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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (240091)	8/28/2007 2:04:08 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Nadine, re: "As far as I can tell, you believe that the whole problem would go away if we ignored it. Which sort of begs the question of how the whole string of Al Qaeda attacks since 1993 happend in the first place." The problem for emotional thinkers, especially frightened ones, is that "as far as I can tell" doesn't take you very far. I've written many posts that set forth my views on the wrong way to counteract the problem of terrorism and the right way to do so. You, on the other hand, are so caught up in the misleading use of the words "war on terrorism" that you can't seem to understand that waging real "war" against a hidden enemy is entirely counter productive. It's not terrorists that you must defeat; it's the ideas that drive them to become terrorists. Kill terrorists and the ideas breed more terrorists impassioned by the martyrs you've killed. Kill the ideas that fuel their passion and you need not kill anyone. On the other hand when, by your own actions, you create more ideas to impassion terrorists then you add fuel to the fire. It's really very simple but you're so busy throwing gas on the fire and then crying that the heat is so intense you have to work harder that you wouldn't know that, would you? It's too bad that the big dog you're following has the same policy....but that is changing. Ed PS. By the way, as Sam so clearly demonstrated, your unchanging views on Viet Nam which have been debunked so often are still dead wrong. If you've ever been right about anything I'm afraid I missed it. Maybe you could help by pointing to some prediction you made that was actually borne out by subsequent events?