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: GST who wrote (109778)	8/4/2003 7:58:14 AM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Unable to continue a debate you resort to personal attack. And what a personal charge for you of all people to make: ..inclination to spread disinformation... If you'd like to see real disinformation, check out your own posts on this thread: 1) Message 19137751 We intentionally bombed the Chinese embassy -- I think is was the wrong thing to do, but it was no accident. 2) Message 19138164 To intentionally bomb an embassy is to intentionally attack a country on its own soil. That is what we did to China. 3) Message 19139754 ...It was not an accident. I have multiple sources on the US side... 4) Message 19149983 If we did hit their embassy on purpose (and I know of no conclusive information one way or the other, ... I will never know if it was intentional..

To: GST who wrote (109778)	8/4/2003 8:32:39 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"Al Qaida is our primary threat. Iraq has nothing to do with al Qaida. Other countries, like Saudi Arabia, are hotbeds of al Qaida." Actually i agree with the first sentence. Second sentence is a bit strong--I think that after(not before) 9/11 it became quite clear to all of the malevolent arabs who are arrayed against us(not all arabs) that there was great opportunity in seizing and moment by working together thru a combination of terrorism and other means IF the US sat idly by like it did for the most part under clinton. The Afgan war was our first answer striking the terrorist base and the iraqi war followed up by taking out a non-islamist totalitarian regime who with wmds, could cause havoc in the region. Also the leverage gained against what was clearly a new Saudi enemy thru the defeat of iraq, was not to be underestimated. Now you say we should focus on al quaida and i agree. You say saudi arabia and i would add afgan border areas and Pakistan border areas too, not to mention al quaida in iran. What would you do right now GST? The threat level is high now with bin and the boys complaining mightily about military tribunals. Take a sec and tell me what you would do now? Then perhaps we could all get out of the name calling mode and look at next steps without the rancor. Just a thought. mike