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 : Polite Political Discussion- is it Possible? An Experiment. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KonKilo who wrote (449)	8/2/2006 3:52:18 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1695

When the invading army happens to be someone else, I think it's easier to justify a war. So for example in Gulf War One- most people agreed it was a good thing to push Iraq back. Civil wars are more difficult to weigh in on- because both sides usually believe in the truth and justice of their cause, and in those cases where you are the invader of another country it's always dicey to justify, because you look like the aggressor. If you're Attila the Hun and you don't care about being the aggressor it's easy, but for everyone else, it's not- mostly because world politics has freighted aggressor nations in wars with some pretty tough baggage. imo