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 : War -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (9336)	11/29/2001 4:24:11 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Respond to of 23908

I agree with 99% of Margolis' analysis... However, I think he's overlooked Pakistan's behind-the-scenes influence: America's ouster of the Taliban regime meant Pakistan lost its former influence over Afghanistan and is now cut off from Central Asia's resources. So long as the Alliance holds power, the U.S. is equally denied access to the much coveted Caspian Basin. Russia has regained control of the best potential pipeline routes. The "new Silk Road" will become a Russian energy superhighway. Actually, I believe that Pakistan really didn't lose anything --quite the contrary: Pakistan abode by a low-profile policy in exchange for a fat, multi-billion-dollar check. I guess there's a chess term for such a strategy: gambit. SYLLABICATION: gam·bit PRONUNCIATION: [...] NOUN: 1. An opening in chess in which a minor piece, or pieces, usually a pawn, is offered in exchange for a favorable position. 2. A maneuver, stratagem, or ploy, especially one used at an initial stage. 3. A remark intended to open a conversation. bartleby.com At any time in the future, if things unfold in the wrong way, Pakistan will throw its weight back in the Afghan theater... Gus