Comments on Here is Kingmi's Global Question of the Day ( in 50 words) --

Go to Eight Your Home Town - Add a comment - Go to Here is Kingmi's Global Question of the Day ( in 50 words) --

Kell, Your are right. Thanks for returning! Have a nice day!

posted by kingmi on January 13, 2005 at 5:19 AM | link to this | reply

kingmi

Seems to me all those big things boil down to a few little things. Comparative to humanity and the way of the world. Thank you for explaining, glad I returned.

posted by Kelli on January 12, 2005 at 8:52 PM | link to this | reply

Kelli, We can't afford those big bombs and stuff that threaten China and

other big countries that we trade with -- and fight the war on terror. We must build our forces to patrol the countries where the attacks are coming from, like Afghanastan. Right now we are at peace with and trading with China. Because they have nukes too, it is not likely that we will be going to war with them (Mutually Assured Destruction). Also, we have the opportunity right now to extend the olive branch of not only peace but trust. They want protection from terrorists as much as we do. So why don't we spend our money developing a kind of homeland security system for all the connected countries.

So, If we miss this chance we have to develop real friends among the connected world, by threatening them with long-range, expensive stuff like star wars satellites, etc. then we will wind up confronting them later, or being confronted by them. The author makes the point that failing this post 9-11 atmosphere of bonding among connected countries (USA, EU, Russia, China, Japan, Australia, India, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, South Africa) to build a mutual protection treaty, that the world will divide up once again. We will garner our third of the world. Russia and EU will garner theirs, and China and Japan will garner theirs. We'll be right back into the cold war in ten years.

Hope that helps, Kell!

posted by kingmi on January 10, 2005 at 5:37 PM | link to this | reply

I have no earthly clue what I just read. Sorry kingmi!

posted by Kelli on January 10, 2005 at 5:10 PM | link to this | reply

DamonLeigh, True...Thanks for your comment.

In answer to your question, the author of the link cited, considers China and Russia as part of the connected. That's where a lot of your 3 billion of connected poverty is I imagine. Don't you? I totally agree that poverty people do not feel connected. However, their nations being connected will provide economic reform, markets for products, and labor jobs.

posted by kingmi on January 10, 2005 at 1:36 PM | link to this | reply

I Don't Quite Know...

...how you reckon on four billion living in the connected, civilised world.

Half the world's population - around three billion people - live on less than US$2 a day - many of them on MUCH less. I doubt many of them would feel connected.

D

posted by DamonLeigh on January 10, 2005 at 11:00 AM | link to this | reply

PF, I thought that was meant for someone else, sorry. see my answer to

renegade3.

posted by kingmi on January 9, 2005 at 8:00 PM | link to this | reply

renegade3, thank you. The author give these two reasons:

1. We cannot afford to do both long-range.

2. We will be sending a signal to the allies (which now include Russia and China) that we do not trust them, thereby, causing another split in the world with USA dominating our third, EU and Russia dominating theirs, and China and Japan dominating theirs.

This would be disaster as a lost opportunity to get together , protect each other and bring the under-developed nations into our world happily.