I doubt Pakistan is the most dangerous country on earth. Pakistan is judged "the most dangerous country on earth" according to the editorial in the NY Times this morning. This is arguably a misrepresentation that the moral force of the U.S. is the best country in the world.  The distinction here is which country has the most military power to destroy the world.  Of course, the U.S. would win in this comparison. But, we are talking about the unstable Near East (using distance from us as a location) where the nations there are pointing fingers at each other as causing the most problems to peace and good will in the world. A great many of these would point to the U.S. as the "Great Satan" - with justification?

It can be argued that the U.S. is the most dangerous country on earth.  But why would one argue about this?  What we should be discussing peaceably and judiciously is which country is the BEST country in the world.  We could learn a lot from that country if we could decide which it is.  We could only learn how to wage war most abominably by using the template of the U.S. military and its history in wars past and present.

As a rough guess I would think that one of the Scandinavian countries is a contestant for "best" in the world stakes of which country is the poster child for a country that threatens no one and is well run with its people mostly content.  If you take away all the countries where rebels or "militants" are contesting with the legal powers in charge to overthrow those powers, most of the Middle East, Africa and parts of Asia would have to be discounted. Then, too, South America has its worst examples.  None of them are examples of what is "best".  Well, maybe, most of them could arguably be compared to Pakistan as the most dangerous country on earth.  What we are looking for, however, are the countries that could be held up as some of the best countries in the world.  That would be a more effective and positive.

So what? - Some of my readers would retort.  So what if we were to instead of pasting labels on countries like Pakistan as the worst, we could speak instead of the qualities that make a country the "best"?  I think the answer is self explanatory.

What we need are exemplars, like the winners of the Nobel Peace Prize. And not just for individuals; but for countries which do the best for all the people who live there.  This would certainly be a better blueprint for successful countries rather than counting how many nuclear war-heads they might possess.  Yes, Pakistan is dangerous.  But, so is the U.S. with its vaunted powers still argued over by contesting philosophies. Will Liberalism have a recrudescence or will Conservatism continue to own the present and future of America?