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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gamesmistress who wrote (26060)	1/24/2004 10:26:30 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793868

Our Presidents answer to us, not other countries' rulers. Bush gets this. I don't know if any of the Democratic candidates do. This is another example of unnecessary polarization, I think. There is a difference, a difference bigger than a nuance, between being subservient to other countries or even catering to other countries, on one hand, and recognizing that it's smart to get along with your neighbors to the extent feasible, on the other. When someone advocates the latter, he is automatically charged with the former. Just as when someone raises a question about using language that equates war with a football game or a video game, they're thought to be anti-military. Or when someone questions a mores of the inner city, he's thought a racist. And on and on. Sure, there are some nuts out there who would submit our country to the authority of the UN. A few nuts. Most people just want to maintain alliances, to avoid flipping off an ally or potential ally. If not, we'll "agree to disagree" and do what we think is best. Exactly. You clearly get it. There's no need to make it into a war in defense of sovereignty. Bush's rhetoric was effective flag waving, but his framing of the issue was a fallacy. I don't know if we just don't listen to others or whether we're all just looking for a fight.

To: gamesmistress who wrote (26060)	1/24/2004 10:49:54 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793868

Bush gets this. I don't know if any of the Democratic candidates do. Every one of the Democratic "stump speeches" contains the equivalent of "When I am elected I will go to the UN and get down on my knees" in it. The Republicans have to evade the UN charge by being country specific in naming who is giving us a hard time. France wrote themselves into the "bad guys" in 2003, and are an easy target. They can't go to the center and still attack the UN.

To: gamesmistress who wrote (26060)	1/24/2004 4:38:56 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 793868

Our Presidents answer to us, not other countries' rulers. Bush gets this. I don't know if any of the Democratic candidates do. I think the Democratic candidates have painted themselves into a corner. Liberal Democrats would like to work more nicely with international bodies, as Clinton did. But 90% of what Clinton did was talking a good game. I don't think even most liberal Democrats want to see us do a "Mother, may I?" at the UNSC - but the candidates are almost being forced to talk as if they did.