In the 1990s the world was facing a crisis - the Y2K issue where it was predicted that computer networks were going to crash so bad that it would be the end of civilization. There was two modes of behavior in response to this threat. One was to buy food and generators and prepare for the end of the world. The other was to start a massive effort to reviewing the computer code and fixing the problems before the year 2000 hit. As a result - the Y2K apocalypse never occurred. The survivalists crawled out of their caves and rejoined society.
We are now facing a similar issue about where society will go. We have a choice between terror an hope. To choose a path of war or peace. o we engage in an unending war against enemies both real and imagined? Or - do we do the hard work and fix the problem? Do we proceed on a war footing or a footing of peace. Do we face the problems and fix them - or do we crawl into our caves and await the end of the world? In this election we have a message of terror and a message of hope. Hope is the hard path because it requires more work up front. But war doesn't solve the problem. Eventually - you have to do the hard work - you have to win the peace.
That is the choice we have today between Kerry and Bush. It's the choice between hope and terror. We need to fix the problem. So I'm voting for Kerry.
...and if good will doesn't convince you that you should do the right thing and start supporting peace makers then perhaps this will...
Europe is slowly but surely uniting and it is doing so for a range of reasons; security being one of the "behind the scenes" aim to confront a potential threat whatever that may be. Make no mistake... a united Europe would have the potential to blitz an enemy, no matter how big or small, at the blink of an eye. NOW is the time to act and help your country set itself on a peaceful and prosperous path.
Marios, I think what you are saying holds truth to it, but after living in Europe, I began to understand just how politically diverse it actually is and I'm wondering if Europe's new ideas on continental security are perhaps mainly political, aimed soley at snapping the US into a wakeful reality? Nothing seems to work however when it comes to the Monkey who astonishingly seems impervious to any healthy and constructive ideas that do not spring from his tainted fountain of neocon ideology.
If we don't unseat this nutcase we are going to find ourselves with a very hostile Europe who might just challenge the validity and usefulness of NATO. Imagine that? Losing Europe!
Posted by: Hope at October 19, 2004 01:23 PMWell France and Germany have already clearly shown their disapproval of US middle eastern aspirations; there is a clear escallation of resistance to US "interests" pursuits. Its a matter of time before Europe has a unanimous army under one uniform and command. Tragedies like Iraq would not have been allowed to happen if it were already in place. This coming election I sincerely hope that the American people will realise that the choices they make today will have a profound effect on tommorow.
I told my wife when the Cold War ended 15 years ago, the world would not sit by and allow the United States to rule unopposed. As far as the contest between the US and the USSR, we were viewed as the lesser of two evils by most of the world. I stand by that same statement today, other nations will unite together to check our unbridled power, I thought it would be China and some Pacific Rim nations, and that is still possible.
Posted by: Edd at October 20, 2004 11:55 AMWith a madman at the helm, and I hate to say this, I think we should be held in check by the truly civilised of this world. That is a very sad statement but until we truly oust that madman Bush from the White House we will be facing this tragic situation.
Posted by: Hope at October 20, 2004 01:10 PMEurope is uniting for the purpose of security? That is great, does that mean that we will not need to have all of our service men and women over in Europe, for their security?
One thing that I agree with the liberals on is that we spend way too much money on defense. Most of the waste is the money that we spend defending countries. 70,000 troops in Germany alone. Of course the European economy would take a BIG slump if they had to amass their own military and pay for it.
In whole, bring our guys home, and defend ourselves. Let the rest of the world take care of ourselves.
Posted by: tomocius at October 20, 2004 05:01 PMUS forces in Europe are there to serve US bases which in turn enable the US to carry out terror operations such as that in Iraq. I hardly think that US forces are in Germany, or anywhere else for that matter, to protect the host country! Needless to say that nuclear superpowers like England,France and Germany do not need "protection".
I'm not so sure that Europe is realistically capable of pulling together one army at this point. It will all boil down to money in the end and if they think America will bear the burden - so be it.
Posted by: Hope at October 20, 2004 11:38 PM