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 : America Under Siege: The End of Innocence -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: joseph krinsky who wrote (9787)	11/3/2001 10:11:35 PM
From: Annette	Respond to of 27666

Don't we have a weapon that could cause permanent infertility? That should work to stop the generations and generations over there.

To: joseph krinsky who wrote (9787)	11/3/2001 10:38:34 PM
From: Bill Fischofer	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 27666

The U.S. has neither the desire nor the intention of committing genocide. Armageddon would represent a tragic failure on the part of civilization that would scar and haunt humanity forever. Recognizing that such horror is a possibility is not the same as rushing to embrace it. We could have "ended" the Cold War in the 1950s just as it was really getting started at the cost of making Hitler look like an amateur. We did not because that is not who we are or who we choose to be. If it takes 50 years to diffuse terrorism in a manner that avoids slaughtering millions of innocents then so be it. I personally do not believe it will take anything approaching that length of time but to reduce the argument to one of "convenience" is unworthy of us.

To: joseph krinsky who wrote (9787)	11/3/2001 11:07:40 PM
From: MSI	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 27666

>"The leaders say 50 -100 years. " That's wishful thinking by people that are hoping to live on the wartime economy. IMO, both Afghanistan and Iraq will fall next year, along with a miraculous "jihad revision" by muslim leaders worldwide, finally realizing fighting the US is hard work("Ow! That hurts, hey Osama let's try somebody else, these Americans are a pain in the arse!). I don't know who they'll go after then, but don't care either. All I know is they change sides when convenient, their jihads are all about warlord power, and they lose power fighting against us when we wreck things for them and cut off aid. We definitely need to avoid a bad ground war. A good ground war like the Gulf would work, but not a bad one, and preferrably let the locals take over. When Afghanistan and Iraq are occupied, what's left is to monitor the transition to participatory regimes. As you point out, we can then do pretty much whatever we will, that is, of course, if we can avoid the temptation to get in the middle of things with 10 other countries fighting amongst themselves, and admit we don't know their answers, they have to get it themselves. I'm including Israel and Saudi Arabia on that list. It might take a political shake-up here in the US to cut out the $15 billion in foreign aid in dollars and weapons that helps fuel these problems, but eventually people will wise up. The thing to be afraid of is current administration's temptation to the Orwell-type "forever war", due to it's enormous political benefits to the party in power. The only protection against that is to be RABIDLY AND VICIOUSLY PRO-DISCLOSURE, about every friggin' thing that can't be justified as a bona-fide military secret in the near term, with every other "national security" claim automatically considered hogwash. And all such kept secrets are to be disclosed promptly, with full recourse for any criminality or just plain hanky-panky, whether it be POWs they don't want us to know about, or oil deals or assassinations, whatever. The American people pay in lives and dollars, the administration works for us, and the Republic can only be kept strong by forcing recourse on politicians, 'cause it'll never happen otherwise. "trust, but verify", as the man said. To that end, consider 50-100 years to be wishful thinking, not just by the enemy (who also benefits from "forever war") but by our side too.