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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (11046)	2/7/2006 9:21:02 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541403

Who cares? Iraq wasn't the issue- at least not in the post I responded to. Al Qaeda Nadine. Al Qaeda. The point was they were separate issues, and you can take more than one seriously, (for example, being worried about encroachments on our liberty, or the demonization of the opposition in the US, doesn't mean you don't take Al Qaeda seriously) and on top of that, Molly doesn't represent the entire left. I know you'd like it to be that simple, that Molly speaks for the entire left, and a little snippet from her is where it's at, but it isn't. And not taking the Iraq war seriously has zip all to do with the real battle against terrorism- at least in many people's minds. The "threat" of Saddam Hussein really doesn't have anything to do with Al Qaeda, and taking that threat seriously, which is where we started. Gross generalizations about the left, and now a bunch of red herrings. Gawd. I'm so bored with all the emotional claptrap and mixed up facts. It's just so illogical.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (11046)	2/7/2006 10:09:12 AM
From: KonKilo	Respond to of 541403

Did the people who were concerned about the propaganda problem assert that they were against the war and for pulling out the troops? Was that there sole recommendation for handling the problem of Imperial Japan and domestic anti-Japanese feeling? Bad example. Opposing the Japanese agression was no doubt the right thing to do. Opposing "terror" by being the aggressor is much less clear and a worthy subject for real debate instead of rhetoric. Those who are arguing for a tactical withdrawal in Iraq, are those who have come to understand that our presence there is part of the problem.