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: tekboy who wrote (50866)	10/10/2002 1:14:18 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<<...some people in this administration have behaved as one might have predicted and others haven't; it will be interesting to see why, when we get the full story later on...>> tek: If you ever get on 'the inside' of Dubya's Administration, you could write quite a book...=) -Scott@inquiringmindswouldlovetoknowmore.com

To: tekboy who wrote (50866)	10/10/2002 1:38:02 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 281500

Comments by Veena Das from Johns Hopkins... [Veena Das is Professor of anthropology at the Johns Hopkins University who has written extensively about the nature of violence and suffering.] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Baltimore Sun There is an implicit analogy being made between the earlier attack on Afghanistan and success in controlling the Taliban and the proposed strategy of attacking Iraq to control or get rid of Saddam. This is a dangerous analogy. [The] Taliban was an occupation force, and the local population was under a constant threat because totally foreign conceptions of Islam were being forced on the population. Even though Saddam's regime is brutal to the opposition and hostile to democratic liberties, the population blames not only Saddam but also the U.S. for its suffering. Thus the U.S. is not going to get the kind of support from the population that it expects. Even in the case of Afghanistan, there have been great impediments to the establishment of democratic institutions. Democracy is, after all, not only about elections but also about putting a rule of law and other democratic institutions, such as a free press, in place. Getting rid of one dictator is not going to get rid of the institutions through which his dictatorship functions. To contain the danger of weapons of mass destruction, there is a need for countries in Europe and the U.S. to strengthen the opposition and to support democratic institutions, and that requires a longer commitment, patience as well as the willingness to attend to the threats of terrorism on an ongoing basis. The fantasy of a war in which you can get rid of all these dangers, once and for all, is a dangerous fantasy. Finally, the high rhetoric through which fear and panic is being created about America being under attack is dangerous for the American democracy. One needs an honest sharing of information so that healthy debate can take place. The suspicion of politicians that is emerging -- because of the refusal to attend to the ordinary sufferings created by the downslide in the economy -- is more dangerous in a democracy because it alienates people from normal politics. Further behind the consensus there is appearing a deep ethnic division that will be disastrous for the body politics. Copyright © 2002, The Baltimore Sun sunspot.net