Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Sam Citron who wrote (80021)	3/6/2003 7:45:17 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) of 281500

<<...Four more years? Is your family better off than it was in 2000? Are you kidding? The next President will have a mandate for a complete about-face, not just in economic policy, but foreign policy as well. The extremist rightwing hardliners will be purged in favor of a realistic foreign policy based on cooperation, negotiation and problem-solving via teamwork and dialog. It's mostly about economic development, not regime change through the barrel of a gun. We live in an era of tremendous technological progress. There is no fundamental reason why rich and poor nations must be at war with one another or why ethnic differences must prevail over our common shared humanity. All we need is education (especially cross-cultural training and understanding) and sharing in common struggles to eradicate poverty, hunger, illiteracy and exploitation. The current administration simply doesn't understand that the reason that the poor don't embrace modernity is that modernity has torn their traditional cultures apart without delivering any tangible benefits. Instead modernity has merely widened the gap between the rich and the poor while unrealistically raising peoples expectations. This must change before there can be genuine and lasting world peace...>> Sam: Thanks for sharing your views....That's one of the best posts I've read out on this thread in quite some time. Education, training, dialogue, and compromise are all key...What could we accomplish in The Middle East if we DID NOT go to war and instead we chose to spend our $100 Billion+ in areas that really help combat poverty? How would the U.S. be viewed? I believe we'll have 'regime change' in Washington in '04...it all comes down to the kitchen table issues (is the average U.S. family better off under a Bush Admin.?...Do folks feel more secure?...Do we have a wise leader who represents our country well overseas?...Are we paying attention to the deficit so that we don't place a massive burden on future generations? Are we investing in education and infrastructure at home and actually creating jobs? Are we being a good steward of our environment?,etc.)...The United States must lead by example around the world and many Americans are concerned about the way we are leading...A 'pre-emptive' first strike on a nation that HAS NOT ever attacked us sets an example that we can not be proud of...What does it communicate to other very dangerous regimes in countries like Iran, Pakistan, and North Korea? By killing thousands of innocent citizens in Iraq we will not come out ahead -- Al Jazeera will cover Bush's 'Shock and Awe' bombing campaign like there's no tomorrow...The U.S. may be viewed as an impatient bully that rushes to use its intense military might to try to shape the world order...JMHO. -s2

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next