"The NAM was founded in 1961 by Asian, African and Latin American countries seeking to distance themselves from the rivalry of the United States and the Soviet Union."

It was more like "seeking to play the US and the Soviet Union off against each other to get more foreign aid."

What is interesting about this conference, is the variety of political systems represented with these countries. You see leftist regimes side by side with conservative Islam giving each other a big hug. This conference is not left or right, but, in part, they are joined in opposition to the policies of the Bush Administration. Before the end of the Bush Administration, we may see the whole world lined up against the U.S. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm beginning to feel just a little bit lonely. Is it just me, or is there something wrong with that picture?
The U.S. was the first country to break away from a colonial power in the Western hemisphere. We should be at that conference, and not throwing stones at it. The world does not begin and end in the West, and, certainly, based on historical experience, we have a lot of nerve pretending we know what is best for the rest of the world. We are not Europeans! We are Americans! It is past time we seriously worked with these people and treated them with respect.

In general I'm not that interested in the Non-Alligned Movement in Havanna just held over the weekend. It is pretty bad though that I had to read about this in this "World Opinion Roundup." Nothing was said about it in the NYTimes, Washingtonpost, BBC, etc. We really need to be a lot more open about these things and at least know when, where, why, etc. these meetings take place.

On second thought, reading about some of the issues discussed (see above) by this NAM, Countries and Leaders that participated, etc. it obviously is important to be aware of it and understand it. It really is pretty stupid from major "Western" newspapers and TV Programs not to cover it. The question is why didn't they!

The West (which includes Japan) should coordinate immgration policy. Specifically, Washington should ban the immigration of people from non-Western nations. On the banned list would be any citizen of an anti-Western nation: e.g., India, Pakistan, both Koreas, both China, etc.

Exceptions will be made in the case of political asylum. However, generally speaking, citizens from anti-Western nations will not be allowed into the USA. If they sneak into this country, then they will be deported -- pronto.

Thanks for promulgating that decree, Generalissimo Atheist. It's important to give the Darkies and Fuzzy-Wuzzies fair warning before your security forces (or should I say imaginary friends) round them all up for deportation.

The NAM was so called, of course, because it plotted a third course in between the US and the Soviet Union.

With the Soviet Union gone, by definition it will chart a second course, one that offers an alternative to the US only.

Also, countries further to the left that would have been in the Soviet camp now have no home but the non-aligned movement.

The price of seeking hegemony is that everyone is swept into opposition one way or another. The more the US insists on setting the terms of the global debate purely around its own (self-perceived) interests, the more people it will find on the other side. Stands to reason.

"The price of seeking hegemony is that everyone is swept into opposition one way or another."

Perhaps, then, the price we pay is just national paranoia. Out of the 116 countries in attendence (all those "non-Western" nations, I'm sure), how many really determine policy in opposition to U.S. policy? I suspect that to the vast majority of these nations, "non-aligned" means just that: Independence from America. And independence is only oppositional from the perspective of hegemony. These nations are not, after all, beholden to the States.

In truth, America's relevance is simply waning. We can allow paranoia to determine our course of action (a course described by our mainstream media and the current administration's lone-cowboy treaty-breaking mentality), or we can learn to play nicely with others and get over ourselves.

During his address to the UN, I was amused to see Chavez waving Noam Chomsky's book around. However, his Description of President Bush lacked precision. In my opinion, Neoconservative Corporate Fascist would have been more accurate. But Chavez lacks an initimate knowledge of American politics, and he is to be forgiven for his lack of precision. If he was religious, Chavez could be quite a preacher.

To Mr. Atheist:

I'm going to use India as an example since it was mentioned in your rant and I am most familiar with that country.

India and the U.S. have conducted military exercises in the recent past together, so they're not exactly "anti-U.S." The White House hosts Diwali parties. The Prime Minister even visited last year and was received by the president at the White House to usher in a new era of cooperation between the two countries. India is a key ally in the so called "war on terror," and much of what the U.S. knows about North Korea's weapons programs is due to information discovered by the Indian Government that was shared with American intelligence agencies.

India was one of the founding members of the NAM, so that explains their presence there, even though the predominantly anti-U.S. members (Venezuela, Cuba, Iran) grabbed most of the headlines.

Considering that Indians make up 37% of the doctor population of the United States and immigrants with advanced degrees immigrate here from other countries, imagine what the effect on the economy would be if your xenophobic views were made policy. It would seem that the U.S. wouldn't remain a superpower for long. I can only hope that the vast majority of Americans are not as ignorant (or bigoted, whichever you prefer to be called) as you are.

To Mr. Atheist:

I'm going to use India as an example since it was mentioned in your rant and I am most familiar with that country.

India and the U.S. have conducted military exercises in the recent past together, so they're not exactly "anti-U.S." The White House hosts Diwali parties. The Prime Minister even visited last year and was received by the president at the White House to usher in a new era of cooperation between the two countries. India is a key ally in the so called "war on terror," and much of what the U.S. knows about North Korea's weapons programs is due to information discovered by the Indian Government that was shared with American intelligence agencies.

India was one of the founding members of the NAM, so that explains their presence there, even though the predominantly anti-U.S. members (Venezuela, Cuba, Iran) grabbed most of the headlines.

Considering that Indians make up a large percentage of the doctor population of the United States and immigrants with advanced degrees immigrate here from the other countries you mention, they make a significant positive impact upon your and other American lives. Imagine what the effect on the economy would be if your xenophobic views were made policy. It would seem that the U.S. wouldn't remain a superpower for long. I can only hope that the vast majority of Americans are not as ignorant (or bigoted, whichever you prefer to be called) as you are.

Thank God we have Hugo Chavez to tell it like it is. His address to the U.N. was spot on. George W. Bush is indeed a menace to humanity, and more world leaders need to have the courage to say so. One needn't agree with every aspect of Chavez's policies to see the truth in what he said. George W. Bush has started needless wars, destabilized the entire Middle East, stoked the flames of Islamist extremist groups, made the entire West more vulnerable to terror attacks, sanctioned and encouraged torture, blocked international efforts to curb global warming, undermined international human-rights law and put not only the entire West, but indeed all of humanity, in peril. More world leaders must speak up now. Appeasing fanatics does not work, and you Americans have put a fanatic in the Oval Office. Defending ourselves against the exercise of arbitrary American power must be a top priority for those of us who live in democracies and who cherish freedom. The alternative is a ruthless U.S. global dictatorship that inflicts more wars on the world and poisons our planet ever more.

Well put, Sergio.
One wonders whether Republican opposition to the International Criminal Court isn't rooted in fears by Bush, Cheney and company that they could face prosecution there.
If there were true justice in this world, these men would be before such a court today facing criminal charges.
Try as they may to demonize the likes of Chavez and Ahmadinejad, there is no question that Bush and Cheney have inflicted far more death and suffering on far more people than these or any of the other foreign leaders they so often criticize.
Starting a war on false pretenses and encouraging torture are just two of the crimes for which Bush and Cheney should be tried criminally.

It was a pleasure to see the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh at Havana. India, had forgotten the relevance of Non-Alignemnt of which it was one of the founder memebers. In fact, Non Alignment is all the more relevant in today's unipolar world! It's time even the US be invited to be a part of the NAM!!