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: Hawkmoon who wrote (103413)	6/30/2003 8:42:14 PM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 281500

Hi Hawkmoon; Re: "And as for it being human nature to support the underdog, then why haven't millions arose to support Eric Rudolph, Ted Kaczynski, and any other "underdog" within American society?? Why don't we all answer the "call to arms"??" Humans tend to support underdogs, but not every underdog, LOL. You get nowhwere with arguments like: "Could it be that we don't perceive ourselves as being oppressed by our government?" Our problem is that too many Arabs think Osama is a great guy and that Bush is Satan's Little Helper. And US policies are doing nothing to change this. Instead, Bush is digging us deeper into a hole. Re: "And it explains why it's imperative for the Western nations to take some steps to modernize and liberalize these Muslim states, even if it requires military action and nation-building to accomplish it." This would be a great solution, if you could just push a button and make it happen. But our government is supremely ineffective at this sort of thing. Or are you next going to start arguing that the War on Poverty was a great success. Just look at Iraq. We're unable to get the electricity back on. Back in 1991, when we bombed the bejesus out of Baghdad's electric supply, Saddam had it running again in considerably less time. And talk about unemployment rates, the rate now in Iraq is closer to 100% than Saudi Arabia's 30%. The problem is not that the Administration's goals are unworthy, but that their tactics are ineffective. They failed. Re: "1) Pressure regimes ... 2) Foster and nurture internal democratic revolutions ... 3) Use military action to overthrow ..." This is a great example of your tunnel thinking. You leave off the technique that worked with the Soviet Union: 4) Wait. It's not always the guy who comes back from a patrol with an empty magazine that was the brave man. Sometimes it is better to hold your fire than to shoot. This is one of those times. It is the cowards, who fear death from a thousand terrorists that they cannot possibly locate, who are emptying their guns into the night, who are accidentally shooting civilians, and who are causing greater problems for us. Re: "But in all three cases, the bottom line is that if they don't change and provide for their people, the people will rise up and overthrow them." The people of Iraq were heavily armed under Saddam Hussein. If they'd wanted to, they could have gotten rid of Saddam, but they didn't, though a few of them did try a couple times. Now that we're in the country, a few of them are trying to overthrow us. And since we are a hell of a lot less brutal than Saddam, they will succeed. Bush will have to pull out with his tail stuck between his legs, just like the Israelis pulled out of Lebanon. The sooner he does it, the less damage to our country, our party, and the Iraqis. -- Carl