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 : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kodiak_bull who wrote (8368)	9/20/2001 11:06:43 PM
From: Gottfried	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23153

kb, >it's extremely moving.< Glad to hear that. I actually had tears in my eyes at times. I thought I was too old for that. G.

To: kodiak_bull who wrote (8368)	9/20/2001 11:21:57 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Respond to of 23153

Kodiak, Re: <<GWB surprised us all, didn't he?> He gave a great speech, both in terms of content (9) and delivery (7). I think it is interesting to note what he is and what he isn't. He is a person who can single mindedly and resolutely get behind an idea that he believes in. He has personal courage and, if he hadn't been so pampered in terms of privilege and lifestyle, would probably have developed strong character traits long before he did. In the old days he might well have fit the cowboy image he seems to identify with. He is not a thoughtful reflexive person who can see both sides of a complex issue and make good judgements. This is clear in the flip flop he has done with regard to the role of the U.S. in world affairs. He started out with speeches and positions that declared his view that we were not the world's "policemen." This was reflected in his initial hands-off policy in Israel-Palestine as that problem continued to escalate out of control. This is reflected in his views on missile defense (now clearly revealed as a probable expensive and porous defense to attack inside America) and in his views on such things as worldwide pollution etc. It is also reflected in the rift that was reportedly developing between he and Powell with respect to the role of the U.S. in the world. Now, in the face of events which have shrunk the world to next door proportions, he is talking about the U.S. role in the world in stamping out terrorism and making the world safe for freedom. This sounds a lot like the views he dismissed as liberal not long ago. I think he was wrong then and that he is right now. I think that his single minded pursuit of goals is an important asset in a struggle that will probably make us stop and count our losses at times. I still worry that he will miss some of the important nuances. All in all, however, I think it is time that countries that tolerate terrorists and support them because, after all, it doesn't hurt them, have a new cost/benefit analysis to make. I think that analysis is a lot more scary when the man atop the most powerful nation in the world is not quite as well thought and reasonable as you would like. Negotiating with GB and analyzing his probable moves is scary if you believe, as I do, that his decisions are not always logical, may be influenced by religious and personal beliefs that are a little radical themselves and are colored with a sense of rightousness and purpose that makes you wonder where the limits lie. This is a good thing if he never goes past the point of rationality and justifies those fears. With GWB, there's definitely a new cowboy in town and that may be just what is called for here. Hopefully his purposeful character can combine with the intellect and caution of others to produce effective and appropriate actions to stop terrorism, to stop the illusion that terrorism can be an effective tool to influence American policy in a manner that benefits terrorists, and to start a dialogue to establish rules that control when and where the sovereignty of other nations can justifiably be violated for the good of the world. Ed