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: Elroy who wrote (205618)	10/7/2004 4:57:15 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1578245

Cheney's saying the same stuff, with little detail. Who are they planning to attack next?? CHENEY: I'm saying specifically that I don't believe he has the qualities we need in a commander in chief because I don't think, based on his record, that he would pursue the kind of aggressive policies that need to be pursued if we're going to defeat these terrorists. What aggressive policies are these guys planning?

To: Elroy who wrote (205618)	10/8/2004 2:21:41 AM
From: beach_bum	Respond to of 1578245

”Well if you buy into the freedom idea, it is required. The regime in Saudi takes more of the oil revenues than their % proportion of the general population, and they are all one family as opposed to the most deserving group of people. That's fundamentally wrong, if you buy into the idea of "all men created equal", etc.” Don’t forget that we are talking about what I think the govt is trying to do (as opposed to what my idea and approach would be) and BTW, I buy into the idea of “all men and women are created equal ?” ”Also, autocratic, non-representative regimes only reform in order to hang onto power, they don't do so (in general) because its good for their population. Therefore, they should be given a chance to reform, and if they fail to do so in a reasonable time period should be forcibly removed.” I agree. ”There are thousands of US military personel who's job it is to manage that type of thing. You don't think they have any capability to do a better job than the current adminstration did?? If you think George's handling of the post major combat situation in Iraq was the best the US can possibly do, then your estimation of the US's ability is much, much too low.” We are talking two different things here. You are talking about how Bush screwed up the management during those 6 months. I am saying that, even if he had managed better, we would not have succeeded, given the premise on which we entered the war. The screwups started long before removing Saddam from power. ”This (about things mostly about oil/economy) is nonsense. Are you European? The "Iraq war is all about oil" idea is the stupidest thing I have heard from more people than I can believe, mainly the Europeans.” I noticed that you translated my “this is mostly about economy” to “this is all about oil”. No, I am American. However, I have lived and traveled to Asia, Europa and Africa and middle east (Israel mainly) a lot, so my views are certainly shaped and influenced by international viewpoint. Some of my views about oil/economy are also formed by talking to sibling/close friend, working at Kellogg Brown and other oil companies. ”If the Iraq war was primarily about oil, Saudi still makes infinitely more sense than Iraq!” Attacking Saudi makes lot less sense than Iraq, because we already have the Saudis (and Kuwaitis) on our side, as far as having a voice in OPEC is concerned - that got accomplished in 1991 war. Attacking Iraq and instilling a friendly govertment there, would be a further step in that direction of having more control in the oil economy. If ‘freedom around the world’ was indeed more important that ‘improving our economy and protecting our lifestyle’, how do you explain that we are trying to oust a democratically elected leader, Chavez, in Venezuala ? Hint : Think Oil. ”I believe that food, shelter and freedom are natural desires of every person on the planet, probably in that order. Just because some people give away their freedom for food (hookers come to mind), doesn't mean they don't want their freedom.” Sure, we want all. But we have priorities too and an obsession for freedom comes at an expense of more basic needs for a incredibly large human population and us. Beside if we try to instill a freely elected govt, we are not going to like a lot of democratically elected leader in the middle east. Bum.