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 : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (6879)	9/21/2001 7:39:49 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

The origin of this particular thread was why they [the Taliban] hate us. The Taliban hates us because we haven't impeached GWB? ROTFLMAO!!! Oh, come now, jttmab. Should we have impeached Clinton then? Because they hated us then too. You seem to have the opinion that only the US can claim credit for winning the war. Not exactly. "True, winning involved many nations. However, has the US decided that it would simply trust to the Atlantic Ocean for its defense, there is a very good probability that Hitler could have defeated the Russians or forced them to terms and done the same to the British. Would we be speaking German? Maybe. Probably not." Message 16387995 The British certainly helped. And their unsinkable aircraft carrier was invaluable. The Commonwealth nations- -Canada, Australia, the Kiwis, South Africa- -certainly got their licks in. The French? That's a joke right? 99% were neutral, trying to stay out of the way, 0.99% collaborated with the Nazis, and .01% were the resistance. The Poles? They got a variant of the Enigma machine to Britain. The Italians? They were the other side. The Austrians? Same thing. The Hungarians, Rumanians, Norwegians, Danes,.... They were the victims. But it's still a good bet that, had the US sat it out, had Hitler not gone beyond the requirements of the Tripartite Pact and declared war on the US, Hitler would have kept continental Europe and probably defeated Britain. But if there were some important points that I've overlooked in prior posts or subjects, I'd be happy to re-address them "Encouraging the Iraq/Iran war as a means of balancing power within the region. Encouraging? They needed encouragement? They seemed quite eager to get at each others throats. Support of the Israelis vis a vis the Palestinians. OK. Of course, the US is supporting the only country that is even remotely democratic in the region. Seems to me we ought to support other democracies. And I'd say this is the real reason. The rest is smoke and misdirection. US involvement in Afghanistan; we helped train them in the noble battle of overcoming the evil empire. I thought they wanted to be rid of the atheistic Soviets. No? Economic sanctions in Iraq, starving children of Iraq, etc. Iraq DID invade Kuwait. After their defeat in the Gulf War, Iraq agreed to abide by the terms of certain UN resolutions. And then did not do so. The sanctions were the consequence." Seems fair to me.