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: aladin who wrote (94247)	4/17/2003 7:25:41 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

John, of course it is a double standard. My standards are far higher than Saddam's. The whole point of having the UN take over Iraq via the Coalition's attack is that they operate on a standard different from Saddam's. A double standard is what we want. Disproportionate use of force is a bad idea. Nuking a district from which somebody fires a single bullet is disproportionate. Somewhere between nuking and returning a single bullet is the right response. His point was that there's no need to go ape. From what I understand, the matching of force to threat has been reasonable other than in a few blunders. I only support high-standard people. I operate on double standards. I'm thinking King George II and the team have done a great job. It was a shame they didn't get on the case properly and avoid the 911 attacks, but that was a long time in the development stages and airlines stupidly didn't keep their cockpit doors shut, so it can't be blamed just on the government systems. I expect barbarianism from Saddam, Osama and co, and I expect high standards from my side. I also expect high standards from Hu Jintao and so far, China's growth rate is enormous, which is a vote in favour by people voting with their money. Mqurice