Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: coug who wrote (64868)	12/3/1999 9:23:00 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

There's a tension inherent in this question. Really it all boils down to this: "When do our national interests (which I read as security) get implicated by foreign events no matter how horrific?" Clearly the rise of the Axis powers and the advent of WWII implicated our national security. But its rarely so black and white and I have a real problem putting our service men and women in harm's way over purely "moral" issues, even genocide, if it does not implicate US national security. Let the flames begin! LOL! JLA

To: coug who wrote (64868)	12/3/1999 9:27:00 AM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 108807

BTW, good morning to you. JLA

To: coug who wrote (64868)	12/3/1999 9:39:00 AM
From: Tom Clarke	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Good morning coug! Back when the military ran wars, civilian deaths were called civilian deaths. These bloodless technocrats who fancy themselves the best and the brightest are the ones who gave us terms like "collateral damage" and "corollary casualties." Too bad most of them punked out in Vietnam. If they had a taste of the real horror, they wouldn't be so eager to engage in mass slaughter. You have a nice day too, The UnHoly Roamin Emperor

To: coug who wrote (64868)	12/3/1999 6:51:00 PM
From: jbe	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

Coug, just for the record, I want you to know that I answered JLA's question in the negative. I would go even further. What I find especially immoral in the conduct of modern war is the willingness -- even eagerness -- to sacrifice the lives of civilians in order to protect the lives of "our fighting men and women." Well, if the latter are draftees, I can understand it. But if they choose the life of the military voluntarily, they had to know there was a trade-off. Their side of the bargain is that they must, if necessary, risk their lives. Otherwise, they are just "technicians of death." If it's worth fighting for, it's worth laying down your life for. Sure, the NATO forces escaped without casualties -- hence the Yugoslav civilians did NOT. I find that a downright cowardly way to wage war. And let's not even talk about the civilians of Iraq!!! Joan