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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Geoff Altman who wrote (2262)	11/16/2005 4:10:28 PM
From: Geoff Altman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (712896) 11/14/2005 12:09:27 AM From: Geoff Altman Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 713565 Yes, I know it was a very simplified premise and I glossed over plenty because of time constraints and I didn't want to turn it into a term paper...... "A vibrant Democracy in the Middle East would draw people and financial resources from surrounding countries. If people in the Middle East could see what success from self sufficiency is like, they will want and demand freedom themselves." This was the end point I was trying to get to. I believe that this was the goal that the president had in mind. Like I said, the WMD was valid but the controversy that was stirred up about them drowned out that entering Iraq was the best course of action possible, still is and is the best hope for the entire region through the influence of a successful democracy. "I read this week that many Methodist retired Bishops and a few active ones came out stating they wished that the activities in Saddam's rape rooms had never been interrupted. Was the message that rape, mutilation, and murder are Methodist values to be honored and upheld? If the Methodists who made this a point are offended at my post, they are no more offended than I am at their statements of support for Saddam." Now I've heard everything. That religious men could spout something like that is mind boggling. You've got to send me a link if you've got one. "The fact is that more people would most likely be dead in Iraq if Saddam were still in power, it just would have been freedom loving people and those willing to fight tyranny rather than despots and supporters of tyranny." It's always been the case that as tyrants tighten their grip on a society they cull it. Anyone with the guts to try to remove the tyrant will themselves be removed permanently. The populous living in complete fear was a prerequisite of Saddams reign. That's why we're having so much trouble empowering the majority of the populace. We are making headway but this is not something that the US can afford to change horses in midstream on.