Candle, I hope you are wrong. Even common sense says we are, on the whole, to be given a bit more credit than this. Bush was elected with a minority of the popular vote for one thing. Colin Powell has been put in a no win position as SOS. Too bad. But I would rather have him there with the potential of exerting his influence than to have another Ashcroft type in the cabinet. Powell being acquiescent and quiet right now is still more reassuring than to have a hawk without a brain in his position. At least he can, and hopefully will, make a difference ultimately. As far as "confusing" the domestic way of life with foreign policy, I like to think that this is not a problem amongst we the American people. But I understand your concern that it can and does appear that way to "outsiders". But certainly with exceptions. Look at what Traderfut says. It boils down to an arab living in western europe who admires America and it's people and despises it's foreign policies. The good news is we can easily change our "policies". (Every election we get a big chance). It is our society, our way of life, that will (hopefully) not change so readily. If at all. The one thing we all seem to have in common is a belief in defending our freedoms. We hold them very dear. We surely have an "image" problem right now worldwide. You yourself seem to be one of the more vocal critics of our foreign policies. And justly so. I feel the same, as you know. Only difference is I seem to hold out more hope that we can remedy our woes more easily than do you. Here, I hope you are wrong again. But we have the same desires essentially....to keep our freedoms and not be the world's policeman, etc. It was your comment about looking forward to the "ultimate deteriorization" (is that a word?) of our "empire?" to which I object. I sincerely have faith that we can, as we have before, adapt to a changing world and do it in a way that is universally beneficial. The thought of a "global Islamic" competing factor is kind of scary to me now. Not that I disagree with your contention that the world NEEDS diversity. It does. Just seemingly a movement based (apparently) on conquest and intolerance (sorry TF, but it is not my words...or ideas) should not to be considered as a viable or desirable balancing factor. How about a globalized version of Buddhism? Hindu? Atheist? Shinto? Jewish? Any non, or less aggressive, or expansive culture. Or religion. We need tolerance to balance our act. Particularly if the US continues on it's increasingly steady course towards the Christian Right. This is not the direction nor the intent our country was founded on. (Remember separation of church and state?...Ashcroft and Bush apparently don't). Hopefully the course will reverse. Or slow down at least. Problem is, Bush will have the opportunity to manipulate the Supreme Court with appointments that we will have to live with for 30 or even 40 years. Scary thought that so much power can be granted in such a short time that will last for such a long time by a guy put in office without a majority of votes, let alone a mandate. Peace, and good trading, rs7
You were implying an insult/criticism by putting freedom in quotes. To anyone reading your post, it was obvious. You even got a little pom-pom waving from TF for that comment. If you think that Germany is (mostly) a Muslim society you are beyond help. And I'll therefore cease all efforts towards a dialogue right here. Have a nice day!
You shouldn't globalize your own life experiences and assume others have lived similar experiences. I'd be willing to bet that: Over half of the U.S. population above the age of 15 doesn't know who the Secretary of State is. 10% probably don't know who our own president is. National Geographic did a survery / test and found a majority of Americans could not locate Iraq on a globe. More troubling, over 30% couldn't locate the state of New Jersey and a little over 10% couldn't locate the U.S. on a globe. So, when you ponder foreign policy, don't think that, since you are from a well-educated urban area, that everyone else shares your intelligence / knowledge. However, when our elected officials start touting nuclear bomb threats, that is plainly going much too far. Everyone knows that Bush, along with his statue covering, far right-winged thugs, will be working overtime to find the slightest provocatation to attack Iraq. We're not addressing the real problems with terrorism -- why are they terrorizing us? Nobody wants to give in, but our current administation needs to either "shit or get off the pot." This is the same administration that has John Walters, drug czar of the U.S., touting that pot causes date rapes. Have you seen the commercial? They show a girl about to get it and she is clearly saying "No... no!" Yet, if weed affected her judgement, why would she be saying, "no!" Alcohol has been used to get into people's pants for far longer. U.S. policy is all ass-backwards. This country is going to shit and I am an American.
Aphiiieeeeeee!!!!!!!! You boy genius you, some words of wisdom there But seriously folks! we got a monkey with one finger on the nukes and the other up his ..... :eek: what the frigging F%$K are they doing ???????????? http://www.dubyadubyadubya.com/ THIS IS NOT WHAT WE ARE ABOUT
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/12/12/nkorea.nukes/index.html Surely North Korea is a greater threat to the USA than Iraq... but the USA is not gonna attack North Korea cos there is no oil to be stolen there...