Skip to main content

Home/ Politically Minded/ Group items tagged foreign policy

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
thinkahol *

Armed Chinese Troops in Texas! - YouTube - 0 views

www.youtube.com/watch

Armed Chinese Troops in Texas! - YouTube

shared by thinkahol * on 05 Jan 12 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 05 Jan 12
     
    NOTE: It is important to separate hunting down terrorists who attack our country and deserve justice (which Ron Paul is 100% for), and not confuse justice with occupying entire countries for a decade under the guise of the "War on Terror" or "Spreading Democracy". Terrorists are individuals and small groups, so why are we picking fights with entire nations? BILLIONS for Defense, NOT A PENNY for Empire. This speech is called "Imagine" and it was given by Ron Paul on March 11, 2009. The original text of the talk is below: Imagine for a moment that somewhere in the middle of Texas there was a large foreign military base, say Chinese or Russian. Imagine that thousands of armed foreign troops were constantly patrolling American streets in military vehicles. Imagine they were here under the auspices of "keeping us safe" or "promoting democracy" or "protecting their strategic interests." Imagine that they operated outside of US law, and that the Constitution did not apply to them. Imagine that every now and then they made mistakes or acted on bad information and accidentally killed or terrorized innocent Americans, including women and children, most of the time with little to no repercussions or consequences. Imagine that they set up checkpoints on our soil and routinely searched and ransacked entire neighborhoods of homes. Imagine if Americans were fearful of these foreign troops, and overwhelmingly thought America would be better off without their presence. Imagine if some Americans were so angry about them being in Texas that they actually joined together to fight them off, in defense of our soil and sovereignty, because leadership in government refused or were unable to do so. Imagine that those Americans were labeled terrorists or insurgents for their defensive actions, and routinely killed, or captured and tortured by the foreign troops on our land. Imagine that the occupiers' attitude was that if they just killed enough Americans, the resistance would stop, but inst
Skeptical Debunker

Big Content condemns foreign governments that endorse FOSS - 0 views

arstechnica.com/...ernments-that-endorse-foss.ars

open source Special 301 USTR IIPA absurd recommendations self-serving

shared by Skeptical Debunker on 25 Feb 10 - Cached
  • University of Edinburgh law lecturer Andres Guadamuz wrote a blog entry this week highlighting some particularly troubling aspects of the IIPA's 301 recommendations. The organization has condemned Indonesia and several other countries for encouraging government adoption of open source software. According to the IIPA, official government endorsements of open source software create "trade barriers" and restrict "equitable market access" for software companies. The profound absurdity of this accusation is exacerbated by the fact that Indonesia's move towards open source software was almost entirely motivated by a desire to eliminate the use of pirated software within the government IT infrastructure. It's important to understand that Indonesia has not mandated the adoption of open source software or barred government agencies from purchasing proprietary commercial software. The Indonesian government issued a statement in 2009 informing municipal governments that they had to stop using pirated software. The statement said that government agencies must either purchase legally licensed commercial software or switch to free and open source alternatives in order to comply with copyright law. This attempt by Indonesia to promote legal software procurement processes by endorsing the viability of open source software has apparently angered the IIPA. In its 301 recommendations for Indonesia, the IIPA demands that the government rescind its 2009 statement. According to the IIPA, Indonesia's policy "weakens the software industry and undermines its long-term competitiveness" because open source software "encourages a mindset that does not give due consideration to the value to intellectual creations [and] fails to build respect for intellectual property rights." The number of ways in which the IIPA's statements regarding open source software are egregiously misleading and dishonest are too numerous to count. The IIPA seems to have completely missed the fact that there is a very robust ecosystem of commercial software vendors in the open source software market and that open source software is at the heart of some of the most popular consumer electronics products that are sold in the United States. It has clearly become an important part of the US software economy and increasingly serves as an enabler of innovation and technological progress. In light of the profitability of Red Hat and other open source leaders, it seems absurd to contend that open source software adoption will weaken the software industry or reduce its competitiveness. In fact, the emergence of open source software has contributed to creating a more competitive landscape in the software industry by offering alternative business models that enable smaller companies to gain traction against the dominant incumbent players. The IIPA's position is profoundly hypocritical, because many parts of the US government, including the Department of Defense, have issued their own memos endorsing open source software adoption. The IIPA's disingenuous move to equate open source software with piracy reeks of desperation. The BSA and other IIPA members are likely losing sleep over open source software because that development model and approach to licensing will empower developing countries to build their own domestic IT industries, eliminating the need for them to tithe to American software giants. It's another failing of the 301 review, which Big Content wants used to coerce other countries into adopting ever-more-stringent copyright laws.
  • Skeptical Debunker on 25 Feb 10
     
    In accordance with US trade law, the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) is required to conduct an annual review of the status of foreign intellectual property laws. This review, which is referred to as Special 301, is typically used to denounce countries that have less restrictive copyright policies than the United States. The review process is increasingly dominated by content industry lobbyists who want to subvert US trade policy and make it more favorable to their own interests. We have already noted the targeting of Canada for its supposedly lax copyright laws, but that is not the only nation drawing the ire of Big Content. One of the organizations that plays a key role in influencing the Special 301 review is the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA), a powerful coalition that includes the RIAA, the MPAA, and the Business Software Alliance (BSA). The IIPA, which recently published its official recommendations to the USTR for the 2010 edition of the 301 review, has managed to achieve a whole new level of absurdity.
Michael Haltman

Obama facing another failed foreign policy initiative as Iran announces uranium enrichm... - 0 views

www.examiner.com/...es-uranium-enrichment-facility

Cordoba House Ground Zero Mosque Iran nuclear weapons uranium enrichment Obama Foreign Policy

shared by Michael Haltman on 16 Aug 10 - Cached
  • Michael Haltman on 16 Aug 10
     
    Ground Zero Mosque Is Okay According To The President, But Then Again A Nuclear Armed Iran Seems To Be Fine As Well.
Skeptical Debunker

Google Argues That Chinese Censorship Was "Trade Dispute" - ITProPortal.com - 0 views

www.itproportal.com/...e-censorship-was-trade-dispute

Google China censorship trade dispute

shared by Skeptical Debunker on 03 Mar 10 - Cached
  • Bloomberg.com has reported that the Obama administration is planning to launch an official complaint against China with the World Trade Organisation (WTO) pertaining to the country's stringent web censorship policies. Illinois Senator Richard Durbin has announced that he plans to pass a legislation that will allow the government to prosecute US internet companies if they violate the human rights of their customers when a foreign government asks them to do so. 
  • Skeptical Debunker on 03 Mar 10
     
    A Google representative has announced that the web censorship policies adopted by China can be classified as 'Trade Dispute' as local companies benefit when the government restricts the operations of foreign companies.
Maria Lewytzkyj

Unorthodox compromising Senator Ted Kennedy extended social justice ideals beyond Ameri... - 0 views

www.examiner.com/...ideals-beyond-American-borders

Iraq Cuba Venezuela embargo sanctions Kennedy Ted

shared by Maria Lewytzkyj on 28 Aug 09 - Cached
  • Maria Lewytzkyj on 28 Aug 09
     
    The foreign policy contributions of Senator Ted Kennedy.
thinkahol *

Foreign Policy In Focus | The Political Consequences of Stagnation - 0 views

www.fpif.org/...cal_consequences_of_stagnation

Foreign Policy In Focus | The Political Consequences of Stagnation

shared by thinkahol * on 07 Sep 10 - Cached
  • thinkahol * on 07 Sep 10
     
    If the left doesn't come up with a credible and comprehensive alternative to a focus on reducing the deficit, argues FPIF columnist Walden Bello, the far right might eventually fill the policy vacuum.
Maria Lewytzkyj

Epitaph to self-righteousness: a comprehensive look at al-qaida & counter-terrorism pol... - 0 views

www.examiner.com/...ida--counterterrorism-policies

shared by Maria Lewytzkyj on 22 Jan 10 - Cached
  • Maria Lewytzkyj on 22 Jan 10
     
    There are many solutions various governments have written into policies in counter-terrorism efforts as terrorists continue to dig their heals into a moral high ground that has consumed lives in many parts of the world. Many who study religious terrorism understand that the battleground was not drawn by religions, but by the interpretation of those whose fever for fanaticism prevails. In response, this ferocity has called upon itself moderates and centrists who want to write an epitaph to such self-righteousness, who want to see the end of the bloodshed.
Yee Sian Ng

Hoover Institution - Policy Review - Power and Weakness - 0 views

www.hoover.org/...3460246.html

Geopolitics United States European Union

shared by Yee Sian Ng on 07 Mar 10 - Cached
  • Yee Sian Ng on 07 Mar 10
     
    "IT IS TIME to stop pretending that Europeans and Americans share a common view of the world, or even that they occupy the same world. On the all-important question of power - the efficacy of power, the morality of power, the desirability of power - American and European perspectives are diverging. Europe is turning away from power, or to put it a little differently, it is moving beyond power into a self-contained world of laws and rules and transnational negotiation and cooperation. It is entering a post-historical paradise of peace and relative prosperity, the realization of Kant's "Perpetual Peace." The United States, meanwhile, remains mired in history, exercising power in the anarchic Hobbesian world where international laws and rules are unreliable and where true security and the defense and promotion of a liberal order still depend on the possession and use of military might. That is why on major strategic and international questions today, Americans are from Mars and Europeans are from Venus: They agree on little and understand one another less and less. And this state of affairs is not transitory - the product of one American election or one catastrophic event. The reasons for the transatlantic divide are deep, long in development, and likely to endure. When it comes to setting national priorities, determining threats, defining challenges, and fashioning and implementing foreign and defense policies, the United States and Europe have parted ways."
thinkahol *

GMF - The Copenhagen Consensus: Reading Adam Smith in Denmark - 0 views

www.gmfus.org/...article.cfm

economic policy america government denmark

shared by thinkahol * on 27 May 10 - Cached
  • thinkahol * on 27 May 10
     
    Adam Smith observed in 1776 that economies work best when governments keep their clumsy thumbs off the free market's "invisible hand." Two generations later, in 1817, the British economist David Ricardo extended Smith's insights to global trade. Just as market forces lead to the right price and quantity of products domestically, Ricardo argued, free foreign trade optimizes economic outcomes internationally. Reading Adam Smith in Copenhagen -- the center of the small, open, and highly successful Danish economy -- is a kind of out-of-body experience. On the one hand, the Danes are passionate free traders. They score well in the ratings constructed by pro-market organizations. The World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness Index ranks Denmark third, just behind the United States and Switzerland. Denmark's financial markets are clean and transparent, its barriers to imports minimal, its labor markets the most flexible in Europe, its multinational corporations dynamic and largely unmolested by industrial policies, and its unemployment rate of 2.8 percent the second lowest in the OECD (the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development). On the other hand, Denmark spends about 50 percent of its GDP on public outlays and has the world's second-highest tax rate, after Sweden; strong trade unions; and one of the world's most equal income distributions. For the half of GDP that they pay in taxes, the Danes get not just universal health insurance but also generous child-care and family-leave arrangements, unemployment compensation that typically covers around 95 percent of lost wages, free higher education, secure pensions in old age, and the world's most creative system of worker retraining. Does Denmark have some secret formula that combines the best of Adam Smith with the best of the welfare state? Is there something culturally unique about the open-minded Danes? Can a model like the Danish one survive as a social democratic island in a turbulent sea of globali
Ian Schlom

The Danger of War in Asia - 0 views

www.wsws.org/...pers-f12.html

China US Japan imperialism militarism South_Korea 2013

shared by Ian Schlom on 13 Feb 13 - No Cached
  • Ian Schlom on 13 Feb 13
     
    I'm not sure how seriously to take this article. The articles references two commentators, one from Financial Times and the other from Foreign Policy. Those are pretty legitimate, I guess. They say that the US is forming an alliance with South Korea, Japan, and others contra Beijing.
alex thorn

Raw Replay - Revisiting History - 0 views

rawstory.com/...index.php

election obama politics president usa

shared by alex thorn on 17 May 08 - Cached
  • alex thorn on 17 May 08
     
    Incredible foreign policy perspective of our future president, I confidently predict (without lending a comment to my personal preferences), will be the next president of the United States of America
Michael Hughes

Afghan President is a better diplomat than domestic leader - 1 views

www.examiner.com/-diplomat-than-domestic-leader

Afghanistan Karzai China

shared by Michael Hughes on 28 Mar 10 - Cached
  • Michael Hughes on 28 Mar 10
     
    Although President Hamid Karzai's shining moment this week with Chinese President Hu Jintao may not equal the historical drumfire of Nixon and Chairman Mao's 1972 "handshake felt around the world", Mr. Karzai's trip to Beijing was yet another illustration of his foreign policy sagacity.
thinkahol *

The Tea Party's Blind Spot - 0 views

www.readersupportednews.org/...4500-the-tea-partys-blind-spot

The Tea Party's Blind Spot

shared by thinkahol * on 05 Jan 11 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 05 Jan 11
     
    The upstarts of the new Republican Congress have a risky foreign policy platform-no plan at all. Peter Beinart on how Tea Party outrage over government spending ignores the fact that deficits are often caused by wars
thinkahol *

What Egypt Can Teach America - NYTimes.com - 0 views

www.nytimes.com/...13kristof.html

What Egypt Can Teach America - NYTimes.com

shared by thinkahol * on 13 Feb 11 - No Cached
  • thinkahol * on 13 Feb 11
     
    The truth is that the United States has been behind the curve not only in Tunisia and Egypt for the last few weeks, but in the entire Middle East for decades. We supported corrupt autocrats as long as they kept oil flowing and weren't too aggressive toward Israel. Even in the last month, we sometimes seemed as out of touch with the region's youth as a Ben Ali or a Mubarak. Recognizing that crafting foreign policy is 1,000 times harder than it looks, let me suggest four lessons to draw from our mistakes:
The Ravine / Joseph Dunphy

John Bolton at CPAC: The Benefits of Nuking Chicago | Mother Jones - 0 views

www.motherjones.com/...n-cpac-benefits-nuking-chicago

much ado about nothing Chicago Republicans politics hysteria

shared by The Ravine / Joseph Dunphy on 01 Apr 09 - Cached
  • The Ravine / Joseph Dunphy on 01 Apr 09
     
    Interesting how the warhead seems to be going off on the campus of Columbia College. I guess the bad guys are going to bring us to out knees by cutting off the supply of fashion illustrators and fiction writers? Those fiends! We would have never seen it coming. If you're read my stuff, you know exactly what I think of the Bush administration and how happy I was to see it leave Washington. I like a good neocon bash maybe even more than the next man. But, while this take on Bolton's remarks has been a popular one, I don't feel it's a reasonable one. As the article itself quotes Mr.Bolton "The fact is on foreign policy I don't think President Obama thinks it's a priority," said Bolton. "He said during the campaign he thought Iran was a tiny threat. Tiny, tiny depending on how many nuclear weapons they are ultimately able to deliver on target. Its, uh, its tiny compared to the Soviet Union, but is the loss of one American city" - here Bolton changes his tone subtly to prepare for the joke - "pick one at random - Chicago - is that a tiny threat?" Yes, there's a joke in that remark, but it's not the one that Jonathan Stein of Mother Jones wants it to be. The point of the joke is that if even one city gets hit, that's somebody's home and to that somebody, the difference between a vast nuclear arsenal and a small one isn't going to matter much. By naming the president's hometown in the hypothetical, he invites the president to put himself in the shoes of that person left facing a detonation close at hand. We don't have to guess how Obama would feel about such a prospect; it's the same way anybody would feel about it. To suggest, as the author does, that the audience validated a hope for mass murder by laughing at the joke is a disingenuous attempt to produce a hysterical response for the political gain of an already victorious faction. It's a cheap shot, and the author should have known better. This makes the Bush Administration and neoconservatism look bett
1 - 20 of 56 Next › Last »
Showing 20▼ items per page