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: Rascal who wrote (106635)	7/20/2003 10:38:37 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Remember, the BUsh approval numbers do best when there is the negativity of War and Terror to scare the voters. He's not one to position himself as the the ameliorater. Yes, rascal, we are all aware that all you care about is seeing Bush lose. You would cheer for Kim Jong Il if you felt that it would help defeat Bush.

To: Rascal who wrote (106635)	7/20/2003 11:12:23 AM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 281500

SIAVBM- Love it. The black-white approach so often seen on SI typifies attitudes that prevent any kind of constructive dialogue across the chasm between those who believe the war was legitimate and timely, and those who believe that the action should have been taken only on the most concrete and inarguable evidence, under a UN mandate. The objections raised by many have nothing at all to do with a defense of Saddam and his regime. I haven't read anyone who believes that the world is not a better place without him. What I have read are objections based on the efforts of this administration to force the war too quickly, and to carry it out alone, and without adequate postwar plans in place. Also for many, a preemptive strike, which is an enormous change in our international policy, should only be considered when there is solid evidence provided because of the terribly frightening precedent it sets, not only for us, but for any country who now may feel it is justified. With that evidence is question, people who were sitting shakily on the pre-emptive fence are going to topple. To bring up the mass graves as a post facto justification, is too much like a surgeon who operates on a misread x-ray and then finds cancer and says, hey, good thing I operated. The patient will no doubt agree, but someone better wonder about the misread -x-ray in the first place. To stretch the analogy to the breaking point, the doctor also fails to get all the cancer (some of the cells are hiding behind major organs), and he has no well-conceived plan in place for chemo. I have seen only one article claiming the postwar situation is improving; mostly I read that the situation for our soldiers and for the people themselves is deteriorating. Anyone who did any reading before this war about this country predicted this situation. Sandra Mackey's closing chapters of THe Reckoning lay this out in what now is proving to be a most accurate prophecy. I am amazed when I read comments from the administration that seem to indicate they are "surprised". Also, as many have pointed out, it is a fact that we have known for a long time about Saddam's killing sprees, and done nothing. A moral argument which is pulled out only when convenient lacks authority. Until we can accept that neither of the rationales- for or against this war- was etched in stone by the hand of God on Mount Sinai, but written in pencil on scraps of paper by men and women with partial knowledge, different philosophies, and imperfect reasoning, we won't be able to accept that there are many grey areas where decisions could go- and be legitimate- either way. You and I may decide what is Right (or Left) for us, but if we refuse to listen to another's explanation or justification for his opinions, we lose any chance of, if not agreeing, at least understanding. And until there is understanding, with some willingness to modify our own opinions toward a solution, there is absolutely no chance of building a bridge across the chasm.