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 : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (83948)	7/16/2018 5:35:01 PM
From: Katelew	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 365165

Lane and anyone else... I'm not ducking your posts, lol. I'm in the middle of a storm cell and my elect. keeps cutting on and off. I've lost four halfway completed posts to people and am going out for dinner in an hour. So I'll try to answer anyone who posts to me later tonight or tomorrow. I'm hoping to watch the interview with Putin you just posted. Chris Wallace is pretty good and doesn't hold back.

To: Lane3 who wrote (83948)	7/26/2018 12:18:43 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 365165

I didn't see the intervene. As for "an every encroaching NATO", I don't much like the term and I don't think its the best way to describe what occurred or is occurring. NATO is a voluntary defensive pact. If it was involuntary (states were force in to it) then encroaching wouldn't be such a bad term to describe it. If it was offensive (an aliance with plans to invade Russia once it expanded to a certain point, or even just an alliance that was generally throwing its weight around with force and more often with threats to try to compel compliance) than maybe the term would be OK as well, but its neither.