Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
NotCranky
ParticipantAllan,
I typed you a response yesterday but deleted it because I was uncomfortable with it.I have no doubt you can support your visions from many angles. I did read up on the Hamiltonian, Jacksonian, Wilsonian,and Jeffersonian influence in foreign policy. I think this discussion has pushed me into deeper studies.
I also came across what I believe is the crux of our draw to debate one another. I believe that we view the concept of “special providence” quite differently. I think the way to handle it is not foreign policy debate because we would go in circles for ever. It shades everything you and I could opine on. It is a philosophical problem to me. So I am agreeable to diasgreeing.
As to your being uncomfortable with the terms word empire and its derivatives I found something that might help explain that too. I will paste it if I can find it.http://zmagsite.zmag.org/Dec2003/nevins1203.html
I agree with arraya on Iraq. There is oil as well as strategic importance there.
Best regards,
NotCranky
ParticipantAllan,
I typed you a response yesterday but deleted it because I was uncomfortable with it.I have no doubt you can support your visions from many angles. I did read up on the Hamiltonian, Jacksonian, Wilsonian,and Jeffersonian influence in foreign policy. I think this discussion has pushed me into deeper studies.
I also came across what I believe is the crux of our draw to debate one another. I believe that we view the concept of “special providence” quite differently. I think the way to handle it is not foreign policy debate because we would go in circles for ever. It shades everything you and I could opine on. It is a philosophical problem to me. So I am agreeable to diasgreeing.
As to your being uncomfortable with the terms word empire and its derivatives I found something that might help explain that too. I will paste it if I can find it.http://zmagsite.zmag.org/Dec2003/nevins1203.html
I agree with arraya on Iraq. There is oil as well as strategic importance there.
Best regards,
NotCranky
ParticipantAllan,
I typed you a response yesterday but deleted it because I was uncomfortable with it.I have no doubt you can support your visions from many angles. I did read up on the Hamiltonian, Jacksonian, Wilsonian,and Jeffersonian influence in foreign policy. I think this discussion has pushed me into deeper studies.
I also came across what I believe is the crux of our draw to debate one another. I believe that we view the concept of “special providence” quite differently. I think the way to handle it is not foreign policy debate because we would go in circles for ever. It shades everything you and I could opine on. It is a philosophical problem to me. So I am agreeable to diasgreeing.
As to your being uncomfortable with the terms word empire and its derivatives I found something that might help explain that too. I will paste it if I can find it.http://zmagsite.zmag.org/Dec2003/nevins1203.html
I agree with arraya on Iraq. There is oil as well as strategic importance there.
Best regards,
NotCranky
ParticipantAllan,
I typed you a response yesterday but deleted it because I was uncomfortable with it.I have no doubt you can support your visions from many angles. I did read up on the Hamiltonian, Jacksonian, Wilsonian,and Jeffersonian influence in foreign policy. I think this discussion has pushed me into deeper studies.
I also came across what I believe is the crux of our draw to debate one another. I believe that we view the concept of “special providence” quite differently. I think the way to handle it is not foreign policy debate because we would go in circles for ever. It shades everything you and I could opine on. It is a philosophical problem to me. So I am agreeable to diasgreeing.
As to your being uncomfortable with the terms word empire and its derivatives I found something that might help explain that too. I will paste it if I can find it.http://zmagsite.zmag.org/Dec2003/nevins1203.html
I agree with arraya on Iraq. There is oil as well as strategic importance there.
Best regards,
NotCranky
ParticipantAllan,
I typed you a response yesterday but deleted it because I was uncomfortable with it.I have no doubt you can support your visions from many angles. I did read up on the Hamiltonian, Jacksonian, Wilsonian,and Jeffersonian influence in foreign policy. I think this discussion has pushed me into deeper studies.
I also came across what I believe is the crux of our draw to debate one another. I believe that we view the concept of “special providence” quite differently. I think the way to handle it is not foreign policy debate because we would go in circles for ever. It shades everything you and I could opine on. It is a philosophical problem to me. So I am agreeable to diasgreeing.
As to your being uncomfortable with the terms word empire and its derivatives I found something that might help explain that too. I will paste it if I can find it.http://zmagsite.zmag.org/Dec2003/nevins1203.html
I agree with arraya on Iraq. There is oil as well as strategic importance there.
Best regards,
NotCranky
ParticipantI’ll get back with you later Allan.
NotCranky
ParticipantI’ll get back with you later Allan.
NotCranky
ParticipantI’ll get back with you later Allan.
NotCranky
ParticipantI’ll get back with you later Allan.
NotCranky
ParticipantI’ll get back with you later Allan.
December 15, 2007 at 9:08 PM in reply to: By spot to live that isn’t more than 20 minutes from downtown… #118136NotCranky
ParticipantR.O and M.P.O are not the same people.
MultipleProperty Owner was always Multiple Property Owner and R.O. was a couple of street names and now has been only R.O for a week or two.
December 15, 2007 at 9:08 PM in reply to: By spot to live that isn’t more than 20 minutes from downtown… #118269NotCranky
ParticipantR.O and M.P.O are not the same people.
MultipleProperty Owner was always Multiple Property Owner and R.O. was a couple of street names and now has been only R.O for a week or two.
December 15, 2007 at 9:08 PM in reply to: By spot to live that isn’t more than 20 minutes from downtown… #118303NotCranky
ParticipantR.O and M.P.O are not the same people.
MultipleProperty Owner was always Multiple Property Owner and R.O. was a couple of street names and now has been only R.O for a week or two.
December 15, 2007 at 9:08 PM in reply to: By spot to live that isn’t more than 20 minutes from downtown… #118342NotCranky
ParticipantR.O and M.P.O are not the same people.
MultipleProperty Owner was always Multiple Property Owner and R.O. was a couple of street names and now has been only R.O for a week or two.
-
AuthorPosts
