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 Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (67681)	2/7/2003 10:35:52 AM
From: Fred Levine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Sun-- Your thoughtful post does deserve a more complete answer. IMO, we are living in a hostile world with people determined to destroy as many of us as they can. They are not constrained by our morality or even personal consequences. Given that, how in the world do expect reason to work? When I grew up in the SE Bronx, it was axiomatic that we fight with at least the same level of weapons as our attackers. Otherwise, we would get our butts ripped. I saw crazies who were only stopped by force, sometimes a bullet, more often by police. When I talk to my academic friends, they don't share my experiences and cannot relate to the reality of force as a method of influence. You quoted Noam Chomsky whom I rate as a first class dope. His work on deep structure in linguistics is incomprehensible and therefore regarded as profound and his political rants as equally incoherent. Recent research repudiated his linguistic bullshit. His oft-quoted critque of BF Skinner is equally misinformed. However, he is a campus hero because he is anti-establishment. We differ in our perception of threat. Bin Laden declared war. I have given all the reasons that I regard Saddam as a threat and want to avoid being even more redundant. There is also the Arab proverb that, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." I also remember attending an early anti-Viet Nam war faculty rally. I was kicked out when I stated that it was inconceivable to me that N. Viet Nam was not involved in the South. The same reasoning may refuse to see a connection between Al Queda and Saddam. I have prominent Arab friends who tell me that elimination of Saddam by force would be more welcome than publicly admitted, including, if not especially in Iraq. (BTW, your accusing me of being ant-Arab was a cheap shot). Friedman, with better Arab contacts than I, has stated the same. Perhaps by living in NY I am more aware of the immense and fruitless damage. All the arguments you used were used before to avoid getting the inspectors in Iraq and to avoid getting the US in Afghanistan. If you think that reason will prevail, your arguments fit into place. However, I think we are in a war they started and that force is, tragically, more persuasive than reason. If you are wrong, we can kiss many European and American butts goodbye. I am still hoping that threat of force will rid the world of Saddam and lead to his disarmament. I absolutely believe that Saddam and Bin Laden will use WMD's if they can. Saddam will use them once again. I don't think we will use either. I am ashamed of the US role and the world's role in allowing this. Interestingly, my wife had been opposed to invasion of Iraq. She just changed her mind when she saw the lack of response by the UN to the inspecors report. fred