friends or foes in the aftermath of conflict - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-25-2003, 07:59 AM   #1
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
kobayashi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: the ether
Posts: 5,142
Local Time: 05:34 PM
friends or foes in the aftermath of conflict

is there any historical precedence for america, or any nation, being unfriendly to another who has chosen not to participate in a conflict? is participation in a war really a pre-requisite for good trade relations?
__________________

__________________
im the candyman. and the candyman is back.
kobayashi is offline  
Old 03-25-2003, 09:26 AM   #2
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 04:34 PM
I don't think Dubya knows his history anyway, nor does he care.

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
Old 03-25-2003, 10:03 AM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 02:34 PM

I disagree and
plus he dresses well
DB9
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 03-25-2003, 10:34 AM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Lilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: back and to the left
Posts: 8,523
Local Time: 03:34 PM
he ususally has a red tie on.


that's an interesting question kobe, i'll look into it when i get back from class today.
__________________
Lilly is offline  
Old 03-25-2003, 01:33 PM   #5
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2girl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: slovenija
Posts: 20,953
Local Time: 10:34 PM
To your first question - I don't know. To your second question I would say I see no reason for that.
I fear some economic retaliation might follow...
__________________
U2girl is offline  
Old 03-25-2003, 03:18 PM   #6
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Lilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: back and to the left
Posts: 8,523
Local Time: 03:34 PM
Re: friends or foes in the aftermath of conflict

Quote:
Originally posted by kobayashi
is there any historical precedence for america, or any nation, being unfriendly to another who has chosen not to participate in a conflict? is participation in a war really a pre-requisite for good trade relations?
ok kobesan, I've got a few examples here for you since I'm not exactly sure what your questions entailed.

Example 1: Finland and the United States after WWI. Up until 1917, the US had a policy of neutraility, meaning it could loan money and goods to belligerent countries, but not *participate* (of course, the US only lent to Britain and her allies). After WWI, most of the countries were looking for ways to get out of paying the debt to the US, and the German economy was so bad it couldn't pay back anything to the US without going bankrupt (by 1923, the dollar was equal to almost a trillian deutschmarks). The only country that paid the US back in full? Finland. Then as WWII was burgeoning, the US was declaring acts of neutrality to avoid getting into this second European war. That is, of course, until a Finnish ship was attacked. Then the US started taking a closer look at Hitler.

Point: People who stay in good standing, keep good standing. Because Finland was kind enough to pay back their full debt to the US, the US knew that offering their services to aid Finland again was a small calculated risk.

Example 2: The Treaty of Versailles. The Treaty of Versailles ended WWI and was signed in Versailles, France in 1919. It demanded that Germany lose the Alsace-Lorraine territory, give up much of its industry, almost completely disarm, cut its military almost in half, that it can't maintain reserves, destroy navy boats and u-boats, and pay HUGE reparations. The US Congress never ratified the Treaty of Versailles, and therefore never claimed as harsh reparations as Britain and France had. When Germany hit economic troubles in the 1920s, the US loaned Germany a lot of money, which Germany in turn used to pay Britain (Britain was buying US goods, so it was a triangular trade of economic goodness).

Point: Even though we just fought a war with them, the US still loaned Germany the money. According to Keynsian economics, a poor Germany = a poor United States (a huge step in thinking for the time), and the last thing the US wanted was to be poor.

These examples are the closest I could come up with to what's happening now, though the situation is a bit different. With the globalization of the economy, no one can afford a major player to have a weak economy or have sanctions on one another. It's not like the US is going to sanction Canadian goods out of nowhere because you're not supporting the war. It would be too damaging to our already hurting economy. But, as the past has shown, people who participate with the US or aid the US will probably get a bit more preference in the future.

Does that answer the question?

I can look more if you want.
__________________
Lilly is offline  
Old 03-26-2003, 11:33 AM   #7
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
kobayashi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: the ether
Posts: 5,142
Local Time: 05:34 PM
that's perfect, lilly.

thanks. i am meeting with some people from the US embassy here in ottawa next week as part of a governance research project i am involved in.

long term troubles aren't likely to persist because of canada's passive attitude toward iraq, but there could be significant short term upheaval. especially in terms of the softwood lumber dispute.

ambassador celluci was very critical of the liberal government yesterday at the economic club of ottawa. celluci lamented canada's lack of involvement in the war, but also the poor management of outspoken liberal MPs who went largely unpunished after criticizing american's in general, the administration, or bush himself.

well this is damaging to US canada relations, the most hurtful aspect for chretien's liberals is liable to be come election time.

thanks again lilly
__________________
im the candyman. and the candyman is back.
kobayashi is offline  
Old 03-26-2003, 12:43 PM   #8
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
I don't think Dubya knows his history anyway, nor does he care.
Melon
Not true, Melon. When Bush first came into office, he had a "think tank" come in and they discussed indepth all current world issues.
__________________

__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com