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: JohnM who wrote (84947)	3/22/2003 2:46:47 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Respond to of 281500

> Since the Bush folk clearly used the humanitarian arguments as only spin, not substance, I...found their use...downright offensive. So did I. I expressed my disgust of using greatest American values as punchlines for the propaganda elsewhere. I just don't see a point going over it here. > I think you and I should have been able to still support the invasion had we seriously thought the Bush folk planned to address the humanitarian issues. When Bush starts to actually deliver all the aid he had promised Afghanistan, I will give him another look. Until then there is no point getting your hopes up. ST Q. How many water purification, electrical plants, hospitals, schools, etc etc has Bush contributed to in Afghanistan? And when is there going to be a broad based government built there (I am not even asking for democracy).

To: JohnM who wrote (84947)	3/22/2003 5:34:20 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

>>Since the Bush folk clearly used the humanitarian arguments as only spin, not substance, I, like you, found their use not only unacceptable but downright offensive.<< You're entitled to your beliefs, but I think your assertions are extraordinarily repugnant. Not to mention extraordinarily ill informed, given your obdurate insistance on obtaining your information filtered through biased sources rather than making the effort (which isn't all that taxing) of actually going to the source, even once. Not even I, who loathe Clinton and Gore like skin cancer, deny that they have a tiny vein of the milk of human kindness flowing in their beings somewhere deep inside. To deny the same of Bush is to accuse him of a vileness beyond human experience. You carry partisanship beyond what it can bear.

To: JohnM who wrote (84947)	3/22/2003 5:46:43 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

On second thought, maybe your rejection of Bush's motives is a backhanded compliment. When the Iraqi people are liberated, you can grumble that, no matter how happy they are, it was a lucky accident, because Bush's motives were not sincere. And, perhaps the Iraqi people won't be so demanding as to request that their liberation be put off until a Democrat is elected President, but will take what they can get. Or, speaking hypothetically only, you could support the war regardless of Bush's sincerity, because you wanted the Iraqi people to be liberated, even if by the insincere.