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: paul_philp who wrote (57329)	11/15/2002 1:34:04 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

He articulates the anti-war argument clearly and with precision. There is no assumption that Bush is stupid, ill-informed, war-monger, doing a favour for his oil buddies, payback for the attempt on his father's life or finishing the undone job. Moyers does not preach that the people making this decision are morally bankrupt. He simply argues that they are wrong because the price of war is too high. His is being principled and speaking with an authentic voice. He is being inspiring. The only thing missing is owning up to the cost on inaction. What about the mother's who lose children in the next attack on American soil. Is he willing to pay tha price for his principals. I think the answer is yes but I wish he had the courage to say. Or in the war we may have to fight once Saddam get nukes? He does not own up to the true costs of deterrence. Good post, I agree on all counts.