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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Strictly: Drilling II -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: White Bear who wrote (26079)	1/20/2003 9:35:42 AM
From: c.hinton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36161

I will get alot of flack for this,but... We drug our children with TV ,fast food and Retilin.We drug ourselves with credit , consumtion and prozac. If americas Current idea of liberty is so great why are we in such deep financial dogdoo? What is the diference between liberty and libertine?I would think that for the average american there is no difference. I apologise in advance.sorry

To: White Bear who wrote (26079)	1/20/2003 2:37:32 PM
From: el_gaviero	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 36161

Sahara, Thanks for your post. You have put into words the new emerging, neo-conservative ideology of Washington. I appreciate your effort, even though, with respect to the content of your post, I disagree with every sentiment, every thought, every paragraph, every sentence, every comma, every period, every “a” every “and” and every “the.” The course that you neo-cons are setting us on does not emerge organically out of our strengths as a people, but rather, is a symptom of weakness. Historical antecedents that characterize the present scene in Washington are not Americans of the time of Manifest Destiny, but rather, ghost-dancing Ogala-Sioux at Wounded Knee, and the sweet-talking Alcibiades, who convinced Athenians to undertake the harebrained scheme of attacking Syracuse (which finished Athens as a center of power for the next 2400 years). The idea that we can impose a Vision on the World when we lack the manliness to control our own borders is a joke. The package that you set forth ---- with its project of invading and taking over Iraq, and anywhere else we wanted, and the ideological justifications of the project---- smells of weakness to me, the peculiar kind of weakness that characterizes a bully. When I look at my country, I don’t see the attractive looseness and courage of stouthearted men, but something close to the opposite: the up-tightness of men good at getting grades, good at getting ahead in bureaucracies, good at landing sinecures in think-tanks, good at manipulating symbols and images --- but not good at doing anything real in the real world. Such men are going to run an empire? I wouldn’t count on it. We could solve our Arab problem in ten minutes --- by doing what is in our interest as a people to do anyway: stop taking the side of the Israeli in their tribal fight over land with Palestinians. However, to be evenhanded (really evenhanded, you understand) would take courage, because to do so would require men able to withstand social and political pressure. “The vision here is essentially that of a universalist, transnational civilization on the march.” A transnational civilization? What does that mean? I have no idea, but I am sure that whatever it means, we should not go there. We have an immense job to do here at home --- work out an understanding of, and institutional arrangements to deal with, a world in which it is precisely the case that we do NOT have overwhelming power. Nobody is more logical than a lunatic. Grant a lunatic his premise --- yes, he is Napoleon --- and everything he says makes perfect sense. Same with your post, Sahara --- it has the impeccable logic of a madman. But there is more, too. As I think about your post a bit more, I think I detect something else, another odor, faint but definitely present --- the smell given off by the most purely evil European of the 20th Century, Alexander Kojeve.

To: White Bear who wrote (26079)	1/20/2003 5:45:39 PM
From: Webster Groves	Respond to of 36161

I believe your vision of the rebirth of the Pax Romana might get some flack from the subjugate states (i.e., the rest of the world). Historically, political and religious ideologies have been best advanced at the point of a sword. Judging by recent increases in our defense budget, looks like this successful strategy hasn't been forgotten. Given that current US economic policies favor the advancement of China over all else, it's going to be a bit hard to avoid a peer challenge from Asia in the near future. In the last super-power match-up, the USSR folded because it couldn't continually ante into the game. Next time around, who's going to find the cost a bit steep ? -wg