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 : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kodiak_bull who wrote (21862)	10/13/2004 3:20:29 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

Yes, the draft possibility is a scare tactic. So is the possibilty of another preemptive attack. So is the possibility of another terrorist attack on American soil. So is the possibility of N. Korea or Iran securing more nuclear capacity. So is the possibility of more Americans suffering lost jobs and health care coverage. They're all scare tactics and they're all being used for partisan political purposes. Once you concede that the need for a draft is a genuine possibility then the difference in foreign policy principles of the two candidates makes that issue timely. You can argue that the Democrats have overreached in terms of whether the Bush policies will lead to a draft as opposed to whether the Bush team is planning a draft, but you can't argue the legitamacy of raising the issue. And it does help the Democratic ticket. That's why they raise it. Is that wrong?