A scenario doesn't have to be particularly appealing to have a better final outcome. There are 30,000 Iraqis dead today. That doesn't mean that our current actions aren't going to be the cause of 100 times that in the next decade. I was just countering Scott's scenario with the notion that sometimes you have to stomach the stench of what evolves naturally in order that the future is more peaceful and steady. I certainly can't say with any certainty that what I laid out would come to pass anymore than Scott could say his notions would.
But I sense this cowboy mentality in our foreign policy where we can never sit back as moral observers and let the world evolve on its own. We have this need to mess with things, this arrogance that we have all the answers. Of course a lot of this need to screw with things comes from our economic insecurity. My gosh, allow a couple of Mideastern countries to duke it out? Our oil prices will go up and my stock portfolio will lose its value.
The other problem is that whenever Israel is involved we get this warm fuzzy about the cradle of Christianity and somehow relegate their status to absurd levels. They're big boys and can sink or swim on their own in my opinion.
I honestly believe we're going to see someone chuck nukes at their neighbor within our lifetime no matter what we do. It's a horrible thought but maybe the world needs to see how terrible that is again to slap people back to reality and let mankind know what unbridled nationalism and rabid religiosity can cause. If we can evolve naturally without that lesson so much better but If it's going to happen, I certainly would prefer it be somewhere far from our shores and without our involvement in either side.
As it is, it seems we're setting everyone's gunsights on our country, destroying the good will we've cultivated by our generosity. It's time to start playing some chess here and not go for the quick fix. History shows those rarely work.
Current Events » in reply to Okay, now I'm really confused.
re: Okay, now I'm really confused.
The whole thread (79 posts)
- has anyone mentioned here Bush's acknowledging 30,000 Civilian casualties in Iraq?
- re: has anyone mentioned that this is hardly news?
- Never mind
- Good point but
- yes those elections are very good news. Think of this though:
- I've got a better one.
- Freedom and democracy...and where would that be?
- that's not really the point here
- "Could anyone still say, 'this is worth 30,000 deaths'?"
- Get real.
- that's not really the point here
- Freedom and democracy...and where would that be?
- re: See the alternate timeline and please tell me where my assumptions are wrong.
- I've got a better one.
- yes those elections are very good news. Think of this though:
- Good point but
- re: has anyone mentioned here Bush's acknowledging 30,000 Civilian casualties in Iraq?
- Well, they were going to die sometime anyway, so Bush isn't really responsible.
- "I ask merely for information......."
- Meanwhile, as the American Left desperately prays for failure...
- We know the election is going to be a success.....Katherine Harris was placed in charge...
- So which finger has the paint on it?
- Dear Tom, F*** off. (n/t)
- re: Meanwhile, as the American Left desperately prays for failure...
- Is that a purple chad? (n/t)
- Meanwhile, as the American Left desperately prays for failure...