I am trying to understand your
position better. Certainly non-interference in someone's sovereignty is a principle reasonable people should
be able to agree on -- in principle. And certainly reasonable people can agree that we must respect the results of
democratic elections around the world, even if the results turn out not to be to our liking.
But could you
explain specifically what you mean by "being involved" in another country's "political process"? Do you mean
expressing an opinion on an election, or what?
And what happens if another country's "internal" actions affects
your country, or the world? What are the appropriate deliniations of concern there?
And what if someone else
expresses concern, but you really value your relationship with them and are trying to improve it?
How do you
keep your position from becoming a sort of schoolyard-level, "I don't give a crap what you think"?
Just out of
curiosity, what if a country like N. Korea would continue stockpiling nuclear weapons systems? Would it just be a
matter of thinking, "We don't care what they do inside their own borders"?
What do you think of the thesis that
the natural, irreducable "resting state" of things in a small world like ours is for there to be constant,
omnidirectional, mutual affects among it's nations? What would be the implications of this thesis for your
position?
***
BTW, that is a little strange of Putin. He must not take his own opposition to the war seriously,
or must just not know what he is thinking about as regards Bush being strong against terrorism (Has anyone really
seen evidence of any such "strength"?).
Bookmarks