Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : War -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (15205)	6/9/2002 5:37:19 PM
From: goldsnow	Respond to of 23908

What a ridiculous simplification... dixienet.org World politics is entering a new phase, and intellectuals have not hesitated to proliferate visions of what it will be--the end of history, the return of traditional rivalries between nation states, and the decline of the nation state from the conflicting pulls of tribalism and globalism, among others. Each of these visions catches aspects of the emerging reality. Yet they all miss a crucial, indeed a central, aspect of what global politics is likely to be in the coming years. The fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural (emphasis added). According to Huntington the clash of civilizations is the latest phase in conflict's evolution. From the Peace of Westphalia until the French Revolution, Western conflicts arose largely among princes trying to expand power and territory. From the French Revolution until the end of World War I, nations fought rather than princes. From World War I until the Cold War's end came the wars of ideology with their transnational superpowers. As international conflict moves out of its Western phase, civilizations will face off, the West against the non-West and non-Western civilizations against each other. What interests us here is not Huntington's shifting the focus from West to non-West, but from ideological and political goals to cultural clashes. He defines a civilization as "the highest cultural grouping of people and [their] broadest level of cultural identity. . .short of that which distinguishes humans from other species." Both objective elements (language, history, religion, customs) and the people's subjective self-identification define civilizations.

To: Thomas M. who wrote (15205)	6/9/2002 8:18:08 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 23908

Wow, still defending the murder of Klinghoffer. How about the murder of Ambassador Cleo Moore Jr. and George Curtis Moore on Arafat's order - were these crimes justified too?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (15205)	6/9/2002 9:51:40 PM
From: hal jordan	Respond to of 23908

Continuing to spout gibberish is not one of your finer points. There is no justification whatsoever for the brutal murder of Klinghoffer. As for historical reasons, you have blinders on to history prior to Israel. The Jews have been scapegoats for over a thousand years. From before the Inquisition to the pograms in Russia to the systematic murder by the Nazi's. The Arab region continues to foster this hatred. Why did the Arabs align themselves with Hitler during WWII? When a child is taught to hate Jews, what is the end result going to be when he or she grows up. Why do so many Arab Muslims believe that Jews were informed about the WTC prior to its destruction and therefore believe they did not show up for work on 9/11? Why do they believe Muslims were not the ones who piloted the planes into the WTC? When you can answer these questions without constantly pointing a finger of blame at Israel, you may learn something. Then again, perhaps you are an Arab Muslim and have an agenda here...