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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (48265)	9/30/2002 12:51:04 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

" have seen several comments, like the one you made, asking how our strategy would affect other countries. That is really up to them, isn't it?" Yes, you are right. But we clearly set ourselves above other countries -- the whole doctrine basically says we are a role model to be followed and admired. 1. Look at the passages about the Muslim world. You would think that the Muslim world is waiting for us to invade their countries to liberate all. If I was in an Arab country I would read this doctrine as saying that we want to control the political destiny of the middle east as directly as possible -- invading any country that does not bend to our will. (By the way -- what did you think about the latest round of elections in Kuwait?) 2. We rallied an international coalition against Iraq because they invaded another country and the whole world agreed that this aggression "must not stand". It was the idea of invasion that provoked this widespread response. Now we are moving in the opposite direction, legitimizing regime change by invasion and raising it to the level of a long-term doctrine to be applied to all of our relationships. This certainly begs the question of how or if we would try to restrain the horrors of war that could spring up all over the world if other countries follow our lead and pre-empt their enemies. India has plenty of nuclear weapons and a population of 1 billion -- surely they could crush Pakistan, even if it meant launching a nuclear exchange in which many millions die on both sides.