Conservatives vs. liberals: Before you indoctrinate your kids, read this

[Winehole23]

(for the fish in water, is the water noticeable?)

[Winehole23]

Oh, and have you read the new NATO mission statement?

[Winehole23]

(disclosure: this wino only recently heard of it, and has not gotten around to reading it himself)

[Winehole23]

(Be the first on your block, SpursTalk)

[Winehole23]

The recent MK Bhadrakumar piece was illuminating as usual.

[Wild Cobra]

Oh, and have you read the new NATO mission statement?

I'll bite. I haven't seen a NATO mission statement for about 20 years. What is it?

[Winehole23]

Jeez, I just gave a link to commentary. Didn't you read that, yet?

[RandomGuy]

My child will figure his political views on his own. I would never tell him that our president is a liar or he's a socialist because that would be my opnion. Unfortunately most kids take thier parenst word as gospel and carry on their parents points of view. I don't talk politics with my 8 yr old because he doesn't know enough to differentiate my opinions from the facts. I'd like to think my opinions are based on facts but in the end I have created my own truths. I CRINGE every time I hear someone tell hannity or Rush that their kids get the real news from them.. really? How unfair is that? Teaching your kids how to think is limiting them to seeing an issue from more than one point of view.

Yeah, I think 8 is a bit young to start teaching this sort of stuff. I think one has to really make a sharp deliniation between facts and opinion, something that gets blurred for a lot of people.

Not sure when *is* the right time to start, though. Parenting is a lot easier when all you have to deal with is trying to get them to eat their vegetables.

[RandomGuy]

I remember taking a trip to Yellowstone when I was a kid. We stopped at a rest stop and there was a sign that said "Don't feed the animals". I asked a park ranger why we couldn't feed the animals and he said that the animals would become conditioned to depend on humans for food. If it happend for long enough, the animals would lose their natural ability to find food and would starve to death.

Which is something of a polite lie on the part of the ranger.

They become dependent on humans, and then hang around humans. This is ok if the animal is relatively innocuous, like a racoon, but becomes VERY problematic if it is a bear or a moose.

The ranger didn't want to tell you that the animals would have to be killed to protect humans.

[TeyshaBlue]

Since WWII, haven't we been on a war footing more or less the whole way? That's 65 years now.

Just curious, what counts as perpetual war, TeyshaBlue?




(And btw, when do we return from Iraq and Afghanistan?)

Point taken and kinda exposes where I wanted to go with this until Parker lost the ability to communicate.

We've been on a war footing longer than that I would argue....and it's certainly not unique to America by any stretch of the imagination. One would almost entertain it's part and parcel to the human condition.

[Wild Cobra]

Jeez, I just gave a link to commentary. Didn't you read that, yet?

No, I was too busy trying to get through all the unread posts. I'll take a quick look at the links I didn't open, but cannot spend too mush time today.

[Wild Cobra]

I don't see a mission statement in that link. When i did a search, I found a link to the 2009 Mission Statement, and that there is a 2010 draft, but I didn't find a final. For that matter, I didn't find an actual mission statement anywhere. I forget, but maybe it's classified.

[RandomGuy]

I don't see a mission statement in that link. When i did a search, I found a link to the 2009 Mission Statement, and that there is a 2010 draft, but I didn't find a final. For that matter, I didn't find an actual mission statement anywhere. I forget, but maybe it's classified.

Classified?

Nope.

Posted on the website, but not quite called a "mission statement", but rather a "strategic concept".

Below is the pdf link for it, from the official NATO website.
http://www.nato.int/lisbon2010/strat...t-2010-eng.pdf

1. NATO’s fundamental and enduring purpose is to safeguard the freedom and security of all its members by political and military means. Today, the Alliance remains an essential source of stability in an unpredictable world.

2. NATO member states form a unique community of values, committed to the principles of individual liberty, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. The Alliance is firmly committed to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and to the Washington Treaty, which affirms the primary responsibility of the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security.

3. The political and military bonds between Europe and North America have been forged in NATO since the Alliance was founded in 1949; the transatlantic link remains as strong, and as important to the preservation of Euro-Atlantic peace and security, as ever. The security of NATO members on both sides of the Atlantic is indivisible. We will continue to defend it together, on the basis of solidarity, shared purpose and fair burden-sharing.

4. The modern security environment contains a broad and evolving set of challenges to the security of NATO’s territory and populations. In order to assure their security, the Alliance must and will continue fulfilling effectively three essential core tasks, all of which contribute to safeguarding Alliance members, and always in accordance with international law:

a. Collective defence. NATO members will always assist each other against attack, in accordance with Article 5 of the Washington Treaty. That commitment remains firm and binding. NATO will deter and defend against any threat of aggression, and against emerging security challenges where they threaten the fundamental security of individual Allies or the Alliance as a whole.

b. Crisis management. NATO has a unique and robust set of political and military capabilities to address the full spectrum of crises – before, during and after conflicts. NATO will actively employ an appropriate mix of those political and military tools to help manage developing crises that have the potential to affect Alliance security, before they escalate into conflicts; to stop ongoing conflicts where they affect Alliance security; and to help consolidate stability in post-conflict situations where that contributes to Euro-Atlantic security.

c. Cooperative security. The Alliance is affected by, and can affect, political and security developments beyond its borders. The Alliance will engage actively to enhance international security, through partnership with relevant countries and other international organisations; by contributing actively to arms control, nonproliferation and disarmament; and by keeping the door to
membership in the Alliance open to all European democracies that meet NATO’s standards.

5. NATO remains the unique and essential transatlantic forum for consultations on all matters that affect the territorial integrity, political independence and security of its members, as set out in Article 4 of the Washington Treaty. Any security issue of interest to any Ally can be brought to the NATO table, to share information, exchange views and, where appropriate, forge common approaches.

6. In order to carry out the full range of NATO missions as effectively and efficiently as possible, Allies will engage in a continuous process of reform, modernisation and transformation.

[RandomGuy]

Also because it seems relevant, the treaty itself:

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/...exts_17120.htm

with current member countries:
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/nato_countries.htm