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: Mary Cluney who wrote (70912)	9/16/2004 12:32:37 PM
From: John Carragher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793771

this war is also about oil... we do not want terrorist to shut us off from mid east oil

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (70912)	9/16/2004 12:53:37 PM
From: SirWalterRalegh	Respond to of 793771

Was Iraq the right target? (Time will tell) Could we have better spent the $200 billion dollars on stopping Iran's nuclear weapons program? (Maybe Isreal will take care of this. If they don't we will. Kerry said this week that the $200B should have been spent on the inner city and SS) Do the citizens of this country (US) have the right to know that we have this plan to fight this long term war in the ME ? (The President has said all along that this WAR will take generations. It is not confined to the ME it is worldwide, where ever there are Muslims.) Should this plan be discussed? (Dan Rather stepped in front of the line.)

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (70912)	9/16/2004 12:53:43 PM
From: SBHX	Respond to of 793771

The american public clearly feels that if 200 billion is what it takes to secure the future for their children, then it is money well spent. In fact, even at a few trillion, many will wince but gladly pay up if they can be convinced it is necessary. War and diplomacy is a very interesting game. True intentions cannot be telegraphed clearly unless these are mere political games in an election year. In some cases, merely sitting down with these leaders and having frank heart to heart discussions behind closed doors can succeed, but the public will not know of these until decades later when biographies are written. What is very clear is that the most desired goal is to bring free elections in all of ME, to push equality in choice and opportunity between men and women there, to have societies where some glue other than fundamentalism and theocracies and hate can bind the fabric of their existence. Even foremost ME intellectuals have expressed this at various times. What is unfortunate is that the most desired goal is sometimes out of reach, or the price so steep that most of us are not willing to reach for it. So, we look really at choices. If you believe the true nature of the enemy is one of hatred for your very existence, and if you believe that this hate is because the very societies that forments these hate are fundamentally broken, and if you believe the numbers will continue to swell as long as they remain broken, then you try to do something to fix it. If you believe that these are mere isolated criminal acts perpetrated by misunderstood victims of american hegemony, then perhaps, you believe a more sensitive war and grouphugs is the way to peace. Or perhaps, there is a compromise in between. Either way, throughout history, every single war has always had well-intentioned critics on both sides of the fence. Where the discussion is civil, then there is a dialogue, and reasonable people can discuss this. But where it is not, then it has to be settled by an election. Bush, for all his flaws, has stated his case on Iraq clearly and whether you agree or disagree, there is no ambiguity in what he stands for. You have to at least respect someone who sticks to unpopular policies knowing that the polls are against him there. This is what Leadership requires. Kerry, on the other hand, doesn't seem to know what he wants to do there. Does he want the troops to stay? Does he want them to leave in january? Does he want them to leave in 2008? Does he want them replaced with germans and french? Until he makes up his mind, what is the public supposed to think? Is he merely formulating policy based on what his pollsters tell him people want to hear?