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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Clappy who wrote (4905)	8/20/2002 4:25:45 PM
From: Jim Willie CB	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

please attempt to maintain a proper decorum on threads / jw

To: Clappy who wrote (4905)	8/20/2002 4:53:58 PM
From: Jim Willie CB	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Gold imports seen picking up in India Business Recoder, by M.A. Zuberi BOMBAY (August 20 2002) : Bullion traders in India, the world's largest consumer, are holding back on imports spooked by volatile global prices but they may have to shed their lethargy very soon as demand picks up. "I think traders can defer purchases for about two weeks (as they exhaust their stocks)," said a Bombay-based bullion dealer. Demand is expected to pick up in September as the festival season kicks into top gear, putting pressure on supplies, he said. India imports 15,000 to 17,000 bars (of 116.64 grams each) on average every day, rising to about 20,000 bars during the peak festival season. But imports have now dwindled to 5,000 bars a day, down from about 7,000 bars at the start of August, due to fluctuating world prices this month. Spot gold was quoted at $313.0/313.5 an ounce at 0735 GMT, marginally lower than the Hong Kong open at $313.50/314.00. It was traded at $304-$306 per ounce in early August. Local prices are derived from global quotes as India imports nearly 70 percent of its annual demand of 850 tonnes. Gold purchases in India generally rise in the festive season, which starts in mid-August and peaks in early November with Diwali, the Hindu festival of light. "From September onwards, we will witness festival buying as well as pre-marriage purchases," said Satish Bansal of M D Overseas Ltd, a Delhi-based jeweller. The marriage season normally runs from December to May, but many weddings take place in October and November in north India, traders said. "Importers would like to stock gold to meet the fresh demand, but they are currently looking at a target price range of $305-$310 an ounce," said Nayan Pansare, a senior official of Bombay-based gold trading firm Inter Gold Ltd.-Reuters

To: Clappy who wrote (4905)	8/21/2002 8:08:31 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Bush Summit Won't Resolve Iraq Issue Strategic Forecasting LLC 20 August 2002 Summary U.S. President George W. Bush is gathering major U.S. policymakers to his ranch in Crawford, Texas, Aug. 21. Despite speculation, the timing and makeup of the meeting indicate that the Bush administration has decided not to make a final decision during the summit on whether to attack Iraq. Analysis U.S. President George W. Bush is holding a summit of leading policymakers at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, Aug. 21, reportedly to review budgets and go over "big picture" defense issues, including missile defense. Although a possible attack against Iraq was expected to be discussed, it is not on the agenda as a distinct item. The timing and makeup of the summit indeed does not support the notion that this meeting is really a "war council" to discuss Iraq. Among the attendees will be Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice and Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Also present to brief the president on missile defense will be the director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish. One of those who will not be present is Secretary of State Colin Powell. Powell reportedly opposes an immediate attack on Iraq. Therefore, his exclusion from the meeting signaled to many that a decision to attack had been made and that he had finally fallen from grace within the Bush administration and was on his way out. The problem with that theory is that it would be politically dangerous for Bush to make the decision to attack while publicly excluding his own secretary of state from the decision-making process. This is particularly true when influential, non-liberal figures are lining up against the invasion. Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser to former President George Bush during Operation Desert Storm, recently told the Wall Street Journal that an attack on Iraq could destroy the global anti-terrorism coalition. Even Norman Schwarzkopf, commander of the allied forces during the Gulf War, voiced opposition to a unilateral invasion of Iraq, The Australian reported, as have other senior Republican senators and congressmen, like House majority leader Dick Armey. Many in this group have no objection to obliterating Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's regime but feel that the military and geopolitical factors don't favor an attack at this time. If Powell was excluded from a meeting where the decision to strike was made, opponents of a war would have a field day, claiming that all dissent was suppressed. The president could not afford to have a war counsel that excludes Powell. Moreover, Paul Wolfowitz -- Rumsfeld's deputy and the key figure in crafting the anti-Iraq policy -- is not going to be at the meeting either. As the person who would bear much of the responsibility within the civilian defense establishment for crafting an attack policy, Wolfowitz would certainly be present at a war council. Gen. Tommy Franks, commander of the U.S Central Command in the Middle East, is in the United States but will also not be at the meeting. If the decision to attack had been made and this was a planning and implementation session, both Wolfowitz and Franks would be there There is also the matter of timing. Rumsfeld is scheduled to address troops at Fort Hood in Killeen, Texas, not far from Crawford. The speech is scheduled for early in the afternoon, meaning that the meeting at Crawford will likely take place in the morning. A meeting to discuss a major military operation with broad implications likely would not be confined to such a short period of time. It may well be that this meeting originally was conceived of as a war council. However, the blowback that the administration got during the week from people who normally are strong supporters of the administration and an aggressive policy toward Iraq may have caused everyone to stop and reconsider. This means that the war council transformed itself into a budget meeting when it became clear that this was not the time for a decision. Alternatively, it's possible that the White House really did need to schedule a defense budget meeting and a briefing on missile defense -- a major budgetary item -- and was genuinely surprised to see it interpreted as a war council. Either theory points to the same conclusion. The issue of invading Iraq has become so sensitive that the Bush administration is having trouble organizing meetings without being buffeted by the winds. Interestingly, public support for an invasion of Iraq is strong, with many polls showing that more than 60 percent of the American public supports an attack. The opposition, which had been coming from allies in the past, is now coming from inside the Beltway from the administration's friends. Thus, the military and diplomatic problem is becoming a political problem as well. The Iraq question is quickly obscuring all other issues. That is a major challenge for the administration, which has other issues to deal with both in terms of al Qaeda and in general. This cannot be permitted to boil indefinitely. Either a decision will have to be made quickly and implemented or Iraq will have to go on the back burner. The intense debate between supporters of an Iraq invasion, like Rumsfeld, and critics of the plan cannot be allowed to run interminably. Otherwise, the White House won't even be able to call a meeting without a public explosion. stratfor.com