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: aladin who wrote (41012)	8/30/2002 4:42:10 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 281500

So Nadine - no more comparisons to WW2. For you John - no more discussions about slavery, Shermans march to the sea, firebombing Dresden, flattening Tokyo or nuking Japan as an explanation for why we can't call an action terrorism etc. At first glance, that looks like wisdom. But let me suggest otherwise. Nadine and I were discussing ME foreign policy. To say a suggestion of mine doesn't fit Pearl Harbor is to walk away from the conversation by way of changing the subject. On the other hand, in a discussion of what is terrorism, and someone says, quite seriously, that terrorism is killing innocent civilians, the counter points, Sherman, Dresden, are immediately relevant. Incidentally, I think there are quite strong arguments against those instances and Nadine has offered some I had not thought about, about 20,000 or so posts back. But that was all on topic. So thanks for the wisdom but I don't wish to find myself facing a poster who implies I agreed with your post by my silence.