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: TimF who wrote (161034)	2/14/2003 1:05:20 PM
From: jjayxxxx	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574854

<"A poll last week by the firm IFOP found that 77% of French adults oppose a war in Iraq, even if the U.N. Security Council gives its endorsement. And 81% said they didn't believe U.S. arguments that Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) has been developing weapons of mass destruction in defiance of U.N. resolutions."> I would think many who say they don't believe that Saddam has been developing WMD would think that way because they don't want war, but it surprises me that the % who say they don't believe in Bush's claims is MORE then the % that say they oppose the war. That would imply that some of them support the war even though they think Saddam is not building WMD. No, it implies that they simply don't believe the U.S. argument. Everybody knows he has been continuing to develop WMDs. Besides it is only 4% that falls in that category, and that could be within the margin of error. Either way though, people get pretty irrational and either don't have all the facts (or even very many of them) in the first place (but still offer an opinion -- this always amazes me), or they know the facts but are so blind to reality that they will do anything to avoid 'war'. Even though in the long run they could be condemning thousands or hundreds of thousands to death (worst case only, of course). Probably not in their country, though. People are selfish and short sighted. It is a problem of trying to convince people that a horrible thing (war) is better in the short run, especially on our terms, than an even more horrible thing (use of WMDs against anybody) in the long run. People just assume it is best to avoid 'horrible' at all times and all will be well. This is one area where the administration has failed: convincingly communicating this issue. Not sure what the excuse is of those in America that have the info but still can't see the threat. Clueless? JJ