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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DOUG H who wrote (180821)	9/14/2001 1:11:49 AM
From: RON BL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Why do we think we can buy whores. We also send Egypt 3 billion and you saw them dancing in the street. I say anyone who is against drilling in the Arctic and elsewhere helped finance those terrorists. And I own no oil stocks

To: DOUG H who wrote (180821)	9/14/2001 1:39:34 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Doug H, my thoughts: RE - "The Yugoslavian campaign looks much more effect when measured against the humanitarian failure with the Hutu massacres." AND YOUR COMMENTS: "The slaughter Clinton turned his back on, and he did turn his back, was one of the most horrific events in the last 20 years. I consider him a coward and I think the world did too. And of course the Chinese had him in their pocket." >>> I'm the one who called it a major failure of the Clinton administration (but remember: the Republicans at the time weren't exactly screaming for an American response either. Most of them maintained a studious silence. Everyone fails on this test, just like nobody attempted any nation-rescues during Pol Pot's murderous denouement.) >>> And as to Kosovo and Yugoslavia... there was much Congressional Republican (and Dem.) opposition to this intervention, even after the murderous lessons taught by Bosnia. Clinton did finally put the coalition together to prosecute the war, but with Congressional Republicans on his back the whole time predicting abject failure. RE - "I only pointed out that in May, Bush the Second sent $43 million to the Taliban, and I didn't think that was such a good idea. (I believe I called it "idiotic".)" AND YOUR COMMENTS - "Foreign policy brings strange bedfellows, that's for sure. However, neither you or I know the intelligence that drove that decision. Till we do, we can't really say. But on it's face, it looks like a bad call." >>> Sure we know why Bush the Second gave them the money: the US announced why. It was DEA funding when the Taliban promised to cut back on the poppy growing. The Taliban promised it at least partly because their opposition up in the north makes money off of the poppy, and this way by attacking their enemies they can have cover for some of their actions. >>> The Taliban are in dire shape as far as foreign reserves go. That's one of the reasons they harbor Bin Laden... he brings in a lot of funding. Curiously enough, the US might have joined Pakistan and Bin Laden as major funders of their regime this year with this infusion.