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: Alighieri who wrote (149922)	8/18/2002 10:14:55 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1569674

Mention an incident where Saddam has used violence of any kind against the US, or Israel Following are a few, from 2002 alone. -ONW aircraft threatened, Coalition responds (4 Jul) I-raq fires AAA at ONW aircraft, Coalition responds (26 Jun) -Iraq fires AAA at ONW aircraft, Coalition responds (19 Jun) -ONW aircraft fired upon, Coalition responds (28 May) -Iraq attacks Coalition aircraft with AAA (1 May) -Iraq radar targets Coalition aircraft (19 Apr) -Iraq fires AAA at ONW aircraft (28 Feb) -Iraq fires AAA at ONW aircraft (4 Feb) EACH of these instances (and the hundreds that have preceded them) constitutes a violation of UNSC Resolution 687, 688, or 678. During desert storm we went in because we thought he would take Saudi Arabia, not Israel. This is absolutely wrong (not that it matters). Desert Storm was about liberating Kuwait, and that is all. While we certainly would have defended the Saudis, the Gulf War was about Kuwait. It is possible we "used" the notion of a "possible" attack against Saudis to gain their cooperation, but everyone knew why we were there.