To: Michael Watkins who wrote (149469 ) 10/27/2004 8:24:51 PM From: Keith Feral Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500 The essence of socialism as defined by Karl Marx defines the base of all motivation to be economic determination. It effects every other aspect of our lives. I agree with his observation. The only alternate theory with potentially greater force is that the base of all motivation to be love and unity. However, I do not think that anyone is looking to unify Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hindu, and Buddhist religions on these thread. Perhaps we need a spiritual thread where we can pray for unification of all religions under a single Divine God. I can easily separate my spiritual values and my economic values because I accept the Western philosophy on secularism. It doesn't bother me that Islamic people hate Christians or Jews in spite of the fact that God is the Divine spirit of all 3 religions. I guess the same goes for the Hindu faith. I guess that I believe that all religions (except for Buddhism)look toward the same Divine God. Each with unique scriptures and values. I think it is totally natural for men to compete against one another for economic conquest. As long as men don't break the laws that govern our society, they should be free to compete in the free market society. If a country like Iraq does not have adequate laws, something needs to be done to replace the government. I leave my religious ideals behind me when it comes to work. The spirit of competition in daily life gives a sense of purpose. I am not about to give up my individual freedoms to unify all people. The socialist utopia is not something that appeals to me on any level. The ironic thing is that all of the left wing tree huggers that are into spiritualism have a negative attitude about the Church. It is wierd to see Catholics becoming conservative icons because Bush's policies take aim against abortion. I have no particular problem with anything you are saying. I know there are a lot of people that feel the same way that you do. I am not willing to concede the fact that the US is in Iraq just to complete it's economic interests. Saddam gave Bush and Cheney and the whole free world the impression that he was a threat to the West. That gave the US a legal precedent to push Congress for a declaration of war against Saddam. The mess in Iraq is why the US does not get involved in too many coup d'etats. Why didn't anyone complain when we got the sob Milosevic out of power in Serbia? I would argue that Saddam should have been removed from power before Milosevic. Sure, that was a UN mission, but there is no way that Russia or France would have passed a UN Resolution which is why the US and Britain withdrew their petition. To answer your question, it makes me disgusted that Russia and France blocked UN involvement in Iraq for purely economic reasons, namely, food for oil contracts.