cspruck at mindspring.com
Sat May 31 14:54:55 CDT 2003
At 19:36 5/31/2003 +0500, Syed Zeeshan Haider wrote:
>Questions are merely comparison. I want USA not to talk needlessly.
>USA must create examples of peace by its own acts. If USA can't do this
>it must keep quite in the matters of war in other countries.
OK, now read that again, but substitute USA with Pakistan.
Oh, and try India, Afghanistan, North Korea, China, Cambodia, Indonesia, Peru,
Colombia, Israel, Palestine, Bosnia, Serbia, Saudi Arabia, Rwanda, Congo,
Liberia, Russia, and Chechnya, just to name a few off the top of my head,
on practically every continent on the planet. Hell, just grab a United Nations
directory and go down the list.
See, the problem is, the US can "create examples" for the next 1000 years,
but what other country or religion or name-your-group is actually going to
stop and suddenly decide, "Hey, we've been blowing each others brains out
for millenia, but the US is starting to behave. I guess we should, too."
Yeah, right. If anyone buys that, I've got an underwater palace on Neptune
that I'd like to sell them too.
The solutions to the world's problems do not lie entirely with the US
(whether the US government thinks that or not) and it's utterly ridiculous
for anyone in ANY country to expect that, Syed. If people can't stop bombing each
other long enough to come to a negotiating table (and be serious about it)
or allow someone else to drop in humanitarian aid or whatever, then don't
expect us or anyone else to bail you out and save *your* world just because
we can. No one is *forcing* us to make the foreign humanitarian efforts we do.
We have enough problems of our own that need funding and effort and don't get it.
As does every other country in the world, yet sacrifices are made for the greater
good. Doesn't seem like it's gotten much for anybody.
>Whoever says whatever, I never trust the intentions of USA.
Believe me, a lot of us residents don't either. Yet another problem - trust
has to go two ways. Haven't seen many countries/religions/name-your-groups
that seem too trustworthy lately. Any given parties have to *prove* to each
other they can be trusted, before it can be truly effective. It's all about
the relative risk you're willing to accept.
If you refuse to meet half way, then you'll eventually get "met" by somebody
at 75/25 or 95/5 or whatever it takes. Stand up for *your* half or it will get taken
from you. By that, I mean be a responsible global citizen, instead of bombing and
forcing your way to respect. You do that and it's not earning respect - it becomes containment.
You want peace? Step the hell up and do something peaceful.
More information about the thechat