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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (574963)	5/13/2004 3:48:06 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

C'mon Tom. The government representatives haven't and wont comment on 99.9% of the things happening under its umbrella until, for what ever reason, it becomes a public issue. We would need 100 million cable stations operating 24/7 to cover everything. There is a basic rule in correcting bad things. And that is what do we do to put things on track without creating new problems in the process. Usually that is the method that is the least restrictive and the least intrusive, while still being effective. Not every problem needs an intervention at all. If someone is misbehaving you have to look at the circumstance. Is it aggressive behavior, disruptive behavior, annoying behavior, innapropriate behavior or what. Each circumstance is different. For example, if you are riding an elevator and someone picks their nose, what do you do? Well... There is a good chance that the person did it without thinking. Most people will just ignore it. Why? Because the problem is gone with the booger. Nothing to correct or improve. However, if you reem the guy out, you make provoke him into a confrontation where he points out some personal flaw you have. Maybe his date is on the elevator, so he has an ego to protect. He has to prove he can stand up to you and defeat you... and so it escalates into something that is way more of a problem than getting over the sight of him picking and flicking. However: If he originally picked and flicked AT YOU, then he was aggressing. He had a reason to aggress against you and if you ignore that, there will be further aggression against you and probably at a more severe level. Why? because aggression has a goal that requires a response from you. Same with disruptive behavior. If soldiers are misbehaving and we can stop the behavior without involving people outside the event or outside the system, then we correct the problem and prevent other more serious problems from occuring. In this case the behavior of the soldiers was an unacceptable aggression against the detainies and a violation of military policy and American principles. If this could have been handled at the site, corrected, and the mission continued on track according to policy without outside involvement that would have been much better. It wasn't and probably couldn't be, since the detainees were people from outside the system. When it became public fat to chew a new problem arises. Now we have to decide individually, as a nation, and internationally whether the noble identity of the USA is worthy of its reputation. I think it is even though there are some bad apples here and there. We are currently investigating the 4 month period you are complaining about. I see no reason to have made a proclamation to the world 4 months ago or now, to correct the conditions in the prisons. Correct the problem by changing the behavior of the soldiers, deal justly with the harmed detainees and move on in a more responsible manner. However, since the world news is carrying the issue a response from our official representatives in required.