IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 1 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Well, if they didn't invade it...
would we know it to be within their sphere of influence? Unless you define "sphere of influence" so broadly as to divest it of practical meaning.

And if they do invade it, there's proof that it's within their sphere of influence. Unless you're willing to argue that invading a country doesn't influence that country in the least.

But never mind invading. They don't need to invade. they've got nukes.

[link|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html]
Everything's a mystery until you figure out how it works.
If competence is considered "hubris" then may I and my country always be as "arrogant" as we can possibly manage.
Expand Edited by marlowe July 16, 2002, 02:50:34 PM EDT
New Forget the term RED CHINA, why not try DARK AMERICA it is ..
more up-to-date and more accurately reflects how some countries see America and many of its actions around the world today.

We surely all know by now that US is the world's *only* superpower and when people in the US start implying or directly criticising a smaller weaker country of being beligerent (when we all plainly know US could swat them in short order) one has to question who is the aggressor.

This applies to the now demonised Saddam Hussien of Iraq as much as to the RED baiting remarks in the original post, about China.

I am one who is generally grateful that US won the cold war. US are my countries friends, but, that doesn't mean I have to like what I see as bullying or barefacedly beligerent acts against smaller weaker countries as a means of keeping them under control.

I posted this item elsewhere but will repeat it here -

"Late 1940s - after WWII British power begins to wane and America steps in. George Kennan, U.S. State Department stated in 1948," The US has about 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population. In this situation we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and daydreaming, and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford the luxury of altruism and world benefaction. We should cease to talk about such vague and unreal objectives as human rights, the raising of living standards and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.""


This above quote clearly and accurately outlines why Bush's administration is behaving as it is internationally.

Here is an interesting and seemily very fair perspective on some US actions in light of the reality that it *is* the world's only super power.

[link|http://www.spacedaily.com/news/bmdo-01zzq.html|China fears post cold war superpower USA]

Question I would ask is are their fears unjustified or very easy to understand. To truly answer this one needs the ability to wear the other persons shoes.

Cheers

Doug Marker

New Believe the George Kennan screed is fully equivalent to
the, "cut off their air supply" M$ e-mail (re. the illegal, criminal leveraging of monopoly power against a competitor with a Superior product.. (which they admitted! they could only copy, feature by feature..))

Kennan's 1948! stark revelation demonstrates a full awareness at the highest scales of US Government: that we were [already] 'consuming' a vastly disproportionate share of the world's wealth, that we intended to continue or expand 'our share' ... and certainly suggested the lengths to which we Would Go - were Anyone to attempt to interfere with this (nothing less than) Imperialist direction.

No subsequent weasel-words can much rebut his baldfaced assertions: the record *since* is fully consistent with that having been our aim. Or rebut the proposition that: it still is. Perhaps.. more rapacious than ever, despite the spin/truth ratio of 100:1 (?)

Hoist from Our Own Horse's Mouth\ufffd.

(No wonder Billy Gates is still a Murican Hero; he exemplifies *US* !! and... not to worry pretty-little heads that his / our behaviour is counter to those lip-service Principles we say... "we want to spread around the planet because they are all undistilled Goodness - by inspection..")


{sheesh}


Ashton
The Answer is: No! indeed we have no 'shame', just lust for $/power like every previous Empire. Tawdry. Ultimately catastrophic, unless 'we' grow up reeel fast, via some next traumatic event.
     Don't forget about Red China - (marlowe) - (17)
         We aren't forgetting about them - (orion)
         M.A.D. II - (Brandioch) - (7)
             You forgot about the "Star Wars" program - (orion) - (6)
                 On $500 hammers - (Steve Lowe) - (5)
                     You can't fix how the government buys things.... - (Simon_Jester)
                     Having spent 11 years in audit defense and . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (2)
                         The game. Remember it well. - (Steve Lowe) - (1)
                             Alas, we didn't have that option . . - (Andrew Grygus)
                     Thanx for ruining it for me - (SpiceWare)
         Re: Do you truly believe that ? - (dmarker2) - (7)
             Not to increase your wrath but - (boxley) - (3)
                 Re: Not to increase your wrath but - (dmarker2) - (2)
                     earlier than I thought 499 AD - (boxley) - (1)
                         Re: Interesting thoughts - (dmarker2)
             Well, if they didn't invade it... - (marlowe) - (2)
                 Forget the term RED CHINA, why not try DARK AMERICA it is .. - (dmarker2) - (1)
                     Believe the George Kennan screed is fully equivalent to - (Ashton)

Yeah, it was some sort of corporate sabotage.
97 ms