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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (14345)	11/6/2006 7:44:05 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Well then I suppose we can't ever have any war, and while we are it we have to get rid of cars, planes, trains, ships, candles swimming pools, drugs, Christmas trees, stairways, pets, farm equipment, baseballs... they have all caused more than one child's death. We also would have had to outlaw Saddam, he killed a lot more than one child. (But how to enforce it?) The death of one child is bad, but do you honestly think if that if the war ended successfully now, and the only cost was the death of one innocent child, that freeing millions of children from Saddam wouldn't have been worth it? If you think "yes it would not have been worth it", then you have a rather odd opinion. If you think "it would have been worth it", than you don't think "the death of one child is one too many."