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 : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (103807)	7/24/2007 3:26:50 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

excellent post.

To: one_less who wrote (103807)	7/24/2007 4:20:26 PM
From: Steve Dietrich	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 173976

Calling the situation a civil war is just your attempt to discount the mission of the American government and the Nationally elected government of Iraq. You don't support that mission because then you couldn't espouse pure enough hate for the American Administration if you did, but you aren't honorable enough to admit it. By resorting to argument ad hominem you reveal just how weak your position is. Iraq is in a civil war. No attack on my motives can change that fact. Incapable of arguing the facts, you go to the man, it's a pretty common hack technique. In fact that's pretty much all a lot of posters around here are capable of. People who are informed take Iraq very serious. Do they use adverbs? Colin Powell says Iraq is in a Civil War. Is he an informed person who takes Iraq seriously? Vietnam was not a superpower enemy with nuclear capability to wipe out our entire nation. This is just silly. Vietnam was supposedly (but wrongly) a front in the Cold War just as Iraq is supposedly (but wrongly) a front in the War on Terror. The Cold War was much more serious and perilous than the War on Terror. The Communists absolutely stated their desire to destroy us and unlike AQ, the USSR had the means to do it. And this Iraqi government you keep fawning over is a myth. It has no popular support and will crumble (just like South Vietnam) as soon as we leave. As i said before, Iraq has only ever been held together by force, never by will. You can't change that fact by resorting to ad hominem either. George Bush was a fool to think Iraq could be held together by anything other than force. BTW: Will you be answering my post on the nobility of fighting them there instead of here? If a madman was after you, would you go to your neighbor's house so as to fight him there instead of at your house where your family might get hurt? Would you call that strategy noble? My post from Friday is here: Message 23720945 SD

To: one_less who wrote (103807)	7/29/2007 5:31:18 PM
From: Rarebird	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

<<In addition to Iraqi sectarian conflict you have outside fundamental fascists who hope to create an Islamic EMPIRE and are in Iraq as a front line of their war to achieve their goals.>> You want to talk about Empire? The rest of the world knows very clearly about the American Empire, especially inside the nations where the US has major military bases. In these nations, there is constant talk that the American soldiers should not be there. This is often expressed in public demonstrations. The news of these demonstrations are covered in the local news in these nations. but are rarely given any time in the American media. What is mentioned in the American media is when the President travels overseas, often to be met with public demonstrations. The real "lie" held up before the American people is that the rest of the world hates them because of their "freedoms" and because of their "way of life". That is false. What is disliked, even hated, in many foreign countries is the presence of US military personnel and the numerous bases where they are housed.