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: tejek who wrote (604502)	3/21/2011 2:26:56 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574649

Yes....an invasion might actually accomplish something....a no fly zone is the equivalent of Obambi's many "present" votes....

To: tejek who wrote (604502)	3/21/2011 2:34:35 PM
From: TopCat	Respond to of 1574649

The "invasion" of Iraq started with the establishment of a no fly zone.

To: tejek who wrote (604502)	3/21/2011 2:50:54 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574649

>> Sigh. I am trying to help you understand the difference between a no fly zone and an invasion, and why the reaction to each is different. Let's assume you are semantically correct. Please explain as you said you would, HOW IT IS DIFFERENT FROM THE IRAQI INVASION? This idiot on CNN (Peter Bergen) is making the same liberal argument you are today. It is stupid. It is, effectively, the same idiot argument Al made this morning: Attacks (call it invasion or not) that don't get messy are okay, while the ones that do are bad. You cannot reasonably know in advance what will be required. Obama has foolishly ruled out the use of ground troops, and like pretty much everything else he has done with regard to military, there is a pretty decent chance he'll have to back up on that claim. He's an idiot when it comes to this stuff. Just like you, Just like Al.