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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PROLIFE who wrote (371370)	3/15/2003 1:43:19 AM
From: CYBERKEN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Two left-wing baby-killing Senators display the fundamental cowardice of the Marxist/Leninist anti-American left. ONLY in the cancer-ridden contemporary Democratic party could a slimy bag of pus like John Edwards get serious consideration as a candidate for ANYTHING. He makes William the Bastard look ALMOST respectable. Is there no one of CHARACTER left in the 200-year-old Democratic party? No need to even consider the question. What a f--king ZOO... nytimes.com

To: PROLIFE who wrote (371370)	3/15/2003 6:13:59 AM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

PL - Since I've already answered some of your points in my previous posts, I'll just say this: I am not suggesting that we do nothing about Saddam Hussein. As far as I know, no one is suggesting that. If you can find me one quote from any liberal saying that we should just leave Hussein alone, I'll be very surprised. When Bush said in his State of the Union address that "Trusting Saddam Hussein is not an option", he was using a very old propaganda technique. When your position is not being accepted as rational, make the other guy out to be an even bigger lunatic. Make statements that suggest that his position is even crazier than yours. Once again, the choice is not between complete inaction and all out war. There are other alternatives, such as continuing inspections with greater specificity of deadlines, etc. We can always go to war later if it is absolutely necessary. It just isn't absolutely necessary now. You know, only six months ago, the U.S. was enjoying an unprecedented level of support, from around the globe, for our fight against terrorism. Yet today, we are becoming more and more isolated. Even the British may not support our action in Iraq. Don't you think that if our arguments for war were truly compelling that more people around the world would believe them? Even the Arab countries didn't give us a hard time about going into Afghanistan, but now we can't even get Cameroon to go along with us! - Allen