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: ManyMoose who wrote (144913)	9/4/2004 6:59:38 AM
From: Sig	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<<What's your solution for this conundrum, jtt? >> The US solution depends not on us, but on which Kerry re-surfaces after the election. As a Senator, he could still cast votes against proposals. This election can be decided by votes of veterans of all wars, which is why Bush and Cheney refuse to say that Kerry lied about his Service and medals. That leaves Kerry as the one who insults the honor of those many veterans, as he did when he testified so many years ago after leaving the Service. Sig

To: ManyMoose who wrote (144913)	9/4/2004 7:24:06 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

What's your solution for this conundrum There's no conundrum. You ask the question ... what's in it for the US? It's what we refer to as "American Values" and "moral clarity". jttmab

To: ManyMoose who wrote (144913)	9/4/2004 8:46:06 AM
From: Sig	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

<<What's your solution for this conundrum, jtt? Would you go the Angelina Jolie route (in "Beyond Borders")? Massive infusions of foreign aid? Food? Exodus? Pretty tough, huh! Good thing we're not in charge of fixing it. >>> Having just completed my study of the question "which came first the chicken or the egg", I feel qualified to comment on Africa. (The chicken came first but it was not yet a chicken, it was just a conglomeration of cooperating molecules driven by desire to live). The life force being one of consume or be consumed, and the survivors will have developed the ability to survive by growing the various appendages and characteristics seen today in a chicken. Humans today are not changing physically at a great rate, but they are changing rapidly in mentality and knowledge and that mental capability is devoted mostly to survival. Therefore there is a great battle in Africa as each tribe seeks survival and unless we or other powerful nations interfere it will continue. Who are we to judge which tribe should survive and which should be ignored and left to perish? By what standards do we decide to mess with the life-seeking forces of nature? I think Africa may be over-populated, having read that in many regions all the trees have been burned to keep warm or to cook with. To save one tribe people may have to move to another tribes territory, which then in turn becomes over-populated. An interfering nation will then have to make the distinction which nobody wants to make - deciding which ones will have to die. And if it got out of hand the decisions would effect nearly all of Africa. ( Its tough to be an Empire builder, but somebody has to do it) In summary: The Africans will have to progress by learning for themselves and we should give them all the help in that area we can afford. It will be a slow process. Much can also be done in the way of providing medicine,water and food supplies to relieve suffering. Some military aid to prevent mass executions. We should be extremely cautious in going beyond those measures and controlling Political processes, else others can accurately label the US as an Empire- and all Empires are evil. Sig