<So they bluster and threaten, and we really don't know whether they are serious or not (because even they don't really know, imo).>
Another good point Hawk. You do produce a lot of them.
I recall decades ago, J K Galbraith told of when he was USA ambassador to India and he was amused at being spied on. He said that there was no point in spying to find out what he was going to do because he didn't have a clue himself right up until the time he did it!
Sure, there is evident tendency [lining up a million soldiers], but that doesn't mean they have decided to attack.
I know myself, when building up to a big decision, I can bail or go right up to the last instant and it is often flippism which decides. kits-silver-age-comics.com
<But of course, should your nation become willing to bear the cost, financial and human, of fighting this war, I would certainly be willing to provide you all the "votes" you want... :0)>
Hawk, that's yet another good point. I haven't figured it out, but I'm sure that mob rule [democratic voting] is not the best way to run a railroad [or government]. It usually involves lazy, stupid, useless bastards voting to take OPM [other people's money]. Until I've figured out a better way, I guess it's better than the other methods tried so far. I think some 'he who pays the piper calls the tune' component is necessary.
I rant in favour of a super duper United Nations. Of course the last thing I'd want is a useless, smothering limitless Kremlin-style bureaucracy, which is what many people immediately think of when they think of the UN.
I'm thinking in terms of a Libertarian-style UN in a federation relationship with states which decide to join and are accepted. libertarianz.org.nz
Mqurice |
