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: cnyndwllr who wrote (204723)	9/29/2006 2:09:48 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

There are shades of grey too. If I remember rightly, NZ troops who went to Vietnam volunteered to go. They had already volunteered to join the army, but they separately volunteered to go. I don't know what the incentives were and how much being "the chicken who stayed behind" would push one to go. I guess that would be a strong push. In the corporate world, one has volunteered for service, but there's a continuous voluntarism, with quitting at any time being an option. One can also choose among various job offers. I was in favour of the war against Saddam, but it wasn't worth my life. My "in favour" was that if some people wanted to attack Saddam's gang, I didn't see it as an ethical, or legal problem. I didn't think it was the best idea, but if they thought it was, then good luck to them. I don't think that makes me a hypocrite. I certainly wouldn't have ordered anyone to go. I preferred a NewUN and work from that basis. There didn't seem to be a need to rush in. It wasn't that he was part way through purifying uranium for a bomb. Iran is. If Israel and the USA want to attack the threat to obliterate the Jews, and the Great Satan, then it seems fair enough that they respond in kind. Mqurice