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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (27506)	9/16/2001 9:44:54 AM
From: Carolyn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

This is one of the most sensible posts I have ever seen.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (27506)	9/16/2001 10:22:42 AM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

>>We should make a grand show of submission. Loudly pressure Israel to withdraw. Pull high-profile units back from the middle east. Pretend bafflement. Make them think that they are safe, even if it drives our own citizens nuts.<< You make some good assertions in your post. The above is NOT one of them.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (27506)	9/16/2001 10:25:35 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Why don't you just try first the Masood Connection?? Message 16344701 France + Russia + Masood Guest star: the so-called Russian Mafyia as an international conduit...

To: Dayuhan who wrote (27506)	9/16/2001 11:10:31 AM
From: epicure	Respond to of 82486

Steven- I loved your post. Your idea is clever and devious, and I like that. I chess as well as in life, the very best thing that can happen is for your opponent to think you have given up, or are an unworthy challenger. Sometimes you need to look a little stupid to get them to come round to underestimating you- but it is always worth it when you deliver the coup de grace.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (27506)	9/16/2001 11:46:34 AM
From: X Y Zebra	Respond to of 82486

Your ideas seem clever and reasonable. However... In practical life, if you could give me an example or two in our history in which such plan yielded the result that was intended would assist me in understanding its effectiveness. We should make a grand show of submission. More than what we have already done ? During the gulf war, we acted as private bodyguards to a bunch of corrupted royals. We delivered the loot back to them, the oil fields. And left the known bad guy in power somehow controlled. Just so the "status quo" of power in that country would not put at risk the lock on power of neighboring monarchs. Several times already I have put the example of Latin American leaders being assisted by the US and then left alone to do what they will with their respective people. Just for the sake of American interest being protected and the people be damned. I trust this time it will not be that way. You can see in Latin America since democracy has been allowed to be implemented, however limited things have improved. Not ideal yet, but the circle of bloody revolutions has diminished greatly. True, the demise of Communism helped. We need to focus less on leaders. They are replaceable. Of course they are replaceable and that is exactly what we should aim for. Replacing them. Not only Bin laden or Hussein, but every one of the corrupt ones that refuse to deliver power to democratic elected governments. When we have the whole picture, we move. It could conceivably take months. But when we move, we should move with all the surprise we can muster and with utmost ruthlessness. Well, why have we waited all this time to do such a thing... I mean we knew Bin Laden and friends, (amongst a long list of others), were the evil ones all along, he even announced it. What has the CIA and all the rest of secret operations infrastructure been doing all this time? Sleeping? Prior to this, we had the element of surprise and secrecy in our hands. Now, they will be expecting it, I am certain they will even stage "assassination plots” just to satisfy our own plot to kill the bastards. If we do not hit them in a way that impacts their people the same way it has impacted us all here, we will be perceived as weaklings, and THAT we can hardly afford any more. NO, I am not suggesting to destroy public buildings or similar, but they must "feel" they are NOT safe supporting these animals. We witnessed the result of "moderate behavior". The time to talk softly is over, it is time for the big stick now. Effectively. NO, I am not suggesting to go and start bombing every single country we think it houses terrorism, I am not suggesting that at all. Or an all out invasion of a specific country either. I agree with you that we should use our heads and plan carefully how we will achieve our goals. Carefully measure the possible consequences. It is not the time to be submissive they cannot think they can freely come here and destroy us. The current leadership in every country that this applies also needs to understand that they should open their societies to the realities of the modern world, such as the simple concept of government by democracy. Leadership by the corrupt few, the oppressing monarchs and religious madmen needs to be removed. This is part of the objectives of this war. It is in our best interest to pursue this goal. Until this is achieved, you are correct, they can replace their current madman with the next in due time. Perhaps the "answer” lies somewhere in the middle of an aggressive military attack combined with a series of secret operations as you describe. However, we cannot longer afford to be the submissive type. They need to fear us. Loudly pressure Israel to withdraw. Pull high-profile units back from the middle east. Pretend bafflement. Make them think that they are safe, even if it drives our own citizens nuts. Absolutely not. If we do this every single Israeli enemy will come forward and will attempt to obliterate Israel. They do not do it now, (after how many wars now? -- I've forgotten), because first, the Israelis have proven to be far more effective warriors and second because they know we stand behind them. Israel has defended itself, they have not been the attackers, and they have had no choice in how they have proceeded. But If we even do a good job, we can win this war, or at least win the upper hand This is going to be a long, long term effort. I am not sure that we will ever be able to say... "We won this war", perhaps in the distant future. The upper hand is what we should aim for and you do not achieve that by a continued show of submissiveness. News from other threads : cnn.com news.sify.com

To: Dayuhan who wrote (27506)	9/16/2001 5:42:44 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Steven, I wonder if you mean that no immediate retributive response should be made? I think maybe you don't, and have tentatively proposed that on kissy, in the post below, which i'm pasting here. My assumption is that this proposal of yours We should make a grand show of submission. Loudly pressure Israel to withdraw. Pull high-profile units back from the middle east. Pretend bafflement. Make them think that they are safe, even if it drives our own citizens nuts. which would be accompanied by the stealth strategy you outline, would not be at all inconsistent with an immediate retaliatory strike or strikes. (BTW, as long as i'm here, Steven honey, i think i'll say something you know from past arguments of ours anyway, that, mirabile dictu, i'm in agreement with Neocon, and not you, on the Israeli issue. (He posted to someone else, not you, but it's on this thread i know.) (isn't it clever the way i write 'honey' in hopes of disarming you so you won't resume the old argument, hehe?) Here's the post I mentioned, fyi, written to CR.... Message 16361548 <<I think it's unrealistic, too. Swift retribution is necessary for a number of reasons. I believe Steven is talking long term strategy, and suspect that he didn't intend that the scenario he outlines in several of his posts exclude an immediate violent response. Let's ask him. What about something like this, which would meet the need for an immediate and highly visible and substantial response while the detective work Steven advocates gets going. This would be a variant of NATO's Belgrade strategy, with one addition. The object would be, first of all, to destroy, from the air, any military capabilities the Taliban possess. Airports, fields, fuel tanks, etc., making the country not workable. (The Pakistanis have apparently agreed to cut the fuel shipments already.) This would be punctuated by demands that bin Laden be turned over. The additional step would be essentially to take over the Northern Alliance that is clinging to power in northern Afghanistan and convert it into a force capable of retaking substantial territory from the weakened Taliban, concentrating on the cave districts where bin Laden is hanging out with his hundred or so best friends. This would require ground forces. One hopes some other countries would contribute troops. It would be forming a cordon around bin L's territory and hold it until he could be starved or smoked out. Or something. This could be an immediate response, and Steven's scenario could continue in the background. It also might help to save the women of Afghanistan from "the cult of ignorant psychotics who took over in 1997," to borrow from the link Rambi posted. EDIT: Iraq might be tempted to intervene. Maybe a good thing, from our standpoint. We could retaliate. Just thoughts.>>