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: diana g who wrote (10504)	11/14/2001 9:57:23 AM
From: kodiak_bull	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

Diana, Actually, it's quite interesting. One reporter some time in the past week asked if we really needed to ask them (the Taliban, the Arab terrorists and their Afghan, Pakistan pals) to "surrender." You see, they are so proud, so defiant, that "surrender" had, well, you know, "issues." "Surrendering" was the last thing they would do, because it had sort of a manliness issue. Same sort of manliness, one supposes, that had them beating women in burkhas and using the soccer stadium for executing women who had defied the Taliban by going to school or listening to music or revealing a nose to sunlight. We needed to be sensitive to "manliness" issues for these guys? The folks in Kabul didn't waste a minute before shaving beards, doffing the burkha and listening to music. As for surrender, I'd accept them all, that is part of The American Way. If I were in the Taliban I'd be praying 5 times a day that the U.S. would, post haste, put significant ground forces in so there'd be some non-Afghans to surrender to. PDQ. But the groups headed to Kandahar and a sprint for the Pakistan border? Aim and squeeze. Kb