SI
SI
discoversearch

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 Policy Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TimF who wrote (7829)12/21/2006 12:25:02 AM
From: Maurice Winn  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 15987
 
Tim, more than 1 million troops, is the psychological advantage of democratic agreement. The USA is not generally seen as the "leader of the world". People generally do not like self-appointed leaders who tend towards unilateral self-dealing advantage. People generally like to have a say in political activity which is nominally on their behalf.

The 1 million troops would be much lower cost than USA troops. 1 million Pakistani troops would be vastly cheaper than 1 million Americans.

It would probably be better to fly troops in military transporters rather than put them on trains. Trains are slow and expensive for very long trips. But it might be that a railway line would be a better way of moving soldiers/police en masse.

I'm sure Pakistan and Iran wouldn't object to NUN military barracks to provide a break in travel. It would provide some cash flow. Egypt has lots of people too. There are loads of people who could provide stability.

I think with the right design, people would be inclined to be enthusiastic. Assuming things would be difficult is quite a barrier to achieving anything: <I don't see how even if it had strong support from the US, that a totally remodeled and stronger UN would happen, except perhaps after decades of negotiations. > People do what benefits them. Most people would benefit from such a thing, so most people would be in favour. What people don't like is bossy bureaucrats from Brussels telling them how much foam they have to have on their beer, and how much curve a cucumber has to have, and whether they are allowed to buy bananas or not.

What gets rewarded gets done. People like to improve their lives. If they see a chance to do that, they usually take it.

There is more argument for Kuwait being part of Iraq than for Taiwan being part of China. Or, if Kuwait isn't part of Iraq, or the NUN, then they should be left to deal with their own security next time Saddam or successor decides it is. I dare say, with the right NUN constitution, Kuwait could very well decide to become the first state of the NUN. That would be an excellent guarantee of independence from marauders.

Mqurice