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: JohnM who wrote (6644)	12/12/2005 12:28:48 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Respond to of 543016

The first is the argument to use state sponsored violence to stop ethnic cleansing (Bosnia and Kosovo) and the second to use state sponsored violence to stop the violence of groups like Al Qaeda. That's all. I don't disagree with you. However, it is all in the execution. I think George H W Bush's and Bill Clinton's approach to Iraq was working. No fly zones and weapons inspectors were working. Violence was kept to a minimum and the objectives were being achieved. Similarly with Bosnia and Kosovo - getting allies to agree and get on board - organize a military presence - and use minimum or sufficent force to achieve the objectives. I am against war - but that seems to be the real world. Wrt Al Qaeda - cut off the funding. Cut off the leadership. Use minimum (or sufficient) force. Be magnanimous toward the Muslim population. How could that not work?