SI
SI
discoversearch

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
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (153577)10/18/2002 1:15:56 AM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) of 1580253
 
Ted, <we got interwined with Saddam in the 80s not because he was controversial. We got embroiled/intertwined with Saddam in the 80s because we wanted Iran put down.>

That seems pretty damn controversial to me. In fact, we did a lot of controversial things because of the Cold War, and one of them was supporting Saddam Insane because of Iran's relation with the Soviet Union.

Sorry, but the Soviet Union actually was closer to Iraq than Iran. The recent trade deal between Iraq and Russia was not the beginning of a new relationship but just one more deal in a long history of deals.

It's just like in South Korea, where America supported a brutal dictator (Chun Do Hwan) to contain the North.

Now read your posted comment back to yourself; does that make sense to you? You support one brutal dictator to contain another brutal dictator. Do you think it matters to the people who are brutalized whether their dictator of choice happens to claim to be a communist or not? The American public was told that we supported a brutal dictator to contain communism when both leaders were brutal and dictators. So what difference did it make? Nothing......its really pitiful.

<Whether its a person or a nation that plays like that, it usually comes back to haunt that person or nation.>

No question about it. No one is arguing that it was a good idea to support these bozos during the Cold War. The only thing was whether the alternative (allow the Ayatollah or Kim Il Sung or whoever to have a free reign) would have been worse. Either way, you're screwed, hence the controversy.

You don't have to be screwed.....you don't support either. We've never tried it that way. May be we should.

<What's the hard line? War with N. Korea?>

I don't know. North Korea seems more interested in selling their weapons than using them. But I would not doubt their willingness to sell a nuke to a member of Al Qaeda. And that in itself would be a good enough reason to invade North Korea.

Do you really think we can control all the dictators; all the bad people; all the evil empires....in the world? We don't have the resources nor the capabilities. Besides, we would be turning into control freaks. Not good......not good at all.

ted
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News