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: sylvester80 who wrote (189686)	6/19/2006 1:21:43 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

So then you are saying that Bush WAS WRONG with his UNILATERAL policy which even called the "UN irrelevant". I assume you mean his views on UNSC inability to enforce and sustain binding resolutions against Saddam? Yeah.. I think he (and Clinton) attempted the multi-lateral approach to the point of exhaustion. So long as France and Russia were content to block enforcement of those binding resolutions, the UNSC had been rendered irrelevant. It's one thing to see opposition to NON-BINDING resolutions, but quite another for nations to put their own parochial interests ahead of those of the UN Security Council with regard to binding (and enforceable resolutions). When we get to issuing BINDING resolutions in the UNSC, it's not just arbitration, or peace-making. We're responding to an international crisis and the UNSC is making a statement that the situation must be rectified immediately by whatever means necessary. Keep squirming Sly... I know it's tough having to swallow all of that "humble pie"... And you know what humble pie is, don't you?? bartleby.com Yum.. Yum... :0) Hawk

To: sylvester80 who wrote (189686)	6/19/2006 1:28:03 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Btw Sly.. since you seem to show considerable interest in N. Korea, nukes.. and things like that... What would you think if Bush had our military shoot down that N. Korean missile, should they launch it? Would that correlate with the kind of "message" you think we should be sending to Kim Jong Il? What would be the repercussions to the status of the "Dear Son" if it was revealed we could shoot his missiles down? (and consequently, if we missed). Would he invade S. Korea because the US shot down one of his missiles? Is it worth it? Hawk