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 : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (991)	7/26/2008 7:51:04 AM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86352

Yes, because we have a job to finish. We need to get Bin Laden. He killed 3,000 Americans, so we should have focused on getting him and never quit. Bush quit to go after Saddam instead. That was stupid. Having said that, I don't believe in waging a vague million year war on terrorism. That is a recipe for a bankrupt America. We need to secure our borders, cut off funding for terrorists, heavily fund our spy agencies, create international networks to find terrorists and prevent terrorism, and work to solve the ultimate root cause which is our dependence on oil. Those are the appropriate actions, not spending the next 100 years fighting wars in the Middle East. Which action do you will reduce the number of terrorist actions over time? a) American troops tramping around the Middle East killing large masses of hostile Arabs and masses of civilians along the way? or b) becoming oil independent and having zero presence in the Middle East, so we aren't the focus of all the ire of those crazy people and so that we don't send hundreds of billions of oil dollars to the Middle East, some of which ends up in terrorist coffers?