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: hmaly who wrote (156908)	12/28/2002 11:25:16 AM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583384

And the problem with that would be? Beside the fact that it will cost thousand of lives, you are witnessing it already in the world disorder that is beginning to emerge elsewhere in the world. Not that this had gone unpredicted by critics of this tough pre-empt stance this administration has undertaken. Only a liberal would think that saving the lives of thousands of children would be wrong, because a republican president did it Do you want to save children, start by lifting sanctions and devote yourself to humanitarian assistance in Iraq through the UN. This president could not care less about the children of Iraq anymore than the one that came before him did. I am a conservative, and yet I believe it was right of Bill to save the lives of thousands of children in Yugoslavia. I clearly remember that you severly criticized Clinton for intervening in Kosovo. You were so admanant that at one point I thought you might be a Serb. Don't make me dig the posts. Al

To: hmaly who wrote (156908)	12/28/2002 4:31:52 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1583384

Alighieri Re...unopposed Bush would be in Baghdad now. And the problem with that would be? If the Us took Iraq unopposed, wouldn't that be wonderful; as we could then rid Iraq of their WMD, feed the children, and establish a representative gov.; quit paying terrorists to bomb Israel; bring stability back to the region. What is the downside here? Only a liberal would think that saving the lives of thousands of children would be wrong, because a republican president did it. I am a conservative, and yet I believe it was right of Bill to save the lives of thousands of children in Yugoslavia. Was I also wrong because Bill was a democrat? According to your standards I am. Interesting.......one minute liberals are too soft, the next too harsh. Only consevatives it seems have the necessary ingredients of compassion and aggressiveness in the right proportion. You guys are incredible! NOT! Where you are very wrong is over the issue of dissing a president simply because he is of the GOP. Nothing would make me more happy to have a president who is doing things I can get behind. However, with this president, just as I think he's about to do something I can rally behind, there proves to be a flaw. Case in point is Frist. I was very glad that Frist replaced Lott.......Frist is intelligent, compassionate, dedicated etc...everything that Lott isn't; I was happy that is, until I heard Frist's record on the environment. Once again, the fly in the ointment is more than I can accept. ted