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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gary Walker who wrote (14689)	3/15/2003 9:53:54 PM
From: lurqer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

Now that you have decided to be a little more forthcoming, let's consider this. You state The only thing you believe in is NO WAR. Really. First time I'm aware of that. And here I was sure there were conditions that would justify war, but I'm certain you know more about me, than I do myself. I had always thought that I was opposed to a war initiated by a neo-con clique to establish a hegemony for the "New American Century". Unfortunately, there are people in this world who want to destroy life and property for their own gain. Don't suppose it ever occurred to you, that some of those people might be in your own government. If that unfortunate circumstance obtains then, to use your words, how do we defend our freedom or system as flawed as we know it is? All I'm saying is, don't just assume that your government in general, and your president specifically is telling you the truth. Nixon lied, Clinton lied. Could Bush? Just think about it. I do believe in your right to express your opinion. I just cannot agree. Concur. Consider that we both may be very patriotic, it's just that we perceive differing threats. How about this, we both wish that our troops will soon be out of harms way. Surely we can agree on that. lurqer

To: Gary Walker who wrote (14689)	3/16/2003 12:02:36 PM
From: portage	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 89467

It seems that you don't get it. Afghanistan was necessary. Iraq is not. Blind support of a warmonger's wrongheaded position is still blind. The troops have no say. Of course they are valued. It's the chickenhawks sitting in Washington who are in the wrong, not the troops. Why do you assume that "no war" is the absolute position being held ? How about "not this war" ? For the myriad reasons that have been given here. Defending freedom - define that for me. My definition is not set by the white house. Or by Ashcroft and Poindexter.