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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (149789)	8/16/2002 2:27:13 AM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1579811

This is probably the best reason NOT to attack Iraq. In fact, I wouldn't mind if Saddam did indeed take out his neighbors once again. They seem to be rather ungrateful for America's role in the Gulf War. Ten, but guess who's father thought it was important to protect Kuwait ten years ago. Wasn't that about the time GW landed all that loot from selling Harkness? I wonder if there's a tie in. <g> ted

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (149789)	8/16/2002 9:22:45 AM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579811

They seem to be rather ungrateful for America's role in the Gulf War. The years following the Gulf war saw an oil supply that was stable and cheap, largely due to Saudi Arabia. I don't want to seem a supporter....SA is a screwed up country, devoid of democracy, full of demagogues and extremists...just offering food for thought. Also remember that SA (and Japan) carried a large share of the Gulf War cost. I suspect that what would constitute loyalty to the US in a new attack on Iraq probably evokes visions of suicide to the ruling family in SA. Think about that one. Osama would have his goal realized. Al