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.

Pastimes : Kosovo -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RealMuLan who wrote (9190)	5/20/1999 11:40:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17770

Yiwu Zhang--- It would be an interesting poll, considering the repeated assertions that the world hates us. If that is so, you have nothing to fear. If it is not so, but everyone wants to be part of our country, even if it means staying where they are, then I guess we aren't so bad after all...

To: RealMuLan who wrote (9190)	5/20/1999 12:11:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17770

<tfic> means tongue firmly in cheek.

To: RealMuLan who wrote (9190)	5/21/1999 12:43:00 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17770

or would they rather go under the Empire of the United States? Yiwu, One day we will find ourselves in a world where nations will have to sacrifice a measure of their sovereignty to a global governing body. The only question that remains is how long it takes, and its ultimate form. The US has been promoting representative democracy, while Russia and China promoted Marxism and Maoism. So being the strongest economic nation, the most free, the most diverse country, AND having thoroughly discredited the Marxist ideology, it stands to reason that the US is going to ensure that those values it's people fought and died for will be protected and extended to everyone equally and responsibly. Just as Bejing claims that it is taking a slow, orderly path towards political liberarlization, the US is taking a slow, orderly and measured approach to permaturely surrendering to the UN, its constitutional sovreignty and unilateral ability to act in its interests. The US has nothing to gain from trying to completely dominate the world, except in promoting a close form of its political system as the model for a world gov't. No single national democracy, no matter how large, can govern all of the people of this planet. Even a totalitarian regime would have difficulty controlling everyone. So dominating a world gov't organization would inherently be unstable for the US. What is required instead is a combination of somewhat equally powerful spheres of influence. Europe is in the process of trying to form one, and one of these days, when China opens up its society and accepts is responsibility, it will quite likely be the nation that influences decisions in the Pacific Rim. But, pardon the metaphor, the US will be damned if they give the keys to the Asian Kingdom to a nation that does not yet share its values for individual rights and freedom. Call me arrogant, but China has a role of peacemaker that it should be playing here. Instead it and Moscow chose to exploit a weak chink in NATO and Europe's armor by encouraging Milosevic to defy world opinion towards the Kosovo issue. There simply is no way that Milo would have stuck his neck out to the extent that he did, except for the tacit political support providing by Russia and China. The US has been trying to settle this problem peacefully for years now. The Dayton Accords were signed in the US, not in Moscow or Bejing, right? If Bejing spent more time helping to solve instability in the world instead of trying to create it, then we'd all be better off. Regards, Ron