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: GST who wrote (147817)	10/17/2004 5:52:28 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 281500

The attitude that the US is the only source of leadership in the world and that every other country is just a rubber stamp for our decisions is almost entirely unconnected to my post. The actual attitude was that on some instances the US leads or things don't get done. The wars with Iraq are two such cases. In the first case we led with more support from others than in the current war but in both cases it was our war. We decided what should happen and then we made it happen. In both cases the other countries at best marginal at worse irrelevant. That doesn't mean they always are, in other instances other countries have led and the US has either followed, opposed, or not gotten involved. To say that the idea that Gulf War I was won by the US with only marginal input by other countries is no more a claim that the US is the only source of leadership in the world, than saying that WWII in the Pacific was won by the US with only marginal input by other countries would be such a claim. Obviously the US is not the only source for leadership in the world, but that fact doesn't mean that it isn't the leader in many cases. Tim

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next