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.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: muzosi who wrote (55586)	9/17/2001 2:19:18 AM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 275872

Muzo, not really; as i mentioned before, we have two examples where in one case the result was "accepted" and the other resulted in an alliance to defeat the aggressor. What I meant by "accepted" is that enough time passes with certain status that it becomes status quo is no longer challenged. this is reasonable logic if the conquest ended. but the occupation and invasion is growing daily by bulldozers under the support of tanks. if mitchell plan is fully implemented without euphemisms like "natural growth", i think the situation can be improved. if one side decides to use the overwhelming power it has to the eventual complete destruction of the other side, the cry "give me freedom, or give me death" will alas be heard more. I am not sure how much difference a few bulldozers will do. These territories are called "occupied" because of a good reason: They are occupied. And have been occupied since 1967. Are these territories being "more occupied" now? That would be an interesting, subtle distinction. One could argue the opposite. There has been an 8 year experiment with "less occupied", which failed miserably. Joe