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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (451757)	9/3/2003 11:43:45 AM
From: cnyndwllr	Respond to of 769670

Jewell, that's a very thoughtful post. I have a couple of observations concerning what you wrote. First, if you are correct and the level of hatred and contempt between Westerners on one side and Arabs and Muslims on the other is rising because of the war, wasn't that predictable? Doesn't that promote an escalation of the very problem that we need to address; the problem of popularly supported terrorism? Second, if we say that "cause' like the world is dynamic," aren't we giving our political leadership a free rein to redefine their "purposes" to suit the most expedient rationales as time passes and their old rationales fail the test of reality? I think we should assess their wisdom and foresight based on how well their stated purposes and assessments comport with the actual realities as we learn them. I say that because I believe it's vitally important to have wise men with realistic assessments running this country, especially when we're going to war and we know that our men and women WILL die in the process. Finally, I disagree with the concluding paragraph. You state that: "Honoring our leaders and our nation as a group of people who’ve made good decisions to unseat a despotically criminal regime and who are trying to help the Arabs of Iraq reclaim the autonomy and dignity they rightly deserve is a noble goal." That's a mouthful but I think that you're suggesting that we should rally behind the administration and put the best possible face on this effort in Iraq. There is a good argument for doing that because it would show solidarity, present a united front and help discourage those enemies of the U.S. that are encouraged by the discord that's raging over the war in this country. There are also good arguments to support the position that we should not curb our dissent in order to aid the effort. One of the historical strengths of this country is that we argue the issues publicly and test our ideas and policies in the open. This is necessary so that the ultimate authority in America, the people, remain engaged in the issues and so that the various points of view are tested by debate. It's a necessary process that has the sometimes unintended consequence of undermining official policy when a substantial number of Americans begin to question the actions of our leaders. The alternative of beginning to stifle debate by terming it subversive, is far too scary. Where does that end? Thanks for the reply.