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: KLP who wrote (147006)	10/5/2004 3:03:55 PM
From: marcos	Respond to of 281500

Intelligent treaties should be honoured and stupid treaties repaired or abrogated as soon as possible, imho .... it serves no useful purpose to 'honour' a treaty that requires you to support a brutally corrupt regime by laying waste to a nation who was a threat to nobody .... had the treaty to which you refer been 'honoured' to this day, there would still be boys from your street over there wiping out gook villages - the vietnamese wanted above all independence, and the sooner they got it the better .... best course of action for the US was to realise that, and eventually they did, after men of courage like Kerry stood up and called bullshit on the policy du jour It wasn't Kennedy who made the watershed mistake on Viet Nam, rather it was Truman, who caved to pressure from de Gaulle, who wanted to re-colonise the place, pour la gloire de la France ... upthread i post a quote from him that says basically, 'France without indochinese slaves would not be as great' ... he puts a neocon/gaullist spin on it, but that's the general gist Actually the first US action against vietnamese was by a US navy commander called Mad Jack Percival, who went out of his way to kill some people near or in Hue, in 1845 .... but there was no continuity between that and Truman's dismal choice, the vietnamese had forgiven and forgotten, they were in fact pleading for US support in 1945 There is more to US politics than the matter of who is president, and the slaver/neocon/warhawk factions are always there, to greater or lesser extent depending on specific administrations and circumstances .... there is always intelligence being injected by thinkers such as Thoreau and Twain and politicians such as Webster and [maybe? - t.b.d.] Kerry as well, problem is they are often outnumbered by the bush-doctrine type of rule-by-gun militarists But speaking of honouring treaties, how do you feel about honouring the one with the iroquois?