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: Maurice Winn who wrote (136515)	6/13/2004 6:56:43 PM
From: Andrew N. Cothran	Respond to of 281500

Maurice: Unfortunately, all of us at some time or another are guilty of wishing that the world conformed more closely to our particular views of what constitutes reality. I think that you are wearing a particular set of blinders that hinder you as you attempt to analyze the American political spectrum, particularly where it involves GWB. Unlike Kerry, GWB knows the limits of so-called world government, particularly as it is espoused by the current United Nations and its ardent and not so ardent supporters. GWB is committed to maintaining American strength in a dangerous world intent on limiting and circumscribing that strength. GWB'S concern is for his country and its people. He is not about to limit America's strength by subordinating its exercise in defense of freedom and on behalf of national security to a world body still under the veto power of Chirac's France and others of his ilk. If Kerry continues to advocate a closer alliance of America's power with the United Nation's weakness,(in reality an abdication of national responsibility) he will find an American electorate flocking to the tents of GWB. If this happens, come November, the outcome of the election will not be close.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (136515)	6/13/2004 7:34:47 PM
From: Sig	Respond to of 281500

<<A good definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. Unless the USA goes for Empire, which makes the foundations of the American war of Independence looks dodgy, we will continue to operate on the Arabian Nights version of geopolitical relationships. Alliances and foreign adventure will be perpetual. Such alliances and competition for power led to WWI. >>> I dont see much to take the place of alliances, even if the UN was more effective, it would still be an alliance of sorts. No big wars for a long time as a result of those. Needed for business. We support S Korea and Taiwan. And the US is not doing the same thing over and over again, so history is not repeating. Most of the complaints have come about because we are doing things different each day. We ignore the UN, and then return to get their approval or backing of the Iraqi government. We power into Fallugha , and then move back out again to let the Iraqis handle it. We plan to reduce troops in Iraq, and then when circumstances change, we send more. If anything is done about N Korea or Iran, it will be unique and fitted to the task or end result. Sig

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (136515)	6/13/2004 7:37:10 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

Mq, whatever you say about US policy for the last three years, it is definitely different from the preceding forty. Very different.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (136515)	6/14/2004 12:01:52 AM
From: KLP	Respond to of 281500

Clinton wanted One World Order. Still does, I think. We were attacked because the Islamic fascists felt we were weak, and wouldn't attack more than a camel and tent or two. After all, they were used to that response for 8 years. What do you think will happen when Iran continues to gather nuclear strength, and sells it to A-Q and other terrorist groups around the world? What will NZ do? What do you think the US should do?