It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Therefore. It is well known that international security comprises much more than issues relating to military and political stability. It involves the stability of the global economy, overcoming poverty, economic security and developing a dialogue between civilisations.
This universal, indivisible character of security is expressed as the basic principle that “security for one is security for all”. As Franklin D. Roosevelt said during the first few days that the Second World War was breaking out: “When peace has been broken anywhere, the peace of all countries everywhere is in danger.”
These words remain topical today. Incidentally, the theme of our conference – global crises, global responsibility – exemplifies this.
Only two decades ago the world was ideologically and economically divided and it was the huge strategic potential of two superpowers that ensured global security.
This global stand-off pushed the sharpest economic and social problems to the margins of the international community’s and the world’s agenda. And, just like any war, the Cold War left us with live ammunition, figuratively speaking. I am referring to ideological stereotypes, double standards and other typical aspects of Cold War bloc thinking.
The unipolar world that had been proposed after the Cold War did not take place either.
The history of humanity certainly has gone through unipolar periods and seen aspirations to world supremacy. And what hasn’t happened in world history?
However, what is a unipolar world? However one might embellish this term, at the end of the day it refers to one type of situation, namely one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making.
It is world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within.
And this certainly has nothing in common with democracy. Because, as you know, democracy is the power of the majority in light of the interests and opinions of the minority. Incidentally, Russia – we – are constantly being taught about democracy. But for some reason those who teach us do not want to learn themselves.
I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today’s world. And this is not only because if there was individual leadership in today’s – and precisely in today’s – world, then the military, political and economic resources would not suffice. What is even more important is that the model itself is flawed because at its basis there is and can be no moral foundations for modern civilisation.
Along with this, what is happening in today’s world – and we just started to discuss this – is a tentative to introduce precisely this concept into international affairs, the concept of a unipolar world.
Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by oghamxx
He took Russia, which was well on it's way to becoming a real Democracy and turned it backwards toward a Dictatorship. Many evil men in history have been charismatic, good speakers. To support anything he does I'd first have to be functionally illiterate on the topic and want a world ruled by elitist Dictators.
The danger of propaganda is it's hard to tell from truth at times. Just like Putin, Stalin and others fooled lots of people.
Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by auraelium
Why would you actually believe the things he says for internal consumption to control his population. I back, in my mind at least, those in Russia stilling trying for Freedom despite Putin. They will never be Free until they have a Free Press and Free Speech.
Putin is for whatever gives him the most personal power and wealth. I'm sure that devising propaganda is a big part of his world. In other words he is very adept at lying to maintain his power. In this case it's his well practiced technique of diverting attention from himself at a convenient moment for him. His fantasy fight against the Bogey Man, the NWO is so much garbage I think.
They're coming to get us, so hide under the bed little ones
Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by auraelium
Kind of a strange tangent your on there.
You've never been here in the US have you? Let's just say we are far more free than the radicals pretend. All we have to do to get all sides of issues is change the channel. Russians have no such choice.
What's the point of defending Putin's desire to return Russia to being under a Dictator, which he has already done?
Don't confuse the political nonsense here at ATS or in the news during political dialogue with facts.
Unlike with Putin, we can get rid of our problems at election time. Most of the hype here is just hype and the result of paranoia and hate. I think most of us know that. Deny Ignorance.edit on 5/23/2012 by Blaine91555 because: (no reason given)edit on 5/23/2012 by Blaine91555 because: (no reason given)
was well on it's way to becoming a real Democracy and turned it backwards toward a Dictatorship. Many evil men in history have been charismatic, good speakers.
It started with J. F. KENNEDY ... so, don't blame it all Nixon. Besides, it wouldn't have mattered who became president of the US at that time.
What's the point of defending Putin's desire to return Russia to being under a Dictator, which he has already done?