By: Dr. Megalommatis Muhammad ：博士megalommatis穆罕默德。
Shamsaddin (Pictured Below) 夏姆沙丁（圖下文）
Going through the vast literature that is being daily produced with focus on the ongoing Democratic campaign, one gets the idea that rich conceptual thinking, innovative approaches, and nuance are all there.通過大量文獻指出，現正每天產生的，重點是對正在進行的民主運動，人們得到的思想，豐富的概念思維，創新的辦法，和細微差別，都是有。
Yet, the field where nuance seems to be permanently absent in America is the US foreign policy.然而，外地的細微差別，似乎是永久缺席在美國，是美國的外交政策。 This does not concern the present campaign only, but the situation has certainly been exacerbated over the past weeks.這並不關注目前的運動，只是，但情況已有所當然，加劇了在過去數星期。 From the comical comments of Senator McCain about the從滑稽的評論麥凱恩參議員有關 US staying in Iraq another 100 years 美國滯留在伊拉克的另一個百年 () to the hysterical reaction of Senator Clinton as regards to US ‘ （ ）歇斯底里的反應，第一夫人希拉里克林頓至於美國 policy toward Iran 對伊朗的政策 ‘ Ayatollahs, one gets the impression that the US foreign policy risks being entrusted in irrelevant hands precisely at a moment when the unipolar world of one and sole superpower seems about to end. '阿亞圖拉之一，得到的印象是，美國外交政策的風險，被賦予在不相干的手中，正是在的時候的單極世界，一個和唯一的超級大國，似乎即將結束。
With the American economy in the middle of a serious crisis that can be tremendously deteriorated, with a great number of social issues unresolved, with a wide range of very preoccupying global problems (energy, food crisis, bio-fuel, environment), America’s foreign policy needs reconsideration, reassessment and re-evaluation from scratch.與美國的經濟中的嚴重危機，可以極大地惡化，大量的社會問題得到解決，與範圍廣泛的非常令人擔憂的全球性問題（能源，糧食危機，生物燃料，環境） ，美國'外交政策需要重新考慮，重新評估和重新評價從零開始。
The need for an immediate shift in the US foreign policy consists in the most urgent demand for America as it hinges on all other issues, energy, environment, commodities prices, economy, to name but a few.需要立即轉移，在美國外交政策的組成，在最迫切的需求，美國，因為它取決於對所有其他問題，能源，環境，商品價格，經濟，名稱，但數。
In a rising multi-polar world where China, India, Russia, the Islamic World, Africa, Brazil, Mexico and Japan vindicate their position next to the US and the EU, America needs to think out-of-the-box, and devise a global strategy that will promote the US interests genuinely conceived.在一個上升的多極世界，在中國，印度，俄羅斯，伊斯蘭世界，非洲，巴西，墨西哥和日本平反他們的立場在明年向美國和歐盟，美國需要思考出來- - -框中，並制訂一項全球戰略，這將促進美國的利益，真正的構想。
To briefly comment on the aforementioned oversights, we would focus on US-Iraq issues, and ask the following: 簡單的評論就上述疏漏，我們將側重於美伊拉克問題，並要求如下：
- - What is the benefit of the US staying 100 years in Iraq, if the Christian Aramaeans who are the ethnic majority of Mesopotamia (Iraq is a false term that severely damages the US interests) are thus eradicated from their fatherland? -什麼是有利於美國在下榻的百年在伊拉克，如果基督教a ramaeans誰是民族的大多數美索不達米亞（伊拉克是一個虛假的任期，嚴重損害了美國的利益） ，因而根除他們的祖國？
- - To whose profit is this sort of extended American presence in Iraq going to be? -其利潤是這類延長美國在伊拉克的打算呢？
- - Are Americans able to understand that the US-led invasion of Iraq turned to the unique advantage of the Islamic terrorists? -是美國人能夠明白，以美國為首的入侵伊拉克轉向的獨特優勢伊斯蘭恐怖分子？
- - Is Senator Mac Cain mentally capable of envisioning an 100-year long American presence in Iraq that would not be to the profit of the terrorists? -是參議員的M ac該隱弱智能力構想1 1 00年之久的美國在伊拉克的表示，不會以利潤恐怖分子？ If yes, why doesn’t he publish an overview of this policy so that people be able to appreciate the pillars on which it may be based and be convinced about it?如果是的話，為什麼不公佈他概述了這項政策，使人們能夠欣賞的支柱，它可能是基於和信服它呢？ If not, for whom is he working in order to practically extend US damage (present policy has been clearly assessed as such thus far) due to the invasion of Iraq for another 100 years?如果沒有，為誰是他的工作，以切實擴大美國的損害（目前的政策已經明確評估，例如，迄今）因入侵伊拉克的另一個百年？
One can therefore understand that what matters in Iraq is not whether the US military stay there 3 months, 3 years or 3 centuries but whether US presence in Iraq can let Justice prevail, help repair damages caused to several ethno-religious groups over the years of colonialism and post-colonialism, and promote a culturally – educationally genuine, democratic nation building that has long been deliberately averted.一，因此可以明白，什麼事情在伊拉克不在於是否美軍逗留3個月， 3年或3世紀，但是否美國在伊拉克可以讓正義得以伸張，幫助修復所造成的損失數民族宗教群體多年來的殖民主義和後殖民主義，促進文化-真正的教育，民主國家的建設，長期以來一直刻意避免。 As we have entered, since 2001, in the period of the so-called War against the Islamic Terrorism (irrespective of the veracity or not of the events of September 11), America should consider whether the infantile US foreign policy has so far committed, in this new era, precisely the same errors that have been perpetrated in the period of the foremost waste of US national resources, namely the Cold War.正如我們已經進入了，自2001年以來，在該段期間的那些所謂的戰爭對伊斯蘭恐怖主義（不論是否屬實，或不是9月11日事件） ，美國應該考慮是否有嬰幼兒美國的外交政策，至今已經承諾，在這個新的時代，正是同樣的錯誤已經犯下的時期，首要的浪費美國的國家資源，即冷戰。
Absence of Nuance 缺席的細微差別
To be more precise, we will circumspectly present two models of consideration.要更精確，我們將circumspectly目前的兩種型號的考慮。 Evaluating America’s performance during, and contribution to, the Cold War (1950 – 1990), one could conclude that the US, by forging an alliance with Western European democracies, managed to contain and in time to cause the downfall of the Soviet regime.評價美國的表現，貢獻，冷戰的結束（ 1950年-1 990年） ，人們可以得出結論認為，美國，鍛造聯盟與西歐的民主國家，設法遏制和在時間造成的滅亡蘇維埃政權。
This is the conventional thinking that does not take into consideration the resources and the time wasted, the loss in other fronts (Europe, Africa, China, Latin America), as well as the impact on the image and the perspectives of America.這是傳統思維，這並不考慮資源和時間的浪費，損失在其他方面（歐洲，非洲，中國，拉丁美洲） ，以及作為影響，對形象和觀點，美利堅合眾國。 Even worse, this conventional way of thinking does not take into account the fact that the so-called collapse of the Soviet Union consists in an absolutely false myth; in real terms, it was a 10-year moratorium that ended up with the replacement of the former Soviet Union by Russia.更糟糕的是，這個傳統的思維方式，沒有考慮到一個事實，即以所謂蘇聯的崩潰構成在一個絕對虛假的神話，以實質計算，這是一個10年的暫停，結束了與更換前蘇聯，俄羅斯。
As conventional thinking is based on a quantitative approach, defenders of this interpretation would say that Russia is now much weaker (comparatively speaking) than Soviet Union in the mid-70s.作為傳統思維是基於一種定量方法，捍衛這個解釋會說，俄羅斯是現在弱得多（相對而言） ，比蘇聯在七十年代中期。 This is absolutely wrong because America is similarly weaker now, as Europe, China, and to lesser extent India and Brazil have risen to significance.這是絕對錯誤的，因為美國是同樣較弱的現在，隨著歐洲，中國，並在較小程度，印度和巴西已上升到意義。
This ominous way of conventional thinking is what publicly unseen but real and omnipotent centers of power promote in order to besot the vast masses of the Americans, divert them from global issues, and then effectively run them without them even understanding it.這不祥的方式，傳統思維是什麼公開看不見，但真正的和萬能的權力中心，促進在以besot廣大人民群眾的美國人，使他們擺脫全球性問題，然後有效地運行它們，沒有他們，甚至了解它。
According to an unconventional approach and interpretation, after WW II, all the administrations failed to understand that ’superpower’ (anytime anywhere) means above all ability to deal with nuance.按照常規的做法和解釋，第二次世界大戰後，所有的行政部門未能認識到'超級大國' （任何時候任何地方）指上述所有的能力來處理的細微差別。
Of course, the Russians are quite the same.當然，俄羅斯人是不盡相同。 And perhaps, this is the reason for which the Cold War lasted that long.也許，這是其中的原因，冷戰持續了很久。 If France or England had been in the position of (as powerful as) America in 1945, the Soviet Empire would have collapsed in the early 60s.如果法國或英國已在立場（強大） ，美國在1945年，蘇聯帝國的崩潰，會在六十年代初。
America cannot be an ally for Colonial England and France 美國不能成為一個盟友，為殖民地英格蘭和法國
As a matter of fact, the lack of nuance made America (under either Democrats or Republicans) perceive itself as an ally of colonial empires that following their collapse managed to turn the colonial rule to postcolonial rule (which is just another form of colonial rule) under America’s nose - and the US started understanding this reality only in the 90s.作為一個的問題，事實上，缺乏細節使美國（下無論是民主黨或共和黨）的看法，本身作為一個盟友，殖民帝國之後，他們的崩潰，管理，把殖民統治的後殖民統治（這是剛才的另一種形式的殖民統治）根據美國的鼻子-和美國開始了解這個現實，只有在9 0年代。
For Eisenhower or Kennedy, Johnson or Nixon, Carter or Reagan, the Search for Freedom could not have a positive exit if undertaken in alliance with the most vicious enemies of Freedom, France and England.為艾森豪威爾或肯尼迪，約翰遜或尼克松，卡特或雷根，尋求自由，不能有正面的退出，如果承諾在聯盟與最惡毒自由的敵人，法國和英格蘭。 The two colonial countries are not only guilty for Serial Crimes against the Mankind because of their deeds in Africa, Oceania, and Asia but also responsible for terrorism, oppression and cultural genocide practiced in Ireland, Scotland, Brittany, Occitania, Corsica, Bask Land, Catalonia and French Polynesia.這兩個殖民地的國家不僅是有罪的串行危害人類，因為他們的事蹟在非洲，大洋洲，亞洲，而且還負責恐怖主義，壓迫和文化滅絕，實行在愛爾蘭，蘇格蘭，布列塔尼，奧克西塔尼亞，科西嘉，享受土地，加泰隆尼亞和法屬波利尼西亞。
The oppression in Corsica was not different from the oppression in Estonia.壓迫在科西嘉沒有什麼不同的壓迫，在愛沙尼亞。 If Ukraine is now an independent country, so Scotland and Catalonia must.如果烏克蘭現在是一個獨立的國家，因此，蘇格蘭和加泰羅尼亞必須。 Today, in 2008, France cannot possibly dare demand of China to respect the rights of the Tibetans because France has long implemented far crueler practices of oppression in Brittany under the infamous emblem “In the streets it is prohibited to spit and to speak Breton.”今天，在2008年，法國不可能不敢需求，中國尊重他們的權利，藏族，因為法國長期以來實施至今殘酷的做法，在布列塔尼的壓迫下，臭名昭著的徽號， “在街道上，這是禁止隨地吐痰和發言布列塔尼語” 。
It would be a terrible political mistake to identify ‘anti-colonial’ with “Democrat”, ‘left’ or even ‘leftist’.這將是一個可怕的政治錯誤，找出'反殖民'與“民主派” ， '左'的或什至'左' 。 Anti-colonialism is Americanism, the essence of the Declaration of Independence.反殖民主義主義，本質的獨立宣言。 It has to be undertaken / promoted / implemented by either Democrats or Republicans.它必須承諾/晉升/實施，無論民主黨或共和黨。
Lessons to take from the Cold War 的教訓，採取從冷戰
Conventional thinking and traditional approach to foreign policy are responsible for the following oxymoron - all due to the lack of nuance:傳統思維和傳統做法的外交政策是負責下列矛盾-所有由於缺乏細微差別：
Anti-colonial (by nature) America was the ally of the colonial powers England and France (1950 - 1990), while they promoted postcolonial structures in Africa and Asia, involving state run economies, totalitarian regimes, and at the same time a great dose of Anti-Americanism.反殖民（按性質） ，美國的盟友殖民國家英國和法國（ 1950年-1 990年） ，而他們的後殖民結構，促進在非洲和亞洲，涉及國營經濟體系，極權主義政權，並在同一時間，大劑量反美。
Was it not a form of American suicide? 這難道不是一種形式的美國自殺呢？
In fact, the Cold War was in itself a terrible anti-American trickery of England and France.事實上，在冷戰本身是一個可怕的反美弄虛作假的英格蘭和法國。 It helped the colonial powers ensure the implementation of the following projects for some decades:它有助於殖民國家確保執行下列項目為幾十年：
1. America would waste an incredible amount of resources in the Cold War. 1 。美國將廢物令人難以置信的大量的資源在冷戰中。
2. England and France would recover financially. 2 。英格蘭和法國將收回財政。
3. They would maintain the colonial control in most of their former colonies. 3 ，他們將維持殖民控制在大部分的前殖民地。
4. Soviet Union would also waste an incredible amount of resources. 4 。蘇聯也將浪費一個不可思議的大量的資源。
5. Every liberation movement would be triggered by the Soviet Union, thus 5 。每解放運動將所引發的蘇聯，從而
contributing to a good public image of that monstrous realm for decades.貢獻一個良好的公眾形象，這滔天的境界，數十年之久。 It would however be without real effect as the Soviet system was never viable.它將但是沒有實際效果，作為蘇聯體制從來沒有可行的。
6. Americans would try to prevent ‘Soviet expansion,’ thus triggering anti- Americanism, and identifying themselves as the ‘bad’ guys! 6 。美國人會設法防止'蘇聯的擴張，從而引發的反美情緒，並確定自己為'壞'傢伙！
It is all being currently reproduced in the equally fake War against Islamic Terrorism.這是所有目前正在轉載於同樣假戰爭打擊伊斯蘭恐怖主義。 By this I don’t imply that there are no Islamic extremists!由這點我並不意味著不存在伊斯蘭極端分子！ On the contrary!與此相反！ Simply, the setup is fake.簡單來說，安裝是假的。 All the US has done against Islamic extremism thus far is just a mere unilateral damage of the US image, influence and potential allover the world.所有美國做了對伊斯蘭極端主義，因此到目前為止，只是一個純粹的單方面破壞了美國的形象，影響和潛在的allover世界。 America rather contributed to severe worsening of the case.美國，而不是作出貢獻的嚴重惡化的情況。
It is high time for Obama to envision an American policy able to redress the current ordeal.這是高的時間奧巴馬設想，美國的政策能夠解決目前的磨難。 The only way would be rethinking from scratch without endorsing anything in the world that contradicts America’s basic principles and values as defended by the Founding Fathers.唯一的出路，將反思從無到有，未經批准任何在世界上違背了美國的基本原則和價值觀作為辯護的創始者。 Political realism is a monodrama for which the US has an expiry date.政治現實主義是一個monodrama ，其中美國已屆滿日期。
Popularity: 36% [人氣： 36 ％ [ ? ？ ] ]
Sphere: Related Content 領域：相關內容 
