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.

Strategies & Market Trends : India Coffee House -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Senor VS who wrote (825)	5/22/1998 11:58:00 AM
From: peter michaelson	Respond to of 12475

I agree with all of your post, Ravi, except "idealism will not work". You will die, idealistically or not, rich or poor. The soul is of supreme importance - regardless of Mohan's heresy. Now, will Jill kick me out for this SI sacrilege?

To: Senor VS who wrote (825)	5/22/1998 12:12:00 PM
From: Rational	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12475

A famous history professor at Yale wrote (recently reproduced in Indian Express) that the West became rich by LEARNING how to kill. They got the dynamite invented by Chinese and made guns to kill others and occupy others' lands. They are now preaching morals. The famous George Will writes in Washington Post today: He [Clinton] has helped China, by technology transfers, to develop nuclear weapons and delivery systems. He has been relaxed about China's helping Pakistan toward nuclear capability. He is startled that India wants nuclear weapons. India, although provoked by recent U.S. policy, would have acquired nuclear weapons anyway. With a population 45 percent larger than the combined populations of four of the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council (the United States, Great Britain, France, Russia), India is not impressed by "international norms" defined by others to ratify their advantages. Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser to presidents Ford and Bush, and his colleague in a Washington consulting firm, David Sloan, express (in the Los Angeles Times) the foreign policy elite's dreamy disappointment that India has affronted "international norms." India, they say, must decide whether to "rejoin the global community." But it is peculiar to speak of a "global community" with India's one-fifth of the world's population exiled (by whom?) therefrom. And what is the pertinent "norm"? That there shall be no nuclear proliferation? Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter's national security adviser, notes that U.S. policy (not quite the same thing as an "international norm") "all along has been one of selective and preferential proliferation." U.S. policy openly helped Britain to become a nuclear power, less openly assisted France, and did not become exercised about Israel's developing such weapons.

To: Senor VS who wrote (825)	5/22/1998 12:51:00 PM
From: JPR	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12475

Ravi: <<Idealism in a non-ideal world will NOT work.>> How true!. Foreign policy decisions are made in the interest of the dispensing country. Morality, right or wrong are not considerations. That is the reason why Chinese got the MFN status. Just consider: China at the time it was given MFN status was a nuclear power, though not a democratic country. Nuclear China was an unquantified entity at that time. US desperately wanted some kind of contact with the Chinese in order to quantify and characterize it and it is easier to deal with a known entity than an unknown entity. The contacts with the Chinese had to be sweetened with MFN status for the contact to work. Chinese characteristically are/were a walled-in people ( no insult is intended) , "pure" in race, ancient in civilization and politically autistic. Chinese political system was the least of the consideration, when US gave them the MFN status. I hope you didn't mind that I abbreviated your name. JPR