SI
SI
discoversearch

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 ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (90354)4/17/2003 7:09:05 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
1-3 make sense sometimes but not in all situations. 90% persuation would leave Saddam in power until he died a natural death.

4 Generally makes sense and should be the overall goal. However there are times when not supporting one undemocratic force leaves a worse undemocratic force to control the situation. I don't think we should just cut off all ties with and never support the large fraction of the world that is not democratic.

I mostly disagree with 5. Force indiscrimantly used will increase terrorism, but lack of force will also increase terrorism. We have to go after terrorists and their supporters, but we can't just go out and push around the whole world.

7 Makes some sense but I don't think we could efficently spend $70bil (or even the $20bil that the government says the war has cost so far) efficently on this. I think we have to try to spend smarter instead of just spending more.

I don't support any kind of "Manhattan Project for Energy Independence". The real Manhattan Project developed technology for a specific end. We already have alternate ways to generate energy and technology to conserve enery, it just hasn't made economic sense to use it when oil is much cheaper. Spending $bil or $100 bil on a generalized government research project won't change that.

I'm not sure number 9 would work so well. How are we going to shut down madrassahs unless we plan to make half the middle east in to an American empire. Also I have my doubts that we could conceal the fact that any large effort to replace them was funded by the US. A smaller effort with a few schools might work, but trying to eliminate the old ones and bring in tons of replacements under an American initiatve could not be hid.

Start following the Geneva Convention; give Guantanamo "illegal combatants" POW status.

I'm willing to listen to arguments that this is a good thing, but it isn't something needed under "international law", and it wouldn't make a big difference in perceptions of the US in the Middle East.

The main difference that giving them full POW status would cause is that they would have to be released when the war is over. But when does the war end. Is the war in Afghanistan over? Not complelty but if it was I would not support releaseing the terrorist. And the war on terrorism or even just Al-Qaida probably isn't going to be over any time soon. And even if OBL and the top remaining leaders of Al-Qaida did surrender and sue for peace I wouldn't support releaseing the terrrorist.

11. Stop agricultural trade restraints, and subsidies to wealthy corporate American farmers, which is the #1 thing we do that causes poverty in the developing world.

Great idea. Helps the US directly as well as helping the developing world.

12. Sign the Kyoto treaty. Even if you are not an environmentalist, this makes sense, as it really pissed off the whole world when we didn't sign it.

Not so great idea. If rigidly applied it would be an economic disaster. Anyway for the most part it has not been ratified by other countries and the US Senate would not ratify it if we did sign it.

13. Reform the UN, rather than dissing it.

Not a bad idea but very hard to do.

14. Sunshine; follow the lead of S. Korea re the North.

I'm not sure this would get us anyware. Of course we haven't gotten much accomplished yet with our current strategy but maybe the mulitilateral talks with China and the US and NK and maybe later Japan and South Korea and Russia will bear some fruit. But then what do we get if NK agrees to shelf their nukes and then keeps building more like the did last time there was an agreement?

15. Use our leverage to Engage in the Israeli-Arab conflict

We should encourage a solution but I don't think we can impose anything that would be a real solution. If the actual participants in the conflict can't agree I don't think we can really force peace on them.

Insist on an Exit Plan, when U.S. troops are sent to foreign conflicts. No open-ended Tar Babies, like Yugoslavia and Afghanistan

Sometimes it makes sense to have an armed presense for a long time. We had to take down the Taliban and now we don't want it or something like it to come back. It makes sense even from purely selfish reasons to try to create some decent order in Afghanistan.

Tim
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext