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: Neocon who wrote (152265)	11/22/2004 8:15:22 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I think you are overreacting. Keep in mind i was looking to find something that would take use of wmds off the table for both sides. Bin Laden may have every interest right now in using a nuke on us and you come up with trade sanctions by an offended world as a reason not to at least think about protecting ourselves in some way. But you cared little for the worlds view when you defend iraq policy. In retrospect, would you as some neocons continue to maintain, ivade iraq today knowing what we now know? I know i changed topics on you but the two relate in some ways. You think self defense deterrence announcement, is any worse than what the war in iraq has done to our standing in the world. One is a statement that puts the onus on others to clean up their act while the other now appears as failed policy. By the way, the weakest link in the deterrence argument is that third parties of many stripes may be incented to hit us in order to obtain that attack on moslem holy places. A poster who lurks here pointed that out to me over the weekend. That one i havent been able to refute. Hopefully all this talk is moot and we reverse iraq debacle in the next few months and continue to make progress against al quaeda as well as nuclear proliferation dangers. Mike