Did anybody of you heard about Sonnefeldt's doctrine? according to this doctrine the USA should not try to tear off Eastern Europe countries from SU influence, just the opposite:
****
That the State Department continues to connive with Moscow's tyranny over the Captive Nations and to implement Roosevelt's comment to Cardinal Spellman that Christian Europe with America's blessing had to get used to living under Soviet Russia's control, was shockingly made clear in 1975 by the Sonnenfeldt Doctrine. In December 1975, Kissinger convoked a conference of U.S. Ambassadors in Europe, at which his First Counsellor, Helmut Sonnefeldt as chief speaker said,

"An intervention of the United States in Eastem Europe ... is inconceivable. The best American strategy would be to help Soviet Russia consolidate its influence in that zone." (See Christian Science Monitor, April 7,1976.)

Here is stark proof that, as the Monitor comments, for the public the State Department professes "to favor the liberation of the satellite peoples," but its "operating policy is" not to "destabilize the existing condition," that means, that it connives in the tyranny over the Captive Nations.

Hi Jaga,
1976 was a very long time ago and was during the Cold War. Much has happened since then, including the EU which is now a much more dominent force in EE than the former Soviet Union.

Carol,

yes, but this is sad that politicians were just giving the Eastern Europe to Russia without the fight.
Yes, you are right, this changes completely

It's an old story.

From a forum:

Interesting perspective from Wharton MBA. Thought this would make a good discussion considering that Wharton, world's oldest business is also known as The Cradle of Capitalism
"...I'm a patriot; I believe strongly in the core American values of democracy, opportunity and individual freedom. But this summer, while traveling through Southeast Asia, when people asked me where I was from, I felt a twinge of shame because I am not proud of America right now. My embarrassment to tell people where my home is struck a chord inside me, and any American who has spent time abroad recently has likely experienced this feeling as well.
At the root of these emotions is a fundamental change in the way America treats its neighbors and, importantly, how they view us. The U.S. role in the world is shifting, and its new image is that of the global bully. Put another way, America has officially come out of its imperial closet.
The U.S. has always had imperialist tendencies, beginning with the conquering of the West from Native Americans and accelerating after World War II solidified America's status as the dominant world power. However, our country was founded by separatists, and this has imbued us with the notion that America is constitutionally incapable of imperialism. We were the underdogs once, and so we would never impose ourselves on another country in that manner, right?
Despite increasing involvement in world affairs over the years, America's "land of the free" value system has tempered its international policy and, until recently, prevented America from embarking on the downward imperial spiral that crippled so many empires before us. America built hegemonic stability on the strength of strategic alliances, respect for the self-determination of other nations, economic ties, and military deterrence.
Of late, though, the fabric linking us to the rest of the world has been deteriorating rapidly. Almost two years ago, President Bush announced America's pullout from the 30 year-old Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, a hallmark of nuclear non-proliferation. This move angered both Russia and-more significantly-China. Now, President Bush is looking to prevent nuclear arms build-ups in Iran and North Korea (notice I didn't mention Iraq; still no WMD's found), but no one will get behind the administration because no one respects a hypocrite.
America desperately could use China's help in engineering a solution to the North Korea mess, but when the Bush administration decided to nix the ABM Treaty it didn't have enough foresight to realize that we might ever have to ask China for help. Even South Korea, our ally with the most vested of interests in stabilizing that region of the world, has become increasingly vocal in its anti-U.S. sentiments.
Then, we went to war in Iraq relatively unilaterally, and now over 100,000 U.S. troops are stuck there because no country is willing to commit sizeable forces to supplement the U.S. military presence. President Bush sent these courageous men and women into a war that he could not sell to the world, and now that the invoice has arrived (measured in billions of taxpayer dollars each month) we have no exit strategy and the world is sticking it to us. Further, as the facts come to light, we the American people along with the entire world know that we were, at best, misled about the reasons for going to war, and America is turning into the boy who cried wolf. My concern is that the next time we have a genuine threat on our security, our friends may not stand with us.
America's national security problems are serious and they are not going away. But the solution lies not in bombing convenient targets, but rather in political and economic engagement coupled with mutual respect. Often in America, we talk about tolerance of people from different backgrounds and cultures. I'm worried about who will tolerate us."
http://www.whartonjournal.com/

Dear Carl,

Having read your post, brings to my mind a situation first encompassed by my self. Once upon a bit of time so long ago, I arrived in SA with very little knowledge of the country and people.

I was first intiminated by a couple from Britain. They looked up from the rail station and said this to me.

My, another foreigner! how so nice.. in my best Englisch, I politly told them this: go to hell.

They then looked very hurt, then the man said to me, this in very good german: How nice Hun, we fought you in the great war, what have we to do now?

My point of this is: be so proud of who and what you are, then be confirmed, you own the piece of realistate where you stand, if you do not first give it up.

Karl

Karl, well said! Thanks. Carl

Carl,

very good post. It seems that people are becaming more polarized either for or against Bush. It is sad!