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 (163702)	3/10/2003 4:47:03 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573841

Germany was in the ascendent when Chamberlain was trying to appease them. No one can possibly say that currently Saddam is at the top of his game. Saddam as a threat to world peace is old news; Hitler was not. What nonsense. The liberals, aided by Chirac, want appeasement of Saddam. Just like Chamberlain got for Hitler. Your [usual] weak argument notwithstanding, the anology is a good fit. At the time of Chamberlain, Hitler was not perceived to be "at the top of his game", either. That's the point: Neither you nor I know where Saddam stands with his weapons programs. We just don't know. And I don't want to know. The Hitlers, Pol Pots, Saddams, and Ho Chi Minhs of the world have one thing in common: They were remarkably resilient individuals once they came to power. Merely making it hard for them isn't sufficient; you have to strip them of every ounce of power, better yet, blow their brains out. Then, and only then, can you be sure you killed the cancer.