SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Alighieri who wrote (162477)2/28/2003 4:22:57 PM
From: brian1501  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1576189
 
There you have it...our young men and women off to war for this. Read the rest of the article. Nothing is as certain as the paragraph above. It tells volumes.

I guess you missed all the parts about how terror attacks would probably increase if we back out and all of the other negative international consequences.

Even if you do focus on that one paragraph, why do you think he would be weakened? Because all of his supporters that can clearly see the need for the war would be left hanging. Those supporters are a good 50% + of the populace, so what makes him wrong to follow that when coupled with the national security issues?

This is not a 'wag the dog' situation. You're fooling yourself.

Brian



To: Alighieri who wrote (162477)2/28/2003 4:32:53 PM
From: Tenchusatsu  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1576189
 
Al, <There you have it...our young men and women off to war for this.>

Guess you ignored the part about how not going to war would encourage our enemies even more.

We're way past the point of no return. You can argue over who or what brought us to that point in the first place, but at least this analysis goes much deeper than the slogans of the Hollywood anti-war zealots.

Tenchusatsu