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: SecularBull who wrote (374746)	3/19/2003 9:41:45 PM
From: Kevin Rose	Respond to of 769670

Well, we were previously talking in generalities. Specifically, in Saddam's case, I don't think much is 'unjust'. However, there are some things that certainly set a dangerous precedent: 1) Assassination 2) Nuclear arms 3) Chemical agents 4) Biological agents All of these put us on the wrong side of the moral equation. Of these, assassination is probably the stickiest one. You could argue that it would save a lot of lives, but then you lose the moral high ground when others do the same. So, the ends never justify the means. However, even though I think we could have done a better job on the means, IMO we are still well within moral boundaries.