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: c.hinton who wrote (230408)	5/9/2007 4:05:19 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

American "aid" can be tied to anything and still not be forcing. People don't have to choose to accept an offer of something being given. They can say, "Thank you for the offer, but we decline". If the USA said, "Change to atheism or be nuked", or "Convert to Christianity or be hydrogen bombed", or "Wear your turbans backwards or be neutron bombed" then that would be forced conversion and forced conformity. But if the USA said, "Change to atheism and we'll give you $1000 a year from now on, each", then that would be voluntary and perfectly reasonable. I'm not sure how one would monitor compliance as beliefs are notoriously hard to measure if the person chooses to keep their beliefs private. Given that Moslems have declared an intention to forcibly convert all infidels to Islam, it would be reasonable for Americans to return the favour and demand all Islamic rituals cease and a new USA-approved activity adopted, or the USA will nuke them. If Moslems nuke Washington or New York or somewhere, I will be very surprised if Mecca remains in existence. It would be reasonable for Americans to state what will happen given certain attacks. A bit like those who kidnapped the two Israeli soldiers wouldn't have done so if they had known what Israel would do [so they say]. Mqurice