Nano Nano wrote:
(2) The oil thing. Yeah, there's some of that. But do me a favor and separate out (1) from this in your rhetoric.
Not my rhetoric but it is a common enough one that people need to address it.
The best thing you can do about (2) is change cars, the the oil companies will become other kinds of companies. Arabs didn't used to be important 100 years ago. It will be that way again.
Hard to change cards any more. :P
My concept of "local" and "nation" are changing. I'm pretty sure we're not going to see eye-to-eye on this one.
So you believe that any time any nation has a problem with out we (meaning your nation) does something it is perfectly OK for them to invade?
What are you, new?
No, there was a point there if you had cared to engage your brain for more than a few seconds to scratch your nuts. The concepts seem to be quite clear. If Mike did not believe that then the concepts of local and nation is defined. IE, Our nation clearly has power of what's within its borders (local to it) and obviously if Mike didn't like other nations meddling in his nations crap then they would feel the same way which provides a basis for the concept of nation.
From that it is easy to define policy when it comes to certain matters. A nation can influence external problems by governing what it controls without also going out messing in other nation's crap. To do the latter invites the same to be done to it. And if we don't want people messing with the US they why the hell do we put up with the US messing with other nations. It's called a double-standard, really pissy things.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature