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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: James Calladine who wrote (32672)	8/10/2005 12:41:28 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 361137

I have responded to most of these questions at length but will happily summarize for you: "-- the Iraq war -- the Administration -- torture of prisoners -- immense deficit spending -- anything else "The Iraq war:" I was protesting the sanctions for years as a lone wolf howling at the moon. It was wrong because it targeted innocents. Albright recognized this when she said she thought it was worth it if half a million children under the age of five would be denied basic medical and nutrition and died as a result. I detested Saddam and was really happy when the true enemy of the region became our target. I was never a believer that we were in immediate danger from anything Saddam and his regime could do in 2002-2003. I did, however, believe that he was biding his time until the sanctions could be whittled away and around (which was happening). Now we are in for it. Because if any of the major extremist interests in Iraq is allowed to conquer the others it will be a blood bath that will make our war with Iraq look like children playing in the sprinklers. If that is allowed to happen the victor will take the wealth of the world to create a super power with us in its cross hairs. Given modern resources this could occurr in less than a decade. The administration: I didn't vote for them and believe we can move to change and renew our situation with diligent effort that is reasoned and constructive. I believe the American people will rally more around innovative solutions than comments about Bush's drinking addiction. Torture: I have argued unflinchingly against any use of torture or excuse for torture. On right wing threads I have engaged in very heated debates in which I declared my position to be this. "If I could save the entire human race by torturing one person, I would not do it nor would I ever condone it." immense deficit spending: I don't get it and don't feel that I have a qualified position. "-- anything else" Everything else is just fine.

To: James Calladine who wrote (32672)	8/10/2005 1:03:17 PM
From: Skywatcher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361137

Support Our Troops: Call a Truce in America’s Drug War by Arianna Huffington The war in Iraq is coming home in cruel and painful ways. It’s almost impossible to find even a tarnished silver lining amidst the suffering, but Tony Newman of the Drug Policy Alliance raises the interesting possibility that something good might come out of it -- if our elected officials are forced to rethink our nation’s disastrous war on drugs. More and more soldiers coming home from Iraq are developing mental health problems (a recent study by the Army’s Surgeon General put the number at 30 percent). Already nearly 25,000 Iraq and Afghanistan vets have been diagnosed with psychological ailments. Because of the nature of the fighting in Iraq -- constant threats, hard to discern enemy, ambiguous goals -- experts expect that number to continue to rise. And soldiers suffering from such problems are known to have higher rates of substance abuse. So how will we respond when the young men and women we sent to stamp out Saddam’s WMD...uh, I mean, bring democracy to the people of Iraq... start getting busted for taking to drugs to deal with their troubles? Will we “stay the course” and do what we’ve being doing for decades (a failed strategy that has our prisons bursting at the seams, with around half-a-million people doing time on drug charges)? Or will we finally come to our senses and start dealing with nonviolent drug use as a medical problem not a criminal one? Will the Bush administration really “support our troops” -- or is that just a feel-good slogan to trot out at campaign rallies? So far, despite the supplemental funding measure just passed by Congress, vets across the country still report having to wait months or even years to receive the treatment they need for mental disorders and drug problems. Plus, as Mark Benjamin wrote in Salon Tuesday, the financially motivated review of 72,000 vets who have been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder isn’t exactly a show of “support” to vets haunted by the memory of war. It’s so much easier to slap a bumper sticker on a car or tie a ribbon around a tree. What needs to be done across the board on the drug war front -- move resources to treatment and rehabilitation -- needs to be done with much greater urgency when it comes to our vets. The U.S. military, for example, is sending 40 drug-addicted Iraq vets a year to a highly regarded rehab clinic in Peeblesshire, Scotland. The chairman of the clinic painted an evocative picture of the troops he’s treating: “They are being sent to all the corners of Iraq and are falling to pieces when they get back to base.” But this is a drop in the bucket. Here in California, Nicole Parra, a State Assembly member, has introduced legislation that could be a model across the country. It authorizes judges to refer veterans diagnosed with post-traumatic stress and convicted of a crime -- including drug offenses -- to treatment programs instead of jail. The legislation itself simply extends a 1982 law designed to help Vietnam vets to include soldiers who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan. But what is promising is that it was introduced by Parra, who has traditionally been something of a drug warrior. It’s not exactly Nixon going to China but it is indicative of a subtle shift in the political and cultural wind. Noting that so many Iraq vets are coming home psychologically damaged, Parra says: “The question then becomes, do you incarcerate a soldier with a mental illness if they commit a crime or do you treat them so it doesn’t happen again. I say you treat them.” It’s a rationale that could serve as the starting point for a new way of approaching not just our Iraq vets but the entire war on drugs. © 2005 Huffington Post