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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (359897)	11/23/2007 2:07:38 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573573

Important" isn't the same as directly important to the defense of the US. Neither is "real war". Having almost 50 million South Koreans live under conditions like those in the North Korean hell hole would be a rather bad thing don't you think? Of course, but it should not be our position to make it right. Also even more narrowly from the perspective of US interests, if we count South Koreans and their wealth and freedom as being worth nothing - If we were passive in the cold war than the world would have shifted against us. Even back then overseas trade was important to us. If the rest of the world moves more to support those hostile to us, and also doesn't produce as much to trade with us, than we would be worse off. One of our biggest trading partners today is China. Had we not gone into Korea, maybe China would not have kept its walls for so long and we might have been trading vigorously with them much sooner. Things might have been entirely different and much more beneficial to the US. Having said all that, I don't think it should be America's position to play global cop. I, for one, am sick and tired of having so much of my tax dollars go to military building and warring because some American president is feeling overly paranoid.