user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Voted : Useless
The UN is leading it? Useless.
Voted : Useless
It won't solve the Clash of Civilizations at all- this global phenomenon is far too complex to be solved by a bunch of intellectualists from each civilization meeting for tea and biscuits. I doubt it will even lessen the Clash of Civilizations yet alone stop it.
The U.S./Bush approach is much better. Invade a Muslim country, try to steal their oil, get bogged down in a never-ending civil war, spend hundreds of billions of dollars, make the West look like a bunch of impotent, corrupt, ham-fisted idiots, which emboldens Islamic radicals world-wide. Brilliant.
cranky- Yes, the Bush approach is flawed. Now, I would like your analysis of the UN Alliance of Civilizations. But it is nice that the UN is implicitly aknowleding Huntington's theory of the Clash.
Voted : Useless
Will their diplomats be allowed to double-park their limousines at strip clubs too?
Soc: I hope they will be a little bit useful, but they may fail. However, better to try than to do nothing. Still, regardless of whether the U.N. did something - or nothing - they would be condemned by some either way.
cranky- "However, better to try than to do nothing." - Sometimes. But is it so in this case? Is this really a balanced attempt at solving the crisis? Let us look at Fox News' perspective: "Originally proposed by Spain and Turkey, both of which have contributed funding, the Alliance was announced by Annan in July as a kind of one-year talking shop to ease tension between Islamic nations and the West. In a Sept. 2 letter soliciting money for the Alliance from member states, Annan described the program more generally as an initiative meant to bridge the divides “between different cultures and religions.” But one lane of the bridge is a lot wider than the other: the panel of 18 “eminent persons” whom Annan named to the Alliance (a 19th, representing all of East Asia, has yet to be named) is weighted heavily on the side of Islamic states, including representatives of Egypt, Qatar, Tunisia, Morocco, Pakistan and the former president of Iran, Mohamed Khatami. There are two representatives from the U.S., but none from Israel." (Source: Fox News) - Sounds like Alliance of Civilizations is a one-sided piece of incompetence?
Voted : Useless
I'd love to be proven wrong on this, but history shows I won't be.
^Well, there is always a first time for everything.
|
|