To: Lane3 who wrote (26720 ) 1/29/2004 1:25:31 AM From: D. Long Read Replies (1) | Respond to What you are arguing is that some of the parties subordinate their own determination of their own self interest to the US. If, in my scenario, we decide that it's in it's our best interests to invade Iraq and, say, Germany determines that not to be in Germany's best interests, Germany has every right and every obligation to try to change our minds, to try to stop us from doing what they perceive to be harmful to them. As you said, "the self-interested actions of all parties benefits all." I think we must respect them for that, then do whatever is best for us, whatever that may be. If Germany is in our way, we do what we need to get Germany out of the way. Certainly correct. But that is a far cry from the typical reaction. The typical criticism isn't that Bush didn't try to get along with the neighbors, but that the neighbors don't agree with us, therefore we shouldn't do what they don't like. When there is a disagreement on minor matters, it is worthwhile to compromise one's interests for the sake of not rocking the boat. But you don't worry about disturbing the neighbors when you need to discharge your firearm to stop a home invasion. Derek, you can have this: "the self-interested actions of all parties benefits all." Or you can have "expecting others to appreciate that America acting in its own self-interest has the 'second-order effect' of furthering the greater good."
