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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Win Smith who wrote (147541)	10/11/2004 12:33:05 AM
From: Keith Feral	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Imminent threat vs. pre-emptive threat? I wish we had charts to let us knowthe difference between when our enemies said they wanted to murder our people vs. when they actually meant it. Maybe we could apply 200 day moving averages to the threat of terrorism to pinpoint the timing of their destructive actions. I doubt there is an academic professor in America that would error to the side of caution. They kicked us in the teeth. They behead Westerners in their country trying to aid the process of relief. They get elected to office for promising to stop killing more people. They doubled the price of their precious commodity in the process. We criticize our leaders for the anarchical state of affairs. We go to sleep wondering what the French think of us. We second guess the entire logic of the war in the face of our own public elections. Democracy will always divide itself to maintain decency. However, the indecent treatment of the democratic process needs to be balanced by the reality of the electoral process of this country which needs to raise money to fight the circuitous battle of elections. The concept of globalism is to create an absolute set of facts that are black and white. State supported murder through jihad and fatwas is not an acceptable set of standards for people with "deviant" religious beliefs. It is ironic how strongly all people feel about the particiaption of the US in WWII to combat the Nazis vs. how ambivalent they feel about Al Quaeda leaders that wish the destruction of non believers in the Jewish and Christian religions. Is the tyranny of Islam vs. outside religions to be accepted as a policy of global idealism? We do not accept the integration of religion and state in our society. That is not necessarily a wise decision. However, we should not let the balance of our own Constitutional rights extend to a pattern of civil disobediance that uses suicide and terrorism to challenge the security of our global society. This contradiction of idealism should be modified to allow for some discriminate use of force against radical elements of foreign countries that openly call for the murder of Western targets.