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: SiouxPal who wrote (230986)	9/4/2013 12:45:30 PM
From: Metacomet	Respond to of 542937

She nailed it.. ..she usually does

To: SiouxPal who wrote (230986)	9/4/2013 4:40:22 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Respond to of 542937

If Assad were smarter, he would: 1. invite the UN into Syria for intrusive inspections anytime anywhere 2. invite experts from neutral nations into Syria, to dismantle all chemical weapons 3. admit past crimes, and promise not to repeat them 4. demand the U.S. not help the rebels 5. threaten to use chemical weapons openly on a large scale if the U.S. attacks Using chemical weapons is an act of desperation, used by dictators in danger of losing a war, which usually means losing power, probably losing their life, followed by a massacre of their supporters. That's what Assad is facing. It's not possible to deter a man like that, in that position. Chemical weapons give little additional military advantage to the Syrian regime, and the potential downside (U.S. attack, no-fly zones, etc.) is huge. He could give them up, and only slightly decrease his chances of winning the civil war. The upside is, if the U.S. attacks anyway, we look like arrogant blundering bullies. The whole world would condemn the U.S., Obama would look worse than Bush, and Assad looks like a hero to the Arab world. But Assad probably isn't that smart.

To: SiouxPal who wrote (230986)	9/5/2013 2:26:02 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542937

Nice Pelosi isn't as smart as her 5 YO grandson. Congress: listen to Pelosi's grandson on Syria, not grandma Written by Jeff Crouere // Wednesday, 04 September 2013 13:35 // Yesterday, in speaking to members of the press outside of the White House, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), recounted a conversation with her five year old grandson. Pelosi said that as she was leaving San Francisco, her grandson asked “are you yes war with Syria, no war with Syria?” Instead of answering him, Pelosi asked, “well, what do you think?” The young man responded, “I think no war.” Instead of listening to this smart young man, Pelosi went on to explain that she supported “action” in Syria because “they have killed hundreds of children.” Her grandson then asked “were these children in the United States?” Pelosi answered that they were not American children, but that “they're children wherever they are.” Of course, both sides have killed thousands of children. Neither side in the Syrian civil war is composed of good, civilized, freedom lovers. On one side is the dictator Assad, who has been a friend of terrorists and an enemy of our ally Israel. He has certainly committed atrocities. Yet, despite the assurance of our President, there is not convincing evidence that Assad launched the chemical weapon attack. It is quite possible that the “rebels” launched the attack and successfully pinned the blame on Assad. The rebels are infected with elements of the terrorist group Al Qaeda. Videos have been posted on the Internet showing the “rebels” beheading Catholic priests and eating the heart and liver of Assad backed soldiers. These “rebels” are barbarians, who do not deserve the support of any civilized nation. It is no wonder that the United Nations, NATO and the Arab League have all declined to intervene in the Syrian civil war. If we act, the only country that may join us is France, which is not very reassuring. It will cost this country billions of dollars to launch an attack against Syria. Even without “boots on the ground,” the cost of cruise missiles and relocating war ships in that region is quite extensive. In a country that is $17 trillion in debt, it is foolhardy to waste more money on a civil war that we have no business getting involved in. President Obama has painted himself into a corner by claiming that the use of chemical weapons would be “crossing a red line.” It is not a good enough reason to go to war because Obama made a promise. Overall, the President’s conduct in foreign policy has been atrocious. We have destabilized Egypt by supporting the Muslim Brotherhood. We toppled the dictator in Libya and ushered in lawlessness and despair that eventually led to the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi. Today, Syria is being targeted, but there is no guarantee that the next regime will be any better than Assad. In fact, we may go from bad to worse in a country that has weapons of mass destruction. Nancy Pelosi’s five year old grandson is right, unless American people are being killed, unless we are attacked, unless our national security is threatened, we should not get involved. With a defense department being cut, our military forces stretched, we need to focus on protecting our own country, our own borders. It is time we stopped being the policeman of the world and started to focus on creating our own natural resources so we no longer need the oil from the Middle East and can let the people of that region sort out their own problems. It is a real shame that Pelosi and politicians of both parties are beating the war drums when the majority of Americans are opposed to any intervention in Syria. Too bad that our politicians are not listening to the American people, including one smart five year old, who is much smarter than his powerful, but idiotic, grandmother. bayoubuzz.com