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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (48063)	2/5/2008 9:15:28 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541663

we would give the Al Qaeda movement a chance to get off the ropes where it is being hurt and we would destroy our credibility with future allies in the fight against Islamic radicals, and to a less extent in any fight that is anti-terrorism/anti-insurgency/anti-guerilla, rather than conventional Tim, 1. Too late--we've already given "the Al Qaeda movement a chance to get off the ropes where it is being hurt"; that is one of the primary reasons why diverting attention to Iraq in '02 was a huge mistake. The chickens are coming home to roost now in Afghanistan/Pakistan. 2. "we would destroy our credibility with future allies in the fight against Islamic radicals"--we've managed to do that too. Yet another primary reason for not invading Iraq. Up until the point at which Bush ordered the inspectors to leave, he was doing OK (not great, but OK--he would have done much better to have gotten inspectors in Iraq and let them do their work for a year or two while focusing on Afghanistan. But nevermind. 3. "to a less extent in any fight that is anti-terrorism/anti-insurgency/anti-guerilla, rather than conventional"; The Bush admin has damaged US credibility in the world in so many ways it is impossible to count them. If the next administration follows in their footsteps (a McCain admin, in most ways), we will be in even deeper trouble. At least McCain vaguely recognizes that climate change is a reality. But his pronouncements on the issue show that he doesn't see how serious the problem really is. But then, I suspect you are a skeptic a la Lomborg, so it doesn't really matter.

To: TimF who wrote (48063)	2/6/2008 3:47:22 AM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541663

>>Cogito its not just "they hate us because we support Israel". And if we left Iraq and stopped supporting Israel tomorrow we would still have serious issues with Al Qaeda and their ilk. Its possible that each action could actually make the problems worse<< Tim - I'm well aware of that, and I didn't suggest that we alter our policies to suit Al Qaeda. That would be abhorrent. We've definitely got a problem with those people. And it's definitely not a problem that we're going to be able to solve by hunting them all down and killing them all. Though I do think that a more concerted effort to catch Bin Laden and Zawahiri would have been useful. But no, we had to go after the paper tiger in Iraq. - Allen

To: TimF who wrote (48063)	2/6/2008 10:03:51 AM
From: Suma	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541663

Tom your kind of reasoning will keep us in the middle east forever.. Zealots do not give up. Al Qaeda are religious zealots. I do not want my taxes to pay for an unending war. I do not want my country in debt up to the kazoo to fight this war. We are almost alone fighting there. What is the rest of the world doing. They are not trying to convert Russia. I wonder why. The countries that stayed out of this conflict have not had terrorists bombers.. They have to convert the entire world. Do you not see where it has to stop. NOW... Protest our own borders and people here at home.