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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: jbe who wrote (6586)10/2/1998 12:13:00 AM
From: Achilles  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 67261
 
>>My feeling is that this Administration (like previous administrations, alas) has used, and will continue to use, different standards in different situations. In some, like the Chechen situation, it will let itself be guided by "realpolitik." In others (e.g., bombing of pharmaceutical factory in Sudan), it lets the "lone cowboy syndrome" govern its actions. In still others, when it is both easy and expedient, the U.S. professes to be inspired by "concern for human rights."<<

I think this is essentially correct. Though I would merely point out that while it is possible (though not normally desirable) for the USA to be a 'lone cowboy' in Sudan, this possibility is not open to the USA in Russia. Even if America is the world's policeman (and trust me, this is a concept with which I'm not entirely comfortable), there are still places that are beyond its jurisdiction.



To: jbe who wrote (6586)10/2/1998 1:56:00 AM
From: pezz  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 67261
 
<<In other words we are scared of the Russians,who represent a potential threat,we are not scared of the Serbs,who represent no threat to us as a nation.Hense we can bluster at the Serbs,but not at the Russians.WE stand up for the human rights of "oppresed peoples" only when their oppressors are weak >>Well that is exactly right what else can we do?
Life and the world we live in isn't always pretty .But we can only do the best we can.Define it any way you want.
pez



To: jbe who wrote (6586)10/2/1998 10:37:00 AM
From: Les H  Respond to of 67261
 
>We stand up for the human rights of "oppressed peoples" only when
>their oppressors are weak.

More importantly, when our financial interests are not at stake.