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 : Let's Start The War And Get It Over With -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (4)	2/26/2003 2:32:38 PM
From: Glenn Petersen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 808

Laz, if I were you I would insist that he address you as "Mr. pro-war activist", or more accurately, "Mr. pro-just war activist."

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (4)	2/26/2003 5:39:48 PM
From: Augustus Gloop	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 808

Ya know....nobody wants to go to war but deciding not to make a decision is not an option either. Regardless of involvement or lack thereof in the 9/11 events, Saddam poses a risk. He has the means, desire and past history to suggest he would be more than willing to use any weapons he has against us. He also has the network to be able to teach people how to make deadly chemicals on a local basis around the globe. His human rights history is UFB and he happens to be located in a region of the world that has a huge impact on the global economy because of the oil reserves. In addition to all of the above (and much more I'm sure) he hasn't held up his end of the cease fire deal dating back to 1991. The most common theme I've seen as an excuse for not going to war with Saddam is that there are other countries who also have similar issues with regard to WMD and human rights violations. And while I realize thats true what I don't understand is how that makes Saddam any better as a global citizen. The situation as it stands is like putting a serial killer on probation. Think of the response we all had when OJ Simpson got off. People were furious and to be honest I don't think he poses much of a risk to society. Here is a guy that didn't kill 2 people but rather millions over the years and we're supposed to just overlook him as he gathers more and more ability to strike from afar? I don't know. I don't believe that I'm a war monger but I have a hard time agreeing with people who would prefer that we not get involved. Personally I'd rather not wait until he has the ability to wipe out our kids before we act. Now I understand that the very thing I don't want to happen (terrorism here) may happen as a result of us taking action but we weren't at war on 9/11 (that I recall) and it still happened. So since we seem to be living under the threat of terrorism anyhow (and it sure feels that way to me) isn't it prudent of us to and eliminate a person who has used WMD and is working towards being able to use them on a global level? Isn't it honorable of us to eliminate a person who has committed human rights violations to the degree he has? Does it somehow make it more honorable to wait until he can inflict even more widespread damage? What would those who died fighting Nazi Germany think of our country today?