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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (3066)	8/28/2005 12:51:58 PM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 540985

The more the incumbents on both sides of the aisle fail in the next few years, the better the odds of a clean sweep and a new set of faces and attitudes in power in a few years. Otherwise we will just keep rehashing the same stale old SOS sandwiches, instead of actually entering the 21st century and moving forward. That other guy's comment that the challenge of our age is dismantling a totalitarian religious death cult made me wonder - at what cost? Do we destroy our economic landscape in order to save it? Is there nothing else more important on America's agenda? That kind of absurdist reductionism has justified a lot of tyranny throughout history.

To: epicure who wrote (3066)	8/28/2005 12:56:25 PM
From: coug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 540985

<<Desert Storm, imo, was absolutely justifiable->> I'm not sure about that either. Especially what Bush 1 had April Glaspe <sp> tell Saddam.. I just don't know what the setup there was at all. Especially when we were just getting off of Saddam's horse or were still on it. Being his ally, I mean. And the way we slaughtered the retreating Iraquis on the "highway of death" Sitting ducks. I once talked to a army medic, at a resort in Mexico about that. He was there.. It sickened him so much, he won't even go fishing now. To take a life. That's how the conversation started, we were standing in the surf watching some locals fish and I asked him if he fished... :( And I agree about Tibet.

To: epicure who wrote (3066)	8/29/2005 5:52:49 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 540985

(thought I have to wonder why we have rolled over so completely on Tibet- that still sickens me). Defending Tibet would have been very difficult. Its up in the Himalayas, from from the Ocean or from any American base at the time. It was invaded in the period between WWII and Korea, when the US military was demobilized and week. We would have had to take on China under very unfavorable circumstances, and possibly have faced war with the Soviet Union. We were more concerned about Europe and the USSR. Just a few years after the Chinese invasion of Tibet we were almost kicked out of South Korea by the North Koreans (the Chinese only intervened later after we had almost destroyed the North Korean army and were pushing up towards the Chinese border). We couldn't have really have defended Tibet. We could only have attacked China in other locations. We would have had war with China, and still probably have not freed Tibet. We were not ready for war militarily and probably not politically/psychologically. Tim