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: epicure who wrote (213663)	1/20/2007 7:36:12 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

We seem to be having two different conversations. I was talking about your allegation that conservatives "love" to see American soldiers maimed and killed. You said that without any signal that this was intended to be limited to the context of Iraq, so I didn't take it as such. In contrast, my statement that liberals love authoritarian mass murderers is based on an entire lifetime of observation of liberals maundering over this and that Marxist authoritarian mass murderer, from Stalin to Mao to Castro to Saddam. There are two ideals which I love, which cause me to throw in with the conservatives, which I consider to be absolute goods, free minds and free markets, democracy and capitalism. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats actually work towards both, free minds and free markets, but the one thing I have to hand to the Republicans is that they absolutely hate collectivism. Upstream Sarman was maundering about how Saddam's victims "gave up their lives for the good of others," which is absolute bullcrap. They were murdered against their will. But his statement was liberal collectivism in a nutshell. Forcing others to give up their freedom, their wealth, their lives, for the good of others, is the essence of collectivism, which is what liberalism has become.

To: epicure who wrote (213663)	1/20/2007 7:46:01 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Second, in response to your query as to what the war in Iraq has to do with American freedom, it's plain and simple. For decades the United States followed your logic that we shouldn't intervene in other sovereign nations to eradicate state sponsored terrorism. We looked at war as conventional war, the way it's been fought for centuries. Finally 9/11 made it crystal clear that our biggest danger is no longer from nation-states, per se, it's from non-state actors and the rogue states which shelter them. It's unlikely that Saddam would ever have attacked us directly. Instead, he was supporting terrorists who did attack us, as proxies. As did the Taliban in Afghanistan. And that's no longer something we can continue tolerate. You may wish to continue to tolerate being attacked by proxies. In fact, I have no doubt that you would prefer this, based on earlier conversations. But you're outvoted. The Democrats who carried the day for your party in November 2006 were not the anti-war crowd. They were, on the whole, the old kind of Democrat, the ones who recognize that your freedom to shop until you drop is paid for by American blood. They may not be the majority in the Democrat party, in fact, I am pretty sure they are not. But the American people that voted for them didn't all vote for the Berkeley crowd, they voted locally. Jim Webb, for example, was a Marine, a highly decorated combat veteran, and Secretary of the Navy under Reagan. He's no Nancy Pelosi, and no Harry Reid. If Jim Webb is the future of the Democrat party, that will be interesting. And then there's Joe Liebermann. If any election demonstrated the ineffectiveness of the anti-war crowd, it's Joe.;^)

To: epicure who wrote (213663)	1/20/2007 8:04:36 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Third, although chaffing you about shopping may seem like an insult, it's not intended as so, just chaffing. As someone who loves free minds and free markets, your right to shop is sacred to me. In fact, you are in many ways an apotheosis of American ideals, exactly what American soldiers fight to protect, a beautiful, free woman who never troubles her pretty little head about the sacrifices they make to preserve your freedom. That's exactly how it should be. They do it for you and your children, they do it for me and my children, they do it for their own wives and sweethearts and their own children. It is, of course, the grossest insult to insinuate that I wish to see these beautiful men and women "maimed and killed." The kind of insult which rolls off your lips without a thought. Which is fine by me, the fact that you can utter such insults freely, thoughtlessly and heedlessly is a tribute to our democracy.