Showing posts with label enemy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label enemy. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

No Takers? Well, I was on C-SPAN

Since there doesn't seem to be much interest in the questions posed in my previous post, I suppose I will move on, but I thought I'd show you my little spot on CSPAN from last week (below).  You see, this  important Ambassador came to Denison (my school), and spoke about the recent 6-party talks with North Korea (Christopher Hill--the leading diplomat to the Republic of Korea).  He said that much progress has been made--just this month, the North Koreans have agreed to replace the nuclear seals and continue the dismantling of their nuclear facilities.  

His talk gave me more optimism in our diplomatic skills--Hill spoke not as a politician, but as someone who has invested himself into the success of these talks.  To further this idea, I asked his what it meant to be and "enemy" of this country.  He begins his answer with "I think I know what you're getting at"--and I believe that was his way of acknowledging the "Axis of Evil" rhetoric that does not seem to help diplomatic efforts.

My hope was to get a little conversation started on the topic of enemies and evil before showing you the video... but perhaps Hill's response to my question will spark some critical thinking.  I'm working on cutting the clip onto YouTube, but for now you can see it here... just skip to the 33:34 timecode, and ignore my stuttering.


Thursday, October 23, 2008

Here's a Question: I'd like to hear your thoughts


The terms "enemy" and "evil" are used quite often by government (and citizens) to characterize certain rogue elements and sovereign states.  During World War II, Nazi Germany was our (America's) enemy; the Cold War pitted us against the Soviet Union.  Today the world is a much different place, so perhaps some distinctions ought to be made to better understand it.

Some questions for readers: Who are our enemies today and why?  What is an enemy by today's standards versus those of the past?  Is this terminology the best way to approach
 international relations?  Is there a such thing as good and evil, and if so, what characterizes each?

Give your feedback on the discussion board, and after I get enough points of view, I'll draw some conclusions and post an analysis.

Please contribute (anonymously if you wish)!