Quote:Those actions were not motivated by our desire to colonize subjugate and or exploit the resources of the countries that we assisted. So they would not fit the basic definition of imperialism.


In the case of the behaviors exhibited by various terrorist groups and specifically Iris I was simply demonstrating that these individuals display distinct characteristics in line with extreme Muslim Orthodoxy has put forth and codified by law in certain Islamic countries. That defeats the notion that their motivations have nothing to do with religion

 

This is your quote, not mine:  Imperialism is "a policy of extending a country's power and influence through colonization, use of military force, or other means"

Proxy wars, Coups, covert insurrections, direct military invasion. How do these not fit the above definition of "extending influence" or use of "military force, or other means". Again, I am not stating that this is an American thing, pretty much all of the major players have done it, and even some of the lesser ones like Iran. But the U.S. does have a long history of such actions, so what seems to be your claim that we do such things out of the goodness of our hearts (while not invading, committing coups against, or otherwise 'extending or influence' against countries that are equally oppressive but more aligned to our geopolitical goals )seems to ignore reality..

---