Impeach George W. Bush Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Impeach George W. Bush

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: jttmab who wrote (6921)	9/23/2001 5:42:16 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (2) of 93284

I'm a bit disappointed that you thought I was so stupid that I was using the beginning of the thread to mean "Impeach George W. Bush". I apologize. I meant to imply no such thing. I certainly do not consider you stupid. In spite of your political views. :-) And I agree with you about sanctions. We've had sanctions on Cuba for 40 years. Last time I checked it was still Communist and Castro was still in charge. Really effective. If sanctions don't accomplish their goal quickly (and they only very rarely do), they're useless. Fair enough. Of course, he and Shrillary did the things that led people to that position. I disagree. Perhaps someday we'll discuss that on a PM or two. I don't think Slick started out with anything like the opposition he ended up with. He did things that incited his opposition. Gays in the military was one. He handled that one such that when he was done both the gays and their opponents were pissed at him. Shrillary attempting to dictate the shape of socialized medicine was another. Slick's sexual peccadilloes was like pouring gunpowder on a fire. So THAT's where you get some of your statistics! You sure have some depressing links. Not all the countries with large under-15 populations have exploded- -yet. I remember reading some time back that if you want to identify populations about to undergo serious social turmoil, look for those with unusually large young populations. But the big race is whether the world can effectively deal with terrorism and weapons of mass destruction before the terrorist world makes or buys a nuke or a biological weapon. So far, we've been able to control that sort of thing. So far. Nukes will probably require at least aid from a nation-state. That nation had best cover its tracks well, because it will most likely get more than just a few back. We have two objectives, Bin Laden and world cooperation. How about deterrence? Bin Laden would make a good example. Our response on Bin Laden must be adjusted by the greater objective of world cooperation in the long run.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next