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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wizard who wrote (156248)	4/22/2003 3:59:14 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

we don't approve of many places, including Pakistan. but they are NOT threats to the United States. If they were, we WOULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Don't let zonder trap you into agreeing with his rhetorical argument that if we "regime change" one despot, we have to "regime change" them all. He, of course, thinks we have no right to do anything to any of them, including Iraq, because he won't ever admit that any of them are an "imminent threat" to us unless they actually send uniformed troops over here. But intervening with despotic regimes need not be driven only by "imminent threat," however you define it, and it need not directly involve the military at all. It is in the interest of US security and long-term prosperity (as well as that of France, Monaco and everyone else) to have peace, stability and liberty in all nations. We should not, of course, use military force unless absolutely necessary. Sometimes it becomes so because of a threat to us or our allies. Sometimes it becomes so because of an ongoing human disaster as in Rwanda or Kosovo (of course, the world didn't think one worthy of intervention). But in most cases, diplomacy as well as internal pressure for freedom and a chance at prosperity will get the job done over time. On the latter, having a good example can help as I think Iraq will with Syria, Iran, Saudi, et al as it becomes democratic and stable. Iran was making progress already and Syria now seems to be seeing the light as does the PA. Israel needs to see the light, too, BTW. Bob

To: Wizard who wrote (156248)	4/23/2003 6:27:06 AM
From: zonder	Respond to of 164684

we DON'T approve of the Saudi Royal family and the system they have. WE DON'T. Not 'Do,' we DON'T. is it clear now? Your words are clear but acts speak for themselves and they are OPPOSITE of what you are saying. Which means you don't know what is going on in that part of the world re Saudi/US relations, or you are deliberately misrepresenting the issue, or perhaps you have misunderstood my point to mean "Americans personally like Saudis" whereas I was talking about state policy. Is that clear for you? we don't approve of many places including Pakistan. but they are NOT threats to the United States Try to decide what the reason for the invasion of Iraq was, will you? Are you under the impression it was because Iraq was somehow a threat to the US? Please say you think so. It will be such fun to read about your explanation of just how...