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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (29526)	2/14/2004 7:27:46 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793955

Dems might offer up something limp-wristed as an alternative. Karen, it's pretty obvious that the Dem FA program will boil down to "cut and run." They are willing to "Pancho Villa" Al Qaeda, but not willing to go after the states that are sponsoring them. A Dem victory will be viewed in the Arab States as a victory of Islam.

To: Lane3 who wrote (29526)	2/14/2004 10:43:52 AM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 793955

"I submit that at the core is making us a less attractive target. " Karen, Read brooks op ed NYT today. You are right and what have done and are doing in both afghanistan and iraq have weakened al quaeda even to the point of them backing away from iraq if a popular regime is in place. The notes from the al quaeda leader in iraq say that the US is not the paper tiger they expected to face after 9/11 and i think that gives al quaeda pause in attacking US again. Perhaps all the warnings are just psych warfare designed to weaken resolve over time. Having said all of that, i agree with you that we have not gone far enough in securing the homeland. "The best defense is a good offense" doesnt hack it over the long term whether in the war on terror or in the Super bowl. Mike