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: Alighieri who wrote (155142)	11/21/2002 2:44:26 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1580015

This administration is doing less than nothing about this problem. What, exactly, do you think WE can do to solve this ages-old conflict, when the Palestinians have raised an entire generation of terrorists who live only to kill innocents? Less because it is infact encouraging Israel in responding with violence and less than nothing because it is not brokering any peace between the two sides. The ONLY encouragement has been to agree that Israel should defend itself. And that, coupled to our bellicose stance in Iraq, will be responsible for more terror against Israel and the US than what we have seen so far. So who's fault is THIS? Ours, or the terrorists? If Palestinians want to commit more acts of violence against innocents, those Palestinians should die. The more they kill, the more of them who must die. People like you rationalizing their behavior will not further the cause of the Palestinians.

To: Alighieri who wrote (155142)	11/21/2002 6:55:22 PM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1580015

Alighieri Re..Less because it is infact encouraging Israel in responding with violence Where are you getting this stuff? AFAIK, GW has urged both sides to stop the violence. What is it with you liberals, that you can only condemn Israel for the violence, but not the Palestinians. If you truly are against violence, you would condemn both sides. And that, coupled to our bellicose stance in Iraq, will be responsible for more terror against Israel and the US than what we have seen so far. Interesting statement. You make it sound like we should live with the terrorism at the current level, and not attack back at the terrorists, because retribution would just encourage more terrorism, at a higher level. How so? Should the US allow the terrorist to destroy the twin towers, or its equivalent, every yr, every other year, once every five yrs., How many nightclubs in Bali should we allow to be destroyed, how many oil tankers sunk, how many embassies have to be rebuilt, before you agree that the purpose doesn't justify the means. Iraq is a first step in stopping the terrorism, by giving the Arab people a showcase for democracy. A gov. not of dictators, not of extremist religious clerics, but a gov. of the people, by the people, for the people. Besides, I don't see how you can back a holy war by the Muslims. I sincerely doubt the holy war will do any more for Islam the the crusades did for the Church.

To: Alighieri who wrote (155142)	11/25/2002 12:46:30 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1580015

Al, a couple of things I've noticed on my vacation......got back yesterday but by the time I unpacked and stuff it was too late to post. ;~)) First, without you or me or GW or another liberal posting, there was no there there on this thread. The conservatives kind of just floundered.......really sad. Secondly, the day of my forced vacation, I remembered this kid who was in my seventh grade homeroom. He wore these big glasses, had zits on his face, buttoned his top button, and carried a briefcase. We used to pass his briefcase to the back of the room. He always would complain [tattle] to the teacher whenever he perceived some wrong, or he saw an opportunity to get one of us in trouble. He became a big, whiny baby. I guess my recent experiences have caused me to have deju vu. Whatever! ;~)) ted