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: geode00 who wrote (199020)	8/24/2006 4:21:49 AM
From: kumar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The US govt is responsible for security of its citizens, constitutional things and other things. please give us a link to a Lebanese Constitution. Would be really interested in learning what the Lebanese Constitution says.

To: geode00 who wrote (199020)	8/24/2006 9:35:02 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

That's like telling the Bush administration it's RESPONSIBLE for securing Iraq. No.. Iraq is responsible for securing its borders, and the US has pledged to assist. Remember that we're NO LONGER in Iraq as an occupier, because that DULY ELECTED GOVERNMENT has requested COALITION forces remain to assist in restoring internal/external security. ONE FURTHER, AND SIGNIFICANT, DIFFERENCE is that when terrorist activities are initiated from Iraqi territory, both the Iraqi and Coalition forces TAKE STEPS to apprehend the perpetrators. This was the case when the hotel was bombed in Amman, Jordan by Iraqi terrorists. Lebanon has DONE NOTHING, and in fact, it has provided legitimacy to Hizbullah, by permitting them to become part of the government without first disarming, and pledging loyalty to the democratic process. Yeah.. I think most of their verbal support to Hizbullah was generated out of fear and intimidation about their inability to control the rogue organization, but Lebanon has made no request to the UN for assistance in carrying out the mandate of UNSC 1559. And in fact, Hizbullah's power in the past 6 years grew astromically in comparison to its strength since the withdrawal of Israeli troops in 2000. And the last thing they should have done is to praise Hizbullah for "defending the integrity of Lebanon's territory" when in fact, they intitiated an illegal war with Israel. Israel would likely not have invaded Lebanon had the Lebanese army quickly moved into Hizbullah territory in the south and taken demonstrable steps to confront Nasrallah and disarm his troops. And by failing to take such an action, the Lebanese government effectively abdicated their responsibility to preserve the sanctity of their borders. As for my "standards", I have no illusions about the difficulties involved in fighting these insurgent/terrorist groups. They are ruthless in intimidating any potential opposition. Which is why I believe we need to be just as ruthless in confronting and defeating them. And unfortunately, diplomacy is not going to accomplish that task.. At least is won't until their is the implicit threat to use significant military force to back up that diplomacy, as well required in the case of Iraq. Which also means that the sad reality is that people are going to die in the process. Hawk