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 : THE WHITE HOUSE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PROLIFE who wrote (18875)	3/31/2008 6:32:28 PM
From: pompsander	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 25737

Pro, take off the blinders. You are in such complete denial about the Iraq situation it is laughable. You think somehow a Western Democracy can be grated on a Middle East nation whose legacy of government is so different? Why? Whatever gave you (and Mr. Bush, such an idea????) Want some differences between the United States in the age of enlightenment and Iraq in the age of Muslim fanaticism???? 1) We grew out of internal rebellion forged in COMMON interests. Yes, the States had differences, but they built an internally crafted common form of government. It wasn't forced on them from outside, like Iraq. Iraq has no common interest...it is pieced together from segments that don't beliee they are one nation. Never have! 2) The U.S. did not have critical sectarian divisions in its population. What divisions there were did not mandate form of government or primacy of one sect. 3) Violence was not directed internally during the formation of the Constitution. What violence there had been in the revolution was toward the British. Imagine if South Carolina had blown up the churches of New York during the 1780s. What if death squads from New Hampshire killed the residents of Rhode Island because they were "different". Do you think a unified government would have formed in such an environment? Iraq is not North America. Why even try to compare the two....Everything that allowed the United States to form is missing in Iraq today. Not least of which, an occupying force walking around "encouraging democracy" to take hold, backing one faction over others.... Blaming "the left" for the failure of Iraq is so weak an argument it is beneath contempt. The president has had everything he has asked for since 2003. Manpower, money (tons of money!), control..... And you dare blame "the left" for the arrogance, incompetence and hubris that has built today's Iraq? Denial ain't just a river in Egypt. Not with Pro...