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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (187070)	5/23/2006 4:14:11 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Nadine, I am not going to debate whether Israelis are better than Arabs. That is a useless debate. Nor will I accept the "he/she/EU/China/... does it too arguments" I am not living in EU or China and am neither responsible for nor can have any influence over their actions. I can discuss and some minute way influence US actions, so that is what I am willing do discuss. Anyone who is so concerned about Russia's (or whoever else's) behavior may move there and try to influence the Russian conduct. This is my answer to the first part of your post. Now on to the second part: >> you're obviously talking about a world government... obviously...and this is where the world is headed, though some of us will have to be dragged in kicking and screaming. There are a lot of problems in the world that can only be effectively addressed this way, environment, slavery, child labor, nuclear proliferation, etc to name a few. And in fact they are being addressed this way in the current system through agreements such as WTO or Kyoto, but the current framework is very half baked. >> ...You want America to conquer the world and impose universal parliamentary democracy. LOL! Leave it to Neocon to pin her stance on me and blame me for it!! This is a real hoot. Not this is not what I am saying at all. I am proposing a push towards a confederal model of world governence with very limited but strong and enforcible roles for the world body...and this is something that the US is shortsightedly opposing at every step, precisely because US feels it can pummel the world into submission anytime it wants and has no reason to consent to any international law. US is wrong on both of these presuppositions. ST PS I am rather surprised you did not comment on this part of the article: My interviews with a half-dozen Arab foreign ministers and deputy foreign ministers in recent years have confirmed that US diplomats routinely blame the "Jewish lobby" as a way of diverting blame away from the US government. This cynical excuse has contributed to the frightening rise in recent years of anti-Jewish attitudes in the Arab world. The consequences of US policy regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could be tragic not just for Palestinians and other Arabs, who are the immediate victims of the diplomatic support and largess of US aid to Israel, but ultimately for Israel as well...It has long been in Washington's interest to maintain a militarily powerful and belligerent Israel dependent on the United States. Real peace could undermine such a relationship. The United States has therefore pursued a policy that attempts to bring greater stability to the region while falling short of real peace. Washington wants a Middle East where Israel can serve a proxy role in projecting US military and economic interests. This symbiosis requires suppressing challenges to American-Israeli hegemony within the region. In other words the argument is that (a) the present arrangement is not beneficial to Israel as it prevents it from reaching a lasting peace. (b) Israel is US' scapegoat in ME. And (c) there is something disturbingly familiar about Jews doing the dirty work of rich ruling Christians and it is not fitting for Israeli nation to be doing so for US policy makers.