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: LindyBill who wrote (65780)	1/13/2003 9:41:06 AM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

res- South Koreans, having to defend themselves, will either see the illusions of their own policy or suffer the consequences of maintaining it. But it's their country, and, frankly, their potential misfortune no longer matters to us as much as it did during the Cold War Yes, it's their country, but the world is far more interdependent economically then it was only two decades ago. To disengage the way he suggests here, can have dramatic effects on us all. Korean peace is important for the region, and for the rest of the world. We have maintained the peace.

To: LindyBill who wrote (65780)	1/13/2003 10:54:13 AM
From: John Carragher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Lindy North Korea calling for a holy war... Since when did they get religion.?

To: LindyBill who wrote (65780)	1/13/2003 2:14:22 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

This is not the Clinton administration, after all; these guys know how to think strategically, how not to leak, and how to focus their foreign-policy activity on something other than the frenzied daily news cycle. What, then, are they thinking? Just finished reading Christopher Hitchens' op ed piece in the WSJ today, in which he argues, among a great many other things, that the conservative movement is so confident these days it is able to see divergent opinions publicly articulated. Well, Chris, if that's the case, tell me why every article, well almost, say 99.9%, one reads in conservative journals has to start with a variant of "we ain't Clinton, we're smart, they were dumb." Sounds more than a little defensive to me.

To: LindyBill who wrote (65780)	1/13/2003 3:16:42 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

SENDING OUT FOR CHINESE I liked that little paragraph header.. Especially, as you all know from my posts, that I perceive the Chinese to be the greatest factor in reining in Kim Jong Il.. And it could even become more interesting if Jong, seeing a growing presence building from an aroused China, seeks Western backing to moderate it.. A very well analyzed piece, IMO. There are FEW strategic US interests at stake in Korea. And all of these young S. Koreans will be kicking themselves down the road as their taxes go through the rough to pay for the rebuilding of the north from their yearning for reunification. Hawk