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: i-node who wrote (376400)	4/5/2008 9:20:46 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576163

Hate to say this, because I will be roundly criticized, but if this is truly a "generational war on terror" then the death of 3000 in pretty inconsequential. Look at the casualties from other US wars... So, I suppose you would agree that 4,013 American deaths in the Iraq War is 'pretty inconsequential', too?? You purposely dropped the qualifier, if this is truly a "generational war on terror". It isn't, so the deaths are consequential. You are the one that can't have it both ways. Was Pearl Harbor inconsequential? Of course not. It isn't the body count; it is the very idea that we were vulnerable and we were attacked. Regardless of the number dead, the vulnerability has to be closed -- in the instant case, by killing terrorists and depriving them of future opportunities. We have more to fear from domestic terrorists. You are bin Ladens best friend, you and the Neos. bin Laden will sucker your ilk into breaking this country.