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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (39766)	8/25/2002 9:06:09 AM
From: NightOwl	Respond to of 281500

...That leaves the wise old foreign policy owls... Don't bet on it LindyBill. <g> There are NO "wise old foreign policy owls." ... And there certainly aren't any young ones. <Hoo Hoo> In fact I will go so far as to say that "foreign policy" itself is quite Dead. At least, I assume that you must have some viable "foreign" if you're going to set up a policy for it. And with the recent decades of "melting" in our national pot, combined with the ultimate victory of our corporate culture back in August of '45, I haven't seen a true "foreigner" for quite some time. When some one can sneeze in Peking today and I can catch their bugs in Bosie tomorrow - to say nothing of the imminent prospect of intentionally shopping for bits of their DNA for my next generation of "owlettes" - well, suffice to say, it may be high time we remembered that international, as well as intra-national, borders are no more than abstractions. These largely defensive constructions have always been of questionable utility, but they are no longer effective at all that I can see. Better to consider our current difficulties with Islamic extremists as a new iteration of the Hoover vs the Black Panther, Capital v Labor, etc., battles of the last century, than to analyze them in comparison to former "wars" wherein entire societies and cultures were mobilized and fully prepared to fight unto death. ...I think. <g> 0\|0

To: LindyBill who wrote (39766)	8/25/2002 11:52:48 AM
From: Eashoa' M'sheekha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

“ Inevitably Scowcroft now supports letting Saddam be because, if we start a war, "We could have an explosion in the Middle East. It could turn the whole region into a cauldron." I agree. The only difference is that I think an explosion is long overdue and turning the whole region into a cauldron is a necessary step toward reforming it. “ And where will Mark Steyn be when the cauldron begins to boil?Likely far far away from the heat and flames, comfortably writing his consistently pro Israel - pro Republican syndicated columns, to publish in the consistently pro Israel - pro Republican pages ,owned and/or controled by the beneficiaries of same Mark Steyn – funny he is – objective he is not. The assault on credible journalism continues. KC