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: Ilaine who wrote (81161)	3/11/2003 10:59:59 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

CB, I remember clearly back then, the gloating of some americans over the iran/iraq war. This is a very interesting debate. However we exist in the now and have to act based on current reality. For the long term, US foreign policy must be revamped and the cynical use of other nations and peoples for to benefit our interests must be replaced by a system guided by morality and long term interests. If you go back to the iran/iraq war, we should have tried to mediate it, not enlarge it or keep it going. What Bush is doing now, is setting a moral compass for foreign policy. The state department are the folks without scruples imo. They all majored in cynicism in college, i suspect. Defense of course is too military a view, but they have a compass. Bush combines that with a civilian view. Mike

To: Ilaine who wrote (81161)	3/11/2003 11:35:47 AM
From: Rascal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The point is: Whose history will be rewritten next? Iran is now Axis of evil. But I hear no ill words? There must be some consistency to track morality. On the moral compass, north is north. Rascal@ busisofftheroad.com

To: Ilaine who wrote (81161)	3/11/2003 12:45:17 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

May I suggest that before you steal the Washington Monument you first find a deep enough well to hide it in. The debate is not about if Saddam is a humanitarian or not. It is about what the outcome of this war will be. And unless we understand how we get ourselves into these hot spots in the first place, this whole exercise is a waste of time, money, and lives, because we'll be fighting Iraqis again in another generation. If believed Michael's point that "What Bush is doing now, is setting a moral compass for foreign policy" then I could be persuaded to support Bush. But I see nothing that says he understands an ethical approach to foreign policy is superior (read serves us much better in the long run) than the "self-interest" policies that we've been addicted to for so long. ST PS Michael you still owe me that drink since the Afghanistan debate.