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: epicure who wrote (61313)	4/23/2008 11:11:21 PM
From: ManyMoose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542759

I understand your point, but there's a big difference between a predator attack sanctioned by the Pakistani government and an attack that 'would be able to obliterate' Iran. I've seen no indication from McCain that he would do either. Obama presumes that states like Iran are amenable to reason. That is a characteristic stemming from his lack of experience and foreign policy expertise. The first thing that will happen in an Obama presidency is that we will be tested beyond endurance just to see what he will do about it. I'm uncomfortable with that.

To: epicure who wrote (61313)	4/23/2008 11:54:53 PM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542759

>>The campaign to attack within Pakistan's borders has already commenced- so I consider it the more likely target right now:<< Syb - There is also the fact that while Pakistan is presently an ally, it's government is shaky, and its status as an ally could easily change. Too, they already have nukes, unlike Iran. Plus Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri are most likely hiding out there. I'm sure all those points are covered in the article you linked to, which I must confess I didn't take the time to read. In any case, they make Pakistan seem like a place likely to see US military action before Iran does. - Allen