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: TimF who wrote (12272)	2/16/2006 1:26:11 PM
From: KonKilo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543651

Or it might indicate that we feel if they are not fought there... It seems to me that you are reading an awful lot into a simple declarative. The line always struck me as cheap political theater, but one that becomes more distasteful the more it is examined. That's more an argument for "false", rather then "dishonest". If it comes from incompetent folks, then it may be false. If it comes from dishonest folks, then it may be dishonest. I do not relish having our leadership fall into either category.

To: TimF who wrote (12272)	2/16/2006 2:33:50 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 543651

so that fighting them there is good for Iraq and the US That may be the case but it's a separate notion. It's not part of the notion of fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here. The latter is morally questionable. Perhaps being morally questionable is a better choice than fighting them here. Perhaps one can rationalize fighting them there rather than here by adding that it's good for them, too, but that doesn't morally elevate the "so that we don't have to fight them there" argument.