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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (109561)	10/20/2007 3:42:11 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

>>You have to understand what my position is and not distort it so it can be attacked. I didn't agree with the neocons or with the people that were anti war at the beginning. I simply understood both sides and had very mixed feelings because I couldn't calculate who was right with any margin of safety. I don't think that is such bad position considering that most democrats actually voted for the war. I think you even said you were for it in the beginning.<< fair enough. a correction, though. congress didn't vote to "go to war." they gave the president the ability to go to war should the president decide it was necessary. there is a subtle, yet significant, difference. i was for the war b/c the fable told by the busheviks seemed very plausible (the good ones always are - lesson learned!) and saddam played right into their hands. now, i'm not saying the busheviks lied. perhaps. perhaps not. maybe they were just totally incompetent. i'm not sure which scenario is preferable. >>As to all the other countries that could pose a risk, I agree. If you take the line of thinking of the neocons you could justify invading all of them. But each has a different set of risks and rewards so most never will be. To me, it appears that Saudi Arabia is the biggest sponsor (both financial and in their schools) of the type of extremism that leads to things like 9/11 and the bombings in Europe. I doubt anyone would advocate an invasion there even if they agreed with me because the downsides are gigantic and extremely likely. Each country would require a separate calculation, and most of the time, being aggressive is clearly not sensible.<< agreed. i think the issue is that you seem ok with us being in iraq given the lies and/or incompetence and i don't. i don't want to misrepresent your position, so do correct me if i'm wrong.