fishin',
Lion did not say you insulted. But now I think that is a safe thing to say. Do you always put on this manly display of hubris?
And you can skip telling me to turn off my computer, you and I both know what a petty tactic that is.
Do you mean "petty" as in your little quips Dreamweaver?
Gezzy - I do not agree with you that the US (I shall assume you to mean by this that ALL countries should stay out of each other's business, by the way) should always stay out of everything.
I am glad, for instance, that Australia involved herself immediately in WW II. I am glad that we FINALLY stood up to Indonesia and intervened in East Timor (WITH UN sanction, by the way).
We cannot - and especially the US cannot, because of her size and weight - avoid influencing each other. I think that what needs to be always carefully considered is HOW and WHEN we do this.
I do not think Lion is arguing against inolvement - I could, of course, be wrong - I think s/he is arguing against the way in which the US, especially, but the west in general, is currently throwing its weight around.
Deb
I see what you're saying and I agree. I suppose I got a bit too carried away in my respose and know that there are times when involvement is necessary and I fully agree with you when you said that things need to be carefully considered. In my opinion, the US has been way out of line for quite some time now and waiting around to see what they do next is like walking on eggshells. It's very frustrating to say the least!
dlowan wrote:
I do not think Lion is arguing against inolvement - I could, of course, be wrong - I think s/he is arguing against the way in which the US, especially, but the west in general, is currently throwing its weight around.
That pretty much sums it up
Fisher'
I will sink my teeth into your post soon enough. No time now though, gotta get back to the Lab.
Yellow, black or chocolate?
Whew - things seem to have calmed down - I was about to put out a brachiation alert!
Calmed down?? Not any longer!
I have no problem with a culture trying to spread its own values over the globe, if those values state that every (wo)man has equal rights and liberties, and that the economical market should be free and open to everyone. What could be wrong with that, what could be wrong in trying to convey that message to cultures where this basis is not ascertained? In my opinion: nothing.
However, that's not what's happening, because the present US White House occupants don't believe in this ideological basis themselves, but rather in a totalitarian, repressive system directed by an elite to further their personal economical interests. That has NOTHING to do with the original values of the Republic (which you share with the French, by the way). It only amounts to a colonization of other hemispheres, under the hypocritical guise of democracy - which was trampled for this purpose in the first place, in both the 2000 and 2002 elections. I don't think Americans fully understand under what kind of government they presently reside.
Maybe that's because fascism has not occurred in their history before.
.....the things he loves...heeheehee
That's truth hittin' ya, my dear Aussie
