As I said, people need some perspective here. When the come up with politically motivated tax audits, FBI investigations of opponents and discussions of raising bribe money, you might convince me we're getting there. Right now I don't see it. I do see some mismanagement and political overreaching but nothing qualitatively different from many other presidencies.
I think people have to get over this notion that if your side loses an election the other side has to be deligitmated. It wasn't any more attractive when the cranks on the right were trying to get Clinton charged with murder or claiming that Hillary had Vincent Foster bumped off.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mixedmedia
So no, I vehemently disagree that we should roll our eyes, chuckle and walk away from several billion of the earth's inhabitants. It's ludicrous because it is impossible.
Not to mention that now we have already planted our fat ass over there and they've got our license number. They know where to find us.
Sorry to go on and on. I know this is threadjacking and I shouldn't do it, but I really care about these kinds of issues more than any others...and, well, folks are talking about them.  |
I'll try to remember to write a longer post later, but my short-form response is that we should help where our help is likely to do good, and stay away where it's likely to be futile. In the short term we shouldn't try to help people who are likely to feel that what we consider help is actually a form of invasion. The trick is in knowing which is which. Long term, helping one group, if done right with a successful result, is likely to incentivize others to want to conform. But that's a long-term scenario, and presumes an ability to know what we're doing. We kinda made that mistake before, so I'd be very wary of making it again.