IowaBill Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 Well, I'm a bad, bad man because I don't care. Sue me. 614151[/snapback] I will have my legal team, Mickey and Tenny, contact you shortly. The thouhgt of that should make anyone shake their apathy.
ASCI Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 The US is constantly exerting external pressure on foreign nations in ways that are unilaterally beneficial, potentially bilaterally beneficial, and often multilaterally beneficial, (such as creating common markets). 614161[/snapback] Give me a specific example
IowaBill Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 Just because you could care less about the local politics of the community because it doesn't affect you, as they said, doesn't mean you cannot or do not affect it. I could care less what happens in my little LA community, both the broad city and the small section of town that I live in. And yet I almost always buy from the local merchants rather than chains, attend and support local street fairs and community events, volunteer for the Big Brother program and other local things, am helpful and friendly to my neighbors, etc. Its politics don't interest me much. I am more concerned with the Buffalo politics where I grew up. 614141[/snapback] I think you and I are more in agreement than you think. I am not saying that you need to be involved in local politics, but people should be engaged at some level locally. Volunteering for community organizations such as BB/BS is a good way for hat to happen. I just think people need to take an interest in what is happening in their own back yard more. If they did, we might find there would be fewer problems on a national scale. You can't pretend that what happens locally has no affect on your quality of life.
X. Benedict Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 Give me a specific example 614177[/snapback] CAFTA
Ghost of BiB Posted February 28, 2006 Author Posted February 28, 2006 I will have my legal team, Mickey and Tenny, contact you shortly. The thouhgt of that should make anyone shake their apathy. 614166[/snapback] Not me, It would be just about impossible to get me to shake my apathy. You would be hard pressed to find someone more apathetic than me in so far as local issues go. Really. I truly don't care, and I can't think of anything that would make me.
X. Benedict Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 Not me, It would be just about impossible to get me to shake my apathy. You would be hard pressed to find someone more apathetic than me in so far as local issues go. Really. I truly don't care, and I can't think of anything that would make me. 614187[/snapback] All rat plagues are local.
ASCI Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 CAFTA 614186[/snapback] Central American Free Trade Agreement. Isn’t that a reaction to the changing market place and a counter weight to the European union?
ASCI Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 Really. I truly don't care, and I can't think of anything that would make me. 614187[/snapback] Would higher state and local taxes make you?
IowaBill Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 Not me, It would be just about impossible to get me to shake my apathy. You would be hard pressed to find someone more apathetic than me in so far as local issues go. Really. I truly don't care, and I can't think of anything that would make me. 614187[/snapback] I realized years ago that not everyone does care. Most communities survive, some for the better, some not so much. Oh well.
OnTheRocks Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 Not me, It would be just about impossible to get me to shake my apathy. You would be hard pressed to find someone more apathetic than me in so far as local issues go. Really. I truly don't care, and I can't think of anything that would make me. 614187[/snapback] BiB cracked corn...and he don't care.
X. Benedict Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 Central American Free Trade Agreement. Isn’t that a reaction to the changing market place and a counter weight to the European union? 614193[/snapback] And the European Union was a reaction to the changing market place and a counter weight to __________ . We can take that logic all the way back to the big bang if you like and blame the God of Aquinas as first mover. Congratulations, you've turned Foreign Policy into an infinite regress. There is probably no point taking this up, but you can't see any areas where Policy would be pro-active in even dealing with hypotheticals and contigencies? Unless you want to argue that it is possible to react to a hypothetical future contigency.
ASCI Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 And the European Union was a reaction to the changing market place and a counter weight to __________ . We can take that logic all the way back to the big bang if you like and blame the God of Aquinas as first mover. Congratulations, you've turned Foreign Policy into an infinite regress. There is probably no point taking this up, but you can't see any areas where Policy would be pro-active in even dealing with hypotheticals and contigencies? Unless you want to argue that it is possible to react to a hypothetical future contigency. 614214[/snapback] And if we were truly proactive about all this we would not have let Europe set trade policy unilaterally.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 BiB cracked corn...and he don't care. 614206[/snapback] "Jimmy crack corn, and I don't care."? What the hell kind of attitude is that?!--Dennis Miller
X. Benedict Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 And if we were truly proactive about all this we would not have let Europe set trade policy unilaterally. 614229[/snapback] Not to worry, you have defined proactive out of existence, now we'll just need another name for it. By the way, by your standard all state sponsored terrorism is reactive which places the culpability on the victims.
ASCI Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 By the way, by your standard all state sponsored terrorism is reactive which places the culpability on the victims. 614244[/snapback] First tell me what exactly are they reacting to? Also, just because a behavior is a reaction to something it does not make the reaction right or justified.
X. Benedict Posted February 28, 2006 Posted February 28, 2006 First tell me what exactly are they reacting to? Also, just because a behavior is a reaction to something it does not make the reaction right or justified. 614280[/snapback] Ahhh, volition, I think you are on to something.....culpability being another matter. If you truly believe what your saying, there is no acting in anticipation of future events, which means proactive. What you have said is it is impossible for Foreign Policy to act in anticipation of future events, or to exert external pressure toward this end on other states without a precipitating cause. My point is, that position is daft. As a matter of Foreign Policy we do it all the time. Bilateral wargames for instance, negotiating international standards for uninvented technologies, pre-emption itself is proactive because it is done not in reaction to but in anticipation of a hypothetical scenario.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted March 1, 2006 Posted March 1, 2006 Ahhh, volition, I think you are on to something.....culpability being another matter. If you truly believe what your saying, there is no acting in anticipation of future events, which means proactive. What you have said is it is impossible for Foreign Policy to act in anticipation of future events, or to exert external pressure toward this end on other states without a precipitating cause. My point is, that position is daft. As a matter of Foreign Policy we do it all the time. Bilateral wargames for instance, negotiating international standards for uninvented technologies, pre-emption itself is proactive because it is done not in reaction to but in anticipation of a hypothetical scenario. 614310[/snapback] You know you're not going to win this argument, right? Oh, sure, you'll feel you're making headway for a while with your argument based as it is in reality and sanity...but before you know it, the commies have Antarctica, clowns are balancing on boards on beach balls, and you're asking yourself "Why? Why? For the love of God, why???"
X. Benedict Posted March 1, 2006 Posted March 1, 2006 You know you're not going to win this argument, right? Oh, sure, you'll feel you're making headway for a while with your argument based as it is in reality and sanity...but before you know it, the commies have Antarctica, clowns are balancing on boards on beach balls, and you're asking yourself "Why? Why? For the love of God, why???" 614375[/snapback] It is possible to defy the bounds of physics and denotation in the same month. cue music: Don't you love farce? My fault I fear. But where are the clowns? Quick, send in the clowns. Don't bother, they're here.
ASCI Posted March 1, 2006 Posted March 1, 2006 Ahhh, volition, I think you are on to something.....culpability being another matter. If you truly believe what your saying, there is no acting in anticipation of future events, which means proactive. What you have said is it is impossible for Foreign Policy to act in anticipation of future events, or to exert external pressure toward this end on other states without a precipitating cause. My point is, that position is daft. As a matter of Foreign Policy we do it all the time. Bilateral wargames for instance, negotiating international standards for uninvented technologies, pre-emption itself is proactive because it is done not in reaction to but in anticipation of a hypothetical scenario. 614310[/snapback] If you are not the controlling hand in future events (proactive) then you can only react to the anticipation of future events
Recommended Posts