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: Bilow who wrote (46959)	9/25/2002 8:02:31 PM
From: BCherry168	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Bilow, the question is: Is Iraq a threat? If they are, then we must use our power to destroy the threat. If we do not, the threat will be realized, then we will be avenging how many deaths? There is always an easy way out. Chamberlain took it with Hitler. What does that solve? It just enabled Hitler to get stronger. Do you wish to wait until we are directly threatened with nuclear weapons before we take action? Or, perhaps you would have a nuke go off in New York harbor, or the Houston ship channel before we act. Or San diego, or San Francisco......you get the idea. I lost friends of mine in 'Nam. The problem there was with who was running the war, and the lack of firm objectives. And the lack of firm backbone by our leadership. We do not have that problem now. >>Nevertheless, those who believe that the military power of the United States may be used freely, without causing our enemies to obtain revenge through attacks of this nature would do well to think more carefully about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. There's damn good reasons for not getting involved in Europe and Asia's foreign wars. We had to have 50,000 young men die in Vietnam before that generation learned this simple lesson. Someday we will forget again and have to suffer again. How many will die then? >>>>>