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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (168096)	4/18/2003 10:21:35 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574441

Bush publicly called the UN irrelevant as his Sec of State was trying to get a approval on a resolution. This isn't true. Bush cautioned them against BECOMING irrelevant, the way the League of Nations did. The UN made its choice, and by doing so they did become largely irrelevant. They may have a place, but the UN lost all credibility in any kind of enforcement action and I would not anticipate a competent (i.e., "strong") president ever calling on them again to support such an action. My experience has been when the dominant party in an organization begins to act irresponsibly and uncooperative that behavior usually spreads throughout the organization. Perhaps, but that isn't what happened. The DOMINANT party encouraged the others to act responsbly and THEY failed to do so. The dominant party did what dominant parties do -- we stood up and said, "we won't be run over by some third rate dictator". This is another thing you and I would never reach agreement on. You support a weak foreign policy, under which our nation's future is dictated to us by other nations. I support a strong foreign policy based on righteousness but not subject to the vetos of other nations, under which we are in control of our own destiny. It really is that simple.