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: JohnM who wrote (67503)	1/21/2003 4:05:20 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 281500

Protest numbers don't add up sfgate.com

To: JohnM who wrote (67503)	1/21/2003 7:06:32 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

John, We faced subversion in the 30s, 40s and 50s from the old USSR. It morphed into a nation state containment situation starting with korea in the early 50s. It led to the 1962 cuban missile crisis in which the world almost ended. We are in the the pre-nuke period with iraq. In your opinion, is it better to stop it here which we can do(couldnt do easily with soviets even in 1945 regardless of right wing beliefs to the contrary back then) or to wait for the 1952-62 period to reoccur. Will the next cuban missile crisis get out of control because of stray nuker or more likely other wmd deliverable by surrogates(islamicists) who will act for their own reasons. Then there is the china scenario in the fifties which like the russian one lends itself more to containment. We could not conquer large land masses at that time, nor sustain war with large casualties, like NK today. There are subtleties in foreign policy that most folks miss. I am just taking educated guesses. I have been trained at this, but not a practicing foreign policy specialist for years. I wish someone could give me a clear concise reason why not to attack iraq? I have not heard it. If we could have easily eliminated stalin in 1945 or Mao in 1950, or Kim jung il today wouldnt you be for it? Mike PS You had no inkling in the sixties that stalinists in the movement were scumbags? Didnt you fight those bastards for control and leadership? Sometimes your friends can be worse than your enemies. As much as i wanted to end the war, i would not have supported policies that would have hurt this country. And i am sure you didnt either so maybe you fought those guys too.