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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Stock Attack II - A Complete Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Siddhartha Gautama who wrote (24668)	11/23/2001 12:44:27 AM
From: Davy Crockett	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52237

Sorry, I don't understand your post. Regards, Peter

To: Siddhartha Gautama who wrote (24668)	11/23/2001 4:05:31 AM
From: Lee Lichterman III	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 52237

>>without fear, could the growth force be strong enough?<< I don't think it is about growth. Just sustaining the economy over tough time troughs. Once we became a world power post WW II, we had huge industrial capacity that we couldn't fully utilize or export via normal means. We helped rebuild Japan and Europe but needed more. We came up with the whole Domino Theory and sold arms to Europe to fight a "Cold War". We also got involved in various Latin American squabbles, massed troops across the Pacific rim, fought in Korea, Vietnam etc which sustained BA by buying bombers, pushed fighters into the supersonic range and ramped up chemical production for Napalm etc. As the Cold War disappeared under Bush Sr. we were suddenly without an enemy but quickly baited Iraq into Kuwait and then seized that opportunity to carry us over. We tried gettign into smaller squabbles like Mascedonia etc but the US public really wasn't on board and the fighting wasn't much of a challenge to justify large defense spending. Bush started getting flack for his star wars defense as he walked in the door and we realized things were going to fall apart soon. Suddenly we conveniently had the WTC disaster, we have a whole new excuse now to get things going again and will use it as much as possible. We now have an enemy, and even better it is an "unknown" enemy as terrorism can be spun anywhere. Heck we could go bomb Ireland if we wanted since the IRA could be spun as terrorists. -ggg- The "War on Terror" is carte blanche to jump in anywhere. I don't think uncertainty of winning is a required prerequisite for this. We are not looking for a fair fight or even a tough one nor sustained growth, just enough production to carry us over the hard times. I don't want to get into a whole black helicopter thing but people are dumb and are set up easily. Already we are now talking about getting rid of Bombers to reduce the fleet. Soon after we get rid of them, we will proclaim we don't have enough bombers and need more B-2s or need a new one, say a B-3 to keep us from being exposed. We will show how our bomber force has dwindled from a thousand bombers to only a couple hundred then show how our war on terrorism is being hampered by not enough planes. They can then justify giving Northrup or BA a huge contract and help them over the commercial airline slump. Of course this works for other items but airplanes are what I know personally and follow closely. We don't need fear, just enough of a perceived threat to keep the American public on board. Now that we have had an attack on our shores, we can probably milk this for at least 10 years if not more. By then, we hopefully will be in a new bull market. Lather Rinse Repeat.... I am not saying it is a bad thing, just obvious to many of us and sad that so few others realize it. We need an enemy of convenience at all times and will make sure we always have one. It is only a bad thing if you are the enemy of the time and are receiving the fruits of U.S. production via bombs, shells and bullets. Good Luck, Lee