The question of whether they'll pursue WMD technology is Korea's. But whether or not they'd use it... depends on China's permission. China would not permit it. You may not like the NK regime. You might find it irrational. But the more you study their actions, the more you realize that there is a rational pattern. Americans have a tendency to call "risk-takers" "nuts." Does that mean they're really crazy? No. It just means that their cost analysis differs from our own. However, the key is then to find the degree to which their cost-benefit analysis differs from our own. If one of their key goals is regime preservation, then the relationship is manageable. NK's key goal is regime preservation. And they can't preserve their regime without Chinese support. Ultimately, they're going to have to remerge with SK. Or else NK will disintegrate as a state. Kim wants WMD as a bargaining chip. Nothing more, nothing less. Things were improving between NK and SK, and between NK and the US. And then Bush had to open his mouth.
haven: Oh, bull****e. What, you think Kim is going to send a diplomat to China to ask "can we nuke the American bases in Japan?" They don't need anyone's permission. They will do it if they feel that they need to - and that's what worries me. I would not be concerned at all if I thought that the Chinese actually had control over those aspect of their 'foreign relations'. They do not. They're as crazy as national govts get. Why did they refuse food aid for the 98-99 famine - in which tens of thousands of their own people died? Why do they periodically challenge Japanese and S. Korean naval units in sea battles that they cannot win? Why do they contunue to build missiles (even given the testing moratorium we have gained from them by their extortion tactics) when the only possible targets for those missiles' range are US targets??? Why continue WMD programs, even when IAEA officials are snooping around their turf? Yeah, bargaining chips. That's all it is. You seem to think that every govt on the planet is rational, and that they will always act in accordance with whatever your Harvard (or whatever) prof says is the governing diplomatic doctrine of the time. Well guess what? Some people are f*ing crazy. A few governments are crazy, too. N. Korea is one of them. And please, don't try to pin this one on Georgie. This problem existed long before he got there. He is just stating the obvious. (what has political rhetoric come to, when you must avoid stating the obvious in order to keep everyone happy? I guess political rhetoric isn't the problem...)
Grizzled you wanted to know: why on earth is Bush labelling them as part of the "Axis of Evil"? This is a speechwriter's phrase trying to parrot "Evil Empire" from the Reagan era. Bubya and his father have always tried to mimic Reagan who was a political genius compared to the tone deaf patricians of the Bush clan. The Bush administration gang does virtually every move with the next election in mind. Fortunately for them, the never ending war on the Axix of Evil, if promoted properly, can extend into the 2004 presidential election cycle and people will forget about the Bush family's continual involvement with the major financial scandals of our time-- the S&L scandal (Neil) and the Enron scandal, bubya etc.
Joe Joe, thanks for being the first to try to give an historical example of volunteerism making a major impact o society as a whole. It may well be true that in traditional Naive American tribal societies a form of volunterrism did that. Of course the whole society was organized differently; doubt the chief for instance earned hundreds of times what they average tirbe member did. I, too, think that welfare should be conditioned on employment or public service. During the Great Depression the US gov. had the Work Progress Administration the WPA, which did that. To this day the public parks created and the priceless oral histories and the irreplaceable original folk music recordings and other fruits of this massive government employment program (WPA) are still being enjoyed by US citizens. I would suggest for instance a real "war on crime" and terrorism, perhaps. Have the federal government hire, say 10 million security guards and baggage handlers etc. to accomplish this. Once the unemployment rate is down to zero, all but the totally unskilled, or even perhaps lazy will work. The down side for the Bushs and those who run this country is that it would also drive up the price of labor that they hire in their comapnies.. So they won't allow this type of approach. Just look at the fight Dick Armey and Tom Delay put up when they thought that the baggage checkers at the airport might get good wages and benefits as government employees. Even 9/11 was not enough to abandon their low wage policies. Another welfare food stamp story. When I worked there, we had a day off of the grind and went to see a beautiful "back to Work program". They provided the welfare mothers: new clothers to interview in, resumes, and a job search support group so that thehy would not be discouraged when they were turned down over and over due to lack of experience and skills. It was enough to bring tears to your eyes. They urged us workers to send over some prosects. So I sent over a fairly presentable young woman who had impressed me because she used to sit and read thick romance novels while I filled out the never ending forms. She was articulate and valued her time. I asked her is she wanted to go and she was excited. A few months later at the next interview I asked her what happened. She said she had gone and really like the program. She had found a minimum wage job, but couldn't take it because the program could not provide subsidized daycare in her area of town and the cost to babysit three or four kids exceeded the take home at minimum wage. Last person I referred. I would support it, but you must unmderstand that to really put the type of woman I mentioned to work, will require more government aid to her in food stamps, health care and child care than she earns at minimum wage. I would support this as good for her character and that of her kids, but it is actually cheaper to keep her on welfare and I believe that is the bottom line for many..
Weren't Armey and Delay picked as numbers 1 and 2 as the meanest legislators by staffers a couple of years ago? Guys like Delay keep me from being a Republican among other things. BTW...I don't believe the President makes a 100 times more than the average American that works. I doubt its even ten times. He gets plenty of Fringe benefits, but so do most leaders. The Native American doesn't fit as a good example because of different social and economic structure, but the modern global economy and changing social structure, there aren't any good example in history for us to learn from that fit the US's situation as a capitalist society. The US going to year round schooling is the only way to solve most of the daycare problems, but I believe this is a state issue not a federal issue. I wish Texas had the balls to do it.
glynch - I don't have numbers in the aggregate...I don't know how much aid churches/mosques/temples give to the poor in relation to the federal government. I can only tell you from my experience how my church has enriched the lives of people in need. please keep in mind we are a relatively small church... we have adopted three refugee families: two are muslim families that escaped from the troubles in bosnia...another is a guy about my age (27) whose family was killed my muslim extremists in Iran..he was imprisoned at age 17, escaped..moved to pakistan...met up with catholic missionaries who protected him there...and he sought asylum to the U.S. He grew up Muslim (though not of the extreme fashion)...ask him why he chose Houston, and said it's because he knew there were more churches in the south so he was more likely to have people willing to help him...the only people he had ever encountered in his life who helped him were those associated with the church. We work through InterFaith Ministries, a terrific non-profit, that assists in relocating him, setting him up with a church, providing intensive English training and job training, and teaches him about life in a new culture. we run a food bank through our church we have told the managers of the surrounding apartments that if any tenant gets in trouble and needs assistance to meet rent, to let us know so that families don't lose a home. i can't tell you how many we've actually helped out with that..but it's quite a few. we have a mentor program through a group called Kids' Hope which mentors at-risk kids in the elementary school next door. we do a monthly mission project on a saturday afternoon where we go and either assist in building a home or repairing a home we send funds to various groups around the world, including an orphange in Goma that particularly tugs at my heart. we have a tremendous prison ministry program (one of my business partners is intimately involved with this)...in particular, we help out the families of those who are in prison, as well. i could go on..i know i'm leaving stuff out...not only for the sake of time, but also because i'm forgetting. the church isn't perfect by any means, I'll grant you. but the church does some marvelous things for people. i make no apologies for saying that I participate in these things because Jesus loved me first...because He said how I treat the least of people is how he deems I treat Him. I make no apologies for that, Glynch. But please don't say that the work is insignificant...I can think of no more important work, whatever the motivation is for it.
treeman: Good question. At this point I'm very much kicking around ideas. I wrote a long answer and scrapped it because there were just too many unknowns. I agree with the desired end result, and the fact that it can't be achieved through a puppet government. Throwing it in their lap seems like risky business though. This technique had only marginal success in Russia, and if it fails we will be in a situation where we will have raised hopes in the people only to have them dashed. This may leave us in a worse situation than we started. I think there would have to be lots of support, as you say, with as little appearance of biased interference as possible. In broad terms, the approach should be one that is very much focused on a positive outcome for the people of Iraq, and defining "positive outcome" in their terms as much as possible. What the west really wants is peace, long term peace, I would say, (although there is the oil issue too. I'm not sure how big this is now with so many other sources of oil and alternative energy on the horizon.) Peace comes through positive relationships. Positive relationships occur when both sides feel empowered and respected. Afghanistan will be a test of sorts. The conditions are different, but the general approach will be the thing to watch. HOWEVER, we need to keep close tabs on the nature of the greater social/spiritual/political movement in the area. The conditions, to my eye, are vaguely reminiscent of the ones before WWII. There is a region that has been repressed, for a long time in this case, (for various reasons, but western intervention in the area is a big factor). The feelings of national pride and a spiritual pride in this case, are welling up… I have a bad feeling about this. Win win situations, positive sum games, are the best solution to any conflict/negotiation, and there is lots of room for that here. OTOH, sometimes you have a party in a dispute/conflict who is blind with rage/pride/arrogance, and their mindset is fundamentally different. If you can't deal with the driver of the mania, then you're ****ed. That party will go out in blaze of glory and do considerable damage on the way down. So what are the drivers for this movement and how do we address them? This is your turf treeman, but an obvious one is them not having control over their own region. This is immediately problematic, because much of that sense of lack of control is derived from the situation in Israel and Palestine … @#%#*. (You couldn't pay me enough to be a strategist in Washington now.) This is not the whole story, although I think it's a big part. There are other old grievances in Iran, for example, which could potentially be addressed. I was surprised that Iran was a major sponsor of terrorism, and I'm not sure what the driving force is for this. The people are fairly moderate, and they are Persians, not Arabs, so they many not feel as slighted by the Palestinian situation. Treeman, do you have any insights on why the are so active in promoting terrorism?
This must be for domestic consumption. I makes you wonder if the Enron scandal is about to heat up and he's creating a diversion. This doesn't make sense to me in terms of international PR, and it may in fact be the first major misstep by the US.
Madmax. I am genuinely impressed by the accomplishments of your church and its members. What I object to is the cynical use of volunteerism by the Bush's etc. to undercut even bigger programs by the government to accomplish on a humanitarian level the same goals as you and the church members work on due to your religious faith. There is unfortunately a major conflict between having as a primary goal lowering the taxes on the upper middle class and even more drastically the rich and accomplishing the humanitrian goals of your church. I would agree also that if everyone was a perfect Christian that we might not need few if any social welfare programs. I don't think we should run our country on such an idealistic analysis. In Scandinavia where they have plenty of freedom of speech the public health statistics of the upper 20% are virtually identical to those of the lowest 20%. I've been to what used to be called West Germany and the whole thing looks middle class compared to the many pockets of poverty in the US. I'm not trying to knock religion, but these countries are not nearly as church going as we are in the US. I am hopeful that one day the sincerely religious Christians will realize that their commitment to their fellow man is in contradiction to the primary goal of the Bush type Republicans to lower their crowd's taxes, no matter what the social costs to society.
i make a distinction between christian charity and the government's "charity" which is compelled by law with the threat of jail time.
just because u are poor does not make you a deadbeat just because u rich doesn't mean you excell Clinton Excelled GW had a rich and powerful and i will admit it . . a very inteligent father. While you may not like Clinton . . he made a MAJOR COME UP while on the other foot. . where the hell would GW be with out GH? Rocket River
