SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: LPS5 who wrote (7620)8/3/2004 1:41:37 PM
From: Rock_nj  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20039
 
And that simple solution would be...*drum roll*...reviewing our foreign policy decisions and adapting a less interventionist stance. By Constitutional amendment, if necessary.

I couldn't agree more, and it wouldn't require a Consititutional ammendment. Just common sense. We really are an empire in the classical sense of the word. We're more outwardly focused than we are inwardly focused.



To: LPS5 who wrote (7620)8/3/2004 2:00:04 PM
From: JBTFD  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20039
 
<<And that simple solution would be...*drum roll*...reviewing our foreign policy decisions and adapting a less interventionist stance - by Constitutional amendment, if necessary. I'm all for it.>>

That approach would require that we become more self sufficient, energy wise. IMO, that is not going to happen. In the minds of the powers that be, the oil over there is a world resource and we will take it, regardless of the price.

The difference between you (and I) and them is you are thinking as an American and they are thinking of the next stage, the "one world government" stage.



To: LPS5 who wrote (7620)8/3/2004 2:52:55 PM
From: Proud_Infidel  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 20039
 
adapting a less interventionist stance

What about situations like the Sudan? We just stand by while people are slaughtered?

The UN has proven itself ineffective.