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: i-node who wrote (157169)	12/31/2002 3:45:42 PM
From: hmaly	Respond to of 1580595

Dave Re..I was, at first, quite uncomfortable with the notion of pre-emption. It did, after all, seem contrary to our nation's recent history. However, on reflection, it isn't that different conceptually from a "Monroe Doctrine", updated for a global era. Hmmm, I never seen it equated to the Monroe doctrine on a world scale. Could be I guess. Monroe Doctrine or not, it was one hell of a bold and gutsy statement. And interestingly, it might have been the one thing OBL hadn't accounted for in his strategy; that Gw would put one of terrorism's main tenets to test; that more terrorism would result, if you attacked back. . Terrorism can be exceedingly destructive if left to its freedom of action. Most terrorist wars have been fought in the other guys country. Now the host country will be sharing the burden. You can bet that there would be a lot fewer terrorist actions, if the real backers were held accountable. A huge high risk, high stakes gamble, which could pay off in spades, if it works.