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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (18847)	2/14/2002 4:44:12 PM
From: frankw1900	Respond to of 281500

Finally, the world is heavily populated with border disputes which flair into conflict on some irregular cycle. I don't think the US sees itself as the arbitrator of those, again, unless some larger national interest is at stake. I wasn't clear about this point. What I meant was 'wars for territorial expansion'. Since WW2 China has taken Tibet. What else? There have been proxy wars and civil wars and border disputes but the latter rather demonstrate the point I was getting at., I think. Hard to know about the Gillispe (sp?) thing. I think it's better to believe the US version than Saddam's.