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: Ichy Smith who wrote (204555)	9/28/2006 12:23:12 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 281500

In each of America's adventures into war, the anti-war group has eventually persuaded the American public to lose the war. Not "each" but several, for sure. Islam is coming, and there is nothing in Americans that will stop it. Not true. Americans, like every other human being, act a lot like a troop of chimpanzees meeting another troop of chimpanzees. Some posture, some cower, some wait to see which way things go. I was truly awestruck by the spontaneous outpouring of resolve within minutes after the second tower fell. People all over my town were putting American flags on the poles outside our doors that we generally only use on 4th of July. People were waving flags on the street, and from their cars. Nobody told us to do it, we just did it. When things are tough, we stand together. Most of us, anyway. The Americans who laugh and jeer at patriotism and resolve were silent that day. But the war in Iraq is a tough sell because the Iraqis are so bloody stupid. It's hard to maintain resolve to help them when they won't help themselves. After all, it's their country. I don't expect the Europeans to accomodate Islam to the extent of surrender. We've seen that over and over again, when the Muslims get unreasonable, even the French stand together. We believe in tolerance and accomodation, but tolerance is not a suicide pact.

To: Ichy Smith who wrote (204555)	9/28/2006 12:28:11 PM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 281500

no, the fault is with our leaders, particularly the last two. Clinton turned a blind eye at times regardless of what he says to chris wallace and bush is lost in space with his old white guy team that badly "misunderestimated" the costs of this war while not being willing to change strategies and tactics to meet the new realities. FDR needed a couple of years to get Americans to understand the threat of nazism and japanese militarism. Reagan finally was able to defeat the evil empire. Our next pres will be the critical factor in determining how this plays out. And it may be a democrat who comes with the support of the left like FDR did but with a grounded realistic assessment of the threat and the guts to educate the american public and fight when necessary and in the proper manner. Can Hillary be tough--i think so. Are John McCain and Rudy tough?--no doubt. Those are three folks we could live with. Many of the rest are either pansy assed liberals or buchanan isos. If Hillary faces an ISO or if McCain faces a pansy and if we view this as the issue of the century, how we vote is clear although i bet folks like you will have to hold their nose to vote for Hillary.

To: Ichy Smith who wrote (204555)	9/28/2006 1:34:45 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Ichy, you've really outdone yourself this time. "In each of America's adventures into war, the anti-war group has eventually persuaded the American public to lose the war. That's a pretty sweeping statement. Did we lose the "war" in Grenada? WW1? WW11? No, you must have meant the two recent wars we've "lost;" Vietnam and Iraq, right? "The problem is that you hold power only if you are not afraid to use it. No, I'd like to think that governments hold power to discourage other nations from interfering in their own internal decisions or the decisions of allied sovereign nations. Do you think power should be used aggressively like some individuals use physical, legal or economic power to bully others into submission in order to gain what they would not otherwise be entitled to receive? "America is afraid. Islam is constantly attacking the US and now the Anti-war group has decided that the US has no right to determine any policy that goes against the wishes of Islam. They require a complete and absolute surrender to Islam and it's superiority." Your thinking is skewed. The "anti war" group includes many, like myself, who think there is a time and a place for war. Many of us, however, long ago decided that with respect to our meddling in the Middle east, the "US has no right to determine any policy that goes against the wishes of Islam." Now why would that be? 1. The Middle East is a predominantly Islamic region. In case you hadn't noticed, it's been that way for thousands of years. The culture, the religion, and the traditions are steeped in Islamic law and beliefs. That's the direction the water's flowing. Do you think WE have the "right" to determine policies that "go against the wishes of Islam" in our arrogant determinations of how they will be governed, what kind of foreign policy they will pursue, how they will treat their women and what kind of justice system they will adopt? 2. It doesn't work. Even if you, for some strange reason, think WE have the RIGHT to determine such policies, what makes you think we have the POWER to make those policies stick? Or maybe you're blind to the patterns of pervasive insurgency that inevitably arise when you step into another nation and try to CHANGE thousands of years of religious views and culture at the point of a gun? And then your finest moment: anti war liberals will persuade America to lose the war since, "After all they were willing to sacrifice the Vietnamese with no thought." MILLIONS of Vietnamese men, women and children died during the years that America was "helping" Vietnam. They died of bombings, bullets, and disease. Millions of them died horribly painful, fearful deaths. When THE VIETNAMESE forced us out they sorted out their differences quickly, without a lot of bloodshed, and formed a stable government. The Vietnamese who fled after the war ended are flocking back into their country and we're now their biggest trading partner. I'd say that the people who were "willing to sacrifice the Vietnamese with no thought" were not anti-war liberals, they were war-wimp chicken hawks, like you. And they were not only willing to sacrifice the Vietnamese, they were willing to, and did, sacrifice a whole lot of young, many conscripted, American soldiers in a fool's cause. Today their war-wimp progeny are sacrificing a lot of Iraqis and American soldiers in an equally foolish cause. When you realize you've only succeeded in getting our asses handed to us you will, of course, argue once again that if not for the "anti-war" liberals we would have turned the corner and won. You'll be wrong again, of course, but you'll sow the seeds of another crop of war wimps for some future debacle. "Islam is coming, and there is nothing in Americans that will stop it." Get some balls and stop screeching hysterical nonsense. Ed

To: Ichy Smith who wrote (204555)	9/28/2006 2:49:23 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Islam is constantly attacking the US and now the Anti-war group has decided that the US has no right to determine any policy that goes against the wishes of Islam. They require a complete and absolute surrender to Islam and it's superiority. Pretty much sums it ups, doesn't it.. :0( Now I don't actually see Islamo-Fascists being able to defeat the US. But I sure see the possibility of their creating some major economic chaos if they manage to pull off another 9/11 style attack against our infrastucture. Hell, just infiltrate 1,000 gunmen into the US to commit suicide attacks within various and random public malls and you'd shut the American consumer down overnight.. And the repercussion would be that all shoppers would have to be patted down like they were going on an airline flight.. That's just ONE SCENARIO I can mention.. So what's the alternative but to "pee in their pool" and attempt to create some form of alternative political options for the people of the mid-east than either secular or religious totalitarian regimes. Hawk