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: i-node who wrote (149279)	8/8/2002 3:28:25 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577147

You have to understand the nature of the region; these people will stop at nothing to kill Americans, America, and our ways of life. You are describing radical Islam. Iraq is a secular country, with Islamic factions in the South and Kurds in the north. Saddam has kept radical Islamists under his thumb for year. His removal may unleash it, as it did in Kuwait. Finally, by your conclusion, we should do better by invading Saudi Arabia than Iraq. At least there's more oil there. Al

To: i-node who wrote (149279)	8/8/2002 5:14:09 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577147

How do you square this allegation with the fact that we received an unprovoked attack on 9/11, fully supported by most of the MidEast and certainly to Saddam's delight? How do you square this remark with the notion that Saddam compensates suicide bombers families'? Who is the bully? First, I don't know the role Hussein played in the events of 9/11......I don't think anyone does. However, to go around blaming 9/11 on all of our enemies may seem reasonable to you and the president but it doesn't to me. It sets up a dangerous precedent. However, like everyone else, I don't want to have Hussein putting together nukes either......its for that reason, I am hoping like you that the administration's war drums are intended to intimidate Hussein into cooperating with the weapon's inspectors. You have to understand the nature of the region; these people will stop at nothing to kill Americans, America, and our ways of life. Most of us are not prepared to allow that to happen. Liberals don't always have a proper respect for what it took to get us where we are. There are many people in the region who are not ready to attack Americans.......for an example, Mani's parents and family. It seems conservatives don't have the ability to empathize and understand that the vast majority of Muslim people are peace loving, and more concerned with their own well being than the attacking of Americans. However, a heavy handed approach to the resolution of our fears in the region runs the risk of alienating these people who, if not our friends, are certainly not our enemies, and solidifying the growing opposition over there to anything smacking of American intervention. I'm sure you've heard there are a number of ways to skin a cat. Further, I believe you mentioned once that you consider one of our great presidents to be T. Roosevelt......he said "walk softly but carry a big stick". Well, we need to implement both adages wisely. In this region and with the multiple conflicts, less is more and a showing of fairness will go along way. So far we've got the less is more part down, but its with the fairness, we seem to be having some trouble getting our arms around IMO. Muslims make up 1/3 of the world. We can't afford to play favorites and we can't afford to alienate too many of the people. If we do, then all the kings uzis and all the kings armies won't be able to keep all the kings people safe at night.