Jon Gabriel wrote:
And I think your analogy is far too simple. The "neighbor" lives on the other coast and couldn't hope to hit us with his cannon in a thousand years. No one has seen the cannon he is setting up, but the fact that he has every weapon imaginable pointed at him from many of his neighbors is no secret. He has not threatened to do what he wants, the only threats I've heard are that he will defend himself if attacked. And no one has called the police, the police have decided that based on past offenses he should be punished even if they can't come up with any new ones.I'm not a fan of the current administration's policy on NK, and I'm really not a warmonger, but... I think your analogy here may be a bit too simplified. If your neighbor across the street starts setting up cannons in his front yard pointed at your house and tells you 'it's a free country and i can do what i want.' when you tell him he shouldn't, do you have a right to call the police because he's endangering you and your family?Can I beat my kid because he may hit me someday?
Without meaning to be to harsh, I have to say that it sounds like Bush propaganda to me.
Granted, we look like we're about to act unilaterally instead of going to the body we're trying to promote as the global authority (the UN), but the above description seems a bit more appropriate to me.
Doug
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
