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: Ilaine who wrote (72320)	9/21/2004 1:17:09 PM
From: Sig	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793897

Nice thoughts and wish it could happen, but..... We would lose all markets for Coke and Jeans, for drugs and cotton, for feed stocks and military hardware. Some American companies have factories in hundreds of foreign countries And we would lose the money from foreign students who come to our universities, and lose the chance to teach them advantages of democratic government or how to implement changes when they return home. But the world could use a leader. Not a softie who would get walked upon or dismissed , but a man to set a direction based upon human rights to liberty and justice. To apply a firm hand when countries take a wrong turn with genocide, support of terrorists , or development of banned weapons. Kofi Annan would not qualify. A Muslim cleric would not qualify. Even the Pope would not qualify. How about Chirac, or Putin, or Tony Blair? Whatever the choice it would not be unanimous. And the job, from the American standpoint, would have to protect the US economy which seems , apart from Japan, to be the only nation with enough money/funding to do an effective job. Would Chirac do that? When voting in this election, consider which contender has the best potential as a world leader since there may be some hellish times ahead unless the Muslims change their attitude about destroying us non-believers. Sig

To: Ilaine who wrote (72320)	9/21/2004 1:37:35 PM
From: KyrosL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793897

The US spends about 0.1% of its GDP for foreign aid, which comes to around $11 billion per year. Of this Israel gets $4 billion and Egypt gets $2 billion (the price we paid at Camp David to get the peace treaty between them). If we cut off the remaining $5 billion, we will save enough money in a year to pay for about 3 weeks of Iraq war costs (Iraq costs roughly $90 billion a year). ncpa.org

To: Ilaine who wrote (72320)	9/21/2004 1:42:04 PM
From: Bridge Player	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793897

Well, there are certain parts of it that are pretty appealing :)) Like the cessation of foreign aid to those nations whose foreign policy opposes us. Seriously. And by the way, why the hell are we spending so much money supporting Israel? I thought they were big boys now, fully capable of supporting themselves. Allies or not. But I do believe that withdrawal from Iraq now would be a devastating mistake. Continued presence in the ME is essential to ever realize the Bush vision.