[AndyJackson]

How can the open society survive unless those committed to its survival will preempt those miscreants who live in closed societies and are willing to resort to WMD for their ends?

[Steven W.]

by lying and obfuscating. Note the premise begun in the article that denies public opinion here is FOR taking out Iraq ASAP with or without UN approval and a vast majority think the UN is handling things poorly to pathetically.

[Wonder Warthog]

"How can the open society survive unless those committed to its survival will preempt those miscreants who live in closed societies and are willing to resort to WMD for their ends?"

It cannot. Soros is a wealthy statist fool. Better that there be "Pax Americana" than universal socialist (or Islamic) tyranny.

[ModelBreaker]

It is not too late to prevent the boom-bust process from getting out of hand. The U.N. could accede to chief weapons inspector Hans Blix's request for several months to complete his inspections. America's military presence in the region could be reduced, but it could be beefed up again if Iraq balks. Invasion could take place at summer's end. This would be a victory for the U.N. and for the United States whose prodding made the Security Council act resolutely. That is what the French propose, but that is not what is going to happen. President Bush has practically declared war.

So perhaps Soros would be willing to foot the bill to move 100,000 of the troops that are in the Gulf back to the states, then move them back to the Gulf in the fall, and also the bill for keeping the other 100,000 in the Gulf waiting.

Oh, and perhaps he will also be personally responsible for explaining to the families of our brave soldiers, why they have to be separated from their families for another six months so that the French and Germans can jerk-off in the UN.

The notion that our 'prodding' made progress possible is sophistry. No. 250,000 troops on Iraq's border made it possible.

Finally, the french have already betrayed us once. Their behavior now is directly contrary to their assurances to Bush when Resolution 1441 was passed. Why should we trust them to behave themselves in the Fall.

Soros is an idiot.

[Servant of the Nine]

If George Soros has taken a position you can be sure it is motivated solely by profit. He just told us where his money is.

So9

[PackerBoy]

Needs something .... hmmm ... let me see .... is it more salt? No. This needs a BARF ALERT!

[Hadean]

This is reminiscent of George Orwell's Animal Farm: All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. To be sure, the Bush doctrine is not stated starkly; it is buried in Orwellian doublespeak.

So is the entire anti-war movement, Mr. Soros.

Rule#6: No animal shall kill any other animal.

[Ecliptic]

The rest of the world is opposed to the war?? Not hardly...no Arab country has come out against the war; Arafat hasn't even come out against it; if there was a unanimous resolution at the UN, how can the "rest of the world" be against the war?...

Germany and France are to blame for the problems in the EU and NATO, not the USA....

Soros should be glad that Bush is the Pres and the USA is a superpower...

[AdamSelene235]

'I have always harboured an exaggerated view of my self-importance. I fancied myself as some kind of god or an economic reformer like Keynes (child rapist and socialist gravedigger of the British Empire), or, even better, like Einstein.'

-George Soros

[glorgau]

Actually I agree with a lot of what he says. There is no way that the United States can - over the long run - pay for all the commitments it is setting itself up for.<br.
That said, the die is already cast for Iraq this spring. Holding off until the fall or winter is not in the interest of the United States. The UN can go to h*** on that idea.

[wretchard]

"The Bush administration believes that international relations are relations of power; legality and legitimacy are mere decorations."

That description might apply more to the French, for whom the letter of Resolution 1441 means anything but what it says. Yet since we are on the subject of bubbles, Soros might well ask himself how the the bubble of unenforced declarations, flaunted sanctions and ignored resolutions might fare in a world full of needles.

Just now, the Serbian Prime Minister is lying in a coffin and the Balkans are trembling on the edge. What treaty will Soros despatch to pull things back from the brink? When Portugal opined that they backed the United States because they could expect no help, in a pinch, from France, they were not referring to either the financial bubble that Mr. Soros might provide, nor to the airy assistance that France or the UN customarily sends.

The bubble.

[Dead Dog]

The only true International Laws are the Laws of Physics.

[elbucko]

In the long run, an open society cannot survive unless the people who live in it believe in it.

Uh, just what exactly does he mean by this pointless platitude? George Soros' entire essay is nothing but a thread of senseless, high sounding sentences strung together that supposedly make sense.

Just because one cannot see the bottom in a pool of water doesn't mean its deep, chances are it could be murky. Like this example of Soros murky reasoning.

[Natural Law]

Another instance of some rich slapdick sitting in judgement of the US.

I like to believe that the American hegemony and the resultant Pax Americana are the result of Devine Intervention in world affairs.

[DoughtyOne]

Perhaps Soros can explain to us which bubble he thinks will take out Hussein before he errupts, if not the United States' bubble?

In the last 100 years, can anyone provide better examples of governments as benefactors, than the United States and Great Britain?

We've seen the German model.  We've seen the Soviet Russian model.  We've seen the Japanese, Korean, Chinese and Vietnamese models.  Which one of these models was better than the United States, more fit to resolve issues around the planet, without subjegating it's citizens?  We've seen European, Central and South American, Asian, Australian and African models.  None surpass the United States.

The United Nations is often touted as the natural planetary governing body.  Hooey!  The United Nations can't point to one single victory in it's existance.  Cyprus, Lebanon, Bosnia, Kosovo, a number of places in Africa... the list is extensive.  Where the United Nations has raised it's ugly head to get involved, it is still involved.  Perhaps someone else can think of an instance of success.  I can't.  Not only that it fails to rail on terrorism, coddles terrorist leaders and won't even denounce present slavery or white genocide in Africa.  The United Nations is one of the most prominant frauds ever perpetrated on this planet's citizens.

We liberated the Pacific.  We helped liberate Europe and Northern Africa.  We have rebuilt more nations that most nations have ever conquered.  We turned governments from pariah states without war in some instances.  Nicaragua was one.  There was an insurgency that removed the communist government there, but they did the heavy lifting by election, once Nicaragua realized a communist nation wasn't going to fly without free elections in this hemisphere.  Then there's the USSR.

We have helped liberate France, Germany Belgium, Italy, a number of other states in western Europe, a number of Eastern European states, a number of former Soviet States, Japan, the Pillipeans, South Korea, Parts of China and other places.  We even liberated the citizens of Soviet Russia.  What did we take for ourselves.  What lands did we demand to remain property of the United States?  What riches did we denude the conquered countries of?

Soros mentions the willingness of constituent citizens to live under a certain system.  He addressed Afghanistan and misses the one right under his fat ass.  For all the carping the United States is doing a job that no other nation or agency on the planet can or will do.  If even one middle east state develops the bomb outside of Israel, Isreal will go first and we will be next.

My question to Mr. Soros is this.  Mr. Soros, do you like living in a free nation?  Do you consent to be government by a free Republic?  I ask because if you do want to be governed by a free Republic, you better recognize that that free Republic must do certain things to maintain itself as a free Republic.

Our President George W. Bush isn't perfect.  His supporters and I go round and round from time to time, when I disagree with him.  When it comes to national defense, I'm going to be right in there supporting him unless he's going to dismantle it.  I would urge Mr. Soros, the intellectual wanna bees from the media and the entertainment industry to do a little self-assessment.  Do you want a free Republic or don't you?

You see folks, if we can't back Bush and our free Republic now, when the hell will we be able to?  I don't expect Bush to get a free pass all the time.  I'm going to be here to make sure he doesn't get one from time to time.  But when it comes to terrorism, the prevention of third world nations and terrorists to obtain the bomb and other WMDs, or the attempt by China to use proxy states to take down our free Republic, I'm not only going to be directly behind Bush, I'm going to be pushing.

Mr. Soros I'm getting a little tired of assessments that seek to caste the United States as a new pariah state.  If you don't know better, screw you and your bubble!

[dennisw]

You have confirmed for me how rotten and clueless George Soros is. Freakazoid citizen of the world preying on financial markets .....scoring big in the past but he's lot his touch

[Friend of thunder]

Beyond Iraq an even more dangerous threat looms in North Korea - a crisis precipitated by President Bush in his eagerness to break with what he deemed to be Clinton's appeasement.

Emphasis mine.

Stick to stocks George. While it may not have appeasement by Clinton, history has – already – demonstrated it was a mistake. It makes absolutely no sense to blame the situation in North Korea on Bush. And unless I am misreading him that is what he is doing.

[Boot Hill]

Tread lightly there, AndyJackson, anyone showing the socialist George Soros in a bad light can get seriously flamed by the pro-drug cabal on FR since he is also the Libertarian Party sugar daddy and poster boy for the legalization of drugs. They are personally beholding to him.

--Boot Hill

[NetValue]

"The Bush doctrine is built on two pillars: (1) The United States will do everything in its power to maintain its unquestioned military supremacy; and (2) the United States arrogates the right to preemptive action. "

Soros got his premise about the "Bush pillars" wrong. If the premise is wrong, that which follows is all faulty.

This is not a dispute over water rights. Al-Quada has set out to destroy us and our way of life. There is no reasoning with that kind of enemy. They started this war. They declared it a fight to the death. With terms so clearly defined, they must die if our lives are valuable enough to fight for.

Mr. Soros may think his life is not worth fighting for, so let him have a seat in downtown Baghdad while he waits for Saddam to help him "out".

[gcruse]

Do you want the capability of pre-emptively attacking whomever we like to rest in the hands of Hillary Clinton or any other Democratic president? How many Waco's shall we order up?

[Fractal Trader]

George Soros alert. Ok, he once made billions on betting that the pound would fall, but has he really done much since then? Is his analysis valid? Or is he a press whore whose reputation is built on luck, past successes, and faded glory?

Free Republic Stock Market/Economy Discussion List. Freep Mail me if you want on or off this list.