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: FaultLine who wrote (130744)	4/30/2004 8:50:41 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

You're right, this is a very talented thread and there's no sense in ruining it by infighting with childish posts. I confess to being guilty for reasons which seemed persuasive at the time and which, unfortunately, I can no longer recall. Now, with regard to Neo's independent thoughts....... Just joking. I won't be the one to lower the level of discourse on this thread and Neocon has posted several thought-provoking and informative posts.

To: FaultLine who wrote (130744)	4/30/2004 11:20:34 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi FaultLine; Re: "I'm afraid you understand nothing. Neocon has a long and distinguished history of contributions here on the Foreign Affairs Discussion Group." Let me try and rephrase cnyndwllr's comment in a way that better explains what I think his point is. Neocon's statement was: "Trusting no one is not a matter of thinking for yourself, but of the cessation of thought." #reply-20080764 In other words, Neocon believes that it is impossible to think if one fails to trust anyone. So for Neocon to claim to be a sentient being implies that he trusts someone. Neocon makes it clear that among the people he trust is included the politicians currently in power in the White House. From here, it is quite natural to conclude that Neocon would have a "blind adherence to the Bush party line". After all, Neocon trusts Bush, so why should there be any distinction between Neocon's beliefs and those that Bush is supposed to believe? If someone has access to a Neocon post where he has disagreed with or failed to believe Bush, I'd love to see it. Now consider the problem with having a logical discussion with someone who "trusts Bush". Neocon has already stated that in the absence of trusting someone, he will turn essentially into a vegetable, unable to think. Therefore, it is only possible to agree with Neocon if you also believe in Bush. In short, Neocon is a believer, and he believed every fantasy that Bush brought to this sorry war. Neocon believed in WMDs. You want posts? He believed that the Iraqi people would welcome us. He believed that Iraq's oil would pay for the war. He believed that the war would remake the Middle East. He believed that our troop level would be down to 30,000 by late 2003. He believed that killing Saddam's sons would decrease the guerilla war. He believed that finding Saddam would cause the insurrection to die down. He believed that the Shiites wouldn't rise up against us. He believed that Syria and Iran would be so cowed that they wouldn't allow their citizens to cross the border and hunt our troops down. He believed that France and Germany and all the other countries that begged Bush not to start this madness would end up begging for scraps of Iraqi reconstruction contracts that now go uncompleted due to violence. He believed that the US would convince the UNSC to vote for a war. He believed that Turkey would let our troops invade Iraq from Turkish soil. He believed that Iraqi soldiers would surrender en mass and turn in their weapons. He believed that we would improve the economy in Iraq. He believed that Iraqis would luv the US more than France or Russia. He believed that Chalabi would be welcomed with open arms by the Iraqis. (Note that one of Saddam's old generals is now parading around Falloujah, wearing his old uniform, waving the old Iraqi flag, and is being treated as a hero.) He believed that the gas generator was a mobile biological weapons factory. He believed that Saddam was killed in any of several American air strikes. The list goes on. In short, Neocon is a "believer", and it is impossible to argue with believers. They just believe. But I found Neocon's explanation for his belief to be particularly insightful: "Trusting no one is not a matter of thinking for yourself, but of the cessation of thought." There are circumstances when a man's ability to distinguish between hopes, dreams, fears, and reality is all that keeps him alive. The Bush presidency is not one of these. Bush can believe pretty much whatever he wants, and Bush will remain alive and President of this country. Our soldiers in Iraq are not offered that sort of philosophical leeway by this cruel world. Neither was cnyndwller in Vietnam. Sure it is possible to stay alive by being lucky, but being very careful about the difference between truth and fantasy is a lot easier than luck. I, like cnyndwllr, also trust no one. -- Carl