Tests  Types  Diagrams  Books  Forums  Enneagram Relationships  What's hot now  Search
Main | Type 4 | Type 5 | Movie | Care | Chat

Enneagram Type 5 Board Archive

You asked for a reply.
[ Boards: Main, Type4, Type5, Movie, Care, Chat ][ Top 10 ] [ HOME ]

You asked for a reply.


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Type 5 Message Board ]

Posted by Ev (134.163.253.126) on March 11, 2003 at 11:50:20:

In Reply to: Showdown Iraq!.... posted by 5 (205.251.209.200) on March 09, 2003 at 20:27:55:

5,

You said: “First, North Korea's a bigger problem.”

You speak of N. Korea being a bigger problem so I’d ask you how ‘you’ think it should be handled. Should the US commence bilateral talks with the N. Koreans as China and Russia suggest? [Keep in mind that the countries that suggest such a course of action are the same countries that are among the most vocal opponents of US unilateralism.] Should the Korean crisis be the US’s alone to deal with? This seems to be the prevalent view at the moment. Shouldn’t China, who has a huge stake in maintaining a nuclear-free Korean peninsula, be bringing some of its power and influence to bear? This non-acceptance of “US unilateralism” is very ‘situation oriented’.

You said: “Bush is spending way too much money . . . how long can the U.S. keep this kind of spending up. Some states are already feeling the pressure(which is, in my opinion, is why the emergency status was lowered back to yellow).”

5, why does it matter to you, a Canadian, how the US allocates its resources?

You said:” There has been a lot protest world wide. I'm Canadian, so I feel very connected to the U.S. but listening to Bush lately. I can't help but dislike your country more and more. There's two main reasons for that: Bush sounds nuts . . . like Hitler . . . maybe worse. You think your nationalism is a good thing. Yes . . . Woo!!! The US unites even if they know what there doing is wrong; well great for you.
That paragraph was just to make the point if I, a Canadian is losing faith in the red, white and blue; just think what the rest of the world is thinking. I mean once you attack Iraq, people are going to sign up, join the terrorists. By starting this war too early you will make millions of enemy's. Just think why do people in the middle east hate you now? Because of old wars, because you got involved in their business. In Islam it seems allowing foreign troops on your land in a bad thing. That's a huge reason why Bin Laden started the terror network in the first place. So now Bush decides to fix the problem by doing the very thing that started it. “


Sweeping aside your comparison of Bush with Hitler, which I respect as your opinion but personally think is absurd, on what basis are you making the claim that the US, in a fit of nationalist zeal, is uniting ‘even if they know what there doing is wrong”? I’m assuming that you’re resting your argument on the fact that there were protesters marching in the streets, chanting slogans, and carrying signs that disagree with US policy. So, just to make sure that I’m not depriving you of an opportunity to fully make your argument, I’d ask why it is that you think the average American believes that US policy and actions are “wrong”?

5, you need to understand that there’ll be no shortage of terrorist recruits regardless of what the US does or doesn’t do. And even more bizarre yet, you associate terrorist recruitment with the ‘timing’ of military operations. Would this mean that someone who would willingly pledge their life to the destruction of ‘the great Satan’, if a war started in March, would see the folly of their position in May? It sounds as if your solution to our middle-eastern woes is to first check with the terrorists and gain their consent before we do anything. I can see it now; “Oh, by the way Mr. Bin Laden, would it be acceptable to you if some of us didn’t convert to Islam?” Most people miss the fact that Bin Laden and his ilk only see as legitimate those governments that conform to sharia law. So, barring us becoming an Islamic nation, how do you propose we win the terrorists over?

You said: “What will happen if the US goes into war without UN backing. Since the US is one of the five main members of the UN, if they/you ignore the UN why should any other nation take it seriously. It the League of nations all over again.”

Actually I don’t think much of anything will happen if the US and its coalition go to war without UN approval. Oh, possibly the UN will increasingly be seen for what it is, a feckless organization that lacks the moral authority or the force necessary to back its resolutions. I think it’ll be less likely that a future President would take any matter deemed to be of national security significance to the UN. After all, why should we, or any other nation for that matter, subject our foreign policy to the approval or disapproval of nations that have no tangible stake in the matter? When the Chechnya’s were raising hell in Russia should they have checked with Guinea or Cameroon before responding?

Also think about the action taken in Kosovo under NATO auspices. Three of the permanent Security Council members launched an attack without UN approval. Why was that, and what disruptions in world unity can you attribute to these actions? The vast majorities of military actions are engaged in outside of UN resolutions or approval. Why doesn’t the UN do something about that? You can choose to see the UN as the final arbiter of all things but I’d just as soon the US not follow your example.

Here’s something to ponder in your spare moments. Why do you think Hans Blix chose to leave out certain information regarding proscribed weapons and weapons systems that would have bolstered the US position from his oral statement before the Security Council? Could it be this revelation that has helped convince you of the necessity of this war?

> Well lately . . . I have been watching CNN and all other news shows nonstop.
> From what I've seen I can't understand how anyone is for war on Iraq.

> First, North Korea's a bigger problem.

> Bush is spending way too much money . . . how long can the U.S. keep this kind of spending up. Some states are already feeling the pressure(which is, in my opinion, is why the emergency status was lowered back to yellow).

> There has been a lot protest world wide. I'm Canadian, so I feel very connected to the U.S. but listening to Bush lately. I can't help but dislike your country more and more. There's two main reasons for that: Bush sounds nuts . . . like Hitler . . . maybe worse. You think your nationalism is a good thing. Yes . . . Woo!!! The US unites even if they know what there doing is wrong; well great for you.

> That paragraph was just to make the point if I, a Canadian is losing faith in the red, white and blue; just think what the rest of the world is thinking. I mean once you attack Iraq, people are going to sign up, join the terrorists. By starting this war too early you will make millions of enemy's. Just think why do people in the middle east hate you now? Because of old wars, because you got involved in their business. In Islam it seems allowing foreign troops on your land in a bad thing. That's a huge reason why Bin Laden started the terror network in the first place. So now Bush decides to fix the problem by doing the very thing that started it.

> What will happen if the US goes into war without UN backing. Since the US is one of the five main members of the UN, if they/you ignore the UN why should any other nation take it seriously. It the League of nations all over again.

> In addition, Don't think winning the war on terror will be easy. It's not easy to fight a group with no ties to any one nation.

> Anyway now that I've said a few of the reasons I'm against the war on Iraq I'd like to ask you what you think on the topic . . . especially those of you here who are for the war.

> P.S. This whole thing makes me question democracy. Yes, the people vote someone into office but do not really know what he/she stands for. And then ultimately don't get any say in what choices are made. OK I'd never be against democracy, but I think that the senate or the people should have a far greater influence, generally all countries actions reflect their leaders views; the people need to have some sort of veto ability.




Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Type 5 Message Board ] [ FAQ ]
type5board/messages/9553.html