Politics for Pros- moderated 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 : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: LindyBill who wrote (15101)	11/4/2003 5:39:37 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) of 793611

<<Do we decide that Bush's policy is fundamentally mistaken, that we are not as much at risk as we thought, that we can return to what John Kerry has called a "law enforcement" approach to terror, rather than outright warfare against both terrorism and its sponsoring states?>> I, for one, would like to see a thoughtful discussion of this. It seemed to me that we were swept into war by anger and fear--and some macho thing about looking weak. It seemed to me like the powers that be felt they had to do something forceful. In my mind, going straight for the biggest guns is not a sign or strength. I'm reminded of the saying, "if the only tool you have is a hammer, then you'll see every problem as a nail." The guy who did that didn't "win my trust." I'm pleased to see Sullivan raise the possibility thoughtfully and without a demeaning tone. I still think the question of a legalistic approach deserves discussion. Alternatives have never been aired. Alternatives were treated contemptuously at the time as unpatriotic or cowardly. Perhaps the route taken was the best one, after all. It's hard to tell since others didn't get a fair hearing.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next