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: Maurice Winn who wrote (29389)	5/12/2002 11:54:31 PM
From: jcky	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Maurice, That's a pretty cynical response considering the United States is forking out 3 billion dollars each year for Israel to keep her afloat (paying for the expanding settlements as one can argue). This doesn't even include another 2 billion dollars to Egypt as bribe money for peace against the Jews. Now that you brought it up, what exactly is the strategic interest of Israel to the United States? Political expediency for re-election in the Unites States does not count as an answer.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (29389)	5/13/2002 2:47:37 AM
From: Eashoa' M'sheekha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The Reason Israel Will Not Use Nukes Unless A Last Resort? How many nukes would it take to completely wipe out Israel? How many nukes would it take to completely wipe out the ME? Four nukes on Israel would leave nothing there. This is why it is so important to keep Iraq et al in check. Israel plays a game of end times chicken with its neighbors I believe. They believe they will overcome any and all threats to their existence as was stated/suggested in the scriptures.That’s faith. However, the proliferation of every increasingly powerful weapons is a disadvantage to a smaller country over a larger one.Less area to destroy and nowhere for them to go. Israel may need divine intervention , never mind US/UN intervention ,to survive/win the next major conflict , when there is one. Rev. 16:16 ? Message 17458763 Your comments on the importance of oil present and future is well off the mark , just the opposite actually. However, the US dependence on ME oil has curtailed to about 25% from a high of 40% in the mid 70's.Yet, it is still suggested every 1% decrease in oil output longer term, adds 10% to the top line price of crude. Iraq had no immediate effect because it was not sustained and the shortfall was easily taken up short term.Any long term disruption in the oil supply from the ME would be devastating to the US and the World at large. Do not underestimate or understate the importance of ME oil , now or in the future. It is the reason many countries will not go the distance in the event of an Israel – Arab all out conflict , as the US/UN did during the last one. It’s why the US cannot move on Iraq without the green light from it’s neighbors , regardless of the base of operation scenario.Bottom line , unless a force is willing to go all the way, they cannot go anywhere. That’s where we stand today and for the foreseeable future. Regards, KC