Im gonna play devil's advocate for a second...

[KissMyAsscroft]

Ive been thiking about a lot of things lately, this one especially...

Of course we all think it is right to be respected throughout the world, and we dont want to offend anyone but is there really any realistic gain in not insulting other nations?

I mean, is there some measurable way of the damage we are doing by insulting other nations?

Can anyone give any examples?

For instance, would France not give us intellignce now that they would have before the march to war?

Its nice for us all to talk about stature and respect but are those things REALLY important when every nation has their self interests at heart?

[Dookus]

1. I think it's both possible

and important. Just like individuals, nations have different interests. But just like people, what unites us is far far greater than what divides us. We get bogged down on the divisions, but we need to focus a lot more on the issues that unite us: justice, human rights, jobs, the environment, etc. etc.

[stepnw1f]

2. I believe so...

Humans run governments. Humans have feelings. Sounds goofey but yes it does change the forum for discussion.

[earthman dave]

3. No real gain,

which is why unilateralism, threats of force etc are "good" policy, in that they get you what you want. Domestic PR might be a problem, though.

[david_vincent]

4. A measurable way?

I work with a guy who's in the National Guard and he told me
today that he's come to regard every other country on the planet
as just a bunch of stupid fuckers who hate us, so we should
never lift a finger to try to help any of them. Of course, the
reverse would also be true: we get our asses in deep shit, and
who would come to help us? It's a two-way street.
Rogue status, here we come... **not** a wise course of action
if you want your dollar to remain at the top. You wanna measurement?
Measure the fall of the dollar versus the Euro. Then measure the
rise in unemployment as the foreign investment we depend upon goes
elsewhere.

[robertpaulsen]

5. Measure the damage by counting the days Bush has left to screw up!

Honestly, I think most of the leaders of other nations in the world realize what a complete idiot the chimp is. Didn't someone from Canada call him a moron? I believe someone in Germany compared his behavior to the Nazis. (And I don't believe they were affiliated with moveon.org)

Look at how many troops from other nations have been pouring in since that new U.N. resolution Bush pushed for this fall! I think that qualifies as a good measurement of the lack of respect Bush has brought this country.

Can we win their respect back? Changing horses in midstream sounds like the best solution.

[LosAngelesDemocrat]

6. the art of negotiation

In thinking whether there is a strategic reason behind intentional offense you have to think about if there are reasons in taking a confrontational attitude. In addition, there are reasons in holding back also from taking a confrontational attitude. However, in a diplomatic world of shared mutual "self" interests, it is generally agreed that diplomacy should be the preferred route.

Examples... the bloc that rose against the war in Iraq (Russia, France, Germany) Even though they were pretty much the same in position against US intervention, the approaches that the US took with each of these countries were different. Usefully also, in our own self interests (speaking specifically on this one dimension). In a complicated world where actions have ramifications both good AND bad at the same time, a cost/benefit analysis of political, economic, military, and social dimensions are useful in understanding why the US choose to chastise France, issue objections with Germany, and apparently restrain criticism toward Russia. Though we may agree and disagree on some of the conclusions that led to that, it is undeniable the intent in action that the US took at that time(self interest). It is also useful to apply the use of insults by other nations toward the US (N. Korea) in seeing their effectiveness. Obviously so, it is useful to N. Korea to insult the US, not only does it increase nationalism internally minimizing domestic pressures, but it also allows them to "bluff" a bigger hand than they got.


In regards to the concept that "every nation has its own self interest at heart," it is undeniable that that is true. But it also simplifies the reality of the situation when sometimes there are conflicting self interests or contradictory interests at play. The foundation of modern diplomacy and world peace rests on a concept of shared self interest- only executed strongly in the past 50 years of economic interdependence. It is ironic that the multinational corporations are what prevented large scale war between traditional enemies within this period.. even so transforming enemies into friends. However, as a liberal that supports free trade, i do add a disclaimer that free trade has not been executed in a completely balanced way.

[interupt]

7. Here is the calculation you are looking for

Goodwill + Political Leverage
------------------------------
Self Interest


- Goodwill = The amount of trust or respect you place in other political bodies
- Political Leverage = the amount of "dirt" or results of goodwill that you have obtained.
- Self Interest = the amount you are willing to place in your own interests for your country's survivial

ASSUMPTIONS
* Self Interest must not = 0 or your country will not survive
* Political Leverage must not = 0 or you have no position
* Self Interest is a multiplier scale in regards to following criteria 'Local' 'National' 'International.'


-Added paragraph edit-