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: Ilaine who wrote (211907)	1/6/2007 2:44:42 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

It was a sovereign nation. After we invaded, deposed its leader, and occupied it, it's hard to think of it as quite so "sovereign" as it once was. We can pretend that it's sovereign, now that we've rearranged the deck chairs, but that doesn't mean we don't have enormous (overwhelming?) influence at many levels, behind the scenes, and sometimes in front of the scenes. We cannot control the common people- hence the civil war- but we can certainly put the thumb screws to the upper levels of the government. That is what I comprehend. For you to tell me I don't comprehend the legal niceties of a charade is quite insulting. I comprehend it ever so well. I just see the pantomime differently than you do, and since we so fundamentally disagree, I see zero to be gained in a discussion. We see it our different ways, both comprehending the situation perfectly well, we draw different conclusions. You don't always have to face a stupid or ignorant opponent to come to an insoluble disagreement over a situation.