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: TimF who wrote (148915)	7/31/2002 8:55:40 PM
From: Alighieri	Respond to of 1574260

but there is nothing irrational about premption either in general or specifically with enforcing the violated cease fire agreements with Iraq and prempting Saddam from getting nukes that he might use against us or allies or our interests. It is clear that Sept 11 did far more damage to this country than the buildings and the 3000 victims... Al

To: TimF who wrote (148915)	7/31/2002 11:14:27 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574260

isn't he an argument for finally breaking with the myth that war solves more problems than it creates? Wageing war often solves more problems then it causes. Yes WWII caused tons of problems but WWII was started by Japan and Germany. If we didn't wage WWII but rather just let Japan have its way in the Pacific and not helped out against Germany then this lack of wageing war would have caused a lot more problems then our wageing of the war would have caused. Tim, Japan and Germany were the attackers, not the attackees. After Iraq, which nation will be next? What are the conditions that will determine when a preemptive strike is appropriate, and who died and made us king? ted