The Realist Perspective of International Relations

[strouse]

So you supported the war in Vietnam Jennaye?  That's interesting. 

Of course not, but that doesn't take away from the fact that he volunteered for what he thought was a good cause and served bravely.  So if we're talking about "toughness" I think  Kerry had Bush beat by a long shot. 

So then you will admit that our soldiers in Iraq are heroes too, right?

I would say that.

and Jennaye YOU TOTALLY ROCK. If you lived in Seattle I would so be your firend.

You just think she's hot

[VinnyMyCousin]

So you supported the war in Vietnam Jennaye?  That's interesting. 

Of course not, but that doesn't take away from the fact that he volunteered for what he thought was a good cause and served bravely.  So if we're talking about "toughness" I think  Kerry had Bush beat by a long shot. 

Jennaye supported the war in Vietnam until Forrest volunteered, at which point she became a coke whore. 

[giffy]

So you supported the war in Vietnam Jennaye?  That's interesting. 

Of course not, but that doesn't take away from the fact that he volunteered for what he thought was a good cause and served bravely.  So if we're talking about "toughness" I think  Kerry had Bush beat by a long shot. 

So then you will admit that our soldiers in Iraq are heroes too, right?

I would say that.

and Jennaye YOU TOTALLY ROCK. If you lived in Seattle I would so be your firend.

You just think she's hot

Perhapse  , but in an intellectual way. 

[lawbuddy]

The whole "unified earth" idea is viable, as long as the rule of law is viable.  Unfortunately, because so many people are so hideously corrupt, it just ain't gonna happen.  Taking a collection city-states and forging a nation was a difficult task, but was achieved because of a common ethnic/geographic identity--separate from others--and provided for a common defense.  It was actually in the best interests of city-states to join together in order to fend off the wolves (take the principalities of Italy mentioned in "the Prince" standing side by side to fight off the French king, despite mutual hatred and jealousy).

We just don't have that kinda thing going on with this world.  The EU does, against the US, and can create an "us vs. them" mentality which goes a long way towards creating political solidarity, of which Chirac is a poignant example.  Muslim radicals are doing the same, originally with OPEC, and now with the anti-western philology.  But remember how this turned out at the turn of the last century.  Alliance building is not a good idea, no matter how powerful you are.  America is not an isolationist as in the past century, able to march in as a second wind after everyone else had tired out.  Things are going to be much different this time, and I assure you that there will be strange alliances formed.  NKorea, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and many other nations would have no problem seeing the US destroyed, despite any invested economic interests.  There will always be someone else to buy oil...

There will also always be an enemy.

So long as a man stands proudly alone, there will always be several others banded together to pull him down.

[Jennaye]

So then you will admit that our soldiers in Iraq are heroes too, right?

This is an interesting question...  On one hand, they're doing their job bravely and presumably signed up to defend our country, etc. etc. and they have no choice of mission.

On the other hand, they did sign up to be part of a branch that engages in killing and stupid wars such as the current one, and such actions cannot be justified under the "just following orders" rationale.  If they're asked to do something that's wrong (such as being part of this stupid war), they should object.

Of course, it's much easier said than done.

[A.J]

On the other hand, they did sign up to be part of a branch that engages in killing and stupid wars such as the current one, and such actions cannot be justified under the "just following orders" rationale.  If they're asked to do something that's wrong (such as being part of this stupid war), they should object.

Of course, it's much easier said than done.

This must be that intellectual side that Giffy spoke of. 

[strouse]

So then you will admit that our soldiers in Iraq are heroes too, right?

This is an interesting question...  On one hand, they're doing their job bravely and presumably signed up to defend our country, etc. etc. and they have no choice of mission.

On the other hand, they did sign up to be part of a branch that engages in killing and stupid wars such as the current one, and such actions cannot be justified under the "just following orders" rationale.  If they're asked to do something that's wrong (such as being part of this stupid war), they should object.

Of course, it's much easier said than done.

Please explain how this is different than Vietnam and your interpretation of John Kerry's service then.  Kerry admitted to committing war atrocities, yet you commended his service.

[VinnyMyCousin]

On the other hand, they did sign up to be part of a branch that engages in killing and stupid wars such as the current one, and such actions cannot be justified under the "just following orders" rationale.  If they're asked to do something that's wrong (such as being part of this stupid war), they should object.

Of course, it's much easier said than done.

This must be that intellectual side that Giffy spoke of. 

Nope...still not seeing it.

[VinnyMyCousin]

j/k Jennaye, I'm still hating on you b/c of your Mazzy Star comment 

[Jennaye]

Please explain how this is different than Vietnam and your interpretation of John Kerry's service then.  Kerry admitted to committing war atrocities, yet you called him a hero.

touche

Ok, so he wasn't a hero, but this doesn't still change the fact that he's tougher than Bush.