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: GST who wrote (195529)	8/7/2006 10:44:23 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

The only problem with using "extreme" as a qualifier is that it is always the other guy who is extreme -- not me -- if you know what I mean. I define "extreme" as any group that believes that force is the only means by which they can coerce others into holding to their beliefs. Of course, since I believe that democracy is a system by which beliefs can be realized, and disputes resolved, peacefully, I do not consider it "extreme" to confront those who would deny people access to that process. For example.. Saddam attempted to use force to dominate the Kuwaitis, under the pretext that Kuwait was the 19 province of Iraq. He should have been removed from power in 1991, but it required 12 more years of "other means" before it became obvious that he was not going shape up.. So force was required to make him "ship out". And in the aftermath of that overthrow, and the opportunity for potential democratic reform in Iraq, it was imperative that the Iraqi should be permitted the chance to possess a democratic system. So while a war to "make" countries adopt democratic systems might be "extreme", it certainly is not extreme to foster democratic reforms when opportunities present themselves. Hawk