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 (126175)	3/14/2004 1:29:56 PM
From: NightOwl	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

*Hell, had Bush been president during WWII, GST would have been supporting Hitler and Mussolini..* Well ...it was good enough for Charles Lindbergh, Joe Kennedy, England's Crown Prince and lord knows how many others. I don't think GST would have made much difference. The interesting thing about the WWII pacifism, is that it never really went away post Pearl Harbor. Churchill was given the boot practically the day after it was over. Long before it ended, the fear of US war mongering was so great that we had people falling all over themselves to give away military secrets to Stalin purely for principle rather than cash. Pacifism, like poverty and disease will never be eliminated. Goes with the territory when you enter The Deadly Dichotomy Zone. Just be glad they are prohibited from shooting you because, like war, if it doesn't kill you... it only makes you stronger. If you think about it, in a Deadly Dichotomious way, you could argue that "making your killer instinct stronger" is it's true purpose. <Hoo><Haa><Hoo> 0\|0

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (126175)	3/14/2004 5:15:05 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

<GST would have been supporting Hitler> I would have opposed Hitler for the same reason I oppose foreign policy under Bush -- Hitler pursued a policy of unilateral invasion of sovereign states without legitimate issues of self-defense. If there is anyone in this conversation who belongs to the "Hitler camp" dear Hawk, it is you. And as for Japan, they always claimed that they only attacked in "self-defense" just as your dear friend G. Bush claims. Japan needed the resources and interpreted any threat to foreign sources of commodities to be a threat to Japan -- You, Bush, Hitler and the leaders of Japan would all fit nicely in the same foreign policy framework -- unprovoked unilateral expansionist war.