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: Sdgla who wrote (202527)	9/11/2006 10:56:00 AM
From: bentway	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

If Bush is serious about this "war", why don't we have a draft to build a big enough army to fight it? Why isn't he taxing the American people and calling for sacrifice to pay for it? He's always invoking WWII, but we had a draft and a 90% top tax rate to pay for that, REAL war. Americans were rationed, couldn't buy new cars, went on scrap drives, etc. Because it's a fraud designed to fool ignorant fearful suckers like you for political and economic gain. You of course, are more concerned for Israel than America anyway. Neither country is at risk, and Bush knows it. But it pays his cronies very well, who will catch HIM on the backside, and any power he has is based on the fear he can whip up waving the bloody flag.

To: Sdgla who wrote (202527)	9/11/2006 11:05:51 AM
From: Don Hurst	Respond to of 281500

>>" Try a little read : Lawrence Wright's "The Looming Tower: Al Qaeda and the Road to 9/11" "<< On numerous book plugging appearances Wright has pointed out how stupid the Iraq mess is. After we had Al Queda nearly decimated in Afghanistan we pulled out our best most knowledgeable troops and sent them to Iraq prep school in early 2002; so that we could now increase the number of skilled American haters and killers in Iraq...an incredibly idiotic American mistake, which you don't have even enough active brain cells to comprehend. Barnett says this >>" Five years into this Long War against radical extremists, we measure our progress and naturally feel depressed: enemies proliferating, friends disappearing, the front seemingly limitless. "<< Where does he say this? The invasion of Iraq was great Or that the Israeli destruction of Lebanon was oh so very helpful to American worldwide interests and we should bomb Iran asap?? Hell, he did not even mention those evil "Islamo-Fascists". He did close with this...>>" Judging the Long War strictly as war will always yield a depressing verdict: This killing won't stop anytime soon. But judging it within the context of globalization's progressive advance across our world provides us sufficient confidence that we stand on the side of liberty, faith - and history. "<< which is absolute rubbish equivalent to "tomorrow the sun will rise". Figures you would have subpar comprehension...

To: Sdgla who wrote (202527)	9/11/2006 2:26:12 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Sdgla, re: "I know we are on offense as opposed to sitting on our collective arses and doing nothing while being attacked." Yes, we are on offense. That may make you feel good. If it does, however, try analyzing how well our offensive game plan is working. We're busy firing very expensive cannon balls at no-see-ems. The fact that no-see-ems can't be effectively killed with cannon balls doesn't seem to register with you. Some things to consider: Running your head into a brick wall trying to solve a problem is "doing something." People who do such things themselves are often admired for their grit and determination, even as they cause themselves injury and pain. If they ram other people's heads into the wall then that's another thing altogether, and if they keep ramming their own heads into the wall we don't call them determined; we call them stoooopid. We are at war..... and not because of our Iraq operation." You've got it backwards. We are at war, because of our Iraq operation. The "war" on terrorism is not a war at all at least not in the conventional way that Bush/Cheney want you to view it. Of course when you have the "war" on drugs, the "war" on cancer, or a "war of words" then it gets confused. Bush/Cheney deliberately pinned the "war" on terror on the struggle against terrorism in order to support giving Bush constitutional war powers to invade Iraq and create obscenities such as Gitmo. But 9/11 wasn't an act of war, it was a deadly crime committed by a cell of international terrorists with a political agenda. They had no national allegiance, no army, no navy, no air force, no manufacturing base and no face. They were so small and so hidden that 5 years later we still haven't killed or captured the two main leaders of that cell. But that didn't stop us from, as you so aptly stated, "doing something." When we attacked Iraq we actually started a war that, with respect to fighting terrorism, has one inevitable ending; triumph for all of those who want to see more terror, a less effective American response to terrorism, more hatred directed against and more death to Americans. Do you prefer to live with your eyes closed ? No, I'm OK with living with my eyes open. I'm OK with living with the knowledge that there are groups of people who want to kill us and will, at times, succeed. I'm OK living that way without becoming so frightened that I want to "kill em all" who might support them, or look different, or believe in the same religion as those who want to kill us, or who even support them "in their hearts." I'm OK with doing the kinds of things that will, eventually, allow other cultures to mature and choose to either change or wither and die. I'm OK with taking a chance that someday we might have to actually go to war and kill millions of people if nations truly do threaten us....but not till then. I'm not OK with swallowing slogans like "A democratic Iraq will not be a threat to its neighbors." A "democratic" Iraq whose leaders and policies mirror the barbaric, old testament wants and desires of the majority Shiites is a nightmare, and not just for the Sunnis and Iraqi women. We need to pull our hand out of the Iraqi mixer and start focusing on doing things to effectively diminish the number and severity of terrorist attacks. As for Iraq, sometimes the best cure for a nation of people who think they want radical, Islamic rule is to let them have what they want. We did that in Iran and, until we invaded Iraq, Iran was the Muslim country whose young people were the most pro-western, pro-democratic and anti theological rule. The thought of radical Islamic rulers in Iraq doesn't scare me. Experience is a great teacher and with our possession of the world's greatest arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and the most efficient means of delivering them across the globe, do you really think that people who've come out of the shadows into the light and assumed leadership will really want to "attack" the US? If people would get past all the "democracy is the God-given right of all people" and "we have to win in Iraq because losing isn't an option," crap then maybe we can figure out what we can, and cannot, do and start moving ahead. In the meantime we just keep ramming our bloody heads into that brick wall sending our children half a world away and telling them they're dying fighting for freedom when they're dying for nothing, actually less than nothing. Ed