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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (190129)	6/9/2004 4:32:06 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1576790

I can't imagine what you think is going well right now in the world of terrorism. While the fundamental difference is that you're an extremist liberal and I'm more moderate, there is a specific difference in perspective between us. I know that it appears to you that I am an extremist but I might argue that our backgrounds are very different, that your exposure to extremists is somewhat limited and that in the grand scheme of things, I am not that liberal.....except from your narrow perspective. For an example, opposing the subsidizing of Israel at a cost of $4.2 billion per year normally would be a conservative's POV.......however, you label it liberal because it runs very counter to your position. Nation building is a liberal tenet that's been hijacked by Bush. Just because that's happened does not make nation building suddenly a conservative ideal. Unfortunately, people have a simplistic grasp of the political spectrum that's often based on misconception rather than fact. I look at the long-term trend. You look at where we are instantaneously. I understand that you do......and to a degree, I do too. However, once again, I have a conservative's take on the issue. I don't think its worth spending $300-500 billion to create a democracy in Iraq. I have felt that way from the get go. Nation building is too costly and too problematical to risk so much money IMO. Please note that I am not discussing the removal of a threat to our well being because Saddam was not a threat to our well being. My view is that the war on terror will take several years, and you can't discern useful information by looking at a given month or even a given few months. There will be ups and downs, but it is clear that the overall trend is positive. No, that is not clear. Forgetting Iraq for the moment, al Qa'ida/terrorist activity has started to increase despite the fact we have for nearly three years tried to tie down the Taliban and OBL. Foreign policy professionals believe the war in Iraq is a fertile training ground for up and coming terrorists and has turned into a fundraising bonanza for OBL. I agree with them. Iraq is moving toward its own government and its own security. It takes a little time, that's what matters. Its not clear Iraq is moving forward.......its simply your optimistic and somewhat biased hope. As to the war on terror, you say "we have terrorist incidents" but WE really don't. WE haven't had one in the United States in 3 years. I'm good with that. Sure, Iraq is a dangerous place. Sure, terrorists are going to attack where they see weakness (Spain) because they can't hit us here. But these are simply signs that the war on terror is working. I'm afraid I don't agree.......there is a bigger picture here; one which is beginning to pull in more and more of the Muslim world. Its too bad you don't see that.......because that's what has me most concerned. Its very easy to envision a conflict between the US and Islam much like the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.........a conflict where much like the Israelis we have very little chance of winning. There are alternatives to standing army fighting....I want those alternatives explored because I am convinced they are the best way to fight terrorism. I am so sure I am right that I will do whatever I can legally to stop you all.

To: i-node who wrote (190129)	6/10/2004 8:36:14 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576790

But these are simply signs that the war on terror is working. Powell seems to disagree with you...so did Rumsfeld the other day. Dream weaver... Al ==================================================== US Corrects Terrorism Report, Says Attacks Went Up Thu Jun 10, 5:22 PM ET Add U.S. National - Reuters to My Yahoo! By Arshad Mohammed WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The State Department said on Thursday its April 29 report that the number of international "terrorist" attacks and resulting deaths fell last year was wrong and both figures had in fact risen. Reuters Photo The admission dented the claim by some U.S. officials that the report provided evidence that Washington was winning the "war on terrorism," whose success is critical to President Bush (news - web sites)'s reelection strategy. The department's "Patterns of Global Terrorism Report" said "terrorist" attacks fell to 190 last year, their lowest since 1969, from 198 in 2002. It also said those killed dropped to 307, including 35 U.S. citizens, from 725 in 2002, including 27 Americans. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said both totals were understated because of errors in compiling the data by the Terrorist Threat Integration Center. The interagency group was set up last year to address the failure of U.S. intelligence agencies to uncover the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in advance. Boucher told reporters the terrorism experts appeared to have made a series of mistakes, failing to count attacks for the full year and possibly misinterpreting the definition of such attacks to exclude incidents included in the past. "The data in the report are incomplete and in some cases incorrect," he said, admitting his department failed to catch the mistakes. "We got the wrong data and we didn't check it enough ... That's the simplest explanation for what happened." Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) said he was "very disturbed" that errors had made it into the report but denied the numbers were manipulated for political benefit. When the report was released, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage said it provided "clear evidence that we are prevailing in the fight" while State Department coordinator for counterterrorism Cofer Black hailed its "good news." Boucher said the department learned of the report's errors in the first week of May and began an investigation. He said a May 17 letter from Rep. Henry Waxman, a California Democrat and frequent critic of the administration, spurred its efforts. He said the State Department asked the Terrorist Threat Integration Center to review the numbers. Preliminary indications were that it would show a sharp increase over the previous year in incidents and resulting deaths. A senior State Department official later played down his remarks, saying although the number of deaths would be above 2002's level it may not be a sharp increase. One U.S. official who asked not to be named said the report's errors included a failure to count "international terrorist attacks" that occurred after Nov. 11, 2003. "I am very disturbed that there were errors in the report," Powell told reporters. "We're going to correct it." "It was a combination of errors both at the new Terrorist Threat (Integration) Center as they were transitioning into the job and building their organization and errors crept into the report that frankly we didn't catch over here," he added. Asked if the numbers were manipulated to make the administration look good, Powell said: "Of course not."