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 (157199)	1/1/2003 1:13:57 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1580210

The dems need to counter with a better plan that has an end game. Put up or shut up, us cheeseheads always say. It seems to me there is a lack of awareness on the parts of Dems that a problem even exists with Iraq; that the Palestinian conflict is the source of all our problems in the Middle East. While the Palestinian conflict is certainly contributory, the REAL PROBLEM is evil dictators with powerful weapons. There also exists a great deal of hypocrisy in that we are willing to involve ourselves to get rid of Milosovic, yet Saddam isn't worthy of our attention. The reason, of course, is that we had a "pure" motivation with respect to Kosovo, whilst our motivation is purported colored with the desire for Iraq's oil. It is as though the liberals believe we're going to overrun Saddam's military, capture the oil fields and steal the oil. The competitive bidding situation that will develop after the Iraqi oilfields are freed from Saddam's control will be the best thing that could ever happen to the people of Iraq. Yet, the Dems see it as Cheney's oil men stealing Iraqi oil.

To: hmaly who wrote (157199)	1/1/2003 2:54:29 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580210

With that I agree. Al and Ted and the dems have strangely come up with this convoluted theory, that somehow they can avoid war, by saying we have more reasons to go to war with NK,Yemen, Iran, etc. before we go to war with Iraq; therefore we shouldn't go to war with Iraq, we should go to war with everybody. Isn't that really more wars. And they don't define an end game. I am very clear what the end game is......disabling al Qaeda. And I have been clear about this issue from the get go. However, you, Ray, Harris et al don't want to hear it because its the not the easy way to go; its not the one that will reassure your man's reelection in 2004. As for the rest of the end game, its really pretty simple. We need good diplomacy to keep the NK jerk off in line......the idiot doesn't want to start a war [he doesn't dare with China sitting right on top of him] but rather he wants to maintain the lifestyle that he's grown accustomed to......and his life, of course; the Yemenese and Pakistani leaders is a fascist and we need to stop consorting with assholes period; we need to continue to contain Iraq and keep Saddam on a short lease until he is deposed or dies; we must have a more balanced policy towards Israel and Palestine [that means a lot less aid to Israel]and use whatever influence we have to engineer a peaceful solution; and finally, we need to butt out and let the Iranians determine their own future..........it would appear that slowly over time the Ayatollahs are losing their influence over secular Iran, and that Iran will adopt a more democratic stance. Everyone forgets that their are millions of Iranians living in the States who directly influence the politics and manifest destiny of that nation by simply writing emails and letters letting people know what life is like in a democracy. Mr. Bush's current behavior is a reactionary throwback to a time when the world was not so small and the world's peoples not so aware. If ever there was a time to adopt T. Roosevelt's philosophy.....walk softly and carry a big stick......its now. So don't go off saying liberals don't have an approach to these problems. The truth is you guys don't want to hear about this approach, because its the much harder one, requiring patience and diplomatic finesse. ted