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: tejek who wrote (148387)	7/16/2002 4:54:20 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577894

I see the UN as having less credibility then the US. Its not an American birth right to be a bull in a china closet like some would like us to think. Its any countries right to defend itself against attack and to retaliate against its attackers. It always has been, and (if this is important to you) its also recognized by the UN. We can be the bull in the china shop rather then the china because we are powerful, but anyone other country has the same right even if they do not have the same ability to exercise it. Tim

To: tejek who wrote (148387)	7/16/2002 5:18:07 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1577894

Clinton was smart enough to recognize that.......he used the UN as the lead. He knew it was not a powerhouse but by standing behind the UN shield, he gained a certain world credibility with lesser nations plus he took the focus off the US. It was a very subtle difference and a very effective one. The brilliant Clinton* (*impeached) did exactly as you say -- it is called selling out our sovereignty. Why would we ask permission from the UN or anyone else to take military action as we see fit? We have EARNED the right to be the most powerful nation in the world. We don't need any third-rate liberal leaders giving away that power (the way Clinton, Carter before him, and LBJ before him did).