I did some "soul searching" today, after reading the Nicholas Leeman piece in this week's New Yorker. He broke down the Foreign Policy into groups, "Hawks" and "Realists". He then made this statement:
>>>>The contrast between the Democrats' faith in international treaties and organizations and the hawks' mistrust of them couldn't be more deep-seated; it reflects fundamentally different views of human nature.<<<<
I think this is true, and shows up to a very large degree on this board. That is why we have laid out both sides of this issue here on this board, to a point of pain. We have been reduced to endless reposting of our opinions, and are now just "shouting past" each other, IMO.
Those that tend to think as I do, believe that force is the only thing that the Islamists respect, and we will have to use it to solve our problems. Those who disagree think that force will backfire on us and we must work to negotiate our way out of this.
This next thirty days will probably show which way we are going to go. I watched Cheney on PBS last night, and based on that, I think we will move on Iraq. I think the Administration will "go through the motions" with the UN and Congress, and then go.
I respect the people here who don't agree with my position. They are not "Wimps," who are afraid to move, they just think attacking Iraq is not the way to go. They could be right.
I think we will only succeed at this "War" we are in by forcing major changes in the ME. TWT. |
