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: Win Smith who wrote (38175)	8/16/2002 6:32:22 PM
From: Rascal	Respond to of 281500

There's always the "diplomatic breakthrough" W can take creit for. By the way, what percentage of oil do we buy from Iraq today? How would it change after the invasion?

To: Win Smith who wrote (38175)	8/16/2002 7:43:17 PM
From: Ilaine	Respond to of 281500

"While long-range American strategy must try to overcome legitimate causes of [Islamic] resentments, immediate policy must demonstrate that a terrorist challenge . . . produces catastrophic consequences for the perpetrators, as well as their supporters, tacit or explicit." In other words, we must break the will and pride of all those in the Islamic world who would dare terrorize us and the international system. Way to go, Henry the K! We are already at war. It is a new kind of war. We've been engaged in it for years, fighting it ineffectively because we were thinking that the Treaty of Westphalia applied here. The people we are fighting don't have a state of their own, they are sheltered by many states. States which sponsor and harbor terrorists delenda est.