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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (252687)	9/26/2005 7:07:09 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578012

re: If US troops leave Iraq today, the consensus view is that civil war is more likely, not less. So the "anti US troop presence" movement is not an "anti-war" movement. It's better described as a "let them go to war, we don't want to be involved" movement. Our presence just delays the inevitable, AND causes the suicide bombers (remember, we went through that before you left). It's none of our business, never was. Let the Iraqi's self determine their own government. Nation building just doesn't work. John

To: Elroy who wrote (252687)	9/26/2005 2:14:33 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578012

It is more accurate to label your view as the "no deployment of US troops outside of US soil" message. Well, that's an oversimplification with a slant towards dismissal. I think we all pretty much agreed to deploy to Afghanistan....there were clearly articulated objectives for it. There were no special interests, no hidden agenda, no sidebars. Iraq is this bouncing ball rationale war with backup reasons in case the once given at the time didn't pan out. Please...does anyone dis-respect him/her self as to still defend this madness conducted by the most incompetent, arrogant, presumptous adminstration in the history of the country? Al