SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Jill who wrote (2759)10/5/2001 12:28:12 PM
From: SirRealist  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
Jill: it does seem too simplistic but I expect that when the WSJ is discussing anyone to the left of an insurance agent. Couching all things as L or R itself is misguided. Like most folks I know, the position depends on the issue under discussion.

Certainly, there is discomfort and revaluation occurring in the few kneejerkers who think so simplistically, just as has had to be done by one side or the other with Clinton or Nixon.

For most, I doubt the core has changed much. I lean to the left on poverty issues; on war and peace, I always knew there were Stalins and Hitlers and Zedongs and Pol Pots and Idi Amins and Hutus that I would easily take up arms against.

And I knew there are cases more complicated and pertinent to this fresh threat: I would have fought the Shah because of SAVAK, as well as Khomeini for his human waves of young boys on the battlefield against Iraq.

Inhumane is inhumane; that has never changed.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News