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 (117139)	10/18/2003 1:57:59 PM
From: marcos	Respond to of 281500

'The "game" analogy is not designed, nor intended, to define the strategy I opine is currently being implemented by the Bush administration.' Very well, that's probably good, as it looks like it won't work so well that way ... however, your subsequent sentence seems to indicate otherwise, that there are 'opponents' readily identifiable to, and agreed upon by, all observers - 'But what is key is NOT to permit your opponents to impose their own anarchic and militant "rules" on the "playing field".' .. which two supposition is not mutually accepted by the Rest of Us, in the way your coach is using them to to justify his control by a tiny group, by broad-brushing dissent regarding his methods as support for the other team ...... so i think maybe game analogies are only going to work when viewed in perspective - we have to agree on a great deal before we even can determine what game is being played, a very necessary basis since, as you will readily appreciate, even the chess queen with all her move capability intact will have a rather difficult time resisting the offensive of the shot-put So we need a place where we can work out all these things, figure out who are our friends, who our enemies, and get a more healthily cooperative spirit going among the species by shifting total control out of the back rooms of Washington ...... eh On one specific point in your previous post, that occupation and reconstruction costs in Iraq be in the form of grants not loans, i agree with you completely - having occupied a sovereign nation, the US has taken to itself a responsibility ... he who calls the tune pays the piper, the optics of any grab of future iraqi oil revenue would guarantee failure of positive goals, only a government installed by iraqis can legitimately sign for iraqi oil ..... cheers [edit] - here is a major point on which we disagree - 'But it's a war, nonetheless' - #reply-19414011 It's not a war, and it's not in our interests to call it war .... the WTC et al attacks were crimes, large crimes and deadly to be sure, but they were not war, and there is no point in elevating demented criminals to the status of warriors, especially considering that doing so augments their own use of the adjective 'holy'