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 : Israel to U.S. : Now Deal with Syria and Iran -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (11702)	7/25/2006 12:57:18 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22250

but since you refuse to support any of your statements, The statements 1 - " The US is almost universally the aggressor. Not just wrong, but blatant nonsense." In this case you aren't just saying the US is aggressive, or that it has made attacks, but that "it is almost universally the aggressor". In other words in almost any conflict that it has been in, it initiated force in an act of blatant aggression. Spending time supporting the assertion that that is false is somewhat like spending time supporting the assertion that the earth is not flat. The US was not the aggressor in Lebanon in the 80s. It made an attempt to restore order where there was violent chaos, it got attacked and left. The US wasn't the aggressor in "The Gulf War". Iraq under Saddam, attack Kuwait. The US wasn't the aggressor in the confrontation with Iran in the late 80s, where the US protected shipping from an Iranian threat. The best case you have is the 2003 invasion of Iraq, where the US did invade a nation that was not currently invading or occupying another nation. I wouldn't call it foolish or ridiculous if you want to call the US the aggressor in that conflict, but even here the situation is not so simple. Iraq did break the ceasefire agreement that it made after the previous war where Iraq was the aggressor. Also even if you do consider the war as an act of aggression by the US that would hardly make for the US being "almost universally the aggressor." As for my other statement - "Arresting criminals and terrorists is not kidnapping innocent people. Assassinating killers and terrorists and their leaders when they have committed terrorism against you isn't an aggressive act." That pretty much stands by itself without and further support being necessary. run along and play somewhere else. I don't think you are the moderator here, or the voice of some consensus of the thread.