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: Hawkmoon who wrote (36314)	8/7/2002 2:36:07 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Either that or we need to undertake a massive domestic program of our own towards energy independence and "isolate" ourselves from any political activity in the region. But I think we don't have enough time to enact such a policy to any great effect. Which bring us back to another pressing question....WHO and WHY have caused such a US energy independence domestic program to NOT be enacted....Perhaps we should start look at the voting records of Congress for the last 10-15 or so years....and start asking questions.

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (36314)	8/7/2002 5:07:09 PM
From: Spytrdr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

american taxpayers are already financing this prophylaxis: cns.miis.edu fas.org fas.org 216.26.163.62 that's more than enough to take care of the 'arab demographic menace'. what other steps do you suggest beyond reducing Baghdad to ashes and invading and occupying forever after a sovereign country? ___ <<But most of all, I continue to direct attention to the demographics of the muslim world... That's the fear I have.. that if we don't take some prophylactic steps to altering the economic and political situation in the mid-east, it will continue to spiral out of control to the point where we are required to undergo full mobilization and engage in a much wider scale conflict to preserve access to mid-east oil.>>

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (36314)	8/7/2002 6:20:44 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Well, I certainly don't favor putting our heads in the sand, like ostriches. Certainly the problems you raise are genuine problems. All I am saying is that I don't believe the case has been made that 1) it's time to attack Iraq; 2) attacking Iraq will lead to a better solution. You don't put the US military into play until and unless there is a clear-cut objective that they can achieve and then get out and come home. What is it? What will it take? Who will do it? How long will it take? Can we do it? Who will help us? Who will help Iraq? While we're focused on Iraq, what will happen in Afghanistan? In Taiwan? If the Chinese attack Taiwan, will we be be able to help or will we be spread too thin? Which of our priorities are most important at this minute? Yesterday I read in a Seattle paper that the Pentagon is trying to lease 100 planes that can refuel military planes in the air. We don't have enough of them. Boeing is willing to lease them (for billions, natch) but some critics are saying it would be cheaper to buy them. That suggests war sometime. I was looking for confirmation of something I read elsewhere that the Port of Seattle is laying people off due to lack of work. That refutes Nadine's rumor that the ro-ros are getting scarce, unless it's on the East coast. I don't hear a lot of planes (neither do you, right?) so that suggests no war anytime soon. Congress is in recess until after Labor Day, and it's an election year. Bush is on vacation in Crawford until after Labor Day. I don't think much is going to happen in August.