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: i-node who wrote (205097)	10/4/2004 11:07:37 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573432

"Kerry doesn't address the obvious follow up," You keep missing the important point. and you can prove to the world that you did* it for legitimate reasons.* Now 'did' is past tense. It implies the action was already carried out. There is nothing in that phrase that implies permission of other countries was being sought. However, it does imply that, for example, if you say you are going to perform a certain action because there are weapons of mass destruction, there better actually be said weapons. Else you come off as a liar who can't be trusted...

To: i-node who wrote (205097)	10/4/2004 11:07:57 PM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573432

>Oh. Glad you have that all worked out. Unfortunately, it is totally inconsistent with what he said: We continue to read it completely differently. "where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons." >Kerry doesn't address the obvious follow up, "What do you do if some people of the world (e.g., France, Russia, Germany) don't see things quite your way?" It wasn't asked, though it'd certainly have been a fair question. >How stupid would that be? Well, if you're a decent debater instead of a moron (GWB, not you), you explain the situation better... >I get it. You [and Kerry] would deny our troops the support they need because you don't think there should be tax cuts to improve the economy. I don't remember the last time I beat my wife. >You guys really support our troops. I want 'em to come home (or in the case of my friend Ryan, not to leave for Mosul in five days)... that's support to me. >You're all so two-faced I don't know how you tolerate yourselves. I have mirrors on opposite sides of my room. Ted, John, Al? How do you tolerate yourselves? -Z

To: i-node who wrote (205097)	10/5/2004 10:43:48 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573432

You are completely misinterpreting the quote about the "Global Test". Use some objectivity in analyzing it, and you'll see the following: Oh. Glad you have that all worked out. Unfortunately, it is totally inconsistent with what he said: "But if and when you do it, Jim, you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons." Kerry doesn't address the obvious follow up, "What do you do if some people of the world (e.g., France, Russia, Germany) don't see things quite your way?" In regard to US military action abroad, he says 1. Your countrymen (that's US citizens) should understand why are you are taking action. Yuo don't disagree with this, do you? And he says 2. After the fact (after the US military action is taken) the US should be able to demonstrate it was taken for legitimate reasons. There is nothing in that quote that says the US should get approval from anyone or anything before taking action. It does say after the US has done something, it should be able to explain itself. The quote doesn't even seem controversial if looked at objectively. If looked at through GOP spin, of course it can be made to sound anyway they want. Don't fall for the GOP propaganda - make up your own mind. How did you decide that that quote implied Kerry would let objections from Chirac outweigh his own decisions?? Elroy