Analysis of US policy.. The red or the blue pill?

[Karl]

And everyone else is a child of a lesser god?

...that is what 'self-interest' means...'me' first!

No need to shy away from truth. There is a Jamaican saying - Parson chris-en im pickney fus! To a greater or lesser degree we are all 'parsons'.

[Willi]

So never criticize anyone else doing the same...whether "big man", Gunman, sleazy politicians, republicans, Labourites, Socialists, etc.

Everyman can use the same excuse.

[Karl]

And there in lies the problem.

Yuh have not resolved the conflict of duality.

You're soooooooooo correct! ...both as an abstract (e.g. looking at our current JA discourse...and looking at the US...aims of the US foreign policy) and within self!

[Muadib]

Figured that would change your tune...

[Karl]

So never criticize anyone else doing the same...whether "big man", Gunman, sleazy politicians, republicans, Labourites, Socialists, etc.

Everyman can use the same excuse.

Did you mention below - conflict?! ...conflicted? ...ofcourse I fall on the side of the disadvantaged more often than not...save and except it touches 'my family' - real family, country, beliefs, etc.

That is why from my school days I have been extremely disgusted, angry...enraged/burn white heat...if a friend or relative 'encroach' in a manner where to defend and protect same means I would have to compromise my principles.

That is why we (that includes all persons) are too often never FULL 100.

Question: If your child does something wrong that would put that child in the hands of 'destruction' and you could deny yourself to protect and save that child would you?

Don't answer!

Well if it is about your country...the place where your children must grow and prosper...would you fall on the side of your country or against your country?

Don't answer!

[Don1]

Figured that would change your tune...

Change my tune??? My song doesn't change... not even a note.

[Muadib]

Yup.. ah tyad tune...

[Don1]

Yup.. ah tyad tune...

suggest when u don't have anything to say... say nothing... we're all better off that way.

[Don1]

My friend, all I did was agree with your original post...and pointed out that I have become less strident 'now I am an American'!

ok boss... understood.

[Peter R]

Karl,

In the last week I have mentioned the docu-film "The Corporation" in a few posts. It has been discussed here in the past. Have you seen it? I highly suggest it as a good representation of one aspect of how we should view big business. View the chapter that's entitled "Taking the right side" dealing with IBM Corporation during WWII. The entire documentary is worthwhile viewing.

Essentially the way big business has evolved and what large corporations are about in many ways can be said to be inimical in the long run to the interests of y/our children...and most modern governments have followed the Americans lead in how we treat corporate entities.

What we have now, and look at where we (globally are) now, is the tail wagging the dog in the pursuit of unsustainable profits.

[Karl]

It depends what one calls "interests" and how this is defined.

Unless you believe that whatever the government does is truly in the interest of "all" people.

It is usually in the interest of their favoured constituency... eg transnational corporations and/or the military industrial complex.. that even Eisenhower warned about upon leaving office.

It seems you took the wrong pill Karl.

Excepting the part about the wrong pill taken
...once more I have to let you know I am agreed!

If you go back you will see 'confliction', recognition of the US' self-interest...thus implicit is the fact of various US administrations 'twisting and turning in the wind' to justify 'their/the policy'...and my compromise (and thus 'picking and choosing' when to agree and disagree with my inner self) with self = and coming down on the side of my self interest.

I could say the US is just pushing its 'right is might' self-righteous agenda...but I think mere words cannot really explain my thoughts/my take on the complexity of US foreign policy actions. In the final analysis we are both not blind to the US acting always in what it perceives as its own self-interest and to hell with any other nation else.

Aside:
An example?
Remember the embrace of the Shah of Iran and and then the throwing him to the wolves...and how his death in the US fit so convenently with the US wanting/need to get rid of 'an embarassment'?