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 Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonder who wrote (67006)	12/10/2002 11:16:18 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

we all make our choices, dont we. When one of your casinos blows up with 3000 dead you wont minimize the WTC attack as you consistently do. If you want to think bush is doing all this for personal gain in oil be my guest. It is a giant waste of time to argue with you. You are inflexible and not a clear thinker. You have you agenda to spread in your very nice manner. In the end I will continue to be an American and react as americans do to external attack. When the terrorists blow up a casino in Monaco with 3000 dead, call me--then you will understand. Or when they blow up a school bus with a relative on board, call someone in israel who lost a loved one this way to commiserate with. Until then I guess you are on the other side. Mike

To: zonder who wrote (67006)	12/10/2002 11:35:06 AM
From: Fred Levine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Mike and Zonder-- As you know, I share your anger at 9/11, and support most of the foreign policy positions of Bush. However, your post was not worthy of you. Enlightened policy requires understanding of the other side. In fact, yesterday's mail had 3 more books on the ME for me to read. For you to claim we are bashing Bush may be true (I don't think it is), but is irrelevant. Defend him, but don't claim that we should follow our leader blindly. Z-- re:>>All international issues are quite complex, as they involve a variety of economic and geopolitical variables.<< IMO, the current wave of terrorism is more related to religious issues than eco-political ones. Altho Mike might object to the analyses, IMO, the consequences of global trade are enormous. Once MacDonald's had a location in Moscow and we began importing Stoli, I knew the world was safe. It is now in the national interest of each country to engage in trade, and each country represents a potential market. War interferes with trade. Disputes must therefore be settled in an eco-political way, rather than by invasion. It is ludicrous to think of Germany and France at war, yet when I was young, we viewed them as eternal enemies. Rather than expand this point (and be accused by Mike of being irrelevant), religion does not fit into this category. If interpretation of god's will requires killing to cleanse the infidels, than it is just and even required. The terrorists chanted to Allah as they went to their deaths and didn't say, "Remember Pearl Harbor!". To many, religion cannot be negotiated. The view that religion is primary, IMO, has enormous practical significance. We must depend upon the moderate mullahs and/or the political leaders in the ME to create a climate of change. Of course, I am aware that there is political and economic motivations for hatred as well, but I think that the religious part has been minimized because of political correctness. People are simply afraid to discuss the role of religion for fear of offending. In fact, I brought this up at a dinner party with a Shiite (who is also an atheist), and she defended Islam as a religion of peace passionatly. BTW, I am an atheist and becoming more critical of religions with time. People realize, and have intense ambivalance about this, that the US is now the policeman of the world. Tell me a place where the police are loved? There is also a tendency for power to corrupt. (Interestingly, Lord Acton's proverb about absolute power corrupting absolutely was first applied when Pious lX forced the Vatican Council to declare the Pope infallible in religious matters). fred