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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SilentZ who wrote (144878)	4/13/2002 3:47:19 PM
From: AK2004	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572939

Z re: See, I think that that's party of what Israel is doing, and part of what America is doing... eh? Israel and America attack to eliminate threat by destroying centers of terror. I recall America dropping food supplies to minimize suffering of the general population. Are you telling me that US tried to maximize the suffering of general population by dropping food supplies? re: you do need to let them understand that doing so is not going to get them anywhere America and Israel does via the message that terrorism would not be tolerated rather than purposly inflicting pain on that population. There is a BIG difference here -Albert

To: SilentZ who wrote (144878)	4/13/2002 4:07:03 PM
From: ptanner	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572939

re: " I think that that's party of what Israel is doing, and part of what America is doing..." I disagree. I don't think Israel (in Palestinian areas) or America (in Afghanistan) has been committing acts of terrorism. The actions in both instances have been careful to try and minimize harm to unarmed civilians and instead focused on those with weapons. I believe both Israel and America understand that if the civilian populations are to be kept civilian and not become active opposition (terrorist or militia) then it is in their interest to both limit the attacks which may harm civilians and further to provide them with aid (food drops). re: "Also, as long as you only directly attack the non-civilians for such a cause, it's fine." How about assassinations? The US govt believes that attacks directed solely at individuals is not acceptable even during a state of conflict. Now it was often noted that Saddam Hussein may have been in the communications bunkers targeted so often during the Gulf War... -PT

To: SilentZ who wrote (144878)	4/13/2002 5:32:10 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572939

See, I think that that's party of what Israel is doing, and part of what America is doing... I mean, when you have a population in which many of the people actually do support the "evil" government, such as the population in Afghanistan and in the West Bank/Gaza, you do need to let them understand that doing so is not going to get them anywhere. Also, as long as you only directly attack the non-civilians for such a cause, it's fine. Z, what percentage of the Afghan population was pro Taliban......I would bet it was not more than 20%, if that. That's clear from how clearly the Afghans have thrown off the Taliban shackles. Once again, perhaps there should be a better term than "terrorism". Once again, I think its very apt. Don't you think its odd you have to rework the definition to fit your needs and views? ted