The military bases that you mention; are allowed by the current govenments
of those countries.  If the local people are so opposed to those bases, then
they should interact with their government to have the bases removed.

Can you think of a better way than rather than a smaller group of
individuals to dictate their desires over the larger group?

Have you investigated how much the military bases contribute to the local
business? I would sense that if that base is closed, the local business will
suffer a lot more for the majority than the few who want the base closes. I
sometimes wonder if those who want it closed are even local people.

To the HP3000-L

Do member of this group what this thread to continue. I sorta gathered from
earlier comments, that the general thought was "NO". Perhaps I was wrong.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Heasman, David" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 11:09 AM
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: A sobering answer


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Berkowitz [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 27 March 2003 16:32
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: A sobering answer
>
>
> * Please Note : This message was received from the Internet *
> _____________________________________________________________
>
> David Heasman writes
>
> Mike B puts it straight : -
>
>  Here is the text of a meeting Powell had with former Archbishop George
> Carey on Jan 26, 2003.
>
> Full text at
>
>
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/01/28/opinion/diplomatic/main538320.shtm
> l
>
> < relevant portion >
>
> The Secretary of State was at his diplomatic best and still he managed to
> remind his audience pointedly, "Sometimes you are faced with situations
that
> you can't deal with," (unless you use hard power). "It was not soft power
> that freed Europe (from the Nazis). It was hard power," Powell politely
> reminded the skeptics: "And what followed immediately after hard power?
Did
> the United States ask for dominion over a single nation in Europe? No.
Soft
> power came in the Marshall Plan....We did the same thing in Japan," Powell
> added. Solid applause followed Powell's concluding line in defense of
> American values: "So I don't think I have anything to be ashamed of or
> apologize for with respect to what America has done for the world."
>
> ===========
>
>
>  It was perhaps a watershed that the US didn't seek permanent dominion of
> any countries after WWII. For which we're grateful. And it perhaps has
> served as an example to other states, with two conspicuous exceptions in
the
> USSR & China, not to seek permanent dominion either. Even Tanzania didn't
> take over Uganda, though they could have, I think. In the end it didn't do
> the USSR any good and it still may not turn out favourable for the
Chinese.
> Senegal is still trying to absorb the Gambia and Guatemala still has it in
> for Belize, but the trend these days is to separate rather than to
coalesce.
>  And I don't think Ray can be faulted for putting a rather more
sentimental
> spin on his account than even CBS News did.
>  However, there are US bases in about 100 countries at the minute. Public
> opinion in these countries is fickle; sometimes the bases are welcome,
> sometimes they aren't.  And the US has fought some very nasty proxy wars;
> for every WWII there's an Angola.
>
>  Sometimes the US of Ike, Omar Bradley, Mark Clark & even McArthur, who
only
> had total dominion over Japan for a little while, is hard to spot among
> the...how shall I put this... sometimes less than disinterested
> political leaders. Powell's response to Carey as quoted by Ken certainly
has
> some of the old-time religion to it, until the last few sentences anyway.
>
>  But this war in Iraq. It's all Cheney. And he hasn't. Sorry.
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
>
>
> This message might contain confidential information. If it has been sent t
o you in error please do not forward it or copy it or act upon its contents,
but report it to [log in to unmask]
>
> Schroders has the right lawfully to record, monitor and inspect messages
between its employees and any third party. Your messages shall be subject to
such lawful supervision as Schroders deems to be necessary in order to
protect its information, its interests and its reputation.
>
> Schroders prohibits and takes steps to prevent its information systems
from being used to view, store or forward offensive or discriminatory
material. If this message contains such material please report it to
[log in to unmask]
>
> Schroders does not normally accept or offer business instructions via
email. Any action that you might take upon this message might be at your own
risk.
>
>
>
> Schroder Investment Management Limited
> 31 Gresham Street
> London EC2V 7QA
>
> Registered Office at above address
> Registered number 1893220 England
>
> Regulated by the FSA
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *