SI
SI
discoversearch

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: ManyMoose who wrote (84518)9/15/2008 10:51:06 AM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 540944
 
Her statement makes sense to me. I don't know why you need an alternative explanation.

If it makes sense to you, then would you please explain it to those of us for whom it either doesn't make sense or make sense only in you interpret it in unflattering ways. Just who is it that her son would be fighting in Iraq that fits the description she gave--"the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans." Who in Iraq fits that description? If you can't offer an alternative, we are stuck with the choice between her thinking that Saddam was behind 9/11 and her being incapable of differentiating between the al Qaeda terrorists responsible and the rest of the Arab/Muslim population.



To: ManyMoose who wrote (84518)9/15/2008 4:06:49 PM
From: Cogito  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 540944
 
>>They already know what Bush will do, and that kept us free of attacks for seven years.<<

MM -

So we should just not count the hundreds of attacks on Americans in Iraq? Shall we not count the 4,500 American dead and the tens of thousands wounded?

Shall we not count the attacks on our allies in Spain and England?

Is this how Bush has kept us safe? By sending thousands of young men and women to their deaths in a country that had no Al Qaeda involvement or presence before we invaded, and further destabilizing the Middle East?

- Allen