To: combjelly who wrote (262201 ) 11/26/2005 2:14:57 PM From: tejek Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572993 "War or no war, skirmishes or no skirmishes; the only places where there is true peace is with those countries that are true democracies." Never claimed anything different. But until they make the transition, is the only alternative is to allow them to run roughshod over their neighbors? The simple answer is yes. You work for peace within the context of peaceful efforts. The alternative runs the risk of turning into an Iraq.That proved to be such a ghastly quagmire that we retreated into isolationism until the byproduct of the collapse of the Ottoman empire sucked us back onto the world stage. It took two tries, but we did finally puts things to rights after most of Europe obliterated itself during WWII. We did well by Western Europe and Japan, not so well by Eastern Europe. The Marshall Plan is about the last good thing we've done. I am afraid we are putting too much stock in it. With all the billions we have spent on wars, we could have done three more Marshall Plans in other parts of the world.........and yet we have not. How long do we keep touting the Marshall Plan as a sign of our good intentions when we never seem willing to repeat it? After all, we can't spend billions on a war in Iraq and then spend more billions rebuilding it. It would end in our own bankruptcy."Bottomline: we are not using our enormous power and wealth for peace but to promote our agenda and secure our resources. That's why the world is not a very safe place right now and is probably in more danger of blowing itself up than it has been for 20 years." True, but the seeds of the collapse of the USSR were already planted 20 years ago. Now if you had said 25 years... Go ahead and extend it to thirty years........I don't believe we were in more danger then. At that time, nuclear proliferation was just starting to grow beyond the western nations, China and Russia. At that time, the owners of nukes were sovereign nations. Now you have rogue nations with nukes and you have rogue outfits trying to buy nukes on the open market. I think the danger of nuclear confrontation has grown exponentially. We were a lot closer when the USSR was flexing its muscles in Afghanistan. If they hadn't of clotheslined themselves there, which they did with our help, we likely would have faced a newly expansionistic USSR. They would have started pressuring Europe, and that would have led to either a confrontation or the US retreating into isolation again. The Soviets had been building their military up to levels where they thought they were up to the challenge, but that wilted in the face of their much vaunted and very numerous equipment being taken out by cheap, man portable weapons we were supplying in abundance. Suddenly they were faced with having to rebuild their entire military. And they couldn't afford that. So their government split over what to do, with various factions fighting each other. When they took their eye off the ball of their empire, it teetered and fell. So there is little chance of the particular nightmare of another global war for a long time. That's the problem........because nukes have grown in size, it wouldn't take a global, nuclear war to end up in a nuclear winter. A nuclear war between say India and Pakistan I think would do the trick. That has caused more than one Chinese government to fall. When it can't feed or protect the people any more, it happens. The farming peasants who aren't on the coast or along the major rivers aren't sharing in the economic boom that those areas enjoy. And they are growing unhappy with the disparity and the way the government is pandering to the booming areas. If they have a banking crisis and a severe recession, then the displaced farmers from the Three Gorges Dam might form the nucleus of a backlash that forces some serious changes. Please, I don't even want to go there. If China has a serious recession, the world will have a serious recession. Its China's growth that's propping up the global economy. Without it, this country would have been in recession for all the years of the new millennium. Bush lucked out on that one.The biggest strength of the US is our Constitution. It is a major part of our identity. We are at our best when we follow its ideals. At our worst when we violate them for expediency sake. On that, I agree with you. ted