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: Hawkmoon who wrote (87538)	3/29/2003 12:36:08 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

thanks for this set of links, as well, Hawk. I won't take them as authoritative interpretations of Wilson's 14 points or other statements but I've never seen any disagreement on the point that, at its core, Wilson's doctrine involved: In Wilson's view, the best way to achieve American security was not to defend the United States against the outside world, but to fundamentally change the outside world. The question that brought this issue to the table was whether the notion of forcibly imposing democracy was a way to "change the outside world." I knew of nothing in the literature on Wilson that argued such, but I don't read in that. Mostly just impressions from conversations or articles about other matters. I continue to believe that. As for the bit of text at the end about the UN enforcing resolutions, that's simple spin. You and I both know that the first group of politicians who would oppose the UN actually having sufficient enforcement powers to have its own military would be the right wing in this country. So that's out. We also know that line about enforcing resolutions is clearly very narrowly drawn as to attempt not to draw attention to other unenforced resolutions.