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 : Strictly: Drilling II -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Douglas V. Fant who wrote (4382)	11/25/2001 2:52:09 AM
From: Cogito Ergo Sum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36161

HI Douglas, Taking a break here. Interesting post, seems you must have read a lot of similar things as I growing up, then again I read almost everything voraciously. I've always found all this roots stuff fascinating. The mixing and blending of 'tribes' to form new tribes etc. An interesting fictional history of England I read a few years back gave a unique perspective of this effect, Sarum by Edward Rutherfurd. I don't know if you noticed as I have in the news reporting, especially of Northern Alliance the obvious wide variety of features present. Some very light skinned, some positively oriental, more like Mongolian or Tibetan or Chinese etc. Just not very stereotypical. The Iranians (Persians) were quite formidable but never quite cracked the European nut thanks to those pesky Greeks or we might all be speaking Farsi, a la Xerxes or Darius :o) Trajan always sticks in my mind thinking of Rome because as you mention Rome even controlled the entire fertile crescent at that point and it lent an obviously different physical view of Rome's expanse (an Imperial bubble LOL). Hadrian, well he had that wall thing going on but yeah the Persians were too much for him ;o). Speaking of Hadrian as an aside England is just an incredible place if you like history. Rent a car and take your time. I was planning to go back in the next year or two. I never got as far as the walls last time but did squeeze in Bath, Stonehenge, Arundel, Salisbury, a bit of London and a host of other sites. Historically only two groups have accomplished that feat Al is rolling over in his grave right about now LOL. He took Persia (damn those Greeks again) and got stopped out just past the Indus as I recall. But he too, like ole Genghis left not much behind when he died (except that Egyptian library which didn't last :o( So ignore the carping of the old "beards" in Iran and focus upon the actions of their political leadership Yup, that's my point too. I think wrt the Mullah's, as BB King would say 'The Thrill is Gone' :o) I hadn't been giving much thought to Iran prior to WTC but on closer inspection I do feel optimistic on that front. Tacitus I'll try and give it a read. My problem is when I get hold of a good read I'm lost to the world :o) Conoco I've been following them ever since they got all those juicy continental properties from my old pal Gulf Canada Resources. regards Kastel a cute and cuddly Canadian

To: Douglas V. Fant who wrote (4382)	11/25/2001 11:25:55 AM
From: Frank Pembleton	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 36161

Douglas -- I can't keep score anymore... :) - acquiring top of the line weapon systems from the Russians - relationship between Iran and the western powers will develop - Iran would likely defeat Iraq It's like we've gone full circle ... wasn't it the U.S. back in the early seventies that originally armed the Iranians? From what I understand, after the Brits pulled out of the ME in 1968 the Americans undertook what's considered the biggest and most rapid build-up of military power in “peace-time” history. The U.S. supplied Iran with over $20 billion in sophisticated weapons between the years of 1970-78. So unless the Russians have weapons that are far superior to the American ones already procured, a war with Iraq would probably give us the same results of what we’ve already seen. Regards Frank P.