venstresida.net

Comment 2:
Another couple of words about Arafat. My entire point was that the current treatment of Arafat is not at all different from the treatment of the state of Israel, as the violent Irgun/Stern terrorism past of its founders is now forgotten. Then one can naturally discuss possible alternatives for Middel-East history until one gets blue in the face, that is something completely different.

Then to the lefts so-called anti-Americanism. It is my firm belief that the foreign policy of any country (not just the USA) is mainly formed in such a way that it serves the self-interests of the forces in power in that particular country.

Thus I believe that f.ex. the French and Russian opposition to the Iraq war was also founded in their regional interests, as they had many of the oil-contracts in Iraq before the invation.

The only reason that the US is getting an earful from 90% of the world population, is that at the current time in history the US is the single most dominant global force. If we go back a couple of decades, the Soviet Union was just as bad in its part of the world as the US was in f.ex. Latin-America. If we go further back, the British, French and German were spreading death over much of Africa, not to forget the Belgian king Leopold in the Congo, and one could generally make the list as long as one would like.

So it is not a criticism of the US in particular, but a criticism of egotistical use of force in general to protect ones own strategic and economic interests.