Quote:
Originally Posted by aklim
We did in the past because it was strategic. Life is not going to be a video game where you put another quarter and we start it over. At this point, Isreal is still a strategic place. It does keep the bunch of them in check with something else to worry about so it is a good thing. Even if we did stop today, assuming our strategic point doesn't get wiped out, they would still be our enemies so there is no going back.
Probelm is that the way the UN works is that something gets done ONLY if the major powers in it are not in disagreement. All it takes is 1 veto and the measure is done for. Yes, in theory, your answer would work. However, it would be like the story of the little red hen. When it comes down to it, nobody would want to do the work. So, we did the only thing possible which is what we are doing right now with a little more clout. I doubt it would make the jihadist's enemies stateless. They would blame the countries that were contributing and what not so we have the issue still spread out. Also, that might mean we get buffeted to where the others want us irrespective of whether it is good for us or not. Just like Kyoto. |
We can't selectively be an island and then a member of the world community as we see fit for the occasion. The world is steadily shrinking, and I think more decisions regarding international relations should be managed by a world body, instead of unilaterally by us. After all, when we insert ourselves in other countries' affairs, people no longer say its purely to spread freedom and democracy, its because theres some sort of gain to be had. More and more, the world sees our actions as another move to maintain our high levels of consumption. As the last super power, credibility is important. How do you maintain credibility against such conflicting values?
As long as the world regards Israel as an important sovereign entity, it has nothing to fear from such an arrangement. Perhaps the UN was created for such a time. Even Hezbollah listens to the UN, but not the US. As far as not creating a stateless enemy of Jihad, I would rather they have many enemies instead of 2 or 3.