Bagi Yang Tidak Bisa Bahasa Inggris??.....Salah Sendiri!!!!


----- Pesan Asli ----
Dari: mediacare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Kepada: mediacare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; zamanku 
Terkirim: Selasa, 16 September, 2008 15:32:09
Topik: [zamanku] Ulil tentang McCain-Palin

Jika McCain-Palin terpilih, ini isyarat yang kurang baik bagi dunia di luar 
Amerika. Semboyan Partai Republik sekarang ini, "Country First", terus terang 
kurang terasa simpatik di mata saya. Semboyan itu seolah-olah mengisyaratkan 
bahwa Amerika tak peduli pada dunia luar, dan kebijakan luar negeri yang 
unilateralistik akan diteruskan oleh McCain. 

Pemerintah Amerika sudah 
semestinya tahu bahwa negeri itu sudah menjadi semacam "empayar", istilah orang 
Malaysia untuk "empire". Amerika tidak bisa lagi memikirkan negerinya sendiri 
seperti tercermin dalam semboyan McCain itu. Tindakan dan kebijakan luar negeri 
pemerintah Amerika memiliki dampak internasional yang besar sekali.

setuju dengan pandangan Fareed Zakaria di bawah ini, dan saya juga setuju 
cara pandang Obama yang lebih "rendah hati" dan "realistis" dalam melihat 
situasi keamanan di dunia saat ini.

Selamat menikmati kolom Zakaria di 
bawah ini!


The World Isn’t So Dark

Ever since 
WWII, America has tended to make its strategic missteps by exaggerating 

Fareed Zakaria


Updated: 2:18 PM ET 
Sep 13, 2008

On the campaign trail, the debate over foreign policy 
has been muted of
late. That might be because more-important topics like 
lipstick and
hockey moms have taken center stage. But the contrasts between 
presidential candidates also seem to have softened. Their 
over Iraq policy have shrunk as the place has stabilized somewhat 
the Iraqi government looks for a timetable for a U.S. withdrawal. 
candidates oppose Iran's nuclear ambitions and Russia's incursion 
Georgia. Both support a vigorous fight against the Taliban 
Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Yet there's clearly a fundamental 
difference in the way the two candidates see the world. The
split might best 
be captured by asking a simple question: what kind of
a world do we live in? 
Neither candidate has been asked this, and I
doubt either would answer as 
frankly as I am suggesting, but here's my
guess—drawn from their writings and 
speeches—about what each might say.

We live in a very dangerous world, 
John McCain would respond. In his eyes,
Islamic extremism is the transcendent 
challenge of the age. Jihadist
warriors—funded and supported by states that 
adhere to their views—pose
the central threat to the United States. In the 
rise of China, Russia
and India, McCain sees turbulence. Russia and China, 
being autocracies,
represent a special danger. Moscow's attack on Georgia 
was, for McCain,
the "first serious crisis since the end of the cold war." 
The role for
America, in such an environment, is to aggressively use its 
power—to fight evil, spread freedom and defeat the enemy. 
Otherwise we
will lose the struggle for the 21st century.

sense of the world is more optimistic. The dangers are real but not 
all-encompassing. Obama speaks less of Islamic extremism in general 
more of Al Qaeda and its affiliated groups specifically. He points 
that compared with the cold war—when thousands of Soviet 
missiles were pointed at American cities—the threats we face today 
reduced. He argues that most people in the Islamic world 
development and a better life, not jihad. America's promise 
alive even in these countries.

America's role, for Obama, is 
to restore its military strength, fight Al Qaeda and its ilk,
and deter rogue 
regimes like Iran. But it is also to stay calm, because
in overreacting to 
dangers, we often cause new problems and crises. To
lump together all 
Islamist groups is to exaggerate and misunderstand
the threat. The Iraq War, 
for Obama, is a prime example of an alarmist
overreaction, one that had the 
United States launch an unprovoked
invasion of a country and rack up huge 
costs. If America can keep its
cool and provide the help that countries 
really seek—in development,
modernization and democracy-building— then we will 
gain in both security
and legitimacy.

There is some truth to both 
visions of the world, but in my view the reality is much closer to Obama's—more 
so than most American politicians seem willing to admit. We live 
remarkably peaceful times. A University of Maryland study shows 
deaths from wars of all kinds have been dropping dramatically for 
years and are lower now than at any point in the last half century. 
study from Simon Fraser University finds that casualties from 
have been steadily declining since 9/11. It is increasingly 
at their voting from Indonesia to Iraq to Pakistan—that very 
Muslims anywhere support Islamic fundamentalists. More countries 
ever before now embrace capitalism and democracy.

It's also worth 
noting that ever since World War II, the United States has
tended to make its 
strategic missteps by exaggerating dangers. During
the 1950s, conservatives 
argued that Dwight Eisenhower was guilty of
appeasement because he was 
willing to contain rather than roll back
communism. The paranoia about 
communism helped fuel McCarthyism at home
and support for dubious regimes 
abroad. John Kennedy chose to outflank
Nixon on the right by arguing that 
there was a dangerous missile gap
between the Soviets and the United States 
(when in fact the United
States had almost 20,000 missiles and the Soviets 
had fewer than
2,000). The 1970s witnessed a frenzied argument that the 
Soviet Union
was surpassing the United States militarily and was about 
"Finlandize" Europe. The reality, of course, was that 
neoconservatives were arguing that the U.S.S.R. was about to 
the world, it was on the verge of total collapse.

Since end of 
the cold war, similar alarms have been sounded several times. In
the 1990s, 
the Cox Commission argued that China was building a military
to rival ours, 
citing numbers that soon proved to be bogus. Then
there's Saddam Hussein, who 
was described as a powerful and imminent
threat to the United States. In 
fact, the greatest problem that we have
faced in Iraq is its weakness, its 
utter dysfunction as a state and a
nation. Rhetoric about transcendent 
threats and mortal dangers grips
the imagination of the American people. But 
it also twists U.S. foreign
policy in ways that can prove to be extremely 
costly to the country and
the world.

URL: http://www.newsweek .com/id/158764

Dapatkan alamat Email baru Anda!
Dapatkan nama yang selalu Anda inginkan sebelum diambil orang lain!

Kirim email ke