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: TimF who wrote (124311)	2/7/2004 1:35:45 AM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi twfowler; Re: "... the war back in the 90s never really ended." This is the kind of word weaseling that any nation and any leader can always find at any time and use it to justify anything. No, the war in 1990 ended. To start another war, Bush had to fake the intelligence evidence to scare Congress into giving him a green light to start a war. He then had to order hundreds of thousands of troops to the Middle East. It took a lot of effort to begin the war. One would never mistake this for a continuation of a war that began in 1990. With your logic, it would be perfectly justified for the North Koreans to attack us across the DMZ in Korea because that war wasn't over. Or for the Vietnamese to sink our ships in the Pacific because the Vietnam war didn't end. Or whatever. Lawyers can always come up with words to justify anything that their clients want. What international relations boil down to is that he who has the guns makes the rules. The US has guns, but we do not have *all* the guns. We can influence the rules, but we can not make them up out of whole cloth. On the other hand, I'd love to see Bush stand up in a debate and argue that his disastrous Iraq war wasn't his fault because his dad was the one who really started it, LOL. -- Carl