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: KLP who wrote (94627)	4/18/2003 3:43:29 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Respond to of 281500

There are certainly differences. Remember one when Khrushchev banged on the desk and said they would bury us....and remember another where OBL and AQ and other terrorists continue to say "death to America and Americans".... I must be missing something. Where is the difference? In both cases we looked at the most extreme statements and formed a policy that justified every immorality based on "necessity" without really trying to encourage the moderate moves on the other side as a weapon against the extreme. Since always men (and women) make the judgements, it really means that we as a Government and civilization haven't evolved enough for all positions to be examined and decisions made that are in fact, "what is best for ALL the citizens." Not just the so called poor. Not just the so called rich. ALL citizens. I see structural problems on the way to progress. By that I mean the system is set up in such a way that it cannot fix itself. Chief among them is the ability for Business to strongly influence government policy. As I see it, government is obligated to see to the welfare of business so long as that creates prosperity for the people. But I see no reason why closer ties to the business must exist. There are three structural changes that must be met before we can progress. The first is elimination of political contributions by business. The second is removal of taxation as a method of directing economic policy. And the third is to stop treating corporations as if they were people. And since it is wrong to have taxation without representation, I am willing to drop corporate taxes in favor of above changes. It is not that I am anti-rich or pro-poor. I love to get rich as much as the next guy. But I don't see why business should be allowed to influence government policy, especially foreign policy. The government will be representing all citizens, if and when all citizens are on equal footing in the entire system that leads to the creation of the government. ST

To: KLP who wrote (94627)	4/18/2003 5:19:10 PM
From: arun gera	Respond to of 281500

>"death to America and Americans"....> It's clear that Osama really meant this slogan. But there are some expressions that do not translate very well. For example: In India (and maybe the middle East), a common sign of jeer is "Murdabaad" which literally translates to "Death to...". I have seen this slogan being used so freely that its more appropriate meaning is "We are against..." So when the Railway employees hold a peaceful protest strike, they hold up signs such as "Mangagement Down Down" and "Management Murdaabad' both being equivalent. The Indian media will not translate those signs as "Death to Management", neither does the Management think that the protesters mean that. But the Western Press could make the mistake of translating literally... -Arun