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.

Strategies & Market Trends : P&S and STO Death Blow's -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeff who wrote (28778)	3/2/2003 10:53:31 AM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 30712

a new poll out has 71% for and 24% against in america.. Absurd. Depending on how the questions was asked, (If it was phrased as should the US get UN approval first) there there was no majority for war. When various price tags were put on support dropped. I read that poll and came to the conclusion that we are very very deeply divided and there is no general concensus for war vial unilateral action, which at this moment is all we are likely to see. If you are talking about a different poll than the one I read, show a link. This is what I recall. Can not find the silly link but this reference is exactly what I remember washingtonpost.com Two questions from a recent New York Times/CBS News poll: "Should the United States take military action against Iraq fairly soon, or wait and give the United Nations and weapons inspectors more time?" A majority said more time, no rush to war. And: "Do you think removing Saddam Hussein from power is worth the potential loss of American life and the other costs of attacking Iraq?" A majority said yes, it's worth it, go for it. This shows the public is damn confused if anything. In all questions about UN approval as well as more time for inspections, the public wanted to wat for UN approval and give time to inspections. To say on the basis of that poll the US is in favor of war is a misrepresentation of the facts. If you have a link to that poll or are referring to a different poll I would like to see the questions. M

To: Jeff who wrote (28778)	3/2/2003 11:16:26 AM
From: Big Dog	Respond to of 30712

<<well...the fact is there are more countries with us for this war than against.....>> What are you talking about?

To: Jeff who wrote (28778)	3/2/2003 11:25:36 AM
From: Big Dog	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 30712

Jeff: What in the world has happened to you? You used to be so rational and sensible. What is with all the diatribe? You do realize that Limbaugh and Gallagher are showmen? Stop trying to be a wannabe. If you believe in this country. You believe in the Constitution. One of the things that makes this country great is the ability to think for ourselves and talk rationally. When you go off the way you and Mike have, you're acting more like communists and fascists than Americans. I hope that you realize this. I also hope that you realize that the same debate that we're having was taking place behind closed doors in the White House. The President has sided with Rumsfeld. So be it. But, realize that just last week our international supporters have asked Rumsfeld to get out of the spokesperson role.

To: Jeff who wrote (28778)	3/12/2003 3:53:59 PM
From: C	Respond to of 30712

Jeff......This from a Nobel Peace Prize winner. WARSAW, Poland - Former Polish President Lech Walesa, the winner of the 1983 Nobel Peace Prize, on Wednesday urged the U.N. Security Council to back a U.S.-led war on Iraq and criticized the United Nations "ineffectiveness" so far. The United States and Britain are seeking support for a new resolution that would give Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein an ultimatum to disarm, or face war. They face opposition from France, Russia and other nations that argue U.N. weapons inspections should continue. "International authorization for the United States is today the only way to solve common problems," Walesa said in a statement. "In view of the ineffectiveness of U.N. actions, the international community must authorize the United States and its allies, as its representatives, to take the necessary action." "Otherwise, there will be further conflicts and mutual accusations will weaken cooperation between the nations of the democratic world," Walesa added. If the new resolution is defeated, U.S. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair have said they would be prepared to go to war anyway. Poland's current government backs their stance. Walesa, the founder of the Solidarity movement and a key figure in the end of communism in Poland, was president from 1990 until 1995, when he lost his re-election bid to current President Aleksander Kwasniewski. story.news.yahoo.com.