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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (222303)	3/6/2005 3:37:35 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576660

In fact, history is on my side.........rarely does the good generated by an outsider outweigh the bad. Depends on the outsider and which history you examine. How about the "good" the USA imposed on Japan post WW2, on Korean Peninsula post-Korean war, on Europe (you know, occupied France!) post-WW2, on Philippines post-WW2, on Panama post-Noriega? You have an argument with Japan but not the others. S. Korea did not go communist in the 1950s, but it was a corrupt, oligarchic society with limited democracy until the mid 1980s. In fact, the Chabons or whatever they called their extended industries that were crippling their economy were not broken up until the late 1990s. Europe was mostly democratic before WW II. Even Germany had been a democracy before the war. And we went into WW II as an ally and not an invading force like we are doing in Iraq. And you forget the results of the US/Soviet occupation of Europe.........a divided Europe that lasted for 50 years. Ask the Czechs from the Prague Spring how good the US occupation of Europe was for them. Philippines? I have no idea what you're talking about.....same with Panama. Both countries are a mess..........if that's our positive influence at work, then Iraq should be very afraid. Are you going to argue that the outsider's actions (The USA) were a net negative to Asia and Europe, that the world would be better off with Asia now being called Japan and Europe now being called Germany? Duh? Of course, I am not saying that,Mindmeld II. However, we are not talking apples to apples. Iraq was not attacking the US or our European allies. Germany started a war with the rest of Europe. Japan was allied with Germany and attacked us. Comparing that with what is happening with Iraq is not a very useful exercise IMO, and for that reason, I don't think the outcomes will be the same. You only site the examples of colonies, where the outsider tries to exploit the resources and population of the affected country. In the US's foreign policy, I don't think there has been anything that looks like a "colonization" since WW2, most of the foreign policy has been attempting to either reshape the country in a form that resembles US government, or just trying to maintain something resembling stability against various warring factions. Most of the US's post military efforts were to keep communism contained. We had mixed success at that venture. I don't think our intent was to redo the world in our image like the Iraqi invasion. In any case, I am not sold that we are creating positives. If we are, then I am wrong and Bush will go down in history as a hero. If I am right, we are in for world of hurt. ted