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: neolib who wrote (184537)	4/3/2006 11:27:58 PM
From: GPS Info	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I agree, but there could be limits… to changes in power. Uh, yes of course. Mullahs can claim…absolutely anything they want. Who's to stop them? Voting out theocracy might be problematic at best… That’s why I wouldn’t want theocracy that removed democratic institutions or policies after they were elected. The US applauded that one at the time, but then failed to heed the warning wrt Iraq. Why? You want me to answer why there is an inconsistency in US foreign policy? Sorry, I truly don’t have the bandwidth for that one. Why is how you view that important? My question was whether you would accept their views on the subject. No, I wouldn’t agree with their view on the subjects that I listed, if they differed from mine. Are you asking why my view important to me? Because it violates my view/perspective/take/values/ethics of universal human rights. Any yes, I actually do believe there is such a thing. Should outsiders have a say in [the death penalty]? Yes, absolutely everyone on this planet should be able to express their opinion on any subject without fear of a reprisal – other than another opinion, such as “you’re stupid.” I realize that we could get into a discussion of what constitutes a ‘reprisal’ but I will demur on that subject.