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: stockman_scott who wrote (60605)	12/8/2002 2:56:13 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Smarter leaders would seriously examine WHY we are being attacked. What are the root causes of all this tension...? Some of it may have to do with how the U.S. is viewed around the world...Maybe its time to lead by example Try illegitimate leaders playing the politics of grievance, while globalization makes the contrast between American success and Arab failure starker by the year. You tell me, why do Egyptians hate us? What wrong have we done them, besides sending them $2 billion a year? Not all grievances are rational or subject to negotiation.

To: stockman_scott who wrote (60605)	12/8/2002 3:14:26 PM
From: paul_philp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I'm not sure I agree with you there...I actually think that a policy of vigilant containment may be the safest way to deal with Iraq. I disagree - obviously - been there, done that, saw the results. I fear a U.S. attack against Iraq will only motivate Al Qaeda to increase their resolve to commit more terrorist acts against our 'softer targets' around the world...It doesn't matter how much we spend on defense --> there is NO WAY to totally protect ourselves. Smarter leaders would seriously examine WHY we are being attacked. What are the root causes of all this tension...? Some of it may have to do with how the U.S. is viewed around the world...Maybe its time to lead by example. Why would an attack on Iraq lead to AQ taking action. As far as AQ is considered Iraq is not a Muslim country. You need to find out what Whabbism is really about. The idea that American action somehow motivates AQ is an incorrect notion that leads to all sorts of incorrect conclussions. It is American existance that motivates AQ. It is American success that enrages their envy. It is American culture that is their enemy. It is that America presents a threat to their ideas and beliefs that gets them into airplanes. There is no path, no plan, no diplomacy, no aid, no tolerance that will change their hate. It is hate that motivates them. Hate is not the rational effect of some real cause. Hate has no reason. You cannot negotiate with hate. You can't close your door and hope it goes away either. They are there and they have organized. They are coming at us again and they don't care what we do between now and then. As long as America exists as the country and culture that it is, they want it destroyed. Otherwise, they will be destroyed and they understand that fact. We are in a clash of incompatible civilizations. Either we inspire them to modernity or we live a state of perpetual terror wars. AQ is simply the head of the snake. Cripple AQ and you only slow them down for a while. Failing to act because of some vague notion of unintended consequence is foolhardy because it fails to appreciate the situation. BTW, I know that the US has made many short sighted policy errors in the Middle East. Some made sense at the time. Some were stupid. People were harmed by some of those policies. All of the policies were motivated by the desire to keep the oild flowing. All true. None of this explains AQ or Wahhabism. None of it explains their hatred. None of it justifies their actions. Basing policy today on the mistakes of the past simply carries forward the culture of mediocrity that led to those mistakes. Paul p.s. Yes, there are some real a$$holes in the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

To: stockman_scott who wrote (60605)	12/8/2002 3:36:40 PM
From: Sig	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Many of those 33 people would have to re-think the problem if their University becomes the victim of the next act promised by the Terrorists. Free people had a choise, to live in increasing terror and uncertainties with escalating terrorist attacks , or to take a firm stand. Since those countries and people involved l respond only to force and violate all verbal and even wrtitten agreements ( witness Iraq) , making them stop and think required the maximum commitment possible short of war A solid, unrelenting, unchanging threat by the only world leader in a position of power and with the forces to back up that threat-President Bush The threat of War- regardless of the UN who blew the chance to contain IRAQ's wmd activities. At this moment the US is proving by the buildup that his threat against Terrorism is real. It is important to obscure the date and method of attack from certain of those incredibly un-American sensation- seeking journalists who would be so stupid as to publish those facts if they could access them. Thus we have much disemination and many red-herrings even from our own government when the press gets too close to publishing the actual Military plans. When Mr Bush says Saddam must give up those weapons he means it -seriously, and on behalf of other countries who agree that nuclear arms proliferation by rebel nations must stop. Having served in the MI complex, I assure you again that there has been a ten-fold improvement in exotic weapons effectiveness and our knowledge of Iraq's sensitive positions since that last operation in Iraq. We plan for the worst, with a big buildup . But in the best case,if a war happens, it could end in days But don't spead that item around since we still need the maximum possible coordination and support of citizens whithout giving them as easy out on a vague hope. Sig