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.

Pastimes : AMAT Off-Topic Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FiloF who wrote (30)	10/25/2001 11:24:32 AM
From: Dale Knipschield	Respond to of 786

No, I didn't see the article, but its hard for me to see how Saudi Arabia could be much more of a problem for us than they already are, since it seems that 15 of the 19 terrorists who pulled off the 9/11atrocity were Saudis. I think its time that our State Department stops basing our international relationships on our need for oil imports. Following is a paragraph that I lifted from another thread. If you think about it, there's a lot of truth to it. The Saudi's, and all others who depend heavily upon oil sales, must sell their products somewhere, or starve. "One of the thoughts that has been cropping up lately is that we should no longer care about who controls Arabian oil. If they sell it to us fine, if not, let them sell it elsewhere. It will still satisfy world demand and free up other oil for us. In the final analysis it takes a seller and a buyer to make a market and we sure as hell qualify as a customer. It might have been different when oil was a strategic weapon in the cold war but now that there is no cold war, what will happen to the Arab countries if they stop selling oil? Maybe we should stop propping up the oil rich countries and let them find their own equilibrium. Whoever is in charge will certainly sell oil unless they really are fundamentalists. In that event they will starve." Regards, Knip