THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING Message Board

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.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (3262)	3/17/2002 5:28:36 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) of 21057

But what is the alternatives? We certainly can't expect anything of the UN or the Europeans. I am not yet convinced that we need to do anything. If we do, however, I would favor 1) assassination or 2) UN inspectors backed up with US special forces and air power. Actually, I think N's theory is a pretty good idea, particularly the part about setting up our military in that lovely location where they aren't quite as finicky about infidels. I also think that a guaranteed oil supply is a good idea. It's distasteful to get it that way, but less distasteful, perhaps, than continuing to support the Saudis. From a simple perspective of self interest, it makes a lot of sense to me. I don't think Iraq would put up much of a fight, although there would be casualties. But the Administration does not operate off of self interest but good and evil. I don't know how we could subsume N's approach under the umbrella of good and sanctimoniously continue to assume that God would be be on our side. And then, too there would be the difficulty of doing something so conspicuously oil industry friendly in the aftermath of Enron... Karen

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next