by RICoder » Sep 18, 2001 @ 5:51pm
Muuhuuuhaaahaaa!!!!<br><br>1) Right, we funded the Afghanis and they funded the VC. Not too gentlemanly. But, that was not my point, so for clarity I will elaborate.<br><br>-The natural degradation of power in a nation-state comes from within. This is historically demonstrable, from Rome to the British Empire and beyond. The young nation-state comes to power through ragged warfare (case: US guerilla fighting in the Revolution). Power is held, and grows. Eventually the populus becomes politically active, and gets a sense of elitism. This invariably leads to an intollerance for attrocity in most forms. (case: Britain wearin red and fighting in lines). This is when weakness is shown. Gulf War: We allowed troops to return to Bagdad instead of slaughtering them.<br><br>2) I somehow doubt that Machievellian strategy can be labled as insanity.<br><br>3) I, also, feel the pain of the free world. However, in this case, I believe that the US needs to have its priorities in order. To concern ourselves with everyone else's problems is too overwhelming. We leave our borders open to help others, what do we get? We help with disaster relief, who pays us back? We send troops to help others in their wars, are they concerned with our needs? In this regard, I view this as a US issue, and a US issue only. I welcome our friends to the fight, but I don't much care about their needs and wants right now. If they can benifit, benifit from the US action on our terms.<br><br>4) On this point, I have this to say. The rules are going to change. I know this. We are going to be fighting down and dirty. You won't see it on TV. You will only hear of unusual deaths and weird explosions. This is not going to be a collaboritive exercise.
<iframe src="http://gamercard.xbox.com/RICoder.card" scrolling="no" frameBorder="0" height="140" width="204">RICoder</iframe>