Presumably one would also prefer to hear “we don’t care” from others also?
So, if a state or organisation sees what it feels is an “anti-Arabic display”, it should act regardless of the will of the rest of the world?
Fine, one might say, the US is so powerful: let them do their worst!
OK, they say, and fly planes into buildings.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by december *
**I love it. In the 3rd example, Blix no longer has any standing. His obnoxious criticism of the US shouldn’t entitle him to anything. His offer deserved to be ignored, and it was.
That approach simplifies foreign policy. This board had a complex debate about the Blix offer. But, if the question never arises, then the US can simply go ahead and do its job of finding the WMDs, if any.
Regarding France, it sounds as if US policy now is: the smooth wheel gets the grease, not the squeaky one. Such a policy will encourage other wheels to run more smoothly.
I expect to see improvements in a number of foreign problems as a result of this new policy. **[/QUOTE
yeah, that’ll work: piss off everybody even more. It’ll only lead to morte Anti-American feelings, and more resentment to dealing with the US.
Ah well.
pride comes before the fall, n’est-çe pas?
:-p
We don’t care. We don’t have to. We’re the Americans!
Actually, the more I think about the “we don’t care” policy (as I envision it), the more I’m inclined to vote for Bush in 2004, though some of his domestic policy leanings make me uncomfortable.
Again, public opinion seems to want less of an American presence in the world, and wants less of an overt American influence.
OK by me. Besides the points I raised in my earlier post, I take this to mean:
Again, what are we protecting Europe from these days, now that the Soviet Union is no more?
Besides, if France and Germany want to build a real EU “counterweight” to the US, they can do it on their dime. It will be interesting to see how the welfare states of Europe accomplish this, and how Europe’s politicians explain a military mobilization to its decidedly leftish citizenry. It will also be interesting to see how the Eastern European countries really integrate into a Paris-led EU system.
Besides, we could use the money we save to address some of our own vexing social problems, such as the unhealthy state of American public education.
American liberals, isn’t this what you want?
Europeans, isn’t this what you want?
Keep our nose out of the EU’s business (as in, let Europe decide for itself whether or not it grants Turkey membership).
Redirect American resources into Africa (as illustrated by the $15 billion AIDS relief package Bush spoke about during the last SOTU speech). AIDS is not only a massive health problem, but it presents a real geopolitical danger (failed states with nihilistic citizens = bad news). I have no idea on the best way to address this awful situation, but I think Bush realizes that it behooves us to at least start trying.
Like I said, I see this policy as a way to hoist the world’s public opinion on its own petard. And I’m fine with that. If the world wants to see less of America, it can live with the perceived benefits — and consequences.
What’s new about it? This has been observed for ages.
Unintentional comedy? You’re more inclined to vote for Bush, even though you must know that there’s just no way he’s going to do any of the things you actually want?
TFT was popularized as a strategy in a computer-based game without communication. But, the real key is that* there was no way to make an enforcible contract.* TFT has been applied in situations where there is communication, but which do not permit enforcible contracts.
Read Axelrod’s book to see various applications, including those between countries.
futureman, you say, “The Iraqis basically don’t care that we got rid of saddam anymore.” Do you have a cite? This article from the Christian Science Monitor says that the Iraqis care a lot.
This “we don’t care” policy is in fact a very sound policy. I’ve taken the lead from President Bush and implemented my own “we don’t care” policy with regard to our neighbors. It’s working wonders!
Recently, I was playing music really loud in my apartment and the old lady from downstairs came up and knocked on the door, asking us to turn it down as she couldn’t sleep. My wife, having agreed to uphold the “we don’t care” policy spat in her face and told her to fuck off. We turned the music up instead. We haven’t had to put up with any more shit from that old bat.
Also, I decided that since I drive a large pick-up truck, I deserve to have two parking spaces in the car park. A few complained, but not after I threatened them with a baseball bat. When I bought a boat and parked it along side my truck taking up four more parking spaces, one of my neighbors confronted me aggressively. I employed by baseball bat liberally and now he is recovering from a fractured skull.
Many of my neighbors showed contempt for my actions but since I am bigger than all of them and have a baseball bat, none have been willing to argue the point too much. Conversely, my family thinks that our new policy is great. The apartment complex has a swimming pool and these days all other occupants vacate the facilities when they see us coming. It works out excellent for us.
This morning the manager of the apartments knocked on my door and told me that I would have to move my boat and stop intimidating the other tenants. I punched the crap out of him. He cried like a baby and said that he would call the cops and press charges. Fucking pussy!
I’d like to thank President Bush for the inspiration he has given me and my family. We are starting a “we don’t care” campaign in support of our president. Watch for the website, coming soon.
How nice. We start a war with the euphemism “Operation Iraqi Freedom”, only to learn later that the Iraqis must be prevented from selecting a government that the US doesn’t like.
How very nice. Hey France, forget that we would never have won the Revolution without you, forget that Statue of Liberty thing, what matters most is that you sided with the majority of the civilized world against us, so you can’t be our friend anymore.
How very nice indeed. Our govenment cannot tolerate any criticism. Let’s see, we threaten Hussein with war because he wouldn’t let inspectors in. They get in, and then we can’t accept the results so it’s bombs away. Now the weapons aren’t there but we can’t let independent inspectors verify that. Of course not, my goodness they said things we don’t like.
Ribo:
“Although I didn’t vote for Bush in 2000, I’m strongly inclined to vote for him in 2004 because of his foreign policy.”
I predict that this quote will appear again and again between now and Nov 2004 in this forum. You will be famous!
Apos:
So, you “rebuked” December for TfT already? Good for you. Have you read Axelrod’s book? If you had you would know that of course TfT is a simple, theoretical model for cooperative behavior, but has clear applications in the real world.
Figure them out.
I thought it was pretty well established that it was American restraint in the face of earlier provocations (embassy bombings, the USS Cole, the Beirut bombings, etc.) that emboldened bin Laden and his cohorts to carry out 9/11. Like the Japanese before Pearl Harbor and Saddam before his invasion of Kuwait, they assumed that a big democratic country’s unwillingness to retaliate for small-scale attacks, provocations, and diplomatic setbacks added up to weakness.
Sorry if it sounds jingoistic, but it looks like the best way to prevent another 9/11 is to demonstrate that we have the capability and resolve to find and kill individuals and regimes that might support any such future attack.
Fears of rage on the so-called Arab “street” are sounding mighty Chicken Little-ish at this point, don’t you think? If that rage amounted to anything fear-inspiring, don’t you think we would have seen some demonstration of it by now?
I think its telling that this topic has come up at all.
It is fairly obvious that for a “we don’t care” policy to work the entity that carries out that policy must enjoy a massive and total imbalance of power in its favour. Essentially everyone else must need it more than it needs them.
People who support a “we don’t care” policy must therefore believe not that the US is extremely powerful, but that it is some kind of monolithic entity which doesn’t really need the rest of the world. I find this staggering.
The Romans were saying “oderint dum metuant” for about 500 years before the Empire fell.
Y’all really do believe in a moral universe where pride is punished and humility is rewarded, don’t you? Would that it were so.
It’s hardly obvious to me. I think you’re confusing “we don’t care” with “we want to dominate the world”.
Nah. Just leave us alone as we enjoy our rich society, share our blessings with our friends, choose to ignore our detractors, and destroy those who would try to harm us. As long as you’re not plotting to kill us or our friends, guess what? We don’t care.
It does sound jingoistic. It also sounds really stupid.
There’s no terrorism in Israel, right? Because the Israelis are capable and resolved, right?
There was no terrorism in the U.K. over the Northern Ireland issue, either, was there? Because of the U.K. government’s capability and resolve.
Wake up, sport. This has been tried before. It doesn’t work.
Er, cite?
There is a very big difference between Pearl Harbour, the invasion of Kuwait, and 9/11. Both Pearl Harbour and Kuwait were carried out for more or less rational reasons. There was some form of decision making, it was decided that the benefits would outweigh the costs. In this sort of situation your remarks make sense.
When you’re talking about what is essentially an irrational desire to harm a country then its totally different. They don’t care if you will retaliate or not, i mean they’re willing to end their own lives for this! Whether you’re perceived as “soft” doesn’t make any difference.
We already have.
Continuing to negotiate with the folks who are dedicated to your destruction is not resolve, and moreover is an exercise in futility. Thanks for the examples demonstrating my point.
You’re simultaneously missing my point, and making it for me. Impressive.
You’d choose to “share your blessings with your friends?!” What do you think you are some sort of jesus, dispensing bread to an starving but adoring crowd?
The US needs the rest of the world. To try to pretend otherwise is just arrogant.
Doghouse, I don’t know who “established” those things but I’ll have some of what they’re drinking. Nonetheless, if “we don’t care” policies are good, why should such terrorist organisations care about who the US throws its weight around at?
I sincerely hope that another large scale terrorist attack against US citizens does not occur. But if “we don’t care”, why should the terrorists?