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: Ilaine who wrote (122698)	1/3/2004 1:33:11 AM
From: GST	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

<Using force to save innocent lives is moral.> What makes you think we are saving innocent lives?

To: Ilaine who wrote (122698)	1/3/2004 8:54:00 AM
From: boris_a	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

everything else is details. No. Applying force according to rules (proportionality, no double standards, ...) is the main civilisatoric achievement and not a detail. BTW, I'm curious about how applying force against suicide attackers. This spreading phenomenon needs deeper reflection.

To: Ilaine who wrote (122698)	1/3/2004 1:38:10 PM
From: LarsA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

OT: Cobalt, "Using force to save innocent lives is moral. Evading that responsibility is immoral." - that's a great motto for a health care system like they have in most other industrialized countries. Put all the DNA and other risk factors in one pool. Cheaper that way too. Lars

To: Ilaine who wrote (122698)	1/3/2004 5:17:40 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 281500

<<Once you accept and admit that sometimes you have to use force to repel force, everything else is details.>> Outstanding!!

To: Ilaine who wrote (122698)	1/3/2004 6:35:38 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

News Guarantees nytimes.com [ People who engaged in massive coprophagia followed by extensive dutiful regurgitation on the WMD war marketeering front should perhaps be careful of accusing others of "flinging excrement". Not that anybody ever claimed that Iraq was an "imminent threat" or anything, snort. Anyway, more than one source seems to have picked up on this one. ] Suppose you're a television pundit and you believe something in particular is going to happen. No, you really believe that thing is going to happen. There's only one attention-grabbing method left to convey your conviction: promise that, if wrong, you'll do something utterly ... In March, Bill O'Reilly, shouting head for Fox News, demonstrated his absolute certainty that Americans would find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq by declaring on “Good Morning America,” If the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it’s clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush administration again” (Nine months later, with no evidence of weapons of mass destruction, the nation is still waiting for O’Reilly’s apology ) . . .

To: Ilaine who wrote (122698)	1/4/2004 2:53:52 AM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<thumping your chest and flinging excrement...> Bravo! What wonderful imagery! A new and creative insult makes my day. It's so boring for Nadine to, once again, call me a fascist, coward, and traitor. Thanks. Chimpanzees share 98.5% of their genome with us. When establishing their dominance hierarchies, they will frequently throw things at each other. Usually rocks or sticks. Throwing things is a very effective way to win an argument among chimpanzees. Chest-thumping, on the other hand, doesn't impress anyone, not even juvenile females. Males throw things a lot more than females. But, since they have a horror of touching feces, they won't fling excrement, although it probably would be an effective missile. Of course, being an evolved ape, I could just put on gloves...