Playing the blame game

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Michael, Jul 29, 2007.

  1. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,285
    Labeling and then blaming "them" has always been a good way to focus the attention of people. But there is a difference between the attention of a nation (or city-state) and the attention of the religous devote. The former could in theory be treated as rational and the later as irrational.

    With this in mind lets think about the aliment - it seems to me that the main, or maybe only, aliment is economic. An economically secure society will tend to be less antagonistic towards their leaders and thus less likely revolt and hence their leaders are less likely to play the blame game and go to war with their neighbors.

    Knowing this, "rich" nations can use their capitol to elevate the economies of those that threaten them most. If the people act rationally then this should benefit both people and secure the future for both.

    Take Pakistan and India. Pakistan is nearly a failed state and is probably considered third or fourth world status. Pakistan has many poor citizens with (and this is the key) little avenues for success. Thus many Pakistani are easily radicalized. Wouldn't India make itself much more safer by trying to help Pakistan lift it's economy? If India was simply in a pure rivalry with Pakistan then perhaps barring trade between the two people would eventually crush Pakistan's economy - but wouldn't really help make India any more secure. Soon Pakistan would be ruled by people looking for a "them" to point the finger at. And while India has every right in the world to regulate trade with themselves, I am sure half-starved Pakistani wouldn't really be thinking so logically ("gee India has a every right to not trade with us"). So, if it is politically possible to help ones rival then India should be better off by not only trying to lift it's economy but also trying to drag Pakistan upwards with it.

    That's the rationality of nations.

    BUt what about the Religious devote? Saudi Arabia is rich. They have a pretty decent standard of living - compared with their grandparents generation things are getting better. And even now money is pouring into their economy. Yet, they seem to be producing a large number of fundamental Wahabi people happy to play the blame game and send idiot young hot-heads off to kill the "them" - Jews, Xians, Hindu etc.... For these guys the solution can not be as simple as economic. It must be education. Saudi Arabia must change their school system such that Jews are not a race but a faith that anyone can join or leave (including Muslims) and that Islam is only one of many faiths of EQUAL status that people can choose to belong to and also choose to leave if they want to. When people are not half-starved then education is the only solution.


    Well what do you think?

    Michael



    PS:
    Isn't it odd that the millitary plays no solution in these scenarios, at least as I can see. Yet, we spend trillions on the one thing that is only ever useful if we are attacked by a conventional army (which isn't going happen in this day and age) and are planing to attack another country (which isn't ever going to work in this day and age).
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931
    Michael

    That is the problem with liberal think, it isn't the Military's job to deal with these things, the job of the Military is;

    1. To defend this country.

    2. Carry out the Political will of the Government of the United States.

    3. Accomplish the Mission.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    "Carry out the Political will of the Government of the United States."

    No, the Constitution comes first. What other aspects of Basic Training and elementary education in democracy went over your head?

    Our orders are and always have been to refuse to participate in the damaging of our country, even if the damage comes from the top.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,285
    Perhaps before the Military became an institution in and of itself, it was there to protect the people. As I pointed out, in this day and age, we actually have the foresight to see that economics and education would do a much better job at that.

    Even here in the USA, I think that is there were a rich upper class and large poor lower class that had no means of ever becoming rich, we'd probably have a revolution and there'd be nothing our military could do about it.

    Michael
     

Share This Page