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 : War -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: average joe who wrote (16593)	8/23/2002 3:30:31 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Respond to of 23908

Re: Never underestimate the Brits for especially gruesome murders. God forbid! You bet I don't underestimate these silly Brits.... Actually, MI5 is in charge of the whole mess. It was a really brilliant idea to burn the corpses of Holly and Jessica so that no DNA analysis could be performed. A DNA check would have cleared Ian Huntley pronto... Oh well, now that poor chap has been secluded in a loony bin --another smart move by MI5-- so that he can't consult a lawyer and get proper help. But ya now what? In a coupla weeks, truth will out... and remember: YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST --LOL. BTW, how is it that no one has asked me about my personal theory on the Soham rape & murder case? Are you all on the US gov payroll? Scary about blurting classified stuff?? ROFL.... Gus

To: average joe who wrote (16593)	8/23/2002 5:49:48 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Respond to of 23908

Footnote to my post #16601: British establishment divided over US war against Iraq By Julie Hyland 23 August 2002 Unease is growing over possible British involvement in a renewed US war against Iraq. But as the ranks of former military, diplomatic and political advisers critical of a potential military strike swell, it is clear that there is not a shred of principle in their opposition. It is motivated purely by political expediency and concern for Britain's own imperial interests. On August 21, Lord Wright of Richmond, who headed the diplomatic service during the 1991 Gulf War, became the latest establishment figure to speak out. In an interview with the Radio 4 Today programme Wright warned Prime Minister Tony Blair of the "absolutely devastating" implications of another attack on Iraq and urged him to be "cautious" in signing up to a US strike. Wright made plain that it was not opposition to a military attack on Iraq as such that motivated his criticisms, but fear that without broad international support a US strike could destabilise the Middle East, and drag Britain into a quagmire. A "massive diplomatic effort" had been undertaken by the US and the UK during the 1991 Persian Gulf War to build an international coalition of support for military action, Wright said. On this occasion, in contrast, "it is becoming increasingly clear that there is a strong body of opinion here, both in Parliament and more widely, that an attack against Iraq would be a costly mistake". "I believe it is absolutely vital that the Americans acquire the support of a much larger constituency. If they don't, I believe they could be in serious trouble." Blair has insisted that his support for US military action is in line with the two countries' "special relationship" as well as Britain's own national interests. Based upon its role as loyal ally to the US, its international standing is strengthened and it can then punch above its weight in the international arena. So far, Blair's position is the dominant one within ruling circles. Britain's main business journal, The Economist, August 10, dismissed charges that Blair was acting as Bush's "poodle", stating that the prime minister's solidarity with the US "is based on national interest". Britain's foreign policy aims are contingent upon "American power", "the EU, whatever its pretensions, is no substitute", it wrote. Moreover, "Britain gets a more attentive hearing in the White House than does any other power ... because it is consistently willing to commit highly capable (though, it must be said, too often ill-equipped) forces to violent action". Under conditions in which Bush needs all the allies he can get, this was of great political value, the journal continued before intoning rather pathetically, "influence, even at the margins, is preferable to the alternatives: impotent confrontation or passive acceptance of the world's wickedness." [snip] wsws.org