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.

Pastimes : The Boxing Ring Revived -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cosmicforce who wrote (4521)	2/16/2003 5:45:34 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 7720

There is a principle of equal treatment under the law that we must retain. At the same time, we recognize legitimate differences. Even though not all blacks are educationally behind Asians, we have programs that seek to provide any blacks, even though they may not be in need of it, added assistance in certain areas. We provide resources to women that aren't provided to men. We have programs for mentally challenged students that aren't open to non-challenged students. We allow people of certain ethnic and religious backgrounds special dispensations not available to those not of their ethnic and religious backgrounds. Equal treatment does not mean identical treatment. It allows the recognition that certain people, by virtue of their membership in a group, may deserve or need special treatment or a different application of the laws. As to "collateral damage," it happens all the time in every sphere of life. That doesn't make it right, or good. But it is. In apprehending a violent criminal sometimes innocent people get injured. It was entirely possible that parts of the shuttle falling to earth might have killed innocent people. Intentional burns can get out of hand and damage property or even cause death. Unintended consequences are part of life. As to isolationism, in a military sense it is perfectly achievable. In fact, of the 160 or so (I haven't checked) members of the United Nations, I would venture to say fully two-thirds, if not more, are militarily isolationist in that they don't have troops in any foreign lands nor do they seek military dominion over any foreign lands. We could easily do the same.

To: cosmicforce who wrote (4521)	2/17/2003 2:08:18 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7720

"I'm a globalist, which is the opposite of your professed isolationism. I don't think in a modern world you can really be isolated and to not tend ones garden in a proactive way makes the solution to the problem of weeds much more difficult. " Saddam is a murderous, despot; lopping of heads, whipping the folk and gassing groups of people for the sake of his own little tyranous control of the region. He has sought and found insidious ways of reaching beyond his borders to inflict his brand of treachery onto others. If his regime is not removed in this effort, we (the globe) will have authorized its existence and condoned others like it. How do you propose dealing with the weed (Saddam)....by having inspectors watch?