inally I do not condone terrorism, however I do understand that when you are treated like shit by the big guys, eventually extrem reactions will happen, and as the saying goes, "WE RAP WHAT WE SOW", and in the case of the US this is becoming more apparent.

Name the specific action the United States did, that was unique, that you believe earned it 9/11 in response? How about a set of actions uniquely American.

I asked when has the US deliberately attacked innocent civilizans, which was answered with "when hasn't it?" I'm sure that many will agree with me when I say that it sounds as though that implies that hte US has deliberately attacked innocent civilians since its birth and continues to do so.
As for Canada not being attaccked by terrorists, I'm sure it's the same reason as to why Mexico and some tiny insignificant nation in Africa hasn't been attacked by terrorists. They have no influence. I think this is obvious.

Well, obviously the US doesn't always attack civilians, I think the point attempting to be made Messy Buu, was that in the past, the United States has attacked and killed civilians, something you claimed had never happened.

Not once did I say that the US has not attacked and killed civilians, but if we're going to use the past to criticize the present US, then I can gladly say that anything the US has done does not compare to the evils of Europe. Therefore, rather than criticize the US, I think we should focus on ridding the world of the evil that is Europe.

Civilians die in war. What is the point of arguing that?

The United States certainly didn't target civlians in Iraq.

Interesting reply, in regard to thugs taking over countries, lets explore, Nicarauga. The People of the country vote for a government, your country does not like them, or more correctly they do not cow tow to Washington, Your government send support to a rebel force, in the form of arms, money and advisers, you assist in the overthrow of the said democratically elected government, and in turn a thug takes power, and Washington is happy, not to mention, a not so subtle warning to the people of this country, at their next election about the folly of their ways, in who they may choose. The end result was a bloodthirsty repressive Dictator, who drove the economy into the ground. As for soverignty, well just as with the US most other countries do not believe that another country has the right to invade, that's soverignty, just as the US was rightfully upset when attacked by terroists.

Then again with the aggorance of the US I suppose you feel that you can pretty do what you like when you like. This is really setting up a great future for future generations, one where as a nation you will be less secure both on the level of safty of its citizens and economy. But I suppose if ine puts their head in the sand then all is OK he Brad.

I should add that civilians do die in war, they are also killed by muderous Dictators, Just like Chile, face it Brad the US does not have a good record, and no matter what spin you want to put on it, thats the way it is, and with many countries finding that they oppose US forign policy and are not willing to cow tow, I suppose you could say that thats the way of the world.

Of course if countries like the US where prepared to look at why there is resentment towards them they may find out a way to stop terror,, because killig terroists does not stop them it just increases resentment and thus the threat, what you need to realise is every action does not lower the threat, it increases it. Then again I suppose that suites the amarican psychi. At least that is the way you would portray it, you know slow to anger, but piss us off and we will make you pay. Seems to fit with the way of thinking of terroists.

As for your comments Messy Buu, Europe has had a not to squeky history as has most of us, however we are not discussing the past we are discussing the now.

We are discussing the past though, which is why we are discussing past events of the US.

We are discussing a point which is yet to be properly Debated, that being the US administrations complete lack of recpect for other countries soverignty, You guys can debate the past and the present till the cows come home , you can also use the defense of others doing this, however it does not address the point at hand that is that in the past and right up to the present The US Government has violated the soverignty f others, sometimes directly sometimes VIA its agents, and by this I mean , supporting countries which do the same , that being violating the soverognty. The truth of the matter is the US Iss the largest Militaryt and Economic power in the world, and one would expect that they would lead by example, instead we have seen the opposite.
For me to list the actions of the US during the last century up to the present day would take up a very large space, so I refrain and give examples, however I did not start a debate to list these actions my point was and still is your lack of respect for others and the use of you power to facilitate this, and the ensuring reactions from others, to make a benign comment that the reason others are not attacked is because they do not have as much influence, is to say the least a total wank.
A good example would be, the US has pretty much along with France and the UK exploited the Arab States for most of the last century and continue to do so, they have through their agent bening Israel, terroised most Arab states, . The uk has for more than a century held power of Nth Ireland, France in Algeria, all these countries have suffered at the hands of terroists. Point being you build resentment through lack of respect and something will give.

Brad as for what did the US do so wrong to incur the attack of 9/11, lets see, military of Israel to secure dominence in the Arab states to secure flow of cheap oil, exploitation of these state again for oil, by supporting various governments, for instance, the Shah of Iran, a thug by anyones standards, support of Israels , murderous attacks on Lebanon, and massacre of many citizens, these are actions of the past which are still going, not to mention the US's very obviuos support of Iraq, a sworn enemy of the extremist Al Quadia. Then you ask me why do Muslims and Arabs feel so agrieved by the US that would attack the US.

Of Course if we want to go on discussing the past up to the present, lets look at Central and South America, where do I start Panama, Chile, Niaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, not to Mention Cuba, who did not become a threat until pushed into this position by continued attackes by the US, and are still being Victimised to this day for no other reason than the fact they have a communist government, which nationalised industry. Of course being the great Military power that they are we should all be really scared of them.

So whilist it is true that some european countries have been guilty of the same, it is the US the Dominent and only Superpower, which uses its might the most and ignors Un conventions and the general worlds community to do as it wishes.

It always strikes me a interesting the attitude of the US and UK inparticular to what is the soverign right of nations, and their patronising attitude to the rest of the world.

Maybe it's me, but I think that the Arabs who have terrorized Israel are as guilty as Israel in spreading the terror in the Middle East. We have supported Israel but have we ever given them license to do what they desire in the Middle East?
It also seems that people are criticizing the present US government for things in the past, such as supporting anti-Communist governments. My only advice to that is to get with the times, or let's judge all present governments by past actions no matter how different times were before. Perhaps it was wrong for the US to fight against communism with the zealous it did, but unless I'm mistaken, the US is no longer doing that.

I would just add a further comment of the issue of soverignty and the question of thugs.

No one and I include myself in this comment , would ever deny that in cases of obvious violations of human rights others should help, however it is more than in most cases this is not the case.

In the main it is for totally selfish reason that countries do what they do, and in many cases the thugs which have commited these crimes, have at sometime been on the payroll of the same governments which have deposed them.

It would be nice if we all helped countries when they need help and left them alone when they don't however this is not the case, as Brad said its the the way of the world.

And in most cases the reason behind violations of soverignty is for installing people who will allow the large economies to prosper at the expense of others, and this is the way of the world, however with the advent of technoligies in communication, people are becoming more aware of what is true and what is spin, ultimatly this will be what brings down the monopoly of power currently being exercisewd by the US and other like minded countries.

Sadly the reality for the US is that whether you agree with me or not, and we can argue this point till the cows come home, the reality is that unlike yourselves and me, who prefer to debate, there are people who will feel far more maligned and disenfranchised, and these are the people who will terroise countries like the US and Australia as a result, and until we move past retribution, and decide to look behind the reasons why in a more objective way, will we solve the problem of terror, and eliminate it. Sadly it will not be eliminated by killing off the perpatorators, as they become marytres to the cause and inspire more to do the same. Seems simple and yet we all know it is not , but if we fail to change we will reap what we sow, even if we do feel vindicated in our actions.

"although I do know that Vietnam was France's fault to begin with."

Saying that the Viet-Nam war was France's fault in simply absurd and fuelled by the recent American anti-French sentiments.

Sure, France fought after WWII to regain colonial control over Viet-Nam (The Vichy government had given it to Japan). But Ho Chin Minh's armies successfully drove the French out of the country.

Furthermore, after the division of Viet-Nam between the South and North, there were scheduled election in June 1956 but Eisenhower never allowed them since he knew the South Viet-Namese would vote in a great majority for the Communists.

Thus, the Viet-Nam war was COMPLETELY the American's fault. Viet-Nam should have been unified right after WWII, communist or not. The hypocrisy of a democratic power refusing to acknowledge the people's wishes and choice is astonishing and part of the dubbed "American Hypocrisy" of the past 50 years.

"Perhaps it was wrong for the US to fight against communism with the zealous it did, but unless I'm mistaken, the US is no longer doing that."

The U.S. government is still greatly scared of communist regimes around the world and still intimidates other nations regardless of the population's wishes

For example, in the 2002 Bolivian presidential elections, Americans tried to stop the spread of the popularity of Evo Morales, leader of the Movement Toward Socialism. The American ambassador to Bolivia, Manuel Rocha stated a few days before the elections that if the Bolivians voted for Morales the United States would cut off foreign aid and close its markets to the country.

Cutting off foreign aid and closing its markets to a country is nothing to taking that country over. I don't see why people would have a problem with that, unless they expect the US to give them support without any expectations. The US isn't a charity.

The Arabs who terroise Israel are the one who have had their country stolen, lively hood destroyed, families murded, and homeland divided to a point that it is impossible to even grow food, or get to work, what did they do to Israel, nothing except live where the Israelies wanted to, and while we are on this subject, it is worth mentioning that every single proposal for peace made by the arab states in relation to Israels position in the Middle East has been vetoed by Israel and the US alone.

Messy Buu, it is not the issue of what the US has done, the issue is that future administrations learn from mistakes in the past and find more constructive ways to address the problems we all face, one being Terroism, others being putting peace before political gains and selfish regional power gains for one country or another.

Until large nations such as the US are seen to be doing this other nations will never be compelled to follow when they can point the finger at the US and argue that they do this as well, nor will we be able to get power brokers in Muslim states to work with us if we do not first show a willingness to be fair to all parties and respect their cultures and soveriginity, there comes a time when someone has to make a stand and become the leader, and lead by example, currently the example is not sending out the message which will bring all parties to the table.

I'm sure if Evo Morales would have been elected president, there would have been some kind of coup with American influences in the years following; a bit like Hugo Chavez, the president of Venezuela, experienced in 2002 (and PLEASE, don't tell me the americans had nothing to do there).