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: Orcastraiter who wrote (159370)	3/21/2005 11:14:26 AM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<I'm an independant. I have no party. I'm a conservative person. I find little solice in the policies of this adminstration in the areas of fiscal or foreign affairs. I've never seen such a disregard of fiscal responsibility in my life. I've never seen a more bankrupt foreign policy. This adminstration is selling our country down the river...and those close to the adminstration are reaping huge profits...at the expense of the nation. We're being drawn, quartered and sold to the highest bidder all in the name of Jesus and Corporatisim. It's uncanny that this nation sits back and lets it all happen.> Well said.

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (159370)	3/21/2005 11:43:47 AM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Orca, your post is an example of the kind of well articulated, sensible and perceptive thinking that will get you ignored by more and more of the true believers. They can only see the rear end of the big ass in front of them. Remember, never get between the flock and their path over the cliff. g. Excellent post. Ed

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (159370)	3/21/2005 2:48:41 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

I am, and I was against removing Saddam with a military invasion. I was for the military build up and increasing readiness. I was for the continued demand that weapons inspectors be given free and unfettered access In short, you are for military threats, just so long as the threat is empty. You seem to think that the other players on the board are so stupid that they can't tell the difference between a real threat and an empty threat. Well they can. And precisely because GW Bush has shown himself ready to do more than bluster, we had Libya flip, and Saudi Arabia and Egypt starting reforms, and Lebanon rise against Syria; in short the entire frozen Arab political scene, where for fifty years dictatorships passed from father to son, is now thawing. Because they can see this guy means business. None of this would have happened after a "military build up" that was an empty threat. Just the opposite would have happened. The idea of America the paper tiger, America that looks strong but can't take any casualties at all, the idea that had been growing since 1983, the idea that inspired OBL, would have been proved right yet again. To me, that is so obvious that the course you still seriously propose seems ludicrously unrealistic. What a load of Rushlimbaugvian horse manure. Saddam had Zarqawi and Nidal on the payroll? Saddam trained terrorists at Salman Pak? Saddam aided AQ with poison gas training? Yes, yes and yes. What do you think Zarqawi and Abu Nidal were doing in Baghdad, vacationing? Why was there a Boeing 707 at Salman Pak? The Iraqis tried to explain it was for counter-terrorism, but the UN inspectors didn't buy that idea. I did not read these things from 'right-wing nutjobs' but from David Kay and Ken Pollack, and others on the UNMOVIC team. Islam is not a danger to the US. The danger comes from fundamentalist crazy Islamists. We do not need an ideological answer to Islam. As for Arab dictatorships, if you wish to eliminate them...you need to stop coddling and favoring them. They exist simply because it has been expediant to keep them in power. Islamism is very different from Islam, do you understand the difference? Islamism is the fundamentalist political movement. As for Arab dictatorships, now you are forgetting the power of oil to keep the most dysfunctional governments solvent and in power. The Arab dictators stayed in power because the US said 'we don't care what you do, just pump the oil'. But now the policy is different; it takes US pressure to allow an opening for reform in the Arab world. Because a government that has oil money doesn't have to be accountable to anybody.