Larry,

Nicely put. Always a good idea, in general, to follow the money. In US foreign policy it can often be the best idea. Whether a matter or intent or coincidence, our foreign policy seems to follow the dictum that what's good for General Motors (Or Chiquita or Enron) is good for the USA. And the effort is elegantly, democratically, bipartisan too boot. War may not be healthly for children and other living things but it has proved, in our history, remarkably profitable. As we move deeper into a funded deficit posture, I suspect our options will be greatly reduced by busines interests.

The 70% figure is a little higher than I've seen (55-60% range) but we clearly use resources out of proportion to our numbers. And use our foreign policy to support same. It is not a sustainable plan and as it seems to involve support for regimes that are directly opposed to our supposed values of civil liberties and self determination, it certainly portrays us in a less than favorable light.

I've always thought (a bit tongue in cheek) that the solution to the ME might well be WalMarts, McDonalds, cheap credit and MTV; while realizing that such might spell the erosion of our standard of living. Such thing seem to be cyclical, however, and like it or not, the time may have come, as we move from an production based economy to a financial based one, to follow the 'example' of Spain, Holland and England. Maybe we'll be the exception.

troll,

In my year or so absence from the Board, I'm sad to note that your use of the non sequitur to attempt to make a point hasn't improved. Conversely, if your Boortz comment was meant as some sort of attempt at humor, it fell a lot flat, as I contend that the "UN Resolution" based argument, whether for or against the War, is as lacking in substance as the resolutions themselves. To say nothing of the ethical quicksand involved in cynical selection of just which resolution are to be pursued.

On the other hand you remain my favorite, if only, brother and as always I stand ready to assist in improving the quality and relevance of your responses.


Regards

John