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 : Stop the War! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Augustus Gloop who wrote (2858)	3/25/2003 3:15:28 PM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21614

I think we'll have all the evidence needed by the end of this Most probably. The question is of course whether it was there before the invasion began. Nothing and I mean NOTHING is more cold blooded than to use YOUR idea of innocent to determine the sadness on ones death. Who said anything of the sort except you? OK, you didn't mean it, but really... Nobody else said that. But there is a level of sadness according to who dies, imho: (1) (Saddest of all) Death of a child, who cannot even defend himself, or even survive on his/her own. (2) Death of an Iraqi who fights an invasion of his country (3) Death of an invading soldier, who has at least chosen to be a soldier, and who is after all the invading party. (4) Death of Saddam, who has killed many people himself. I am not saying one is more innocent than the other, mind you.

To: Augustus Gloop who wrote (2858)	3/25/2003 3:24:05 PM
From: Rainy_Day_Woman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21614

I think we'll have all the evidence needed by the end of this gloop gloop gloop [she shakes her head] you don't think for one single second they will believe any evidence that is uncovered do you? I can't begin to speculate how they will disavow it

To: Augustus Gloop who wrote (2858)	3/25/2003 4:53:58 PM
From: epicure	Respond to of 21614

You did realize that my idea of innocent had nothing to do with killing people, I hope. I thought it was fairly clear. Adults are responsible for the government they allow to exist, and for what that government does. I believe in the social contract. If we do not challenge the contract, then we are implicitly or explicitly supporting it. The only way to take that challenge to the limit is to destroy oneself (as the Buddhist monks did who immolated themselves to protest the Vietnam war), or those who take up arms against the government. All other adults, who do not go to those extremes, are at some level giving in to governmental power and are, at some level, responsible. you can't opt out just by saying you opt out- imo that's cheating. It's fun to say, when you despise what the government does, but morally it is (imo) meaningless. Does that mean all civilians suddenly become military targets? No. It's a different issue.