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: Brumar89 who wrote (172393)	10/12/2005 7:22:35 PM
From: epicure	Respond to of 281500

No. I don't. And you don't either- if you are imagining I disagree with a war on terrorism (which I am sure you DO imagine, because you have such a creative imagination, and are so absolutely clueless when it comes to understanding my positions). Even though time and time again I've laid out ideas I think are crucial to winning the war on terrorism, you go imagining I oppose fighting terrorism. Know anyone who imagines all kinds of incorrect things about other posters? I do, and it's you. But then, I have the proof of your posts for my opinions about your (incorrect) ideas, while you just have your imagination.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (172393)	10/12/2005 8:08:57 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

<I think a supporter of al Qaida would more likely oppose the US's use of force in Afghanistan and oppose the very idea of a war on terror> Nobody has done more to help al Qaida than Bush -- the invasion of Afghanistan was a logical response -- pulling key people off the trail of bin Laden to focus on an Iraqi invasion was nothing short of supreme stupidity. The rush to unilaterally invade Iraq rather than hunt bin Laden down like a dog has done more for al Qaida than any other single stupid thing we could have done.