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: steve harris who wrote (203954)	9/25/2004 9:28:46 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575825

re: why doesn't your theory apply to Afghanistan? That shows your theory is wrong doesn't it? Because that's where the terrorist were. Sending 130K troops to get al Qaeda would have been entirely justified. Taking 1000 casualties would have been entirely justified. Swift and brutal retribution for 9/11 would have been entirely justified, and we would REALLY be safer today. Instead, Bush went to Iraq, to fulfill a long time neo fantasy. He left the guys that hit us alone, to regroup and hit us and our allies again and again. al Qaeda is the majority of terrorism. We lost the "war on terrorism" at Tora Bora, because Bush had other priorities. The neo agenda was more important to him than retribution for the victims of 9/11, and more important to him than protecting the country. The lesson is avoid ideologues, elect pragmatists. John