Quote:
Originally posted by powerclown
Good points, rb.
I've heard it said before that blaming the problems of the Middle East on Israel is like blaming the problems of the United States on Rhode Island. The Arab world is sitting on huge quantities of valuable natural resources, and if they are poor, it's because they allow themselves to be run by tribal kleptocracies and be hobbled by medieval interpretations of their religious beliefs that prevent them from joining the modern world. As well, the governments of the Middle Eastern countries avoid scrutiny of their corruption and pillaging by blaming Israel and the US for all their problems.
|
The issue of Israel does have very little to do with the state of Middle Eastern economics, but your assessment completely ignores the role of colonial powers in shaping the modern arab states, as well as the continued western support for the very same "kleptocracies" that you mention. I'm not trying to lay all of the blame on outside forces, but we shouldn't ignore the effect of historical and economic forces on the region. As always, subjects of such complexity do not lend themselves to simple explanations.
Quote:
It is a double-edged sword isn't it? Isolationism vs. Intervention. Im sure most know the arguments for and against both, so I won't rehash. Obviously because the world is so technolgically inter-related (Didn't Andrew Grove of Intel refer to this new technology as "Opening Pandora's Box", ie., as something evil for the world, and something he regretted introducing?) civilizations are inevitably going to clash.
So, if civilizations are going to clash, does that mean there must be a dominant and a submissive? Is there a way to get on so that both partners retain their dignity?
|
Isolation is not really an option any more. It never was a very good solution to anything and is impossible for a society like the modern United States. I don't know that I would say that "intervention" is what we need to replace isolation with. Perhaps "engagement" has a less aggressive tone.
I think that our dealings with China illustrate how very differnet cultures can function together in the globe with a minimum of clashing. This is not a soft-pedal on any of China's faults, just an acknowledgement that we can avoid war with radically different cultures.