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: tejek who wrote (162575)	3/1/2003 5:17:41 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577900

I am not sure why you have problems with Kosovo Actually, I don't have a problem with Kosovo: siliconinvestor.com There was a dictator in charge who in some ways was more violent than Saddam Not as violent, but nonetheless, he needed to go. How this leads you to conclude that Iraq and Kosovo are analogous is beyond me? I think your accusation that Al and I are saying one is okay and one is not based on who was president is your excuse for not looking closely at the reasons for going to war with Iraq. No, my accusation is based on the fact that neither of you has any reasonable explanation for your difference in the positions. Al's, in fact, has been worse -- proclaiming that, in effect, because America had no national security interest in Kosovo it somehow makes it more "just". Ridiculous. also can say when Clinton made his case for going in, it made logical sense, it made obligatory sense and was predicated on a sense of duty rather than paranoid fear. I was never once worried that things might get out of control nor that there would be serious repercussions for the US going forward. And to date that has proven true. Clinton didn't "make the case". He went to war without either congressional or UN approval. A clear and present danger to our allies or ourselves. But there was no clear and present danger to our allies or ourselves in Kosovo. I am opposed to going to war against Iraq under this president. Right. Even though this war with Iraq is more justifiable than the war against Kosovo. In this instance, there is a clear threat to us (according to practically every expert on the subject), there have been tremendous human rights violations, and he poses a clear threat to both our military in the region as well as our allies in the region (Israel, and Kuwait as well). Again, you have yet to enunciate a clear rationale for supporting the war in Kosovo and opposing the war in Iraq. Your only basis continues to be political.

To: tejek who wrote (162575)	3/2/2003 6:15:31 PM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577900

Ted Re..His aggressive behavior threatened the well being of the region which happens to be where our NATO allies are located. How so MIlosevec never threatened to invade any of our Nato allies. Besides, France could have easily sent in more inspectors there and kept it under control. Europe is trying to say war should be the last resort, but here Europe rushed to war, without sending in any inspectors. Besides, Milosevec didn't have WMD, and no Al qaeda in the area to give them to; so he could easily have been contained. The US was required under NATO obligations to respond. LOL Yeah sure, Germany France and Belgium don't have to respond to the defense of Turkey, but we have to respond to a war in Bosnia, who isn't in NATO. If defending NATO was their concern, why not beef up the defenses around Kosovo, in the NATO countries. I am not saying I am against Kosovo. I am saying all of the reasons for Kosovo apply to Iraq in spades; so if you were for Kosovo, you should really be for Iraq. I was not opposed to going to war in Kosovo under a Dem. president. I am opposed to going to war against Iraq under this president. Doesn't that statement say it all. Who cares which party the president belongs to. The question is if the war is right for America, not which party the pres. belongs to.