# News Is the U.S. a global dictator?

## Is the U.S. a global dictator?

15 vote(s)
45.5%
2. ### no

18 vote(s)
54.5%
1. Dec 21, 2003

### bloodsucker666

The U.S. has always tried to achieve global domination barring the
causes the motive is the same primarily being communism ,then racism
and now in the name of drugs and terorism .can any one tell me when is the "war on terrorism", end ? after the destruction of world peace ? or after world gets into pieces .U.S. rather george wishes to bring smile upon his people which would cost him to destroy all the terresterial life barring america

How can any one without offering an insult to the common sense deny the fact that the united kingdom is blindly supporting the U.S???

2. Dec 21, 2003

### Jonathan

There are 60 some other countries also blindly following the US. But I'm sure some nutjob on the net and three immoral countries that have been proven to have been sleeping with Saddam's wallet know better than them.
The war on communism ends when all communism is gone.
The war on racism ends when there is no racism.
The war on drugs end when there are no more dangerous drugs.
The war on terrorism ends when there is no more terrorism.
The last three should have had no rememberable beginning (commmunism hasn't been around forever), and they will have no end, there will always be evil in this world, until the very End, (which will be caused by God, not the US, thank you very much).

3. Dec 21, 2003

### kat

Destroy world peace? Exactly what world are you talking about that has "world peace"? Certainly not mine! give me a break!

4. Dec 21, 2003

### Andy

I look at the US as trying to be the Global policemen, nobody likes them but what would the place be like without them?

5. Dec 21, 2003

### MHills

The US certainly ignored the UN (as well as several other nations)when they attacked Iraq. They(Bush and company) obviously care little about the Iraqi people. And above all, the rest of the world can only participate when the US can't do it alone or to clean up the mess afterwards. Above all that, they seem to ignore the real problem: the violence and terror in Israel.

Conclusion: the US are the global policemen (as Andy already stated) and they do it in a lousy manner

6. Dec 21, 2003

### Andy

How many police officers do you like?

7. Dec 21, 2003

### Nommos Prime (Dogon)

The "Greater Threat"

Because of the sheer destructive power of it's arsenal of WMDs, it is the global dictator.
It is not a global "policeman".
The position of a policeman implies that one makes at least a token effort to uphold the law (although there are corrupt cops).
If anything, the US is the global criminal, or global dictator.

I see the "greater threat" though;
The US is embarking on dominating the high-ground. Total domination of our near-Earth space is the next goal for the US military. We've seen the NSA send Deep Space Probes out past the orbit of Neptune. Secret deals have already been done with the Russians, Chinese and British regarding exploiting the Earth's immediate neighbourhood.
Whether these relationships will turn out to be the standard "US allies relationship", like Australia's "Joint Space Defence Research Facilities", remains to be seen.

8. Dec 22, 2003

### Jonathan

Nommos Prime (Dogon), you're crazy, and I don't understand why Zero hasn't blocked you or something yet.
If these deals are secret, then how do you know about them, oh Great Paranoid Foolish One?
MHills, this doesn't make sense:
Saddam has gone on the record countless times saying that the first chance he gets he will destroy Israel, so taking Saddam out does seem to help a little, even if it would be another thirty years before he actually did anything. Taking him out will stabilize the region in the long run, as can be shown by the fact that when in power he invaded neighbors, but he can't do that when out of power. We know that Saddam was fostering terrorists, since he was one that happened to run a country. The war on terror, the war on drugs, and the war on the former Iraqi gov't all help stabilize the region eventually.
Andy summed it up best, no one likes cops. We're all innocent aren't we? But you love them when they cuff the guy that tried to kill you. Two days later, if a cop thinks you're speeding and pulls you over when you weren't and wastes your time, you'll hate them all over again. It probably wouldn't cross your mind that the only reason youy are around to be annoyed by them is that they helped you before. Let's face it, if the US was a completly isolaionist country for all of history, we'd all be dead several times over by now. First Nazis would take over. Then the Commies. And intermixed with various anarchies inbetween and popping up now and then. With out the US the world would be screwed.

9. Dec 22, 2003

### bloodsucker666

So if u call the right to self defend oneself as the the act of terrorism then son u know little about politics. If the U.S has attacked iraq for WMD then it's job has ended after saddam has been captured i find no good reason as to why the U.S army should be placed in iraq for the next one second !when you are getting pro saddam attacks post saddam capture does that not enlight u r moron mind that saddam was one of the very liked leaders u can't win laurels all over the world AS U R SO CALLED DUBYAMAN {georgy}is winning! u bet!Not only dybya i guess every american president has done some very GOOD gestures to maintain world peace if we date back during the GULF WAR the U.S had offered help to iraq by lending them weapons and inturn the iranian and kuwaitain army was helpedby letting them know the strategic locations of the iraqi army i can sight as many instances as u would like to "BRO" to uneveil the global dictatoring polici of the very great "WORLD POWER".

kid i guess the main motive behind this and every attack is to achieve global domination that's it. u need fuel for u r army and iraq is the reserve bank from where u r getting it got that ![zz)]

so one could have expected the alien army to leave afghanistan after the establishment of democracy but they never did!u know y sunny ??coz they need to have control over central asia in the event of crisis!
[b(]
got the cheap poltics of the very famous "WORLD POWER" Killing innocent people women and children is the war on terrosim for the US.
hey forgot to tell u man can u ever imagine the "world power"denying the right to reconstruct iraq to one of it closest allies that's FRANCE ,GERMANY AND OTHER COUNTRIES so is it neccessary that one should be DESTRUCTIVE to CONSTRUCT SOMETHING !
[b(] ????
KID i guess u need to do a lotta answering !!!
blood!!!

10. Dec 22, 2003

Staff Emeritus
For what it's worth, the rate of US soldiers killed by Iraqis has gone down from pretty close to 1 a day in the period from the "victory" up to the capture of Saddam, to more like 1 a week since the capture. Of course that says nothing about what will happen next.

As to why Iraq, I think the neocon's original plan was to conquer the weakest Arab state(Iraq) first and then use that as a base to conquer or cow the rest, the purpose being to deny Arab government support for the terrorists, specifically al Qaeda.

This of course has not worked. Not only has Iraq not rollled over and played dead, but the biggest supporter of al Qaeda turns out to be Saudi Arabia, sitting on top of all that oil we desperately need. But politicians (Australian ones too) don't like to say I was wrong, and now they are trying to be "defenders of liberty" and brag of getting rid of Saddam, who was, let's not forget, about the evilest character since Idi Amin and Pol Pot.

But world domination? Fuggedaboudit. We haven't got the military for it, and the US public is not going to OK the draft anytime soon.

11. Dec 22, 2003

### Staff: Mentor

World domination allegations have always cracked me up considering the fact that the US has gotten smaller since the end of WWII.

Of course the usual response to that is that either we have a lot of puppets (laughable considering our obvious lack of control over the UN) or that there is some supersecret world government no one except the woowoos knows about.

12. Dec 22, 2003

### MHills

Jonathan,
my statement about Israel had nothing to do with Saddam or Iraq(just to make it clear), what I meant was that the US don't seem to care about the terroristic attacks and violence(not only on the Israelians but also on the Palestinians by the Israelian army) that happen every day.
Why do you think he wants to destroy Israel? Because the Palestinian people is suppressed by Israel without Israel ever being sanctioned by the UN(because of the continuous support given by the US). If the US want to create real stability in the area, they should solve the root cause. If Bush could create peace and stability in Israel(on condition that both parties are treated equally),this would be a breakthrough for peace in the whole region.
Getting rid of Saddam is only a solution for the near future. Who knows what the future brings, maybe the next dictator is already waiting for an opportunity to seize power? Don't forget Saddam was considered the good guy earlier.

13. Dec 22, 2003

### MHills

This site to illustrate the quote.
There is a clear trend in this matter, the U.S are dominating space more and more as time goes by. Soon they will be so far ahead of the rest of the world, they can't be caught up anymore(if not so already).
I do not believe in those secret deals however. I also wonder why the NSA would send probes out to past the orbit of Neptune. [?]

Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
14. Dec 22, 2003

### pelastration

US has not only nukes and a perfect military machine but also a world-dominance by Internet, servers, ... and your PC ... and all these PC's in all those governments worldwide. NSA has all codes of all software including your encryption systems. Look to your computer and look to CIA's/NSA most powerfull spionage machine. Your on file baby! And we even write the files ;-)
And me too!

15. Dec 22, 2003

### Nommos Prime (Dogon)

NSA Deep Space Probes

Posted by Jonathan;
“Nommos Prime (Dogon), you're crazy, and I don't understand why Zero hasn't blocked you or something yet.”
Posted by Mhills;
“I also wonder why the NSA would send probes out to past the orbit of Neptune.”

Here’s proof the NSA has been involved in the US space program since it’s inception;
http://www.users.wineasy.se/svengrahn/trackind/Deepspac/Deepspac.htm
“In the early sixties the United States created a sophisticated system of ground stations to monitor the flights in the Soviet lunar and planetary exploration program. This was a joint effort between NSA, Norad, DIA's Defense Special Missile and Astronautics Center, CIA's Office of Elint and Foreign Missile and Space Analysis Center.”

And, the NSA helped to obtain the first pictures from space. These pictures did not come from a US spacecraft. They were STOLEN (or intercepted) utilising NSA technology;

“During the flights of Zond 1 and 2 the US system still was not able to track in deep space, but did track just after injection. That tracking data was sent to the US for determination of the trajectory. Also, during the Zond 1 and 2 flights the US succeeded in picking up the uplink commands! The location of the uplink monitoring station is in the original article, but blacked out in the declassified copy of the article. However, it is mentioned in (2) that the capability to monitor the uplink was lost while Venera 9 and 10 were en route to Venus. The probes were launched on 8 and 14 June 1975 and beginning in July 1975 all U.S. signals intercept operations were suspended (4), due to a U.S. arms embargo against Turkey because of its invasion of Cyprus. Thus, it seems probable that the uplink monitoring station was in Turkey.”

“Luna 8 was observed by Asmara to decelerate during descent, but not enough for a soft landing. During the flight of Luna 9, Asmara, Jodrell Bank, Naval Research Laboratory and The Royal Radar Establishment were all listening. The US sensors also picked up the pictures and produced printouts of them, just like those of Jodrell Bank, but stamped SECRET!”

US Department of Defense News Release, dated January 1964!
http://www.users.wineasy.se/svengrahn/trackind/Deepspac/Stoneh.htm
“The new equipment will expand Kagnew's communications research capability and will
permit scientific measurement of unusual transmission characteristics in outer space communications research.”

Another classic from Sven (and another link to the Lake Vostok antennas – which I have already revealed the coordinates for on another thread);
http://www.svengrahn.pp.se/trackind/TVostok/TVostok.htm

NSA Deep Space Probe Launches;
http://www.rense.com/ufo6/nsaprob.htm
http://www.ufocity.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=2092
The USAF approach;
http://www.skywatch-international.org/usafufo.htm

And the NSA also controls ECHELON through facilities such as Pine Gap;
http://baltimorechronicle.com/spot_sep98.html
“Abolition 2000 caucus member Loring Wirbel ( Iwirbel@igc.apc.org ) explained the purpose of the satellite destroyed Aug. 12: an “Advanced Vortex satellite managed by the National Reconnaissance Office on behalf of the National Security Agency--hardly works in terms of U.S. or global security. Its tasks have turned away from telemetry studies and order-of-battle analysis, and toward greater and greater broadband interception of civilian communications.”

And, remember Polar Lander? The Defense imagery analysts (NSA) were certainly looking at the Mars photos. Why?
http://www.floridatoday.com/news/space/stories/2001a/mar/spa032701b.htm [Broken]
“NIMA interpreters, who daily examine scores of spy satellite photographs, said pictures show the Polar Lander made it to the Martian surface in one piece. They have also picked out the probe's parachutes and protective shell. NASA, however, says the analysts have confused the spacecraft with interference from the Mars Global Surveyor's cameras.”http://www.enterprisemission.com/mpl.htmIn [Broken] a surprising development, a recent Space.com story has revealed that a highly secretive arm of the US intelligence community may have found the long lost Mars Polar Lander intact on the Martian surface.

Its nice to know I am not the only crazy one out there.
Sven is a genius. Jonathan, you are not.

Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
16. Dec 22, 2003

### Staff: Mentor

Re: NSA Deep Space Probes

[giggle]

This thread went off the deep end fast.

17. Dec 22, 2003

### Nommos Prime (Dogon)

More Craziness

Here is some more info from crazy land (actually the US government).

The DOD’s space budget is classified by the Director of Central Intelligence;
http://www.ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/Science/st-57.cfm?&CFID=11737616&CFTOKEN=93702398#_1_13
“NASA and DOD Space Budgets
The majority of U.S. government space funding goes to NASA and DOD. The accompanying table shows NASA and DOD space funding, but must be used cautiously. Tracking the DOD space budget is difficult since space is not specifically identified as a line item in the DOD budget. OMB and GAO provided CRS with DOD space funding figures through FY1995 including funding for both unclassified and classified DOD space programs. However, in 1996, the Director of Central Intelligence decided for the first time to classify the NRO funding figure so total figures for DOD space spending were not available for more than a year. In the summer of 1997, the Administration finally released a number for the total DOD FY1996 space budget, $11.5 billion, but at the same time revised numbers downward for FY1992-1995 without explanation. This table shows the data as provided in the FY1997 Aeronautics and Space Report of the President (published in 1998), with additional data from DOD for its total space budget for FY1996 through FY2000 and projections through FY2005. DOD's final space funding level for FY2001 and its request for FY2002 are not yet available. NASA received$14.25 billion for FY2001; the FY2002 request is $14.5 billion. NASA's out-year projections as shown in the chart are from NASA's FY2002 budget request. All NASA figures include aeronautics funding, approximately$500 million-$1 billion a year in recent years.” NRO and NIMA; “It's overall finding and conclusion was that NRO requires the personal attention of the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Director of Central Intelligence and must remain a strong, separate activity focused on innovation. The Commission warned that without such support, significant intelligence failures could result. NRO's budget is classified, but is thought to be on the order of$6-7 billion a year.”
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/R?d106:FLD002:@1 [Broken](106+120)

A nice report from GAO “Space Exploration: Power Sources for Deep Space Probes”;
“GAO noted that: (1) federal laws and regulations require analysis and
evaluation of the safety risks and potential environmental impacts
associated with launching nuclear materials into space; (2) as the
primary sponsor of the Cassini mission, NASA conducted the required
analyses with assistance from the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Department of Defense (DOD);”

And;

“For example, in fiscal year 1998, NASA and DOD will invest $10 million for research and development of advanced solar array systems, and NASA will invest$10 million for research and development of advanced nuclear-fueled systems.”
Gee, the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy intimately involved with Deep Space Probes. Surprised?
http://www.ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/Science/st-57.cfm?&CFID=11737616&CFTOKEN=93702398#_1_10
“Military Space Programs
The creation of NASA was a deliberate step by President Eisenhower to separate military and civilian space activities. Among other things, he wanted to stress that the United States was interested in the peaceful uses of space, but recognized that space had military applications as well. The 1958 National Aeronautics and Space Act specified that military space activities be conducted by the Department of Defense (DOD). The Air Force is DOD's executive agent for most space programs. The intelligence community (coordinated by the Director of Central Intelligence) makes significant use of space-based intelligence collection capabilities, and participates in managing satellite reconnaissance programs through the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), an agency within DOD. NRO builds and operates intelligence collection satellites, and collects and processes the resulting data. The data are provided to users such as the National Security Agency (NSA) and the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA).

How to organize DOD and the intelligence community to work effectively on space matters has been an issue for several years. Congress established commissions to review the NRO as part of the FY2000 intelligence authorization act (P.L. 106-120), and the U.S. National Security Space Management and Organization (the "Rumsfeld Commission") in the FY2000 DOD authorization act (P.L. 106-65). A commission was also created to review NIMA. The reports of these commissions are discussed below.
DOD and the intelligence community rely increasingly on satellites for reconnaissance, surveillance, early warning, weather forecasts, navigation, and communications. During the Persian Gulf War, space-based sensors furnished commanders and staff at all levels with detailed information, often in near real-time, and satellites were crucial for communications between the National Command Authority in the United States and Central Command in the Persian Gulf, and within Central Command. GPS navigation satellites helped U.S. and allied land, sea, and air forces pinpoint their own locations as well as enemy targets. Support from space displayed great improvement over what was available during the last major conflict, Vietnam. Hence, the Persian Gulf War is dubbed by some the first "space war."
The separation between military and civilian space programs remains, but the functions performed by satellites and the vehicles that launch them are not easily divided. Both sectors use communications, navigation, weather, and remote sensing/reconnaissance satellites, which may operate at different frequencies or have different capabilities, but have similar technology. The same launch vehicles can be used to launch any type of military, civilian, or commercial satellite. DOD uses some civilian satellites and vice verse.
DOD develops space launch vehicles, too. The Delta, Atlas, and Titan launch vehicles were all initially developed by DOD, while NASA developed Scout and Saturn (both no longer produced), and the space shuttle. All except the shuttle are "expendable launch vehicles" (ELVs) that can only be used once (the shuttle is reusable). An August 1994 White House policy gave DOD responsibility for maintaining and upgrading the ELV fleet (through the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program), while NASA maintains the shuttle and develops new reusable technology (see CRS Issue Brief IB93062).
After the Cold War ended, DOD and congressional interest in space weapons, both those to attack other satellites (antisatellite, or ASAT, weapons) and weapons based in space to attack ballistic missiles, declined initially, but since the 104th Congress, funding has been added for these projects (see below). Using satellites to attack ballistic missiles has been controversial since President Reagan's 1983 announcement that he would initiate a Strategic Defense Initiative to study the viability of building a ballistic missile defense (BMD) system to protect the United States and its allies. In May 1993, DOD changed the name of the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization to the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO)reflecting decreased emphasis on "national missile defense" (NMD) to defend against a Soviet attack and increased interest in "theater missile defense" (TMD) for regional conflicts. In recent years, however, a renewed commitment to NMD has been made (see CRS Issue Brief IB10034). Whether BMD weapons ultimately are based in space or on the ground, a BMD system undoubtedly would require satellites for early warning, communications, and other traditional support functions served by spacecraft.”

Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
18. Dec 23, 2003

### bloodsucker666

So the rate of Death has declined !!but the thing that matters at the end of the day is that people or rather soldiers are still DYING but for the whims and fancies of Dubya life is precious, loosing life while defendin your country is good i mean gr8 but when the army is targeting "civilians"just because they are protesting for there leader , i don't finda cause which is legitmate enough which can justify dis act ! talkin about "WMD 'S" where did the AIDS virus come from ? can any one deny the fact that it was a BIOLOGICAL Weapon which fell in to the wrong hands and got transmitted to the human race via chimps????

Anyways iam, say partially happy by your answer but still the "world power" should have TRUSTED the "Global organization"{for some }.The main purpose behind setting the United nations was to set up Global peace which iam afraid it has fail to done !If the U.S wanted to dominate it right from the creation of it then the causes whic caused the league of nations to fail shall be one of the prima causas for the failure of the united nations too!!!
Thus creating an environment favourable for "the third world war".WMD'S are used only in the event of crisis or can we say in the even of war? so in the war is it not every ones right to selfdefend onesself as the U.S herself is doing the same after 9\11.Iam still of the opinion that osama was created by the U.S or rather it's policies

19. Dec 23, 2003

### Achy47

http://www.dorrk.com/inside.asp?editorial=americanthreat.ssi [Broken]

"Although you may perceive the U.S.A. to be an imperialistic and fascist nation, can you name an empire in human history that acted in a more benevolent fashion so far beyond its borders? By the way, where did you ever get the idea that nations or empires should act in a moral fashion anyway? I'll tell you where, from the United States and Wilsonian ideas on foreign policy. The idea that nations should be decent, humane, "friends," is an American creation---part of our Judeo-Christian ethics transferred into our foreign policy and first practiced in the League of Nations, and now the U.N. Do you think this idea came from Europe where nations waged war with each other as soon as they could muster up the strength (Richelieau's "raison d'etat", balance-of-power diplomacy?) Do you think it came from Asia where there is not even a concept of the importance of other nations? By recently announcing the breaking of a nuclear treaty, North Korea just acted as most civilizations have acted throughout the history of the world until America came along. By damning America for being too unilateral and imperialistic, you are ignorant to the fact that you are ironically borrowing America's geopolitical ethics in your argument against it."

Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
20. Dec 23, 2003

### Jonathan

Many of these posts do not deserve a response, but these two do:
Archy47: That is a wonderful quote, I will need to go to that site.
MHills: You said:
Then how do you explain the fact that China has now entered space, that NASA's budget has been decreasing for decades(the distribution of its contents, but not the total, is secret), and we can't even remember to convert the units to metric before sending the craft to outer space ?

Last edited: Dec 23, 2003