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 : Israel to U.S. : Now Deal with Syria and Iran -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (1153)	7/11/2003 9:45:43 AM
From: rrufff	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22250

Although I disagree with much that the posters on this thread write, I do agree that the nature of most politicians is suspect. I believe that the type of person who makes it "to the top" is the type of person that believes that his mission and goals subsumes all other things. This perhaps explains behavior. As for your question, there should be neither. I'd rather have a leader who screws around than screws his people but that begs the question. All things considered, our leaders and system are better than just about anywhere else in the world. That doesn't change my belief that perhaps we can do better. Here, we are arguing about approaches and weaknesses that other peoples would be glad to have as a focus point. Getting to reality - neither Bush nor Clinton have killed millions of their own people as have the tyrants like Saddam. As for sexual issues, Europe and most of the world tolerates and, in France actually admires <ggg>, leaders who "fool around." I guess it's nice that we can argue here without the door being broken down by the secret police. It's also good that we can argue about the question you posit. I do agree that it would be nice to have moral leaders, who tell the truth, who treat those around them with kindness and honesty and who lead the world with a true vision of humanity. The only problem is that the media would jump on that guy as a "wimp" and he wouldnt' get elected.

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (1153)	7/11/2003 10:20:08 AM
From: Ed Huang	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 22250

>>Who is lying here. The CIA or the President?<< There's little doubt that both of them cooperated very well at the time to do the trick and pave the way to Iraq war. Now, after the invasion and occupation with 200,000 troops in Iraq, they still failed to produce the "evidence" of WMDs while disasters in that country and the casualties of the US troops are mounting (not to mention the moral, political, financial and diplomatic costs for America caused by the war). Both CIA and the White house are feeling the heat and the political pressure these days. And quite naturally, they start finger pointing to each other. But bottom line in time is, both of them are just the tools of the powerhouse. If the problem continues to grow, well, one of these guys will become a scapegoat and get kicked out later. The powerhouse will just install another tool in the position and continue the same venture. Let’s wait and see. reuters.com

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (1153)	7/13/2003 9:44:02 PM
From: Ed Huang	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22250

LOL, now no lying... --------------- Bush Aides Now Say Claim on Uranium Was Accurate By JAMES RISEN ASHINGTON, July 13 — Senior Bush administration officials today adjusted their defense of President Bush's claim in his State of the Union Address that Iraq tried to buy uranium from Africa, insisting that the phrasing was accurate even if some of the underlying evidence was unsubstantiated. Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser, and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said in separate appearances on Sunday television talk programs that the disputed sentence in Mr. Bush's January speech was carefully hedged, enough that it could still be considered accurate today. ... nytimes.com ------------------------- Condoleezza Rice and Donald H. Rumsfeld must think that the other people in the world are 100 points below their IQ level.