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: Road Walker who wrote (192112)	6/28/2004 6:30:29 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1587524

JF, I don't know the answer. Bush doesn't know the answer. And Kerry probably doesn't know the answer. So it's silly to kick it around as a litmus test for a candidate. Of course, we all "know" that what Bush is doing isn't working. Better for Bush to have done nothing? It seems so if Clinton is being used as a "model" for dealing with Korea. Anyway, I brought the question up to AS because he's acting like Kerry has the perfect solution to every problem regarding foreign policy. It wasn't meant to stir intelligent debate, because with him, that's not possible. Tenchusatsu

To: Road Walker who wrote (192112)	6/29/2004 3:23:07 AM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 1587524

John, The reality, as I see it, is that there isn't a good solution for NK. Invade? I don't think you would support that, I know I wouldn't. It's one of the few countries where political and economic isolation from the world community doesn't seem to work, even in the long term. Popular uprising? I doubt it. If you read this thread over time, you would find 10 opinions opposing (and of course ridiculing) what Bush was saying and doing at the time. Nevermind that the 10 opinions may contradict each other, differ more from each other than from Bush's policy vs. N. Korea... Basically, the rule is, if Bush is doing it, it is wrong. Joe