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: GST who wrote (145417)9/10/2004 6:01:41 PM
From: one_less   of 281500
 
"The primary weakness we now have is our almost complete loss of credibility with most people in the world -- the world is partisan and decidedly against us so long as Bush is President -- this is the result of US policy under Bush.

I agree. That is not to say I think what Bush has done is wrong. There were times in raising my kids when they all agreed that I was a mean bad guy. I was the adult in charge and had to make decisions that I felt were in their best interests whether they agreed with my perspective or not. They are all very loving and grateful kids. Not a spoiled brat in the bunch and they appreciate me living up to my responsibility to make hard decisions in spite of their whining and complaining. Things change with time and people typically grow to appreciate the ones who bore the wait of responsibility.

However, your point is well taken. There is another side to every coin. We must continue to reach out as a world community member, but we must do it without compromising our principles. No guarantee it will be an easy row to hoe.

"The war on terror is, first and foremost, a war for the hearts and minds of people who are also being recruited by terrorists. We give the terrorists credibility. They use our policies as a recruitment tool. They use Bush as a recruitment tool.

This is all true. However "terrorist" isn't just the name we call foriegn groups that are enemies of the state. Terrorist specifically defines people who have taken the corrupt and evil course of action to promote political goals that are incompatible with our own.

I felt it was a huge mistake of Bush to declare his 'Axis of Evil'. This was an act of name calling toward countries with which we have competing interests but who were not necessarily committing evil acts.

I am not against fundamentalist Muslims. I am a moderate Muslim and have many close friends that I love who are Salafis (the correct name for Wahabis). I also have Shi'ite friends that I love and respect. So, I know of what I speak when I describe the extremist groups in the Middle East and what they are up to. I hear about it in the community and read about it in literature. They could be successful if allowed to brutally begin conquering and oppressing the people under their rule. That is exactly what the Taliban did in Afghanistan, so it isn't like there is no precidense. The world is shrinking and speeding up, so that such ventures can quickly take a foot hold and become major concerns before we have a chance to deal with them in a diplomatic way. But it doesn't have to happen if we engage them now, and help them develop institutions and structures that afford us opportunity for diplomacy.

You saw what happened when Saddam called the UNs bluff and the UN was tasked with providing a solution, they got bogged down in complicated and irresolvable bickering. Look at the kerry/bush campaigns and then multiply that by the number of interest trying to get their way in the UN... it became as bush labeled it 'irrelevent' to the problem that had to be dealt with in practical terms.

In order to address the hearts and minds of potential terrorists, there has to be a viable alternative that is available to them. If you let the extremists conquer them, there are no options left for them but to support the regime dictator.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext