> > No argument about that. Just out of curosity do you over there get the same arguments about "We must do something about the shrinking population - have more babies!", while at the same time "We must keep immigrants out unless they're the Right Sort for us (white, good professions, etc), and be careful of those asylum seekers!"?
>
> The US has experienced a steady population growth pretty much since it was founded. It has tapered off quite a bit recently, but remains positive largely because of immigration. I've certainly never heard anyone complain that we were in danger of shrinking.
>

Well, that's probably even more a regional thing in my state where the population is shrinking than even the whole of Australia, but there was a rather "amusing" incident in which some politician visited an all girls school and told them they needed to go forth and populate the country.

> > I can't think that there'd be much good to say about monsieur Bush,
>
> I'll say a few good things about him (and I did not vote for him and am not a particularly big supporter of his): he seems to be a generally sincere, honest individual. It makes him sort of tactless sometimes, which can be a disadvantage when dealing with foreign affairs, but Americans love direct leaders. And I must say I admire his willingness to say some really non-PC stuff (such as labelling countries like Iraq as "evil").

It's non politically correct for a reason... it's a blanket statement likes the ones I'm making about America and as you're going to lengths to show such statements can't be accurate. And "evil" is a lot stronger than what I'm saying.


> I don't think Bush is stupid (he comes off that way a lot, but I think it's because he's a crappy speaker, though he has improved quite a bit). You need to provide reasons as to why you think he's dangerous.

Well, as I recall he told students at a college that you too can become president with a C-average, or something very similar, which doesn't quite equal stupid, but I for one would feel happier with somebody beyond mediocre at best as a president. Perhaps stupid is too strong, but not intelligent enough for someone in that position is more what I mean. A perfectly intelligent carpark attendant...
As I said in my reply to Eric stupid + huge military = dangerous.


> > That explanation works better for me. But disregarding the opinion of the rest of the world because you have more missiles than the rest of them combined appears to be Bush's solution...
>
> Like with what? The Kyoto treaty? The International Court? Come on. We're under absolutely no obligation to give a wit what the rest of the world thinks of us and we're certainly not under any obligation to bind ourselves to the whims of the "international community" -- this is the whole idea of sovereign nations.

That's exactly the kind of attitude I mean, I'm afraid. Why aren't you under any obligation? If the US made some kind of effort instead of having that attitude then don't you think the world could be a better place? Do you think the environment doesn't matter? That criminals other than the ones who attack the US should be ignored? The US _does_ have a responsibility as such a powerful nation to improve the lot of humanity beyond their own shores, something which in many instances they shirk (and in many others sure, they are doing a perfectly good job - but not enough of these).


>...Virtually no head of state really cares more for the world as a whole than about his own country. It really is a game of who has the most power and who has the will to use it....

In the end they care more about themselves than about their country. There are tough decisions that ultimately would benefit their country as well as the rest of the world, but would be hugely unpopular and then they mightn't get reelected, so they don't take that path. If the US made more effort at an international level then a lot of progress could be made in creating an international community, which I for one feel would improve the world. Sure they don't _have_ to. There isn't a higher power that can force them to, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't.