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 : New FADG. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: michael97123 who wrote (205)	5/15/2007 3:26:13 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4152

"Assymetric warfare works both ways." No it doesn't. Not when the cultures are this dissimilar. Not when one is a homogenous nation and the other is a diversely disconnected mass of people blended into the multi-various countries, cultures and subcultures of the world. Use of military is taking an authoritarian role to force change, which is fine when justified. I will give you an example learned in education. If a teacher has a kid who insists on disrupting every lesson to get the attention of the other kids, the teacher has three choices. 1. She can ignore the problem and hope it goes away. It wont because the kid is working for a particular outcome and ignoring him guarantees the results ... loss of control of the group and a disrupted chaotic classroom. 2. The teacher can come down very hard on the kid until his behavior is extinguished or he is out of the classroom. That works as long as the teacher abides by the rules of the system. Hint: Just because the kid can survive while breaking rules doesn't mean the teacher can. 3. The teacher can punish classmates for the behavior of the student, or for being friendly to the disrupter, or encouraging or laughing at the disruptive student, hoping they will retaliate against him. This is the most risky. It wont work unless the kid is a sociopath that all the kids hated in the first place, which is not the usual for disruptive kids... they are usually funny or charming or tough or in some other way popular. The most likely outcome when employing option three is that the normally respectful kids lose respect for the teacher and band with the disruptive kid in mass disobedience. If you choose example three and retaliate against innocent emblematic targets of Islam you are A. Breaking the rules of your own game (fighting for principles of decency and justice). B. Targeting the innocent will rally the sideliners against you. Not just Muslims but other Western nations. C. You lose any moral ground you may have had to base your position on so what would you claim to be fighting for?

To: michael97123 who wrote (205)	5/15/2007 4:31:54 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4152

I don't think individual bombers would need cells to function if they spoke english. A lot of Arabs do. Not if, but when, they strike us again, look for the suspension of the Bill of Rights. Some politicians, if not Hillary, will exploit the fear just as Bush exploited 9/11 to sucker us into Iraq. I think it's a sad thing. I think Americans could handle it without a lot of government intervention and loss of rights. First thing, investigate EVERY illegal and REALLY seal the borders, instead of this fake stuff we do now. Everyone should have a SECURE, rfid'd national ID/Voter reg/driving liscence card only after proving they belong here and it being VERIFIED. Citizens should be required to carry it whenever they leave the house. Merchants would be required to check it before completing any transactions. Tourists would get temporary ones, and would be required to return them on exiting the country. The problem of our security here really IS a police problem.