part of President Bush, what politician wouldn't? That being said herein lays the difference between Hussain and the President.  First off the President is beloved by many here in this country, not withstanding some of those on the Looney left coast.  The same case could not be said of Saddam. All of his so called forays into the midst of the crowd were certainly more staged than any political event here in the states. Even Hillary's news conferences are less contrived.  Point 2. If you have ever seen Saddam in public he is always accompanied very closely by his goons. On the USS Lincoln the secret service was no doubt there, but not exactly in evidence. 


Ok moving on to how the rest of the world sees the US. Frankly I don't care. However, it is a sad sad thing that they see us as conquerors because nothing is further from the truth. IF the United States were as they see us, (and I seem to note that many of those nations are not even close to a democracy), then most of the world would be a US Territory by now.  I will give a quick history lesson.


Had the fortunes of war gone a bit more in the favor of the US during the war of 1812, then many parts of your own nation would be part of the US. During the War with Mexico, while the US received huge concessions from the Mexican government after they had taken Vera Cruz and successfully marched on to Mexico City. The fact remained that there was STILL a Mexico left for the Mexican government to govern. Hardly the stamp of a conqueror.  Fast forward to the end of the Spanish-American war. It can be correctly argued that during that period of time the US was in fact becoming a colonial power with the acquisition of the Philippines, Cuba, and Puerto Rico. Yet less than 50 years later both the Philippines and Cuba were granted independence. I might add that both countries were given and left with a democratic form of government. Maybe not a perfect one but one none the less.  PR, is still a US commwealth as is the V.I. and American Samoa.  Yet every few years they vote as how they wish to remain are always given the opportunity to change that status to either statehood or independence it seems to me that they chose what they feel works best for them.  The key word here is CHOSE, as they have the same rights as ANY American.  OK FF again. Had the US so chosen FRANCE, GERMANY, (along with a host of other nations in Western Europe)  AND JAPAN,  would still be US Provinces at the end of WWll. And yet we chose instead to instill the concept of liberty and democracy in many of those nations, not to mention the rebuilding of them with US TAXPAYER DOLLARS.  The US is responsible for the end of the cold war with the FORMER evil empire of the USSR.  Had it not been for the US, all of Korea would be like N. Korea,,,,starving. Yes there are some dark episodes in US as history as well, but on the whole wherever we went we tried hard to leave it a better place than we found it. Again hardly the mark of conquerors. I could go on, but I believe it isn't necessary.  NO SIR, we are NOT conquerors! We are lovers of liberty, who are willing to sacrifice our own to help in the liberation of others. We joy in the role of being the GARUNTEERS OF LIBERTY, AND THE PROTECTORS OF LIBERTY. Not only ours but anyone anywhere that would ask us for help or need it.  The same cannot be said of many nations of the world.  Who seemingly care little for their OWN people let alone others. 


Catpn, sorry, but ks has a valid point as well.  For too long nations such as your own have been getting a free ride on protection. Your government, which is a socialist democracy has coddled your countrymen with cradle to grave care in almost every aspect of your life. And why not, you all don't spend a dime on a military. The same can be said of France and others in Europe.  As of this afternoon the Pentagon announced that they were going to remove the 17th armored division from Germany. The government there howled how it would cause economic hardships for the residents that live around the military base there and might result in the loss of some 250 jobs. Sorry, but that is the nature of things.  As I said we are not conquerors, if we were there would not be a Germany to worry about losing 250 jobs. 


I will leave this with my favorite quote by a famous American Teddy Roosevelt I am sure he might have used it a great deal if the need had arose during his Presidency or if he were president today:


" I speak softly but I carry a big stick"