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: unclewest who wrote (45418)	5/19/2004 9:11:04 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793903

<<<i guess you are not interested in getting the votes of folks who have differences with the way the war has been handled.>> I think he meant "you" plural meaning pro-war Republicans. Same issue I've been raising about reaching out. About flexibility and coleagiality. They ("you") are digging for a last stand in rather than looking for ways to expand their support.

To: unclewest who wrote (45418)	5/19/2004 9:16:18 AM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 793903

Mike, You have influence me greatly. When i say your rhetoric leads to possible kerry voting, i am saying this symbolically. I am thinking of the shrill talk radio right that is so sure Bush will win, that they ignore the center and independents. My object to current policy is exactly because you have influenced me " to stop for just one moment and think about the importance of supporting our military in these trying times.." Rummy war on the cheap worked well during the war phase but it has broken down now. For a minute forget whether he should be fired, and concentrate on how troops have been left out there without the necessary tools in the current situation. Self confidence turned to arrogance and now Rummy has been McNarmaraized and will soon write a book lamenting on where he went wrong. There will be tears in a few years as well. Hubris mike is what i am opposed to here. No man or men is/are not replacable. In order to win, Bush needs to take control of his destiny and take it away from Rove and Cheney. Thats why i suggested he talk to dad. Dad knows how a son is being used. My dad has helped me over the years and now i give good advice to my son who is sometimes taken in by fast talkers. You more than anyone (again symbolically) needs to take a hard look at what other military men are saying--Peters, McCaffrey, Powell, Schwartzkopf, and General S.... who lost all influence when he opposed the way the war would be fought. I follow Peters. He has been saying these things since the beginning and he is a huge supporter of ousting saddam. Loyalty to superiors is a necessary trait for soldiers. You are a civilian now Mike and i would ask you to dispassionatley analyse what i have suggested rather than just dismiss it out of hand. We need to get Bush reelected and a large swath of the american public--libs, cons, mods and indys all think Bush operation team has not succeeded with its policies in the post war pacification effort. And many also believe that they have not changed their ways and new leadership is needed. Mike

To: unclewest who wrote (45418)	5/19/2004 11:58:45 AM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793903

unclewest, Please keep up the good work. You're a straight shooter who brings a real world perspective of combat service & military service to folks on SI. You also bring the perspective of your peers here for us which is quite helpful. IMO, this perspective is quite necessary given the WOT & the two men running for President. Given the POV of many other military personnel that I've seen posted here & on the internet, your POV seems to be pretty much in line with most of your peers. Is your POV biased? LOL! Name one person who isn't. I'd be concerned if you had a propensity to lie, intentionally distort & withhold information contrary to your POV. That doesn't seem to happen, so why should anyone be concerned? Folks seem to be asking you to change your tone because your "rhetoric leads to possible kerry voting", that you are not "reaching out", or you "are digging for a last stand in rather than looking for ways to expand their support". Well, I don't see them moderating their rhetoric one bit. Why should they feel it's perfectly fine to ask you or anyone to change theirs? I thought this was a place where folks talk about politics & let each of us decide what our rhetoric will be as time & events unfold. Did I miss something?