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 : Dutch Central Bank Sale Announcement Imminent? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_urchin who wrote (21685)	9/30/2004 11:44:07 PM
From: The Wharf	Respond to of 81091

>>Unfortunately, I have to go to bed early so I won't be able to see the debate. I thought the debate was excellent. To me it appeared we are a unified nation if we have political differences. Kerry scored high no flip flop in my books. His responses were well given the flip flop most assuredly had to do with a war that he as all of us cannot turn the clock back on. Bushes responses were also excellent. Kerry's figures might not of been as accurate as should be. However world wise i believe Kerry showed he has more respect for all world leaders and would not be so quick to draw a gun. To me that is a prime point. We are in a global economy and in order continue on this course we must view the UN and International law as that which applies to the whole. The irony of the whole thing is corporate America operates in location world. If India at present has a new problem with a possible cap on outside interest and Russia is about to start manufacturing her own ag equipment isolation is not the answer for planet earth. It appeared Kerry is more understanding of the need of mutual respect being compulsory in order to be successful in world business. I was impressed it appears he has the potential for the roll of an international diplomat which i feel is very important. Phily what did you think?

To: sea_urchin who wrote (21685)	10/1/2004 2:51:28 PM
From: mcg404	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81091

Searle, Someone please explain to W how hard it is to prove a negative... From last night's debate: "And I went there [the UN] hoping that, once and for all, the free world would act in concert to get Saddam Hussein to listen to our demands. They passed the resolution that said, Disclose, disarm, or face serious consequences. I believe, when an international body speaks, it must mean what it says. Saddam Hussein had no intention of disarming. Why should he? He had 16 other resolutions and nothing took place. As a matter of fact, my opponent talks about inspectors. The facts are that he was systematically deceiving the inspectors."