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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tekboy who wrote (78659)	3/1/2003 12:32:13 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 281500

But of course the sense of further Arab victimization and powerlessness that an invasion would represent might also spur those regimes' domestic oppositions, perhaps even (although I doubt it) past the point beyond which the governments could maintain control. That's precisely what I meant to say in my second point of introduction. However, to back up a bit, I find the argument that there is presently a revolutionary situation to be somewhere between weak and mildly strong. It's cobbled together from a great many bits and pieces and then thrown across several obviously different countries with different levels of discontent, different histories and levels of Islamist organization, etc. But it is, imo, an argument one needs to keep in mind. I don't recall but could be wrong that the author of the NYReview piece argued that the US caused this situation; rather that it was present and an invasion could tip it into revolution. On that point, I agree with you. There is simply no way to know. As with almost everything else in this invasion, the outcomes are not knowable. But this is certainly one of the factors that should be prominent in anyone's thought about it and one the Bush folk don't mention, at least publicly. We've still got about a foot of snow on the ground here in nothern Jersey. What's it like across the rivers?

To: tekboy who wrote (78659)	3/1/2003 2:54:29 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The latest from PIMCO's Bill Gross (the largest bond fund manager in the world)... pimco.com <<..."I speak now, and risk client, public, and press censure because I was silent 35 years ago. I sailed off to Vietnam, came back and collected my Veteran's benefits and was none the worse for the experience. But hundreds of thousands, including some friends - were - and that is the point I suppose, in speaking out now. The crux of the current argument involving Iraq is this: All would agree, especially since 9/11 that America has a right to defend herself. The question is how far we can go in that defense and in the process what cost to the American spirit and the American soul. President Bush and others say that we must take almost every step to insure our internal safety. He argues that, in addition, those steps will bring positive changes in regimes dominated by oppression; Afghanistan, Iraq, North Korea and Iran are but steppingstones towards a new democratic world order with America at the center. I know the arguments - I'm even temporarily persuaded by them during emotional speeches such as Bush's State of the Union. I suspect, however, that by invading "evil doer" nations, we may lessen our vulnerability but lose a piece of our soul in the process. Yes, I'm aware that Iraq is in noncompliance with UN resolutions and that its leader is a near madman. I'm also aware, however, of how absolute power corrupts and how we may be crossing a thin line. Preemptive attacks? Kill them before they kill us? No one has experienced such Hours in the United States before. I am heartbroken that it has come to this and I fear for my country's proud heritage and even more for its future."...>>