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: Sun Tzu who wrote (167268)	7/26/2005 3:21:45 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The views appear to be oppositional and that may be useful in making political forced choices but not in expressing my personal outlook. There are valid points in each position which may be recognized by objective reasoning of sound principle.. The goal of the USA in global theater should be to support responsible players (Talbot’s position) and not simply the competition of flocks and herds (Geode’s claim) to win over weaker competitors. Responsible players (representatives, nations, and groups) are those who would promote a peaceful coexistence that affords dignity and autonomy to all. Power and Wealth is a responsibility and not simply an advantageous privilege. Where power or wealth may be used to protect and promote the relatively peaceful, prosperous and free condition the world enjoys today, it is justified. So, Talbot’s statement should be taken as a position of caution, rather than allegation. We should not get overly caught up in political alliances that build economic strength (atavistic thinking) while endangering the stability and success of responsible players. At the same time we should not allow ourselves to become weakened in a manner that could undermine the goal of liberty and justice for all.