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: lorne who wrote (11190)	1/27/2002 10:04:10 PM
From: lorne	Respond to of 23908

The Next Target As W pursues war on terrorism, a list of nations for the second stage President Bush announced last week that he plans to ask Congress for an additional $48 billion in military spending. He explained the budget-busting request in terms of future wartime costs. "Our fight against terrorism began in Afghanistan, but it's not going to end there," he told a group of reserve officers on Thursday. Which raises the question: Where's the war going next? If I were handicapping the targets, I'd make Iraq the favorite. Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein is already feared and hated by the American public. Bush has a personal score to settle with him for ordering a hit on his father back in 1993. This, coupled with an advanced bio-jihad program and nuclear ambitions, makes Baghdad the greatest short-run threat to American security — and my frontrunner for the next target. Iran, it seems to me, is a close second. Like Iraq, it is a terrorist-list nation on the way to gaining weapons of mass destruction. And like Iraq, it is seen by Washington as unsettled business. The Iranians are widely understood to be behind the murder of 19 American soldiers in Saudi Arabia in 1996. And it was Iran's proxy, Hezbollah, that blew up the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983. Some congenital optimists think Iran is edging toward a more pro-Western, democratic stance. It isn't. Medieval ayatollahs are still in firm control in Tehran. They recently proved it by shutting most of the country's newspapers, arresting prominent democratic dissidents and publicly threatening atomic warfare against the Little Satan, Israel. Iran also has been involved in two alarming new policy initiatives. It reportedly is trying to project its influence into western Afghanistan. And this month, it was caught sending an arms shipment to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. At the same time, Iran has been pursuing detente with other terrorist states. Last week, it announced that it is resuming air traffic with former enemy Iraq after a break of almost 20 years. It also will use Iraqi air space for flights to another longtime rival, Syria. In fact, Syria could be the next theater of war. It harbors half a dozen terrorist groups. It is a major international drug dealer. It exercises operational control over Hezbollah in Lebanon. And it is known to be stockpiling chemical and biological weapons. Since Sept. 11, Syria has been keeping a relatively low profile. But last week, the new head of Israeli military intelligence told a closed-door parliamentary committee that Al Qaeda terrorists have been turning up in Lebanon — a country under Syrian occupation. If that turns out to be true, it makes Syria an overnight favorite. Iraq, Iran and Syria have been considered potential targets from the start of Operation Enduring Freedom. But here is a dark horse entry in the Who's Next Sweepstakes: Saudi Arabia. The kingdom has good terrorist credentials. It is the chief financial underwriter of militarized international Islam, as well as the ideological homeland of Bin Laden-ism. These were sins the United States was prepared to overlook as long as Saudi Arabia remained a willing client. That could be changing. Lately, the Saudis have been broadly hinting that they would like the U.S. to close its military bases and remove its troops from the kingdom. Next month is the beginning of the hajj season. Millions of Muslim pilgrims are set to descend on Mecca and Medina, the Saudi holy cities remodeled by the Bin Laden family. Even in the most tranquil of times, the hajj poses major security problems. This year, with anti-American sentiment running high, the possibilities are truly frightening. The Saudis may be trying to defuse this nightmare by booting — or at least threatening to boot — the U.S. out of the kingdom. The U.S. can't let this happen. Without American troops, Saudi Arabia opens itself up to domination by Iran and Iraq. And if the Saudi royal family can't guarantee American oil, it raises another question: Who needs them? After all, the Bush Doctrine already stipulates that in the war on terror, nations are either friend or foe. Friends get a nickname, a photo op at the White House and military protection. Foes — especially terrorist-bankrolling foes — leave themselves open to a regime change. The U.S. has a considerable military force in Saudi Arabia — far more than it needs to overthrow the corrupt, impotent Saudi dynasty. The pro-American Hashemites of Jordan — who consider themselves the direct descendants of the Prophet Muhammed — were once the custodians of the Islamic holy places. They could be again. Mecca and Medina may be holy cities to Islam, but it is the oil fields that are sacred to Americans. For that reason, if for no other, Congress won't turn down Bush's $48 billion request. He'll get the money — and he should — even if nobody knows yet which horse he plans to put it on. nydailynews.com

To: lorne who wrote (11190)	1/28/2002 1:20:06 PM
From: Machaon	Respond to of 23908

<< Ok, I have to think about the diaper on the head thing...:o) >> The actor, James Woods, used the term to refer to the terrorists. I haven't heard the entire story, but some Arab groups are complaining about the comment. But, in my mind, diaper heads is a minor insult to a culture that keeps it's women covered up because their men cannot control their sexual urgers, and to a culture where the men wear dresses and wear a diaper like thing on their heads, and to a culture that won't tolerate or allow any other culture to exist. About the article- Perhaps, someday, Afghanistan will be a commonwealth of the US. <g>