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: Jim Willie CB who wrote (134623)	5/27/2004 4:41:54 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Woodward exposed Bushy's attitude toward intelligent people he called them "fancy pants intellectuals" Well, if he's referring to those intellectuals who encourage inaction by way of "paralysis by over-analysis", I would agree.. then Bernstein compares Bushy to Nixon in his disdain for the first 10 Bill of Rights And you're point? I don't see where Bush has EVER displayed any public disdain for the bill of rights.. but I find Bushy and his Neocon gang unbelievably dangerous USA has become isolated among westerners for the first time in 70 years I personally found the utter indifference and seeming lack of resolve on the previous administration equally dangerous.. I'm enough of a realist and pragmatist to recognize that no war is ever going to be perfectly executed. War, by its very nature, is a fluid and dangerous undertaking, with many unforseen obstacles (even if others could see them) popping up all the time. As for the Neocons, they are no different than many groups of intellectuals who advocate a specific policy agenda. There are good ones, and there are those who display equal hubris.. My view is that we should not question the righteousness of our cause, namely to spread the concept of democratic reforms and pluralistic governments and economies.. Those are the ideals that we stand for as a nation and the minute we stop pursuing those goals for other peoples around the world, we have effectively signaled that democracy is only for the elites. But how we do it, and what level of intensity of will (or force) we pursue in advocating such reforms will obviously vary according to both our abilities, and the legality of doing so under international law. Which, in the case of Iraq, we possessed both... And the fact that the world's economy, like it or not, is dependent upon oil, makes pursuing such reforms part of our national interest. Furthermore, the need for economies in that region to possess a marketable resource which they can convert into hard currency makes them equally dependent upon the western democracies. Letting them sell us oil is the ultimate form of foreign aid, and far preferable to just passing out billions in loans and grants. However, it's important that we have as much influence as possible in order to ensure that this revenue is invested wisely into diversified economies that can promote growth once the oil has been depleted. So when folks like Kerry and others assert we need to reduce our dependence upon foreign oil, they need to ask themselves what other products they are going to help these folks sell? Hawk