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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (26805)	9/13/2001 8:06:49 AM
From: Poet	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

Hello Lazarus, I'm glad you've cooled down. You're probably on a more even keel, then, than a number of the knee-jerk "let's nuke 'em before we know who did it" types who've just shown up on this thread. I'm sure you understand you could wake up tomorrow and find that your country is at war. You may be surprised to learn that I understood this the moment the first WTC tower crumbled and I am in full agreement with our government if we declare war. The likeliest perpetrator is bin Laden. He is being given refuge by the Taliban - effectively the government of Afghanistan. (There are reports that the Taliban has placed bin Laden under house arrest.) If bin Laden did it, I would expect the US to demand that Afghanistan turn him and his gang over. If they refuse we have several options. We can ignore it- -bad idea; it encourages repetition. We can try to snatch bin Laden; unlikely to succeed and will most likely just result in more deaths. We can bomb and launch cruise missiles. I would expect the US to restrict targets to the government and military. We can invade- -costly in lives and could have other very bad repercussions. We can aid the groups fighting the Taliban and provide them with air support- -possibly the best and safest military option. Agree with you here. Well said. But I would suggest to the humanist faction that before they express sympathy for the Afghanis that they keep in mind that they provided a safe haven for people to kill what will very likely be several tens of thousands of their fellow citizens and that we may very well be at war with the Afghanis very soon. Here I am in disagreement. First, Iam surprised that you appear to be positioning yourself as someone who is not a humanist. IMO, a humanist is someone who is concerned with human affairs: a humanitarian. At this point, I think it is wise to be fully cognizant of our very human grief , anger, and tendency to want to lash out against anyone even other victims. I think it is wise for each of us to take care of our need for sleep, sustenance and the comfort of our family and friends. This will permit cooler heads to prevail during what is likely to be a long and painful time in our history. And last, I woke up this morning to CNN reports of anti-Muslim activities across the US. CNN reported that windows have been broken in mosques, that a man attempted to run over a Pakistani woman in a parking lot, and that police in Chicago turned back acrowd of three hundred who were intent on storming a mosque. I'm concerned about this misdirected violence. I hope you are too. Regardless of whether the government targets the Taliban or the government of Afghanistan, there are innocent Afghani's, both in that country and certainly within ours, who deserve mercy.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (26805)	9/13/2001 8:46:07 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

OK, I've cooled down now. It seems that most people have cooled down by now. There were a lot of intemperate statements made the other day. When we're upset, we react to such intemperance with more intemperance. But I would suggest to the humanist faction that before they express sympathy for the Afghanis that they keep in mind that they provided a safe haven for people to kill what will very likely be several tens of thousands of their fellow citizens and that we may very well be at war with the Afghanis very soon. I recall seeing posts suggesting carpet bombing or even nuking whole countries because some of their citizens were glad to see the US get this comeuppance. Surely they didn't really think that was an appropriate response. Or maybe they did. In this written medium, it's hard to distinguish overreactions uttered in the heat of the moment and regretted later from expressions of firmly held opinion. I understand why expressions of concern for innocents located amongst the enemy and concern for the long term implications of whatever action we might take may seem traitorous on a day that we were attacked. I also understand how "nuke the bastards" statements can provoke fears that the US might do something stupid and maybe even evil as a reaction to the attack. I was really saddened by much of the opinion I saw posted. I was even more saddened by how people went after each other over those posts. I don't know how much of what was said would still be said today after people have cooled down. I worry that some of it still would. Karen